Oenatel a0.43coreetingsi in parliament.

1. IRELAND. On Monday, when Mr. BERNAL brought up the re- port of the Committee of Supply for granting three millions,

Mr. O'CoNNELL said, that often as he had endeavoured to direct the sympathies of the louse towards the wrongs of his ill-fated country, he never felt so painfully anxious as at that moment. He had termed the Address a brutal and sanguinary address ; but, as it had received the sanction of the House, he could no longer apply such terms to it.

His present object was not W characterize by any attempt at strength of language the proceedings about to be adopted in Ireland. The subject would be degraded and the cause injured if he descended to personalities; and in adverting to the projected measure, he wished to be discovered to be an Irishman only by the infallible test of ac- sent: He would fain speak only as a lover of freedom and of the constitution—as an Englishman or a Seotchman would speak upon a topic interesting to all hearts. He was desirous of characterizing that measure as if it were proposed at once to outlaw the Scottish nation—to abolish her rights, and to place her liberties at the mercy of officers of two years' standing. Tranquillity of temper was a proof of determination ; and this he must sae, that ere he an Englishman, and such a measure brought forward applicable to England, he should think death preferable. Though " the blood would folhaw where the knife was driven," the " iron had not yet entered the soul ;" and de- testing slavery as jibe were an Englishman, he could not but be deeply sensible of the tally, the madness, the wickedness of those who would now crown all the mischiefs and 311iiseries of Ireland by the extinction of the last spark of her liberty.

He proceeded to vindicate himself from the charge that he had insti- gated And-Tithe meetings and then shrink from attending them. The tact was just the reverse. He was three hundred miles distant when these tithe meetings were held ; and had he been in Ireland, it was pro- bable that they never would have been held at all. With regard to the pretexts put forward for the justification of the coercive measures now in preparation against his country, he would say that The drivellings of old doating senility—the ravings of antiquated old-womanhood- were more dignified than those old Psmininities so garrulously put forth as reasons for the measure he alluded to. (Repeated cheers from the Opposition.)

It would be well to inquire what had been done to pacify Ireland, be- fore it was sought to enrage her. With the exception of the relief from the payment of Church Cess, every measure of conciliation was pro- spective. The Church Reform Bill did not suspend the tithe-hunt for one moment; pigs would still as remorselessly be chased, and corn and bay as ruthlessly seized, as before. No prospective reduction in the income of the Church was contemplated ; but he saw clearly that it must follow.

" The Bill cashiers ten out of twenty-two.Bishops as of no use; and no not think that a Reformed Parliament is likely again to 'admit the practice, that those who are of no service shall be paid just as if they were. The Bishop of Waterford, for instance, is to be something like a dummy at whist,—three are to play the game, while he is to do no- thing ; and it is out of the question to suppose that the House, as at present consti. tuW, will allow ten of these practical dummies to exist in Ireland. (Cheers and laughter.) I find in the measure, therefore, the seeds of much future good, and I hail it accordingly."

He would not be stingy in his praise. He would not enter into the merits of the Corporation Reform Bill; and he would give Ministers full credit for intended benefits.

"When Mr. Stanley the other night spoke of his affection for Ireland, who (said Mr. O'Connell) cheered him more warmly than I did ? Expressions of kindness are music to my ear ; and I do him the justice to say that he threw upon his colleagues in office a Still participation in all the measures of harshness of which we have been complaining. Be fully vindicated himself from any individual severity ; and I will not, in future, forget the courtesy that I owe h;m as a gentleman, or the justice that is due to him as a statesman. (Cheers from all sides.) If, hereafter, in the warmth of debate, I chance So mix personality with argument, I will remember that the acts of Mr. Stanley are the acts of the Government."

He hoped to see the day when the head of that Government would be made to answer before the justly indignant Commons of the United Ympire for his outrageous violation of all law and justice in his mea- sures of coercion towards Ireland. He would remind those Members who had voted for the Address, that they were not pledged to support those measures. When he so earnestly opposed that Address, he bad been accused of slandering the Ministry, by Mr. Spring Rice, be- muse be assumed that the Habeas Corpus Act and Trial by Jury were to be suspended. He thought it but reasonable, as Mr. Rice was con- nected with the Ministry, to believe that no such measures were con- templated; but was it fair to allow the House to be so deceived ? Mr. O'Connell then proceeded to stigmatize the proposed measures in the most emphatic terms, and justified his former attack upon the Whig party by a reference to their violation of the treaty of Limerick, and their original introduction of the Insurrection Act into Ireland in 1807.

Now," he said," what do the Whigs do again? They threaten us not with one act, 'but with the accumulation and concentration of every oppressive statute ever inflicted upon Ireland—the Curfew—the Insurrection Act—the suspension of the Habeas Cor- pas—unlimited power of imprisonment, and consequent torture—the abolition of the Trial by Jury—the absence of all legal responsibility—and the total suppression of the light of petition." Never yet was there such a measure as that for changing the venue.

, Mr. WYNN here called Mr. O'Connell to order, on the ground that he was irregularly discussing the details of a measure which might never come before the House.

The SPEAKER said, it was always difficult to distinguish whether a member was speaking about any particular measure not before the Rouse, or whether he was generally discussing the notorious intentions of Government with respect to any line of policy. In the former case, lie would be out of order.

Mr. O'CONNELL said, he would take care to reconcile his observa- 'gory and inquiries with the rules and forms of the House. He rose for the purpose of putting a question to the Ministry respecting some tne,asure which it was understood that they had in contemplation, and which they would not be able to execute, if the,vote of Supply now under the consideration of the House were refused. He then com- mented in very strong language on the iniquity of that part of the pro- posed bill which, by changing the venue, would enable Government to send a Catholic of the South to be tried by an Orange Jury in the North. The suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act was, in the plain language of Mr. Cobbett, a power of indefinite imprisonment. And when the wretched prisoner was brought to trial, he might be convicted and sentenced by five military officers, who had reached the age of twenty-one and been two years in service.

Mr. SHIEL here said—" A majority of five will be sufficient to find am Irishman guilty."

Mr. STANLEY insisted that this was a disorderly discussion of the details of the proposed bill, persevered in by Mr. O'Connell, although lie knew that the Ministry could not join issue with him on any of those -details.

Mr. O'CosNELL said, there was swains to prevent the Secretary for Ireland answering him.

" I am not out of order. I attribute to his Majesty's Ministers certain designs; and I tell them that I will vote against going into a Committee of Supply until I have ei. pressed my opinions and feelings as to what those designs are said to be, and until I Stave ascertained precisely their scope and tendency. (Cries of . Hear, hear r as .., ' Order, order .") Oh ! give us some fair play. What ! will you not only oppress the `I unfortunate Irish themselves, but silence their chosen though talenlless advocate ? Az I thus to be put down, and replied to by instalments 1" The SPEAKER said that the discussion of these details was disorderly.

Mr. O'CoserELL was desirous of not transgressing the rules of the

House ; and thought that, if rightly understood, it would be found that he wiS not intentionally out of order. He then contended that the Americans had less cause for revolt than the Irish, for they had still a 1.54 trial by Jury. He dwelt upon the enormities committed during the Rebellion under martial law,—particularly the whippings inflicted to ' extort evidence. The refusal of the right of petition drove the Stuarts from the throne ;—yet that right was to be denied to Ireland. He de. nied in the most direct terms, that any considerable portion of Ireland was disturbed, or that the prndial " insurrection " (as .Lord Grey termed it) had any connexion with political agitation. He had done more than any other man to put down the priedial insurrection. In 18'22, Sit John Lambert, the Commander of the troops stationed at Cork, had printed at his own expense thirty-six thousand copies of an address which he (Mr. O'Connell) had writtendn order to induce the peasantry to obey the law. He recommended the employment of Special Coin. missions; which had always proved successful in quelling disturbances. He declared that he was only a Repealer because there was no chance of any, but a Local Legislature really understanding and applying a pro. per remedy to Irish grievances. The present measure would increase the Repeal cry a hundredfold. He firmly believed that the real ob- ject of Ministers, after all, was to facilitate the collection of tithes , throughout the land. He maintained that for the mere suppression of disorders, they had abundant means already at their disposal ; but they ' wanted Juries who would convict without evidence. He pressed ' strongly upon the House the momentous dangers which would arise i should a rebellion in Ireland break out in consequence of these violent i measures. " I call upon the English members not to give their sanction to these measures—not ! to condemn unheard, and confound every civil and political right. Before they act us. ! - justly towards Ireland, I bid them be cautious, and reflect upon the monetary and con. i mercial system of their country. I bid them think upon the Powers of Europe. Let . injustice be done to Ireland, and you will see what weight England will have in the : Congress of Nations ! Let insurrection and rebellion be created in Ireland, and yea ; - will soon see the value of your Three per Cents upon the Stock Exchange ! Be unjust / to Ireland, and your measures of economy will go for nought. You will have an increased standing army ; you will have thousands of other mercenaries under various denomiuz. • tions; to support whom the taxation you complain of must be kept up, if not increased Besides which, you will have its moral consequences—you will be accused in the faced s Europe of ingratitude; and it will be said that Ireland hates you, as she ought, if yes , sanction such measures to be passed against her." Lord ALTHORP said that this discussion was most irregular. Be [. should be prepared to justify the measure when brought before the i House; and in the mean while, he protested against the general veracity I of Mr. O'Connell's statements.

