SCOTLAND.

Dundee continues to support its high rank among the constitu- encies of Scotland. The electors met their admirable represeLtative, Sir Henry Parnell, on Friday last week, at a public dinner; and Sir Henry gave a full, true, clear, straightfornaird, and stab:ft/iv evcouet of his conduct in Parliament, since his return for Dundee as Mr. Kinloch's successor.

Provost Kay (recently elected as the successor of Mr. Liialsay) was in the chair. The first toast was " The King, and may he long deserve the name of William the Reformer." After the health of the Queen, the Duke of Sussex, and the other ;Members of the Royal Family had been drunk, the Chairman gave "The Army and Navy," with a few very apposite remarks, somewhat out of the beaten track.

It was the opinion of many people, as well as his own, that fn the Hum of pew, there should be a considerable retiumien in both establishments. They were state organs, anti stood much in need of a thorough reform. Ile aras clearly of old:Ina: that the system of imp; essment fi:: the Navy anti the practice or flogging in the army were

et,juationable. But, while he said so. he could net but admire the eoinitae of our soldiers aud sailors, displayed 00 every occasion when the cause of t heir country required it.

He next proposed the health of Sir Henry Parnell and paid a warm tribute to his character as a public man.

Sir Henry's speech. iu returning thanks, deserves attention, both from the high character of the speaker, and the very important matters which he discussed. After a few prefatory sentences, lie said- " I feel that this occasion it is not only my duty to thank you for th ftvours you

