20 NOVEMBER 1830, Page 1


THE Parliamentary business of the week came to a premature close by the important result of the Commons debate and division of Monday—the resignation of Ministers ! That event has not, indeed, altogether arrested the oratory of the two Houses; but it has wonderfully lessened its quantity, and, in its own absorbing interest, left the public comparatively little inclination to attend to minor matters. The feature of the week was the Civil List debate of Monday. The question whether the accounts should be submit- ted to a Committee of the whole House, or to a Committee of a part of the House, may not seem, at first sight, of very high im- portance; but Ministers had determined to stand or fall by the result, andthey fell. On the same evening that the Civil List was debated in the Commons, the Regency Bill was introduced into the Lords, by Baron LYNDHURST, in a long and masterly speech, most admirably delivered. The Bill has Merely been printed; and it is not probableThat any Anther steps will be taken in it until the new Administration is coMpletely formed. Among other Par- liamentary topics of the week, a summary of which follows are the Resignation of g'"!rs, which was made known officially,on Tuesday and the New Police Act, which has been discussed in both Houses, and on winch,from what fell from Sir ROBERT in the Lower, it seems probable a Committee will soon sit to reme.'y its alleged defects. The questien of the Union with Ireland has beau,,, repeatedly talked of and at, by Mr. O'CoivivEra. and the rest of the House. In the course of Tuesday, it was reported that a sinecure office (thesecond Clerk of Council) of '2500/. a year, which became vacant about thirty-six hours before Ministers resigned, was filled up before its former occupant, Mr. Buller, was quite deal The person appointed was said to be Earl BATHURST'S son, and the appointer Earl BATHURST ; but questions on the subject having been asked in both Houses, the fact of Ae appointment has been denied by his Lordship. An attempt was made by. Sir M. W. RIDLEY, on Wednesday, to have all the election petitions, except two or three, that are fixed for November, postponed to January, on the plea that their settlement (there are sixty-eight of them) was not sufficiently important to detain members in town at ajtime when their private business called for them in the country : it was lost, on a division, by a large majority. Dr. Prm.r.vorrs' living in commend= has been noticed; and the address of Sir James GRAHAM has been withdrawn, on the understanding that the warrant shall not pass the Seals without due notice. The La- bouring Poor Bill of Lord NuoEmr, and the Game Bill of the Mar- quis of CHANDOS, have been reintroduced. Lord TENTERDEN'S Common Law Amendment Bills have been read a second time.

1. THE REGENCY. The object of the Bill introduced by Lord Chancellor LYNDHURST on Monday, is to provide only for such contingencies as Parliament without such a provision might find it difficult to meet in a constitutional and regular way. All those particulars which, should the possible event of a minority occur, the Legislature can regularly provide for, are left to be settled as the future wisdom of Parliament shall see meet. The Princess Vic- toria, the heir presumptive of the Crown, is now in her twelfth year; and as by law the majority of a female is fixed at eighteen years, the utmost period to which the Bill extends cannot be more than six years.

The first question, said Lord Lyndhurst, it was likely their Lordships would ask was, to whom was to be intrusted the guardianship of the in- fant Sovereign? The answer, he was sure, at once suggested itself to all who heard him,—who but the infant Princess's illustrious mother? (Laid cheers from both sides or the House.) The manner in which the Duchess of Kent had hitherto discharged the duties of a parent towards her illustrious daughter—and he did not speak on vague report, but on

the most accurate information—afforded the best security for the satis- SirHenry remarked- factorinessot her future conduct as Regent (Cheers.) The person of l's first,difficulty was to discover where the savings were mad the Regent being thus so cordially agreed upon, the next point was the I next difficulty was to conceive why the source of thern'-Was c extent of the authority to be intrusted to her. He was.sure also on this matter of obtaining the unanimous suffrages of their Lordships. After a mature consideration of the subject, it did not appear to him and his colleagues in the Government wise or expedient that the authority of the Crown during the possible minority should be vested in a Council of Regency, or at all separated from the office of the Regent ; and accord- ingly it is pronosed, that the Duchess of Kent shall be armed with all the authority of the Crown till her illustrious daughter shall have completed her minority.

His Lordship here cited a number °teases, to show that the ap- pointment of an unfettered Regent with responsible Ministers, as provided in the Bill, was not only the simplest but the most con- stitutional method.