Mr. FERGUS O'CONNOR said that he would resist the proposed act of i tyranny "to the death !" If this measure were carried, the Irish would consume no exciseable articles, and the revenue must consequently -: suffer.

Colonel CONOLLY regretted the adoption of strong measures - but, in the present state of Ireland, they were necessary. He said that he had sworn informations before him that Mr. O'Connell had attended an anti-tithe meeting at Leixlip, where fifty pounds of rent was collected for his use.

Mr. SHEIL considered that Colonel Conolly furnished in his own person some evidence of the character of those military tribunals which were to supersede the ordinary judicature in Ireland— His manifest impartiality, his freedom from all passion and all prejudice, strolagIT, no doubt, recommended the dressing of justice in regimentals (Hear, deer!) Who cost be so unreasonable as to object to a triumvirate composed of such men as the gallant Colonel? Who could think his liberty or his home in hazard, when they were tots confided to men who, under red coats, bore so much calm disinterestedness as the gi. lint Colonel ?

He maintained that there was no difficulty in obtaining verdicts against the guilty in Ireland; and that scarcely an instance had occurred of witnesses or jurors being molested. He read extracts from forms speeches of Mr. Spring Rice, Lord Brougham, and Lord John Rus- sell, in which they condemned, in the strongest language, the use oi coercive measures towards Ireland, even at a time when the disturb- ances were much more serious than at present. He also read a proten by Lord Grey against a clause in one of the Six Acts, which gave the Police the right of search for arms in Ireland. In Ireland, the prom stated- " It is well known, nothing more contributed to irritate the people, and to proms acts of private resentment and revenge, than the abuses which took place, particula0 the insults which were offered to women, in the exercise of a similar power." He concluded by imploring the House to save his country from th

infliction of the dreadful tyranny with which it was threatened. .

Mr. O'CONNELI. here rose to deny Colonel Conolly's statement t; his having been present at an anti-tithe meeting. Colonel CONOLLY said, he had been to the town of Leixlip, and lei stopped at the house of a tenant of his, named Herbert.

Mr. O'CONNELL said, the only meeting which he had ever attendi there was an Anti- Union one.

Mr. STANLEY maintained, in opposition to Mr. Shell, that intim- dation of witnesses and jurors was carried to a very great extent in Ire- land ; and mentioned some instances of the difficulty of getting a kill empannelled. In one case, out of two hundred and five names whist were called over, only thirty were answered.

Mr. D. RONAY/4E said, it was very common, when there was n) pretence of intimidation, for only fifty-jurors, out of one hundred art fifty who were summoned, to answer to their names.

MT. CALLAGHAN, Mr. O'DWYER, MT. FINN, Mr. MAURICE 0'0)5' NELL, and Mr. HUME supported the same side of the question e Mr. O'Connell, and reprobated the measures of Government. Dlr. HUME said that Ministers in fact called upon the people of England w wage war against Ireland for the sake of the Church Establishment. ' Lord JOHN RtssEns declared that tie was guilty of no inconsistency in supporting measures of coercion towards Ireland. He had several times refrained from opposing the Insurrection Act, when it became necessary to introduce it into Ireland.

The resolutions of the report of the Committee on Supply were then agreed to.

2. Intsu DISTURBANCE Bum. In the House of Lords, on Monday, Lord ELLENBOROUGH moved for returns from the Chief Constables of Policein Ireland, specifying the outrages committed in March, April, and May 1832.

Earl GREY said, it would be very inconvenient to make them at the present time ; as many persons were deterred by fear from making com- plaints of what they had suffered. He had made himself thoroughly acquainted with the state of Ireland—all the retarns, every source of in- formation, had been carefully examined by him previously to the intro- duction of his bill for suppressing disturbances in that country.

Lord ELLENBORQUGH did not wish to delay the progress of the bill, but thought it desirable to have all the information on the subject Which could be obtained previous to passing it.

The returns moved for by Lord Ellenborough were then ordered.

Earl GREY moved the second reading of the bill for the Suppressing of Illegal Associations and Local Disturbances in Ireland.

The Earl of WICKLOW agreed that the present bill was rendered ne- cessary by the alarming state of Ireland; but strongly censured the Ministry for not having introduced a similar measure at an earlier pe- riod. He said that their present object was to conciliate the Con- servatives by coercive measures, and to gain over the Radicals by throwing sacrilegious hands on that venerable pile the Church Esta- blishment. He maintained that the Repeal of the Union was merely the watchword of a faction, and was quite unpopular with the wealthy and intelligent members of Irish society. He admitted the abilities of Mr. Stanley, but thought that a man of more experience should be sent to Ireland as Chief Secretary.

Lord MELBOURNE denied that the Government entertained any un- worthy views of conciliating the Repealers. He would not use any language that was not respectful to the House ; but what Lord Wicklow had stated, he,would plainly say., was not the fact. Coercive measures alone had been often tried without success. He was therefore, for one, well pleased that conciliatory measures were to accompany those which the Government had with extreme reluctance been compelled to adopt.

The Earl of LONGFORD was convinced that the Marquis of Angle- sea, though an excellent military man, was totally unfit for the govern- ment of Ireland. He had in fact mismanaged the affairs of that country for several years.

The Earl of RODEN complained that Ministers had not been earlier with their coercive measures; which ought to have been adopted during the last session of Parliament, when he had drawn their attention to the alarming state of Ireland. He would support the present measures of Government ; but with regard to the plan for reforming the Irish Church Establishment, he would only then say, that it had for its object the spoliation of the Church in Ireland, and that the same principle would speedily be extended to the Church in England.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE defended the Marquis of Anglesea against the attacks which were so unfairly made Alston him. Nothing could be more unjust than to reproach him with the accidental use of the word agitation, at a moment when his feelings were excited and he was not in office.

The Duke of WELLINGTON said, it was useless to go back to former proceedings. The duty of the House was to attend to the state of things in Ireland at the present moment. That state of things ren- dered the proposed measure absolutely necessary. He should, there- fore, without looking to one side or the other, give the Government all the support in his power. He was sorry that the present measure had not been sooner introduced; but as he conceived that it would do much good, he hoped it would be adopted by the House with as little delay as possible. He was of opinion, however, that some amendments were necessary; and he should move in Committee that the Courts- martial should be appointed on the principle recognized in the Mutiny Bill.

Earl GREY thanked the Duke of Wellington for the courteous man- ner in which he had stated his intention. His suggestions should be taken into serious and immediate consideration. The present bill was a matter of necessity, not one of choice. It was brought forward for the preservation of the public peace—for the maintenance of the power of Government--above all, for the protection of the great body of the people, whose rights were outraged by the prevalence of riot and intimidation.

The bill was then read a second time, without a dissentient voice.

Lord TEYNHAM, on Tuesday, moved for a list of Irish Privy Coun- cillors. It was his intention to propose an amendment in Committee, to the effect that proclamations declaring places to be in a state of dis- turbance should be issued under the seals of not less than six Privy Councillors.

Lord CLONCURRY charged the Magistrates of Ireland with culpable negligence in the performance of their duties. It was by no means difficult to quell disturbances in Ireland, if Magistrates would only act with vigour and prudence at their outset.

The Earl of Wmanow defended the character of the Irish Magis- tracy.

The Marquis of WESTMEATH said that Lord Cloncurry appeared to keep up a correspondence with a number of priests, whose information was hardly to be relied upon. Lord CLONCURRY denied this. He derived his information from the newspapers.

Lord Teynham's motion was then negatived.

Earl GREY then moved that the House resolve itself into a Com- mittee upon the Irish Disturbances Bill.

A number of clauses were read and agreed to. Cln the dense being read relative to the formation of Courts-martial, Earl Grey observed, that he had paid due attention to the suggi stions which Iliad been .offered by the Duke of Wellington on the preceding tight. One or these was, that the sentences of courts-martial should uot be carried into effect until they suet the approval of the Lord-Lieutenant or of the Lords Justices of Ireland. Thesecond was,

that an officer of a certain rauk should preside over such courts-martial. as bail no serious objection to either proposition : he only feared, with respect to the firbt, that in some cases an inconvenient delay would be caused in waiting for the approval of a sentence.

The Duke of WELLINGTON explained the object be had in view.— It was to confine as nearly as possible the duties that officers in the Army were under the provisions of this measure called upon to perform to those which they might be called upon to discharge at military courts-martial for the trials of officers and soldiers ; in short. that they should try none but under the orders of the Lord Lieu- tenant, and should cause the execution of no sentence they might pronounce, until its

confirmation by the Lord Lieutenant should be first had and obtained.

The Earl of WicsLow objected to the amendment, on account of the delay which would ensue between the conviction and the execution of the sentence, if the approval of the Lord-Lieutenant was to be obtained.

Lord BROUGHAM explained the operation of the proposed measure— The party charged would be brought to trial, and the trial for a time closed, though not closed in reality, but closed only by a cessation of the proceedings for a day or two ; and though the trial bad concluded, it would only be as if an adjournment boil taken place, and the real conclusion of the proceedings would be wilco the coufirmation of the sentence by the Lord-Lieutenaut was received, and then the party would be brought up, and the sentence so conlirmed pronounced, o.nd would then be immediately carried into effect.

The clause, as amended, then passed.

The other clauses of the bill were also agreed to, after some discus- sion. The last clause limits the operation of the bill to the 1st of August 1834.

The report on the bill was brought up on Thursday; when Earl GREY proposed an amendment to the tenth clause, relating to courts- martial,—to the effect that the accused might have the benefit of coun- sel; who should be allowed to put questions to witnesses.direetly, in- stead of handing them up to the President, and putting them after

having received his sanction.

