Debates anb Vroceebings in Varliament.

CROWN AND GOVERNMENT SECURITY BILL.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, the discussion of the Crown and Government Security Bill was renewed, on the order of the day for re- ceiving the report. The speakers were the same as before, and the topics those already exhausted in debate. Several alterations were proposed by the Government, and adopted by the House; and several amendments were urged by the Opposition, pushed to a division, and rejected. The altera- tions proposed and carried by Government were—

First, a proviso at the end of the third clause, enacting that no prosecution should take place under the act except on information sworn by two witnesses before two magistrates, within six days after the offence, and except the warrant --am were issued within ten days after information should have been lodged,

after the passing of the act. On this proviso Mr. Ezra and within' ty;,,".„7-Oxs '—nt. that the warrant should be issued " forth- Wows proposed an - ti bat h defeated with," instead of "within ten days " utter a....7na ° was ea on a division, by 142 to 30; and the proviso was added to. tne "nal, tared:

Secondly, a clause assimilating the bail provisions, in cases of Scotch.orre;="; to the provisions of an act of George IV. relating to bail in cases of forgery in Scotland, and an act of the Scotch Parliament in 1701 for preventing wrongous imprisonments and undue delays in trials.

Thirdly, a clause against allowing costa to prosecutors or witnesses. To this clause Mr. BRIGHT proposed the addition of a proviso that no prosecution should be allowed except on the sanction of the Law-officers of the Crown; but he was defeated on division, by 170 to 49. Lord JOHN RussELL, however, admitted that the principle of a public prosecutor was good, if this were the proper time for first introducing it in English law. The clause was added to the bill unaltered.

The other amendments proposed were—

A clause by Mr. Acuoany„ taking away the power of transportation, and making thepunishment on conviction of " open and advised speaking" to be im- prisonment for two years with or without hard labour; and also narrowing the privilege of bail: negatived on division, by 117 to 50. A clause by Sir WILLI/kw. CLAY, by which it was intended to leave the law of sedition unaltered, but to deprive an offender of his liberty of bail on a second charge: negatived, by 83 to 39.

Captain HARRIS moved a clause enacting that the pike be an illegal weapon; and that its manufacture, sale, purchase, or distribution, be a misdemeanour punish- able with imprisonment and hard labour; and giving Government powers of search. On the persuasion-of Mr. DISRAELI, the clause was withdrawn without division. Not, however, before Lord JOHN RUSSELL had turned an ironical re. mark of Mr. HUME into an occasion of thanking Captain Harris and his side of the House for their support to Government: " So far from being ashamed of that support," said Lord John, "as the honourable gentleman seems to think we ought to feel, I am exceedingly grateful for it." Mr. DISRAELI concluded the discussion, generally uninteresting, with a characteristic point— Mr. Disraeli's friends had been anxious that Mr. Home should have full scope and fair field for all his strategetical manmuvres, and the marshalling of his new and not too well disciplined forces. Mr. Hume should now be content to repose upon the remembrance of his first field-day, which was fraught with no mean reminiscences. The honourable gentleman, however, turned round and seemed to accuse the honourable Members on the Opposition side of the House with having given a support to the Government which was not founded on reason. He could tell his honourable friend that they were satisfied with the measures of the Government on the whole; offering, where it was necessary, a proper criticisme but not giving the House the trouble of dividing upon amendments which they bad no chance of carrying. " We (continued Mr. Disraeli) repose on the recol- lections of a great party—at present, I admit, under a cloud, but which in the course of its day has done something. The difference between the honourable Member and us is that he is now in his political youth. He is full of the vigour and inspiration of his new birth, and nothing will serve him but to make speeches and divide. We, on the contrary, are content with the calm although not alto- gether satisfactory march of affairs; and we leave to him the more active career mwhich he has given promise of so much ability, and in which with a little prac- tice, he may ultimately, though after a considerable interval, find some success."

(Continued laughter.) .

The report was agreed to; and the House decided to sit again next morn- ing at noon, for the third reading.

Upon the order of the day for the third reading, on Tuesday, Mr. HUME moved that the bill be read a third time that day six months; and was supported by Mr. F. O'CONNOR, Mr. BRIGHT, and Mr. MUNTZ. Mr. W. P. WOOD made a final protest against what he conceived to be a direct invasion of those principles of constitutional law which had now existed for five hundred years—since the reign of Edward the Third, and to which the country was indebted for its happiness and prosperity. He acknowledged that the bill was less objectionable as a temporary bill; but in any shape the precedent was bad, and might hereafter be revived with most pernicious effect.

Mr. Honskalf was grateful to Lord John Russell for the concession he had courageously made. The bill was unconstitutional; but Government was called on to violate con- stitutional principles on great emergencies. He thought the Roman Catholic population of Ireland was, in a certain sense of the phrase, one great conspiracy. The cure would not be found in this bill only. In the two years of its operative force, the Government must enter upon great measures of improvement. If this were not done, the Irish Members would not stand alone in voting for a repeal of the Union. If it were intended to rely on this bill to suppress the public opinion of Ireland, he solemnly believed that things would soon arrive at a state compared with which the present world be but the beginning of the end.