" There is still another question," continued Lord Lyndhurst,." to which, however reluctantly, I am compelled to advert. I say reluctantly, because it refers to a possible case for which we have no authority, no precedent. The subject was alluded to in the last session by a noble ear/ who is not now in his place. It is a subject which is certainly beset with very grave difficulties; and I confess that I approach it with some de- gree of apprehension. It was stated by the noble earl to whom I have alluded, i.hat, although the monarch might have no child living at the time of his death., a posthumous child might nevertheless be born. In that case, my Lords, clearly, and without the possibility of controversy, that child, whenever its birth took place, would instantly succeed to the throne. Of that, there is no doubt whatever. But the great difficulty is to decide what are the existing rights in the interval between the demise of the Crown and the birth of such a child."

It is not a little curious that the long line of English monarchs does not present a single precedent of the case here put: The Lord Ctkancellor cited several from French history, which are, however, hut imperfect helps in settling so nice a point.

" We 'are therefore driven to the necessity of considering the subject with reference to what appears to be the general principle of air own law. The descent of the Crown follows the rules of the descent of real property„ in most respects, eXcept where there are two daughters, in which the real property is shared between them. It becomes, therefore, important to inquire what happens with reference to a posthumous child entitled to real property. It has been settled in the courts of justice of this country. that such a child, before it is born, cannot be seised of such property. The right to enjoy and possess it is in the presumptive heir. He has the Whole interest in it from the (Rath of his predecessor until the birth of the child. That precisely the saniedoctrine stands good with respect to thetrown, I will not (said Lord Lyndhurst) ,assert with confidence: but this princip'e is undoubtedly common to both, namely, tridt there. can be

aboraw2e—there can be no TacancY. The Ki . :,1.iter dies ; there - always be a Sovereign. The principiv J real prof.— Ly ;a evpheable to the Crown. The child uaborr. cam_ seised of the Crown ; it must devolve for the time to the presumptive heir. My Lords. jnowaurnieeil..i...--......if—smasening from analogy. I submit it to your -Lordships' consideration—I beg to say,: to your Lordships' in- dulgent consideration—seeing the nature hi the question and the e fficulties which surround it. My Lords, we have two courses to pursue —we must either adopt the course taken in the French monarchy, or we must appoint a Regent to administer the functions of the govern.. ment in the interval between the death of the Monarch and the birth of the posthumous child. Your Lordships tin, however, advert to this cir- cumstance—that the government, under any Regency, must be admi- nistered in the name and on behalf of the Sovereign. If you appoint a Regent to administer the government, without stating that he is to ad- minister it in the name and on the behalf of the Sovereign, you create a Parliamentary Sovereign under the title of Regent. It would be more correct, therefore, under such circumstances, to say that the Regent shall administer the government in the name and on behalf of the pre- sumptive heir; and that he shall be liable to be divested of his authority on the birth of the posthumous child. When I say that the King never dies, I appeal to the uniform proceedings of our courts of justice. There is no proceeding in any civil case, there is no proceeding in any criminal case, which does not take place in the name of the King. Such or such an act is said to be against the King's peace. The King is always sup- posed to exist. I repeat, therefore, my Lords, that the best course will be to appoint a Regent, to act for the presumptive heir to the Crown, -liable to be divested of his authority at the birth of a posthumous child. The seisin in law must rest somewhere, and in whom ought it to rest if not in the heir presumptive? It must be admitted, that the present would be a more fit period for the appointment of a Regent in the event of a posthumous child, than after that circumstance, which must neces. sarily be a period of great excitement and agitation. Therefore, acting

• on the principle which induced Ministers to propose that the Duchess of Kent should be the guardian of the Princess Victoria, and Regent of the kingdom, they also proposed, for the adoption of their Lordships, in the event of the birth of a posthumous child, that her present Majesty should be the guardian of its person, and Regent of the kingdom during the minority."

The debate will be taken on the second reading of the bill ; but, from the very cordial manner in which the statement of the _Lord, Chancellor was received, and from the unanimous appro elicited, it is probable that very little debate will necessary.

2. THE CIVIL LIST. The debate on this qitestion ss On Monday by Sir HENRY PARNELL ; who moved counts which had been laid on the table by Ministers. referred to a select committee. On Mr. Goulburn's

.. • further complexity by his division of his subjects into classea. Sir U. ia country ; and it was not a very wise delusion, as it might have been an- It had always been charged upon and paid out of the Consolidated Fund.

