24 AUGUST 1833, Page 2

Behan: nub finvirtainfil #n VarliamEnt.

1. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY. The House of Commons went into Com- mittee on Monday, on the motion of Lord Aimionr. His Lordship then stated, that the estimated expense of the Army, Navy,Ordnance, Miscel- laneous service, and the interest on Exchequer Bills for the current year, would be 15,285,487/. ; and that from various sources grants had already been made to the amount of 9,210,0001.: he now moved that a further grant of six millions be added from the Consolidated Fund. In answer to a question from Mr. HERRIES, he said that the million for the Irish titheholders, had been voted in a resolution of the House, on which a bill had been brought in, and that there would be no occasion to take any other vote for that sum. No provision had been Made for raising the money, but it would probably be raised by an issue of Ex- chequer Bills, and be added to the Unfunded Debt. He then went into some statements to show that the estimated surplus of revenue over ex- penditure for the year was only 117,7011. - but, in consequence of an improvement in the revenue, be expected ;hat he should have a some- what larger balance.

Some conversation arose relative to our share of the Greek Loan; which Mr. HU1IIE maintained that we should have to pay, and which Mr. WARBURTON said had been contracted for on very'bad terms for the country.

The resolution moved by Lord ALTHORP was then agreed to. 2., IRISH Trritx BILL. The adjourned debate on this, bill was re- sumed on Monday.

Mr. Hums, being questioned by the Speaker, stated his intention to pegs his motion to a division ; which then took place : for the. motion, .42; against it, 69; majority for Ministers, 27.

The House then went into Committee.

The clauses to the 19th passed without amendment.

The 19th, which renders the clergyman a. Crown debtor, exposed to all the consequences of an extent, including personal caption, was strongly opposed by Mr. SHAW, Sir H. WILLOUGHBY, and Mr. JEPH- soN; and defended by Mr. LITTLETON and Sergeant PERRIN. It finally passed, without a division. The next five clauses were also agreed to.

Mr. O'FsaitaLn moved to strike out the 25th clause, because it gave landlords the same power to collect tithes as rent.

The House divided : for striking out the clause, 12; for retaining it, 52. The other clauses down to the 32d were passed.

A Member moved an amendment to this clause, to the effect that the expenses of carrying the act into operation should be chargeable upon the Church of Ireland. Another division took place : for the amend- ment, 18 ; against it, 49.

The clauses from the 33d to the 38th inclusive were then agreed to, and the House resumed.

The report was brought up on Tuesday.

Sir E. KNATCHBULL protested against the bill.

Mr. COBBETT had rather send money than bayonets to Ireland.

Mr. E. RUTHVEN would give his strongest opposition to the measure.

The report was then received.

On Wednesday, Mr. LITTLETON moved that the bill be read a third time.

Mr. HUME moved that it be read that day six months ; and Mr. SINCLAIR seconded the motion.

Mr. O'CONNELL offered his hearty thanks to Ministers for the in- troduction of the bill.

He hoped a strict inquiry would be made into the population of the country; that the number of Protestants would be ascertained, and that the Church Esta- blishment would be reduced to agree with that amount of population. If this were done, there would be ample funds to repay every shilling of the million ad- vanced by this bill. He again expressed his approbation of the conduct of Go- vernment in bringing forward this measure, declaring his intention to give it his decided support.

Sir ROBERT 'Netts said that he felt himself compelled to vote for the amendment.

Mr. SHAW said, the bill wai productive of all evil, and opposed to all good.

But the assembling of each juries would coetinue so long as the juries were is defective, =Me Tory Anorney-Oenerkl of Irelaratbad the powerto north- Of all the measures of injustice and injury that had ever been passed with re- gard to Ireland, this was the worst. It was fraudulent ; it borrowed without the intention of repaying ; it held out a premium to resist the law, gavea bounty to outrage, and placed the forbearance of the Clergy at a discount. He verily be lieved it was the intention of Government (he did not say it offensively) to over- turn the Protestant Church in Ireland, and establish the Roman Catholic reli- gion as the religion of the State. (Laughter.) He, however, excluded Mr. Stanley from this charge, from his personal knowledge of the private opinion and character of that gentleman. He thought the bill ought to be entitled " an act to subvert the Established Church and increase the disturbances of Ireland."

Mr. Hume, at Mr. WARBURTON.% suggestion, withdrew his amend- ment; and the bill was read a third time.

Mr. HUME then proposed to add to it the following clause- " Provided always, that if the sum to be granted under the provisions of this act shall not be paid from the sources provided, and within the time specified in the act, any balance then remaining due to the public shall become chargeable on the funds of the temporalities of the Church of Ireland, and shall be placed at the disposal of the Commissioners under the Church Temporalities Bill, to be annually paid to the public until the principle and interest shall have been satis- fied."

This clause was opposed by Lord ALTHORP ; and rejected, on a di- vision, by 47 to 27.

The bill then passed.

3. TRIAL OF OFFENCES IN IRELAND. The bill for this purpose passed through-the Committee of the House of Commons on Tuesday. On Wednesday, Mr. LITTLETON moved that it be read a third time. Mr. O'CONNELL strenuously opposed it.

Ireland was now tranquil, because they had given up the collection of tithes, and had poured in troops, in addition to the Police force already in exercise there. Why, then, in such a state of things, should the power be given to an Attorney-General to remove the venue to a court where the public had no con- fidence and where was an instance to be found in which the jury bad refused to do their duty ? He believed no such case could be found. Even in the case of Whiteboys, the utmost alacrity had been shown by jurymen to convict; and more convictions in such cases had taken place than the Government thought necessary to follow up with punishment. The newspapers had attributed to Sir John Campbell an opinion that the Court of King's Bench possessed the power to change the venue ; but he supposed it must be an error, and pledged his legal reputation that such was not the law.

Sir JOHN CAMPBELL said, there was no error : it certainly was his opinion, which had also been confirmed by the twelve Judges.

Mr. O'CoNNEtr...—" Then the bill was unnecessary. And why should two Judges be empowered to do that.in Ireland which it required the

• presence of four to do in England?"

He had carefully looked into the law, and declared that it was not such as was laid down by the Solicitor-General. Mr. Stanley seemed to doubt his read- ing of the law, but he knew the law on the-subject much better than Mr. Stan- ley. Why, he asked, was the country to be insulted with such a bill, except because, as the session had been commenced with a measure of outrageous coer- cion for Ireland, -the session was to be closed with a measure of insult against that enentey?

He admitted that in the North the law was not conspicuously obeyed. There had been Orange processions, and in one case an' Orangeman bad been acguitted by an Orange Jury.

nate them all. The Orange system was au exotic in Ireland ; and for ite con- tinued existence, it required the hotbed of Government protection. Let thatt be withdrawn, and the Orange system would soon expire.

He concluded by moving that the bill be read a third time that day three months.

Mr. LITTLETON maintained, that a case had been made out to call. for the enactment of such a bill as the one before the House.

It was distinctly shown by the evidence on the Coercion Bill, that prosecu- tors and witnesses had been deterred from doing their duty. He was willing to admit the statement of Mr. O'Connell, that on the introduction of the measure no reference had been made to the state of the Northern counties ; hut the conduct of the jurors, in those counties more particularly referred to by the bill, abundantly testified the necessity of the measure. It' the jurors in those parts of Ireland acted with as much partiality as the jurors in other parts had been found to act, it would be the duty of the Crown to apply for a change of the venue. With respect to the right of the Attorney-General to challenge, it would be some answer to the statements of Mr. O'Connell to say that this was intended only to be a temporary enactment. He sincerely hoped the jury-law would undergo such alterations as to divest it of all interest that rendered it partial and oppressive. He believed the jury system that was about to be-in- troduced would be productive of the best effects to the people of Ireland. He therefore could not acquiesce in the amendment.

