Eidetic anti Vroterbincs# in Vadiament.

1. PooR-LAw BILL.

The House of Peers resolved itself into a Committee on this bill on Monday ; when the postponed clauses were taken into consideration, and most of them adopted, after a brief and dry discussion. It was agreed that further debate should be postponed till the third reading of the bill ; but that the report of the Committee should be brought up on Thursday.

On that (lay, accordingly, their Lordships again went into Committee. Lord BROUGHAM proposed a clause relative to Friendly Societies; which was opposed by the Duke of RICHMOND, and withdrawn. A desultory conversation on the bastardy clauses, resulted in the Duke of WELLINGTON proposing, that some additional clauses framed by Lord Wharncliffe, but which he declined pressing on the Committee, should be inserted; to be struck out the following day if the House thought proper to reject them. This motion was acceded to by Lord BROUGHAM; and the clauses, which, as explained by the Duke of Welliogton, go to "temper the severity of this part of the measure," wens ordered to stand part of the bill.

Last night, the motion for the third reading of the bill being put,

Lord KENYON spoke briefly against it. The bill, be said, was founded upon this grievous error, that because it was desirable to do certain things in certain places, therefore the same things ought to be done throughout the kingdom at large.

After a few observations from the Bishop of LONDON, Lord TEYNHAM moved that the bill, which lie characterized as a perfect delusion from beginning to. end, should be read a third time that day three months.

A brief discussion ensued, in which Lords STRANGFORD, FALMOUTH, WYNFORD, and the Duke of RICHMOND joined ; and their Lordships divided : for the third reading, 45; against it, 15; so the bill was read a third time, by a majority of 30.

Lord WYNFORD then proposed a clause, giving the tenants who pay 200/. annual rent two votes in vestry, and to those who pay 400/. rent three votes : by the bill as it stood, the tenant was allowed only one vote. This clause was agreed to.

The Bishop of EXETER moved to strike out the 55th or bastardy clause. His object was to procure more time for the discussion of this subject—to suspend the operation of the bill, as rewards the law of bastardy, for six months; during which, a more merciful and equitable provision might be framed. No injury would arise to the bill from pursuing this course, for the bastardy clauses were distinct from the other parts of it. The Bishop proceeded at great length to enforce the duty of parents to maintain their children. He referred to Grotius, Puffendorf, and Montesquieu, to prove that this was according to the principle of natural law ; to Blackstone, and the Commissioners' Report itself, to prove that it was the law of the land; and to the Holy Scriptures, for evidence that it was laid down by God. He enlarged upon the temptation which the rigorous provisions of the bill would hold out to the woman, if not to murder, yet to get rid of her offspring. Many an infant, nicely and warmly wrapped up, no doubt, would be found at the parson's door. At the most agonizing period of her existence, the unwedded mother would feel that the world was not her friend, nor the world's law. She would have the horrors of utter destitution before her, and would tax her ingenuity to the utmost, and commit any violence on her natural feeling, to free herself from the burden of maintaining her offspring. It frequently happened now, that women who acted unchastely before marriage, became virtuous an

exemplary wives and mothers. But this bill would exclude from the erring female the hope of marriage. She would be consigned, with her child, to the workhouse : she would have no motive to reform ; and the consequence would be, that she would produce many other bastards for the parish to support. The direct tendency of the bill would also be of the worst kind on the morals of men: it would tend to harden their hearts and increase their profligacy. In order to render such a bill as this efficient, it must be sanctioned by public opinion : but it would never have that sanction—it was impossible—he would defy it. Its effect would be to disgust the people of England with the law.

The Bishop of LONDON defended the bill. There was nothing in it to contravene the admitted principle in morals, that it was the duty of the father to maintain his child : that obligation was not in the least degree impaired by the measure. The Bishop of Exeter had overlooked the difficulty of enforcing the performance of this duty by 'mein the cage of bastards ; he had overlooked the vice and perjury which arose from the law as it stood. There was ample evidence to prove that the effect of such clauses as it was now proposed to strike out would diminish the number of illegitimate births : and the Bishop read some letters, and stated some facts, in support of this assertion. Ile also mentioned some instances of gross perjury on the part of the mothers, and of injury done to young men by the affiliation of other persons' children upon them. He asserted that there was one fallacy running through the whole of the Bishop of Exeter's speech,—namely, that the mother would be left to destitution ; whereas, although she was liable to be removed to the workhouse, she had a claim under this bill for support and medical attendance. The great incentive to infanticide and to desertion of children by their mothers, was the dread of public exposure. This would in a great measure be taken away by the bill, and therefore the temptation to crime was lessened. The Bishop concluded by quoting the opinions of Dr. Chalmers and the Bishop of Chester, in commendation of this portion of the measure.