The Duke of CUMBERLAND and Lord HARROWBY objected to this deviation from the practice of courts-martial.

Lord liriwroan supported the amendment. It was necessary in some degree to depart from the strict practice of courts-martial, le- cause the courts constituted under this act would have to dotal with civil offences.

The clause, as amended, was agreed to.

Earl GREY introduced an additional clause, making it a misdemean- our for any person to give any signals by bonfires, rockets, ringing of bells, blowing of horns, firing of guns, or by any other device•for the purpose of convening or giving notice of any illegal assembly.

This clause also was agreed to.

Earl GREY moved the third reading of the bill last night.

Lord TEYNHAM contended that the measure was a violent issfringe- ment of the Constitution, and would add to the irritation instead„of tending to allay it. It was hurried indecently through the House; tint still there was time to pause; and he entreated Ministers to recollect that violent measures never succeeded in obtaining their object.

The Earl of WESTMORELAND expressed his entire approbation of the bill; and taunted Ministers with having been forced at at to adopt more arbitrary measures than those which they had so violently opposed when emanating from a Tory Administration.

The bill was then read a third time, and passed.

The Disturbances Bill, as passed by the Lords, was presented in the House of Commons the same evening.

Lord ALTHORP said, as it was considered desirable that the bill should be printed before it was read the first time, he should move that it be read a first time on Wednesday next. In answer to a question by Mr. kinlE, he stated that the Church Reform Bill would be brought in by the end of next week; and the Grand Jury Bill, he hoped, next week also.

Mr. O'CosnesLn said, that Ministers could not control tbe 7direc- tion of their conciliatory measures in "another place." lie should move for a call of the House for Wednesday next, to be repeated day after day, until there was some relaxation at all events in the provisions of the despotic bill.

Mr. STANLEY said, the Government were as greatly pledged to the remedial as to the other measures : they were hound as a Government to a certain line of policy, which they had explained ; and ir they should be unable to enforce that policy, they would be utterly disgraced by retaining their situations.

Mr. SHEIL thought that they ought to be certain, before passing the coercive measures, that the remedial ones would be passed in the House of Lords. He asked Lord Althorp what had become of his pledge to improve the system of calling Juries in Ireland, and to assimilate it to the English mode. That pledge had been distinctly given last session, and never had been redeemed.

Lord ALTHORP admitted that this was true; yet he gave the pledge in perfect sincerity, believing that it would be redeemed. The bill was not carried in the Lords because the prorogation of Parliament inter- fered.

" I am ready to say now that my pledge was not redeemed last session ; and that it must be redeemed in the course of the present session. (Cheers.) I do not consider. from the circumstances under which that pledge failed, that I was so cotureraised as to make it impossible for me to remain a member of the Government." ("Him', heart') 3 IRISH VENUE BILL. A bill introduced by Earl Guy, for changing the venue in certain cases in Ireland, was read a first tune on Thursday, and a second time last night. Lord Grey observed, that there were, unfortunately, several precedents in Irish history for such a bill. In those, however, to which he alluded, the venue mild only be changed to Dublin: he proposed, where it was practicable, to change it also to the neighbouring county. By the former bills also,,it.could only be changed at the instance of the .Attorney-General: he .proposed that it might be done at the instance of the party accused. Islats bill would be limited to August 1834, the same period as the Disturbances

Bill which had just passed.

The Earl of Wwxtow, Lord ELLENEOHOUGH, and Lord.W.W0.11D, were of opinion that the bill should be made a permanent measure ; or at any rate, that its duration should be extended to at least five years. Lord ELLENBOROUGH reminded Ministers of the truth of Lord Bacon's saying, "that nothing destroyed authority so much as the un- equal and untimely interchange of power, pressed too far, and relaxed too much."

Lord BROUGIIAM saw no objection to making that part of the bill permanent which changed the venue to the adjoining county. The duration of the bill would have to be considered in the next session.

Earl GREY said, the bill secured to the prisoner the fullest oppor- tunity of bringing forward his witnesses, and allowed him all reasonable expenses.

4. IRISH GRAND JURY SYSTEM. Mr. STANLEY, on Tuesrlay, brought forward his motion on the subject of Irish Grand Juries. He explained the nature of the duties which they had to perform-.—

The Grand Jury in Ireland, in a Iffition to their criminal functions, had the whole ad-

ministration of the civil affairs of the county iutrusted to them. They fixed the sala- ries of public officers ; they regulated prisons and houses of correction ; they levied funds for the support of hospitals; Hwy made aml repaired roads and bridges ; and they framed accounts of the expenses incurred in these matters. They had, in fact, not only to transact the business which was usually performed by an English Grand Jury, but they exercised, at the same time, many uf the functions of the English Legislature. They determined what public works should be tindertaken—what price should be paid for them—and who were the individuals that should undertake them, and be responsible for their completion. They declared the amount of the local taxation of the county ; and, under their direction, it was levied from the actual occupiers of the laud.

The amount of local taxation which they controlled was no less than nine hundred and forty thousand pounds per annum. Their delibe- rations were carried on in private their presentments were secret ; • there was no check whatever on their proceedings. The time which was allotted for the performance of their duties was too limited. The , whole system was favourable to corruption. P An instance of the mode in which corruption was exercised, in consequence or these powers of the Grand Jury, might be given in the making of roads. A gentleman who wanted a road made, on his estate, or who wanted employment for his labourers, would make a presentment ; a committee would be appointed; he would get his ow-n name, 'and perhaps that of a friend, put upon tins committee ; and he would thus have the manageinent of the whole affair. He would then employ his own labourers—would pay them out of the funds levied upon the county—and by these means would enable ' theni to pay him, out of the salary they thus received from the county at large, a rent which depended not on the profits of the holdrug itself, but on the amount of the inouey he wos enabled to procure them on account of labours in public works.

The following were the remedies which he proposed for the evils of the present system. He would render it, imperative on the High She- riff to put upon the Grand Jury one gentleman from each barony in the county. He would provide for the public discussion of every present- ment in open court previously to its being laid before the Jury ; so that a presentment negatived by this Court (which would be so consti- tuted as to resemble the English Quarter-sessions) would never be laid before the Jury at all. He would take away from the Grand Jury the power of selecting the persons who were to have the contracts for , the performance of any public works which might be determined upon. . Tenders should be made for the work to be done : and, with very few and peculiar exceptions, the persons making the lowest offers should be employed. An engineer, approved of by the Board of Engineers, and • whose situation would correspond with that of County Surveyor, should attend every session of the Grand Jury, and report upon the expediency and probable'cost of each undertaking. A;provision should be made in all • leases, that the tenant might deduct from the landowner the amount of the County Cess, which would thus be thrown more directly than at present upon those who had the privilege of voting it away in public works. The Session should be empowered to appoint a committee to manage the County funds, instead of a County Treasurer. County Treasurers had frequently jobbed with the public money, lending it out at interest for their own private gain. Defaulters, too, had been nume- rous among them. It was desirable, therefore, to take the funds of the public from under their control. He considered that it was desirable, though his bill contained no clause to that effect, to take the great mail- . coach roads out of the control of Grand Juries, and invest it in some public board. He thought that the plan proposed would effect great good ; and he should be ready to introduce any amendments that were • practicable and advantageous into the measure. Mr. Stanley concluded by moving for leave to bring in a bill "to amend the laws relating to Grand Juries in Ireland."

Mr. O'CONNELL said that Mr. Stanley had underrated the evils of the Grand Jury system in Ireland.7— Some estates had been purchased, antimony freed from incumbrances, merely by the owners sittbag upon Grand Juries; and it at last became a point of honour not to vote against any gentleman's presentment.

He considered that two persons from every barony ought to be elected by the rate-payers to sit upon every Grand Jury, seeing that it -bad the voting away of the public money.

Some of the details in the plan of Mr. Stanley he highly approved, but others he thought impractieable. It was idle to suppose that he would gain any thing by publi- city, if, after providing for the open discussion or a question, he allowed the-Grand Jury ' to retire and in secret to decide. This was blowing hot and cold, and destroying the very principle professed to be established. These were matters that could be discussed - in the Committee, tis'well as the futile attempt (for such he must with all respect call It) to throw upon landlords the payment of the County Cess. At best, it could only be

' prospective, if it did any good; but be feared it would do much harm, by..iBducing the landlords of Ireland not to grant leases.

Dr. LEPROY defended the present Grand Jury system, and the con- duct of the High Sheriffs.

Colonel CONOLLY completely concurred with those who thought that any change in the Grand Jury system must be for the better, and thanked Ar. Stanley for his measure. Mr., F. O'CONNOR, Colonel TORRENS, Mr. FINN, MT. JOHN BROWNE, Lord CLEMEN,TS, MT. PRYME, and Mr. MAURICE O'CON- NELL; all concurred in their approbation of the proposed amendments.

Leave was then given to bring in the bill.

• 5. STAMP DUTIES. When Lord ALTHORP, on Monday, moved the order of the day for bringing up the report of the Committee of Supply, .Mr. COEBETT 'said, he would not allow the Representatives of the . People to grant any supplies to the Government until he had made a

statement of some of the 'grievances under which the -people laboured. • He would not occupy the attention of the House with trifling matters, but would confine himself to an exposure of the partiality, cruelty, and injustice of the two acts of Parliament called the Stamp Duties' Act

What ought the House to do, then, if this state of facts was true? TItere ought tote a Committee of the House to take into consideration these grievances—they ought to tell the people that at least they would look into these grievances. Let them tell the t people so now. He would try them now. He should conclude with moving this lieu. lution—" That on the 1st of March this House will take into consideration the nature, tendency, and effect of the several Acts of Parliament winch impose taxes on Sunnis, and on things sold by Auction." All he asked, then, was to take these things into coo , sideration.

