Illiebatett atilt Pratte/rim: in parliament.

1. WEST INDIA QUESTION. On Monday, the Earl of HAREWOOD moved for a Committee of Inquiry into the causes of the present dis- tressed state of the West India Colonies. He described the meeting from which the petitions emanated, and in accordance with which he moved for the Committee, as one of the most respectable, in all points of view, that he had ever }men present at. He disclaimed all political feeling in making his motion. All that he or the petitioners demanded was, that their case should be fairly and impartially considered. He said the distress complained of did not arise from accidental causes; it bad had been of long standing. He denied that the planters had any wish to retain the Negroes as slaves, were an alternative open to them. Free labour would be much better ior the interests of the planters than slave labour, if it were within their reach. He came at length to the Orders in Council, so much and loudly complained of. He said they were wholly unsuited to the actual state of the Colonies, and went to justify an opinion that the Black population was utterly neglected there. Al-. though much remained to be effected, it was absurd to suppose that the slaves were either morally or physically neglected. He blamed the ap- plication of one general rule to colonies so different as Demerara and Barbadoes ; and deprecated strongly the means by which the acceptance of these Orders in Council was sought to be insured by giving certain advantages to those who accepted them, of which the rest were to be deprived. It was the wish of the petitioners that the execution of these orders should be suspended until the report of the Committee was made known.

Lord SUFFIELD said, the Government would act a very extraordinary part if they agreed to a committee on such a case. Their Lordships were surely not ignorant of what was notorious to every one else. It required no committee to tell them that the Colonies were distressed ; the mere existence of slavery in them was sufficient to prove it. Former Governments had professed to interfere for the purpose of im- proving the condition of the slaves, but it remained for an honest Go- vernment to do what their predecessors had talked about. The local legislatures of the West Indies had hitherto resisted all attempts at amelioration of the condition of the Negroes ; and if they continued to do so, they must take the consequence.

Lord G ODERICH defended Government in the issue of the Order in Council complained of. It was framed in strict accordance with the resolutions of 1823. For eight years, the suggestions of Government had been treated in a way to disappoint the expectations of Parliament; and it became in consequence a matter of absolute necessity that some additional inducement should be given to the Colonies. The objections made to the minute details, particularly of the despatch that accompanied the order of 1810, were founded on a false view of its object. The de- spatch had been drawn up from the existing regulations of several of the sugar colonies ; and it was intended to serve as a text-book for a gene- r,dobde of slave regulation. It was necessary that it should go into minute details. He was well aware that the planters suffered under great difficulties ; and he felt that, to inquire into the cause of these difficulties, was no more than was due to their magnitude and duration. At the same time, however, that be conceded the Committee demanded by Lord Harewood, be exceedingly doubted whether the demand was a politic one : instead of moderating what was termed the intemperate haste of Parliament, he rather thought its results would serve in future to accelerate it.

Lord SEAFORD said he did not, because he had voted for the resolu- tions of 1823, conceive himself pledged to the Order in Council that followed them ; and he knew that Mr. Canning did not think he was so pledged. He contrasted the conduct of Mr. Canning towards the West India legislatures and that of the present Government—

Did Lord Goderich wait to see what would be the effect produced by those regulations sent out, in 1830, to Trinidad, St. Lucie, and Demerara, upon the people's minds and the Legislature,in Jamaica, and other independent local Le- gislatures? No. He tells them, by the despatch sent out, they must adopt these regulations into practice ; or, if they do not do so, he has it in his power to coerce them by excluding them from the benefits of the boon intended for them by the relaxation of a part of the duties on their produce, to which Parliament thought they were fairly entitled from recent occurrences. He confessed he re- gretted the reception the Colonists had given to the recommendations of Go- vernment. If, however, they had showed any want of temper, had there been no want of temper on the part of their adversaries?