Lord WYNFORD spoke against the clauses. He maintained that all that was necesary was the judicious enforcement of the existing law.

Lord BROUGHAM said, he would not repeat arguments which had already been urged six or seven times. It was easy to charge the supporters of the bill with oppression of females, and encouragement of masculine immorality ; but as justly might its opponents be charged with abetting peijury, conspiracy, and, unchastity. The facts were against those who maintained that the clause would encourage infanticide; and Lord Brougham referred to France and Belgium in confirmation of this statement. He concluded with saying, that be would not violate his pledge not to make a long speech, nor delay the noble Lord who was about to succeed him ; as be knew the impatience of delivery and the pain of postponing the happy moment, which, in some instances, exceeded that of postponed parturition.

Lord FALMOUTH said, it had been forgotten that if the money were not handed to the mother, she would have no motive to commit perjury.

The Duke of RICHMOND, in his Magisterial capacity, was aware of the evils resulting from the present law ; but would not consent to its alteration, except with a view to the adoption of other clauses, which had been proposed by the Duke of Wellington.

Lord TEYNHAM would vote with the Duke of Richmond. There were 100,000 women at this moment pregnant with illegitimate children. (Great laughter.) The law therefore would have an ex post .kzeto effect. As to France, the state of society was different there from what it was with us : in France women got husbands by their virtues—in England by their big bellies. (Much laughter.) The Marquis of WESTMINSTER would support the Duke of Wellington's clauses : the cord should not be drawn too tight, or it would crack.

The Bishop of EXETER briefly replied; and the House divided.

For the clauses, Present Proxies

42 40 82

For the amendment,

Present 40

Proxies — 71

Majority 11 So the amendment was lost.

Several verbal amendments were made in different clauses. A new clause relative to settlement was proposed, and withdrawn, by Lord WYNFORD. The Duke of RICHMOND proposed a clause to prevent sea apprenticeships giving a title to settlement ; which was agreed to.

The Duke of WELLINGTON then proposed a clause to mitigate the severity of the bastardy clauses. It was to the following effect— The putative father of any bastard child, so soon as such child should become chargeable to the parish by the mother's inability to maintain it, to be liable to reimburse the parish for such expenses, on his paternity being proved before the Quarter-sessions ; but not without the testimony of the woman being corroborated by other evidence. The payments not to be made after the child is seven years old, and the money may be collected by distress. The Marquis of WESTMINSTER cordially seconded the motion. The Bishop of EXETER described the new clause as a consummation of the iniquity of the bill.

The clause was then agreed to, and the bill was passed.

2. IRISH TITHE BILL.

The report of the Committee on thisbill was considered in the House of Commons, on Monday. Mr. Straw denounced the measure in strong language as a robberyof the Church, and putting money into the pockets of the landlords at its expense. Colonel DAVIES, Mr. LEFROY, Colonel PERCEVAL, and Mr. GOULBURN, also protested against the bill, which was defended by Mr. LITTLETON, Mr. O'CONNELL, Mr. O'DWYER, and others. Colonel TORRENS said— It would be most unjust to lay the full amount of the tithes as a burden upon thelind ; in his opinion the land ought not to bear more than half the sum due for r:thes, for the abolition of them would not augment the rent more than, if as much as, one half the annual amount of the tithes. Forty per cent, then, was rather too little than too numb to allow the landlords as a bonus. If any thing were taken from the Church, it would be nothing but a remission of a tax upon food. The bill upon the whole would, he was persuaded, prove a great boon to Ireland.

Mr. Hume contended that some declared appropriation of the tithe* was necessary to make the bill a means of securing peace in Ireland. The report was then agreed to. On Tuesday, Mr. LITTLETON moved the third reading of the bill.' Mr. LEFROY moved that it be read a third time that day three months. Mr. SHAW considered the measure as a piece of trickery: the Chfirek

was sacrificed to the landlords. He was aware it was a quite worn-out question, but it was his duty to oppose the bill to the last.

