h7rbates1 ant Prorrching1 in Parliament.

1. THE OPENING—THE KING'S SPEECH.

On Tuesday, the King in person formally opened the session of Parliament. The attendance of Peers in the temporary House of Lords was unusually large ; and the scene was enlivened by the ladies who occupied the side galleries and the greater part of the lower benches. The corps daphmaatique mustered strongly, and ten of the Judges, in their robes, were present. The King took his seat on the throne soon after two o'clock. The Commons were summoned by the Usher of the Black Rod ; and a much larger number than is customary obeyed the call, headed by the Speaker. The King then read the following Speech, in a firm and clear tone of voice. " My Lords and Gentlemen—I avail myself of the earliest opportunity of meeting you in Parliament alter having recurred to the sense of my people. " You will, I am confident, fully participate in the regret which I feel at the destruc- tion, by accidental fire, of that part of the ancient Palace of Westminster. which has been long appropriated to the use of the two Houses of Parliament. Upon the occur- rence of this calamity. I gave immediate directions that the best provision, of whieh thocirenmstanees of the case would admit, should be made for your present meeting; and it will be my wish to adopt such plans for the permanent accomodation of the two Houses of Parliament as shall be deemed, in your joint consideration, to he the most fitting and convenient. "1 will give directions that there be laid before you the Report made to me by the Privy Council in reference to the origin of the fire, and the evidence upon which it was founded. " The assurances which I receive from my Allies, and, generally, from all Foreign Princes and States, of their earnest desire to cultivate the relations of amity, and to maintain with me the most friendly understanding, justify, on my part, the confident expectation of the continuance of the blessings of peace. "The single exception to the general tranquillity of Europe, is the civil contest which still prevails in some of the Northern provinces of Spain. "I will give directions that there be laid before you articles which I have concluded with my allies the King of the French, the Queen of Spain, and the Queen of Por- tugal, whirls are supplementary to the Treaty of April 1834, and are intended to facilitate the complete attainment of the objects contemplated by that treaty. "I have to repeat the expression of my regret that the relations between Holland and Belgium still remain unsettled. " Gentlemen of the House of Commons—I have directed the Estimates for the ensuing year to be prepared. and lo be laid before you without delay.

"They have been formed with the strictest attention to economy; and I have the

satisfaction of acquainting you that the total amount of the dema de for the public serviee will be less on the present, than on any firmer Lecithin, svdhin our recent experience.

" The satisfactory state of the trade and commerce or the country, and of the public

reveuue, fully justifies expectation, that notwithstanding roluetious in taxation which were made in the last session, and which, wheu they shall have taken full effect, will tend to diminsh the existing surplus of the public revenue, there will remain a suf. Sent balance to meet the additional annual eharge which will a.ise flora providing the compensation granted by Parliament on account of the abelitioauf slavery through- out the British dominions.

" I deeply lament that the agricultural interest coainues in a state of great de. pression.

"I recommend to your consideration whether itImay not he in your power, after pro- viding for the exigencies of the public service, and consistently with the steadest maintenance of the public credit, to devise a method for mitigating the pressure of those local charges which bear heavily on the Owners and Oceupierss f Land, and for distributing the burden of them more equally over other de,criptEons of property.

"My Lords and Gentlemen—The information received nom the Governors of my Colonies, together with the Acts passed, in execution of the law for the Abolition of Slavery, wilt be conimunicated to you. it is with much satisfaction that I have ob. served the general concurrence of the Colonial Legislatures in giving effect to this im- portant measure ; and, notwithstanding the difficulties with which the subject is neces- sarily attended, I have seen no reason to abate my earnest hopes of a favourable issue. Under all circumstances, on may be assured of my anxious desire and unceasing efforts fully to realize the benevolent intentions of Parliament.

" 'There are many important subjects—some of which have already undergone par. tial discussion in Parliament—the adjustment of which, at as early a period as is con- sistent with the mature consideration of them, would be of great advantage to the public iuterests.

"Among the first in point of urgency is the state of the Tithe question in Ireland, and the means of effecting an equitable and final adjustment of it.

"Measures will be proposed for your consideration, which will have for their respec- tive objects—to promote the Commutation of 'Tithe in England and Wales, to im- prove our Civil Jurisprudence and the Administration of Justice, in Ecclesiastical causes, to make provision for the more effectual maintenance of Ecclesiastical Disci- pline, and to relieve those who dissent from the doctriues or discipline of the Church .1rad the necessity of celebrating the ceremony of marriage according to its rites. "I have not yet received the report from the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the state of Municipal Corporations ; but I have reason to believe that it will be made, and that I shall be enabled to communicate it to you at an early period. " I have appointed a Commission for considering the state of the several Dioceses in England and Wales, with reference to the amount of their revenues, and to the more equal distribution of Episcopal Duties; the state of the several Cathedral and Col- legiate Churches, with a view to the suggestion of such measures as may render them most conducive to the efficiency of the Established Church ; and for devising the best mode of providing for the cure of souls, wills reference to the residence of the Clergy on thelr respective benefices.

" The especial object which I have in view in the appointment of this Commission is, to extend more widely the means of religions worship according to the doctrines of the Established Church, and to confirm its hold upon the veneration and affections of my people.

"I feel it also incumbent upon me to call your attention to the condition of the Church of Scotland, and to the means by which it may be enabled to increase the opportunities of religious worship for the poorer classes of society in that part of the United Kingdom.

"It has been my duty on this occasion to direct your consideration to various im- portant matters connected with our Domestic policy.

"I rely with entire confidence on your willing cooperation in perfecting all such measureseas may be calculated to remove just causes of complaint, and to promote the concord and happiness of my subjects.

" I rely also, with equal confidence, on the caution and circumspection with which you will apply yourselves to the alteration of laws, which affect very extensive and complicated interests, and are interwoven with ancient usages, to which the habits an I feelings of my people have conformed: " I Mel assured that it will be our common objeect in supplying that which may be defective, or in renovating that which may be impaired, to strengthen the foundations of those institutions in Church and State, which are the inheritance and birth-right of my people; and which, amidst all the vicissitudes of public affairs, bare proved, under the blessing of Almighty God, the surest guarantees of their liberties, their rights, and their religion."

As soon as the Speech was finished the Commons retired to their own House ; and the Peers adjourned till five o'clock.

2. TIIE ADDRESS.

In the House of Commons, the Speaker took the chair about four o'clock, and read a copy of the King's Speech.

Lord SANDON then rose to move the Address. He contended that Ministers had a right to a fair trial ; and that he could consistently give them his support, although he had been for a time connected with Earl Grey's Government ; for the principles of Ministers as developed in the Royal Speech, were similar to those on which Earl Grey pro- fessed to act,—namely, Peace, Retrenchment, and Reforin. With regard to the Melbourne Ministry, he never had, and he never pro- fessed any confidence, in it. There was no difference between the principles of the present Government and those of Earl Grey, as re- garded Reform ; for Earl Grey would give no more, and the existing Government would take nothing away. He appealed to the members of the Opposition who had supported Earl Grey, to know whether they felt very comfortable in their present position ? He pointed out the discrepancy of opinion between a large portion of the Opposition and Earl Grey; and after adverting to the several topics mentioned in the Speech, concluded by moving an Address, the counterpart merely of the Speech.

Mr. BRAMSTON, in a tone of voice that was almost inaudible in the Gallery, seconded the motion.

Lord MORPETH admitted that there was much in the Speech cal- culated to give satisfaction to the friends of Reform ; but he com- plained of its vagueness, and especially of the want of a more direct allusion to the state of the Irish Church. With regard to Corporation Reform, be wished that Ministers had indicated the principle which they intended to adopt. The Dissenters, too, might reasonably com- plain, that front the Speech it was to be inferred that the whole circle of their grievances might be comprised in the single article of marriage. Lord Morpeth proceeded to remark upon the late change of Ministry.

His Majesty, in the exercise of his undoubted prerogative, was pleased to dis- raise the Government of which Lord Melbourne was the head. Now, no one admitted more fully than he did his Majesty's undoubted right to exercise that prerogative; and he would further express his sincere belief that his Majesty was mnPahle of exerciaini it ualeas with the intention of promoting the true inter- ests of his people. But ,be would, with equal confidence, assert that no one could deny the right of that House ta call in judgment, not th unthubt.?i aod inalienable prerogative which the King possessed, but this particrear and special exercise of It, so far as related to the acceptance or rejection of the measures and administration of those servants of the Crown, and consequently servants of the People, to whom he had confided the administration and superintendence of the national affairs. Ile was one of those who sincerely lamented the dissolution of that Government. As to the causes of that dissolution, they knew nothing more at present than this—that the late Administration was one that was only re- cently formed ; diet it was one that possessed in an extraordinary degree the confidence of Parliansent ; and that its political opinions coincided with those of the great majority of the late House of Commons. They knew, further, that at the period of its dissolution the late Government was employed in some of the highest matters of national concern ; that the dissolution occurred in a time of complete tranquillity—of comparative and growing prosperity :

" It was not in the battle, No tempest gave the sleek."

With the causes of the dissolution of that Adininistration they had still to he made acquainted, and along with these causes with the quarter where lay the r.Isponsibility of the late Ministers' removal. Surely the causes of the dismissal of the late Government must have been of a grave nature indeed, when they were dismissed at once without notice, when the usual courtesy was departed from of the occupants of places retaining them until their successors were appointed, and when there occurred that most unusual and most unseemly huddling of otfiast in the single person of the Duke of Wellington.

It was owing, he observed, to the admirable regularity in which the late Ministers had left the public affairs, that no bad practical conse- quence had arisen from the concentration of so many offices in the per- son of the Duke of Wellington, till Sir Robert Peel came from Italy.

In mentioning Sir Robert, he would be the last person to do injustice either to his talents or to his high and honest aspirations to be of use to his counter His only ground cf difference with bins was, that from the principles which Sir Robert had supported throughout his life, and from the associates by whom her was now surrounded, he had put himself (not that any thing like eternal ex- clusion from political office should be considered as the result with regard to him personally, for who could foretell the thousand-and-one changes in the publirs service), but certainly for the present, Sir Robert Peel had put himself at vari- ance with the political inclinations of his countrymen. What they had to de with were his acts. His first overt act was the dissolution or the late Puha. ment. Now, he would propose that they should respectfully state to his Majesty their disapprobation of that dissolution. What misdemeanour had that Parlia- ment committed ? It nourished a spirit of loyal attachment to the Crown, it sustained public credit, it enforced economy, and it abolished slavery. True it was, that it had manifested a desire for the admission of the Dissenters into the Universities, and that it had exhibited an inclination to accommodate the secular state of the Irish Church to the spiritual wants of its flocks. But no differeuce had occurred between it and the other House ; there was no collision between the two Houses; there was no hostile vote of it against any Administration ; and yet, at a most important crisis of public affairs, this Parliament was, by the ene- mies of short Parliaments, dissolved and cashiered.

The Amendment, which Lord Morpeth moved should be substituted for the last two paragraphs of the Address (corresponding with and echoing the last two paragraphs of the Royal Speech) was in the following words.

" To assure his Majesty that his Majesty's faithful Commons acknowledge with grate. fat recollection, that the acts for aineuding the Representation of the People were sub- mitted to Parliament with his Majesty's sanction, and carried into is law by his ma. jesty's assent : that, confidently expecting to derive further advantages from these wise an 1 necessary measures, we trust that his Majesty's councils will be directed in the 'pint of well-cousidered and effective reform; and that the liberal and comprehensive policy which restored to the People the right of choosing their Representatives, ant which provided for the emancipation of all persons held in slavery in his Majesty's colonies and possessions abroad, will, with the same enlarged views, place. without delay, our Municipal Corporations under vigilant popular control, remove all the well- founded grievances of the l'rotestant Dissenters, and correct those abuses in the Church which impair its efficiency in England, disturb the peace of society in Ireland, and lower the character of the Establishment in both countries. To represent to his Ma. jesty that his Majesty's faithful Commons beg leave submissively to add, that they cannot but lament that the progress of these and other reforms should have been inter. rupted and endangered by the unnecessary dissolution of a Parliament earnestly infant e‘ion the vigorous prosecution of measures to which the wishes of the People were most anxiously and justly directed."

Mr. BANNERMAN seconded the Amendment ; which he was aware many of the Members on his side of the House considered to be too muck of a milk-and-water nature. At first he thought so too; but was now satisfied that it was well calculated to meet the circumstances of the case. Mr. Bannerman spoke very briefly, and scarcely alluded to any of the topics in the Speech, except that of Municipal Reform ; the ad- vantages of which were so apparent in Scotland, and ought to be ex- tended to England. He expressed his hope that the present Ministry would be turned out as unceremoniously as their predecessors had been.

Mr. PEMBERTON spoke at great length in defence of the Address, and in eulogy of the Duke of Wellington, and Lord Stanley, whose ab- sence from the Government he much regretted. He denied that oppo- sition to the Reform Bill was any disqualification for taking office.

There was nothing in the construction of the Reform Bill that indispensably required that the Original inventors should always preside over its workings. Yet the subject was treated as if the Reform Bill were a machine which neces- sarily gave the inventor a patent right in its management and use. If the Reform Bill were thought to be in danger, he could understand why there should be lealousy • but it was not, or if it were in any danger, the danger arose, not from those who bad formerly opposed, butfrom those who were once Its warmest friends. Those who had been for" the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill," were now for any thing but the Bill—they were for Triennial Parliaments, vote by Ballot, Household Suffrage, and he knew not what. He:could not help thinking that the present Government possessed many advantages beyond those enjoyed by the hast. He knew that there were some who think it not a recommendation, but the contrary, when he said that the House of Lords reposed a greater degree of confidence in the existing Cabinet. He knew that there were too many out of the House, and he feared there were a few in the House, to whom it would appear a recom- mendation to a measure if it appeared likely to produce a collision between two branches of the Legislature. But he did not believe such to be the sentiments of a majority of the House—on the contrary, he believed it would be considered an advantage if measures could be carried with the general concurrence of the different branches of the Legislature. This advantage would be possessed by the present Ministry in a much greater degree than by thelast.