have conferred !wen tee, hut, having come amongst you alter It laborious sesiuti, ii is right that I should y eu an :teemed of my couTluet as your representative ;I: P.:lini- ment. It is the duty rf every inemIter readily and w y to Slaal hi:FAO It::: t'1,1:SIl- mtlelltS: to teal WhZtt hit has duce, :ZS Well as 10 hear what they have to say le :tn.:oral or candemnetion of his rot:duet. I am happy in the opneremity I sly of meeting you at present ; met shall nnw Ina:reel to give von. an account of the cutase I have pursued. First, with roetual to ltiS Majesty's IM inistens. I thought it WaS proper to place confidence in them, as p.ssessing every disposition to cunduet the besiness of the country un mitwiples. ter hating carried Refunn in Parliament. I therefore went on the prim-Iola of giviit4 11101a a general support ; but I reserved the right of differing from them when I thoneld per, and of utaintaMing those prie,:ples 1 have alwaysadvoiattedwiththatcomagmemisisteney.andfirmnesswhielawcameyvurre- presentative. Slut, ahhough I gave them a general support, y on will Mid that I voted against several of their measures. I am aware that Ministers had great di:lieu:11es to encounter ; tut, ha my toduien, awl in the opinion of ntany others wdl able to ji;dgc, had Ministers acted with more ceuraye. they would. have 1a:waved matters with mote success, and with greater satisfiiction to themselves and advantage to the public. I think they gave way too nineh to the apprehension of opposition in the Ifsetse of Lords. 1 think they show'd hare looked to the House of Lords as pussexsiaj e pow( r which werc'd not be submitted to in this country. If they had felt that the People would never sn Wes themselves to he governed by the I louse of Lords, they might in the rail have sivered the passing of their measures, by the support of public opinion ; stud they might have brought the I loese of Lords to give way to what was the prevailing wish or the ,eittarv. (Great cheering.) But I wish to explain to the electors of Dundee, that, when a member of Parliament takes the course I have taken, of giving a general support to Miuisters, he places himself dhatdv ant a geousty in the view of his constituents. They calculate what is doing from what apmans in the join-Bois as having been said; and, when a member speaks seldom. they two apt to think that he is less efficient than they wish him;—without reflect tog t 114t t Ile fact of a Member giving a general support to Min ist ers, necessarily it: some degree silences hint, because, if always ou his legs, he would impede the progress of public measures, end be serving the cause of the most violent opposers of Government. rem Ihis circumstance, I have often spoken less than I used to do, when regularly, asformerly, opposed to Go:sr:anent. But, when circumstances required it. I always appeared in my place, and :poke and voted in the way which I thought best fertile country. Gentlemen. before I had the lemour of representing you in Parliament, part of the session had passed away,—the question as to the Irish Coercion Bill hail bean carried, and the Budget had beeu agreed to. L certainly do still think, as I stated to you on a former occasion, that the Government made a great mistake in regard to Ireland, in passing so strong a measure as it Coercion Bill • rind, the more have looked iota the question, the more convinced I Pei, that, had the suggestions I mode as Chairmau of a Committee in 1ot!'31, appointed to inquire into the state of Ireland, been attended to, they would have found means specified much more likely to tranquillize, and ulti- mately to lead to a permanent settlement of the difficulties concerted with that country. With regard to the Irish Church Bill, I consider it a very valuable measure. The abolition of no less Ilium ten bishoprics was certainly a large oleo towards Church Reform ; but I consider that the concession made to the House of Lords in regard to the . 147th clause.was extremely objectionable, as altering in a great measure the efficiency of the measure. I voted against the alteration of the 147th clause, the object of which was to declare that the surplus revenues of the Church might be applied to temporal purposes. As the case of Ireland is one of great interest, I will make an observation as to tithes, be- cause Ireland will never be in a settled condition till this point is settled. But, unfor- tunately, the attempt to settle this question has been postponed, and nothing like a large and extensive measure has been entered upen with the view of settling this din- cult and engrossing question. In 1831, the subject was proposed in the King's speech; in 1831, Cutrueittees were appointed, and a bill to collect and secure the arrears of tithes, under which several thousand prosecutions took place at an expense of 50,0004, and with the n•sult of receiving 11,0001.! (Great laughter.) The session of 1833 passed without the subject being adverted to, till towards the close we were called upon to vote one raillesm as a loan to the Irish Clergy, to make up, in the mean time, for the bygone arrears of tithes. (In that occasion,. I saw nothing like security for payment of the loan, and accordingly I voted against the granting of it.„ The 'first question of im- portance which occurred after 1 had taken my scat, was the question as to the currency, brought forward by Mr. Attwood. I entirely disapproved of Mr. A ttwootl's views on the currency question, and accordingly spoke and voted against him ; and I am glad to think that the alterations suggested by him were nut adopted ; but at the same time, 1 thought t hat Government went too far in opposing all inquiry as to the state of the natiou ; and, in my speech on that occasion, 1 advised Government to have Committees of Inquiry. 1 was happy to see that next day Lord All harp adopted my suggestion. and ;deposed the Committees width have dune so much good, and dispelled mane of the apprellettsious which existed ts to our future prosperity. With regard to to tlie Army Estimates, I felt that 1 could not agree to them as proposed and printed; and, in consequence of that being my opinion, the matter was submitted to a Cont- mittee,--it int-a-sure which I agreed to iu preference to opposing the Estimates iu the House, believing that it would end in making some considerable reductions. Here, however, I hq,c been disappointed; a majority ef the Committee nut being disposed to manage twitters with suffic'ien't icononly, l'here was a considerable division of opinion iu the Connuit.ce, and ou several questions I was int.lie minority ; so that I am not respon- sible for its report."

