Debit t es an prottebing% in Varliament.

PORTUGAL.

The adjourned debate on MI. Hume% motion respeeting des British la- tervention in Portugal, ises‘vesumed onitteaday.

The motion of censure was supported by Mr. BORTHWICK and Lord JOHN MANNERS. Their main arguments were, that the insurgents in Por- tugal were justified by the oppression and bad faith of the Queeu's GOVATII- Ment; and that no reliance was to be placed upon the same Government for observing the arrangement brought about by Great Britain: also, that no distinct avowal had been adduced on the part of France, of an intention to interfere • nor on the part of Spain any proof that she would not have been prevented from interference in the same way that she was in 1826, when Mr. Canning declared that he would plant the colours of Great Britain on the heights of Lisbon and resist foreign intervention. In illustrating the bad faith of the Portuguese Government, the speakers made good use of the disingenuous assurances given, that the prisoners taken at Torres Ye- arns should not be conveyed to Angola, but only to Madeira or some other healthy place outside the kingdom, in order to secure their absence until the conclusion of the revolt.

Ministers were defended by Mr. CHRISTIE.

Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE moved an amendment. He had entered into the question with a bias against the intervention; but his opinion had been modified by reading the correspondence. He taunted the Protectionist opponents of Government with not having uttered their expressions of at- tachment to constitutional freedom earlier in the session. He remembered having heard public thanks offered to the Emperor of Russia, the Emperor of Austria, and the King of Prussia, for extinguishing the liberties and in- dependence of Cracow. He waived the argument that if this country had not interfered Spain would have done so; the intervention to be justified at all, must be justified on its own merits: but he found that the British Government had stood by the cause of constitutional freedom in Portugal; and he believed that any declaration made in conjunction with the two other intervening powers, and supported by the House of Commons, would inspire great confidence in the people of Portugal. He therefore moved the following resnlution as an amendment to Mr. Hume's-

" Great Britain having become a party to foreign armed interference with the 'dew of terminating the civil war now unhappily existing in Portugal, it is the opinion of this House, that, on tranquillity being restored, it will be the duty of Øo British Goverment to endeavour, by all just means in its power, to secure to the people of Portugal the full enjoyment, of their constitutional rights and privileges?'

Mr. MACAULAY heard with great pleasure the amendment proposed by Mr. Duncombe. (Ironical cheers from the Opposition.)

He did not complain that intervention had first been viewed with jealousy. No doubt, the rule which restricts interference in the internal concerns of foreign nations is generally sound. He admitted that the throne of Portugal had been eurrounded by bad counsellors • that the most violent and unconstitutional mea- sureswere adopted by the Court; and that any course to be taken by the British Government must be full of difficulty and inconvenience. It is often the ease in private life that every course is beset with risk: but in such cases, those who condemn the course taken are bound to suggest a better. Mr. Hume ought not wily to censure the conduct of Government, but to propound a plan of policy:

Mr. Macaulay proceeded with more specific arguments in favour or the inter- vention. It is to be observed that our connexion with Portugal is peculiar. It began at the time of the Black Prince, in 1373; and the continuance of so dose an alliance between nations for nearly five hundred years is without parallel in his- tory. Those earliest treaties are still in force. No one can fail to be struck by the fact, that the persons who framed those treaties seemed to have a presentiment that they would outlive all the great changes which have taken place in the mode of warfare and the relations of the world. Our first treaty with Portugal, framed in the fourteenth century, but still in force, provided that we should send to the defence of Portugal "troops, archers, slingers, ships, galleys sufficiently armed for war," or any other kind of defence." In 1381, when the Portuguese Am- bassador came to claim protection for his country against a Castilian invasion, the English Monarch declared that his friends were Portugal's friends, and his foes her foes; and accordingly five hundred archers and five men-at-arms were sent over; just as we sent men, though armed differently, in 1826, to protect Portugal against a threatened attack from the same quarter. Some may think that such relations are not beneficial to the more powerful kingdom; but Mr. Macaulay was of a different opinion. During the whole of our trials Portugal has remained our friend. In the Seven Years war, when France mind Spain were united against us, Portugal refused to take part with them or to make separate peace. Daring the late war, it was Portugal that suffered for us. In one of his despatches, the Deke of Wellington said that the question to he de- cided was between the defence of Portugal and the invasion of 'England: while Portogal was undergoing the horrors of war, we were manufacturing for the whole world; and the lines of Torres Vedras were a protection against the spoliation and Tillage of a larger, richer, and prouder capital than Lisbon. When that great struggle ended by the settlement m 181,5, the two nations were the more en- deared to each other. We sent to protect Portugal against hostile designs in 1826; and in 1884, when there appeared a pretender to the throne, we formed the Quadruple Alliance. He had admitted that the present civil war in Portugal originated in misgovern- ment. It happened, unfortunately, that it was not in the power either of the Queen or the Junta to meet on fair terms. The Queen might be constrained by her Wirt- Were ; the Junta surrounded:by adventurers, eager for employment and ready to discountenance any proposal for peace. The trade of Portugal languished, and British interests suffered. The agents of Great Britain interferred only by coun- selling conciliation, and by preaching moderation to both sides. It had been observed that Lord Palmerston had departed from the doctrine of noninterference which he laid down with so great clearness, and the change had been attributed to some strange backstairs influence. But the reason of the change was obvious. While the question was purely an internal question, the British Government interfered only bycounsel and exhortation. It became after- wards an international question, and then the English Government could no longer abstain from intervention. Even Mr. Hume would admit that sometimes the in- ternal policy of a country may become connected with the policy of foreign powers. History furnishes two remarkable instances. Queen Elizabeth interfered in France, because the success ef the League would have had the effect of throwing France Mt° the stale of Austria • and in 1688 the States-General of Holland countenanced the English revolution, because it secured to her side the throne of England, and they were endangered by the predominancy of France. In the present case, it appears that Spain was resolved to interfere. On the principle of noninterven- tion, we might have acted in one of two ways,—either by absolutely refusing to iatesfere, and not interdicting other powers; or byprohibitmg interference to other pewees. The absolute noninterference would have been to the last degree dis- graceful to this country, considering our ancient historical relations with Portugal: to prohibit the intervention of other powers would have been idle, unless we had been prepared to enforce the prohibition, and so to risk a general war in Europe.