Mr. SINCLAIR said, there was no ground for terming the Orange party exotics. They were desirous of supporting the Protestant Establishment. Were not Popish priests too often engaged in a. con- spiracy to overthrow that Establishment?

Mr. O'CONNELL explained— He had not attacked the Orangemen as exotics ; on the contrary, he helieved many of them to be honest and consistent men ; his attack was upon the sys- tern. He repeated, the Orange system was an exotic in Ireland, and could not exist except it were fostered by Government. As to those who were not very ceremoniously spoken of as Popish priests, they were not conducting themselves as the honourable member intimated ; the Protestant Establishment of Ireland had much more to fear from its own avowed friends than from the Popish priests.

Mr. O'CoNNELL was proceeding with his reply, but there were loud cries of " Spoke, spoke," amidst which he sat down, exclaiming, " Oh! then I've done."

The House then divided ; when Mr. O'Connell's amendment was rejected, by 61 to 15 ; and the bill was read a third time, and passed.

4. ROMAN CATHOLICS MARRIAGE BILL. The Marquis of 'CLAN- RICARDE moved the second reading of this bill on Tuesday, in the House of Lords.

Lord WYNFORD moved that it be read a second time that day three months.

The Bishop of HEREFORD supported the bill. The Bishop of HEREFORD supported the bill.

The object of it was to put the Roman Catholics on the same footing as the Protestant Dissenters as regarded the celebration of marriages. He hoped that ere long, certain classes of Dissenters in this country (more particularly the So- cinians) would be enabled, by a legislative enactment, to solemnize marriages within their own congregations, instead of being compelled, as in some cases they were, to in a manner profane our churches by then being necessitated by the present forms to acknowledge certain matters in religion contrary to the peculiar faith of each.

After a few remarks from the Earl of WICKLOW and the Duke of WELLINGTON, the bill was read a second time ; Lord Wseneottins amendment being negatived without a division.

On Thursday, the bill went through the Committee ; and on Friday was read a third time, and passed.

5. EAST INDIA CHARTER BILL. This bill passed the. House. of Lords on Monday.

6. CHINA TRADE BILL. Lord AUCKLAND, on Monday, moved that this bill be read a second time, to be committed on Tuesday: which was accordingly done.

On Tuesday, Lord AUCKLAND moved that the bill be committed ; which was done, after some opposition from Lords ELLENBOROUGH and STRATHALLAN. The several clauses, with an additional one moved by Lord AUCKLAND, which makes five shillings the maximum tonnage.. duty on vessels entering China, and imposes a duty of ten shillings per cent. upon their cargoes,—were agreed to without amendment ; and the House resumed.

On Wednesday, the report of the Committee was brought up and received ; and on Thursday the bill was read a third time, and passed.

7. TEA DUTIES BILL. This bill passed through the Committee in the House of Commons on Tuesday; on Wednesday the report was brought up and agreed to ; and on Thursday, Mr. SPRING RICE moved that the bill be read a third time.

Mr. EWART asked whether any arrangement had been made with the East India Company, with respect to the stock of teas in band; and as to the time ships would be permitted to sail from this nountry to Canton ? Unless vessels were allowed to sail from this country so as to arrive at Canton on the expiration of the East India Charter, it would be impossible for them to return to England in the course of next year.

Mr. RICE said, With 'respect to the first sale of tea, it was impossible that any communica- tion could have taken place except with the East India Company; and he very much regretted that the authorities empowered to act on that occasion did not accede to the arrangement proposed by the Government. It was most desirable that the present stock of tea should be so reduced as to give free scope to the private trader; but, in his opinion, it would not be advisable to reduce it as low as zero. It was not for the interest of the East India Company-that there should be an accumulation, of tea left in their possession; as that would have the effect of distressing the private trader, and exposing him to a competition he did not calculate upon. ("Hear, hear !") The three next quarterly sales would be carried on in the usual way, at the discretion of the Company. After these sales had taken place, the Board of Control would give notice to the country what quantity was to be brout to the market; and so control the sales that a regular and gradual increase should take place, and the parties made acquainted from time to time with the maximum amount.

Mr. CRAWFORD would not have risen so soonafter taking his seat, to address the House, had he not been applied +a by several of constituents, who were deeply interested in the tea' trade, to -make some statements-on their behalf. • These gentlemen complained, that although the bill was about to receive the sanction of the House, it had only been printed on the 17th instant; and that no communication had been made with them on the subject by his Majesty's 11!-misters, though they were perhaps more deeply interested in these alterations than any other body of merchants in the city of London. They objected, with the test of the trade in sgeneral, to the classification made by the Government, which they considered alike injurious to the importer and the consumer of tea.

A better classification than that proposed by the bill should be made. [The bill divides teas into three classes,—first, the Bohea, on which a duty of Is. 6d. per pound is charged; second, Congou, Twankay, Hyson Skin. and Orange Pekoe, the duty on which is 2s. 2d. per per pound ; third, Souchong, Flowery Pekoe, Hyson, Young Hyson, Gunpowder, Imperial, and other sorts, on which 3s., the highest duty, is to be paid.] In the third class, Mr. Crawford said, there were eight different descriptions of tea which properly belonged to the second class, and should only pay a duty of 2s. 2d. per pound, although 3s. was to be charged upon them.

In addition to this the East Im7ia Company was already exempt from the payment of auction-duty ; for their teas were disposed of by public sale; and it would be only just that the other importers of tea should be placed on the same footing. He wished to ask Mr. Rice, whether, supposing, the present bill to be passed, there would be any objection to an early reconsideration of the subject in the next session, that the anomalies complained of might he then amended.

Mr. RICE replied, that such a pledge as Mr. Crawford asked for would be pregnant with inconvenience, and would paralyze the trade. The House should remember, that in all the alterations of duty, a re- duction had been made.

In the first class, it had been reduced from 96 per cent. to 81 ; in the second class, from 100 to 94i ; and in the third class, from 100 to 81. And those classes had been determined on after communications with several brokers, not one of whom had differed in opinion with the others. If Mr. Crawford thought an ad valorem duty would have been preferable, he would say, that such a mode of as- certaining the duty could not have been practised at the outports, where auction sales would not he held under the same security as in the port of London ; and giving it an act valorem for a rated duty, which should be alike on all descrip- tions of tea, would only have tended to increase the price of inferior teas, or such as were consumed chiefly by the lower orders. The best inquiries which could be made had agreed so well with the experiments made at the Board of Control, as to leave no doubt of the certainty of collecting the duty under the classification that had been made.

Mr. HUME thought, the proposed classification, though attended with difficulties, better than continuing the ad valorem duty. Mr. YOUNG asked, whether the East India Company had determined to send, or not to send, any more vessels to Canton ; or whether any arrangement would be made with the Company, by which private ships might be sent out? At present the trade was wholly suspended ; for the Company sent no ships out, and private traders could not till the charter had expired. It was also desirable to know with what ports in the United Kingdom the China trade might be carried on.

Mr. RICE could give no specific answer to the first question ; and referred Mr. Young to the China Trade Bill for an answer to the others.