['Ile assertion in Mr. Jeffrey's Edinburgh speech, which we noted last week with an expression of surprise, is cleared up by Sir Henry, in it way more complimentary to the cleverness than the candour of the Lord Advocate.] " In regard to this Committee, I wish to explain a point brought under public notice by the Lord Advocate, in his speech delivered lately in Edinburgh. Ile has brought me forward as an authority fur the vote he gave w when the question of Sinecures was submitted to parliament by Mr. Hume. This was certainly eery ingenious or. his part ; but there ttever was any thing more inapplicable to his case than any thine' I have said or done about these sinecures. (Great cheerily and laughter.) The occasion of Mr. Hume bringing forward his motion, was in consequence of Government having filled up taro va- cant sinecure Governorships, and he called upon the llouse to declare that similar va- cancies should not agaiu be tilled up. The general question as to Goveruorships, alluded to by the Lord Advocate, was referred to the Committee on Army appointments; and their Report went to express au opinion that such Governorships, when vacant, were not to be filled up. The Committee stated, however, that military officers who now filled those situations in consequence of valuable services, should not be dispossessed of them. This is the only part of the report which the Lord Advocate alluded to; but this in 119 degree goes to jostife the opposition which Government made to Mr. Hume's mo- tion. On the subject ol Mittutry Establishments. the question arose as to the number of men which should be kept up. I proposed a reduction of ten thousand men ; and I specified the manner iu which this could be accomplished,—namely, by not tilling up the vac:metes which occurred by death or otherwise. It is milculated that, in the course of a year, eleven thousand of our Army are reduced by casualties ; and from this cause alone the reduction I proposed would be accomplished, assisted as it might be, by ac- cepting of dhcharges. In this way the deadweight of pensions would be avoided. Mr. Hume proposed a reduction of twenty thousand men ; but, as every soldier is entitled by act of Oarlianeett to have a pension, such au extensive and immediate reduction is utdd fare entailed a charge of front 11.M,000/. to 300,0001. a year for pensions. I ac- eurtlingly opposed Mr. Hume en this occasion, because the same reduction might have been brought :Meat by my plan, without increasing the deadweight."

The next topic in the order of time was theSlave question; on which Sir Henry spoke with his usual clearness, and communicated a new fact of some importance.

" Every body must rejoice at the removal of such a stain on the national character as that of Colonial slavery ; but I cannot help thinking that we have not got so much as we ought to have got for the twenty millions given by Government to the planters. If the matter had been conducted with more cousideration, greater advantages would Lave been got. Every body knows how much we suffer from the existence of the West India ineitopule,—tlitit while South America admits freely your linens, you are pre- vented fi u :a ;;5 Louth American p.oluce in payment, and as cargoes for the return freight. This is one of the ineonveidencies of the munepoly. An agent of one of the West Italia Islands told nos when the proposal was to lead fifteen millions, that, if Government would give twenty midions, ;hey might have the too:201)0ln to the bargain. I think it therefore a misfortune that su great a stun should have beett paid, without se- curing at the same time saute great commercial advantage."

He then went on to the great subjects of Expenditure, Taxation, and the Corn-laws.

On the subject of the public expenditure, the Government have certainly a claim of credit un the eatutry fur Laving accomplished eousiderable rednctit ns. But, if the items are i•xamined, it %till be found that no reduction in that part alluded to by the Provost has heel: made. The Military Establishments of the country are us high as ever. In my opinion, there is much room for reduction; and, if the representatives do their duty, t hey a ill not anew tie next session to pass without causing these reduc- tions to fay. made. On the subject of Taxation, 1 beg leave to state, that, seeing in cer- tain parts or the country su much dose to compel reduction of particular taxes, it is ne- cessary to inquire where reductions can be made iu the expenditure so as to admit of such taxes being repealed. I am sure nobody would like to see the national credit en- dangered, the Dividends unpaid, or provision wanting for necessary expenses; but, if there be pica" of reducing taxes, the question is, what are the taxes which should be reduced, so that t he ink rests of the country may be best promoted by such reduc- tion: Ne one will I;elly that those taxes should be reduced first, which interfere with the productions of industry, in the shape of taxes on raw material, thus diminishing the remuneration of labour, and cramping the enterprise of science and experience. There are taxes which operate directly against the extension of our manufactures; and, from my conitexion with the Commission presently going on relative to the Excise-laws, I have semi the injurious consequences of such taxes in reference to the manufacture of pauper, soap, and glass, which 1 am quite convinced operate materially against the in- terests of the country. It is not so much for increasing the cost, but it is the check which is given to improvement, which is to be complained of. We sec that when a matinfiteture is free, it improves and extends, thus furnishing a conclusive reason for the necessity which exists fur repealing in the first place all taxes on raw material and on manuthrtures. When the titles:hes of the Corn-laws was brought forward, I voted on that occasion against the Goverinent. I stated then what I stated to you when I bad last the honour Maddressing you; and I voted for a motion to get quit of the existing system of restrictions. I am quite confident that nothing satisfactory can be stated to justify the eonthatauce of the present system. As matters stand, nobody is benefited tint the landlord; and all the arguments brought forward in defence, such as the em- ployment of labourers, the enabling of farmers to pay their rents, and so forth, are all sophisms without the least foundation in truth. It by no means follows that a fixed fluty on corn would diminish the demand forlabourers; where a demand for manufac- tures exists, there is ample employment for labour. And., as to the farmer, he is merely a capitalist. The only diffetence betwixt hint and a manufacturer is, that the farmer is connected with the soil, and the other perhaps with a mill. The farmer is just as well oil' with a muderate price as with a high price, when his rent is in the same pro- portion."