Mr. Goulburn said— not help feeling the difficulty in which I am placed in being called on by the most correct and compendious way of examining the mass of Ashes of the House. And farther, as no change that may take place in the

accounts that Ministers had laid on the table. Administration can by any possibility affect me, I beg it to be understood Mr. CALCRAFT objected to a Committee, on the ground of pre- that, in putting off the motion, I will put it off until the 25th of this month, and no longer. (Cheers.) I will then, and at no more distant period, cedent—the former Committees in these cases had been recom- bring forward the question of Parliamentary Reform, whatever may he mended by the Crown, not called for by Parliament the condition of circumstances, and whosoever may be his Majesty's M i- Lord ALTHORPE admitted, that a great degree of delicacy nisters." (Cheers.) ought to be observed with respect to certain heads of the Civil List. In the House of Lords, the same announcement was made by For his own part, he felt no desire to examine closely into them ; on the Duke of WELLINGTON, for himself, that had been made by the contrary, he wished not to Ave such a power. But with respect to many other heads, to which no such feeling of delicacy attached, he con- Sir ROBERT PEEL for himself and his colleagues.

ceived that much valuable information might be elicited, and therefore 4.

he would support the motion. There were many points, in the other ject to Parliament on Monday, previous to the great one, by items, that required clear explanation ; and certainly it was proper that asking Ministers if they intended to give any increased facilities the House should have the means of accomplishing that object. He was to magistrates for swearing in and remunerating special constables. Sir ROBERT PEEL, after expressing his opinion that the fires had which would render the subject more clear and tangible than the speech of opinion, that those items should undergo a thorough examination.,

of Mr. Goulburn, or the papers that had been laid on the table; for after been the doing of one or two individuals, referred to the act attending to the observations of the Minister and his friends, he could no 1st Geo. IV. c.27, in which it was provided, see in what way the diminution of expense, to the amount of 85,0001., That in all cases where it should be made appear, upon the oath of five was made. There was nothing in the papers which had been laid before respectable householders, that any riot or other breach of the peace had them that explained that point; and he conceived that it would be highly taken place, or was likely to take place, the magistrates may, by precept improper for that House to vote 970,000/. a year for the whole of his Ma- in writing, call on any number of householders to act as special con- jesty's rein without due inquiry. To call on them to vote such sum, stables, whenever they (the magistrates) shall see fit and necessary; in 'without entering into the details in order that they might see in what which case it is competent to the justices at the sessions to order the manner that money was to be applied, appeared to him to be so mon- expenses incurred by such appointment of constables to be paid by a rate strous a demand, as he could scarcely consider it possible for iny Go- upon the county.

Mr. HOLME SUMNER expressed his disappointment at the pro-

vernment to make. (Cheers.) position of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He had given no any new measure for enlarging pledge to his constituents to vote for reduction of expenditure, but magistrates' powers of calling out the civil force of the country he would vote for it as heartily as those who had given such a to repress the outrages, if that act were found insufficient.

pledge. LABOURING POOR, Lord NUGENT'S Bill—the same RS that of The House being cleared for a division, the numbers announced last year—was introduced last night. The first clause of the bill

were— is the only one that is mandatory ; and it is intended to do away Majority against Ministers 29 The result (which had been confidently anticipated some hours permissive to vestries to establish, by a majority of two-thirds, a

the numbers were made known, asked if the Ministers meant to Mr. D. W. HARVEY called upon landlords to look at their rent- before) was received with loud cheers. Mr. HOBHOUSE, when go out at once ; but Sir ROBERT PEEL, to whom the question was irolliys in were to prtziltuncgettheeidreetrerinntse to rtehdautestleanndtare dtiieparttiecue-f

more immediately addressed, gave no answer. Mr. BROUGHAM alder of what was best to be done. waanrdtitheess;

was of opinion that the Minister should be allowed time to con- places, lann"2erstotr Mr. Hinaa thought it preposterous to talk of reducing the rent s greater than even on the previous night The resolution of evils of the country had sprung from the country gentlemen p- 'n at All the uteaet 3. RESIGUA,TION OP MINISTERS. The avenues of the House of of lands to what it had been in 1792, since, in the interval Hz a ons was on Tuesday crowded by twelve o'clock, and the deal of capital had been laid out in its improvement. mbar of lumbers that by four had congregated within its walls, be regulated only by the laws of supply and demand. A h