That the Colonists were every way disposed to ameliorate the con- dition of their slaves, he inferred from the congratulatory reports of the Bishops of Jamaica and Barbadoes. He reminded the House of the important act of the Legislature of Jamaica, in removing the disabilities of the people of colour,—an act passed without any communication with the mother country. He quoted a speech of Mr. Canning, and of Mr. Fox, to show the impossibility of carrying into effect the amelio- ration of the slaves, unless through the medium of the master. He concluded by conjuring Lord Goderich- Not to let the feelings of pride impel him to persist in measures which he could not but see, from the present aspect of affairs, wouldprove injurious. He conjured him to take the opportunity which now presented itself, by the change which had been effected in the Government of Jamaica, of sending out the olive- branch of peace to the Colonists by the hands of the Earl of Mulgrave ; and thus endeavour to bring back the slave population to their original habits of obe- dience and industry, i by which means they might ultimately succeed in again re- storing that confidence in the minds of the West India proprietors, both in this country and in the Islands, which recent occurrences rendered him apprehensive had been next to lost for ever.

The Archbishop of CANTERBURY corroborated the account given by Lord Seaford of the progress of improvement in the Islands since the appointment of a bishop and resident clergy. More churches had been built in the West Indies during the last fifteen years, than had been known to be established in any other country during so short a period.

The Duke of WELLINGTON said, with the exception of the recom- mendation respecting manumission, there had been every endeavour made by the various Colonial Legislatures, during the last nine years, to carry into effect the recommendations of Parliament. There was not one island in which some of these recommendations had not been adopted. He felt convinced, that ultimately all that could be done would be done by the Colonists. As to forcing them, he had never contemplated such an idea— With respect to the recent Orders in Council, there could not be a doubt that they were intended so to operate as a direct tax upon those colonies which re- fused to acquiesce in them ; for, in one of them, it was distinctly stated that those colonies in which they were adopted should not pay a certain tax—whilst those colonies which rejected them were to be subjected to a heavier tax upon their produce. Now, in God's name, if taxes were to be paid for the use of the State, let them be so. But who ever paid taxes except for the immediate and actual necessities of the State? To what purpose were the taxes raised from the people applicable, except to the service of the State? and who was it that would be called upon to pay. this tax upon the produce of these colonies who refused to adopt the Orders in Council ? The people of England were to be called upon to pay this tax; and a proposition such as this, he was convinced, Parliament would never recognize.

The Duke mentioned the case of an estate where the gross produce amounted to 6,0101, and from which, notwithstanding, the proprietor received only 7281— .

He could not really understand why a West India proprietor was not as well entitled to protection in his property as any other British subject ; yet nothing was heard of but the cruelty of slavery and the necessity fur its sbolition—at the saine time that people totally forgot the enormous amount of property which was invested by the King's subjects in this question. Iu fact, it nes impossible to derive any advantage from the property in the West Indies, exi ept through slavery, either to the public or to individuals; and this was of itself a sufficient reason.

Lord BROUGHAM remarked on the view of the Orders in Council taken by Lord Seaford, in the inference drawn from the quotations he had made— Who of their Lordships doubted, independent of any notions of Mr. Fox, that such a proceeding would have been not only wild and unjust, but that it would have been the most ill-judged, unwise piece of policy that could have been adopted ; and that to emancipate the slaves suddenly, and without say prepara- tion, would be the most disadvantageous course to themselves which could be taken? Who doubted that the proper way to proceed was by gradually pre- paring- the minds and habits of the slave popillaticAiw freedom, by instruction, and the imposition of nieral in lieu of physical restraint?

The Duke of Wellington had said that some of the Orders had been adopted in every one of the islands— But even should such prove to be the case, the most important of them had never been applied iu any save the smallest and most insignificant of the colo- nies; and, consequently, their effect had never been tried on a large or extended scale. In order, however, to show the disposition which existed in the different Governments—which, as the Duke had stated, had tbllowed each oiler's steps— with regard to these colonies, he would only cite one instance, and that was, the steps which were taken towards rendering. slave evidence admissible. Now there was no doubt that this was, to a certain extent, done in all the Colonies; but the Government to which he referred passed one act rendering it admissible generally. When this act was promulgated, the Legislative Assemblies in the Colonies certainly agreed generally to sutler the admission of slave evidence, but they fettered it, in sonic cases, to such a degree that the law was ineffective. For instance, they required the slave to produce in court a certificate from the clergyman that he was a credible person ; and even then, the evidence was barely admissible—no more. In many places, also, the slave was not under the reli- gious care of the clergyman; and the consequence was, that he was unable to procure his certificate. There were other ewes also, where it was decreed that the certificate of the overseer, as to the slave's comprehension of the nature of an oath, and of the moral obligation which it imposed on him, should be de- livered before the evidence was admissible.