Lord A urnone, Mr. ROBERT GORDON, Mr. EWART, Mr. HOME, and Mr. Ilaavev spoke a few words ; and the bill was read a third time, and passed.

It was then taken up to the House of Lords, where it was read a first time.

8. BANK CHARTER Btu. Lord ALTIIORP moved the third read- ing of this bill on Monday.

Mr. COBBETT, after stating at length his objections to the legal tender clause,—which %vent to make an alteration in the value of the King's coin, to raise prices, to create distress, and to increase the num- ber of forgeries,—moved that it be read a third time that day six months.

Mr. CLAY seconded the motion. The measure had an evident ten- dency to produce a dangerous issue of paper money. He did not see that the House was at all bound to ratify the bargain with the Bank, seeing. that the Bank itself objected to it, in consequence of the inter- pretation of the law relative to the sixty-five mile monopoly, now adopted by Lord Althorp; and which Mr. Clay thought he was per- fectly justified in adopting.

The Bank complained that Lord Althorp had departed from his original agreement; but the Bank should please to recollect that there was another party to the agreement—namely, the Legislature, and that Lord Althorp must he bound by what only was ratified by the Legislature. The Bank now said that they would take the bargain, however objectionable it was, on account of public interest, and for public advantage. He tine one was most anxious to relieve that respectable body from such a hail necessity. If the Bank did not like the bar- gain, neither did the public like it ; and therefore the Bank had no right to ground its apparently unwilling acceptance of it on the footing of public conve- nience and advantage. He could not avoid saving, that throughout the whole of this negotiation the conduct of the Bank had been most amusing. Their co- quetry was particularly edifying. He did not wish to force this bargain on the Bank, as:they said it was a bad one for them.

He objected strongly to the legal tender clause. Its tendency was, as he had some time ago told Lord Althorp, to create a mania for spe- culation.

There had been a rise in the prices of articles of importation for the use of our manufactures, from 30 and 40 to 100 per cent. Consequent upon this increase in prices, there had been a restriction on the part of the manufacturers of their hours of working in their manufactories. Finding the raw material rise in price, thiy lessened their manufacturing supply. Two effects, then, would fol- low this part of the measure,—an increased importation of the raw material, and a lessened production and lessened consumption of the manufactured article; and should Lord Althorp persevere in this measure, he feared that in the winter a great convulsion might be expected, and, consequent upon it, speedy and gene- ral distress. This legal tender clause was a most objectionable one. The instant convertibility of paper into gold was a principle that should never be lost sight of. So far from wishing to relieve the Bank from the fear of that drain to which they had been subjected in 1825, he should be for always holding it over their heads, as a. salutary preventive against the danger of an over-issue of paper.

It was a consolation, however, that this clause would not come into operation till August 1834-1 asasziaeist:sees.s.sasa He was sure that be'ibre that time the voice of the nation would be so loudly expressed against thls measure, that the Government would be compelled mate- riafly to alter it. So far from its being a detriment, he thought it would be the greatest bendt to the public to have this measure postppned until next session. For the reasons he had stated,—because the terms of this bargain were most disadvantageous to the public, because a breach Of faith towards the public was

committed in making Bank notes a legal tender, and because the measure thereby involved a direct departure from the principle of a metallic basis, upon which alone a paper currency could safely rest,—he would support the amendment.

Mr. FRYER supported the bill, as a mere matter of policy ; were it a matter of principle he would oppose it to the utmost. He recom- mended Lord Althorp to provide a large supply of silver (crown pieces), to take the place of the gold that would be subtracted from the cir. culation.

Mr. BERRIES, after remarking that it was not necessary to go into the question respecting the legal tender clause, as that part of the mea-

sure would be open for revision next session, proceeded at length to discuss the question as to the right of the Bank to exclude all other banking establishments, consisting of more than six partners, within sixty-five miles of London. He expressed great doubts as to the soundness of the opinion on this point delivered by the Law Officers of the Crown, and said, that if those doubts were not removed, he must vote against the bill.

Lord ALTHORP defended the measure from the attacks of Mr. Cob- hett and Mr. Clay ; and utterly denied that the effect of the legal tender clause would be to occasion any depreciation of the currency. He had examined, with the assistance of the Solicitor-General, all the acts of Parliament which related to the Bank of England; and was strongly confirmed in his opinion, that:the law gave to the Bank no exclusive right of banking in the Metropolis : it only prevented the establishment of Banks of issue.

Sir W. HORNE, the Attorney-General, and Sir JOHN CAMPBELL, the Solicitor-General, both stated their decided opinion that the esta- blishment of joint stock banks of deposit, consisting of mote than six partners, within sixty-five miles of London, had never been prohibited by law, and that of course they could now be legally established. Mr. J. A. SMITH, Mr. ROBINSON, and Mr. M. ATTwooD, would vote for the third reading ; the latter condemning in strong language the procrastination, imbecility, and vacillation of Ministers.

Mr. HOME, Mr. PRYME, and Mr. HAWES, briefly expressed their dissatisfaction with.the measure.

The House divided ; for the third reading, 95; against it, 23; Mi.. nisterial majority, 72.

Mr. G. W. WOOD moved an additional clause, to compel the Bank to establish branches at convenient stations. This was opposed by Mr. POULETT THOMSON, and rejected by 98 to 19.

Mr. Waitetntrox moved to strike out the legal tender clause. Another division took place, and the motion was rejected by 82 to 35. The bill was then read a third time, and passed.

It was read a first time in the House of Lords on Tuesday, and a second time on Thursday.

On Friday, the Earl of RIPON moved that the bill be committed ; and entered at length into a defence of its principal provisions.

The Duke of WELLINGTON considered that the Bank in some respects had been hardly dealt with by the Government ; which, in regard to the 120,0001., had gone rather near the wind. The Bank had not been favoured in that part of •the arrangement. His principal objection,

however, was to the legal tender clause ; the of which would be to d preciate the paper of the Bank of England.

The country bankers would not give'any thing but Bank of England notes in payment of their own notes, and they would not give gold unless paid 5 or 10 per cent. for so doing. When such things as this came into operation, the fault and defects of the measure would be discovered, and a degree of distress would be produced greater than had ever occurred throughout the world, Ireland perhaps excepted. These were the objections he had to this bill, not only as regarded the principle which regulated some of the'clauses, but also as to the details.

He also thought that the alteration respecting the sixty-five mile clause was not a fair transaction on the part of the House of Commons towards the Bank.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE replied to that part of the Duke of Wellington's speech which related to the legal tender clause ; which, he contended, would not have the slightest tendency to depreciate the currency, but would place it on a safer footing.

Lord Wrsieotto went into a legal argument of some length to prove that the sixty-five mile clause was an infringement upon the undoubted privileges of the Bank ; which only consented to the bargain imposed upon it because it could not resist. He moved, as an amendment to Lord Ripon's motion for going into a Committee, tt Thatbefore the House resolves into a Committee upon this bill, the opinion of the Judges be obtained on the following question,—whether, under the exist- ing law, a co-partnership, consisting of more than six partners, can carryon the business of banker. in London, or within sixty-five miles thereof, though such bankers do nut borrow or take up money on their bills or notes payable on de- mand, or within any period less than six months."