Mr. EWART supported the Amendment.

Mr. RICHARDS avowed his difference on this question not only with the Reformers, with whom he usually acted, but also with many of hi, own constituents; and he therefore wished to state the grounds of his vote for the Address. In saying that be should vote for the Addresa, he did not mean say that he did aot a/so approve of the Amendment. (Laughter from the Reformers.) He, however, begged to say that circumstances altered cases. ( Conttnued laughter.) Did he not see, and that undoubtedly arising from circumstances, a sort of mil- lennium, where the lion and the Iamb were lying down together ? The question at this moment most deserving the attention of that House was, what would be die consequence of rejecting the Address and adoptinethe Amendment ? He saw that the object of the Amendment was to occasion the resignation or dismissal of his Majesty's Government. ( Cheers from the Opposition, echoed back by the Ministers.) Feeling that such dismissal, in theyresent state of political parties, would be injurious hi the highest degree he came forward in spite of obloquy to oppose that Amendment. He had said that circumstances altered cases; and although the expression might create a smile among honourable gentlemen, yet he could not forget that many whom he now saw were not long ago in political hostility towards each other. He did not censure them for being now in harmonious concord, but he belonged to no party, Whig or Tory, but to his country ; and he felt bound to act in that manner which would best matinee to the happiness and safety of the people. No man would deny that the present Ministry was composed of men of the highest honour, integrity, and talent. Looking at the circumstances in which the country now stood, and looking at the principles of human nature which led men to consider what would best conduce to their own individual interests—(Much laughter)—What ! did honourable gentlemen mean to say that they took no enlightened view of what was conducive to their own interests? or that they were not actuated by a desire to promote the best interests of their country ? Now, before the Reform Act it was manifestly the interest of the Ministers for the time being to consult the wishes, the inclinations, and feelings of the owners of boroughs. But was it not new the interest of Ministers to consult at least the supposed good of their consti- tuents and of the country ? Ile believed that the present Government would no longer take those narrow views which they had before done, but would consult the public interest alone in the measures they brought forward.

It might suit the convenience of many of the Opposition to talk loudly of Reform, who lately resisted it from the other side of Ole House.

Was not the motion for the abolition of the Septennial Act opposed by them? MS not the motion for vote by Ballot opposed by them? did they not strenu- crusly oppose the motion for the revision of the Pension-list? Considering that She present Ministers never showed a double face at any rate, and finding that They have the Crown and Aristocracy with them' though not the House of Commons in the same degree as their predecessors hail, he thought that on the principle of consulting their own safety they would endeavour to conciliate this .House, and grant to the country all those measures of Reform which could fairly be demanded of them. He therefore preferred seeing the present Minis- ters in power, and wished the Whigs to remain his Majesty's Opposition. The Whip, if in power, would be weak. Gentlemen could not forget the language need towards them by the Member for Dublin and the Member for Middlesex during the last session—the one calling their measures brutal and bloody, the other declaring that he would much rather see Sir Robert Peel in office than the Whigs. Should the present Ministers resign (which must be the•effect of adopting the Amendment), what materials were there to form another Administration ? There would be a restoratiou of the Whigs, who would be succeeded by men of the most discordant opinions. The dismissal of Ministers would entail a signal calamity on the country. This he stated, although a Reformer. (" No, nor) Ile had been a Reformer for twenty- Eve years; but, though a Reformer, he was not a Revolutionist.

Mr. GROTE said, his Reform principles conducted him to a very different conclusion from that of Mr. Richards.

He could not consent to look for a Ministry in the ranks of those who had always been more widely opposed to Reform than any other public men of their tiny; nor could he agree with Mr. Richards in consideiing it as a great calamity if the adoption of the Amendment should lead to the resignation of Ministers. Having frequently expressed his regret at the dismissal of the late Ministry to large bodies of his constituents who had expressed their unqualified sympathy in that feeling, he could not refrain from giving utterance to it in that House. If the consequences of the vote which he would give should be what Mr. Richards had desciibed, that would be an additional reason fur his giving it. The second Reformed Parliament should certainly, and he hoped would, go at least as far in its desire for reform as the first Reformed Parlia- ment. This was a Speech, however, which if it had come from a Ministry in which he had the fullest confidence, would not ,.;ive him satisfaction ; but com- ing as it did from a Ministry in which he bad no confidence at all, was still

snore to be objected to. Its defects really needed to be supplied by an amend- ment at least as full and as strong as that proposed by Lord Morpeth ; and he had no hesitation in saying that he himself would be inclined to make the Amendment still fuller and stronger. He did not know what Mr. Richards meant by saying that be was sure the present Ministers would follow up

reform; for his own part, lie knew that all their past acts and declarations had been quite contrary to such an idea ; and these were acts and declarations not here or there, not on one particular question or another, but apparent in all They did, and forming a part of their system of management. He could not forget their acts previous to the year ISM, or their feelings and conduct when the Government of the Duke of Wellington was upset by the voice of the People. Had any thing happened since which gave evidence of their having

become converts to Reform ? How could he believe that they hail become Reformers, when he remembered their opposition to the Reform Bill, and to every other measure of Reform which was ever mooted? Believing, then, that they would still continue to act on the same principles upon which they had hitherto acted, he could not give them his support upon this occasion; and it would not prevent him giving his vote for the Amendment, that he had been told by Mr. Richards that a defeat upou this question would lead to the resigna-

tion of Ministers.

It would be ,bad policy in the Reformers, because they could not get every thing they wished, to throw themselves into the arms of the worst enemies of Reform. Slow advances were better than restive- ness; it was better to advance gradually than to stand still. Remarks were made on the morbid desire of the People for change—

He was in daily intercourse with a large poi tion of the numerous con. stituency which he had the honour to represent, as well as with others throughout the country, and he could not discover any such morbid desire for change among the People. But though there was no morbid desire for change, lie acknowledged that he found a very strong wish for the improvement of the institutions of the country to exist among them. There was no wish, however, to get rid of the valuable parts of our institutions. There was nothing in their wishes which menaced the stability of the socitl order. There was nothing inconsistent with the continuance of all parts of the

law, and all the restraints which every well-regulated community required. In spite of all the taunts thrown out on the other side of the House, as to the want of unanimity on the Opposition side, it would be found that they bad a

little more sense and reflection than they obtained credit for, and that they would pursue the stream of Reform peaceably and calmly, but without being

stopped in their course. That it would be the fate of Reformers to meet nit obstructions while the present Ministry remained in power, he could not but beleive.— He could not but think that those who had introduced the name of the Monarch into a discussion of this nature, and who, when they were asked to defend the dismissal of a Ministry which had the confidence of the Parlia- ment and of the country, answered by a reference to the King's prerogative, acted injudiciously ; and, indeed, a measure which requires to be defended upon such ground must be injudicious. Of this, at all events, he was sure, that if all changes in the King's Ministers were to be answered by referring to the prero-

gative of the King, the prerogative itself would soon come to be questioned. He had little more to add, but that he would give his vote and cordial support to the Amendment ; and he would say that if it led to the event which the Member for Knaresborough said it would produce, it would be one of the most useful amendments ever made.

Mr. J. M. GASKELL spoke strongly in favour of the Address.

Mr. Pont.Tra did not question the prerogative of the Crown to dismiss any set of Ministers : he denied not the right ; but be ques- tioned the political wisdom of turtling out Lord Melbourne and his colleagues.

To continue Governments which are acting inconsistently, the individual members of which are strongly at variance with each other upon great national questions, and to select as a good opportunity for the most abrupt dismissal of which there is any record, the precise moment when inconsistency had ceased, and when a united Administration was preparing to submit to Parliament and the country the measures which to them appeared essential to the implovenient of our institutions, did seem to him most extraordinary indeed. (Loud cheer- ing.) He could only judge of the probable benefits to be received by the coun- try from its present Ministry, by recollections of the past; be could not blot out from his memory the language used since the passing of the Reform Bill, that it was an act which had thrown down the great barrier against the predo- minance of mere physical force. If this were true, it ought to be repealed. Every commission which had been issued to procure that specific information which is so necessary to precede important legislative changes, had been stig- matized as unconstitutional and arbitrary, and compared with the acts of des.. potic Sovereigns, and the jurisdiction of the Star Chamber, and, as such, worthy only to be resisted. Every proposition flowing from the Reform Bill had met with the same reception. The adinissiou of Dissenters to the Univer- sities, which mane enlightened and good nice warmly supported, was moat powerfully resisted here, and defeated elsewhere. The same ultimate fate at- tended the bill for the settlement of the tithe question of Ireland upon a fair and equitable basis. Ile observed that this had been our experience: this was the key which was to unlock the prospects of futurity, and from whielr.alone we could form the remotest idea of the probable conduct of the existing Admi- nistration. These were the Ministers who were most likely to acknowledge that a man whose single vote might be the means of returning two Members to that /Luse, ought to have some concern in the municipal government of the city or town in which he lived ! These were the men who were to see, under the influence of a new light, the vast benefits likely to be conferred on religion by a commutation of Tithes—by a just law of Pluralities—by a deliberate and wise revision of the whole temporal condition and state of the Archbishops and Bishops of this country—by putting an end to translations, cornmendams, and the difference between a good and a bad bishopric—and by the application, so long as the present state of religious opinion may continse, sf .lie ecclesiastical sinecures of Ireland to some great national purpose ! lint if the present Mi- nisters were to do all that they promised, was it not wonderful that every thing these great Reformers proposed should spring, not from recognition of any one great principle of Reform, but merely from the possession of office? Ile made this assertion, because, during the two years that he haul sat in Parliament, he bad never bean] one word from them from which he could draw any such principle. What a glorious opportunity the Bishops would have of lam ming themselves ! Though they threw out the bill for the admission of Dissenters to the Universities, still they would say that they would agree to the largest ec- clesiastical reformation. What ease it would have given to the late Alinistry if they had had the assistance of those gentlemen ! What an imineie e as-istance to the House and the country, if they had bad the assistance of such valuable friends to do the same ! But suppose they granted these reforms, was it not reasonahle to imagine, if these new Reformers were allowed to get warm in their seats, that some atonement would have to be made-- that some sacrifice would be required to the offended spirit of the old system ? It was no party feeling that made him say this, but a real feeling as to the probable result. The House, he was aware, could distinguish between resemblances and snalogies : the one was the likeness of things, the other the likeness of ratios. AlthOugh he was indisposed to go the full length of comparing Sir Robert Peel to the Spirit of Darkness, he yet could not shut out fro:a his recollection the old couplet- " When the Devil was sick, the Devil a saint would be; But when the Devil got well, the devil a saint as he."

Mr. TREVOR, Colonel S1BTHORPE, Mr. C. PELHAM, arid Loud CASTLEREAGH, spoke in favour of the Address ; and Mr. CLAY, Sir S. IVIIALLEY, and Mr. BARRON, for the Amendinent.

" Mr. KEARSLEY said that Mr. Poulter had introduced to their notice a certain personage—an angel from below. All he had to say was, that he did not care, if Lord John Russell with all his rag, tug, and bob- tail, were to sup with that personage to-night.

Dr. BOWR1NG descanted on the effect which the accession of the Tories to power had upon our foreign relations ; and maintained that the country never would occupy so high a position as it would un- questionably hold, if its rulers were men whose names were associated with present Reform, and whose past history was intimately connected with the history of freedom throughout the world.

The cries of" Divide!" now became loud and general. Strangers were about to withdraw, and the Speaker had read the Address prepa- ratory to putting the question from the Chair, when

Sir ROBERT PEEL rose to give those explanations which bad been required of Ministers in the preceding discussion.

Ile stood there as the Minister of the Crown ; placed in that situation by no

act of his own—from no combination with those to whose principles lie had been unifurinly opposed, or seeking a temporary alliance for the purpose of embarras- sing any Government. He stood there in fulfilment of a public duty ; shrink- ing from no responsibility ; and, though not with any arrogant pretensions of defying or disregarding the opinions of the majority of that House, resolved to persevere to the last—(Loud and long-continued cheers front the Ministerial side)—so fir as was consistent with the honour of a public man, in maintaining the prerogative of the Crown, and in fulfilling those duties which he owed to lua King and to the country. In vindication of the course which he had pursued, it was necessary that he should refer to the circumstances which preceded the dissolution of the last Government. He had been asked whether he would im- pose on the Crown the responsibility of the dismissal of that Government?In answer to this question, he could only say, that he claimed all the responsibility whichproperly'belonged to him as a public man: he was responsible for the as- sumption of the duty which he had undertaken ; and, if they pleased, he was, by his acceptance of office, responsible for the removal of the late Government. Gad forbid that he should endeavour to transfer any responsibility which de-. volved upon him to that high authority whom the Constitution of this couutry recognized as incapable of error, by reaeon of his actingunder the advice of responsible advisers. But whilst he Inc!aimed all intention of shrinking front that responsibility, which one situated as he was must necessarily incur, he could at the satne time unhesitatingly assert, what was peifectly consistent with the truth, and what was due to respect for his own character—that under no ciicums stances would he have been a party to counselling or instigating the removal of any Government. Although, however, he had not taken any part in procuring the dismissal of the late Government—although he could not from circumstances hold communication with any of those with whom he had auw the houour to act, much less with the highest authority in the state, as to the propriety or policy of that dismissal—still, by the assumption of office, he did conceive that the responsibility of the change which had taken place was nansferred from the Crown to its advisers • and he as ready—he the majority agaiust hint what it might—to take all die w responsibility which properly belonged to hint, and to submit to any consequences to which the assumption of that responsibility ought expose him.

