NEWS OF THE WEEK.

LORD ALTHORP opened his long-delayed Budget last night. His

surplus — with the aid of an increase in the receipts from tea- . duties, an addition on licences for the sale of spirits and beer, - the reduction of the Four per Cents., and a sum to be received . from the Bank—will amount to 1,620,0001., after providing for the payment of the 750,0001. interest on the grant to the West

3 India slave-owners. His reductions of taxation amount to 1,581,0001.; comprising the abolition of the House-tax—the duties on currants, oils, and fruits, as detailed in our account of Mr. Pout.= THOMSON'S Customs Bill—the duties on starch, stone bot- tt Iles, and sweets, as recommended by the Excise Commissioners, and the paltry stamp-duty on almanacks. He also proposes to reduce the duty on Irish whisky from 3s. 4d. to 2s. 4d.a.gallon ; as it is found that the produce of the tax diminishes, though illicit distiration is augmented. A loss of 200,0001. is all that the revenue is expected to suffer on this head; and Lord ALTHORP thinks he can well afford this. Looking at the permanent income of the country, the balance of income over expenditure will be only 234,000/. There is nothing in this Budget which calls for much remark. The principal contents of it were previously known, and have been already discussed. On the whole, it is about as good as we have any right to expect, as long as the present unwise system of taxation, including the Corn-laws and all that fetters production and free interchange, is adhered to. It is gratifying to perceive that increase of consumption uniformly follows diminution of taxation ; and that the resources of the country are still unimpaired. The Peers agreed to the second reading of the Poor-Law Bill, on Monday, by the decisive majority of 7G to 13. It is plain, there- fore, that it will become the law of the land, in spite of the saga- cious prophecies and virulent denunciations of certain leading journalists and parochial demagogues; who have pursued a system LI of wilful or ignorant misrepresentation in regard to this measure, 44 to which the annals of personal and party spite can hardly furnish a parallel. But the national good sense has been proof against i the mischievous attempts of these mortified declaimers. Never

was there so complete a failure in an effort to rouse the popular • .; feeling against a wise'and resolute act of legislation. Day after day, the same refuted arguments were put forth ; but they

" fell dead-born from the press Like the last Gazette, or the last address."

Lord BROUGHAM took the lead in the Lords. He gave an elabo- 4 rate sketch of the past legislation on this subject; of its mischiev- ous consequences on the welfare of the poor, and the community at large ; and then explained the nature of the remedies which the bill was intended to supply. All this, though old, was appropriate. But Lord BROUGHAM, as is too often the case with him, damaged the cause he took in hand, by going out of his way to promulgate opinions which Ile calls his, on very questionable points, by no twang necessary to be discussed. He intimated his doubts as to whether any compulsory relief to the poor ought to be afforded; and hinted, that after the present system had been reformed, it might be worth while to consider that question in Parlia- ment. He even went further, and expressed his disappro- bation of almost all charitable institutions; not only of found- hag hospitals, but of :dispensaries, and ahnshouses for the reception of the aged, infirm, and friendless,—on the ground that men should provide against sickness and old age, which all must expect. Hospitals for the cure of accidents, Lord BROUGHAM thought might be safely encouraged, because accidents often cannot-be provided, against, and men will. not pur- posely maim themselires for the sake of becoming inmates of an hospital. This was:the:plain meaning of the Chancellor's re- marks on Monday, as we find them reported in the TiMes, Chro- nicle, and Herald; but, according to his own interpretation of his speech, on the following Thursday, while he laid down a general rule or principle, he professed his willingness to allow hospitals for incurable diseases, orphans, and aged persons. Without arguing the policy of Lord BROUGHAM'S rule, or the wisdom of his exceptions, we may say that there was not the least occasion to bring forward these most ungracious topics. The Poor-Law Bill expressly authorizes the compulsory relief of the able-bodied as well as of the infirm and friendless pauper ; but it will be difficult to eradicate the idea front the minds of many, that it is only a preliminary measure to the abolition of Poor-laws altogether. The authors and supporters of the measure generally', are well known to entertain no such intentions. Indeed, setting aside the claim, good or bad, of all to be supported, it would be in the highest degree impolitic to deny maintenance to the able- bodied in exchange for work, or if work cannot be provided, for nothing. The country would be overrun with marauders if the ext'eme opinions of the opponents of Poor-laws were to be adopted, in the complicated end vicious state of society which, owing to mischievous legislation, is established in this country. It is the consequence of bad lawmaking that men are unable to earn their living by labour. The state is to blame for this, and the common- wealth must suffer for it. We cannot but consider it as imprudent beyond measure in Lord BROUGHAM to make use of expressions