The bill was supported by Mr. SEYMER and Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. HEAD- Lis thought that unbounded freedom of discussion, and the open advocacy of every opinion not directly incentive to violence, should now be allowed. Mr. ADDERLY was perfectly willing to discuss, after the restoration of re- spect for law and order, the repeal of the Union, or the points of the Char- ter: the monster petition had stated its case in a very fair manner, and he Only regretted it had been improperly brought forward.

Sir ROBERT PEEL spoke with characteristic grasp and breadth. He said- " Sr, I shall make no reference to what may have passed at former periods. I believe the Government to have been justified in proposing this measure; and, be- lieving them to be so justified, I refer to public considerations alone, and tender to them my cordial support. The bill contemplates two objects,—first, the reduction of several offences which have hitherto been characterized as treason to the minor offence of felony; it also proposes that for two years, and two years only, the com- passing certain things, namely, the intimidation of Parliament or her Majesty by levying,war—the compassing of these things by open and advised speaking, shall be subject to the penalty of felony. Of the first part of this act I cordially approve. I think it is right that men who have not the dignity of traitors shall not cover themselves with the illusion that they are so. (Load cheers.) I wish to reduce them to the position of felons. Sir, I make great allowance for those who, inspired by an ardent love of liberty, are ready to sacrifice their lives and fortunes under circumstances of great necessity, and when liberty is really in

danger. I have great admiration for those who are ready to set an example of

peril to others and engage in a common cause. But I have no sympathy, no re- spect, no admiration, for those who involve the ignorant in the capital punishment of tseason, and content themselves with escaping from all responsibility. Sir, / cannot conceive a more detestable character than the man who, for the purpose of gratifying his personal vanity in the hope of having his name associated with splendid names that are included in the category of traitors, urges on the miser_ able deluded followers of his speeches or writings, but is not ready to share with them a common fate. (Much cheering.) I rejoice to see such characters redn_ oed, as they ought to be, to the condition of felons. Let us keep those frogs that are croaking sedition in the marshes in their proper position, and not let them ((Cheers into the dimensions of the nobler animals that bellow treason. (Cheers and laughter.) Therefore I approve of that portion of the bill which enables the Government to prosecute as felons those who act as felons." " I admit that it is dangerous to be influenced in our legislation either by panic, when we are weak, or by the more natural sentiment of indignation, when