After a few words from Lord ELLENBOROUGH, the Committee was agreed to.

2. NEWTOWNBARRY MASSACRE. On Monday, a long conversation took place on the subject of this frequently-discussed affair, in conse- quence of a motion by the Earl of Wicklow for certain documents connected with the erasure of Captain Graham's name from the list of magistrates. The Marquis of ANGLESEY spoke against the motion. He defended the omission of Captain Graham in the new Commission, on the ground that he had no right by law to call out the Yeomanry— that he behaved with great indiscretion in calling out that force on such an occasion, even had it been perfectly legal to do so—that he made no exertion to stop the firing after it was begun. The Marquis spoke of the Marquis of Westmeath writing letters against the Government, instead of endeavouring to preserve the public peace. The manner in which the Magistracy generally performed their duties, was highly blame- able— He could not adduce stronger proof of this than by quoting the evidence which was given by a Catholic farmer at some assizes recently held in Ireland. This individual, on being asked whether he looked quietly on and witnessed the out- rages which were perpetrated around him, replied, addressing himself to the magistrates, " Yes, I am compelled to do so ; but if you and others who call yourselves gentlemen would come forward and exert yourselves, instead of skulk- ing out of the country, I would assist you, and the disturbances would soon be suppressed."

The Marquis of WESTMEATH said, he wished to God that be was at home; but he was attending his duty in that House, and he could not be in both places at once.

The Earl of RODEN said, Captain Graham was dismissed to please the demagogues of Ireland; his dismissal had been felt as an insult by all the Protestant gentlemen.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE commented on an expression of Lord Wicklow's. The Newtownbarry affair was termed "a trifling act:" was the slaughter of twenty-three defenceless people a trifle? Much had been said of the demagogues of Ireland— But, placing the demagogues on one side, and the Orange societies on the other, he certainly would prefer the demagogues as being the least mischievous class of the two. What did noble lords opposite desire? If they supposed that the law, as it now stood, was not sufficient to secure the peace of the country, why did they not state what they wished to be done? Did they mean to have martial law proclaimed?

Lord Wialmin.see defended Orange societies • of which he avowed himself a member. He denied that Captain Graham had acted either injudiciously or indiscreetly.

Lord CLONCURRY supplied an omission in the debate, by stating the origin and nature of the affair at Newtownbarry- It arose out of a dispute, as to whether or not the tithes claimed were due. The clergyman offered to have the matter left to the decision of two lawyers; but the people preferred having it left to two country gentlemen, who were the MS of clergymen. The clergyman to whom the proposition had been made of bringing the parish under the Tithe Composition Act, had said that as he owed money, thepansh should pay him half-a-year in advance; and they did so ; but at the end of the half-year he wanted to be paid another half year : many of the people said, that instead of being called on for any tithe then, they ought to be allowed for the half-year they had paid. Some, however, did pay, but others disputed it ; and it was this dispute which caused the affray. It was for the collection of tithe • so disputed, that-the magistrate called out the Yeo- maary—he, as a magistrate, giving the order to himself, as the captain of yeo- manry, and thus acting as magistrate, and yeoman, and driver, and all.

The motion of the Earl of Wromow, for the opinion of Mr. Greene, was negatived, and the production of the other documents moved for was agreed to, without a division.

3. laisH Taro BILL. On Monday, Mr. PETRE having assigned as a reason why he voted for this bill, the oath that he had taken to support the Protestant Church both in England and Ireland, Mr. SHELL said, he did not participate in Mr. Petre's scruples— According to the oath which he had taken, he would feel bound in conscience and in duty, if a proposition should be made to strip the Protestant Church of all its temporalities, to oppose such a proceeding ; but he did not think that that oath prevented him from supporting, like any other member of Parliament, measures which went to deal with that Establishment, or to settle it on a more liberal and legitimate basis.