Be had made the subject complex by separating the Civil Lists of En p., -

Minters consequent on the vote on Sir HENRY Painvitaa's mo- land and Scotland; and, not content with this, he had iffected a still•tio, was not known, unless to the leaders of the House : the


Parnell had put them together, and had tried them by every calculation, greater it of the members, and almost all the strangers, were and he could not by any means in his power make out a saving of above assembled in anticipation of Mr. BROUGHAM'S speech on Reform 27,0001. Something had been stated about deductions with reference to —the great question for Alia discussion of which the night had fees, to the twelvepenny deductions, and to other duties, such as the been set apart. The solemn rising of the Home Secretary at four land-tax, and by these statements it had been contrived tosive an ap- o'clock, was the first indication to the gallery that what many pearance of savings where none existed. This was a delusion on the

looked on as the first step towards the practical accomplishment

ticipated that it would be foreseen and exposed. Next, with respect to of reform had been already taken. Sir ROBERT PEEL spoke as the pensions ;They were reduced only in form. By taking off the twelve- follows :

penny deductions, the revenue was reduced in a greater proportion than " Sir, the unfeigned respect which I owe to this House induces me to the saving effected by any reductions which had been made in the pen- take the earliest possible opportunity of publicly stating, in my place, sions. If he was wrong in this statement, the Minister was alone to be that, in consequence of what occurred last night, I felt it my duty to wait ' reproached with the error ; for, as far as his accounts could be under- upon the King. .and humbly and respectfully to inform his Majesty that I stood, they led to these inferences. It had been a maxim, that when any no longer found it in my power to administer public affairs, so far as disputed point could be reduced to a question of figures, all disputes or those affairs depended upon me, either with satisfaction to my own feel. argumentswould end, for figures could not err. Very different, however, ings, or advantage to the country. I therefore tendered to the King my was it with Treasury or Exchequer arithmetic, for of all subjects this resignation ; which his Majesty has been graciously pleased to accept; was the most productive of error, confusion, and contradiction. Of the and I now hold the seals of the Home Department only till my successor 38,0001. fallen in as a saving upon the Duke of Clarence's allowance, it shall have been appointed. In like manner, my colleagues, the other could not be said that it was any saving upon the Civil List. This was members of the Cabinet, hold office only till -other individuals shall have manifest, for that allowance had never been charged upon the Civil List ; been appointed to succeed them."

On this subject there could not by any possibility be any mistake, and The cheering that accompanied this announcement, and Sir why, therefore, had Mr. Goulburn made this mis-statement ? By putting Robert's sitting down, had no sooner subsided, than Lord AL- to the Civil List what he knew belonged to the Consolidated Fund, he bad THORPE rose to propose the adjournment • of Mr. BROUGHAM'S made a saving upon the Civil List appear more than it really was, by motion. The resignation of the Ministry, his Lordship conceived, 38,0001. When he saw such errors introduced into an account upon

points so palpable, he had a right to suppose that there were many other rendered it quite impossible to discuss a subject of so much im- errors of as bad a description, in parts of the account that were more portance with any advantage to the country ; nor had any so im-

complichted, and he must add unnecessarily complicated. portant question ever been brought forward under such circum- Mr. Gouanuax objected strenuously to a Committee, on the stances.

ground that a Committee, such as was proposed, without power to Mr. Baormiime—" I am sure that the respect which I feel for this examine persons and send for papers, could do nothing that it House is, on all occasions, fully equal to that which has been so fitly was not competent to the House itself to accomplish ; an argument and so gracefully expressed by the Right Honourable Secretary. I do, however, feel the greatest repugnance to putting off the motion which which he fortified by the example of Mr. Tierney, who had re- stands for this evening. My noble friend near me is quite right in saying fused to serve on such a Committee because of its inutility. It that no question of so much importance has ever before been brought had been objected, that the mixing up with the Civil List of va- forward when there was a deficiency in the executive government; but rious accounts which had no necessary connexion with it, gave a my difficulty is this, that no question of so much importance—no ques- dangerous argument to those who were interested in deceiving tion involving such mighty and extensive interests—has ever yet been the people, by holding up the expense of his Majesty's establish- discussed at all, under any circumstances, within the walls of this house. Sensible, therefore, of the deep responsibility which I have incurred in ment as much greater than it was : in answer to this objection, undertaking to bring forward a question of such vast importance, I can-