we are strong. I have never been an advocate for departures from the constitu-

tion without the greatest necessity; and if I could really believe that this mil deserved the 4-.;:aster given to it by an honourable and learned gentleman, the Member for Oxford, whose coney,' "-tz.id the ability of whose speeches entitle him to great respect in this House,—if I could bciieve the bill merited the de- scription senption he gave of it when he said that we were now, for the nm. *_lone these five hundred years, about to attribute certain consequences and penalties to ti.; offence of ' open and advised speaking,'—I should be disposed, not certainly to alter the vote I am prepared to give from a deep sense of its necessity, but still more to that necessity which compels me to give my support to this bill. But I have ..Uard with great surprise from the honourable and learned gentleman, that it is perfectly new to the constitution, as existing for the last five hundred years, to subject to very severe penalties the offence of open and advised speaking.' I know it has been usual to make a distinction between open and advised speak. ing and writing '; and in this case you are not about to make the offence of 'writing' for certain purposes subject to the penalties of treason—you are about to reduce it to the penalties of felony. The question is, is there anything an precedented in subjecting him who commits the offence constituted by this bill, so far as it consists of open and advised snaking,' to the penalty of seven years' transportation. I must say, that penalties of equal severity have been applied nu. der the constitution and law of England to this offence within the last five hundred years." Sir Robert quoted the 31st Charles I. cap. 1, and the 6th Anne, cap. 7, as acts imposing even the "very terrible penalty " of prcemunfre, for words spoken. "Here, then, is a clear proof that, at two different periods, the offence of malicious and advised speaking, although contradistingnished from the offence of writing, and not made treason, yet was subject to penalties at least as severe as the pre- sent law. But, by this law, you reduce the latter offence, which in some degree corresponds with it, from treason to felony; and you constitute that former offence, namely, contemplating certain things by oen and advised speaking, felony, and subject it to seven years' transportation. Well, the question is, after all, in the circumstances of the present time, with the avowals that are Made' with the in• finance of example in other countries, is it unreasonable and unjust that for a li- mited period he who by malicious and advised speaking shall incite the people of the United Kingdom to effect certain objects by levying war shall be subject to the penalties of felony? Sir, I consider it is not. (Cheers.) I say the language used, I say the congregation of immense masses liable to sudden excitement, is for no other purpose that I can divine than intimidation." Mr. Feargus O'Connor's declarations of loyalty were not altogether satisfactory; though Sir Robert gave him credit for sincerity in his -deprecations of confusion and disorder. " He certainly told us, I am no party to the designs, I depre- cate the conduct of those', who advise resort to force and other lawless courses: Republicanism I particularly disclaim; I have been an attached and faithful sub- ject of the Crown; I disavow all Republican and Democratic institutions.' [Mr. O'Comaron—"Not Democratk, but Republican institutions."] But when he be- gan to explain himself, it became evident that his ardent attachment to the Mo- narchy had not risen to a very high point in the thermometer of loyalty; for I think the honourable gentleman avowed that his loyalty was of that description, that, provided he got Democratic institutions, it was a matter of indifference to him whether Beelzebub were the Sovereign of this conntrf. (Loud cheers sod laughter.) Then, I do most cordially, wish, that when the honourable gentleman has got the Sovereign of his choic&—(Renewecl laughter)—he will enjoy the con- fidence of the Crown. (Continued cheers and much laughter.) Does the ho- nourable gentleman think he can retain his influence over these excited thousands and tens of thousands which he brings here, by profess'ons of loyalty to his Sove- reign, when he is obliged—not voluntarily, but, quoting his own words, obliged '— to avow that his loyalty consists in indifference- as to whether the Pope, the Pre- tender, or the Devil sat on the throne?" Sir Robert addressed a remark to those who declare the magnificent demonstra- tion of last week to be a sufficient proof of the power of order. "Yes, but tell those who made that magnificent demonstration, that you are prepared to take your share in the responsibility of maintaining the ptiblic peace. (Loud cheers.) Tell them, whose time is so valuable, and who made the severest sacrifices by the interruption of their industry and by their personal exertions, that you the Government, you the Legislature, value the institutions of this coun- try; and that you are determined to uphold them in all their leading principles and upon their ancient foundations; and so far from dissatisfying, you will encourage those whose conduct you have admired to similar demonstrations of spirit and active exertions for the future. (Loud cheers.) The constitution of this country is strong enough to bear these temporary departures from the ordinary laws. You found it necessary to resort to them at other periods, and when such extraordinary powers have ceased to exist the constitution has been restored in all its native dignity and energy. (Cheers.) So it will be on this occasion. After the lapse of these two years it will be in your power to consider whether you will continue the authority which this law gives, or permit it to expire.' Crossing the Channel in imagination, Sir Robert made this concluding declam t,ion—" My firm belief is, that the security of every existing Government depends upon rigid abstinence from any interference with what is passing in France. We may maintain our own opinions on that subject. I have mine. But I believe it to be essential to the peace of the world and to the stability of government, that the experiments now making in France shall have a fair trial, without being em- barrassed or disturbed by extrinsic intervention. (Loud cheers.) But at the same time, with respect to social principles, I must say this, that I hope the work- ing classes of this country will not be deluded by the doctrines that are held upon that subject which intimately concerns their labour and the wages of labour. (Loud cheers.) If the doctrines that are there maintained be true—if there be indeed an antagonism between capital and labour—if it be true that all men, with" out reference to their different capabilities, different strength, and different capa- ties, are to have some iron formula applied to them, and all to receive the same dal wages,—if these things be true, then all the experience and all the lights of the last hundred and fifty years have existed in vain. Let us burn the works of Tar- get, Say, and Adam Smith. Let us establish in triumph the doctrines of the Mississippi scheme, and the doctrines of that Law who was supposed to involve France in misery and confusion. Let us wait for the results of ads experiment Let us calmly contemplate whether it is possible that executive governments cen be great manufacturers—whether it be possible for them to force capital to employ industry—whether they can contravene the decrees of Providence, and reduce men without reference to habits or strength, to receive the same wages. For Gda sake, give that social principle the same fair trial as you are about to see given to the political principle. (Cheers.) But I do earnestly trust—I have that ionfidence in the good sense of the working classes of this country—that they Trill believe that no false delusion of the compulsory sharing of Profits, no enmity directed against capital, no distinction of competition among individuals, no over- powering of individual enterprise by government undertakings at the public ex- pense, can possibly be for the benefit of the working classes, or have any other ultimate result than involving them in misery and ruin." (Loud and continued

cheering.)

Lord Joan. RUSSELL frankly avowed and justified his concessions.

"In regard to the alteration which we have made in rendering that provision tamporary which we at first proposed to be permanent, I must declare that I think it to be of infinite value that any measure which passes the House at the present time should combine the advantage of being effectual for its purpose, and of obtaining the concurrence of moderate men, perhaps over-afraid of any infringe- ment of the law and yet unwilling to deny to the Government those powers which may be necessary. My belief is, that the proposal we made, and which we ori- ginally intended to be permanent, will be an improvement in the law•' and that Parliament, when hereafter it should consider it, will be disposed to adopt it as part of our permanent legislation. But certainly, when I found many, not only among those fifty to whom the honourable Member for Manchester has arivertM, but several honourable gentlemen who sit on this side of the House, and who have voted constantly with the Government in every division on the bill,—when I found such men ready to give every power that might be necessary for any temporary Durpese, but doubting whether such a power as that I have just alluded to should be part of our permanent legislation, I did not think that any majority we might obtain—and I believe we should have had as great a majority for the bill if we had persisted in making the provision in question permanent as we have obtained for it now that that provision is temporary—would be a compensation for violently overturning the opinions of those gentlemen, when all that was required for pre- mut purposes could be obtained with their concurrence. I therefore am not afraid of being accused of want of courage or want of consistency in consenting to that alteration."