Sir Robert referred to the numerous occasions on which be had lent

efficient aid to the late Ministers, in proof of the absence of all desire to embarrass theta by a factious opposition. He then proceeded to detail at. considerable leogth the circumstances which occasioned and attended Lord Grey's resignation, and the reconstruction of the Mi- nistry by Lord Melbourne—laying particular stress on the importance of Lord Althorp to both Ministries ; and reminding the House, that Lord Aiding) was in fart the basis of the Melbourne Administration—the corner-stone upon which theGovernment was founded. Not only was the illelbourne Ministry weakened..by the loss of Lord Althurp, and the withdrawal of Lord Grey, Lord Stanley, Lord Ripon, Sir James Graham, and the Duke of Richmond ; but it was deprived of the sup- port of a large body of those who professed extreme opinions. He called attention to Mr. O'Connell's letters to Lord Duncannon ; and read sonic extracts from one dated the 1 lth October, in which Mr. O'Connell charged Lord Duncannon with having " bitterly and cruelly deceived Ireland," and declared that Ireland could expect nothing better from the Whigs titan " insolent contempt, and malignant but treacherous hostility." In the same letter, Mr. O'Connell declared that there must be a change of men before there was a change of mea- sures ; he charged Lord Melbourne with incapacity for the office of Fume Minister, and asserted that Lord Lansdowne was hostile to Ireland " with a hatred the more active and persevering because he is bound by every obligation to entertain diametrically opposite sent!- He thought that these extracts from a letter deliberately penned by Mr. O'Connell, and given by hint to the world, demonstrated how utterly impos- sible it must be for the Melbourne Administration, of which the leading members were so handled, to calculate upon any assistance front Ireland which Mr. O'Connell could withhold from that Administration. Let him then again ask, whether it was unnatural or unreasonable for his Majcqy, in considering the component parts of that Administration, and the prospect of its being able to maintain its ground, weakened as it had been by the loss of the most power- ful members of the Grey Government, and further embarrassed by the recur- rence of that condition of things which had caused Lord Grey's retirement, and which, had it continued, would haw prevented Lord Melbourne front forming any Administration at all—namely, the re,ignation of Lord Althorp and his removal from the House of Commons,—let him ask whether it was at all sur- prising that his Majesty should doubt the propriety of continuing the reins of government in the hands of tnen so circumstanced ?

Sir Robert defended the conduct of the Duke of Wellington during

the Interregnum ; and quoted the precedent of the Whig Duke of Shrewsbury, who, while Queen Anne was dying, WEIS invested with the

offices of Lord Treasurer, Lord Chamberlain and Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland. Ile then came to the dissolution of the late Parliament.

" I am asked whether I will take upon myself the responsibility of the dissolution? Without a moment's hesitation ! 1 do say, I take upon myself the responsibility. From the moment I determined to undertake this atduous duty, I did also determine that I would leave no constitutional effort untried which would enable me satisfactorily to discharge the trust I had undertaken. I did fear that if I met that Parliament which is said to have placed unbounded con- fidence in the late Government, and which is this night declared to have pus- SCSSCII that confidence, I own I was aftaid that I should not find the same disposition to place unbounded confidence in me. And for those who boasted that we could not call to a division more than 120 Members in the late Parlia- ment, and who are determined to withhold from us a fair trial—who say that they will extinguish its without a hearing—it must surely be rather incousistent in them to find fault with me for having refused to meet those who were deter- nahad to vote for our expulsion. But 1 believe the fact will be found, although specious reasons have always been assigned, that upon extensive changes of Government, dissolutions of Parliament have generally, for sonic reason or other, taken placc." He had been told that he ought to conform Isis principles of those

the Reform Act ; but he wished to know what those principles were. During the last two sessions, he found himself constantly supporting • the Reformed Goverrunent on a great variety of questions, when that Government was strenuously opposed by those who call themselves Reformers.

" After the passing of the Reform Bill, I saw a great change, a great revolu- tion, hid taken place, and that there necessaiily must be, on the part of public men who meant honestly by the country, an accommodation to the public voice. But I cannot say. that I intend in power, or as a condition of power, to adopt any course differing from that which I have pursued when in opposition since the passing of the Reform Bill ; for, on the questions on which I opposed the Government, I intend, and I avow it to you, to maintain my principles, that is to say, I avow that I will not go for a compulsory obligation upon the Univer- sities to admit Dissenters to their benefits; inasmuch as lam of opinion that the question ought to be determined by the Universities themselves. On the her question involved in the Church Temporalities Bill, I shall maintain the single principle upon which I acted in reference to it,—nainely, that I ta ill not con- sent to the diversion of ecclesiastical property to other than ecclesiastical pur- poses. If herein I differ from the majority of this House, I regret it; but, acting as a man upon public principles and deliberate opinion, I confess that 1 am not ready to sacrifice them in order to facilitate my course as a Minister. On the other questions in which I have been involved since the passing of the Reform Bill, I intend to act up to my principles. I am not opposed to salutary, progressive, well-considered reform ; and I am nut, therefore, apostatizing; I am not deviating from my principles tvhen I avow may intention, with respect to those or to other measures to which I have referred, to pursue my former course."

He would now give some explanations of the course be meant to pursue, and the measures he intended to bring forward. And first of all, he denied that the foreign policy of the country was to undergo

alteration ; while he maintained the wisdom ot ke _tiring up friendly relations even with despotic powers. The next point was economy; and he believed that he should be able to effect a reduction in the Estimates of 500,000/. With regard to Slavery, the Government felt especially anxious that every thing should be done to insure the success of the experiment of emancipating the Negroes; and with that view had requested Lord Sligo to retain the Governorship of „Jamaica, as his Lordship was cognizant of the views and intentions of the late

Ministry. tVi'l

I intend (continued Sir Robert's to propose a commutation of Tithe in England and Wales. I intend to propose a measure founded on the report of the Ecclesiastical Commission, of which Sir James Graham was the chief pro- moter, the effect of which will be to appoint supreme courts for the cognizance of all ecclesiastical causes. I shall propose a measure for the more effectual main- tenance of ecclesiastical discipline, not meaning thereby the discipline of the Church over the laity, but to enforce episcopal authority, and prevent those instances of clerical misconduct which occasionally arise. We propose also to relieve those u-ho dissent from the doctrine or discipline of the Church, from the necessity of celebrating the ceremony of marriage according to its rites. But then we are asked, ' Oh ! is that all you intend to do for the Dissenters? Do you merely propose to relieve them from the obligation of performing the ceremony of marriage according to the rites of Protestants?' 'Why, I know that great importance is attached to this point ; and one of our first oojects was to consider the possibility of attaining it. It is no easy matter ; but one of the first subjects to which I directed my attention was, how I could be best enablett to fulfil in a satisfactory manner the expectations entertained by the Dissenters oil this head. It may be said that no mention has been made of a general re- gistry. Now this is a subject of extreme difficulty ; and it is not usual for a Government to indicate measures until they are in so perfect a state that the Crown is enabled to hold them out for the consideration of Parliament. But I do ask the House to believe, that the consideration of these measures dining the interval that has elapsed since inv appointment to the Government, has really occupied almost more titne than it was possible to spare frotn the transaction of ordinary duties. The institution of a general registry., in order to be .complete.„ requires most mature consideration. 1 have felt, and I have no hesitation an acknowledging, that I am not prepared to bring forward a measure on this sub.- jeet ; but I have no objection whatever to consider it." The King's Speech was said to be unsatisfactory on the subject of Corporation Reform ; but lie had ascertained that the Report of the Coinmisioners would be ready about the end of this month ; and he maintained that it was unusual and improper, and inconsistent with his duty, to pledge himself to any particular measure pending the getting up of the Report. He was prepared to say as much as Lord Grey bad advised the King to say in his Speech from the Throne on opening

the session of namely, that a Commission had been issued for inquiring into Corporation abuses, and that in due season they would be corrected. Then as to Church rates and Church Reform-

" I am bound to say, that I cannot consent to the extinction of Church rates-: I think it is a positive obligation on the State to provide for the repair churches. It is a charge bearing undoubtedly on the land; and one a the measures which I certainly had in contemplation when I advised the Crown to insert this paragraph in the Speech was, that the House should consider whether there might not he a fairer appropriation and distribution of those local burdens that fall au heavily upon the land. I am told that a misconstruction has been put on that paragraph,—that it has been supposed there was some intentMa of introducing a general measure of taxation. If any such intention were indicated by it, I can only say that the Government had no such intention, and that thiz paragraph had special reference to the Report of last session, made on the sub- ject of County-rates, and the relief of the agricultural interest froin those local burdens which press peculiarly upon it.'Now with reference to the Church Commission, I have only to say, that that Commission has been appointed on the advice of his Majesty's Government, and is proceeding to consider the matters referred to it. The subject is a most extensive and complicated one: I cannot promise any immediate measure ; but I think the best earnest that I can have no interest in retarding it, is the fact that, on the vacancy of the first ap- pointment in the Church in the nature of those which are called siaecarca, although it took place before the Commission was appointed, I advised the Crown to make no appointment, but to permit the circumstances to be con- sidered by the Committee then sitting. The vacancy was in the Prebendary of IS ; the stall was of the value of about 1,2001. I mean to take the same course with respect to every other preferment in the Church partaking of the nature ief a sinecure, with a view to fulfil the object of the Commission before the appointment takes place."

These were the general measures indicated in the Speech from the Throne.

"In rivalry and opposition to this Speech, is presented the Amendment and,

as has been justly stated, if the Speech be vague, the Amendment is at least equally open to that censure. It indicates no measure it states no principle; it only hopes that the same principles which governed the abolition of Slavery and the amendment in the Representation of the People, may correct the abuses in the Church, and place Muuicipal Corporations under vigilant popular control. (Grea( cheering.) Well, but what principle is there involved ? what measure? It is no answer to the question whether ten-pound householders shall elect to all corporation offices. What object is gained when you have the assurance that the report of the Committee will shortly be presented to you, and that you will have an opportunity of considering it ? Is it not evident that this Amendment has been proposed with some other view than that which has been put forward? Is it not evident that you are afraid to recognize in the Amendment those measures no which you know that a diffelence of opinion existed among your- selves ? ( Loud cheers front the Ministerial supporters.) Why have you not inserted the Ballot? Why have you not inserted the Repeal of the Septennial Act ? Why have you not inserted the Repeal of the Union ? Because yon know that of all those measures which have occupied public attention since the Reform Bill passed, there is not one upon which you can express one and the same sentiment. And so you go back to some two or three years ago, when yon were united upon Slavery and on the Reform Bill; and, merging all your in- termediate collisions and differences, you revert to the time when you were united in sympathy and affection— "Quo desiderio veteres renovamus amores? Alive ohm omissas &mos amiefflas?"

Oh! the time of your union and sympathy is gone by. You shrink from the indication of your opinions on those questions which you think grow out of the Reform Bill. You refer to the abolition of Slavery amid the Reform in the Re- presentation of the People, because they _offer no practical point of critical col- lision, and because they form a trap. No; the Amendment is proposed for the purpose of involving in some little difficulty the noble lord who sits on the second bench (Lord Stanley), and his friends; who, because they concurred in the Reform Bill and the abolition of Slavery, it is supposed will be easily induced to fall into the snare, in compliment to measures with which they coincided, and of which they were the chief originators. Why, who doubts that they approved of the principles of those measures? who doubts that they are favourable to Corporation Reform ? But have you so much distrust in their principles that from Me Irish Mimbers.) Yes; but I say this is a great question, and is not the thing, but the name of Reform?

and know what the principles really are on which we are to proceed." bitted to him.

render all their reform ineffective, and would seal the fate of the British Coo- Inquiry in Ireland ? them; and under which he believed no Government could long exist. Sir ROBERT PELT. replied— For these reasons he was prepared to vote against the Address.

He had already stated that soon after lie hail entered the Cabinet, be had ap- plied himself to the consideration of measures for the relief of the Dissenters; and that he hoped to be able to submit a proposition which, although it would not go to the admission of Dissenters into the Universities, would relieve them from the disabilities under which they laboured with reference to the professions of law and medicine. l'ropositions also with respect to the marriages and the registers of the births of Dissenters were under consideration. It had been alleged that the former ought to be postponed entil the latter was ready to be brought forward ; but he did not see that the adoption of the one proposition would be prejudicial to the subsequent adoption of the other. - With respect to what Lord John Russell called a commutation, but which was, in fact, an ad- tstment of tithes, that was a measure which would be soon brought before • arliament. As to the reports of the Commissioners of Church Inquiry in Ireland, not above half those inquiries were complete. He would not pledge himself with respect to any step on the subject, but he would pledge himself that the inquiries should be completed, and the Reports laid on the table of the -House.

The debate was then adjourned ; and the House rose at half- past one.

The debate, on Wednesday, was opened by Mr. ROBINSON. He professed his dissatisfaction with the Speech, on account of its vague- ness and generality ; though some of its deficiencies were supplied by the speech of Sir Robert Peel. Still he would vote for the Address ; but in so doing, he did not mean directly or indirectly to express confi- &nee in Ministers. Ile objected to the attempt to destroy the Mi- nistry by a factious vote; and though a majority of his constituents were Reformers and Anti-Ministerialists, yet be felt bound also to pay deference to the wishes of the minority. He did not think, how- ever, that the majority of his constituents were disposed to subvert the present Ministry to bring about a Ministry of Whigs. Ile deprecated the course pursued by a portion of the press; and declared that his conduct in Parliament should never be influenced by the pressure from without.

Mr. WARD denied that the opposition to Ministers was factious ; and he differed entirely from Mr. Robinson, as to the grounds which ought to actuate Reformers in voting on the question before the _House. The speech of Sir Robert Peel, though he had listened to -it with delight, failed to carry conviction with it.