Mr. Macaulay drew attention to the terms seenred}by the British negotiations for the Portuguese people. The very first condition is an absolute and complete amnesty. The:BortuguesesGoveseunent stiehied hard for sending some persons out to the colonies, or at least apt of the aseartry, if only for eighteen months, or for sixteen or for ten : but lEngland invetiably reified, " No, not one"; and to those ternis sheauthered to Ake teat. The uneasstitutional acts of the Govern ment were to be rescinded, thezGortes convoked, and no member of the Cabral party to form part of the Government. [A Member—"How do you guarantee dist ?"] There can be no better guarantee than the fact that France, Great Britain, and Spain, possess undoubted power to enforce an observance of the con- ditions to which the Queen of Portugal has assented.

Lord GEORGE Birderneow,contended, that the special-pleading of Minis- ters by no means established the case, or made out that France and Spain would have persisted in an interference detrimental to the Portuguese people— Lord John Russell and Mr. Macaulay cited ancient treaties with Portugal; but seemed altogether to leave out of consideration the people Of Portugal. Mr. Mac- aulay J.anoted historical parallels; but he forgot one. When Philip the Second of Spam sought to conquer Portugal, the method to which he had recourse was similar to that which had been adopted on the present occasion by her Majesty's Ministers: be persuaded the leaders of the Portuguese to mix sand with the powder of the troops; and her Majesty's Government had persuaded the honour- able Member for Finsbury, and those who professed such a love of liberty and-ha- tred of interference in the domestic affairs of foreign nations, to mix_ sand with their powder.

In 1833, Lord Grey's Government succeeded hi maintaining a neutral position in Portugal. Great Britain had declared that she would not interfere, but that if any other power interfered to take part with Don Miguel, England would deem it necessary for her interest to take part with Donna Maria: that bad the.effect of arresting Spain. The.British Government was urged in Parliament to trust in the "good faith and humanity " of Don Miguel: Lard John Russell then.said, "it was a mere mockery to require such a conditionfrom a Prinee who was noto- riously deficient in both those qualification.s." Why is the faith of the Queen -of Portugal less a " mockery " now ? She has broken her coronation-oath, and broken the Charter of 1826.

It was notorious that the proceedings- of October 1846 [the expulsion of the Pain:mile Ministry) were adopted solely and altogether to prevent the dismissal of Dietz and the impeachment of the Cabral Ministry. That Ministry had pur- sued a course of unheard-of venality and corruption. They maintained the-esti- mates of the army for 19,000 men, while their effective force was *illy 10,080; and the pay was distributed among the principal officers of the army. It was a notorious fact that everything was sold in Portugal: the places of the judges, the public caoracte, every office of every description was, bartered to furnialt.the op- portunity of rewarding mid increasing partisans. Every one 'knew that Costa Cabral, five years ago, was a country attorney, the son of a shopkeeper in one of the provinces; and yet, upon the ostensible official income of 8001. &jeer; he be came in the course of five years one of the richest men in Portugal; purchasing estates, some of them, as in the case of the estate from which he took his title of Count Thomar, confiscated; and now he is said to be worth 7,0001.-a year. To provide pay for the employes of the faction, what was called a sanatory,act was recently passed; the intention being to create 400 new places, the officers attached to which would be remunerated by fees and fines. A decree was issued that no person should be buried except in the public cemeteries outside tbe town, and ex- cept upon payment of a fee of 10s.; hut in order to secure the officers' larger fees, they took care that no walls surrounded the cemetery, and cats and dogsrand wild swine entered it in such numbers that theytore up the dead bodies and moved the people to phrensy. An insurrection arose, at thehead of which was Mariada Ponta, who took her dead child to the church and insisted on its being buried within the churchyard of the village: the military were called in, and defeated by the populace; and in a few days afterwards all Portugal rose inarms and called with one voice for the expulsion of the Cabral Administration. Another subject of complaint wee, that the tobaeso contract, which had never been let for more than twelve years, had been let for twenty-three years. So also with regard to gunpowder and soap. In every way in which it was possible to plunder and pillage the Iseople, they were plundered and pillaged to enrich this corrupt Administration. Various were the laws passed by decrees without reference to the Cortes at all. The eleotions, instead of being free and uninfluenced, were in many cases carried 411 in the presence of the troops; who were marched by companies ontrary to the Charter. The vote beteg by ballot, papers were supplied a a Particalar colour, so that Ministers might he able to tell how every man voted. A poll-tax of 20d: per head was put upon all the people of Portugal, without distinction of rich or poor, and which they laid on, or pretended to take, for the maintenance of public roads in Portugal. Where a peasant was onable to pay this tax, it with COM- touted for eleven days' labour on the public works. This was a great grievance, and the greater because it was notorious that the pudic works were madealie means of the most nefarious jobbing. It was notorious that Jose Cabral, one of these jobbers, made-59,000k by the contract for the public works between Lisbon and Oporto. All this was enough to, stir up the most patient people that ever existed: the people rose; Juntas were organized in every part of Portugal; the Cabrid Admi- nistration was forced from power•' a new Government was formed; and in a few days universal peace prevailed throughout Portugal. The Queen called upon the people to " confide " in her; and they did confide in her. But on the 6th of Oc- tober the Queen put the new Ministers under arrest, and metered what was to all intents and purposes a Cabral Administration. Was it not &natural consequence of such a breach of faith, that the country should again rise?

The demands of Das Antes bad been oiest moderate. Oneviolent proclamation has been cited; but it was anonymous. The degree of faith to lie put in the Queen has been shown by the treatment of the prisoners taken at Torres ,Vedras; and what guarantee remains for her future good government? The course pursued by Great Britain has been at variance with all we have done for the last twenty-seven years. It is the reverse of the coarse taken by.the Duke of Wellington, when the French people thought fit, for illegal adinhustra- tion, to depose Charles the Tenth. It is contrasted with the conduct of Mr. Can - 'ling in 1826: he feared not the frowns of France, and still less those of Spain. But now, when Spain owes us T0,000,0001. sterling, we are told that we must be brow-beaten and bullied! If Lord John Russell had been confident in the sense of right and the justice of England, he might, as Mr. Canning did, have thrilled every heart with the proud declaration, that we had humbled Spain and silenced France; that we weut to Portugal, not to dictate, not to rule, not to prescribe; we went to defend and preserve the independence of an ancient ally; we went to plant the standard of England upon the well-known heights of Lisbon; and, where that standard was planted, foreign dominion should never come. (Cheers.) After Lord George Bentinck's speech, the debate was again adjourned, about one o'clock on Tuesday morning.