Lord BROUGHAM said, that if he thought the bill before the House would lead to a depreciation of the currency, he should be the last man to give his approval. But, in his opinion, so far from its having that tendency, it was rather calculated to raise the Bank of England notes to a premium. He ridiculed the idea that the Bank bad been hardly treated by the Government. There was at least a reciprocity of benefit —it was not all on one side !

From the year 1797, when a little gentle violence was used against the Bank Directors, and when they were prohibited by an Order in Council from paying their notes in gold,—a proceeding to which they were so averse, that the Order in Council was found to be insufficient for its purpose, and it became absolutely necessary to pass an act of Parliament to compel them, contrary to their most anxious desire, to suspend cash payments—(Laughter)—from 1797, he re- peated, until the year 1819, the fact was that they did cease to pay their notes in gold ; and they so greatly benefited by the violence which was done them, that their dislike to it gradually lessened, until at last they became gradually recon- ciled to it. (Laughter.) It was also a fact, that during that period Bank Stock rose to 280/.

Lord Wynford had said that the Bank was obliged to yield to the Government; but he saw no symptoms of such a yielding disposition.

During the latter period of the negotiation, they resisted the Government; and if they had minded to hold out, they might havedone so; and they would have done so, if they had not thought that they had made upon the whole an exceedingly good bargain. (" Hear, hear 1") Lord BEXLEY spoke in favour of the . amendment. It was highly desirable that the opinion of the twelve Judges should be obtained upon a point OA which so many eminent lawyers differed.

After a few words from Lord RiroN in defence of the legal tender clause, Lord Wyndford's amendment was negatived, and the House went into Committee.

Clauses 1st and 2d were agreed to.

On the 3d clause being read, a clause insuring the Bank of England all the exclusive Rrivileges Lord WYNFORD moved that the entire clause be omitted ; and that granted by the 39th and 40th George III, and confirmed by the 7th of George IV. be substituted for it.

Lord BROUGHAM expressed his wonder at Lord Wynford's praise- worthy zeal in defence of a body who had so honourably proved their ability to take care of themselves. To adopt the amendment, would be not only a work of supererogation, but an implied assertion that the Bank Directors were incompetent, or too cowardly to perform their duty to the proprietors.

The Duke of WELLINGTON and Lord W1caLow supported the amendment.

Earl GREY defended the conduct of Lord Althorp throughout the negotiation with the Bank.

To call upon the House to wait for the opinion of the twelve Judges, would he to defeat the bill for the present session ; so that if Lord Wynford's amendment were carried, he should feel himself called upon to move that the further pro- ceedings of the Committee should be deferred till that day six months. The Duke of CUMBERLAND begged leave to remind Earl Grey, that Lord Wynford's amendment was not for them to await the opinion of the Judges.

Earl GREY—" If the illustrious Duke had taken the trouble to at- tend to what I did say, he would know that I did not say that the learned lord's amendment was for waiting till they had the opinion of the Judges before them."

The Duke of CUMBERLAND—" With great humility, I appeal to the House whether the noble Earl did not so mistake the tendency of my noble and learned friend's amendment; I am aware through mistake—" Earl GaEY—" No mistake at all! I never meant it, nor said it."

Lord WYNFORD asked Earl GREY, whether he meant to say, that when a doubt arose as to the interpretation of a clause in the bill, his own interpretation should be received as decisive ?

Earl GREY said, undoubtedly, if the interpretation of Ministers, acting for the public, were not received, the bargain founded upon the subject matter of interpretation was off and at an end.

The Committee then divided : for Lord Wynford's amendment, 11 ; against it, 29; Ministerial majority, 18.

The clause was then agreed to, as were all the others without obser- vation.

The House resumed, and the report was ordered to be received this day.

9. BANK-NOTES STAMP-DUTIES BILL. This was read a third time in the Commons, and passed, on Wednesday.

11. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. Lord BROUGHAM, on Thursday, stated the outlines of the bill which be proposed to bring in to regulate the municipal affairs of those boroughs, thirty in number, which under the Reform Bill sent members to Parliament, but which had no proper municipal institutions.

The whole population of the boroughs which this bill was to regulate, amounted to upwards of 1,200,000/. • and the number of persons qualified under the late Reform Act to vote for the election of members of Parliament was be- tween 58,000 and 60,000. The boroughs themselves were for the most part situated in parts of the country where the iron and other important branches of trade were carried on,—such as Birmingham, Wolverhampton, Stoke-upon- Trent, Halifax, Wakefield ; and there were others in other parts of the country, such as Cheltenham, Brighthelmstone, Chelmsford, Frome, Stroud, &e. Each borough would be divided into wards; and the qualification which would entitle the inhabitant of any of these wards to vote for a member of Parliament would entitle him to vote for Common Council- men, who would be chosen for three years ; and who would have the power of electing an Alderman for each ward of the borough, who would have his seat for life, except in cases where specified disqualifi- cations should occur. A Recorder for each borough would be nomi- nated by the Crown. The Common Council would be empowered to elect a Mayor, who would hold his office for one year. The body of Magistrates, chosen under the above provisions, would be the municipal authorities of the town ; and they would have two branches of duty to perform,--the one would be the administration of justice, and the other the regulation of the police. With respect to the first of these duties, several regu- lations were made by the bill, some of which lie would refer to. The quarter- sessions would be holden in the same mode and at the same times as were at present provided; and the magisterial body would consist of the officers above referred to, with the addition of the County Magistrates, who be considered ought to have a concurrent jurisdiction with he town authorities. The Re-

10. SLAVERY BILL. The Earl of RIPON moved, on Monday, that the report on this bill should be brought up.

The Duke of WELLINGTON moved an .amendment to the bill, that masters should be permitted to remove 'their slaves from one estate to another in the same colony.

Earl GREY acceded to the amendment, and it was adopted. Lord SuFFTELD proposed an amendment, the object of which was to abolish all flogging of female slaves above twelve years of age.

The Earls of BELMOUR and RIPoN, and the Duke of WELLINGTON opposed the amendment; and it was negatived without a division.

The Duke of WELLINGTON moved to expunge the 61st clause. Upon this motion the House divided : for it, 20 ; against it, 31; Ministerial majority, 11.

Lord WYNFORD proposed that a clause should be inserted prohibiting the admission of sugar produced by slave labour into the British do- minions.

Lords RIPON, GREY, and BROUGHAM opposed, and Lord ELLEN- BOROUGH, and the Duke of WELLINGTON supported the clause.

The House divided for Lord WYNFORD'S clause, 17; against it, 98; Ministerial majority, 21.

The report was then received; and on Tuesday the bill was read a third time, and passed. corder would preside at the sessions, and would of course afford the advantage of the learning and ability which would be the necessary qualifications for his office, and that officer would, of course, not practice in his profession, either at the sessions or the assizes. The quarter-sessions, instead of being confined to being holden once a quarter, might, by the authority of his Majesty, be holden oftener, according to his pleasure as to time; and the object of this enactment would lie to do away with an inconvenience which row existed in the awarding of punishment to offenders tried at the quarter-sessTons. By the present prac- tice, in consequence of the long interval between the several holding of the .quar- ter-sessions, the length of time during which a prisoner was confined previously to trial was subsequently deducted from the full amount of punishment awarded to him upon his trial.