Dr. BALDWIN seconded the motion ; which he thought was practi. cally directed to obtain an advantage for the people. He hoped that ! . the duty on Glass would be repealed.

Lord AI.THORP admitted the unequal operation of the Stamp and Auction-duties ; but so also were the Assessed Taxes. In every case of taxation, when the amount became considerable, the percentage on which the taxes bad been calculated was diminished. The reason of this was, that these taxes seldom came into operation upon large masses ' of property, the proceeds of these taxes being generally drawn from i property of moderate amount.

With respect to the Legacy-duty on land and freehold property, Mr. Cobbett must r be aware that the expense of conveying property of that description was infinitely greater than it was in the case of personal property. He was not answerable fur what was done in 1815, the time at which the Act alluded to by Mr. Cobbett was passed; but perhaps some of the circumstances which had been pointed out were the result of oversight. There was one reason for not imposing a Legacy-duty upon landed pro- perty, to which he would just advert. It must be evident, that if such a duty were in' posed, the whole value of the landed property of the country would, in a certain num- ber of years, pass through the hands of the State. ("Hear!" from Mr. Cobbett.) For instance, if a Legacy-duty of one per cent, were imposed upon landed property, its whole value would pass through the hands of the State in a hundred changes. That had always been considered a great objection to the imposition of such a tax.

He stated that the revision and consolidation of the Stamp Acts were under consideration.There were two hundred and forty acts relating to the Stamp-duties, 'which would be reduced to eleven. He agreed that the duties were in some instances too low proportionably ; but he did not think the House would agree to the alteration which Mr. Cob- bett would suggest. He was sorry that he could hold out no hopes of the repeal of the duty on Glass, especially when the repeal of so many other taxes was called for. He would resist the resolution proposed by Mr. Cobbett, because the House was taken by surprise. He ad- mitted that the Stamp-duties pressed indirectly upon the labouring classes ; but he thought that this inequality and its consequences had been exaggerated.

Mr. O'CONNELL, Mr. HUME, Mr. D. W. HARVEY, Mr. ROBINSON, and Mr., WARBURTON, agreed with Mr. Cobbett as to the oppressive operation of these 'duties upon the poorer classes ; but recommended him to withdraw his resolution, and to bring it forward upon notice, in another shape, so that every member might be fully prepared to go

into the subject. Mr. CORBETT finally withdrew his resolution, after a few remarks from Mr. Farravur.; who wished him to press it at once-upon the con- sideration of the House.

6. Punic ACCOUNTS. • Mr. HUME moved, on Thursday, "For Estimates of the total Revenue and Expenditure for 1833; for Estimates, ii detail, of the charges for Collection of the Revenue; and of Payments made out of tie revenue in its way to the Exchequer for other purposes than the collection of revenue' He complained of the incomplete manner in which the public accounts were laid before the House. 'No account was rendered of those sums which, being charged on the Consolidated Fund, were not under the control of the House. Last year, for instance, although our expendi- ture was fifty-one millions; the amount of mooey voted by the House was only seventeen millions seven 'hundred and 'eighty-two thousand pounds. The cost of- collecting the revenue, which amounted to four millions, was not included in that statement. He believed that if com- plete and welt.arranged accounts of the expenditure of each department were laid before Parliament; a great saving might be made. The Es- timates with all their details melt be made out by the 15th of January, and the Auction Duties Act. It would appear from the statement he was about to make, that the Nobility, Clergy, and Gentry, bad taken can

to relieve themselves from the burden of taxation, which fell heavily on the Poor, increasing in proportion as it reached them. This statement was not likely to excite much love in the people towards their sup. riors. Mr. Stanley had said that Government must be feared before it could be loved. But hatred generally accompanied fear. Ministers thought differently. They wished to be feared before they were loved, and they would soon see how it would end.

The duties on stamps, amounting to about, seven millions per annum; were imposed by an act which passed on the let of July 1815, in the 55th year of George the Third. The landed gentry scarcely paid any portion of this amount. Mr. Cobbett then went on to explain how freehold property was exempted from the Legacy-duty, while personal - property was heavily taxed ; and the smaller the amount, the higher was the tax in proportion. This remark also held good with respect to Leases, Bonds, Mortgages, Annuities ; Receipts, Promissory' Notes, Bills of Exchange, Appraisements, and Insurances on Lives, The poor man, as a matter of course was made to pay more in proper. tion than the rich man. He made this exhibition of the iniquity of the Stamp-laws, because he perceived that Ministers were determined to force all their measures, and not take off a farthing of, the taxes. In one instance, he must confess, there appeared something like impar. tiality in the Stamp-duties : in the cAse of apprenticeships, the duty increased regularly with the amount of the premium ; but then, he re. , collected that the sons of the nobility and gentry were ltever bound apprentices, and that accounted for this single instance of seemin., fairness. There was one clause at the end of the Act to which he would especially refer : it was that which exempted from the opera. tion of the Stamp-duty All mortgages, leases, and other instruments for making provision for the building ;- and purchasing of houses—for whom did the House think? For beneficed clergymen Could such things be endured by a Reformed House of Commons? Would they sit and sanction such laws? If they did do so, let them go back and look their coustite. eats in the face afterwards. Let them take the resolutions which he intended to pro- pose in their bands, and say that they had opposed them.

He proceeded to expose the gross partiality of the mode in which the Auction-duties operated. A duty of seven pence in the pound i was laid upon the sale of lands tenements, shares, jewels, plate, ships, [- Sze. ; while a duty of one shilling was imposed upon the sale of other things, such as furniture, which a ruined farmer or tradesman was corn. pelled to send to auction.

• 7': made.

He repeated, that until they had a statement of every shilling of the public expendi- ture and receipts before them, their accounts would never be in a satisfactory state.

. Ile did not think that to be an honest account which stated the whole expenditure of the nation to be 46,000,0001., when in fact it amounted to 51.000,0001. His object was to obtain the means by which the people might be enabled to judge of the whole amount of taxation to be raised, and the whole amount of payments to be made, in the eourse of the year; as well as the number of individuals employed in the Naval. Mili- tary, and Civil establishments of the country.

Lord ALTHORP objected to the returns of the expense of collecting the revenue, on account of their multiplicity, and because they would not be of any use. He had no objection to granting the other returns. He said that the whole of the revenue was actually under the control of Parliament, as well that part of it which was v3ted annually, as that which was charged by Act of Parliament for certain specified purposes on the Consolidated Fund. It was competent for Parliament to re- scind the Acts by which the sums were so appropriated. He could not give any account of the year ending the 5th of April, because it was not yet closed. It was with Mr. Hume's approbation that the finan- cial year was made to close in April instead of January ; but now, it would seem, Mr. Hume wished to go back to the old plan. He had no objection whatever to voting annually the sums to be paid for the collection of the revenue. Under a bill for the better regulation of the Exchequer, which would soon be laid before the House, the gross revenue of the country would be paid into the Exchequer. With re- gard to furnishing estimates for the coming year—they were always founded upon the expenditure of the last year; and as that was not yet concluded, it would be premature to bring forward the estimates which Mr. Hume called for. Mr. Hume now found fault with the balance. sheet, which had been drawn up last year at his express suggestion, and in the very form in which he proposed. Lord .Althorp concluded by saying, that He would shortly being in abill for the better regulation of the Exchequer. By that bill, the whole gross revenue would be carried to one side of the account, whilst on the other side would be seen the whole expenditure. The House would thus have the full power of checking and controlling the public puree, and of criticising the manage- ment of it even to the minutest item of expenditure. Hitherto the House had nut had that control : when this bill was passed, it would possess it.

Mr. HOME briefly replied. . He complained that Lord Althorp had gained a brief laugh at his expense by a misstatement.

The proposition of the present balance-sheet was not his. He had proposed a ba- lauee-sheet which he thought would have been effectual : but an amendment hod been moved upon his scheme by the late member for Abingdon, and that amendment had been carried by the Committee. Ills object was answered by this discussion, and he would therefore withdraw his resolutions, to save the House the trouble or dividing upon them.

The motion was then, by leave, withdrawn.

7. KING LEOPOLD'S ANNUITY. Mr. HALL, on Thursday, moved for an account of the money which had been paid into the Exchequer by order of the King of Belgium. It was said that after the payment of a few debts, and a sum to be deducted for keeping up the establish-. ment at Claremont, the residue of the pension was to be paid to the Exchequer. Mr. Ball wished to know how much, if any thing, had been paid in pursuance of this arrangement. The debts were calculated at that time at 10,000/.

Lord ALTHORP said, it had turned out, as was usually the case with debts, that they were much larger than was anticipated. They bad not been paid off to this day, as the trustees had been afraid to act; and no money at all had been paid into the Exchequer from that source.

The motion was withdrawn.

• S. RECREATION FOR THE POOR. Mr. SLANEY, on Thursday, moved for the appointment of a Select Committee to consider the best means of securing open spaces, in the immediate vicinity of populous towns, as public walks, calculated to promote the health and comfort of the inhabitants.