On Tuesday, before the resumption of the debate, Lord JOHN'RUSSELL made a remark on the position of the amendment as preventing the House from coming to a direct decision upon Mr. flume's motion : on which ac count, he requested Mr. ThomasHuncombe to permit the original motion to be met by a direct negative, and afterwards to xaove his own resolution separately: Lord John would then be happy to ampert it. Mr. DUN- COHSE was quite ready to adopt the course suggested, on condition it were understood that the motion should not afterwards be withdrawn.

The debate was then continued, with a brief speech from ririns LACY EY.ANS, in support of Government.

Sir ROBERT PEEL rose, with several Members on different sides of the Howie; but they gave way, and he proceeded. rho began by giving a rea- son for the early hour at which he rose- " Sir, as this debate has lasted two nights, and as I think the practicetlzat has up of-confining the more importent part of the debates to two er three grown at the close of the evening is prejudicial to the pahlie service, because it leads to an unnecessary consumption of the public time, I intend, as far as my humble authority will go, to enters practical protest against it, by delivering the few observations I have to make, at this, to a speaker, unpopular hour of the evening.'

He agreed with theeewho said that the motion should be considered on its own merits. There are many motions of light importance, in respect to which the decision may be fairly influenced by extrinsic considerations,—soch as the ap- h of an election, or the embarrassment arising from a sadden change of 1isiistees: but this is not one of them. Mr. Ilume's motion was a vote of censure; and to affirm it would be to reverse the policy of Government. Emphatically de- claring that bespoke only his own individual opinion, Sir Robert declared, that after reading the papers, he could not join inaffirmiiag the motion. Looking sim- ply-to the motives of Government as distinguished from their acts and proceedings, he could discover in the papers no other intention than that of supporting an aecient monarchy and at the same time of obtaining guarantees for the constitu- tional liberties of the people. He had been no party to the Quadruple Treaty: he objected to the treaty at the-time—he thought it better that the people of Portugal and Spain should decide for themselves between the rival branches of the houses of Bourbomand Bragaasa: he was therefore free from prejudice on the sub- ject But it cannot be forgotten that the Quadruple Treaty has been entered into; and that by it they had contracted special obligations, to which the Four Powers were parties, and had guaranteed the thrones of Spain and Portugal to their present posaeesors. The importance of Portugal, too, from its geographical position and long connexion with ,this country, must also be borne in mind. It has not been usual to abstain from friendly intervention with respect either to Spain or Por- tugal. In t823, Mr. Canning gave friendly adviceto Spain, seeking to avert from her the danger of a threatened invasion from France, by recommending a modi- fication of her constitution; and in refusing the motion made by Sir James Mac- donatd, the House concurred in the policy of Mr. Canning. Sir Robert could see nothing in the advice now given by Lord Palmerston to the Portuguese Govern- meet of which the British Minister bad reason to be ashamed. He had resisted the transportation or execution of the captured insurgents; his advice had always been in favour of forbearanee—of lenity and moderation; and Sir Robert could not think it consistent with justice to visit the Government with the condemnation which the motion involved.

He admitted, however, that motives and intentions are not sufficient if the acts are unwise. But in considering the acts, it Was due to justice to assume the po- sition occupied by the Government at the time during very complicated and un- certain contingencies, and not to forget that those who are in the position of judges after the event have a great advantage. Up to the 5th of April, we limited ourselves to friendly advice, warnings, and remonstrances: from that date there was a great change in the policy of the British Government,. Few would be inclined to censure Government for any step taken before that time; and the question was, whether the circumstances justified that change of policy. In Portu- gal there was, on the one hand, a Government which had done acts that merited disapprobation. There was every argument against forcible intervention in the domestic concerns of the country; there was also the danger of setting an embar- rassing precedent, and weakening the throne which it was desired to prop up. On the other hand, these conflicts had lasted since the beginning of October; there was no prospect of any termination from the superiority of either party; and he was not prepared to say that he should not himself have taken the course which, undergreat difficulties, her Majesty's Government finally determined to take. (Loud cheers.) It is easy, after the free and unrestricted communication of every letter, to convict the writers out of their own despatches. Of course, while they wished to prevent France and Spain from interfering, they used every argu- inent against intervention; andwhen the necessity of intervention was forced upon them, no doubt, the arguments they had used against intervention appeared ap- plicable against themselves. But the simple question is, whether, admitting the policy ofatistaining from interference up to the latter end of March, a subsequent change of policy was justified by the position of affairs in Portugal. -He first looked at the question as it relates to the great interests of humanity. 4 it is silvery well to say, We will not interfere: we have misery enough of our own to-provide for-in Ireland and the West of Scotland; let us not take upon oar- getivesahe achlitiooal responsibility of managing the affairsof Portugal.' Nothing can sound more plausibly than that; but no Government could safely pursue that course."

impossible for England to view with indifference the position of such a coun- try as Portugal. Look at the accounts received at the time. Writing on the 14th of March, in a despatch received on the 22d, Sir Hamilton Seymour describes the daily aggravated miseries of the country; and that state of things had lasted from October to March. Writing on the 19th of March, Sir Hamilton describes the growing scarcity of money; while extensive importations of corn had been made from Liverpool, at a profit to the importer of 30 per cent on the high prices then charged at Liverpool. The people who ought at that time to have been culti- vating the soil were engaged in cutting each other's throats, with no prospect of bringing that state of things to a conclusion. Meanwhile the continuance of these aommotions hadmaterially.affected the security of British property, and by inter- rupting commerce it directly affected the interests of British subjects. In the Month of April, Sir Hamilton Seymour describes the plan of the anarchists to set free 1,200 or 1,400 malefactors then in the gaols of Lisbon. Could Great Britain, with a fleet in the Tagus, have tolerated that? The force of circumstances must have compelled interference. "lithe Queen had said, I will give a guarantee; I will give an amnesty; I will repeal the obnoxious decrees, and undertake to govern constitutionally,'—I say, if the British Admiral, having received this gua- rantee, had-permitted Lisbon to be Bred, and the malefactors to be turned out of prison to propagate their disorders through the streets, and if France and Spain should have interfered, and rescued the Queen and property from such degrada- tion and danger as that, I do say the sympathy of Europe would have been with them and not with you. You would have been blamed forpermitting such a state of things in that country, which you have to a certain degree virtually taken under your protection, and then sheltered yourself under the doctriue of non- interference. If you were to leave Lisbon in flames, and leave it to France and Spain to protect the property of its people, would you in the eyes of Europe have a good defence in the principle of nonintervention? But the blood of the British House of Commons would not have tolerated it."