It had been his original intention that the Judges of the Local Courts (bad that measure been adopted) should act as Recorders, and he still hoped that such an arrangement might be made. There were also provisions in the bill for the regulation of the police of the boroughs. This part of the bill had been framed with a view to the advantage which would ensue from its chiming in with, the local police nets in boroughs where such acts were in fore?, so that the local acts should not interfere with this the general net, and that the police committee (to be composed of the above- mentioned magistrates) should be able to carry on the police affairs under the provisions of the local acts where such local acts existed. He concluded by moving that the bill be read a first time ; although be had no intention of pressing it beyond that stage in the present session. • Lord WYNFORD spoke a few words. He thought that the Crown could of itself effect much of what was proposed to be done by the bill, which would interfere with the prerogative of the Crown. He also objected to the Recorder being nominated by the Crown, because he was a corporation officer, and might be frequently engaged in Crown questions.

Lord BROUGHAM thought that Lord Wynford's first objection was groundless ; but admitted the force of the second, which was deserving of further consideration.

The bill was then read a first time.

12. CHANCERY OFFICES BILL. In the House of Commons on Tuesday, this bill went through the Committee ; the report was re- ceived on Wednesday ; and on Thursday, Sir JOHN CAMpBELL moved that it be read a third time. He stated the effects to be produced by the bill ; it inch he had been prevented from doing on a former stage, by a desire not to interrupt public business.

The bill went to abolish thirteen offices which had long existed, and which were nemly sinecures - in others the salaries were greatly reduced. The old system upon which these offices was conducted was this—there was the chief sinecurisc, who did nothing ; he appointed a deputy, who was allowed a larger salary than what ought to have been allowed to the office altogether. The fol- lowing was a table of the offices and salaries abolished and reduced :

PTC. get lecntrie of Prise:pal.


Clerk of Hanaper 2,800

Clerk of Crown 1,100 . .

Clerk of Patents 810 Register of Affidavits...... 1.1400 ......

Clerk of Custodies 1,347 Clerk of Present:Woos .... 43

Clerk of Dispensations .... 316

Patentee of spa 359 Chaff W Sealer ax

13 Prothonotary 1,1,300 100 Patentee in Bankruptcy ... 7,500

DI to of Deputy and Enemies.


559 1,000 .

305 1,000


10O 689 41.10-- 200 abolished. ..

1,500 206

Future Income.


200 800 400 1.000 200 50 SC 50 50


1,034 9,000


- 1.500 805 1,800 1,522 93

1,6 30

950 1110

X18,268 6,202 2,800 21,670

Out of the savings thus effected, the suitors would receive 9,0001. by a diminution of fees ; 2,834/. was to be paid to the Suitors' Fund; and 9,7361. to the Consolidated Fund.

Now it was to be remembered, that all these offices were in the gift of the Chancellor; that former Chancellors had given them to their relatives ; that they had even been made the subject of marriage settlements. Two of the offices—(the Clerk of the Patents and the Registrar of Affidavits)—were held by the brother of the Lord Chancellor, which were to be abolished instantly. (Cheers.) The others were to be abolished as they fell in.

The next branch of the bill applied to the Masters in Chancery, who each received upon an average 3,900/. per annum from fees and perqui- sites. They were now to be paid a fixed sum of 2,500/. each ; and as there were ten of them, the saving would be.14,0001. per annum.

The following were the reductions in the Masters' office:

Present Income.


Future Salaries.


Ssving to Public


Masters. averaging 3,9001. a year each... 33.000

25,000 14,000

Their Chief Clerks, averaging 1,3001. a

year each 13.000 10,000 3,000 The Master of the Report-office 4.300 1.000 3,300 The Registrars and their Clerks 27,800 14,050 13.750 The two Examiners 2,400 1,400 1,000

X86,500 51.450 35,050 It was proposed in future to pay the Masters from the Suitors' Dead Fond, so that the actual saving in all future suits would be the total X

of the Master;' present Income 39.000

Savings by their Chief Clerks 3.000

Savings by Registrars and Clerks 13,750

There would thus be an immediate saving to suitors, in two offices alone, of per annum X55:750

Orders were to be entirely abolished. Petitions and affidavits, formerly required by the Chancellor, were to be sent before the Master_ Thegreat object was to make the Masters efficient officers of the Court.

The present Masters were most respectable, honourable, and learned men; but former Lord Chancellors, considering their appointments as private and per- sonal, had appointed to those high and important situations persons whom they dared not have recommended had the appointment been in the King. It was now, therefore, proposed to vest those appointments in the King. They were now to be made by his Majesty, on the responsibility of the King's Government. No doubt, the King 'slight act on the recommendation of the Lord Chancellor for the time being; but that officer, with all the Cabinet, would be held respon- sible for every appointment. ("Hear, hear !") By this bill, there were to be. particular returns made by the Masters in Chancery to the Lord Chancellor, of the number of hours they have attended their "offices, and the general state of causes, and other matters in the office, from time to time; so that there would

be ample opportunity of ascertaining whether those holding such important judicial situations bad properly discharged their official functions.

This bill, when first introduced in the House of Lords, went fur- ther; but there were parts of it which Lord Brougham was obliged to drop. He had done, however, all that it was in his power to do; and Sir John Campbell hoped that, next session, the public would have the benefit of all the intended improvements. He trusted that the public wou/e appreciate Lord Brougham's conduct in this matter—for he had inet with many difficulties—and award him his due weed of approbation. (Cheers. )

Mr. HARVEY congratulated the House on the great and substantial improvements which the bill would effect. It was impossible for them to conceive the great difficulties with which those who had done so much bad been surrounded. He trusted that this measure, however, was only subordinate to great improvements that were still to take place; and that it was only an earnest of Lord Brougham's determina- tion to make his court in reality, and not in name only, a Court of Equity.

Mr. SINCLAIR observed, that Masters in Chancery were still to re- ceive 2,500/. per annum ; which was more than the Scotch Judges in the Court of Session were paid, although their duties were very labo- rious. He had hoped that their salaries would have been increased, after the pledges that had been given by Ministers. The bill, how- ever, reflected the highest credit on Lord Brougham.

Lord ALTHORP said, all the members of Government had voted against increasing the salaries of the Scotch Judges.

Mr. TOOKE gave his unqualified approbation to the bill.

It was then read a third time, and passed.

13. FINES AND RECOVERIES BILL. On Monday in the House of Lords, this bill was read a third time, and passed.

14. ASSIZES REMOVAL BILL. This bill was read a second time in the House of Lords on Monday.

15. FORGERY OF STAMPS PREVENTION BILL. On the motion of Mr. VERNON SMITH, this bill was read a third time, and passed, on Tuesday.

16. STAMP-OFFICE PROSECUTIONS. Colonel EVANS presented a pe- tition, on Monday, from Joshua Hobson, now confined in Hudders- field Gaol, and treated as a felon for selling unstamped publications.

Sir Jospe CAMPBELL said, he had received no answer to the inquiries he had made respecting this man's case. It had been alleged that his hair had been cut off, and that he had been otherwise violently treated : he had heard, however, that so far from that being the case, lie had one of the finest heads of hair in the country. The prison regulations could not be altered for an individual.

Mr. Coeserr asked why Hobson was sent to such a prison, he being no felon ?

The rules would not allow any newspapers except such as the Governor (meaning the gaoler) approved : only two friends a-week were to visit a pri- soner, and then only in the' presence of other parties. Ought a person ha- prisoned for a penalty to be subjected to the imprisonment and treatment ex- tended to felons?

Lord MORPETII subsequently stated, that the representations in Hobson's petition were incorrect : he understood that he was perfectly able to pay the fine, but preferred the glory of imprisonment.