Mr. BANKES thought that a Committee should be adopted, • •t, therefore, to be understood, that what I do, I do in deference to the INCENDIARIES. Mr. HOLME SUMNER introduced this sub- 6

He thought this act gave all the powers required. He was, however, most ready to concur in For the original motion 204 with the system called roundsmen—a system which exists in a For the Select Committee 233 great many parishes, and which increases the rates, whilst it de- grades the population.. The remaining clauses of the bill are only Majority against Ministers 29 The result (which had been confidently anticipated some hours permissive to vestries to establish, by a majority of two-thirds, a common rate of labour.

pnasyionws, andliwwasw impossible ssible for the porting the Government in its extravagance. The country wanted a cheap Government.

5. UNION WITH IRELAND. The question of the repeal, for the complete discussion of which so much anxiety has been displayed in the House, has been incidentally touched upon 'once or twice during the week. The presentation, on Thursday, of a petition complaining of the form of the franchise in Galway., gave occasion to Mr. JOHN Woon to state what he conceived to be the real grievance under which Ireland laboured, and which was soughtte be remedied through the means of a local Parliament.

The repeal of the Union was clearly impracticable ; and even if it could be accomplished, still he thought it would be extremely mi,chievous to Ireland as well as to England. But he did not believe that the Irish people wished for a repeal of the Union. The fact was, that the Irish people knew that if the Union had not taken place, the libus.es which prevailed in the Church establishment of Ireland would have been corrected long before this by the Irish Parliament. He believed that the Irish people wanted the correction of those abuses ; and that, being afraid to speak out on that subject, they prayed for what they did not want—namely, a repeal of the Union. This was a very mistaken course. Let them in an open and manly way direct their petitions against the abuses of the Church establishment in Ireldnd, which were real grievances, and then they would find many English gentlemen ready to support their petitions.

The mention of the Irish Church led to a conversation, in which Mr. GonenunN defended the character of its members, and de- nied that the number of absentees was so great as alleged. Mr. HUME said, no one wished to assail the character of the Irish clergy ; and that, for the purpose of settling the absentee question, he would move next day for returns of all the clergymen who were non-resident.

On Friday, the Union was more directly canvassed, on a peti- tion presented by Lord G. BEREsFORD from a town in.the county of Waterford. Sir JOHN NEWpORT said—

His decided conviction was, that the repeal of the Union would be at- tended by consequences the most deplorable to Ireland. He had always looked upon the Union as a measure which, once passed, was irrevocable; and he knew that it had been so considered by those great andillustrious men who had been its greatest opponents. It had always been considered by Mr. Grattan, and by the most eminent men who had acted with him, that the measure of the Union, being once passed; could not afterwards be repealed. A great many consequences had been attributed to the Union, which did not properly belong to it. He believed that many abuses which existed before the Union, and much of the misgovernment of the local Parliament of Ireland, were attributed, and falsely attributed, to the Union ; and when gentlemen called for the repeal of the Union, he begged leave to remind them, that lie was old enough to recollect that many of those who now joined in that cry were formerly the loudest in the reprobation of the local Parliament.

Lord NUGENT considered the theory that Irish labourers in- jured the English peasantry, to be ridiculous. They always arrived in summer, when wages were high and work plenty ; it was in winter, when the Irish irruptions had ceased, that the English peasantry really suffered. The Member for Londonderry instanced, as a proof of the feel- ings of the country On the question, a public meeting, recently held at Belfast, where every man of education, intelligence, opu- lence, and respectability in the town—no matter what were his reli- gious opinions or political creed—had joined in declaring themselves opposed to a repeal of the Union.

Mr. O'CONNELL denied that the Belfast meeting was a pub- lic one ; which he afterwards explained to mean—not a meeting called by public advertisement.