which certainly have conveyed the idea that he is prepared to do away with Poor-laws altogether. There is also an apparent want of feeling in a remarkably successful lawyer, of uncommon mental and corporeal energy, mouthing it on the duty of all men to pre- pare for sickness and old age1 Unquestionably, men with such advantages as Lord BROUGHAM possesses are inexecusable if they 1 neglect to provide for the inevitable evils of life ; but many have striven hard and unsuccessfully, and it is bitter and galling to all such to listen to language like the Chancellor's on this subject.

The minority was contemptible in political character, as in number ; for Lord WYNFORD and the Dukes of CUMBERLAND and NEWCASTLE are about the most distinguished men among the thirteen.

We are glad that another measure,which though independent of it,

will, we arc persuaded, be found an admimbleauxiliary to that which we have just noticed—the South Australian Colony Bill—has also passed its second reading. The Emigration-clause of the Poor-law Bill is one of the most important it contains. It did not comewithin the scope of the framers of that measure to proVide a place of re- fuge for the paupers who preferred work with good wages abroad, to work for a mere subsistence at home. But long before their labours commenced, a plan twat matured for accomplishing this object, by men of enterprise, forethought, and capital; who did not limit their views to the mere shipment of their fellow-crea- tures to some distant rad of the earth, but thought it incumbent upon them to make some provision for their welfare and gotid go- vernment in their new habitations. Experience had proved that some such precautions were highly necessary ; that settlers, left to themselves, were left to perish. Accordingly, a settlement was projected in a fine country and delightful climate, exempt from the extremes of heat and cold and fever and ague, which cut off the emigrants to Canada and the Illinois, and from the contaminating influence of the pickpocket society of Sydney and Van Diemen 's Land. All who have tasen the pains to comprehend the plan on which the projected colony will be founded, laugh at the dull malice with wh.cli the opponents of the Poor-Law Bill have perti- naciously assaulted this scheme also It is fair to laugh, since the adversary has shown an incapacity to reason : but let the friends of the measure be on the alert in the future stages of the bill ; for very feeble reasoners are sometimes active mischief- makers, and the victory will be won by votes as well as arguments. The Committee is on Tuesday—at the morning sitting.

The new Coercion Bill is passing rapidly through the Commons.

The second reading, on Monday was carried by 146 to 25. On the order of the day for the second reading, Mr. POULETT SCROPE moved a resolution, pledging the House to adopt measures at an early period to insure the population of Ireland "the means of supporting life by honest and peaceful industry'--in other words, to establish a system of Poor-laws. But the House was not dis- posed to pledge itself to any thing of the kind ; and rejected the re- solution, by 89 to 34. Iii the Committee, the bill encountered some opposition from Mr. O'CONNELL, who made several ineffectual at- tempts to mitigate its bevel ity.