-His notice had been upon the paper for two years; but during that time, he hart found it impracticable to bring the question forward on account of the pressure of pub- lic business. He could not, however, but rejoice at the delay which had taken place, because, during the interval, the measure of Reform had been passed, which had brought into Parliament many members for those large communities for the benefit of the humbler classes of whom his motion was intended.

He observed that the very great increase which had taken place in our population during the last thirty years, particularly in the manufac- turing towns and in London, rendered it highly desirable, as a means of improving and preserving health, that open spaces, public walks, and additional means of innocent recreation, should be provided for the lower classes. In London and the vicinity, with a population of 1,750,000 souls within eight miles of St. Paul's Cathedral, there were only the three Parks to which the people could resort for exercise. The inhabitants of the great manufacturing towns were still worse off.

-Though the population of these towns had actually doubled within the last thirty , years, no open spaces for recreation had been provided for the increased numbers. In- deed. so far fiom it, almost all the footpaths in the neighbourhood had been closed up, so that not even this small means of enjoying fresh air was afforded them. And yet, if the inhabitants of these Northern counties be compared with those of the Southern portion of the island, it would be seen that from their habits of industry and wealth they were eminently entitled to all those comforts and means of health which can be afforded them without encroaching on the rights of private property. The amount of peor-rates per head in the North of England is to that in the South as 1 to 3; per pound as 1 to 4; while the paupers are only as 1 to 7 compared with the South.

Enclosure Acts had deprived the poor of almost every inch of open space throughout the country. The population of Manchester, which amounted to 187,000 persons, had no public walk or open space in the immediate vicinity, wherein to take exercise on Sunday, or after the

But, perhaps, the want of such open spaces for air and exercise for our manufaetur ing population, pent up all day in the close air of their workshops wouldpe

appear more striking if submitted to them as a question of medical police. 01 10,000 !ens under

twenty years of age, the deaths were 3,700, in a healthy and rural country • in a marshy

onintry, 4,200; and in the Metropolis, 4,500; being about 44 in 10: in country; 5,600 or5i in 10; in Preston, Stockport, Wigan, and other places in Lancashire engaged ito the cotton trade, the deaths were 6 out oh 10; while in Leeds the mortality exeeeded6 out of 10 ;—so that 6 out of 10 of the population in the manufacturing towns died be- fore they reached twenty years of age. Was not this striking fact in itself a host of ar-

guments for affording the working classes in these towns increased facilities for health and exercise?

He complained that there had been of late years much busy meddling with the recreations of the poor. Wakes and fairs were suppressed. It was despicable cant and hypocrisy to complain of the drunkenness which was said to be on the increase, while such pains were taken to cgrtail the innocent enjoyments of the poor, alld t9 drive them at the

hours of work were over. same time to the public-houses. There were other advantages con- nected with the providing of public walks for the lower classes : and he expected that Mr. Poulett Thomson would support him on their account, if on no other. He alluded to the increased consumption of clothing which would result from it.

• He was little acquainted with the philosophy of mind who supposed that clothes were merely worn as articles of covering. (A laugh.) A plain man like himself, anti still more his noble friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, might. to be sure. wear : coats and waistcoats for no other purpose (Great laughter); but uine-tenths of the House and of mankind, and, without offence be it stated, of womankind, wore clothes chiefly as a means of gratifying the ruling passion, love of distinction. (" Hear !" and , a laugh.) That principle pervaded all ranks, and the lady's maid took as much

• pride in her brilliant riband as ber Dutelless mistress could in her diamond tiara. But unless I here were pleasure-grounds and public walks for the artisans and their wives and daughters to exhibit themselves in, was it not evident that there was a drawback on that stimulus to industry which the wearing of fine clothes would generate?

He concluded by observing, that by sanctioning plans like this for increasing the comforts of the poor, they would remove much discon- tent, and earn a rich harvest of gratitude.

Dr. BALDWIN seconded the motion ; and said, that the health and comfort of the poor would be more benefited by rendering their dwellings cleaner, and the lines in which they were built wider, than even by providing them with pleasure-grounds, though the latter also were very desirable.

Mr. GEORGE LAMB would do all in his power to promote Mr. Sla- ney's object; but he doubted whether much could be done by the Le- gislature. Ile had no objection to the trial of the experiment; and expressed the great pleasure it always gave him to see people who worked hard all the week innocently enjoying themselves on Sunday. He hoped that nothing would at any time 1.10 attempted to cloud the general sunshine of the cheerful Sabbath in this country. (Much cheering.) Mr. FAITHFUL, Mr. LENNARD, and Mr. POTTER, approved of Mr. Slaney's proposal. Mr. Potter said, that but for the exertion of a society in Manchester for the preservation of footpaths there would have been very few left by this time within ten miles of Manchester.

Mr. PORTMAN said, he had given notice of a bill for amending the law of highways, which he hoped would put an end to the practice of closing up footpaths. He thought that the Regent's Park should be opened to the public as soon as possible.

The Committee was then appointed.

9. LIGHTHOUSES. Mr. HUME., on Thursday, moved for the returns of the lighthouse duties paid at each lighthouse in England, Scotland, and Ireland, from 1828 to the present time. He stated that a great ex- pense to the shipping interest was occasioned, by the practice which was persevered in, although pledges had been given by two of the Cabinet :Ministers that it should be abolished, of granting leases of lighthouses to private persons. Lord Braybrooke and Mr. Coke both received large sums, the former for Winterton and Orfordness, the latter for Dungeness and Harwich lighthouses. Lord Braybrooke and his family had received 22,000/. per annum for twenty-one years from their lighthouses, and Mr. Coke 12,000/. per annum for his. There were many other private lighthouses from which no returns could be had. He considered that the King's prerogative was unduly stretched when leases were granted to individuals by which a heavy tax was laid upon the shipping interest. The whole amount paid by that suffering in- terest for lighthouses was nearly 190,000/. per ann am. Th e members of Trinity House were naval men, and managed the lighthouses under their care extremely well. But in Scotland and Ireland, the provosts, bankers, and lawyers had the management of them ; and it was diffi- cult to imagine that they could be competent to perform the duties of such an office. The whole system wanted inquiring into. Since the reciprocity system was introduced, by which foreign vessels were exempted firm pitying lighthouse dues, the Government paid to the private lighthouses all the extra dues which should have been paid by foreign ships but for that 'arrangement ; so that the Government actually paid money out of the public purse to those private' lighthouses, over and above the large sums which were paia by the owners of ships in this country. which they ought never to pay. Mr. ROBINSON seconded the motion. He thought that private leases, as they expired, should not be renewed, and that the Government should give some pledge to that effect. Mr. POULETT THOMSON would not oppose the motion. The Go- vernment intended to make the management of lighthouses the subject of a specific measure. With regard to the leases which had expired since `the period when the Committee on foreign trade had made their report, his opinion was, that they ought not to have been again conceded, but that those ligh"touses should have been placed under the direction of the Trinity House. He could not agree, however, with Mr- Hume, in think- , ing that the present Government were to blame regarding the renewal of those leases. The only leases which fell in since the present Government took office were two, which leases had been renewed to Greenwich Hospital ; and in those cases from WOOL to 6,0001. a year were given up to the shipping interest, which could not have been de- manded, and the lights were put under the directions of the Trinity House. Sir RoteaT PEEL defended the conduct of the late Government in renewing the leases of Lord Braybrooke and Mr. Coke,—both of them their steady opponents; so that there could have been no design of ac- quiring influence by the transaction. The Dungeness Lighthouse was built !.y one of Mr. Coke's ancestors' and the property belonged to Mr. Coke; so that Government, if they had not renewed the lease, would have had to purchase it from him.

Mr. HOME was aware that the Lighthouse belonged to Mr. Coke ; but there was property within fifty yards of it belonging to the Trinity House, which would fait fully as well as the situation on which the present Lighthouse stood, Mr. PEASE said, he could not but o that this question had been

brought before the House, as it was One._

oiice people was deeply interested. He was de

snirsovhich a large class of the subject should be brought before a Board of prae th ntla

tisethat so iniporta

oroitigthhyp

acquainted with the subject. It was most worthy the House. salon

It appeared to him a very extraordinarY thing, that while noblemen, gentlemen, and companies were subscribing their fifties and hundreds of pounds for the preservation of ships and seamen, for Captain Manby's apparatus, Ike.' a duty should be levied by his Majesty's Government which proved the cause of hives and property being lost in the gross. It was eminently requisite that a Committee should be appointed to see into tlds. While every one felt that aged Mariners and the widows of aged mariners were very fit subjects of our benevolence, yet, at the same time, the greatest possible precautions should be taken for the preservation of seamen and property at sea. While bestowing charity, let care be taken not to reduce the number of lights on the coast ; every feeling of humanity and interest must revolt against such a measure. Mr. Pease concluded by congratulating the House that they had, at length, arrived at a measure of pratewat month The a4timeiti-ot tin:11664, hitherto, aPpeared to bate, belle almod wholly occupied flia series of desultory debating s and special pleadings, which. though they had oceasionally much amused, and, he hoped, iu3tructe1 him, had certainly taken up a great deal of time, and produced very trifliug results. ("Hear,hear!") Lord EBRINGTON said that Lord Braybrooke did not derive half the sum mentioned by Mr. Hume—namely, 22,0001. Per annum—from his

lighthouses. ••

Mr. HUME admitt4d, that if he had so stated the sum, it was by mistake..