He contended that every man of talent, independence, and wealth— not merely in Dublin, but throughout all Ireland—was anxious to obtain a repeal of the Union. He denied that the great men who had opposed the passing of the Union had ever considered it as an irrevocable measure when once passed. He gave that denial to Sir John Newport's assertion, on the authority of a printed speech of Lord Plunkett, who had declared that he would resist the Union to its last stage, and would educate his children in the deepest hostility to it. Mr. GEORGE Mot:gm—Instead of the wealth and the respectability an d the talent of Ireland being friendly to a repeal of the Union, he would venture to say, that all the genuine commercial activity—all that could be fairly included in the respectability, and all that could be properly called the talent of Ireland—were loud in expressions of disapprobation against agitating such a question as the repeal of the legislative Union between the two countries. (Cheers.) Mr. O'Connell had said that there was, in Dublin, a strong feeling in favour of the repeal of the Union. Now, he not only denied that assertion, but he would venture to say that there was not, in that city, any one intelligent being, who was capable of understanding the question, and of appreciation- the disastrous conse- quences which must result from a repeal of the Union, who would not be ready to sacrifice all he possessed in order to preserve the Union iqviolate. (Cheers.) In the course of the evening, Mr. O'CONNELL presented a pe- tition to a similar effect.; when he took occasion to state, in re- spect to the. operation of the Sublettine. Act, which was discussed last week, that on Earl Fitzwilliam's estate in Wicklow,

Instead of 800 persons having got notice to quit (which was his original statement), it would appear, from the documents which had been for- warded to him, that 1,544 persons had received such notices, and their names and residences were furnished to him. He had also received do- cuments fully confirming his statement as to the estate of Lord Rathdown.

The fact of the case seems to be, as Mr. O'CONNELL states it, that writs had been served as alegal formality; but that no eject- ment followed ; that Mr. O'Connell's informants told him only of the serving of the writs, and he inferred the turning out, while the friend of Earl Fitzwilliam knew only that the tenants remained, and hence inferred- the non-serving' of the writs. A similar error seems tohave led to the charge against Lord Rathdown.

6. THE NEW Pothoz.—The new system of Police in the metro- pHs was brought before Parliament on Monday night, by Lord aa .; who presented a petition from the parish of St. Mary, Newington, praying to be relieved from the operation of the act. It appears that, during the six months that preceded the introduc- tion of the New Police into that parish, the number of burglaries was 128, and the expense of watching 3,000/. ; in the six moot* that followed the introduction, the number of burglaries was 145, and the expense of watching 4,390/. : the inhabitants therefore complained, that they were, without their consent, charged one- fourth more under the new than under the old system—that they got less protection, and paid much dearer for it. Lord Durham exemplified, in the case of St. George's parish, still more strongly the increased burden entailed by the new system ; where the cost of watching has been raised from 5000/. to 17,0e01,, without any apparent additional security to the property of the inhabitants. Lord Durham suggested, as one obvious amendment of the Police system, that each parish should have the appointment of an in- spector—a resident householder, to represent its interests. He objected also, with the petitioners, to placing the control of the Police wholly in the lands of the Secretary of State ; not only be- cause it gave the power to expend the public money to parties who did not contribute to the raising of it, but because of the political use to which the Secretary might turn his influence. Lord Due- ham particularly alluded to the alleged case of interference in the Norwich election.

Lord SUFFIELD defended the increased charge in St. George's parish, on the principle that the watching was more extended and beneficial than before ; that it extended to the lanes of the poor as well as the squares of the wealthy. Lord ROSSLYN expressed his disbelief in the existence Of Government interference in the Norwich election ; but candidly observed, that he knew nothing on the subject. In answer to a question of Lord DURHAM, he stated that Government did not intend either to repeal or to modify the act. The same question was mooted in the Commons on Thursday, on the presentation of a similar petition.. Sir ROBERT WILSON thought the increased expenses of the New Police was a subject which called for investigation. As to the unconstitutional nature of the force, he ridiculed the terrors of those who imagined that the liberties of twelve hundred thousand people could ever be brought into jeopardy by a force of five or six thousand men. Sir ROBERT PEEL stated, that had he remained in office, he would have recommended a Select Committee to inquire into the alleged evils of the Police; -and he hoped such a Committee would yet be appointed. It might be made a question, whether a portion of the charge for the Police might-not be fairly borne by the country at large. He believed that if the expense for the Police had been limited to Gd. in the pound, they would not have heard a word about the unconstitutional nature of that force. He feared-that it would be impossible to maintain the Police establishment at a less charge than that now incurred for it ; and if. that charge was to continue to be defrayed by a local tax, it would be impos- sible to reduce it below 8d. in the pound. The maximum charge, it should be observed, was fixed by the act at 8c/. in the pound ; and if the over- seers of the different parishes asked the inhabitants to pay 2s. 6d. in the pound enaccount of the New Police, he would tell them that the over- seers had no legal authority to levy more than 8d. in the pound for that purpose. He would say, as Secretary of State, that if the police force was not honestly managed and conducted, it would be a curse, instead of being an advantage, to the public. With regard to the recommendations of the parishes, they had been always properly attended to. The parishes should understand, that they could recommend individuals who were qualified for the situation, and that in that case their recommendations would be attended to, as well as those from any other quarter. But if they were to recommend whoever they thought fit, and if there was to be no check on their recommendation, the effect would be to give to the parishes a control over the appointment of the police, which it was the object of the act to take out of their hands.