When they talked about "the cause of liberty triumphing," what security was there, at the end of March, that the insurgents would have triumphed ? He saw no proof of it. Spain was prepared to act. In a letter received on the 28th of March, Colonel Wylde writes, " Saldanha's demand to be allowed to raise a legion in Spain has been acceded to by the Government here"; and he adds, "None but ready-made soldiers will be enlisted." There was a Spanish force on the frontier; and if the British Government had waited until there was a legion of Spaniards engaged in Portugal, it might then have been too late to remonstrate; unless England had chosen to send a military force to take part with the insur- gents. But supposing the Queen had been victorious, where then was the gua- rantee for constitutional liberty? There were intestine divisions even in the Junta; the people showed no enthusiasm; and in the province of Berm there appeared no wish to engage with the insurgents. Now in that case, observe, the Government would have -consisted of those who counselled the transportation of the prisoners taken at Torres Vedras. And if we had refused to interfere—if we had said we will stand aloof, what right should we have had to offer our counsels to the Queen against her reaping the fruits of victory ? Sir Robert thought both France and Spain had shown a disposition to place confidence in this country; while there is nothing to show that they sought to es- tablish a separate influence. He believed that, after the late unfortunate differ- ences—in which he thought France was wrong—there had been a desire to act in a way that would be satisfactory in the offers of Portugal. " I don't think that M. Guizot contemplated a separate intervention. I don't think that the Min- ister of Louis Philippe, considenng what is the foundation of his throne, would advise an unnecessary intervention in the domestic affairs of another country. I entirely acquit the Minister of France of any such intention." But he believed that M. Guizot entertained a sincere opinion that a coons leaden's had arisen under the Quadruple Treaty, and that France was bound to interpose. M. Pacheco, he believed from correct intentions, concurred. Independently of each opinions, a state of things might have arisen—such as the firing of Lisbon and the turning loose of malefactors--which might have justified France and Spain, though England had refused to interfere in preventing anarchy in Portugal.

Supposing the insurgent troops had been victorious, there is no evidence that more moderation would have prevailed; and in either event, at the termination of a harrassing civil contest., it would have been difficult to obtain any one guarantee for the restoration of constitutional liberty or mutual kindness.

Sir Robert pointed oat -some further technical inconveniences if Mr. Home's motion were affirmed. It would paralyze the Executive. What practically WAS to follow from it ? Was Das Antes, with his forces, to be replaced in Oporto? After England had backed out of her obligation, was it to be expected that Spain and France would agree to do so? It is infinitely better, on motives if public policy, that we should continue to act in concurrence with those powers in esta- blishing the throne of Donna Maria on a firm basis. He was ready to vote against the motion without any amendment. The amendment would be merely evading the vote of censure; and if he were the Minister he should not consent to that course, but would say " No" to Mr. flume's resolution. To Mr. Duncombe's reso- lution itself he had no objection; but the question of affirming it by the House of Commons was another matter.

Sir Robert adduced from the correspondence unsmpoeting testimony to the good intention of the King and Queen of Portugal. SII ilatnilton Seymour men- tions proofs of a wise and conciliatory disposition in the King; who wrote a letter to Saldanha, calling upon him to make peaceful overtures to the Oporto Junta. Mr. Southern declared that the benevolent feeling of their Majesties led them to support his views respecting the transportation- of the prisoners from Torres Vedres. After the engagement of the 8th of May, the Queen and King visited the hospital at Lisbon, and gave directions that all the wounded, Insurgents as well as Royalists, should be treated alike. These testimonies to the moderation and good feeling of the Queen and King inspired Sir Robert with the hope, that, if they had better counsels to guide their deliberations, there would be a prospect of returning peace and tranquillity for the country. He expressed deep indignation at the exile of that illustrious man the Duke of Palmella; of all Portuguese the man of the highest political consideration—he who aided the diplomatists of Europe in laying the foundation of that general peace which has lasted thirty-three years. Sir Ro- bert also expressed his approval of the terms on which the intervention had been accorded, and the exclusion of the Cabral faction from the future government of Portugal. He believed the faction to be composed of such men, that if the future government of Portugal were given to them, there could he no security for the attachment of the people of that country to the Crown: and then, indeed, it would not be in the power of England to give that advice and lend that assistance which now she can fairly give and lend; "and I hope that it will fulfil the purpose for which it was so given and lent—namely, to maintain the constitutional monarchy of Portugal, and to induce the monarch of that c,ountV to give guarantees for the constitutional freedom of the people." (Much cheering.) Dr. BOWRING began to speak, apparently in support of the motion. But Mr. NEwnEmtre moved that the Home be counted: only thirty-one Members were found present; and the necessary adjournment wits declared, at a quarter before eight o'clock.

On Wednesday, Mr. BORTHWICK asked whether, if Mr. Hume did not go on with his motion, Mr. Duncombe meant to put his amendment as a substantive motion?

Lord Join( RUSSELL did not know what Mr. Duncombe's intention might be; but he assured the House, that, whether the resolution were put or not, Government would feel it their duty to attend to it- " I am happy to find, from a letter which I have seen within these ten minutes, that the Portuguese Government are of opinion, that, notwithstanding the cap- ture or surrender of Dos Antos and his forces, their right course will be imme- diately to proclaim as full and complete an amnesty as they were prepared to do had the terms originally proposed been accepted by the Junta. (Cheering.) That being the opinion of the Portuguese Government, and the Ministers of the Allied Powers also being anxious that the constitutional rights and privileges of the Portuguese people shall be preserved, and that the amnesty shall be full and general, my honourable friend may think it perhaps unnecessary to make his motion. But I again assure the House, that the Government will take the course I have indicated, whether he makes it or not."