Much time has been spent this week in discussing theentidnot

of Mr. ELLICE; charged by Lord WESTERN, in his evidence before the Committee on the Ines of Court, with having ibis varifed 500/. from the Treasury in aid of the Liberal pa,•ty at fielcliester in the election of 1831. Mr. ELLteli was then SecretatittoftleTreasury, ,. ■ and managed the election fur Government : he is generally allowed .:'• ..',/.' to have. displayed great ability in the performance-414114 duty. ._.-,'. • ...") ...'. '4, It is not denied that he Inratti.ded the 5001. in quesstieit ; inVhi: affirms that lie.was in constant communication with Iticletenit0 .-'

Committees in the Metropolis, who furnished him with funds, raised by private subscription, in order to counteract the efforts of

the Charles Street Club to return Anti-Reformers. Mr. Essica also produced two notes, written at the time to Mr. DANIEL /WHITTLE HARVEY, which go to confirm this account. All, it is asserted, is fair and above-board, and not a shilling of the secret service money was expended in electioneering. Well, then, it may be supposed that there would be no objection to grant a Committee to examine into the affair and report to the House. But no, Ministers will not consent to any such proceeding ; and this re- fusal alone suggests the idea that there is something wrong, dis- creditable, and not fit to meet the light in the transaction. It would be exceedingly easy to produce the cash accounts of the Committee who furnished the money, and of Mr. ELLICE, who paid it away, in proof of the correctness of that gentleman's ipse dizit. The very large majority, however, of 114 to 34, decided on Wednesday, that Mr.EL LICE'S statement was quite satisfactory, . and refused to inquire further into the matter. Many who voted 'in that majority, had, we doubt not, good reasons for so doing. It would not be very agreeable to have the source of their supplies disclosed to public view. The pretended horror of the Tories, poor‘innocents! at the bare idea of employing the public money to influence elections, was a joke in its way, but somewhat too broad. The House of Commons has refused to address the Crown to pardon the proprietors of the True Sun; but it seems to be a general feeling, that Ministers will, of their own accord, take steps for the release of those gentlemen. It is a disgraceful affair from beginnim,s, to end. Sir JOHN CAMPBELL'S speech was but a maladroit defence of his individual conduct; and the exposure of Lord BROUGHAM'S hypocritical pretences of fondness for the freedom of the press, while the Attorney General says he ex- pressly concurred in the prosecution of the True Sun, does not improve the complexion of the case. The sham excuse for not prosecuting Earl FITZWILLIAM and Mr. BROUGHAM, was most paltry. A Crown lawyer who will make use of the existing forms of law to crush an Opposition journalist, need not shrink from the employment of spies and informers. Did Sir JOHN ever try to get evidence of the words spoken by the Peer and the Chancel- lor's brother? If he had tried, it is believed that the evidence would have been forthcoming.

Sir JOHN CAMPBELL had better let Mr. Humu alone. What- ever he may think, lie is not Mr. HUME'S match. Never was any man more completely set down than Sir JOHN by the Member for Middlesex, in the affair of the Edinburgh and Dudley letters. "Plain JOHN CAMPBELL," it seems, notwithstanding he now talks so big, was a short time ago an applicant for Mr. HuME'S favour: he would fain have crept into the representation of Dudley under the shadow of " Joseph's" countenance. The late savage flogging in St. George's Barracks has excited public indignation, in a manner which has forced Parliament once more to press upon Ministers the necessity of a change in the dis- cipline of the Army. The effect will be beneficial. Already it Las elicited statements from the Secretary at War, for which the people at the Horse Guards will wish his tongue blistered. Mr. TENNYSON, who brought the subject before the House, refused to make any motion ; because Mr. ELLICE has promised to issue a commission to inquire into the state of discipline in the Army, and the propriety of substituting some other punishment for that of togging. Still no harm, and we believe much good, would have been done, by a strong resolution of the House condemnatory of the practice. Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE, the Moderate Member for Finsbury, observed most truly, that no reliance was to be placed on Treasury circulars and promises. Notwithstanding the fine philanthropic speeches of Sir JAMES GRAHAM and Mr. ELLICE, impressment of seamen and flogging of the soldiery are not abolished.