Mr. G. F. Youem complained that while the merchant-service had to bear the expense of these lighthouses, the Royal Navy, which expe- rienced all the benefit, contributed nothing to their maintenance.

The production of the papers was then agreed to.

10. 'MERCHANT TAILORS COMPANY. Mr. M. ATTWOOD, On Thurs- day, presented a petition from the Merchant Tailors Company, com- plaining of one which Mr. M. D. Hill had presented from Mr. Hugh Franks on Monday last, in which they were charged with the misappli- cation of their corporate funds. The petition of Franks had been re- ferred to the Committee on Corporations ; but Mr.-Attwood contended that the order for such reference should be rescinded, as the powers of that Committee were confined to an inquiry into the state of municipal and did not extend to trading corporations. • He observed also, that the real character of the petition had been mithheld from the House, and that it was presented in his absence.

Mr. HILL vindicated himself as the presenter of Mr. Franks's p. tition. When Mr. Attwood thought tit to insinuate that he (Mr. Hill) had wilfully fwereted the nature or tee petition from the knowledge or the House, and that the petdion had been presented in his absence, he might have had the candour to inform tie. House, that he (Mr. 11111) bad sent him a copy of the petition; that he hail in tletael hi::: when he :mewled to present it; that he was prepared to present it on Friday, oats., having stood at the head of the paper of that day, but that, at the POI,V2Si Or NI ter:Ile...al, he. peetponed the presentation to !Monday, in order to give hint an opt:wee/nit y of being present and of making any observations on the petition which might weef to him.

. There were several charges against the Merchant Tailors Company, which ought to be investigated. Mr. Atwood asserted that these charges were false—then why did be shun inquiry that would prove the virtue of the Company ? Why did he draw the nice distinction be- tween municipal and trading corporations, in order to shirk the in- quiry? The petitioner was a respectable man ; and a petition was not to be slighted because it proceeded only from an individual.

Mr. COIMETT said he knew the petitioner, and be could say that he believed his character, public and private, to be as good as that of the Warden of the Merchant Tailors Company ; and as for his trade, he knew that it was fully as good, for he was a maker and issuer of hats. (A laugh.)

Mr. Arrwooe denied that there was any wish to shun inquiry upon the part of the Company. Ile complained of being libelled in the pe- tition in a way which he had no mode of meeting. The case had been in the Court of King's Bench ; aud the decision had been against Mr. Hill's client, who now on that account brought it before the House. Hiea denied that be as the counsel of the petitioner at the time when he presented the petition.

Mr. Arrwoon hoped that the House would not sanction the practice of professional men bringing their unsuccessful clients bee the House to try their causes over again.

Lord Ammar, in reply to a question from Sir E. Knatehhull, said that his Committee was her inquiry into the state of munieipal corpo- rations only. It was not oecessury to rescind the order for referring the petition in question to the Committee; which had no power to in- quire into its merits.

Mr. D. W. Hansav suggested, that the petition should be referred to the Charity Commissioners ; a body upon whom nearly a million of money had been expended.

This Commission had been in existence since 1818 ; it had produced not less than twenty-five volumes of RePorts, but had been exceedingly inefl'ectual in producing be- neficial results. Ile had no doubt, that if inquiries were instituted into these trading corporations, the greatest good would accrue.

To a company to which he belonged three houses on London Bridge had been left; four centuries ago, which then produced six pounds per annum, which was distributed among the poor: subsequently the pro- perty was wanted for the New London Bridge Company, and sold for 1,70a : an information was filed against his company, claiming the whole of the proceeds, with accumulated principal and interest ; and the company were glad to compromise th.:1 matter by the payment of 10,0001.

Sir ROBERT PEEL thought that the order referring the petition to the Committee should be rescinded.

The SPEAKER said, the order should be rescinded, and the petition laid eon the table, for the House to deal with it as they saw fit.

.1aIr. Hum maintained that the Merchant Tailors Company was not a trading company, because they followed no trade ; and that it was a municipal company, because they could any day admit a thousand Liverymen into the constituency, which would affect the representation of the City.

Mr. O'CONNELL concurred with Mr. Hume.

Lord ALMORP would give no positive opinion on the question.

Mr. BARING hoped the order would be rescinded. The Committee had no power to inquire into the property of corporations. Ile re-

oonitneneed that there should be a subdivision of labour among the members of the Committee,. otherwise they Would not be able to get through their labours in timyears.

Mr. WARBURTON hoped that the order would not be rescinded without notice. He thought that the particular grievance complained of should be referredto the Charity Commissioners.

Mr. SitAw complained that the Corporation Committee was unfairly composed. Out of the seven Irish members, six were known to have made Up their minds against corporation rights.

A Member defended the Committee. Mr. Shaw had no right to suppose that they would decide except according to the evidence laid before them.

Sir R. VYVYAN viewed the powers of the Committee with alarm. if trading corporations Were ams to become the subject of exautinatien, he did not know whether other corporations might not be subjected to an examination of the lame kind; and (rem corpotations they might perhaps pass on to-patents of nobility.

Mr. ABERCROMBIE complained that unusual pains were .taken to throw discredit on the Committee. So far from the members of that Committee being urgent for the destruction of Corporations, he could assure the House, that they had every disposition to inquire fairly and fully into the question which would come before them. He thought that the petition in question could not properly come before them. It would be impossible for them to examine the accounts of all the cora porations in Great Britain and Ireland.

Mr. ATTWOOD gave notice of his intention to move, on Friday, that the order referring the petition to the Corporation Committee should be rescinded.

On Friday, Mr. ATTWOOD moved to discharge the order referring the petition of R. H. Franks to the Corporation Committee.

Lord ALTIIORP said that the Merchant Tailors Company could claim no exemption from the proposed inquiry, because it was a muni- cipal institution in connexion with the Corporation of London, which was to be included in it.

Mr. ATTWOOD subsequently withdrew his motion.

11. PUBLICATION OF THE DIVISIONS. Mr. D. W. HARTRY moved, on Thursday, that the Speaker be requested to make the necessary arrangements for the taking of the Divisions, and for the insertion of them in the Votes, giving the name of each member in the majority and minority. He supported his motion on the ground that it must be satisfactory alike to members and their constituents that a true record should be kept of their votes on every subject. He would not sug- gest any plan for taking the votes, because in that case members would torture their ingenuity to devise objections to it, and thus lose sight of the principle, which was what he mainly sought to establish. lie would leave it to the known talents of the Spealrer to point out the best mode of tweomplishing it. It however, he were to suggest any plan, it would be, perhaps, that there should- be a box provided at the table of tler Heuer, and one in the Lobby: C' Hear!' and a &ugh.) Ile knew that he, should, by mentienive any plan, stir up the gravity of a lawyer; but, nevertheless, he must say, that with triese boxes, and the members' names printed on slips or paper. they might, as the minority went forth, put their names in the box in the Lobby ; while the majority, who would stay in the House, might put their names in the box on the table.

It would be objected to his motion, that it was proposed with a view to intimidation. The Conservatives would say SO: but surely the Conservatives would like to have their votes recorded, to prove that they had acted in an unexceptionable manner. The minority of l38 on Mr. flume's motion was published ; but it contained twenty mis- takes, for it was necessary to go about asking individual members how they had voted. The lists of divisions were in fact already published; and the question was whether they should be published correctly or am. It was clear from the number of corrections sent to the newspapers from the different club-houses after the publication of a division, how anxious members were that their votes should be cor- rectly recorded.

Lord ST0117,10NT was utterly opposed to the publication of the votes of members of the House. Pledges had Leen proposed to him, but he

bad given the proposition a fiat denial.

lie represeuted his own opinions in that House, and uot the (Treblas of ethers. He Con:, ilit.re dee:maned always to exercise his own judgment, ane act accor.iinglv, and me to be gilitIod by the will of any other individuals whatever. Nir. Hal cry %visited to here an ale hentie account of the votes or all the members publiehed in the Papers t"Na it the rtesi. That was, he I taught, an inbingement on the constitutional pvi‘ih•ges of the House, and would only encourage the people to watch their pro- ceedings. Lord Aurnottr could not say that he agreed with Lord Stormont that members ought not to be responsible to their constituents— He therefore did not object to the motion on the ground that the votes of the mem- hers should net be known to their constituents. Nor could he, after consideration, think that the publication was any breach of the privileges of the house, The publi. cation of the debates took place by sufferance, and was a breach of privilege; but the pablication of the names of members was never so considered. It was therefore on very different grounds front those assigned by Lord Stormont that he could not accede to the motion.

He objected to it on the ground that it was impracticable. How could they compel members to put their names into these boxes? How could they tell that wrong names would not be put in, by way of joke? I The House would be thrown into great confusion by the rush of mem- bers to put their names into the box. He scarcely indeed thought that Mr. Harvey was serious in his proposal.. •

Mr. WARBURTON said, that if they admitted the principle, a Com- mittee might arrange how the votes should be recorded. Colonel DAVIES thought the plan proposed was impracticable. If any method could be devised of taking down the votes correctly, it i• should have his support.

Mr. HUME said, be knew from experience that the names of six hundred and fifty-eight members could be called over in half an hour. Ile had made the experiment, and he knew that the names could be called over in ■ I

thirty-tive minutes. and that the Clerk might write them down. It was only necessary .

to have two individuals, one to call over the names, and another to write them down. Ile thought they ought to make a trial, for they could not be worse off than they were. He did not like the plan of the boxes ; but there would be no difficulty in the. plan he ' had hinted at, of making lists of the majorities and minorities. Sir ROBERT PEEL said that there would be no use in the proposed plan, and much inconvenience. As it was, on every important division correct lists were procured. If this motion were successful, it would give rise to many petty motions.