Mr. HARDY confirmed this— He had that morning received a letter from the chairman of the magistrates, who declared that he had visited the Wakefield Gaol, and had seen Robson; that instead of being without hair no dandy could h.tve a finer head of hair ; that he had the prison dress for misdemeanours, a plain dress, not the party-co- loured dress of felons; that the rules of the prison were relaxed in his case, so that he might have any books or papers he pleased ; that lie had the best room, and the best company, the place afforded (A laugh ); and that the individual could pay the penalty, but would not, as he wanted and preferred having the glory of being talked about.

The conversation was then discontinued.

17. TITHE PROSECUTIONS. Mr. BLAMIRE, on Tuesday, moved the second reading of the Tithes Stay of Suits Bill.

What the bill proposed, was to stay all proceedings since the commencement bf Lord Tenterden's Act to the end of next session ; and to provide that in every snit commenced against tcn persons, two only should be considered as necessary parties to each suit.

It was then read a second time.

On the motion that it be committed. Sir JOHN CAMPBELL said,

He had always stood up for tithes, contending they became private property, and ought to be protected as such. The most simple mode would be not to have so general and sweeping a bill, but one that should apply to cases where a modus thcemandi had existed for the last sixty years ; or where there bad been no modus at all. The setting aside a long-established modus, was an injurious practice;- for the land in such a parish bad been bought and sold over and over again on the footing of the modus, and the tithes themselves had in some cases been sold; therefore the tithe-owner would get what he had not bought, and the landowner would he saddled with an unexpected and unmerited burden. He wished Mr. Blamire'had framed his bill to apply to such suits as had been al- ready commenced. Mr. BLAMIRE was willing to adopt Sir John Campbell's suggestion ; - and wished that he would undertake -the management of the bill.

Sir Joni; CAMPBELL declined that task, but would support the bill.

On Thursday, the bill was committed.

• Mr. BLAMIRE proposed some verbal amendments to the first clause ; asd. said, that his object in bringing forward the measure was to re- lieve Ministers from the odium under which they laboured on this subject. • Mr. AGLIONBY said, He knew of one particular instance, in which, before the operation of Lord Tenterden's Act, the greatest harmony prevailed in the parish ; but since that period, in consequence of the frequent prosecutions by the Rector, the church had been almost entirely deserted ; and after the customary service had been read, the most respectable families in the parish invariably left the church, cle- aning they would not stop to hear a sermon from such a man. On the question being put, that the amendments should stand part of the douse,

Mr. HARVEY maintained, that the bill, would be injurious in its ap- plication, and would unjustly affect the rights of property.

It would la.! impossible far any plaintiff, whether he proceeded in a court of law or in a court of equity to establish a tithe which for years bad been dor- mant, to succeed when it became an issue before a jury. The weight of preju- dice he would have to conflict with, would be such as to make it necessary for him to show not merely the legality, but the righteousness of the demand, be- fore he could proceed. If they were to legislate upon it, why not legislate •in the most efficient manner ? He was - on who would stand up for tithe pro- petty, and he viewed with apprehension hose insidious attacks which were being made upon it. The object of the bill was to prevent adverse litigation, till the next session of Parliament : now, nothiug could be done till November, and though he was against the bill in principle, yet, under allthe circumstances, if they were to have such a bill at all, he was an advocate for a bill which would do away with all such proceedings as had been instituted within a given time.

Sir Jonte CAMPBELL congratulated the Clergy on their new defender in the person of Mr. Harvey. He hoped that the friendship between him and Sir Robert Inglis would prove lasting !

He had always contended that tithes were private property, and ought to re- ceive that protection which was afforded to private property. Mr. Harvey had said no action could be brought unless it was upon a 'Indus that it could be clearly shown the parties had been in possession of for a series of years : but ha could tell him, a modus had been set aside, within the last two years, which wan proved to have existed for more than a hundred years—it was proved that it had taken its origin in the reign preceding that of Edward the First. Now, he did not call that justice, but gross injustice, and.cootrary to all rules of jurispru- dence which had guided every civilized country. He did not see what good could result from suspending the proceedings under this bill till the next session of Parliament. He thought it was for the benefit of the Church that the bill should pass, because they did not put an end to the suits, but merely stayed them, while in the mean time gentlemen would proceed with the Tithe Comma- tation Bill.

Sir ROBERT INGLIS said, that decision was according to law. The bill was a gross violation of law, and of the rights of parties.

Mr. COBBETT reminded Sir Robert Inglis, that there was a precedent for the bill— In 1796 or 1797, upwards of one thousand actions were commenced in the King's Bench against clergymen for penalties for non-residence; and what did the clergy do? Come forward and pay the penalties, and so stop the snit:—No, they came before the then Parliament, and got the actions stayed for a year. Next year the same, and the next year again. Then in 1802, Parliament did what he hoped that house would do next session—quash the actions entirely ; and as they relieved the clergy from the penalties, now relieve the people from the payment of tithes. It was idle to talk of its being an invasion of the prin- ciples of law, for the case was one of strong necessity.

Mr. W. BROUGHAM said, this was a case of the strongest necessity.

The number of actions bad been multiplied so enormously, that great injustice must be the consequence if the bill were not passed. He was informed that in the Exchequer alone there had been upwards of four thousand writs issued with- in the last two years; making with those in other courts eight thousand in all. If ever there was a case of stern necessity, that was it. He would ask what right the Rector of Kendal had to 10,0001. a-year of tithes? He must be beat in nine out of every ten of the actions. Mr. BLAMIRE said, the number of suits which it was the object of his bill to stop, was probably not less than nine thousand.

Some verbal amendments were agreed to ; and the report was brought up, and ordered to be considered on Friday.

On that day, the several amendments which had been made in the bill were read a second time,_and agreed to.

[Mr. HARVEY took occasion, on the presentation of a petition on Friday, to state that some of his remarks on this bill on Thursday had been misunderstood. He had been called, in the Morning Chronicle, a " champion of the Church ;" but lie was, and always had been, a Non- Con fOi mist. What he had really said was, that it appeared to him that there was a determination among the landed interest to strengthen pre- judices against tithe property, in order that, having reduced it to a mere nominal value, they might become the purchasers of it, and thus have their lands tithe-free. But to whomsoever the tithes belonged, no one could say that they belonged to the landlord. He contended that tithe property was and should be considered as sacred as any other kind of property.]

18. FOREIGN ENLISTMENT ACT. Lord WESTERN, on Friday, moved the order of the day for the second feeding of the bill for repeal- ing the Foreign Enlistment Act.

The Earl of Rossme hoped it would be withdrawn till next session.

Earl GREY and Lord BROUGHAM professed themselves friendly to the princple of the bill ' • but agreed to withdraw it, on the ground of its having been introduced into the House of Commons at short notice, and sent up to the House of Peers at the close of the session. Next session they would support it. The Duke of WELLINGTON promised to oppose the bill whenever it should be brought forward.

The motion forior the second reading was then discharged.

19. ROYAL MARRIAGES. Colonel WILLIAMS moved on Tuesday for the leave to bring in a bill to repeal the Royal Marriage Act.