In reference to the Bank question, he said-

" It appeared to me most unjustifiable to renew the monopoly, and doubly so when the couduct or the Bank all along was considered. The operation of the monopoly has been most injurious to the interests of trade, and much of the confusion which has prevailed from time to time is to be traced to its misdeeds. I therefore opposed this renewal, but without success. As to the bargain made with the Bank. I. do nut con- sitter it was an excellent bargain. (Cheers and laughter.) The Bank has paid much

less than it should have done." . s

He gave a satisfactory reason for his vote on the Scotch Btirgh Re- form Bill. The only other votes were the two following-

" On the question relative to the Septenuial Act, I voted in the minority for a repeal of it. As to the BOWL I voted for its adoption iu cases of election, I trust that, baying given these explanations, you will see that I have done all I undertook to du when I had the honour or being returned your representative." (Great cheering.)

Dean of Guild Duncan made some good points, in proposing the toast of " Earl Grey and the Ministers."

" It has been asked by the opponents of Reform, what have we gained by it? Wo have got the Bill, they assert, the whole Bill, and NOTHING but the Bill. This is a great fallacy : we can prove the contrary ; and this room itself contains a proud and certain proof that much has been gained by Reform. We challenge the opponents oldie People's rights to gainsay, that, had it not been for the Reform Bill, we would not have heard this evening the very clear and eloquent and patriotic speech, justdeltvered by our own representative?" The Dean proceeded, with much humour, to advert to the days of old, when Dundee had only the fifth of a representative to look after her inte- rests. An invitation to dinner in such a ease could orly be complied with in a frac- tional way ; one fifth was all they could claim, the remaining four fifths belonged to others as needy as themselves. (Cheers and laughter.) Now, however, Dundee could say that they have got " the Bill, and Sir Henry Parnell with the Bill."

Bailie Symon did great justice to the next toast—" the Earl of Durham,"—one of the principal favourites of the evening, in spite of his unhappy libel prosecutions.