He certainly had never seen Conservatism dressed out in such fascinating colours, nor the distinction between the two sides of the House so skilfully de- scribed, as in that speech. It should be his endeavour to bring back the question before the Home to the real grounds upon which it ought to stand ; to show the points upon which the parties in:the House essentially differed ; and to prove that the Reformers were not actuated by a factious opposition to Sir Robert Peel yowthink it neceiimari to tie them and fetter their discussion, that you will not personally, but from respect to the principles which he kad at all times and trust them to act upon 1 i inciplee of which they approved, without being tied under all circumstances professed. The ditterenee of opinion between the two down ? This I know, that they 1611 have the firmness and manliness to dis • parties might be divided into three points; all, however, arising from the same cover what the real quelition at issue ir, and to know that it is quite unnecessary souree---namely, the doobt which pievailed as to the power of the Legislature to on such an occa,iou as this to pass an eulogium upon the Reform Bill or the deal with corporate property at any time. The first point involved the question' Act for the Abolition of Slavery ? If you ask me whether I recognize these of the admission of Dissenters into the Universities. Sir Robert Peel had dis- as established measures, which it is my duty to support, I say that I do, and tinctly stated that the Legislatute had no right to exercise a compulsory power , that I will support them as earnestly as you do. But if you ask me whether I over the Universities to enforce this admission. Ile admitted that this sestric- mean to act on the principles involved in them, I refer you to the course you tion was a practical grievance affecting the Dissentiug portion of the community, have pursued within the last two yearson all those questions, and show you that which to a certain extent he was prepared to remedy ; but he did not recognize you do not know yourselves what you mean by those principles. Instead of the great principle from which redrese should flow. Neither did he recognize deluding the public mind by false expectations of the application of those pun- the principle that admission to the national seminaries for national education ciples, let every man make a secret vow that be will enfince them when he should be without reference to sect or to religious opinions ; and his only ineassre Comes to consider the measures to which they relate. Let him beware how he of relief seemed to be an arrangement, to be effected elsewhere, with respect to deceives the public by holding out the prospect of common accord and unity of admission to the learned professions. The second point on which a difference of sentiment on measures, the details of which are referred to the consideration opinion arose, was upon the subject of the reform of Municipal Corporations. of Commissions appointed by Government, and which you are about to have He must admit that nothing could be fairer than the profeesions of Sir Robe' t under your consideration probably within the period of another fortnight. Now, on this subject : he stated that he ivished to wait for the production of the report with regard to that passage in the Amendment which relates to the grievances of the Commissioners of Inquiry before be pledged himself to any specific mea- of the Dissenters, I cannot say whether or not I concur in it : it is drawn up in sure. In this Mr. Ward also admitted that Sir Robert had the semblance of such a inanuer—it is intended to be so—that it is quite impossible for me to reason on his side ; but was it not notorious that the leading evils of the existing decide. I do not know the meaning of ' well founded grievances of the municipal system in this country were the vices of total irresponsibility and the Protestant Dissenters.' Are the Rounin Catholics to be excluded? Then my want of popular election, both of which:might have been remedied ;led removed measure is more extensive—my measure of relief in the case of marriages goes without waiting for the report ? Mr. Ward held the Corporations, as they now beyond your resolution, for it includes Roman Catholics. Then do net hamper exist, to be the strongholds of the Conservative interest ; and lie at- me ; do not tie up my hands by this resolution. With respect to the Church, tributed the non-intreduction into those close Corporations by the present a direct notice of motion has been given on that subject. But this Address is Government of popular rights to what the 3Iember for Knareshorough so vague that it announces no principle: it professes a readiness to correct those had last night designated as " an enlightened regard to their own interest." abuses in the Church which impairs its efficiency, leaving every man to judge He would ask whether there was a single Member now ranged behind the for himself what those abuses are. With reenril to the Church of Ireland, you Treasury Bench, and represeutiug a populous town, that was not the represen- take an indirect and unfair advantage: you So not say that the settlement of the tative of a close corporation. • Tri observed the noble Member for Noiwich (Lord Tithe question is essential to the peace of Ireland, but that something respect- Stormont) opposite ; and lie would ask the house whether there was a single log the Church disturbs the peace of society—not the temporal and secular town in the kingdom, except a closecorporation, in which the noble Lord would question connected with the tithes; but you impress the opinion, that after the have dared to make his declaration against Reform? Was there a single city, reductions already made in the Ecclesiastical Establishment of Ireland, that town or borough, in the kingdom, except where a close corporation prevailed, which still exists distill bs the peace of society in that country. (Load cheers in which the noble lord would have ventured to state that be not merely hated to be disposed of by mere equivocal and general hints. Let us discuss it fairly, Lord Sroamoter was understood to deny the accuracy of the words attri- Sir Robert concluded his speech by expressing his hope that an op- Mr. WARD—Then, never was an unfortunate Member of Parliament more portunity would be allowed the Government of carrying their plans of grossly belied ; as the statement of the noble Lord's speech had appeared in detail Reform into effect. in all the newspapers ; and such being the case, he was surprised that the noble He offered them a reform in the various branches of our Ecclesiastical Lord had not felt it his duty to give a contradiction to a report at once so in. Establishment. He offered them his endeavour to remove the disablities under jurious to himself and to the Government to which he belonged. Lord Stor- which Dissenterslaboured in entering upon professions. He offered them the pros- moat had certainly expressed himself as feeling something very offensive in the pect of permanent public peace. Be offered them the hope of carrying many mea- very name of Reform ; and he repeated, that it was only in a close cor- sures of public utility into effect. He offered them that peculiar advantage in his porate town that such a declaration would be ventured to be made. Lord -position which he trusted would enable him to restore harmony between the two Stormont, however, in this respect exceeded the line which Sir Robert Peel Houses of Parliament. An endeavour might be made to form a coalition of had now taken ; for the latter had declared himself to be a good and consistent -men of extreme opinions ; but unless he was greatly deceived, the popular Reformer—almost as good as any man sitting on the Opposition side of the • feeling in behalf of such a coalition would soon abate; and there would be no House, and as such had called for the support of Reformers. Believing, as he alternative but either for such an Administration to retire, and leave the Go- did, the close corporations to be the strongholds of the Conservative party, he vernment in the hands of those who, by sober measures, would carry with them did not think Sir Robert Peel would be able to lead the main body of that the concurrence of the respectable portion of the community and of the !louse of party to storm their own fortresses, or to induce them to lay open the strong- Lords, or to have resource to a system of compulsion and violence which would holds in which, on a future occasion, they contemplated to take refuge. atitution.

The third point of difference related to the Irish Church.

It was true that Sir Robert Peel admitted the principle of redistribution it Lord JOHN Russw. rose amidst loud calls for adjournment ; and Church property. This might satisfy the honest Church Reformer in Eng- • fsaid, that before the House was adjourned, he wished to ask Sir land, especially if accompanied with an equalization of the bishoprics to a Robert Peel two or three questions. certain extent, the enforcing residence, and other similar measures : but if One was, what course he intended to pursue with respect to the disabilities the Irish Channel was crossed, would it be found that such a reform would of the Dissenters ? Ile wished also to know whether it was intended to bring satisfy the People of Ireland ? It was impossible by any mode of redistribution on the question of the commutation of Tithes at an early day ? Lastly, was it nicely to poise the burden on the Catholic population in that country, or to hisdetermination to lay on the table the Reports of the Commissioners of Church reconcile them to a system which was every day becoming more hateful to But Sir Robert Peel had asked why were not those reasons expressed in the Amendment to the Address? (" Hear, hear !" from the Ministerial benches.) Ile had only to reply that be sinceiely wished they were. (Par- tial cheers from the Opposition.) An honest and a full expression of opinion, he thought, was always the best policy for a public man.

Lord SToamoNT was glad that Mr. Ward had given him the oppor- tunity of denying the sentiment imputed to him, of hatred to the name of Reform.

Ile admitted that, as it bad appeared in the papers, be had used on the occasion in question the words " he hated the word Reform; " but the newspapers had not had the justice, the fairness, the candour, or the charity to subjoin the remainder of the sentence. He had certainly said that he hated the word Reform as used by those who sought the destruction of time national institu- tions; but that if the word Reform meant amendment of the institutions, then he was himself a Reformer ! if, on the contrary, it meant destruction of the institutions, that then he was an Anti. Reformer. Captain BERKELEY declared that the simple question before the House was, "confidence or no confidence" in Ministers; and that he should vote for the Amendment.

Lord STANLEY said,Aliat be would abstain altogether from voting, if he thought that by supporting the Address, he was pledging himself to a feeling of confidence in the Ministry; which confidence, looking to its composition, he did not possess. He, however, did not think that his vote would bear that construction; and he would state his reasons for opposing the Amendment ; and he wished it to be under- stood, that he spoke the sentiments of a body of gentlemen, not insig- nificant in point of numbers or station in the House, who were bent upon the sure but steady attainment of certain measures of Reform, but would not attempt to secure them by a party course of proceeding. Lord Stanley then proceeded as follows. " Allow me, in the first place, before I proceed further, to express my sense of the very able, temperate, clear, and constitutional manner in which the Amendment was moved by my noble friend. I do not differ from my noble friend in the doctrines lie has laid down, that for the dismissal of the late Ministry the present Government are, constitutionally speaking, sit icily and truly responsible; and that it is within the competency and the undoubted pn- vilege of this House to express an opinion, to pass judgment, and even to offer advice to the Sovereign, upon a circumstance connected with the manner us which be has thought tit to exercise his undoubted prerogative—I mean the ex- traordinary concentration of power for a considerable tints in the hands of oris individual. I agree with my noble friend, that the fact of the illustrious indi- vidual in question having so unexceptionably used his powers, does not of itself justify the act ; but that the high talents and character of the noble Duke would tender the precedent more dangerov.s to the liberties of the people of tlas.coott■ try, if allowed to pass unnoticed by this House. But I am of opiuion, that we should not make further observations upon the subject, under the ciicumstances, dal in the name of the House of Commons to protest against the act in ques- tion being drawn into a precedent. Further than that, I think the mutter ought not to be adverted to. In vindication of this singular concentration of power, the right honourable Baronet last night cited a case which occurred at the latter end of the reign of Queen Anne, when Lord Shrewsbury held in his own per- son the offices of Lord Treasurer, Lord Chamberlain, and Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland. The cases, however, were very dissimilar in their circumstances. What was the state of the country at that time? The Queen was upon her deathbed ; there was a disputed succession ; a foreign prince was threatening to foment a civil war in the country; and the Queen's confidential Ministers bad been for some time carrying on a secret correspondence and intrigue with that foreign prince, whose object was to desolate this cour try. Those Ministers were afterwards impeached ; and Lord Shrewsbury, under those pressing emer- gencies, held the three great offices in question, as the best means of consoli- dating the power of the Executive in a period of great peril. I will for the present pass by other topics which have arisen in the course of the debate, and come at once to the question of the Address, and the Amendment which has been moved upon it. There is, I confess, one point in the proposed amendment for which, if it stood alone, I should feel bound to support that Amendment. I should do so, because, having listened with anxious expectation to the Speech from the Throne, and to the speech of the right honourable Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) last night, as to the terms in which the subject of Muilicipal Corporations was adverted to, I am bound to say that neither the one nor the other gave promise of any thing satisfactory to my mind. I agree that the right honourable Baronet might think himself precluded by prudential considerations from stating the nature of the intended measures. But I should deceive him if I did not tell him that with respect to the principle and spirit of Corporation Reform, the Country has made up its mind ; and that the principle and spirit of such re- form are the same as were pursued by the people of this country with so much ardour in the matter of the Reform of Parliament. I have no hesitation in saying, that my own mind, and that of others in this House, ale made up to effect in this branch of our institutions a reform having for its basis the principle that corporation privileges are a trust for the benefit of the People at large, and that they should be placed upon a system of real and true representation, subject to the control of their constituencies. I will not go the length of the noble Lord who moved the Amendment, in saying that we ought to adopt the plan of the Scotch Corporation Reform ; but I do say that the People of England have made up their minds upon the question; and the omissioo to take more parti- cular notice of the subject in the Speech from the Throne, and in the speech of the right honourable Baronet, has led me to look upon the Government with greater jealousy than I otherwise should have done. I have said that if the Amendment had been confined to this subject alone, myself and my ftiends would have had much difficulty in offering any opposition to it. We, however, cannot by voting for the Address bind ourselves to condemn measures of which we know nothing. And on the other hand, we do not consider that by voting against the Amendment we thereby give a negative to each of its propositions. I find in the Speech front the Throne many substantial measures of Reform promised, although by a singular fatality the word itself never once occurs. If this omission was made as a sacrifice to those gentlemen who cannot bear even the sound of the name, I shall not be disposed to quarrel with it. I shall he satisfied to see the promises of Reform contained in that Speech fully carried out in our institutions."

He objected to the censure of the dissolution of Parliament con- tained in the Amendment ; as he would not prejudge the question of its expediency. He :complained that the subject of Irish Church Reform was so vaguely alluded to in the Amendment; and maintained that the Tithe question, which Ministers were pledged to adjust, was the only question which disturbed the peace of Ireland, though the existence of the Protestant Church might occasion irritation and dis- content.

Dr. LUSHINGTON replied to the Ministerial arguments in defence of the dissolution of the late Cabinet ; and maintained that Lord Al- thorp's removal to the Upper House was a very insufficient cause, though the principal one assigned. He remarked strongly upon the unconstitutional conduct of the Duke of Wellington in assiuning the control of so many different offices. He justified his distrust of the present Ministry by a reference to their conduct when formerly in power.