Mr. DIINCOMBE was quite satisfied with that declaration; considering that, after it, his amendment was virtually carried. He asked what had become of the virtuous indignation of some gentlemen behind him, and of "the Country party," who assisted in the counting-out on Tuesday evening? Mr. NEWDEGATE stated in justification of the counting-out, that there was no Cabinet Minister on the bench opposite; that he himself was alone

on the Opposition benches; and that it was iuconsistent with the dignity of the subject to discuss so important a question in an almost empty House. Mr. HUME, who arrived in the midst of this conversation, expressed him- self with great warmth—

The summary disposal of the question did little credit to the House of Com- mons. That it could have taken place without arrangement, be did not believe. He was anxious to have had an opportunity of replying to the speech of Sir Robert Peel, which was a tissue of absurdities. Indeed, he made out his case altogether ins most extraordinary way for one who was acquainted-With that ought to be the duty of a Member of Parliament—to state the truth arid quote papers cor- rectly. Sir Robert had talked of a legion of Spanish troops; but could not show one man of the legion he talked of, because the fact was they did not exist except in Sir Robert's own brain. Mr. Home thought it very extraordinary, that the mo- ment Sir Robert's speech was delivered, Sir James Graham rose and spoke to another Member—perhaps on some other matter—but at all events both moved

off as soon as Sir Robert Peel had finished his speech; and in a moment there was a complete sweep of that side of the House. Mr. Hume must do Lord John Russell the credit to say, that on coming into the Howe a few minutes after it had been counted out, he expressed his regret at the course which had been taken, and said that the termination of the question in that way was not satis- factory at all. Mr. Hume added a few remarks on the subject of the interrupted debate. He had been blaming the Cabinet of Paris; but it turned out that both the French and Spanish Ministers signed the protocol without authority from their own cottrts; so that the whole responeibility rested on the British Cabinet.

Mt was not his intention to renew the motion, unless new matter arose: but in tint ease he might feel it his duty to bring it forward again; particularly if Co- lima Wylde were allowed to continue in Portugal, to act as a firebrand in place of reascliator.

Lewd JOHN RUSSELL did not wish to revive the question; nor did he r. f necessary to defend Sir Robert Peel from any accusation: his ad- mirable and most comprehensive speech kept close to the facts of the case, awl deduced from those facts inferences which it would be difficult to over- come As 'Sonny arrangement, Lord John considered that none were so great losers by abetevinination of the debate as Ministers, since they would have had a consider- able majority. When, therefore, he saw that the opposers of the motion were mete losers by it, he did not much wonder at the course which was taken to ter- minate it. No parallel could be found except by referring to the books of ancient poetry. "I do think it was an interposition for which we have no precedent in madern times, and which resembles nothing so much as the plan pursued by the go& of antiquity, w'necarried away their heroes in a cloud when they were in any &Welty." (Shouts of laughter.) Mr. Hume was prudent in not bringing for- ams!, his motion again, because he would thus save himself from Lord Palmer- abm's reply. With respect to the remark of Mr. Newdegate, that no Cabinet Minister was prment, Lord Palmerston might have gone out for a moment. A Member— 'Mama present.'] Lord John continued. He and Sir Charles Wood had gone iota the House of Lords to see what was going on there; and, from the distance seer, there is not time for Members—a considerable number of whom were there- tenter/1 in order to prevent the House from being counted out. Lord John warmly defended Colonel Wylde from the charge of being a fire- Sir Jaares GRAHAM left the House to decide on which side lay the bsairdity " which Mr. Hume ascribed to Sir Robert Peel; and went on to answer for himself— Lord John Russell had accounted for his leaving the House by saying that he want to the Rouse of Lords: Sir James had a more inglorious reason. The re- mark he made to the friend who was sitting next him was, that, with all his re- ▪ for Dr. Bowring, he preferred going to dinner to listening to him. (Laugh- s) He went home for a short time, and was foolish enough to return; and he

• se-woe more astonished than when he found the debate thus terminated. He wasnot unprepared to take an humble part in it, having arrived at the identical asceusions with those of Sir Robert Peel.

Zr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN said, the real responsibility lay with Ministers:

• iv their duty to keep a House by exercising their influence over Members— There could be no difficulty in always doing so. Ile, as chairman of a railway beard, found that he could easily manage it; for if his men did not come up in ,they got no pay. (Loud laughter.) Mete the matter aropped.

The subject was brought forward in the House of Lords on Tuesday; when Lord STANLEY moved a resolution— That the papers presented to both Houses of Parliament, by her Majesty's immenel, afford, in the opinion of this House' no justification for the recent in- Ilasitsvence of this country, by force of arms, in the internal affairs of Portugal."

Lord- Stanley charged Ministers with violating the principles of inter- Awainna/ law by the treaty of intervention; and he brought forward a great army of arguments and historical precedents, much to the same effect as Mama advanced by the opponents of Ministers in the House of Commons.

rust, he enumerated eases in which this country had preserved neutrality, even aim to 1828, when Don Miguel succeeded in usurping the throne of his niece, his Mwmaign, and his intended wife. Lord Stanley finished this section by quoting a wassage from one of Lord Palmerston's speeches in 1829. Lord Palmerston cordially ammated to the principle of noninterference. It ought to be sacred, he said; but he elheired to strip the word "interference" of an ambiguity which tended to perplex mid confuse. If by interference," said Lord Palmerston, "is meant interference okitree of arms, such interference the Government are right in saying, general anneiples and our own practice forbade us to exert. But if by interference is mew intermeddling, and intermeddling in every way and to every extent short attnat military force, then I must affirm that there is nothing in such inter- Immo which the law of nations may not in certain cases permit; and that the adale history of the connexion between England and Portugal has been almost an mahroken chain of such interference on our part,—nay, more, that the complaint le which the present Government is most justly exposed is, not that they have ect interfered, but that they have interfered only on the wrong side." The noble Ifircount, continued Lord Stanley, seemed to stand up against interference, but in Savour of intermeddling on all occasions. (A laugh.) This was the key to lie noble Viscount's policy; throughout his administration of foreign affairs he bad been bent upon intermeddling just so far as he thought he could go without the risk of actual harm being done. (A laugh ) In this case, unfortunately,

noble Viscount had carried his intermeddling a degree too far; and his con- bed led to the necessity of that armed interference which the noble Viscount, ii 1829, declared that general principles and the practice of the English Govern- ment forbade them to adopt. Lord Stanley described the actual state of Portugal, as Lord George Bentinck lad dune; more at length, but-with less force. He quoted the correspondence, with the view of showing that Colonel Wylde had not acted as an impartial me- dihror, but was a partisan, a mere tool willing to perform whatever Marshal Sal- ha might think proper to desire.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE defended the course pursued by the Go- vernment, with the same arguments as those employed in the other House; bait his defence included also some additional points.