0 Having felt an interest in the public career of Lord Durham, I am enabled to recur to some of the earlier incidents connected with it. I recollect the time when he en. countered the Bishop of Exeter,—then the Rector of Stanhope,—Phillpors of pam- phleteering notoriety. About that time (he then Mr. Lambton) bad roused his native county of Durham, by setting on foot a system of public meetings which established the independence of the county. On one occasion of great public excitement,the d nth of the unfortunate Queen Caroline.—Phillpots had been instrumental in preventing certain bells from being tolled; the consequence of which was, the publication of a letter addressed by him to the Freeholders of the comity, abusing Mr. Lambton ; which occasioned a note in the Edinburgh Review. attriteocil to Brougham ; and this led to further publications by Phillpots, in a celebrated Northern periodical, not more remarkable For literary talent tints for its Ultra-Toryism ; and, so highly pleased was the editor, old Christopher North, with hii reverend correspondent, that, in a note, he boasted of Phillpot's prowess. in rather a curious way. ' From that controversy,' said North, ' Brougham retreated like a cur with his tail between his legs ; Jeffrey, like a aat that has left his tail in a trap; and Lambton, like a monkey that never had even .a tail." The controversy was chiefly about the Manchester massacre, which the Earl of Durham, as Mr. Lambton, had denounced as fiercely as ever Mr. Kiuloch did ; but, being in a comparatively free country, the results were very different. Now, to under- stand Bladiwood's wit about tails, it is necessary to premise. that this was written just a few mouths after the late King was in Edinburgh. when tails were the order of the clay. You will recollect that it was usual, on that occasion, to estimate the power and influence of the Scottish Aristocracy, by measuring the extent of what were called their Tails, or the number of their followers. I allude to the circumstance, for the purpose of contrasting the situations of those ludicrously exposed with the positions which they now hold in the country. Brougham, with the House of Peers for his tail,—un- wieldy and useless. Jeffrey.—including in the serpentine convolutions of his tail. the Metropolitan and Provincial Bars of Scotland. I wish he would not involve in ins folds our own right honourable member. And let them mark that those who would estimate the power and influence of Lord Durham by such a test, will have, at uo dis- tant date, to reckon up the freemen of three kingdoms." (Continued dicers.) [Bailie Symon went on to applaud the principles expounded by Lord Durham at the Sunder-

land -" And there was no seutiment expressed by him on that occasion which he applauded more cordially than this, that 'it was not the property-, but the Fence and education of the country, which ought to influence the measures of Govern- ment.' It is well known that he was the chief author of the Reform Bill; and what he has said regarding the getting up of that measure shows him to be ra ordinary nem. Ile is a man of extraordinary energy and firmness ; and, at the same time, a roan who considered well the period at which improvements should be attempted, and the means of effecting them. His character is now well known,—well known indeed, loom the abuse which has been heaped upon it—abuse which is an honour, when the • quarters from whence it proceeds are considered."

Bailie Christie, the banker, and Chairman of the Dundee Political Union,.gave " Free Trade, and the speedy abolition of all monopolies."

It may be asked, what is free trade? I reply, that it consists in leaving all and each of us unfettered in fidlowing out our several vet:dims; that it essentially con- sists, as fie as Government is concerned. in extending, on the one hand, protection to . all; but granting, on the other hand, exclusive privileges to none. It is the ditty of

• rulers to extend the utmost freedom and security of property, in the most unlimited

sense, to all; lint they should pamper or protect no doss of producers or trailers at the expense attic rest of the community. Hence, it is not fur them to impose on themselves the very irksome and unsatisfactory task of adjusting or even regulating the profit or loss

that may accrue from any commercial speculation whatever. * * * * For my own part.