Lord John confessed that the law was brought forward not merely because it was desirable to reduce many treasons to felonies, but because also it seemed that the Government had not enough power to combat the peculiar kind of machinations which might have been adopted against it. " I believe, in adopting any altera- tion of this kind you have to steer between two great dangers. I believe, that if you leave treason and sedition to take their course unchecked, you expose not only the constitution and government of this country to the greatest peril, but you ran the danger that for weeks and months together the minds of the working classes will be disturbed—that the peaceful occupations of trade and industry will be interrupted, and thus discontent will grow from the very absence of that peace and order which are necessary to their progress. But if, on the other hand, in adopting such alterations of the law, and in furnishing the Government with such powers, you exceed that which is necessary for the occasion—if you at all interrupt the course of free discussion, whether at public meetings or by the press— in that way you incur a danger equal if not superior, though in an opposite di- rection. You then incur that discontent which you wish to prevent; you send that discontent into other channels; and you find, further, that so far from scour- ing, you have materially endangered peace and order. We have endeavoured, in the measure we brought forward, and we shall endeavour in any coarse we may pursue to avoid those opposite dangers. I do not believe that any man in this country or in Ireland, who wishes by peaceable means to promote any improve- ments, as he may conceive them, in the law, or to obtain the redress of any griev- ances which he may think he suffers under, will be in the smallest danger from stating those grievances in warm and strong language, because this bill shall have passed into law. I believe that he may trust the Government, the judges, and jurors of the country, so far as to feel secure that he will not incur any dan- ger by such peaceable and honest courses." He thought the reproach unseasonable and ill-placed which had been thrown on Government, that it rota not rely only on coercive measures, but must also in- troduce remedies. It would have been most cruel mockery if, when the people were daily perishing by famine in 1847, the Government had come to the House with these words—" We have here a bill to extend the franchise of the people with respect to voting. for Members of Parliament; we have another bill in the purpose of making the corporations in Ireland similar to the corporations in Eng- • the people want an extension of political privileges; and we will postpone until afterwards any consideration of their state of famine." However, imme- diately after Easter Governme would proceed to take up those questions which related to the political state of the Irish population. Lord John ended with this declaration of war against Repeal—" Any proposition which is supported by the great body of the Irish Members, with a view to improve the laws of that coun- try, to improve the situation of landlord or tenant, or to remedy any social or po- litical grievance under which they consider it labours, I shall be happy to listen to: bat, whether in discussion, if discussion they choose—in debates m Parlia- ment, if debates they prefer, so that the matter may be argued—or if, on the contrary, by exciting the people to arm, and obliging us to take measures of force, if measures of force be necessary, I will, as long as I have breath or life in me, oppose the repeal of the Legislative Union." (Cheers.)

On a division, the third reading was carried, by 295 to40. On the question that the bill do pass, Mr. Huxe, as a last protest, moved that the words " open and advised speaking " be omitted; but did not press for a division. The motion being negatived, the bill passed, amidst loud cheers from both sides of the House.

The bill was carried to the Lords; and the second reading was moved on Wednesday, by the LORD CHANCELLOR; who briefly explained its pro- visions.

Lord STANLEY did not intend to throw any impediment in the way of passing the bill; but he called attention to home points that had occurred to him on its perusal. He confessed, looking to the importance of the alteration of the law proposed by the bill, he should have been better pleased if more than twenty-four or forty- eight hours' notice had been given to the House to form its decision,—especially as the law was founded only on temporary causes. Might not the Government have been contented with the powers given thorn in the seventh clause, of prose- cuting for felony in certain cases although the facts proved might amount to treason? He could not see the .benefit of a distinction between compassing the imprisonment and restraint of the Sovereign and compassing his deposition—the first crime being evidenced by printing or writing, and the second not. He was also under an apprehension that as felonies were now first merged in treasons, so misdemeanours would be merged in felonies: if that were so, cases would very likely occur in Ireland where it would be most inconvenient to prosecute offenders for felonies, but where prosecution for misdemeanour might have answered all Purposes.

Lord BROUGHAM contributed some criticisms.

If this bill were extended in its operation to Scotland, a prisoner there would, for the first time, be deprived of his right to a list of the jury and a list of the witnesses against him. Lord Brougham had always understood levying war to bea substantive offence; but under the bill it seemed to be no offence until levied i n order by force or constraint to compel" the Crown " to change its measures He gave a warning to the public press, that though Parliament. protected its own Members in the use of language that might be seditious or treasonable, yet the publication of such language by the press made the printer and publisher liable, as though it were their own original language.

Lord CAMPBELL admitted that the law would not reach Mr. Smith O'Brien for his language in the other House; but neither would it reach the editors, proprietors, and reporters of the Times for reporting Mr. O'Brien's language.

With regard to reporting speeches, he would be the last man to punish faithful reports. He had indeed some years ago introduced a bill one clause of which pro- vided that no person who gave a bond fide and honest report of what passed in either House of Parliament should be liable to punishment. That bill was seconded by Lord Brougham himself, and met with the entire approval of the Lord Chief Justice.