He showed that the course taken by the Government was not based upon an approvaI of the misconduct justly imputed to the Portuguese Government, but is was based upon an admission of that misconduct, and upon the hopeless- ness of a peaceful issue to the cruelty and devastation which had reached their berielit in Portugal.

M the Government of this country had not interfered, one of three results might boas taken place. First. the Queen of Portugal might, if she had succeeded, barreestablished a desparam. Was that a consummation to be desired? She set4ht have been unseen:Will; and the insurgents, having got the upper hand, might have established a republic; which no one could doubt they would have derosif they-had succeeder'. Then there was a third contingency: part of the STaft3 possessed by the insurgents, and by far the most military part, although the leaders carefully disowneu anything like an adherence to Don Miguel and the principles of his insurrection, were favourable to Don Miguel, and they might, if they had succeeded, have established the despotism of Don Miguel. There were therefore, three chances which this country had to contemplate if they did not intrefere,—the despotism of Donna Maria da Gloria; a republic with the Junta of &fee* at its head; and the despotism of Don Miguel. Each of those chalices hi- re-had war, and would have forced upon the Government of this country the ne- eassiey of Ling arms for the purpose of counteracting the evils that would have resalted from it.

1.or.I Lansdowne did not.think that Spain was 'quite wrong in the determina- tion sliehad taken; he did not think that she could see with indifference what was passing in Portugal. When they saw the union that had been cemented be- tween certain parties in Spain and in Portugal, whose object it was to overturn the throne and change the dynasty., the Spanish Government could not afford to view with indifference the great changes which were taking place in Portupl. Lord Stanley said that we ought to have held out a threat to Spurn: that is what his pacific policy would be! He would get himself involved by a side-wind—not by uniting peaceably, but by making war with Spain: and to allow Spain alone to interfere, would not merely embroil Portugal and Spain bat the ultimate result would be to embroil France and this country. Although Lord Stanley had taken advantage of a speech of N. Guiaot, in which he denied that there had been any offer of interference on the part of France by herself, it must not be supposed if, in the course of events, Spam had interfered, and the noble Lord had come down with a war upon Spain for such interference, that France would have stood by and remained perfectly neutral. If the noble Lord founded his policy on a calcula- tion of probabilities for the future, he must not make quite so sure of the per- fect acquiescence of France while we were attacking Spain. He therefore thought that we had pursued a wise policy upon this occasion; and that we had,

as Mr. Canning said in some part of speech to which the noble Lord referred with so much admiration, not waited for war—we had gone before it and had prevented it. Lord Lansdowne defended Colonel Wylde from the charge of partisanship. Colonel Wylde was chosen as an eminent, distinguished, able, and discreet officer, who had been engaged for years in the Peninsular war, knew well the people of Spain and of Portugal, had a leaning towards Liberalism, and a personal knowledge of the Liberals in both countries. The only foundation for the charge of partisanship was that his language had been civil. The Duke of IVELLincrow had listened with attention to Lord Stanley's speech, and agreed in the necessity of absolutely refraining from all inter- ference with the details of any other government; but he must neverthe- less say that this country had a most essential interest in preserving the peace, if possible in preserving the tranquillity of every other country in the world, and of maintaining the due powers of a government with whom we are in friendly alliance.

A British Minister cannot exist in any country in which he will not have a most important and predominant influence in maintaining peace; and it is the duty of a British Minister to watch the proceedings and to endeavour by all means in his power to maintain the tranquillity of the country and the authority of its government. The late transactions in Portugal are partly owing to the want of a sufficient interference by England during the administration of Costs& Cabral; though Lord Howard de Walden had frequently remonstrated against the proceedings of the Portuguese Government, and urged upon the Portuguese Go- vernment the necessity of conducting their proceedings upon popular principles. Although we are bound to avoid all interference with the internal affairs of Portugal, yet our old relations with Portugal, our commercial relations with the Portuguese, our political interest in the position which Portugal should main- tain amongst the independent kingdoms of Europe, require that England should exercise its friendly influence in preserving quiet, order, and good government in that country. It cannot be denied that it is the duty of this Government to pro- vide means of protection for the subjects of her Britannic Majesty residing in Portugal. Now that country was in a state of general insurrection; no great military event bad occurred, but it was governed by two parties, each having nearly an equality oritrength It was ascertained that the insurgent troops had embarked some thousands of men for Lisbon to effect the dethronement of the Queen. Was that an object desirable for this Government to see accomplished? That object had been prevented; and was it possible that the mediating power could act otherwise? He thought the Government was justified in mediating be- tween the Queen and her revolted subjects at the request of the Queen, and with the concurrence of France and Spain; but should the House accede to Lord Stanley's motion, the effect would be to prevent her Majesty's Government from having thii opportunity of bringing to a successful issue the mediation which they had hitherto conducted in so satisfactory a manner. The Government was also defended by the Earl of ST. GERMANS and Lord GRANVILLE. The Earl of W1NCHILSEA supported Lord Stanley. Lord BEAUMONT could not go so far as the motion, but wished no impres- sion to go abroad that the British Government approved of the conduct of the Queen rather than that of the Junta.

The House divided—For the motion, 47; against it, 66; majority for Ministers, 19. The House then adjourned, at half-past ten o'clock.

Some further questions of a minor kind arose in both Houses on Thurs day. Mr. HUTT wished to know whether the blockade of Oporto had been taken off? Lord PALMERSTON hoped that it had, and that the next despatches would announce that Oporto might be approached by shipping as usual.

Mr. OSBORNE wished to know whether the British Government had official information of a Royal decree published on the 6th of June in the Diario do Governo, by which the Queen of Portugal suspended [for one month longer] personal freedom, the liberty of the press, and some minor matters: also, whether the British Government were prepared to enforce the rescinding of it by force of arms if necessary? Lord PALMERSTON answered, that prohably the decree had been issued before the Government at Lisbon was aware that the Junta had accepted the proposed terms; indeed there couid be no doubt that the Portuguese Government would keep good faith with the Junta: but he could not state what Government would do in a supposititious case.