It would be, in fact, a public nuisance. [Mr. Hume—"There would be no its- eonredence."] What ! no inconvenience? Why, suppose a man voted black was white, would it be no inconvenience that his vote WaS to recorded without any explana- tMn? (Cheers and laughter.) Suppose a case of a Russian-Dutch Loan, which an hommirable member thought a case of profligate expenditure, and yet voted for it, would not that member's vote be erroneously Judged of, if the vote only were known? The member might explain that he had voted so to save the Ministers—to protect tho Reform Bill—or for some other equally good reason; but these who read only the Votes would not know that, and he would be condemned.

Mr. HUME said, that he was not ashamed of his vote on the Rus- sian Dutch Loan ; that be would vote co again ; that he had himself published the lists of the majority and minority on that occasion.

Captain BERKELEY was opposed to the motion. He had never given any pledge, nor would he. If his constituents could not tryst him, the sooner the connexion between them was cut, the better. 4 Moulhor said, that the proposed plait would take up. a vast deal a

valuable t,ime. On one occasion, thirteen divisions bad taken place when there were only forty-two members present. According to Mr. Hume's plan, six hours ' would have been required to record the votes upon them.

Lord STORMONT gave an inaudible explanation of some "part of his -speech.

Mr. AGLIONBY would not vote for Mr. Harvey's plan, but would vote for the principle.

Mr. HARVEY briefly replied. He said the object of his motion was the affirmation of a principle—namely, that it was desirable that the proceedings in that House should be known to the public.

A division then took place : for the resolution, 94; against it, 148; Majority, 48.

12. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. Lord ALTHORp, on Wednesday, moved a string of resolutions, to the following effect,— That on every day except Saturdays the House should meet at twelve and sit till three, for the reception of Petitions and for Private Bust.. ness ; that it should then adjourn till five; when the Public Business should be taken in due course ; that Committees should sit from ten till five ; that a Committee should be appointed to classify and report upon all Petitions, except such as complain of undue returns, or relate to private business ; and that the same. Committee should have power to direct the printing of the whole or such parts of the petitions as they deemed advisable.

' Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that the resolutions could not be enforced consistently with the act, which directed the ballot for Election Com- mittees to take place at four o'clock, and to be the first business taken into consideration by the House.

Lord ALTHoRP said, the House might sit as usual on the days when Election Committees were appointed to be balloted for.

Sir ROBERT PEEL disliked the adjournment from three to fire; mem- bers would with difficulty be reassembled. The Chairman of Com- mittees should take the chair at twelve. No constitution could bear the additional labour that would otherwise be thrown upon the Speaker.

Sir T. FREMANTLE moved an amendment,—to the effect that the House should meet at three, the Chairman of Committees in the chair, and transact Private Business and receive Petitions till half-past five ; when the Speaker should take the chair ; and the business set down in the order-book be proceeded in.

Mr. LITTLETON preferred Lord Althorp's plan ; and so, he said, did the Speaker,—which ought to be taken into account. Of course, if the House met at twelve, it would rise much earlier than had been its . practice of late years.

Mr. GOULBuRN feared that the proposed arrangement would give ad.. ditional facility to the delivery of long speeches.

Mr. HuME wished to give Lord Althorp's plan a fair trial. He suggested that the Speaker should leave the chair at ten, without put- ting the question of adjournment.

Mr. WARBURTON concurred with Mr. Hume; but if the House met at tu elve, twenty members ought to be a quorum instead of forty.

Mr. BUCKINGHAM proposed that the House should meet at two o'clock and proceed with private business until four o'clock ; that at that hour the presentation of petitions relating to public matters should begin, and be continued till six o'clock ; and that from six o'clock the public business of the House should be- transacted until eleven; when the House should adjourn, unless any subject should be under discussion, in which case it might sit an hour longer.

De would further propose that all members desiring to speak on any question shomtld enter their names in a book for the purpose. and that they should be called npon by the Speaker in the order in which they were so entered ;—(" Oh! oh !")—tltat no won- t ber should be allowed to speak on any one subject longer than twenty minutes (Loud laughter), except the mover, who should have the liberty of speaking twice, amid for thirty minutes each time (Laughter continued); that on the presentation of petitions no member should be allowed to speak longer than ten minutes; and on rising to speak to order, or in explanation, not longer than five minutes. (Great laughter, and cries of

"Oh, oh!") Sir M. W. RIDLEY objected to a fixed hour of adjournment. Hc feared that as the House was to have two sittings, the proceedings of the first would be imperfectly reported. Mr. WYNN thought that the proposed plan would bear hard upon the Speaker ; but he was willing to give it a fair trial. Mr. O'CONNELL said, that by the proposed arrangement the petitions of the People would be thrown into a refuse corner. He would say— let the House meet three days in the week at ten and rise at eight, and let the other three days be devoted to the business of Committees. Mr. CORBETT said, the great object of the proposition was to abridge the right of petition. The Church was giving way ; Parliament was giving way; the forms of the House were changed ; and yet some men constantly cried out against all change. He objected to the clas- sifying of petitions. As to printing them at discretion, it would soon i come, perhaps, that none of them would be printed. If the House

Imet at twelve, no one would be there to attend to the petitions of the People. " Lord ALTHORP denied that there was any wish to defeat the right ; of petition. As to classifying the petitions, so far from tending to I smother the grievances of the People, it would place them more pro- [ minently before the House.

The House then divided: for Lord Althorp's motion, 133; against it, 14.

Lord ALTHORP then proposed that twenty members should be a House at five o'clock, instead of forty.

Sir T. FREMANTLE objected to this, and the House again divided: for Lord Althorp's proposition, 98; for Sir T. Fremantle's, 37.

The following Committee to classify petitions was then appointed,— Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Hume, Mr. O'Connell, Sir Edward linatchbull, Colonel Davies, Mr. Littleton, Mr. James Oswald, Mr. Clay, Mr. George William Wood, Sir Robert Inglis, and Sir Richard Vyvyan. The members are to meet on Wednesday next, and five are to be a quorum.

Lord ALTHORP proposed, that in taking the divisions, those who ap- pealed against the decision of the Speaker should go into the Lobby. At present there was much confusion in the House from the want of some such arrangement. But, upon the suggestion of Mr. WYNN* and Sir R. H. INGLis, that he should give notice of such a motion, be withdrew it till the next day.

Lord ALTHORP moved that all orders of the day set down in the Order-book for Mondays and Fridays, have precedence of motions of which notices might appear for those days.

Mr. C. W. WYNN put the ease of an emergency suddenly arising for a particular motion ; and asked whether it was meant to preclude the possibility of making one on Mondays , or Fridays previously to the orders being disposed of?

Lord ALTHORP said certainly not ; the resolution would not affect the right which at present existed to make a motion without previous notice in such cases.

13. BREACH or PRIV/LECE. Mr. Ewes, on Wednesday, COM- plained that his name had been inserted in a list of the Majority who voted against Mr. Hume's motion on the 14th, which was headed as the list of those who voted " for the upholding of naval and military sinecures." He had certainly voted in that majority ; but his vote was given against the abstract principle of Mr. Hume's resolution. which Mr. Hume himself did not appear to understand; and it was a gross misrepresentation to say that he had voted for the upholding of sinecures.

Mr. HUME said that Mr. Ellice's complaint was unfounded. His resolution was, " that it is the opinion of this House that the existence of sinecure offices, and offices executed by deputy in the Army and Navy,. is unnecessary, and inexpedient as a means of remunerating public ser- vice." Could any man in his senses not see that its object was to put an. end to Naval and Military Sinecures?

14. BRIBERY AT LIVERPOOL. Mr. BENETT, On Thursdtly, presented a petition from Liverpool, complaining of the gross bribery practised there at the election of the Mayor and Members of Parliament. He said that he could prove that upwards of three thousand persons had been bribed during the last election ; and he moved for a Select Com- mittee to take the subject of the petition into consideration, in the hope that such a report would be made as would induce the House to pass a bill for the abolition of the rights of the Liverpool freemen altogether.

Lord SANnox said that the petitioners themselves had been the original authors of the corruption of which they complained. He de- nied that bribery bad been practised at the late election for Liverpool. On one occasion, certainly, great and notorious corruption had pre- vailed ; but the three last unimpeacbed elections proved that it ex- isted no longer. The disappointed party at the late election had raised large sums to prosecute a petition against his return, but had aban- doned it from the fear of its being declared frivolous and vexatious. The petitioners thought that the deform Bill had not done its work : they held this opinion because it had not enabled them to return their favourite candidate.

Mr. WAsox said, lie believed the assertions of Lord Sandon respect- ing the practice of bribery to be utterly unfouuded; although, of course, Lord Sandon believed them to be true.

The Chief Magistrate of Liverpool had for many years been elected by bribery and corruption

Lord SAynotg-" Not of late years."

Mr. \Viso: answered, that of late years the money had been wanting. (" Oh, oh!" from find Sandon.) Lord Sandon might cry " Oh, oh !" but the last contested election for the Chief Magistracy of Liverpool had cost the successful candidate 8,0001. Would the I lonso take the allegations of the noble Lord, in preference to the assertions of three thousand inhabitants of Liverpool, who stated that their Chief Magistrate was elected by bribery and corruption?