Lord Campbell went at length over the general doctrine of the law on the question of " open and advised speaking," and showed that the bill introduced no new invasion of liberty.

The Duke of WErxrztezote highly approved of the object of the bill.

He considered it absolutely necessary to get some efficient check to the evils consequent on the gigantic meetings by which this and the sister country had been disturbed. Matters had come to that pass that the law was an object of contempt to every one of the persons who broke it. When proceedings bad been commenced against three persons, and after they had been brought before the Magistratis and bail had been taken for their coming to trial, one of them re- peated the offence with which he was charged; and the other two carried out their attempts in an offensive mission to another country. What were those but aggravations of the offences already committed, and a throwing of contempt on the law? Through this contempt of the law, there would soon be no authority- but that of physical force. In 1831, there were extraordinary riots at Bristol, and also at Lyons: at Bristol, Colonel Brereton saved the town from entire con- flagration, and restored order, with one squadron of dragoons; at Lyons, a Mar- shal of France needed 60,000 men to save the town from destruction. Such in 1831 was the respect for the law in Bristol. But where was the respect for the law in London now, when hundreds of thousands of citizens and thousands of armed troops were found necessary to preserve the peace? The transactions in Ireland during the last few years had been the cause of this altered state of pub- lic feeling. A measure was necessary which should apply to such transactions. He did not want to put down discussion, and hoped it would always be allowed on every subject whereon it could be wished: but let it be at meetings of such numbers only as could hear what was said; and let not the meetings, under the pretence of discussion, be made assemblages to create terror and overpower the Government.

Lord Dmemsie agreed that in certain quarters there was a growing con- tempt for the law; but he thought that the feeling was overrated.

Indeed, the spectacle which had lately been exhibited was proof of the estima- tion in which hundreds of thousands of citizens held that law which they met to uphold. With regard. to monster meetings, he thought they were themselves misdemeanours, and might always be put down by the existing laws. With re- spect to one point of the bill—the privilege of challenge possessed by prisoners— he should be sorry to see prisoners in Ireland deprived of that privilege. Earl ST. GERMANS gave the bill a qualified support; and the second reading passed without opposition. The bill was read a third time, and passed, on Thursday.

ARMING IN DUBLIN.

In the House of Lords, on Monday, the Earl of ELLENBOROUGH moved that the return made on the 14th of March last, of arms and ammunition seized and surrendered in Ireland under the act of last November, be con- tinued to the 14th of April, and laid on the table.

He had noticed that the sale of arms was proceeding to a vast extent in Dub lin, and that Government took no steps to declare that city a proclaimed district: he had also noticed statements in the papers that the body of the students of Trinity College and the Royal Dublin Society had been refused the gift of arms by the Lord-Lieutenant, on their requesting, in a loyal memorial, to be armed. Lord Ellenborough saw nothing but ruin in this policy. Loyal subjects were becoming surrounded by men armed for their destruction and the overturning of the Go- vernment. They would naturally be disheartened, and human nature would lead them to entertain ideas of a compromise where honour ought to forbid. Lord Ellenborough asked whether Government intended to put a stop to the arming in the city of Dublin; or to submit to Parliament any measures for increasing the protection of the loyal ?

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE consented to produce the returns, and re plied to the question— The Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland was the fittest judge of the ,bee, place, and mode in which he should use the extraordinary powers intrusted to him: it could not be convenient that the proclamation of any district should be first announced in that House. The real extent of the arming had been greatly exaggeratedi and Lord Lansdowne mentioned instances of specific statements which inquiry had proved to be fictions. Still, Government was not indifferent to the real ex- tent of the movement, and desired that no mistake should be made by any party. He begged most distinctly to state, that there could be no compromise; and that the Government would resist with its whole force every attempt to subvert its role in Ireland or dissolve the union of the two countries.

On Tuesday, Lord BEAUMONT recalled attention to the subject. He had understood Lord Lansdowne that no training to arms was going on in Dublin: he had been informed, however, not only that there was, training, but that it was known to Government. Was this true? Lord LANSDOWNE was glad the subject had been mentioned again—

The evening before, he did not know of any training having taken place, though he felt no doubt that, if it had, and were discovered by the Lord-Lieute- nant, the act would be instantly put in force. Not twenty-four hours had passed without that supposition being verified; for training bad been discovered yesterday, and before the evening had passed all the persons engaged in the offence had been arrested and brought before the Magistrates. It had also been found that, under the Dublin Police Act, firing at a mark within the city pre- cincts was illegal.

CORRUPT BOROUGHS.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, a debate arose on the motion of Mr. WILLIAM EVANS, that a new writ be issued for Derby, in the room of. the Right Honourable Mr. Edward Strutt and the Honourable E. F. L. Gower, whose election the House had declared void. The issue of the writ was opposed by Mr. HUME ; who thought Govern- ment were bound to maintain the rules and orders of the House against all corrupt practices at elections. The Earl of LINCOLN thought there would be a gross injustice in dis- franchising Yarmouth and taking no notice of the long-oontinued practices at Derby— The House could never expect good to result from punishing a Member and re: warding his guilty electors. In the case of Sndbury, an inquiry had been made before introducing a bill; and that inquiry resulting in a confirmation of the Committee's report, a bill bad been brought in and the borough disfranchised.