Lord GEORGE BENTINCK drew attention to a decree issued in Novem- ber, by which the Queen not only made the notes of the Bank of Lisbon a legal tender, but rendered private bargains to pay in specie criminal by annulling them; which Lord George denounced as an infraction of the treaty of Lisbon of July 1842. He also complained that the personal guarantee stipulated for British subjects by that treaty, when the Consis- torial Court was given up, had been violated by the abolition of trial by jury. Lord PALMERSTON replied to the first point, that the giving a forced and arbitrary value to paper which was suffering a depreciation in value was by no means unprecedented in history, nor even in the history of our own notes, although it might be at variance with Lord George's Free-trade principles. Government could not anticipate the complaints of British merchants; but when they are made they are referred to the Law-officers of the Crown, on whose opinion the Government acts. With respect to the personal guarantee, a British subject had suffered great injury from the suspension; a claim was therefore made by the British Government for the restoration of the Consistorial Court; the Consistorial Court has been restored, and it now exists.

Lord BROUGHAM asked, whether it was true that when the Torres Ire- dras prisoners arrived at Angola, there happened an insurrection in the co- lony; so that Count Bomfim, instead of being now a prisoner of war, was Governor of Angola? Lord LANSDOWNE said, he had heard of such a re- port, but did not know whether it was true. Lord BROUGHAM—" Have you any doubt about it? " Lord LawsnowNE--" I have some doubts." Lord Bacucium catechised the Earl of AUCKLAND; but without any awn distinct answer.

COLONLZATION4

On Monday, Lord MAncos HILL appeared at the bar of the Commons, with the following reply from the Queen to the address voted on the 1st of June, as moved by Lord Lincoln- " I have taken into consideration the address of my faithful Commons. I am deeply sensible of the advantages that may be derived from the adoption of further measures for promoting colonization; and I shall direct that such further inquiries shall be made as may enable Parliament to adopt such a course free from those evils which precipitate legislation on this subject might cause both to emigrants and the Colonies."

TENANT-RIGHT IN IRELAND.

On Wednesday, Mr. &Tamura CRAWFORD moved the second reeling of the Tenants (Ireland) Bill; engaging to explain its objects more distinctly, though he still left the subject in some obscurity. The principal objects of the bill were, to prohibit the levying of distresses without full notice; and to secure to tenants compensation for improvements on leaving their holdings, without the condition that the holding should have been sanc- tioned by the landlord. He calculated that the bill would stimulate im- provement to the extent of 11 per acre at least, more probably to the ex- tent of 41 or 51.

Mr. MONAHAN objected to the bill, that it was too vague; not deter- mining the improvements for which compensation might be demanded, and providing for adjudication on disputed points by the very imperfect and expensive machinery of arbitration. He moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months.

Mr. BICKHAM ESCOTT suggested that the second reading should be affirmed, as a recognition of the principle; the bill to be reintroduced in another session.

Mr. LABOITCHERE objected to that procedure. He explained that a Government bill on the subject had been delayed by the death of Lord Besborough, who was to have introduced it in the House of Lords.

The measure was supported by Mr. E. B. ROCHE, Mr. M. J. O'Cos- RF.LL, Sir H. W. BARRON, Mr. BOURKE, Mr. MACARTHY, and Mr. POU- LETT SCROPE; opposed by Sir JOHN WALSH, Mr. SHAW, Mr. TRELAWNY, Mr. Yousra, Mr. LEFROY, and Mr. Ross. On a division, the second read- ing was negatived, by 112 to 25.

POOR-LAW ADMINISTRATION.

In the House of Commons, on Thursday, Sir GEORGE GREY moved the order of the day for going into Committee on the Poor-law Administration Bill. This gave rise to a debate on the general merits of the measure. The speeches which referred to it consisted chiefly of those from opponents of the Anti-Poor-law class, and presented scarcely any novelty. Mr. GEORGE BANKES moved that the bill be committed that day three months; and he was supported in his opposition by Captain PECHELL, Mr. GRIMSDITCH, and Mr. SPOONER.

The real interest of the debate, however, lay in a matter entirely foreign to the proper subject. It was introduced by Mr. WILLIAM MILES; who made a statement on behalf of Mr. Chadwick, in reply to aspersions made on that gentleman in the debate on the second reading of the bill. In that debate, Lord John Russell spoke of Mr. Chadwick as having "secretly countermined" his official superiors; and accusations were also made, of his hav- ing preferred groundless charges, having thwarted his superiors in the execution of their duty, and of having done so from personal disappointment. Mr. Miles read a letter from Mr. Chadwick, giving a direct negative to these statements. He had remonstrated against the measures of the Commissioners; but he had done so officially and in form, and every representation that he made was affirmed by the Secretary of State. His complaints were always made of measures rather than of persons. The larger remonstrances were made in 1835, 1837, and 1841; and therefore no disappointment in 1841, as Sir James Graham imputed, could have been the motive to acts begun in 1837 and earlier. The measures proposed by Mr. Chadwick went to the credit of the Commissioners, and not to his credit; the leading reports, &c. bore their names, not his. Circumstantial evidence would negative every imputation. Mr. Miles also read a letter from Mr. Nicholls' the senior Commissioner, in reply to an appeal from Mr. Chadwick. Mr. Nicholls replied in a very friendly manner, testifying to Mr. Chadwick's ability and respectability of character. Mr. Nicholls observed, that they had differed, especially on the question as to the mode of transacting the office business; and he adds—" You know I always thought you wrong; but I never saw reason to doubt your sincerity, or the integrity of your motives." Mr. Miles was followed by Lord JOHN RUSSELL; who stated that he re- spected Mr. Chadwick's ability, and did not question the general respecta- bility of his character; but he did question the propriety of his conduct to the Poor-law Commissioners.

With respect to the measures which Mr. Chadwick thought injurious, Lord John mast say that he agreed with what Mr. Chadwick said. But he founded his disapproval on Mr. Chadwick's evidence before the Andover Committee. Mr. Chadwick had warned the Assistant-Commissioners that they would gain no fa- vour by preferring complaints; which conveyed a charge that the Commissioners wilfully abut their eyes to abuse. If he thought so, he ought to have stated his complaint to the Commissioners; and if they would not listen to him' he ought then to have resigned. Lord John insisted that the practice of telling Assistant- Commissioners, that if they made complaints they would be regarded with dis- pleasure, was an undermining of the Commissioners. He was sorry that he was bound to state that such was his impression, not removed by what he had heard that night. Sir JAMES GRAHAM followed on the same side.