When he spoke of the present Administration, he could not separate it in his mind from the Administration of lre30. He could not believe that the bringing in of Earl de Grey in the room of Earl Melville, and the putting out of Mr. Croker and the putting in of Mr. Dawson, were sufficient to prevent the identity of the present with the then existing Government. Now that Government, in 1820, had, by a majority of the House of Commons, been strenuously opposed ; he, therefore, could not trust it now. How could he trust the present Ministers to make those great reforms now, who for years had the power to make them when they were equally necessary, to destroy those abuses when they were equally aggravated, and yet took no step whatever to remedy any of those abuses either in Church or State? What act had they done then -or since which should entitle them to the character of a reform Administration? But Sir Robert Peel had endeavoured to induce the House to cast a more favourable eye upon his Administration, by saying to the House " Remember, we are sup- ported by the House of Lords ; they will receive at our hands mea,ures of reform which at your instaAce would have been met with a haughty refusal." What is this? What is the meaning of that declaration? Tell it to the country ; tell it to your constituents. Tell them that henceforth it is not the People of England, it is not the House of Commons, who are to stamp their approbation a the men from whom the selection of Ministers shall be made by the Crown in the exercise of its prerogative ; tell them that that Administration which stands not upon the approbation of the House of Commons, but looks to the House of Lords for support, shall have power to rule the country; that that party—despite the sense of the People—despite the majority of the House of Commons, shall—(Here the cheers from the Reformers and the cries of "24', no!" from the Ministers completely drowned the concluding words of the sentence.) A more frightful course no Government could have followed. Sir Robert Peel had endeavoured to show that the late Government was not popular. Whatever that Government Might have been, he was well assured that the present Administration had not the confidence of the great portion either of the Electors or of the People of England. They had not the con- fidence of gentlemen on the Opposition side of the House; they had not the confidence of Lord Stanley, or those who acted with him. Whose confidence had they, then ? They had the confidence of the High Tories, and of the High Tories only.

Mr. PRAED defended the dissolution of Parliament; and maintained that the fact of about two hundred Members having been returned, who had no seats in the last Parliament, was a sufficient justification of it. The Address was equally explicit as the Amendment on all points, except the dissolution of Parliament, which was condemned in the Amendment, but which he approved of. Mr. SIIEIL and Mr. H. GRATTAN spoke in favour of the Amend. ment, and Mr. CHARLTON and Colonel Pi:net:vat. against it.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL then rose to state his reasons for supporting the Amendment.

Being no longer a Minister of the Crown, but tieing still, as he always had been attached to the institutions of his country, and desirous of seeing them es- cured by the timely reform of any abases that had crept into them, he aonsidered it his duty as a Member of Parliament to provide, as far he could by his vote, that the reforms to be proposed and approved by this House of Commons should not be less searching, and should not be less efficient, than those on which the Administration of Lord Melbourne, had it continued in existence, would have asked for the approbation of Pailiament. It was for this reason that he was glad his noble friend had proposed an Amendment embracing the principle i. voiced in the subject of Municipal Corporations, embracing a declaration en the well-founded grievances of the Protestant Dissenters, and touching on that point which seemed to be carefully avoided in this long and elaborate speech— he meant the abuses of the Church of Ireland. He would say, let the house of Commons, if they meant to maintain Reform in the same place in which it was left at the end of the last Parliament,—if they meant to say that the exercise of the Royal prerogative which removed one Administration and appointed another —that exercise of the Royal prerogative which cashiered one Parliament and called another—need not deprive them of the reforms which his Majesty's late Ministers and the House of Commons would have effected,—if they meant to say this, let them speak it in clear language, and let that language he expressed, as it most probably would be, in the Address. Some honourable gentlemen were alarmed when this course was proposed to them. The Member for Knares- borough, for instance, was afraid of the consequences of this proceeding, which he thought somewhat too bold. To be sure, if they asked for the removal of all the grievances of the Dissenters, Mr. Goulhurn, who held the seals of the Home Department, and who had expressed his horror of that contamination which might be caught from the Dissenting body, might resign his seals. (Laughter.) Then there was sonic danger that Cot poration Reform would be adopted according to the recommendation of that Commission which the Lord Chancellor of the present Ministry had very lately declared to be illegal, and with respect to which the noble and learned Lord would pledge the Government to nothiog more than to lay the report and the evidence before Parliament. (Laughter and cheers.) Thus it appeared, that if they spoke their own lan- guage, and the language of their constituents—if they spoke that language which the Member for Lancashire, who would vote against the Amendment, did not deny would be more reasonable than that of the speech from the throne—if they thus acted, the Lord Chancellor of the present Government might resign his seals. If they mentioned the subject of the Church of Ireland, the whole Administration might quit office. (Shouts of laughter.) Now, be must confess, that lie for one did not think that, for the sake of retaining such benefits as he had contemplated the possible loss of, they ought at once to re- nounce those plans of reform on which the wishes of the people were set. ()kfuch cheering.) He had had some experience of the consciences of that party which had now undertaken the duties of the State. Ile had seen theme before now yield that to demand which they would not concede to right. (Great cheering.)

On the questions of the repeal of the Test Act, Catholic Emanci- pation, and Parliamentary Reform, the Tories had given way, wbent sufficiently urged ; and lie did not doubt but that, after manifold vexation and suffering, they would give way at last on the Irish Church question also. Lord John Russell reminded the house, that, notwithstanding Sir Robert Peel's boasted support of the late Ministry on several questions, he had frequently opposed them when they most needed as- sistance—on the divisions on the Timber-duties, the Russian Dutch Loan, and the Irish Church Temporalities Bill. He denied the truth of the rumour that Earl Grey's resignation was occasioned by the in- trigues of one of his colleagues. The Melbourne Alinistry determined to follow up the policy of Earl Grey.

With respect to the Irish Church, it was a question which, as be had already said, it was considered necessary to brim" under the consideration of Parliament ; but the member of the Administration who, during the recess, was intrusted to prepare the papers on the subject, was Lord Duncannon ; and however often he had seen him, Lord John had not seen those papers till they were out of his hands and were printed. With respect to the suggestions of those papers, it was not now necessary to advert to them more specifically ; but he would say that their contents were entirely different from any timing stated in the public rumours to which he hall adverted. With respect to another statement, that there was a difference between the Marquis of Lansdowne and Mr. Spring Rice and himself, lie must say, that both previously to and since the breaking up the Administra- tion, it did so happen, that there were none of the members of the Cabinet whom he met so often, and with whom he held such frequent communications. He would also say, that if there were any of the members of the Cabinet with whose views, feelings, and plinciples he better agreed than with others, Lord Duncannon, the Marquis of Lansdowne, and Mr. Spring Rice were those indi- viduals. He would go further still, and, without stating the details of any plan, or entering into any specific proposition, he might safely declare that the prin- ciple they were all agreed on was this-that the funds of the Protestant Church in Ireland ought in the first place to be applied to give religious instruction to the Protestant population ; and when that object had been carefully and fully provided for, the Legislature had the right to apply any surplus that might ac- crue to the general education of the People, including Chutchmen, Roman Catholics, and Dissenters. (Much cheering.) It was a charge against the late Ministry that they had followed the suggestions of Mr. O'Connell— Now, however, when the case was to be misstated to Parliament, the only reason given by Sir Robert Peel for a want of confidence in the late Adminn- tration, was a passage of a letter, in which the Member for Dublin, instead of flattering, showed his distrust of every member of that Administration. These frivolous grounds being disproved, and the rumours being false—the preroga- tive having been exercised to dismiss the Ministry and dissolve the Pasha.. ment—he would ask when there was even an exercise of the prerogative fir which so little reason could be given as in this case? There could be no want of confidence in Ministers on the part of the House of Commons. Sir Robert Peel had admitted this last night, in his confession that he could not have depended on 130 votes in that House. Why, then, was the Administration dismissed? Had any dreadful war broken out? Was commerce declining ? Was the internal state of the country disturbed? What extraordinary circumstance* made it necessary to resort to that measure? Why, the King's Speech came and contradicted all the suppositions he had suggested. One half of it was filled with testimonies: to the excellence of the measures of the late Administra- tion—with testimonies to the prosperity of our manufactures and to the good order of society, which the late Government left behind it. lathe other half of the Speech, measures were recommended, the greater portion of which con- sisted of those that the late Government had been prepaiing.

He did not think it possible that Sir Robert Peel could stand on tLe measures he intended to propose.

It was his principle that the surplus revenue of the Established Church in Ire.-

ii

land ehuuld not be applied to any other purposes than those of the Church. Could that principle he maintained ? With reepect to the Church of England, he always felt lw could pay that that did really afford substantial benefit ; hut

what was the advantage of the Church of Ireland in those districts in which scarcely a Proteatant W3S to be found ? The only benefit it could be said to afford to the Catholic population, wae that of having resident amongst them a country gentleman in a black coat. (Laughter.)

"With respect to another subject which is mentioned in the Amendment— namely,. that of Corporations—I think it is now absolutely necessary that we ehould declare some principle, from the establishment of which the Country may skanv that we are going to adopt and abide by the principles of popular control and vigilant superintendence over those funds which have been notoriously managed and abused. If I be asked to place confidence in the right honourable Baronet on this subject, I declare at once and without reserve, that it ie wholly

Out Of my power to do so. ( Cheers.) I cannot support the right honourable Baronet's friends; I cannot support the party with which he has hmgassoeiated ; and I eannotsforget that the fortresses of their power—the strongholde to which they have clung most fondly during many years past—have been those very abuses of the Corporations. The right honourable Baronet has talked of an oppo-

sition upon this ground—an opposition which, as I say, does not go beyond the opinions we entertained as Ministers, and which only binds us to measure,. going as far as our measuree as Ministers would have done—be talks of this as an at- tempt to embarrass Ministers for temporal purposes. Sir, if that right honour- able gentleman will remember occurrences that are past, fie will remember that

he has been in office, and that I have been in opposition to the Government for many years; but I think he will not recollect that during the whole of that time I have been at an disposed to change any opinion I have once maintained, or to qualify any opinion for the sake of offining an opposition to the Government. He says, and others say, that those who were most loud against the late Gov( rut. merit, are now, like ourselves, attacking the present. Does this observation apply only to us? Are there not among the gentlemen whom I now see ar- ranged upon the opposite benches, some who opposed the right honourable Baronet with a far other spirit, and with a very different kind of bitterness from that with which the Whigs ever attacked him? (Much cheering.) I do remem- ber when we were attending, night after night, in large numbers to offer him our humble support, lyben he was acting in accordance with our principlee, that at the end of the night the right honourable Baronet got up and called the House to witness that three-fourths of the debate had been occupied in personal invective. Personal invective ! From whom ? Why, from the very men who are now his friends and supporters. There was a comparison made at that time affecting the right honourable Bat onet person illy he was described as a Protestant gentleman, conceding measures which he allowed to be dangerous to his religious institutions' and altering his course when he declared that he haul not altered his opinion. Did that elaborate and severe comparison come from a a Whig or a Liberal Member of Parliament ? Did it not come from one of the highest of his Tory friends? There was another attack made upon the right honourable Baronet : he was accused, not of yielding the Catholic question, but of not having yielded it to Mr. Canning, the conscientious and eminent suppol zer of the Catle(lic claims. It was urged that the state of Ireland had not changed —that the state attic Catholics had not changed—that the state of the House of Commons had not changed ; and that the light honourable Baronet, having no ground for his change of conduct, was offering an example which would destroy all confidence in public men. The orator who pronounced this wrong and bitter philippic closed it by lifting up his hands and .exclaiming—' Nusquam teneamus.' From whom did this invective come? It came front the Paymaster of the Forces. (Load cheers and kughler.) Why, to he sure, it might have been the ex Payniaeter of the Forces, the Member for Devonshire : was it ? Ni,, it was net—it was( the present Paymaster of the Forces, the Member for Kent (Sir Edward K natchbull.) (Prolonged cheering.) And yet after all this we are to be told, that there is something strange and wonderful— somethieg almost u nprecedented—in our (with no change of opinion) coming to the saute vote, and rowing in the same boat, with those who bitterly and severely found fault with the late Govermnent. I know very well that there are many Members who differed from the late Government. Whether it was because the late Ministry did not go far enough, or that those gentlemen were too impatient, is a question I will not raise again now. My opinion of course is the latter. I think they were going too quickly ; they think, no doubt, that we were moving, too slowly. I really see no reason, however, why we should discuss that question in the present House of Commons, any more than I see any reason why the right honourable Baronet, the First Lord of the Treasury, and the Paymaster of the Forces, should discuss the question whether all confidence in public men has been destroyed by his and his colleagues' conduct on the Cathodic question." (Continued cheering.) lie noticed the intimation of Sir Robert Peel that he should be able to secure the acquiescence of the House of Peers to measures which the Peers would reject if brought forward by his opponents.

" There really does arise upon this point a very nice and delicate question. That question is this—are those measures to be similar to, or are they to be different from, those, the announcement of which gave satisfaction to the country generally ? If you say they are similar measures, you tell the country, in plain terms, that the House of Lords will not agree to Reform measures unless they see in office a Ministry of their own selection. If the measures are to he different they are to be less effective measures of Reform—then are we to be told that we must yield to the House of Lords with respect to the measures themselves, and that that which we think necessary cannot be proposed to Parliament ? Sir, I have always been opposed to attacks upon the authority of the House of Lords. 3Iy own opinion was, that if measures which had the cordial concurrence of this country were sent up to the House of Lords, though possibly they might have been rejected once, though possibly they might have been rejected twice, still the House of Lords would eventually yield to what was the well-expressed and deliberate sense of the People of this country. In thinking and saying this, I pay a due tlibute to the wisdom, I pay a due tribute to the patriotism, of the House of Lords. I wish theni to have their due part and share in the Con- stitution; but I cannot allow that that power over the House of Commons, which belonged to them indirectly before the Reform Bill was passed, shall now be restored to them by such means." ( Cheering for several minutes.) Mr. Goussuals controverted Lord John Russell's assertion as to the unanimity of the late Cabinet respecting the application of Church property, and quoted passages from the speeches of Lord Brougham and the Marquis of Lansdowne to prove that they opposed the appro- priation of the surplus of Irish Church property to any but ecclesi- astical purposes. He contended generally that the Address did not pledge those who voted for it to oppose any measures of reform that might be brought forward ; and avowed his inability to discern any one rational ground why Ministers should have met the late Parliament.

Mr. HARVEY supported, and Mr. ALEXANDER BARING opposed the Amendment ; the latter amidst constant interruption, and cries of "Adjourn." And, on the motion of Mr. HUME, the debate was ad- journed, at one o'clock.