Lord John Russell would do a great public service if he would deal with this me in the same way. Mr. CeaLDEns, as Chairman of the Derby Committee, stated that nine cases of bribery were distinctly proved; and there was reason to believe that 400 out of the 500 freemen had been bribed. There were, however, 1,500 ten-pound householders on whom no imputation had been thrown. The Committee were unanimously of opinion that the freemen, and they only, Ought to be disfranchised.

Lord Jona/ RUSSELL thought that a great public advantage would be the consequence of the unseating of Members by Committees--

Agents would be taught that bribery, instead of promoting the interests of their candidates, procured returns that were set aside. He thought that the report of the Committee called for some investigation by the House in regard to the cor- ruption of the freemen of Derby. He could not, however, agree with Mr. Home and Lord Lincoln, that it was the duty of Government to take up such questions: in fact, he could not undertake, in addition to the weighty business of Government already on his hands, to read through the evidence in the Derby case and esti- mate the degree of criminality in the electors. The bill to disfranchise the free- men of Yarmouth was introduced on the general wish of the House. There did not seem to be the same necessity here for immediate disfranchisement, but cause had been shown for further inquiry. Lord John thought that it would be far preferable, instead of any interference by the Government, if Lord Lincoln himself would take up the case. He agreed that it was advisable that the issue of the writ should be suspended for the present.

Sir ROBERT PEEL concurred in the propriety of suspending the writ.

On the general question of disfranchising the freemen, he would only state his opinion, that freemen who had resisted temptation ought not to be punished in- discriminately with those who had proved corrupt. Sir Robert did not desire to impose on Lord John Russell, in addition to his already overwhelming public du- ties, the labour of wading through the details of this subject; but hoped he would consent to appoint a local Commission, such as that in the Sudbury case, and

lend the authority of Government to such legislative proceedings as might be Th ne- cessary. e suspension of the writ was also advocated by Mr. EDWARkELLICE junior, Sir JOHN HARMER, Mr. AGLIONBY, Mr. STANTON, a member of the Derby Committee, Dr. BOWRING, and Sir GEORGE GREY: opposed by Sir ROBERT INGLIS, Mr. COLVILE, Lord INGESTRE, and Mr. STAFFORD; Mr. Stafford, however, suggesting to Sir Robert Peel, in his present position of peculiar leisure, the bringing forward a measure for purifying the ancient but corrupt borough of Derby. Mr. EvAnts was about to withdraw his motion, on the engagement of Sir Joins HARMER to consider the subject With a view to bringing in a bill, but Mr. COLVILE objected to its with- drawal, and called on the House to divide.

On a division, the motion for issuing the writ was negatived, by 199 to 43.

On Wednesday, Mr. AUGUSTUS STAFFORD moved for a new writ for Horsham, in the room of Mr. John Jervis, whose election had been declared void. The issue of the writ was opposed by many Members, and seemed to be against the sense of the House. Sir JOHN HARMER moved, as an amendment, for leave to bring in a bill to appoint Commissioners to inquire into the existence of corrupt practices at elections for certain boroughs. After same discussion, the original motion was negatived without division, arid-Sir John Hanmer obtained leave to bring in his bill.

ELECTION RECOGNIZANCES BILL. ,

In the House of Lords, on Monday, Lord MorrrEAGLE int*e,d the second reading of the Election Recognizances Bill; pointing out'the defectiVe state of the law, and quoting the authority of the Committee of the House of Commons as an inducement to the Peers to pass the bill. He was sup- ported by Lord REDESDALE and the Earl of DEVON. Lord STANLEY thought the bill offered the only practical means by which the other House could be helped out of the dilemma into which it had fallen. He admitted the bill would be an as post facto law, but still thought it would correct a cams °misses, and do substantial justice between the parties. The bill was opposed by Lord BROUGHAM, who thought there were irrefragable argu- ments against it. Lord CAMPBELL objected that it would give an appeal from a proper officer, the Examiner, to a most improper tribunal, an Elec- tion Committee. The Lour) CHANCELLOR considered it altogether objec- tionable, and against every rule of justice. Lord DENMAN thought it a reversal of' the spirit of all previous legislation on the subject, and calcu- lated to open a door to everything that was dangerous.

On a division, the second reading of the bill was carried, by 19 Peers against 9.

On Tuesday, the bill was considered in Committee. A desultory dis- cussion arose, but no amendment was proposed. Lord BROUGHAM ex- pressed his strong disapproval of the measure as it stood, and stated that lie should move an amendment at a subsequent stage. The bill went through Committee unaltered. On the question that the report be brought np, Lord BROUGHAM proposed as an amendment, " That nothing in this act contained shall be of force, by way of retrospective or as post facto law, to affect any vested interest or decide any question now pending before any court or in either House of Parliament.' On a division, this alteration was carried, by 21 to 16.

Lord MONTEAGLE strongly remonstrated—

Noble lords had gone away in the belief that the bill was 'to he unopposed: immediately there was a whisper, and a, division was taken contrary to every TM- derstanding ap to that time. If such surprises were allowed by Government, how was the public service to be carried on? He would move tomorrow, on the third reading, that the House do disagree with this amendment, and that the bill be restored to its original form.