He had a sincere respect for the character of Mr. Chadwick; thought highly of his abilities; and testified in emphatic terms to the many occasions in which he had rendered public services. But he still thought that Mr. Chadwick had been disappointed in being passed over when a successor was appointed to Mr. Lefe- vre; and that the misunderstandings between the Commissioners and Mr. Chad- wick gave a colour to the evidence of Mr. Chadwick against the Commissioners under whom he was serving. He did not think that the continuance of Mr. Chadwick in this particular Commission would be advantageous to the public service. On the other hand, he mast say that the loss of his services to the pub- lic would be a very serious loss- and Sir James trusted that his claims to some other situation would be considered by the Government.

Lord COURTENAY Chairman of the Andover Committee, declared that he saw nothing in kr. Chadwick's mariner, under repeated cross-examina- fions, to create an impression of unfairness on his part. Here the disputation took another turn. Mr. CurusTrE, who spoke warmly in defence of Mr. Chadwick, alluded to an imputation previously made upon himself by Mr. Villiers, that he had questioned Sir Frankland Lewis on his private affairs. That statement was untrue, and arose from a misconception on the part of Sir Frankland Lewis. He misunderstood a question by Mr. Christie, who stopped the reply as soon as he could. Mr. Christie declared that he should be the last person to wound the feelings of any gentleman; and with respect to the warmth of Mr. Villiers, he thought it excused by the fact that that gentleman is the brother-in-law of George Cornewall Lewis. Mr. VILLIERS rose and insisted on his original' charge, with great bitterness. If there were one person from whom am should have expected something unusual—unprofesaional—something, was going to say which a gentleman was not likely to do in the socielar gentlemen, but he would not use any unparliamentary language—it us the honourable Member for Weymouth. Mr. Villiers was proceeding t. allude to an unfounded charge against Sir James Graham but he was ia- terrupted by Sir JAMES GRAHAM, who reminded him that Graham; Christie bad made a handsome apology for the error. Mr. VILLIERS had not for- gotten that; but the apology came long after. He proceeded to commit on the indecent character of the question put to Sir Frankland Lem.; which the Chairman disallowed— Mr. CHRISTIE--" That is not true."

Mr. VILLIERS—" The honourable gentleman is the last man that eaglet lo talk in that way. How dares he make use of that language to me?" (" Oran order!") The SPEAKER interposed. The two Members mutually apologized for having said anything unparliamentary. Mr. VILLIERS, however, went ea to reflect upon Mr. Christie; till the squabble was finally arrested by Sir GEORGE GREY, urging the House to go into Committee.

After a few more speeches on the real question, Mr. Bankes's tumid- meat was put and negatived. The House went into Committee, and passed several clauses of the bill. Some attempts were made at material altera- tions; but they were decisively negatived; and after midnight the Citair- man reported progress.

BIRMINGHAM AND OXFORD RAILWAY CASE. In the House of Lords, AO Thursday, Lord LYNDHURST called attention to the report of the Select Com- mittee on Petitions respecting the Birmingham and Oxford Junction Railway; stating some new complications of the dispute between the North-western Com- pany and the Great Western Company. Ile moved that the Committee be in- structed to proceed with the inquiry. The feeling of the House, however, wsx against going on with the inquirywhile proceedings in the courts of law are pend- ing; and eventually the motion was negatived.

FEVER AND ASSIZES IN IRELAND. In reply to Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN, OR Wednesday, Mr. LABOUCHERE stated that the Assizes in Ireland would be held at the usual time; the proposal to defer them only applying to parts of %Inaba and Connaught, where the state of the gaols is such that the Assizes cant& be held without imminent danger of spreading fever.

AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS. On Wednesday, Mr. MILNER GIBSON, stetieg that there was no hope of carrying the Agricultural Statistics Bill this sessren„, moved that the order of the day for the second reading be read and discharged. Mr. WILLIAM BROWN- and Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN' pronounced a funeral oration over the bill: the latter observing, that it had not been supported by other members of the Government in a manner that showed their sense of its importance_ lle. WAKLEY objected to the withdrawal of the bill: but the SPEAKER told him tint he was too late in discussing the matter; and the order of the day was tier charged.

PROGRESS OF RAILWAY BILLS IN TITE HOUSE OF COMMONS. Paxstemsa PROVED IN COMMITTEE. June 14th.—EdInburgh-and-Northorn (Brawls from Burntisland to Dunfermline branch, &c.) (No. 2.) PROGRESS OF RAILWAY BILLS IN THE HOUSE OF Lonvs. PassmnLis PROVED IN ComeirrrEs. June 1411,—Norfolk. Caledonian (Glassow- Garnkirk-and-Coaterldge; branch to Glasgow, and station). Vale-of-Neath. Land- and-Northwestern (purchase of the Earl of Ellesmere'a interest). Bristal,and-SentW- Wales-Junction-and-And-Ferry. June 154.- Caledonian-and-Dumbartonshire Junction (deviations between )ark;. tocher lime-works and Bowling). Herne-Bay-and-Canterbury JuncUon. SWSZOsik-' Vale. Eastern-Counties (Maldon-Witham-and-Braintree purchase).

June 161/I.—Caledonian (Glasgow-Garnkirk-and-Coatbridge Railway, branch to Glas- gow, and station). South-Wales. Norfolk (Yarmouth extension). General-Teradnos and Glasgow-Harbour Railway Branches. Shrewsbury-and-BIrmingham Act Amend- ment, and branches. East-Lincolnshire (deviation at Boston and branch to Grad- Grimsby-and-Sheffield Junction). Newport-Abergavenny-and-Hereford deviationa.Ans- bergate Nottingham-Boston-and-Eastern Junction (alteration of line and branches). '

June 171h.—Lowestoff (and Harbour) (alteration nearReedham). London-end-Nor. western (Coventry and Minedun branches). Northampton-and-Banbury, Manderinew- Sheffield-and-Lincolnshire, and Manchester and-Lincoln Union, and Chesterfield-and- Gainsborough Canal amalgamation. Dublin-and-Drogheda (Mayan to Kells). Duo- dee-and-Perth (alteration and extension, and Inchture, Polgave, and Ineansicksal branches). Great-Southern-and-Western extension (Portarlington to Tuliarnao.. East-Lincolnshire (Louth-Navigation purchase).

June Hith.—Liverpool Crosby-and-Southport. London-and-North-western (Porto)ello- and-Wolverhampton branch). Birmingham-Wolverhampton-and-Stour-Valley (No. aj.