Mr. STANLEY described this reasoning as sophistical, and the doe- trine it defended as dangerous— Let the honourable and learned member beware of the course he was pursu- ing. The principle upon which Ministers had founded their measure of Re- form was not that of universal enfranchisement, but that of giving a share in the representation to as large a portion of the people as possible without danger to existing institutions. He believed the people of Ireland were slandered by those who said that they would return members to a Reformed Parliament pledged to the destruction of the Church Establishment. If he did not believe that a safe constituenie; would lie established by the Irish Reform Bill, lie would even now abandi,n that measure.

The bill was read a third time, after a division, in which there appeared fur the bill 52, against it 10.

4. POLAND. The question of Poland was introduced on Wednes- day, by Mr. CUTLAR FiatoussoN, on the motion of Lord A.I.rnolie

for the adjournment of the House to Monday the 7th May. Mr. Fergusson wished to submit, whether the Emperor of Russia, having received the sovereignty of Poland subject to certain conditions, had a right to annihilate the independence and existence of that country whenever it suited him. He noticed the earnestness with which, at the Congress of Vienna in 1814, the late Marquis of Londonderry had contended for the independence of Poland, and how warmly he had been seconded by M. Talleyrand. He described the terms of the treaty agreed on with that view,—guaranteeing an independent legislature and

army to Poland, the right of imposing taxes through the medium of its own Diet, the freedom of the members of the Diet and of the press. He adverted to the violation of these several conditions of the treaty, consequent upon the appointment of Constantine as viceroy, and its consequences— The repeated violations of the Polish constitution justified the insurrection which took place ; bat when Russia succeeded suppressing that insurrection, what pretence was there for putting. an end to the independence of Poland? This country might with as much justice have deprived Ireland of her privileges after the rebel!i.in, or have reduced Scotland to a province in consequence of the assistance which the people of that country afforded to the enterprise of the Pre- tender, which made the King shake upon his throne.

He noticed the only hope that the friends of liberty possessed against further encroachments of a similar character— The friends of liberty in every part of Europe were entitled to look for pro- tection to France and England, and he hoped that the time would yet come when

it would be extended to them. It was his most earnest wish that the feelings of amit?which at present subsisted between ',France and England would long continue to animate the people of both countries. If France and England con- tinued united in support of liberal institutions, the independence of Europe would be secured from any attack, come from what quarter it might.

He adverted to the sentiments in behalf of Poland proclaimed by the French King, and echoed by the Chamber of Deputies, and to the speech of M. Perier on the 7th March ; from which it was quite evident, that the French Government had not the most distant expectation of the step that had been taken by the Russian Emperor. If he were asked,

did he wish England to go to war for Poland, he should say no ; but he wished every means short of war to be employed in its behalf. He spoke of the personal character of the' Emperor— There had been much talk of the clemency of the Emperor Nicholas. How did he show that clemency? Why, by transporting thousands of the gallant men who had served in the Polish army to the inhospitable climate of Siberia, after having prevailed on them to submit by promises of clemency and for- bearance. The same mild Emperor had directed the Governor of Wilna to take

measures to exterminate the remnant of the Polish army which had not yet submitted to the Russian autocrat. He directed his instrument to disregard all ordinary forms, and to execute upon the spot all individuals whom he might think worthy of punishment.

Lord ALTHORP said, they had as yet received no official information of the occurrences which had recently taken place in Poland ; and for

that, as well as for other reasons, it was not to be expected that he should at that moment enter into the views entertained on that subject by his Majesty's Government. At the same time, it was impossible for him even to touch upon such a subject without expressing the pro- found sympathy which the sufferings of the unhappy Poles must excite in the breast of every man of common humanity : m that sympathy, he trusted the House would do his colleagues and himself the justice to believe that they fully participated. Beyond that, it was impossible for him, at the present moment, to go ; unless he were merel) allowed to observe, that the Government of this country had at no time held out any encouragement tending to incite the Polish nation to the late con- test, which ended so fatally for their interests.