An altercation ensued between Lord BROUGHAM and the Earl of MALMESBURY; in the course of which the Baron gave a " most complete, stringent, and peremptory denial" to a statement by the Earl. Earl GREY requested, for the convenience of the House, that the conversation should drop: he hoped the bill would be modified and rendered less ob- ,jectionable before its next discussion.

DENMARK AND THE DUTCHIES.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, Lord PALisEnterox, questioned by Mr. JAMES WILSON, made a statement regarding the recent events in Schleswig-

" Her Majesty's Government have received several communications from both the Danish Government and the Prussian Government upon these matters; tiled, we have been in communication with both Governments. I should hope, from the disposition which has been expressed by both parties, that that overture may be accepted. With regard to an intimation from the Danish Go- vernment of naval operations, undoubtedly if the hostilities were to continue I phonid think it would be probable that the Danish Government, being strong at see, would resort to measures of interruption to the naval commerce of Prussia, and possibly of Hamburg, if Hamburg were to take an active part. I have

not received official information of the crossing of the Holstein frontier by Pr,,,.. sian troops; but at the same time, from information I have received, I Ulnas it not at all improbable that it may have taken place."

recent conduct of the German Confederation towards Denmark, DISRAELI availed himself of the opportunity to make a statement on the When the formal motion of adjournment was made on Wednesday, ara and the treaty obligations by which Great Britain is bound to Denmark in respect to the Schleswig-Holstein question. He sketched the order of the transactions in Schleswig. The present Ring of Denmark, on ascending his throne at the commencement of this year, was sa absolute sovereign. While not a cloud appeared to presage the extraordinary changes which had since taken place throughout Europe, he had of his own vo- luntary motion conferred a most liberal constitution on the States of his kingdom. On his discovery that the Dutchy of Holstein objected to the project of uniting it more closely with the Monarchy of Denmark Proper and of assimilating the law of succession in the two states, the King immediately yielded to the wishes of the Holsteiners, and granted that they should have all the Bee privileges conceded, as a separate atate. No freer constitution has been forced from any Enrop.fta Monarch in the few last months, than these, which were voluntarily granted by the King of Denmark to the States of his realm. Soon after the opening of troubles in Germany, however, by the working of machinery having its centre in Paris, a commencement of agitation and disaffee. tion was established in Schleswig, and in a short time a Provisional Government was extemporized. The King of Prussia received a deputation from that Govern. ment—consisting chiefly, it is believed, of Prussians who had left Prussia—and promised to take Holstein and Schleswig under his protection. He then, with. out any authority from the Germanic Diet, ordered those troops who had not beep so successful as be intended in Berlin, and whose presence near Berlin he wished to dispense with for a time, to march and recover their laurels in an invasion of the borders of a friendly power. Indeed, the Diet itself could have given no right to occupy Schleswig, which is not a member of the German Confederation. This aggression united the brave Danes in support of their King: he led his army into Schleswig.; signally defeated the rebels; and would have pacified every part of his dominions in three days if thesteps of the erratic Court of Berlin had not pia_ vented him. The only pretext of this interference is the German nationality of Schleswig; in other words, the shore of that datchy is coveted by unmaritime Germany. Now, by the treaty of 1715 (the treaty of Gottorp) Great Britain guaranteed the King of Denmark the peaceful possession of the Dutchy of Schleswig, at least against the heirs of the Dukes of Gottorp. At the peace in 1720, Great Britain entered into a new treaty, by which an unlimited guarantee was given to main- tain the Danish King in peaceful possession of the Dutchy perpetually, against every power whatever. The Danish Government has called on us to fulfil our guarantee; and the plain alternative is now before us, of going to war on account of Denmark, or practically announcing that we no longer pay any respect to our engagements. Lord PALMERSTON, avowing great respect for Denmark, observed that the question which had arisen between Denmark and the German Con- federation was a question of right simply, and of right concerning only the Dutchy of Schleswig; and as this country has offered its mediation be- tween the disputants, it would be unfitting to express any opinion as to the side on which right preponderates. Mr. Disraeli had correctly quoted the treaty; and it was undoubtedly fitting that this country should stand by her engagements. But it should be borne in mind, that the purprise of the Prussian troops is not to wrest Schleswig from the Danish crown, but support a party :who hold that the Dutchy should under its ancient laws and constitution be incorporated end ettached to the Dutchy of Holstein. It is not an attempt at conquest, but, en intervention in regard to the future line of succession.

ORDER OF GOVERNMENT MEASURES.