Mr. MULLINS opened the debate on Thursday, and supported the Amendment. Mr. FINCH defended the dissolution of the late Ministry, and de- clared his expectation that the vote of that night would evince the con- fidence of the House of Commons in the Ministers of the Crown.

Sir R. CREWE expressed his intention to vote for the Address ; but was much dissatisfied at its slight notice of the agricultural interest.

Mr. Guises, in opposing the Address, particularly alluded to that part of the Speech which referred to the religious education of the people of Scotland ; and refused to vote any money for building new churches, especially as it wits notorious that while the Dissenting chapels were filled, there were thousands of unoccupied seats in the churches of the Establishment.

Major CUNIMING BRUCE contended, that although the majority of Scotch Members were Anti-Ministerial, the greater proportion of the men of property in Scotland were supporters of Ministers. He also expressed himself strongly in favour of twin:Ming and preserving the union of Church and State, and extending the benefits of religious educe tion.

Mr. Fox Mauls. reminded Major Bruce, that lie himself was re- turned by a majority of four only, and that every other Borough AIeniber in Scotland was an opponent of Ministers. It was therefore too notch to assume that the majority of men of property in Scotland 51 ere friends of the existing Ministry. Mr. Maule also declared that before he could vote any of the public money for building more churches, lie must see the present ones filled.

Mr. MACLEAN spoke in favour of the Address ; arid Lord DUDLEY STUART supported the Amendment. The latter declared his disap- probation of many parts of the Speech, and his want of confidence in Ministers.

Mr. Sergeant GOULEURN observed, that under the milk-and-water of the Amendment there lurked gall, bitterness, and party faction. He contrasted the principal Ministers with those who he supposed would be selected by the Opposition to succeed them ; and argued that the change would excite the ridicule and indignation of the whole country. The real, intelligible question at issue, was whether the House pre- ferred the present Cabinet or the Cabinet of Lord Melbourne.

Mr. GISBORNE made some satirical remarks on the claims of Sir Robert Peel to the character of Reformer on the ground of his having supported some of the measures of Earl Grey's Government. He went over the principal points in the Address, and maintained that in every one it was deficient and unsatisfactory. On the subject of Corpo- ration Reform especially, he ridiculed the notion of the present Ministers doing any thing satisfactory ; and reminded Sir Robert Peel, that when, a few years ago, a bill was introduced to restrain Corporations from applying theiefunds to election purposes, Sir Robert and Lord Lyndhurst opposed the bill, and contended for the right of Corporations to consolidate their influence by the expenditure of the funds intrusted to their charge. Mr. Gisborne was sure that the House would riot be contented with the mere promise to lay the Re- port of the Corporation Commissioners on the table.

" No ; in this Rouse we will go further ; we will test the honesty of the Re- formers. We will see who and which of the Reformers they are, who, having ever professed these principles, and having ever stood by popular constituencies, will assist the right honourable Baronet in giving the go-by to this plain and in- telligible principle—the principle (I use the words of the Amendment) that our ' Municipal Corporations shall be placed under vigilant popular control.' If the right honourable Baronet had ever stepped forward to recognize the present state of those corporations as a grievance and an abuse, we might have had some hopes of hum; but lie is a ticklish person to deal with on such grounds. There is but one way of proving any considerable abuse to him, and that is by a Par- liamentary majority. Therefore I say to you, keep your majority together ; for the moment you pat t with your majority, you part with the only argument by which, on the subject of a grievance or an abuse, you can hope to convince the Minister. If you want to prove the existence of a grievance and abuse to him, you must not prove it by argument—no; you must not prove it by evidence- ; you mmt not prove it by assertion—no; the right honourable Baronet has a particular objection to that mode of proving what somebody may call a griev- ance or an abuse. No; you must prove it by a Parliamentary majority. It was in that way it was proved to him that the Test and Corporation Acts were a grievance and abuse; it was in that way it was proved to him that the state of the Catholics in England and Ireland was an abuse ; it was in that way it was proved to him, though I am not quite sure that he is even ready to admit it now, that the Rotten Boroughs were an abuse. I believe that, throughout the whole course of his Parliamentary career, the right honourable Baronet has never, or hardly ever, come forward of his own accord to recognize any conti- derable grievance or abuse. I do not deny that lie has effected reforms—and many very useful reforms too—in matters of detail ; but I believe he has steered particularly clear of admitting all abuses which could in any way whatever alter the seat of power. I say, Sir, if this has been the ceurse pursued by the right honourable Baronet, why is he to call upon us to put our trust in him on the subject of Corporations? He tells us that he has nothing in common with these Corporations, and can have no interest in objecting to reform them. Why, if he (lid, it would be worse than suicide; it would be an absolute case of felo de se, not even to be accounted for on the ground of temporary insanity." (Much cheering.)

Mr. Gisborne then referred to the satisfaction with which the Despotic Monarchs on the Continent regarded the late change of Ministers.

" Oh, Sir, it was a proud day for England, when the mild and beneficent King of Poland, when the paternal ruler of half Italy, when the ex Kings of France and Portugal, and the rebel Pretender to the Crown of Spain, were rejoiced at the appointment of an English Ministry; when the Court of Peters- burg was propitiated by the selection of an Amhassader—( Tremendous cheer- ing)—by the selection of an Ambassador of sentiments kindred to its own. London, and Edinburgh, and Dublin were disgusted; but there was joy in Petersburg, and Berlin, and Vienna. (Reiterated cheers.) It is only an exchange of confidence. The last Government was trusted in the three inettopolises of the British empire; the present Government is trusted in the metropoliees of Central and Eastern Eutope. The right honourable Baronet gives II4 this as a ground of consolation. It reminds wit of a subject of consola- tion put into the mouth of the Prince Regent by the author of The Twopenny Post-bay :— ' We have lost the warm hearts of the Irish ; 'tie granted ;

But then we've got Jaya, an island much wanted; To pot mite last lingering few icho remain

Of the Waleheren warriors out of their pain.' He retorted. amidst mingled cheers and laughter, the imputation of

disunion which Sir Robert Peel had thrown upon the Opposition.

Why, Sir, are they so very united indeed ou the other side of the House? Is the Member for Essex, whotal am happy to see in his place, so completely re- generated, has he so thoroughly renounced the errors of his youth and manhood, that he should be identified in principle with the Member for Kent, and the Member for the University of Cambridge? Does the whole of the present Go vernment adopt the sentiments of the noble Lord the Member for Norwich ? Are they all exactly imbued with time principles of a gallant Colonel-1 am not certaiii whether he is in the House at this moment ; if so, I hope he will excuse what I am going to say, for I beg to assure him that I have no intention of making an attack upon him—a gallant Colonel who may be designated as the 1.oncentrated essence of Orangeisin in Ireland? Is the Government exactiv identified in principle with the Member for the University of Oxford ? If so' should like to knuw on which side the conversion has taken place. The light honourable Baronet attacked us about our principles, and what we had said upon them, and quoted some words out of a speech or letter u:' the Member for Dublin : vlmy, Sir, has nothing been said on the other side ? Has the right honourable Baronet heard of uo very eminent statesman who said that he saw no public ground of confidence in the present Ad • 'stration? Has he not heard of any very eminent statesman who leis said that the present Administra- tion is composed of the worst possible materials—of men who have been em- ployed all their lives in promoting bad government and opposing good ? Can the right honourable Baronet stand a day—can his Government stand a single day— without the support of the person who used that language ? Did ever any Co. vernment stand in so humiliating a situation ? And when was it—when was it—that that letter of the honourable and learned Member for Dublin was written ? Only in October last,' said the right honourable Baronet. Why we have been told, and I have heard, though I totally disbelieve it, that yester- day, and the day before, and perhaps the day before again, negotiations had heen going on, the object of which was to cement a most unnatural union. When was this change effected ? Otte month—one little month—befoie the meeting of Parliament-

" Thrift. thrift, Horatio ! The election baked meats Did coldly furnish forth the marriage tables."

I say that I totally disbelieve the report to which I have just alluded. I do not believe it of the high-minded representative of the heuse of Detby ; neither do I believe it of the statesman—I had almost said the Whig-Radical statesman— who denounced the Prime Minister—who denounced the Bishop of Exeter—wbe four years ago had, I believe, two or three notices standing on the order-book, on any one of which he Was prepared to turn out the Administration of the Duke of Wellington. I say I.do not, and will not, believe that these individuals will consent to this unnatural union. But the right houourable Baronet who taunts us with, our divisions of opinion must depend on them, and them only, for his support. Why, Sir, what a miserable minority will the right honourable Baronet's Government be left in on the very first division on which that party desyrts him ! Does he suppose that he can trim his boat so nicely between abso- lute principles on the one band, and liberal principles on the other, that he is never to lose the support on the one side of the representatives cf the University of Oxfoid, and on the other of what I may call the Stanley party ? 011 the whole, I must say that I think the right honourable Baronet might have chosen any topic with greater propriety than that of taunting us with our divisions."

Alinisters had a majority against them in the House of Commons, but Sir Robert Peel congratulated himself, on the suppott he received in the House of Lords-

" I really think (said Mr. Gisborne) that this is the most singular argument that ever Minister addressed to a free country. It is the most singular argn.. meat and the least conservative of the rights and privileges of the C'iminions of England. Sir, without any equivocation and without any ambiguity of lari guage, I claim for the Commons of England the right to determine who than be the :Minister in this countiy. (Much cheering.) I claim it, Sir, nega- tively as to prisons, but positively as to principles. There is another topic: I am not sure whether it has been adverted to in this House—I believe it has been referred to in the other House of Parliament, and I must own that it appears to me that it ought to have been preliminary either to the Addiess or the Amend- ment. I think we have a right to know from the right honourable Baronet on what terms we sit here ? I think we have a right to know from hint whether we are at liberty to come to more than one division ? or, to put the matter in the plainest terms, whether our existence as it Parliament depends on our sup- porting the present Ministry ? We have a right to know, Sir, from the right honourable Baronet, whether, having made an appeal to the People, he means to abide by it? This is no new question to be asked of' a Minister. In the year 1784 the question was repeatedly asked, and every time answered. There appearing more than once to be some ambiguity in the answer given by the Minister, the Parliament addiessed the Crown upon the subject ; the Crown gave an answer to the Parliament, and declared it should not be dissolved. I press the right honourable Baronet to answer this questiou. If he do not an- swer it, we shall know what confidence he deserves Irvin this House and from a great and determined people."

The Opposition had been taunted with their inability to form a Ministry. On this subject Mr. Gisborne said-

" I have not the slightest doubt that a Government could be formed on this

side of the House, which would both unequivocally possess, and perfectly de- serve, the confidence of the Country. But I will not be deterred by any taunts that have been thrown out from the other side, from expressing my hope that when such a Government is formed, it will contain within itself—I will par- ticularize two Members to simplify the case, but I will not take the liberty of using their names—some such men as the Member for the City of London (Mr. Grote), and the Member for Bridport (Mr. Warburton). (Laughter, and cries of " !" from the Ministerial side ofthe House, and loud cheers from the Opposition.) I am confident, Sir, that those gentlemen are the representatives of a class in this country who are too powerful to be with safety excluded from the Cabinet. I am confident, Sir, that men of their steadiness and determina- tion being proposed to office from that class, would go a great way towards giving stability to any Administration, and infuse a just confidence into the bosoms of tae People." (Much cheering.) Mr. P. M. STEWART was of opinion that a sufficient demonstration had been given of the power of the Reformers, and that it was now right to give the Ministers a fair trial. He was disappointed by the meagre and flimsy Amendment, and should vote for the Address.

Lord HOWICK avowed his decided tlisapprobation of the political principles and conduct of Sir Robert Peel ; but professed to entertain a much higher opinion of him than of his colleagues. The seals of the three principal Secretaries of State were put into the very last bands to whom it was fit to intrust them, fie complained that it was principally owing to the opposition of the Duke of Wellington and Lord Aberdeen in the House of Peers that the Grey Administration was broken up. He disapproved of the dissolution of Parliament, which had diminished the number of the Moderate party in the House; and he complained of the support given by Ministers to one who two years ago avowed himself a Radical Reformer, in opposition to a rela- tion of Lord Howick's. The Lord Chancellor and Sir Henry Har- dinge had canvassed votes for his relative's opponent. He hoped the

Amendment would be adopted, because he thought it would have a favourable effect on the construction of the Ministry.

In saying this, he did not consider that the necessary effect of carrying the Amendment wonlil be summarily to remove the piesent Affiniuistration from office ; for if he entertained that opinion, he should have very serious doubts aud feel great difficulties as to the course he should pursue. (*Cheers from the :Ministerial benches.) Ile felt so strongly the reasous which were urged the other night by Sir Hobert reel—he also felt so strongly the arguments of Lord Stanley—that he could not without very great apprehensiou—and, indeed, he was not quite certain that he should feel It his duty to give such a vote as he intended to give on this subject--if be thought that it would have such a result. (" Hear, hear, hear !") At any rate, he could not, without great difficulty and apprehension, give a vote which might at once lead to the dismissal of Mia nisters. But be did net see that the adoption of the Amendment would neces- saiily lead to this effect ; and he was satisfied at hearing Sir Hobert PM state the other night that he took the same view of the subject as himself, and declare that, in the event of the Amendment being carried, he should not feel himself called upon to retire from office. Ile heard Sir Hubert PM expresa his inten- tions as to his conduct with great satisfaction ; but, at the same time, he felt bound to add, that he :should regard it as a great calamity dale present Govern- ment should continue unchanged.

Mr. GnovE PRICE (who, owing to the noise that prevailed, was nearly inaudible) spoke in favour of the Address.

Alr. T. DrseosinE supported the Amendment. He alluded to the Stanley party, and desired to know of whom it consisted. He re- minded Sir James Graham of his declaration that the Ministry was composed of the worst possible materials, and said he considered it impossible that after such a declamation Sir James could support that Ministry.