7. ELECTION' PETITIONS. On Monday, Mr. STUART WORTLEY attempted to persuade the House to discharge the order for the consideration of the petition against his return for the Forfar dis- trict of boroughs, and to appoint some more distant day. Sir CHARLES FORBES opposed the postponement: when this case should come on before an Election Committee, it would not stand five minutes, and the sitting member would be unseated. Mr. S. Worerear's attempt was unsuccessful.

On Wednesday, Sir M. W. RIDLEY moved for the postpone- ment of all Election Committees except those which have been appointed for the present month (Forfar stood for the 2d. Decem- ber), as there would be an adjournment for a considerable time to enable the King to form a Ministry. Mr. C. WYNNE opposed this motion as equivalent to a delay of justice : from the state of public business there would be no recess till Christmas, and then only for a few days. Mr. BROUGHAM also strenuously opposed the motion.

What was it to them that Ministers were not in their places ? What did they want with the presence of Ministers on election petitions! Ministers were very good persons for certain purposes, but; with all re- spect for the future Administration, he must say that he did not see how their presence could be necessary at a ballot. He said, "with all re- spect for the future Administration,"—for surely he ought to respect gentlemen who would govern the country on right principles ; and he begged to observe, that, except as a member of that House, he had no- thing to do with them, but respect them, any more than —[We did not, says the Times, catch the conclusion of the sentence. Some persons who were in the front row of the gallery, said that the words were these —" any more than I had to do with the Administration of Mr. Can- ning."] He stated this for the information of those who took any -in- terest in knowing the fact. The question involved in election petitions was the most important possible,—namely, whether some who were sit- ting in that House were sitting there rightly or wrongly, and whether many who claimed a right of sitting there were excluded rightly orwronsly„ The question was pressed to a division, and negatived by 156 to 91. S. DR. PHILLPOTTS. In the midst of the above debate, Sir JAMES GRAHAM took occasion to put a question to Sir Robert Peel touching Dr. Phillpotts. He observed in the Gazette of last night that a conga d'elire had passed the Great Seal, empowering the Dean and Chapter of Exeter to elect a Bishop of that see, and recommending them to elect Dr. Phillpotts. The question he wished to ask was, whether his Majesty's Ministers, now confessedly holding office only pro tempore, would take upon them- selves to advise his Majesty to grant permission to Dr. Phillpotts to hold the valuable rectory of Stanhope in commendam, if that living should happen to become vacant before their successors were appointed ? Sir ROBERT PEEL stated, that the warrant to hold in cons- mendam the living of Stanhope had not passed the Seals, and that it was very improbable that it would during the time that they remained in his possession, as the living would not be vacated until the consecration of Dr. PhiLlpotts as Bishop of Exeter ; but if there were any chance of its passing the Seals before his suc- cessor in office was installed, he would not fail to give Sir James due notice.

The notice for an address to the King, not to allow the living of Stanhope to be held in commendam, which stood for Thursday, was accordingly withdrawn.

9. BELGIUM. Mr. Hommusx on Friday postponed his motion re- specting the question of interference with Belgium, in consequence of the unsettled state of the Administration.

10. COMMON LAW AMENDMENT. Lord Tenterden's Bills, founded on thd Common Law Commissioners' Report, were read a second time on Thursday in the House of Lords. They seem intended solely for the edification of professional men : indeed the very titles are unintelligible without a law dictionary. Lord TENTERDEN ex- pressed his opinion, that too much caution could not be exercised in innovating on the common low. Lord WyNFoau held a differ- ent opinion.

The law, as now administered, was far too expensive and dilatory for the purposes for which it was framed, and which the subject had a right to expect ; and as he was strongly impressed with this conviction, he would next week submit a proposition to their Lordships with a view to a remedy.

11. THE GAME LANs. The Marquis of Chandos's Bill wasagain introduced on Friday, and read a first time.