On Wednesday, Lord JOHN RUSSELL' stated the intentions of Govern- ment with respect to the order of public business after Easter- " On Monday the lat of May, the first business would be a vote for advances for special purposes; first, the West Indian Joan for emigration, of which the sub- stance had-been stated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the commencement of the session; and secondly, a resolution to enable the Government to advance again any repayment of money on account of the advances whico weremade in Ireland in the course of last year and the year before. On the same day; he would move the second reading of the Aliens Bill. On Thursday the 4th, he proposed to take the third reading of the Jews Disabilities Bill. On the following day, Friday the 5th, he proposed to ga into Committee on the Alien Bill, if the second readiug should be agreed to; and, if there were time to proceed with other busi- ness, Lord Morpeth would afterwards take the Committee on the Health of Towns Bill. If that bill, however, could not be taken then, or if it made very little way in Committee on that night, the Health of Towns Bill would be proceeded with on Monday the 8th. On Monday the 15th of May, the President of the Board of Trade would bring under the consideration of the House, as the first order of the day, a bill for the amendment of the Navigation-laws; and would state at the same time to the House the coarse which the Government proposed to take as regarded the registration of seamen and the registry of shipping. Mr. Labouchere would also state at the same time the general views which the Government took of the subject of light-dues to the Merchant Seamen's Fund; so that the House might have a complete knowledge of the intention of the Government on these important subjects. The Secretary for Ireland would on Monday the lot of May propose to introduce a bill relative to the.elective franchise and the registration of voters in Ireland."

REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE. Mr. Hums gave notice on Monday, that shortly after the Easter recess he would call attention to the present state of the representation of the people, and take the sense of the House on that question. MR. IlAWES. The Committee appointed to inquire whether Mr. Ilawes's re- turn was invalidated by his entering the Hoase and taking the oaths without certificate of his return from the Crown-office, have determined that the return is not affected by the irregularity; but they strongly recommend a strict adherence in future to the practice of the House. COPPER AND LEAD DEITIES. On Monday, Sir CHARLES LEMON moved as an amendment.on the order of the day for going into Committee on the Copper and Lead Duties, that a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the effect of the existing duties on the importation and production of copper ores. The CHAN- CELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opposed the motion, on the ground that there was no case for inquiry. On the other hand, the case was strong for giving further facilities to the importation of foreign ore. On the finance of the question he had but to remark, that the revenue on ores was already rapidly falling away. The amendment was also opposed by Mr. LAsoncirEEE, Mr. CARDWELL, Mr. GLAD STONE, Mr. EDWARD WINER, Mr. MUNTZ, Mr. SCHOLEFIELD, Mr. Rowans, Mr. RICARDO, and Mr. JAMES WILSON. Sir Charles Lemon was supported by Lord GEORGE BENTINCE, Mr. CAREW, Mr. WYLD, and Mr. HENLEY. On a division, the amendment was negatived, by 102 to 35; and the House went into Committee. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved, and the Com- mittee adopted, a resolution imposing the following new duties— Copper ore, 11. per ten; regales of copper, ls. per ton ; old copper, fit only to be mr• =teetered, 2r. Fd. per tau ; anwrought copper; namely, in bricks or pigs, rose color, and all cast copper, 2s. 6d. per toe; copper part wrought, namely, bars, rods. or Ingo% p�mered or raised, Si. 6d. per ton ; copper In plates, and copper coin, 2s. 6d. per ton; pig and sheet lead, 2s. 6d. per ton. GAME-LAw RILL. The Game Certificates for Killing Hares Bill passed through the Committee in the Commons on Wednesday. On clause 4th, Mr. GRANTLEY 130ff,LEy proposed an amendment, preventing the destruction of hares by guns, except by persons having an annual certificate: this amendment was carried, by 49 So 44. F,Dercerion use WALES. In reply to Mr. HUME, on Monday, Sir GEORGE Goy said that the reports of the Commission were still tinder the consideration of the Committee of Privy Council on Education. No specific measure would yet be fceposed to the House. CHARITABLE TRUSTS. On Monday, Sir GEORGE GREY stated that the Lord Chancellor would shortly bring forward a bill for the better administration of charitable funds.

Mr. CHARLES COCHRANE'S PROCESSION. On Monday, Sir JOHN YARDE BuL- LER inquired of Sir George Grey whether he had been informed that a procession of 150,000 persons were coming to him at the Home Office on Easter Monday, with petition to the Queen on the Poor-laws; and that circulars had been sent to all the union-houses in the country calling on the inmates to urge their friends out d the union-houses to join in and swell the procession? Sir GEORGE GREY said, three weeks ago be bad received an intimation from Mr. Cochrane, which he had flowered by stating, with other information, that a deputation of a large num- ber of persons could not be received. Moreover in Easter week it would not be convenient to receive any deputation. Sir George had in the last few days received from several boards of guardians information that circulars signed by kr. Charles Cochrane had been received addressed to " Mr. Smith," and some- times to " Mr. Jones," at their union-houses—as if taking for granted that some person of one of those names would be in a workhouse—informing Mr. Smith, or Jr. Jones, of the intended demonstration, and requesting any such person to per- suade his friends to travel to London and join the procession. Sir George thought Mr. Cochrane and his manifestation might be safely left in the hands of

the Pace.

EASTER RECESS. The House of Commons adjourned on Wednesday, and the

House of Lords on Thursday. Both Houses meet today, merely to witness the lloyal assent to the Crown and Government Security Bill; and then adjourn for the Easter holydays. The House of Commons will resume its sittings on Mon- day the 1st, and the House of Lords-An Thursday the 4th of May.