He would state one or two facts respecting the last election for mem- bers of Parliament.

Many drunken men were carried upon the box and carriage of Lord Sandon, who was himself inside : and at one of the poll-booths, the Deputy lteturning-Oflicer refused to receive the votes of a considerable number of the electors, in consequence of their hay- ing presented themselves in a beastly state of intoxieation. Ile should like to know- how Lord Saudon could account for WS ultimate election, when the opposing candidate had a majority on the first day of 600 voters, unless by supposing that his raajority of 145 was composed of freemen, who had kept back until their votes should become of inure consequence.

Mr. GLADSTONE denied that any undue influence had been used by Lord Sandon or his supporters at the last election.

Mr. WARBURTON said, the petition contained no charge of bribery against Lord Sandon or his supporters. With respect to Mr. Glad- stone's asseveration, that to the best of his belief no bribery had been practised at the last election, he would ask— Now it could be possible in the case of Liverpool, where there was so much opposition among the parties which divided time electors, for any individual to make a positive asse- veration that no undue influence had been exerted ? Ile considered that the petition contained allegations which were tit subjects of inquiry. The petition was ordered to lie on the table ; and Mr. BENETT gave notice, that on Tuesday next he would move for a Select Committee to inquire into the abuses attending the late election for Liverpool.

Lord SANDoN wished for more time, in order that petitions from the other side might be presented; and Mr. BENETT accordingly deferred. his motion to Thursday next.

15. ELECTION PETITIONS. Petitions against time returns for Knaresborough, Lanncester' Stafford, Norwich, and the county of Longford, were presented ore Monday. The three former are to be taken into consideration on the 14th, and the two latter on the 19th of March.

On Monday, petitions were presented against the returns for Londonderry, Clonmel, Montgomery, Northampton, and Rippon. The first three are to be taken into consideration the 21st of March, and the last two on the 26th. On the same day, petitions were also presented against the returns for Co- ventry, to be beard 26th March; Portarlington, 28th March; Carrickfergus, 28th March ; Mahon, 2d April; Galway Town, 28 April. On Wednesday, petitions against the returns for Harwich, Bristol, and Car- marthen, were ordered to be taken into consideration on the 25th of April; against the returns for the county of Linlithgow, for New Sarum, and the Stirling Burghs, on the 30th of April ; for the South division of Northumberland, on the 28th of March; for Bury St. Edmund's, on the 2d of May ; for the East division of Norfolk, 2d of May; the city of Lincoln, 2d of May. The SPEAKER said that he had received a letter from Sir J. P. Beresford, the sitting member, stating that he did not mean to defend his return for Coleraine. On. Thursday,- two petitions against the return for Weymouth, and two agiuuat aouttunupton, were promoted. The SPEAKER raid that both petitions should be referred to the same Committee. These were the only two places agaiust the returns for which more than one petition had been presented.

. 16. GOVERNMENT OFFICES. Mr. Hume, on Friday, moved for the apa p(Sintinent of a Select Committee to examine into the number of Members of both -Hoi Bei of Parliainent who held offices under the Crown removable at pleasure. He thought that such -persons, and ilto' Naval and Military officers, should be .excluded from the House. - They were always to be-ffiund in the Ministerial majorities for measures prejudicial to the public interests'. in 17I4,ahere Were 271 persons in Parliament who held offices under the Crown ; in 1727 the ,mimber.was 257 ;. in.1822 it was L48.

Lord ALTHORP had no objection to the appointment of the Committee.

A 'Member indignantly declared, that he was as independent a Member of that House as Mr. Hume was, or • any one else who went about catching the favouring breath of popularity.

• Mr. HOME said he had no intention to calumniate any person. But the .Kiaig could strike the gallant member out of the Army ; he could deprive him of his commission ; therefore he was not so independent of the favour of the Crown as Mr. Hume was. Sir Robert Wilson had been so struck off, and in vain endeavoured to obtain redress.

Captain BERKELEY said that Mr. Hume could not know what honour meant, or he never could suppose that an officer would sell his constituents for the sake of his paltry half-pay. From Mr. Huinc's supposing that officers could be ac- tuated by such motives as he attributed to them, he could not help thinking, that, were he in their situation, he would himself be actuated by such motives. ' Sir E. CODRINGTON said, that half-pay was a reward for past, not a retain- ing fee for future services. Such had been the decision of the Judges in the case of the late Duke of St. Albans, who was a Lieutenant in the Navy in 1793. It was proposed to deprive him of his half-pay on account of his not having offered himself for service ; but the Judges decided that it could not be taken from him, because it was the reward for past services.

A Member complained of the way in which the Naval and Military officers were alandered by Mr. Hume.

Mr. Howatin observed, that Sir Robert Wilson had been removed for a mi- litary offence, proved against him at the time.

Mr. Rs:murex thought that there should be no restriction as to the persons eligible to sit in Parliament.

Mr. COBBETT had rather see Naval and Military men in the House than land- owners who pocketed so much of the people's money.

Colonel TORRENS said that Mr. Hume enforced such rigorous discipline in his camp, that he Was obliged to quit it. [Here Colonel Torrens, who sat near Mr. Hume, took up his hat and moved to a distant part of the House, amidst shouts of laughter.) Mr. HUME was very glad that Colonel Torrens had .quitted the camp, for he was of very little service in it. With respect to the imputations cast upon him by-Captain Berkeley, he threw them back with contempt.

. Lord ALTHORP, in the course of the evening, called the attention of the House to the warm language which had passed between Mr. Hume and Captain Berkeley.

. . Mr. HUME said, he had distinctly stated that he meant no personal impu- tation upon any member, therefore Captain Berkeley was not justaied in making that personal attack upon him, which had called forth the expression of " con- tempt," which lie had used ; but which he was ready to allow was one which never ought to be used in the House.

The SPEA KER confirmed Mr. Home's statement ; and said that lie thought Captain Berkeley should be satisfied with the explanation it gave.

• Lord G. Larrwox in the absence of Captain Berkeley, said that although Mr. Hume had only apologized to the House, awl not to Captain Berkeley, still • he had no doubt that the latter would be satisfied.

17. ASSESSED TAXES. Mr. FRYER presented a petition, on Monday, from Wolverhampton, praying for the repeal of the Assessed Taxes. He thought that not only these taxes, but also the duties upon hops, soap' cotton, and wool, should be repealed. The Fundholder should lie taxed 6s. tSt./. in the pound. . The distress of the country was infinitely increased by the wicked, abominable, and infamous tax upon bread. That and many others might be reckoned among the blessed consequences of that infamous and iniquitous measure, Peel's Bill. . [During his speech, Mr. Fryer knocked his petition, which was a very large one, so tutiously and repeatedly against the bench in his front, as to occasion continued laughter in the House.] I& PROFANATION OF THF. SABBATH. Mr. PLI73ITREE, On Tuesday, pre- sented a petition from Broadstairs for the better observance of the Lord's day. Mr. CoonETT said that the present laws were safficient to insure its proper ob- servance. Mr: WARBURTON objected to the report of the Committee of last session on this subject.. He would not putatu end to the amusement and exer- cise necessary to the smoke-dried population of large towns. Mr. O'CoNNELL felt satisfied that they could not increase piety by act of Parliament, nor enforce the love of God by legislative enactinents. The Morning of a Sunday, by a man of religious feelings, might be devoted to religious exercises; but the after- noon of that day was required by the labouring classes for recreation.

19. Law OF PATENTS. Mr. Gonsox, on Tuesday, obtained leave to brims in a bill to amend the law of patents. He proposed to remedy the evils which i

rose from specifications being defective n the first instance, by allowing secondary specifications. He proposed to give the patentee a more extended interest in his invention, and to diminish the expense of obtaining patents.

20. .VOTE irr BALLOT. Mr. GROTE has postponed his motion on this sub- ject from the 28th of February to the 25th of April.

21. LUNATIC COMMISSION BILL. This bill was read a third time on Mon- day, in the House of Lords, and passed.

22. SIR HUDSON LOWE. In the House of Lords on Tuesday, Lord TETN- HAM remarked, that although it might be safe to intrust the execution of coercive measures towards Ireland in the hands of such a man as the Marquis of Auglesea, yet no one could answer for his successor, who might be a Sir Hudson Lowe.

The Duke of WELLINGTON begged to know what Lord Teynhain meant by making such an allusion to a respectable individual ?

Lord TEYNHAM did not mean to asperse the character of Sir H. Lowe. (cries of" Oh, oh .1" and laughter.) He did not question his respectability as a private man, but as Governor of St. Helena he had been held out to all Europe as a man not to be trusted.

Earl BATHURST said, that Lord Teynham's assertion was directly false—he would give the lie positive to that assertion. Sir Hudson Lowe bad behaved in a manner highly to his credit ; and all persons on the Continent of Europe knew . his conduct and appeciliCd of it.

NOTICES OF MOTION FOR NEXT WEEK. On Tuesday, by Lord Althorp, Bill for the Commutation of Tithes. By Mr. 0' Connell, to amend the Irish Reffirtn Bill. On Wednesday, by Mr. .Hume on Colonial Expenditure. On Thursday, by Lord Morpeth, Bill to regulate the hours of Labour in Factories. -XII Friday, by Sir F. • Vincent, Bill to alter and amend the laws respecting Libel. Mr. Cobbett, on Wednesday, when the House goat into a Committee of Supply, will propose a resolution to the effect that the rich should pay for Stamps and Auction-duties in the same proportion as the poor.