Sir JA3IES GRAHAM said, that he was labouring under indisposition, and was not prepared to take any part in the discussion ; but he felt himself culled upon to notice the allusion of Mr. Gisborne and M. Duncombe to an expression which he was reported to have used at his election. He was quite prepared to repeat what he told his constitu- ents is to the course he should pursue in regard to the present Minis- try. Ile agreed with Lord Howick in reposing much greater con& deuce in Sir Robert Peel than in any of his colleagues.

Ile would state fearlessly, that the feelings he entertained towards a large por- tion of them were not of the most favourable description. These being his sen- timents, be might be charged with inconsistency in not voting for the Amend- ment. The conclusion to which Lord Howick arrived, he could not, however, agree to. Considering the vote of the other evening, he could not believe with him that the Ministry, if they were this night placed in a minority, would not be immediately, or almost immediately, overthrown. He agreed with Lord Howick as to the general character of his Majesty's Speech, but he more porde elderly felt the importance of that portion which related to Corporation Reform. lie agreed that the public mind was made up on that point. ibis was a subject that might be divided into two parts,—the one related to trust property in Cor- porations, and the use and administration of it; that required great nicety of de- tail, and did not involve a general principle : but the other related to the powmr of election to be trustees, and should he short, clear, and precise. The popular election principle was what the People required, and he thought that ought to be conceded. Entertaining this opinion—though he was fully sensible of the importance of that pat ticular point—it would, nevertheless, be impossible for him to agree to an amendment enforcing the opinion, looking to the probable effect cf placing a second time in the first week of a new Parliament Ministers in a minority. In reference to the expression " worst possible materials," Sir James Graham explained— What be said was that the Government was now formed of men to whom, and to whose measures, he had all his life been opposed; that in such an Admi- nistration he could not place unlimited confidence; but that, not seeing his way to the formation of a better, he was resolved to resist any factious motion the tendency uf which might be to displace such an Administration as was then formed.

He and his friends had formed no junction with Ministers— lie must say, in the most unqualified terms, that neither directly nor indi- rectly had Lord Stanley, or himself, or any gentleman sitting in that section of the Iluuse—( Shouts of laughter from the Opposition)—received any commu- nication from the present Government. [Here Lord Stanley interrupted Sir James with some remark, which did not reach the Gallery.] His noble friend reminded him, and he thanked him for the suggestion, that he might add, nor had any coin lllll nication been made to the Government by them or any of them. If any further question were to be put, he should be ready to answer it. Ile begged to add—and he felt confident that in so saying he was speaking the sentiments of his noble friend—that he would not shriuk from sharing in the responsibility of a Government which he could fully approve, under the pretext of acting an independent part. He felt he should be unworthy a seat in that House, or of the confidence of any party, if he could refuse to share in such a responsibility, for the purpose of carrying on so dishonourable an intrigue.

Mr. O'CONNELL expressed his regret at being obliged to trouble the House at that lute period of the debate, when every topic connected with it was completely exhausted. But he had been personally assailed- " The right honourable Batonet has produced a letter written by me, a humble inn, %ideal, and has made what I consider to be an illegitimate use or that document. it would seem that he had taken my cousistency into his holy keeping ; he has said that, we belong to that party whose cry is measures not meu. Yet he would bu angry with me because I show a greater attachment to measures thau to 111131. Then the honourable Member for Yarmouth got me in at the end of his discourse for the nvre purpose of raising a cheer sit my expense. Ile accused me of being a dangerous individual. Now I will not return the compliment (Laughter and cheers.) I 410 not think him at all dangerous. Ile threw out a great deal more of insinuatiou against me: in return I will implore him only nut to follow the example, the b.ul example, of the class of ruen whom he ought to despise—that class who indulgethemsel%es in circulating slanders through the press, and who with an appearance of independruce, are the most servile of slaves. I fuel myself, therefore, bound Us address the House et ell in my own vindication ; but that address will also rotate to matters iblioilely beyond aoy thing connected with myself. When the interest of this country is so mud, at stake—when parties are so much divided—when patriotism has the support if Whigs so conservative and vravering, and the Government so weak and so extraordinary, what is my Ara ditty? It is, to remind the House of what really is the question UeMre it." The question was, whether the Ministry was such a one as the Re- presentatives of the People ought to support. Mr. O'Connell ridi- culed the reasons asssigned by Lord Sandon, Mr. Richards, and Mr. Robinson, for voting for the Address ; and then reterred to the Stan- ley party as alluded to by Sir James Graham- " what are we to call that section of the House? It is not a party—that he 4eniest it is not a faction—that would be a harsher title. I sill give it a name—se ought to call it the nil. How delightful would it be to see it walking in St. James's Street to- morrow—to see the noble Lord strattiutt, proudly, with his segaet.ts behtud tam, and with a smile passing over his countenance—something like, as Currau said, ' a silver plate on a Milo,' a hile the right honourable Member f..,r Cumberlaud iss.sdu One Of U61 beetiest links-not hehl by the Cockermouth crutch, but supported brhis detestation of all coalition. Yes, Sir, this is the ludicrous combination of supports by which the right honourable Baronet is this night to be saved. how was he to be saved ? By the Tories? Oh no ! By the Whigs ? Oh no ; the genuine Whigs have not gone Over yet. (Loud cheering.) Whatever becomes of speculation for places where no ne- gotiation has as yet been mitered into-whatever becomes of future prospects of difficulties got over and subdued, of kinduesses thrown out, and courtesies offired. and protection held over these oufortuuate-orphaus. as we must call them-whatever becomes of their party, the true Whig, the true Reffirmer, the true friend of liberty, will stand firm ; and I doubt much that the right honourable Baronet's protection, with that of the noble Lord, and the serients he may carry with him, will avail those over whom it Is estended, while ' Down thy hill. romantic Ashbourne, The Der? y dilly, carrying six insides.' Sir, it is quite consistent with the villas and disposition of my country to mix merri- ment a ith wo; the sound of laughter is often heard while the heart is wrung with bitter anguish, and the tear of sorrow ilium the cheek. I have been led, in the spirit of this constituency, to miogle mirth with melancholy in speaking of the coalition of *deb we hear so meek-this coalition of those who detest coalitions -this desertion from the cause of the country on the part of a set of nominal patriots and watild-he Ministers. how n:any embryo Lords of the Treasury see I now before me-how many Commissioners of the Board of Control-how many lairds of the Admiralt y- bow many Presidents of the Board of Trade ! Quite enough of them to make an Ad- ministration. And the only difference between such a one and the present Admini. titration %could be, that it would not be so confident of the favour of the Court, or orate favour of the Conservatives. Though it would not have the support of the People, it woubl be a Ministry in number, in imagination. But, God forbid that the des- tinies el this country shoald be intrusted to men who know nut themselves, and who stand firm to nobody."

He ridiculed the idea that the agricultural interest would be relieved to any extent by Ministers, although so many of their supporters had got into Parliament by making large promises of relief. As to the commutation of tithes, it might be a very good or a very bad thing. He would tell the Scotch to do as the Catholics in his parish had done —build places of worship for themselves. He arraigned the conduct of Ministers in the appointments they had made in Ireland, where all the old, intolerant, truculent Orangemen, had been replaced in power. It was plain that the policy which Ireland had always been governed was to be persevered in. He referred to his letters to Lord Dun- cannon, and justified the strong expressions he had used in reference to the appointment of Mr. Blackburne to the Attorney-Generalship, by the fact of that gentleman being now a supporter of the Tory Govern- ment. After some remarks on the foreign policy of the Tories, and some other general topics, Mr. O'Connell concluded by avowing the course he intended to pursue with regard to the Repeal of the Union and his alliance with the Whigs. " I and my friends have been taunted by the gentlemen opposite, who have cha-

racterized our union with the Whigs as a rope of sand, and who have predicted that, although I now support the Whigs, should the Whigs come into poweis I shall withdraw that support. and call for a Repeal of the Union. They ant mistaken. All I shall call upon the %Vides to do when they return to power will be. first, to amend the Reform Bill, correcting its machinery in such a manner as to seeder it as effictive in Ireland as it is in England ; secondly, after providing sufficiently for the temporal and spiritual wants or the Protestant Church in Ireland, to apply the surplus of the Ecclesiastical revenue in that country to purposes of religion and cha- rity, es apecified in the measure of my noble friend near me; and thirdly and lastly, to introduce a thorough reform hi the Corporations of the country, so as to place them under popular control. Such are the measures which, let who a ill be in or out. of office, shall leave my support. If I am asked whether I mean to propose the Repeal sof the Union, my answer is.that I will suspend that question should the three measures which I have described be canied into effect, in order to see what may be their result; and that, if they should fail in producing the beneficial results which may justly be expected from them, I will then propose the Repeal of the Union."

Mr. O'Dwvea and Mr. SHAW spoke briefly ; and the House di- vided.

For the Address 302 For the Amendment .. 309 Majority against Ministers 7 The report was ordered to be received on Friday. While strangers were excluded, a conversation took place in the House to the following effect.

Lord J. RUSSELL inquired whether it was the intention of Sir Robeit Peel to move, on the bringing up of the report, that the words of the Amendment should be expunged from the Address.

Sir R. PEEL was understood to decline, for the present, to answer the question.

Lord J. RUSSEEL said, that he considered the answer as equivalent to an intention on his part to divide upon that question ; and he should advise all those who had this night voted in favour of the Amendment to be in their places next day, to prevent the Amendment from being struck out.

Sir R. PEEL said, he would give the same excellent advice to those Members who had supported the original Address, and beg theni to be at their posts, in order that they might place themselves to-morrow in the same position as that which the majority of to-night now occupied.

Mr. O'CONNELL—" May you long occupy that position." A Member asked if Sir Robert intended to change places with the 3Iajority? No reply was given to this question. The House adjourned at a quarter past two.

The report on the Address was brought up last night, by Sir ED- WARD KNATCHBULL. On the question that it be received, Sir ROBERT PEEL stated, that it was not his intention to attempt to subvert the vote of the previous day. If he did not answer Lord John Russell's question, it was not from any desire to take an unfair advantage, hut he wished to have a little time to consider of the course lie ought to pursue.

''' Another reason, continued Sir Robert, why I was anxious to postpone any decision cu the subject was this-that the debate had continued for three nights; that them was a pretty general expectation that it might be protracted beyond last /eight, as there were several persons who might have been expected to speak ; and therefore that it was possible that a number of Members might have beeu excluded last night, who upon another division would vote with us. I wished, under these circumstances. to base an opportunity of ascertaining whether the division of last night was acci- dental, or a fair indication of the decision of the Nouse. I leave since made inquiries on that point, and I now do not hesitate to say that it was a fair indication of the sense of the Houtm-(Leird cheers from the OpposPion)-and that if I endeavoured to subvert course which it was perfectly competent for me to adopt-I should not succeed. I beg to say, that under such circumstances, I have no intention of subverting the de- cision of last night ; and if the effect of this my resolution shall be to prevent the con- tinuance of any new debate or further delay on this subject, it will be doubly satisfac- tory to me."

Lord JOHN RUSSELL approved of Sir Robert Peel's conduct in this shatter; and gave him notice, that in going into a Committee of Sup- ply, on Monday next, he should put some questions to him relative to the rumours afloat of an intended dissolution of Parliament.

Mr. HumE said that, to save the time of the House, he had desisted from his intention of addressing the House on the bringing up of the report. He read the Amendment he had intended to propose, which went simply to express a want of confidence in Ministers, but he would not press it to a vote. He maintained, that however they might differ on other subjects, the Opposition were agreed on one point—that of turning out the Ministers. All the abuses of the Church

were to be preserved. Sir Robert Peelhad come forward to support the dominant Ultra Church party.

On that question the Section, the Stanley Section, or the Stanley Tail, as it had been called, was quite decided ; but hew this Tail had become united to the body of the present Tel inistry he could not imagine. A more unnatural junction haul never been heard ; hut at least it was some consolation to know that, when the Ministry was expelled from office, as it speedily would be, the 'rail would not be left behiud, but must sneak out between the legs of the party to which it was attached.

He was delighted to find Lord Stanley and Sir James Graham sup- porting Ministers ; and hoped that they would soon be in office, in order to be more speedily turned out.

Nothing more was, however, now necessary to let the People know who were Reformers, and who were wok es in sheep's clothing, prowling about to find a resting- place in some fold where they might lie snug until their hypocrisy was discovered and eximstal.

Sir James Graham hind said, the day before, that it would be seen from the newspapers of whom the Section consisted ; and he therefore supposed that what he sAw published in one of the papers that day was from Sir James's pen—the band of a master being certainly- visible.

The paragraph alluded to a certain meeting, which had been attended by certain Menthes,: ; mid it was said that Lord George Bentinck was there arni-in.arm with Mr. Thiele, !tubes, to whom he was explain Mg that there was to be a patty especi- ally of gel:Hernia, while Sir Andrew Agnew's holy countenance lit up w it h joy, on, learning from Lord George and Loid Arthur Lennox, that it was to be a congregation of pious Christians. it then went iota some other particulars, giving the names of other Members, and concluded With stating. that the party afterwards, " headed by Mr. Hughes Hughes, Sir James Graham, and Mr. Richards, proceeded in an omnibus, three cabs, and a hackney-coach, to Lord Stanley's house." (Much laughter.) This at:count of the meeting, he presumed-tend he did not think he presumed too much- came from the right honourable baronet the Member for Cumberland. The iudividuals cc lio formed the see: ion might, some of them. have been Whigs; but he denied that they had been steady Refernwrs. Ile would take the Member for Newcastle (Sir M. W. Ridley), whom he had known for twenty years. Formerly he had kept lists of the Members in different classes-out-and-out Whigs, out-and-out Tories, and what he termed loose fish, upon whose vote tio safe calculation could ever be made. Among the " loose fish" was included the honourable Baronet. The same, or nearly the same, Eraeia be said of the Member for Shoreham, of the Member for Lynn, and of the Mem- bers for South Shields awl Wigton. There were people who always waited, if they could, to see whWh way the wind was likely to blow.