It had been passed because two Royal Dukes had married Englishwomen. The act, in restricting the choice of the members of the Royal Family, had done an immensity of mischief. He would just mention one or two instances in proof of the fact. The Duke of York never saw his wife until be was married to her, and the consequence was that they were soon separated. His affections had been won by another woman, perhaps an unworthy object of them. That House shortly afterwards rang with discussions about Mrs. Clarke, to the no great promotion of morality or the edification of the country. The late King, too, married a foreign princess whom he had never seen; and the results, the dim- graceful results, were too well known to the country. The Princesses too were debarred by it from following their own inclinations. The effect of the measure bad -been, to make our Princes send to Germany for wives, instead of selecting them amongst their English countrywomen. When George the Third carnet° the throne, he was made to boast that he was the first English King of his race. It was true that he was an Englishman by nativity, but he was not so by prim- ciple. His German mother infused into him .principles that had subsequently caused the greatest evils to the country. She It was who taught him that he should be "a king"—that was to say, in other words, a German despot: and the war-with America and the war with France were entirely owing to the-im- pressions be had derived from his German mother. Lord ALTHORP and Sir Join.; CAMPBELL opposed the motion. The latter said,

He was anxious not to permit the idea to go abroad that the act in question prevented the marriage of members of the Royal Family with English women.

That was a vulgar, but a gross mistake with regard to it. The act provided that no descendant of George the Second should marry any subject without the consent of the reigning Sovereign ; but if that consent were given, the marriage would be valid. Colonel Williams should be aware that by the common law of England, independently of the Marriage Act, the reigning Sovereign had always the right to control the marriages of his children and heirs, and of the heir pre- sumptive to the throne. The Royal Marriage Act only provided that no de- scendant of George the Second should have a right to marry without that con- sent. The law of England in that respect appeared to him to be just and salutary. Colonel WILLIAMS then withdrew his motion.

20. CONDUCT OF THE EARL OF WARWICK. Mr. PETER, on Tues- day, postponed his motion relative to the Earl of Warwick and the bo- rough of Warwick, till next session, in consequence of the thin atten- dance of members, and the non-publication of certain evidence.

21. BREACH OF PRIVILEGE; POLITICAL JUDGES. On Monday, previously to the House going into a Committee of Supply, a conver- sation of some length arose relative to a charge delivered by Baron Pennefather to the Grand Jury of Cork, in which he stated, that in consequence of the Grand Jury Bill, then in progress through Parlia- ment, be should not again have to address a jury composed of gentlemen of property. Mr. O'DWYER, Mr. WALLACE, Mr. CUTLAR FERGUS- ON, Mr. O'REILLY, and Mr. HUME, strongly deprecated the habit in which the Judges indulged so much at the present day, of mixing up political opinions in their addresses from the bench.

Mr. LITTLETON said, he had read the report in the newspapers with great astonishment and regret, but did not see how he could interfere with a charge delivered by a Judge.

Mr. SHAW thought that Baron Pennefather had a perfect right to make the remarks he had done.

Sir JOHN CAMPBELL maintained, that a Judge was liable to heavy censure, if he went out of his way to deliver opinions as a political partisan.

Here the matter dropped.

22. hum JURIES BILL. This bill was read a second time in the House of Commons on Tuesday, and ordered to be committed on Thursday. On that day, it went through the Committee; and on Friday was read a third time, and passed.

23. LIBEL LAW. Mr. HUTT presented a petition on Friday from James Acland, praying to be released from an imprisonment under which he was suffering for having asserted of the Corporation of Hull, what was found by a Committee of the House to be correct.

Mr. HILL did not think that any verdict could be satisfactory to the country where no opportunity had been given to the accused person to prove the truth of his statements.

Sir JOHN CAMPBELL said, that in this case the proceedings were by criminal information in the Court of King's Bench, where the truth of the matter might be and was inquired into.

On that occasion, Mr. Acland brought forward affidavits, and was heard at great length in support of them ; and it was after the hearing that the rule was made absolute. A bill had been brought to do away with the power of the King's Bench to proceed upon criminal information. If that bill had been persevered in, he should have resisted it to the utmost of his power.

The petition was then laid on the table.

24. SCOTCH ROYAL BURGILS BILL. On Monday, this bill went through the Committee of the Lords ; and on Tuesday was read a third time, and passed.

25. Scorca Buttons BILL. This bill went through the Committee on Monday; and was read a third time, and passed, on Thursday.

26. SEPARATISTS AFFIRMATION BILL. The third reading of this bill in the House of Lords was moved on Monday, by the Earl of GOSFORD. After some opposition from the Bishop of HEREFORD and Lord ELLENBOROUGH, the third reading was carried, by 35 to 16. - 27. SCAVAGE AND PACKAGE BILL. This bill went through a Com- mittee of the Lords on Monday.

28. FACTORY BILL. In the House of Lords on Monday, this bill was read a second time, on the motion of Lord AUCKLAND, and re. ferred to a Select Committee.

On Friday, the several clauses were agreed to in Committee, and the report was ordered to be received this day.

29. CHOLERA BILL. On the motion of Mr. POULETT TIIOMSON, on Monday, a bill to renew the Cholera Act of last session; was read a first and second time ; the Standing Orders of the House being sus- pended. On Tuesday, it went through the Committee; and was read a third time, and passed. On the same evening, it was read a first time in the Lords ; on Wednesday it was read a second time, and went through the Committee; and on Thursday was read a third time, and passed.

30. SALE OF BEER LICENSES BILL. On Tuesday, on the motion that the bill be read a second time, Mr. WARBURTON said, he trusted that Lord Althorp would not press the bill this session.

It was one which seriously affected the industrious classes of the community, and others whom the members would have no opportunity of consulting. The bill, it was true, came down from a Select Committee of the House; but the report of that Committee strongly induced him to think that it was highly desi- rable to defer this bill until the next session of Parliament ; for it was at com- plete variance in many points with the provisions contained in the bill now under consideration, particularly as regarded the hours at which the beer' shops should be kept open, and other police regulations detailed in the report. He i also objected to the bill, because it would double the amount of duty, and in this way was nothing more than an indirect tax upon beer ; for the produce of the increased licence-duty, to the revenue, he was told, would amount to 100,0001. per annum.

Mr. RICE observed that It was for the House to say what, even at this period of the session, should be done with this hill; bat, whatever might be the fate of the measure, be was convinced that if the Government had done nothing with the report of the Se- lect Committee when laid on the table, they would have been open to obloquy ; said if, again, the Government had consented to that which was recommended by many magistrates for the regulation of the scale upon which houses shoat be licensed, the opposition to the measure would have been still stronger.

The bill was not introduced for the sake of increasing the revenue.

Mr. ConErr was sure the bill would have a most mischievoed tendency.

The tax, which it was said would be imposed by the bill, could not affect hint personally; nor could any unless a tax upon cows' udders—A laug4)—asm4 therefore he might he thought disinterested in his opinion of this subject.

Mr. FYSLIE PALMER opposed the bill.

He had been much surprised to hear the evidence of _persons whom lie had known from thirty to forty years going the length of saying that crimes, conrs prising poaching, robberies of hen-roosts, and other petty felonies, had increased since the establishment of beer-shops. Never bed any evidence surprised him se much. He must say, that since the existing law had come into operation, and not till then, a supply of cheap beer had been established for the working classes; and it was not surprising that the labourer, who now could get good beer with- out making his belly ache, should occasionally indulge more than formerly. But the great cause of opposition to the Beer Bill arose from the fact that ate operation placed the retailers independent of the Magistracy ; to whom the, need no longer take off their hats, for they could, without difficulty get their licenses from theExcise. The Magistracy had full power to put down any bier friugeinents of the law by the proprietors of beer-shops ; but they had pre- ferred that such establishments should run riot, in hopes that by this they might be put down. The present bill provide(' that six sureties should be given for the good conduct of these beer-shops ; and under this and other provisions contained in the bill, if it should pass into a law, they would be completely put down. He would venture to say, that if the question was allowed to rest as at present until the next session, a great many of the smaller beer-shops, so much complained of, would die a natural death, and that those on a more respectable footing would continue their occupation. Colonel WILLIAMS, Mr. TOWER, Lord GEORGE BENTINCK, RDA Lord HOTHAM supported the bill.