I-see but one great interest, and that is the interest of the community. Give I hen, I say, all interests a free stage and no thyme. Let us have equal rights and equal laws : let us have good and cheap government, and good results to all interests will inevitably follow. What can be more pernicious to the general welfare than the existence of any monopoly? Can any thing be more unjust, for example, than the granting to twenty- four irresponsible men, time very extraordinary and monstrous privilege of raising or lowering the matketable value of all the property of Three Kingdoms, when it suits their policy? This,-however, in point of fact, is still the privilege extended to the Bank of England. Of all the overgrown monopolies in this country, engendered by misrule, I hold the Bank of England to be the most pernicious. The utter destruction of that monopoly should have preceded, not followed, the destruction of all others ; and that for one good reason among many, that it is vain and futile to regulate money's worth, sinless the trade in money itself is strictly regulated ; and that can only be done by making the trade in banking perfectly free. Bankers should enjoy no exclusive privi- leges, whether they act as iudividvals, or band themselves in huge and overgrown asso- ciations. Whilst you allow them to issue paper currency, as the representative of pro- perty, compel them by law at the same time to pay that currency on demand in gold, or some other equally durable article, which requires much labour or wealth to purchase. Aye, and let this compulsion extend from Malinhead to Cape Clear, and from the Landsend to John o' Groats; and then and in that case, a sound and sale and cheap currency will obtain. Then also, you may proceed to legislate with more effect on other pernicious monopolies. Strange as it may seem, our Scottish Representatives are com- pletely abroad on this very important and vital point ; with one honourable exception, however, and that honourable exception is, our highly-esteemed and worthy 'Itemiser. He alone, among the fifty-three, appears to understand the Currency question, or the vast importance of doing away with the monopoly of the Bank of 'England. (Great cheering.) To his immortal honour. I say, Sir Henry Parnell, Member for Dundee, stood alone amidst the fifty-three Scottish Members on the memorable division against the renew-al of the Bank Charter. lie also stood aloof from the dogmatic nonsense of Cobbett and Attwood on the subject of the currency, as well as the more plausible scheme ofthe Nestminster Review, with which, I believe, even Mr. Hume has got ena- moured.—the discussion of which I humbly think has done incalculable mischief to the Bank question. What I allude to is the scheme of a National Bank; and a lead- ing idea of the plan is to compel all bankers to purchase this currency at the national-shop—(Laughter)—and theprofits, if any, resulting therefrom to go into the Exchequer. But I guess, as many of you perhaps will believe me. that if I and others had been compelled to purchase these national notes. in all likelihood we would have been sufficiently 'Jewish to have levied the difference in some quarter or other, so as to save our own bacon: and although the Exchequer might have gained to some extent, the bankers compelled to purchase the national currency, would, on the other hand, take Care to realize on those to whom they retailed the article; and hence the trite national-increase of wealth would necessarily amount to nothing. (Cheers and laughter.) Next in mischief to the Bank monopoly, comes the Corn monopoly,—kept up not by Pediticid Unions, nor even by Trades Unions, of which we have lately heard so much, and with which also I have intermeddled to some extent—(3111d; cheering)—but by a union firm and compact of the great and grinding Landed aristocracy. Our Govern- ment for many years has been essentially aristocratic. and the corn monopoly is one of its blessed products. The protecting duties, extended to this branch of misrule, accord- ing to our worthy Member, cost the country twelve millions and a half annually. i;ut 1 am satisfied that this sum is very far below the mark, when we consider how rapidly and out-of allproportion the nonagricultural portion of the community is outgrowiug the agricultural. I hold that -protecting duties are neither more nor less than a lega- lized-andmefarious mode of reaching, by indirect moans, the pockets of the consumers of the article protected. I hold that protecting duties should be abolished forthwith.. And if a duty is imposed on raw products imported, let it be imposed with a view to revenue, and the impost as moderate as possible. if cheap govenimeut is not speedily obtained—if cheap food is not furnished to an immense and rapidly-increasing popula- tion—then we must bid adieu to our national prosperity; we must sink as a manufac- turing country ; we must yield the palm to France and Germany. We are foolish enough to impose heavy restrictions on the import of flour direct from the United States ; and therefore the Canadians grow wheat largely for export to Britain. and buy from Jonathan what they require for home consumptiou. Even the semibarbarian Russians begin to improve upon us in the same dexterous way. Forty thousand bushels of Archangel wheat have lately been sent to Montreal, to be ground by the Canadian millers and sent across the Atlantic a second time to stupid John Bull, as Canadians flour! (Laughter.) So much for the beautiful working of the Corn-laws. The Wood- protecting ditties are equally absurd. Baltic timber is sent across the Atlantic to be unshipped at Quebec or Montreal, and reshipped again to Britain, after haying been 'nadir Canadian timber ! * • • I should have liked much to have said a word or two of the Church monopoly.—a system embodying as much iniquity as any which I have men- tioned. The Irish have succeeded in getting us to pay fir their blessed Church, and I presume the same game will soon be played by the English. The true remedy is, let a speedy divorce take place between Church and State, and all w ill come right."