Mr. Hume made some further observations, contrasting the Mem- bers of the present with those of the late Ministry—especially Lord Brougham and Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Duncannon and Mr.Goulburn- much to the disadvantage of the Tories.

Colonel SIBTIBMIPE, with much warmth, declared that he had never made any assertion devoid of truth.

Mr. HUME asked to what he referred ?

Colonel SIBTHORPE—" Did not the honourable Member allude to me ?"

Mr. HUME said he had not noticed him.

Sir EARDLEY WILMOT complained of Mr. Home's attack upon him. He was indignant at the charge of being a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Mr. HUME said be did not know before that Sir Eardley belonged to the party.

Mr. RICHARDS and nr. HUGHES HUGHES declared that the story in the newspapers was false. The latter declared that he never was at Lud Stanley's in his life.

Mr. EMERSON TENNENT complained of the vagueness of the Speech, but avowed himself an independent supporter of Ministers.

Mr. SPRING RICE very explicitly denied that there was any variance on the Church question between himself, Lord John Russell, and Lord Lansdowne, and declared, that the late Ministers were of one mind on that subject.

Sir M. W. RIDLEY was very indignant at the attack upon him by Mr. Hume, and asserted his political independence.

Sir HENRY HARDINGE said, in reference to some remarks by Mr. FE A RGUS O'CoNNost, that the Rathcormac affair was not chargeable to the present Ministers, as their predecessors had made all the arrange- ments for employing the military in the collection of tithes.

Mr. G. F. YOUNG said, that his vote for the Address was in a great measure influenced by Mr. Gisborne's declaration that Mr. Grote and Mr. Warburton were fit men to succeed the present Ministers. (! ! !) He also was very angry at Mr. Home's attack on the Stanley Section. Mr. E. B. CURTEIS defended Mr. Flume from the attack made on him from all sides, and highly eulogized his public services. Mr. T. ATTWOOD complained of the statement in the Address that trade was flourishing ; which was untrue. He also said that he was not disposed to submit to such an insult on the national honour, as bad been committed by Russia in trampling on Turkey, in defiance of the Treaty of Vienna.

The Address, as amended, was then agreed to.

The Peers occupied much less time in discussing the Address than the Commons; though the debate in their Lordships' House was more- lively and animated than is usual with them. When the House resumed, at five o'clock on Tuesday, Lord HARD- WICKE moved and Lord GAGE seconded the Address. Lord MEL- BOURNE moved an Amendment, in the same terms as that proposed by Lord Morpeth in the Commons; and in doing so, remarked upon the absence in the King's Speech of any allusion to the recent change of AIiiiisters. He called upon the Duke of Wellington to show the pressing necessity which could justify his assumption of so many offices during the Interregnum. He considered the Dissolution of Parliament

a most uncalled-for proceeding on the part of Ministers, who professed such a desire to preserve the peace of the country, and such a horror of agitation; and he quoted several passages from the speech of Sir Ro- bert Peel at the Mansionhouse Dinner, which represented the country as sighing for repose. It was very extraordinary that such should be the language of a Minister who at that very time was contemplating a

dissolution of Parliament which was certain to agitate the country from one end to the other. Well, he had his dissolution ; and Ministers had gained something by it, but not as much as they required. If the Speech from the Throne was what it was described to be—a good Reform Specch—why was it not submitted to the late Parliament ?

As Reformilr,t measures were to be gabmitted, why was it necessary to turn out a Reforming Parliament ? In harmer dissolutions, such as those to %Hach he had alluded, there had been the justification, such as it was, of an entire change of jolicy. It was o iu 171; and again in 1807, when the question of Catholic Emancipation was thrown over ; awl again it might be so considered in 1831. when the policy of •• Reform or no Reform" was at issue; but what change could justify the late dissolution ? It %as avowedly no tiring: a policy, for the continuance of the Reform policy was professed, It was, ill fact, a change Of MOM only, and not of measures. LIntler these circum- stances, he looked mum the late dissolution as a mere wanton exercise of power ; and be knew of no ether cause for it, except it was for the purpose of introducing some Tory !Members to t'te House of Commons, in order to drag them through the mire alter the abandonment of their principles, l le could not guess at any other cause, except it was that by frequent dissolutions noble lords opposite wished to fulfil their own oft-repeated predictions—that it WaS inipUSSible to enndllet the Government under a Reform dis- pensation.

The Duke of WELLINGTON endeavoured to show, that after the re-

moval of Lord Althorp the Melbourne Ministry could not go on ; though he declared that he was exceedingly surprised when he was called upon by the King to go to Brighton, as he had not been near the Court for a considerable time, and was living at his house in Hampshire. Ile conceived there was nothing criminal in his readiness to tassist his Sovereign ; and if there was, Lord Melbourne himself was a party to the offence, for he had brought the letter summoning him to Brighton with him to London.

Lord 'Wilbourne explained, that, to oblige Sir Herbert Taylor, he had merely allowed his servant to carry the letter to Sir Henry Wheatley.

Lord BROUGHAM spoke at great length. He said that the Speech was one continued eulogy on the measures of the late Ministry; and intimated (ironically, we presume,) that Mr. Baring was the author of it. Ile ridiculed the idea of the existence of a British Ministry de- pending on the life of an old man of seventy-eight, like Lord Spencer ; and quoted some passages from Earl Grey's Edinburgh speech, to prove that he never contemplated the breaking up of the Liberal Mi- nistry and the accession of the Tories upon Lord Althorp's removal, although the resignation of Lord Althorp had certainly caused Earl Grey's retirement. The Melbourne Ministry was perfectly united, and never doubted their ability to go on after Lord Althorp's removal to the Upper House. The Duke of Wellington pretended that the House of Commons would not support the Ministry after Lord Al. thorp was gone, but if that were true, where was the necessity for dis- solving that house? It was because the Tories knew that the House would support the late Ministers in spite of the loss of Lord Althorp. Lord Brougham then, in very pointed and sarcastic language, exposed the inconsistency of the Tories in now pretending to be Reformers ; and asked why they dissolved the Reform Parliament, if they were

honest Reformers ?

Lord LYNDHURST defended his consistency with much warmth ;

and charge :I Lord Brougham with making hasty, flippant, and un- founded attacks upon him. He charged him with an intention to " pervert "—[Lord Brougham said that he had no such intention, though Lord Lyndhurst might make the House of Lords an arena for indecency.] Lord Lyndhurst then defended the conduct of Ministers generally ; and in regard to the Corporation Commission said, that the Speech only pledged Ministers to lay the Report on the table. He referred to the Manchester meeting, at which a vote of censure was passed by Mr. Cobbett's friends on the late Ministry, as a proof of their unpopularity.

A good deal of altercation ensued between Lords BROUGHAM and LYNDHURST ; the latter being very indignant at a remark of Lord Brougham that as be found Ministers were changing their opinions in regard to Reform, as they did formerly on the Catholic question, he now suspended his judgment as to the honesty of their previous

conversion, as well as their more recent one.

Lord MULGRAVE set Lord Lyndhurst right as to the Manchester

meeting. It was entirely composed of Mr. Cobbett's friends ; and though it had been said that there was no alternative but Sir Robert Peel and Mr. Cobbett, this arose from a mistake—for Mr. Cobbett was Sir Robert's ally, not his antagonist.

The Duke of RICHMOND and Lord RIPON avowed their intention to

vote for the Address; and their willingness to try Ministers, but dis- claimed confidence in them.

The Amendment was then negatived without a division.

[The extreme length of the debates in the Commons has prevented us from giving more than a mere sketch of the proceedings in the Lords, instead of the full report which we had prepared.]

3. THE CORPORATION COMMISSION.

There MS a long conversation in the House of Peers on Thursday relative to the legality of the Corporation Commission. The conver- sation was opened by Lord BROUGHAM; who said that the Commission bad been declared to be illegal, and that it appeared it had only been mentioned in the Speech, and the Report was only to be laid on the table, with a view of founding an impeachment upon it. Lord LYND- nunsT replied, that there was no such intention; only a part of the power granted by the Commissioners was illegal ; and it was intended to act upon a part of the Report. Lord LANSDOWNE did not see how Government could act upon the Report of a Commission which they declared to be illegal. Lord LYNDHURST said, he had never seen the

Commission ; and only concluded that it was illegal from a conversa- tion he had held with Lord Abinger on the subject.

Lerd BROUGHAM said that this was most astonishing, when taken in connexion with the declaration that the Commission was illegal. It

was most astonishing that the Lord Chancellor should have charged Ins predecessor with having issued an illegal Commission, on the authority of a counsel at the bar, who perhaps himself had never read the Commission any more than Lord Lyndhurst. Lord Ettesoicnionort considered that the information might be used, though the Commission was illegal.

Lord PLUNKETT said, this could not be done : it was a rule of law ;let to ine evidence -illegally obtained. The Duke of WELLINGTON replied, that the House might legislate upon the information ; and it was not intended to proceed judicially upon it. Lord RADNOR rejoined, that to legislate, was to do more than to pass judgment—it was to execute sentence. Lord Lyndhurst had, he thought, pronounced a rash opinion on the Commission, founded on the opinion of another.

Lord Lys:nut:list' defended himself, on the ground that a better opinion than that of Lord Abinger could not be bad. Ministers would act upon so much of the evidence as bad been taken legally. Lord Abinger had told him that the objectionable clause—that which autho- rized inquiry into the property of Corporations—was not in the first draft, but added by the pen of Lord Brougham.

Lord Baoucitasi, after commenting on the inconsistency of Lord Lyndhurst, who one night said it was only intended to lay the Report on the table, and the next that it was intended to act upon it, and again, that only the evidence legally taken would be acted upon, asked how it was discovered that the clause in question had been inserted by him ?

" Certainly he did not for a mumnit mean to deny that he athiStill the issuing of that Commission. and hid, legal or illegal, he was re.sponsible for its contents ; but he should certainly like to know how it us that the noble and learned Lord, then a coun- sel at the bar, learnt the fact thus itett : he shined certainly like to know who it was 1111(1 had access to the records it the Home Office, so as to discover in its arcltives the original draft of the Commission. The House had fed yet been informed of that ; but lw hoped that it would be, for lie should know what steps to take upon learning the fact. Ile hoped that the information he asked for would be given ; for he should like to know whet her duty had been pei formed, or whether all official duty haul been vio- lated. broken, set at nought, in that race. Ile should like to discover also upon what consideration paid that commuuication of a pi ivate document, which was now relied upon, was made in those quarters. All the time the tile Administration were in office, they knew hew ninny clerks were in commnnication with their enemies; and he knew that several who preceded and succeeded the late Govetnment, were entirely of his opinion as to the conduct of these official gentlemen."

Lord WHARNCLIITE agreed that it would be unfair to deprive people of their rights upon inquisitorial information illegally obtained; but in point of fact such information had not been obtained under the Com- mission, for the Corporations refused to give it. If such information had been given under the Commisson, he admitted it might he a question whether the evidence could be acted upon. The fact, however, was, that different Corporations, knowing the Commission to be illegal, yet voluntarily gave the information sought for. [Lord Brougliam—" No, no 11 It was certainly notorious that the Commission was illegal. for he recollected seeing the opinion of Sir James Searlett in the newspapers ; and he did not see what there was to prevent them making use of information voluntarily- given with a knowledge that it could not have been extorted. He believed there was nothing in law to prevent it, and certainly there was nothing in common sense.

Lord BROUGHAM, soon afterwards, observed that the affairs of three hundred Corporations had been investigated before Lord Abinger's opinion had been given, and therefore before the Commission had been declared illegal.

MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS.

BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS. In the HOUR` of Peers, OR Thursday, Lord BROUGHAM brought forward a bill to prevent bribery. It was the same that the last House of Commons rejected. Lord ELLEN- BOROUGH suggested that the House of Commons was the right place to introduce such a Ineasure ; and after some further observations, Lord Buoucitiot withdrew his motion for leave to bring in the bill.

PLURALITIES AND NON-RESIDENCE. On the same day, Lord BROUGHAM presented two bills for the prevention of Pluralities, and to enforce the residence of the Clergy. Lord ELLENBOROUGII thought it better to wait for the Report of the Church Commissioners. But Lord BROUGHAM persisted; and the bills were read a first time, and laid on the table.

OATHS. The Duke of RICHMOND obtained leave from the Lords, last night, to bring in a bill for the abolition of oaths, and substitution of declarations in lieu of them in the various departments of State.

ELECTION PETITIONS. In the House of Commons, on Wednesday, petitions were presented, which are entered as follows in the Votes.

Rochester City—Petition of William Nicholson awl others, freemen—Ballot for Committee thereon, March 17.

Droitwich Borough — Petition of John Hodgetts Hodgetts Foley, Esq.—Ballot, March 17.

Dublin City—Petition of John Mullett, Thomas Walker, and others—Ballot, March 19.

Stafford Borough—Petition of Rees Howell Gronow, Esq. (the late Member)— Ballot. March 12.

New Windsor Borough—Petition of Sir John Elley—Ballot, March 24. Canterbury City—Petition of the Right Honourable stephen Rumbold Lushington (one of the eandidates)—Ballot, March 24. Ipswich Borough—Petition of Robert Gill Ranson and others, eleetors—Ballot, March 26.

BUSINESS OF THE FloUSE. On Thursday, Mr. EWART moved that no fresh business should be entered on after eleven o'clock at night. The motion was supported by Mr. O'CONNELL and Major BEAUCLERK ; but opposed by Sir ROBF.RT PEEL; and Mr. EWART agreed to post- pone it to the 11th of March, in order that the new Members might have a trial of the late hours!

CORPORATION REFORM. Sir JOHN CAMPBELL gave notice last night, that if Ministers did not bring forward a measure on Corporation Reform, as soon as the Report of the Commissioners was laid on the table, he should himself, with the concurrence of his friends, introduce a bill for effecting Municipal Reform.