Mr. FWART opposed it.

Lord ALTHORP defended the measure at considerable length ; bat promised not to press it this session, though he hoped the second reads. ing would be agreed to.

Mr. LLOYD, Mr. AGLIONBY, and Sir S. WHALLEY expressed their strong disapprobation of the measure.

Sir H. WILLouoneY defended the Report of the Committee ; and denied that there was any intention to revive the old licensing system.

Mr. WARBURTON having withdrawn his opposition, the bill was read. a second time; and on the motion of Lord ALTHORP it was ordered to be committed that (lay month.

31. COMMUTATION OF TAKES. General PALMER, on Thursday, moved a series of resolutions, condemnatory of the existing system or taxation, and recommending in the place of the present taxes, that one on realized property should be laid. His resolutions, he said, were founded upon Mr. Heathfield's plan. Ministers, under the present system, were compelled to cut their coats according to their cloth, as if it were cloth they wanted ; whereas they had abundance of cloth, and only wanted a man who knew how to cut it; and that man, he would confidently say, was Mr. Heathfield. General Palmer concluded by saying, that he merely wished then to have his resolutions read, with ts view of taking them under consideration next session.

32. POST-OFFICE PROSECUTIONs. On Monday, Mr. TOOICE pre. sented a petition from Mr. Oxenharn, a solicitor of Taunton, complain- ing that a parcel of deeds sent by the wail had been opened at the Post- office, because it contained two letters, relating to the deeds and otheg matters of business between himself and his agent. He had first re- ceived a letter from the solicitor of the Post-office, stating that he had incurred two penalties ; afterwards he received another, offering to com- promise the action by exacting only one of the penalties. Mr. Tooke then read an opinion given by Mr. Follett, that letters might he.sent ire a parcel which had only relation to the business of the parties; that deeds and papers were goods, according CO the meaning of the act ; and" that an action would lie against the Postmaster for detaining the parcel. • Mr. STANLEY said, that it had been discovered that numerous letters had been sent by parcels in the mail ; and that a bag had been regularly

made up at the Gloucester and Bristol Mail-offices, one of which was found to contain 42, another as many as 200 letters. It was necessary to put a stop to suca practices, otherwise the monopoly of the Post- office must be given up, and some mode of supplying the deficiency is the revenue which would be thereby occasioned must be discovered.. One of the letters sent by Mr. Oxenham did not relate to the deeds is the parcel, and therefore he had incurred a penalty by sending it. He thought that the Post-office had not acted unfairly in selecting this case to try the merits of the question ; which was now, indeed, in a course of trial.

Mr. HUME remarked, that a consolidation of the statutes relative to the Post-office, which puzzled the ablest lawyers, had been promised seven years ago. Sir JOHN CAMPBELL concurred in Mr. Follett's opinion as to sending letters which related to the deeds in the parcel, but Mr. Oxenham had sent a letter which had no relation to those deeds.

33. POLICE SPIES. Mr. COBBETT called the attention of the House of Commons, on Thursday, to the conduct of Popay, the Police spy; upon whom, be said, justice had not been done. The Government should prosecute that man for sedition ; otherwise the public would naturally think that he was screened, because be might have it in his power to make revelations which would implicate the Government. He said that M'Lean, the Superintendent, had been guilty of the grossest prevarication before the Committee ; his evidence was all shuffle from beginning to end. He then alluded to the case of Mr. William Dean, who had been dismissed from the force for making use of strong language before the Committee, respecting the Calthorpe Street affair. This man was dismissed, while Bartlett, who had stolea some milk from a cowkeeper, was retained. He strongly blamed the conduct of the . Commissioners in this business. He should leave the cirminals in the bands of the Solicitor-General, and would only move for a copy of the order dismissing William Dean from the Police. Colonel EVANS bore testimony to the unimpeachable. characters of the Commissioners, especially Colonel Rowan, with whom he was per.. sonally acquainted. He agreed with Mr. eobbett, that some moo, severe punishment than mere dismissal should be inflicted upon Popay. M'Lean, the Superintendent, was quite unfit to hold the situation he did in a free country. He was a proper myrmidon for the worst system of espionage ; and wasiin the habit of employing as many as twenty persons in plain clothes.

Mr. LAMB acknowledged, that the proof of Popay's being a spy was complete ; but he had been advised not to prosecute him, unless he re- lied for a conviction on the odium which generally attended spies. So he did not think it his duty to prosecute him. With regard to Dean, his language was so violent respecting the Calthorpe Street affair, as to induce the suspicion that he was insane. He did not think, upon the whole, that there was sufficient evidence to justify the dismissal of the Superintendent ; who had employed twenty men at different times, but never altogether in plain clothes, for the purpose of detecting fe- lonies. As to the wearing of plain clothes, formerly all Policemen wore them ; and it was a question in Sir Robert Peel's mind, whether they should not continue to do so. It would never answer to prohibit the use of plain clothes altogether.

Mr. WARBURTON and Mr. HAWES complimented Mr. Cobbett on his conduct in this business.

Sir JOHN CAMPBELL approved of Popay's dismissal. Whether he should receive additional punishment, was a different thing. The House should recollect what a flagellation he had got from Mr. Cobbett and others. (Laughter.) Mr. Cobbett should act with the same spirit of forbearance as the judge who. after he had been employed seven hours in pro- nouncing sentence on a criminal, on being reminded of the misery he had already inflicted, agreed to mitigate the punishment to the payment of a nominal fine.

Lord HOTHAM defended the Commissioners from the attack of Mr. Cobbett.

Mr. COBBETT admitted, that it was possible much of the misconduct of the Commissioners, whom he had accused of prevarication, might be attributable to their laziness and neglect of duty. He then withdrew his motion.

34. APPROPRIATION BILL. Mr. RICE brought in this bill on Tues- day, when it was read a first time. The second reading took place on Wednesday, and on Thursday it was committed.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM then moved an amendment to the bill, relative to the Naval service, making it no longer imperative to pay within the year for all services performed during the year ; which, in consequence of the absence of sailors, could not in fact be done ; but the money, sometimes amounting to a million, was paid into the Batik of England, where it became a complete dead-weight.

This amendment was agreed to; the report was received, and the bill was read a third time on Saturday.

35. SESSIONAL ADDRESSES. On the motion of Lord ALTHORP, the House of Commons, on Thursday, went into Committee on the Ses- sional Addresses.

Lord ALTHORP then said, lie had two resolutions to propose, to which he had no doubt the House would unanimously agree. The first was for an address to his Majesty, praying that he would be pleased to direct that a sum of twelve hundred pounds be paid to Mr. Bernal for his services as. Chairman of Committees during the present session, assuring him that the House would make good the same. ( Cheers.) The second was, that such a sum be paid to the Speaker's Secretary as with his fees would make up the sum of 4001.

These resolutions were agreed to, and the report was received on Friday.