Sir GEORGE WARRENDER, Mr. LABOUCHERE, Lord SANDON, Mr. P. COURTENAY, Colonel Fox, Mr. HUME, Sir CHARLES FORBES, and Mr. SHELL, joined Mr. Fergusson in deprecating, in terms more or less strong, the conduct pursued by Russia towards Poland. Sir CHARLES. FORBES said, if the Poles had hanged Constantine on the highest pin- nacle of Warsaw, they would only have given him his deserts. Mr. SHELL spoke of a duty which, he said, it was always in our power to perform— "France has given the example. She has given to the illustrious exiles from that illustrious and unhappy country a noble national welcome. The coffers of the state have been thrown open. Let England imitate her generosity; or rather, let England look to her own conduct in other instances as a model;. and as to the refugees of Spain and Portugal she gave a prompt and honourable suecour, let her with a hand of hospitable liberality lift those men from destitu- tion, who may seek a shelter on her shores, and prove that while England shall last, liberty shall never want a home."

5. THE EXPEDITION AGAINST PORTUGAL. Mr. DIXON, On Mon- day, having pressed on Lord Palmerston the propriety of taking im- mediate steps for obtaining indemnity from the Brazilian Government for the seizure of British vessels, which it was subsequently stated it was their intention to do, Sir ROBERT PEEL took occasion to comment on the expedition against Don Miguel, and the assistance lent to Don Pedro by English officers— He hoped that the existing Government of Brazil would display a greater dis- position to afford redress than was evinced by the last, at the head of which was that individual—that Don Pedro—the Emperor of Brazil, who, under the sanc- tion, and, as he suspected, the connivance of Government, had been permitted to trample on our municipal laws, had been allowed to recruit for British sol- diers on the British territory, so that he had now in his service a body of troops called by the name of the "British battalion." Under the banners of this indi- vidual, iiritish officers, holding the King's cominis,ion, had been permitted to range themselves, in direct violation of the law. What injuries, he would ask, had Portugalinflicted ou Britain, that we should tolerate such proceedings ? What insults bad Dun Miguel offered to our power, that we should take a hos- tile part against him? What infatuation had induced us, not nominally, but in fact, to lend our countenance to that person who was directing his views towards the throne of Portugal ? If the people of Portugal were determined to acquiesce in the choice of Miguel as the king of that country, he could not see on what principles we lent the authority of our name (for the authority. of our name we did lend) in promoting a contest.

Sir JOHN M. DOYLE ridiculed the charge against Ministers of vio- lating neutrality, because one British officer happened to serve under Bon Pedro—

If ire did not think it unbecoming a member of the House of Commons to turn informer, he could point out several British officers who were at the pre- sent moment in the service of Don 3liguel. lie could also inform the House, that a British officer receiving half-pay, and who was besides in the military service of Portugal, was Don Miguel's diplomatic agent in this country ; but he could not, of course, recollect the name of this respectable individual.

6. BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. The case of a breach of privilege, brought under the notice of the House of Commons on Monday by Lord STonmoNT, consisted in the publication of a list of the division in the Select Committee on the Sunderland Dock Bill, which was published at Sunderland, with the comments of the solicitor for the bill.

Mr. HoDosox said, he furnished the list to the solicitor : lie did not consider it a greater breach of privilege to publish a division of a private Committee than of a public Committee, which done every day. .

Lord AT.THORP said, there could be no doubt on the subject : the so- licitor in question and Mr. Hodgson had been equally guilty of breach of privilege.

The solicitor was ordered to attend on the 7th May.

7. THE ANATOMY BILL. The remainder of the clauses of this bill were considered in Committee on Wednesday. There were no fewer than six divisions on amendments, chiefly proposed, and in three in- stances only supported, by Mr. HUNT. The original clauses were in every instance carried by large majorities of the members present.

8. BOUNDARIES Or SCOTCH BOROUGIIS. The Scotch *Boroughs Boundary Bill was introduced on Wednesday, and read a first time. It is to be read a second time on the 16th May.

9. SCOTCII Pouce. Ott Wednesday the House of Commons ordered a bill to be brought in, to enable boroughs in Scotland to establish " a general system of police."

10. ADJOURNMENT OF PARLIAMENT. Iii consequence of a notice of the Marquis of SALISBURY to move an instruction to the Com- mittee on the Reform Bill, Earl GREY stated, on Monday, that it was his intention that the adjournment should extend from 'Wednesday to Monday fortnight.

• The House of Lords adjourned accordingly on Tuesday. The Com- mons adjourned on Wednesday, to Monday fortnight also. •