Mr. O'CONNELL contended that the bill gave good security to the Clergy for the collection of their income.

The speech of Mr. Shaw seemed to him the dying note of the heretofore ascendaucy party in Ireland : that gentleman deplored this hill as an injury to the Clergy of Ireland, but how could it injure then, ? It was admitted on all hands that they could not collect more than a fraction of' their tithe. By this bill they were secure of 80 per cent. upon their former nominal amount. They would not be reduced to such straits as sonic of the clergymen had been, to sell —not their wines or their carriages, but—their books. That resourse would not now be necessary ; they would obtain Exchequer Bills bearing interest at three halfpence per day (for every 100/. ), and these bills they could get cash for at Cheltenham or any other fashionable place where they might choose to reside, without any difficulty or discount. Mr. Shaw was strangely inconsistent in his logic. One day he objected to this bill as a robbery on the landlords of Ireland, on the next day he objected to it as a bonus to them. On Monday, he said they were robbed by the bill—comes Tuesday, and his tone was altered ; the landlords had a great bonus of 40 per cent. by it, anal in a kind of playhouse whisper he informed the House that the bill would have both effects. Why, none but the representative of an Irish University could have adopted such extraordinary logic. Mr. O'Connell hoped that Ministers would manfully withstand all attempts that would be made to defeat the bill—that they would not suffer it to be defeated by the efforts ofdisappointed ambition, of vexed, fatigued, and expiring bigotry.

The bill was then read a third time without a division.

A clause was added to the bill on the motion of Mr. LITTLETON, empowering the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland to make advances of money for the purpose of carrying the bill into effect.

The bill was then passed, amidst loud cheering.

3. WARWICK BOROUGH BILL.

In the House of Peers, on Tuesday, Lord BROUGHAM moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months.

Having maturely viewed all the circumstances of the case, it did appear to him that they had not sufficient ground for proceeding further with this measure. It would be establishing a most dangerous precedent if they proceeded to disfranchise a body merely because a few of their nimilwr had acted in a guilty manner. If forty-two of their number, or even more, had been guilty ot doing wrong, that did not afford a sufficient reason for altering the whole course of election, and inflicting the punishment of disfranchisement. If they did, let their Lordships only consider how Parliament would be departing from the proper duties of legislation, and placing in the hands of others — in the hands of irresponsible persons—that staff which they should keep in their own. An individual stand. ing as a candidate mignt say, "My opponent can command 120 votes, while I have but 40; still, with that number I can so manage as that he shall never sit for the borough. It is true I cannot procure a majority, but I will instruct those voters whom I have so to conduct themselves, that I shall be able by petition, to defeat my opponent; my friends shall either bribe or be bribed—nothin.' is so easy ; and then I shall come to Parliament for a bill which shall have the effect of altering m the franchise and taking the borough from my adversary." Why might not such a course be taken by forty persons in Leamington, who might look with envy on the holding of the election at Warwick ? If a small application of money were to be made the ground of an act of Parliament for altering the constitution of this or any other place, the power would no longer be confirmed to the hands of the Legislature ; any individuals might fur themselves in that case, by sinister means, cause an alteration in the constitution of a borough.

The Earl of RADNOR admitted that after hearing the evidence he did not think there was ground sufficient to enable the House to proceed; and the motion of Lord Baouetiam was agreed to.

4. THE CORRUPT BOROUGHS.

In the House of Commons, on Tuesday, Lord JOHN RUSSELL gave notice, amidst loud cheering, that he should move on the following Thursday that no writs be issued for the boroughs of Hertford, Warwick, or Carrickfergus, until fourteen days after the next meeting of Parliament.

On Thursday, accordingly, Lord JOHN RUSSELL, after alluding to the rejection of the Warwick Bill by the Peers, and mentioning that

Sir Ronald Ferguson intended to introduce a similar bill next session, moved that no new writ be issued for Hertford, Carrickfergus, or 'Warwick, before the 20th of February next. He afterwards, how ever, moved a resolution respecting each borough separately. Those for Hertford and Carrickfergus were agreed to.

Mr. GOULBURN opposed the suspension of the writ for Warwick. He maintained the necessity for completing the numbers of the House.

This was an important principle, and more necessary to be acted up to now than before the Reform Bill passed ; for now the duties of Members were more confined to particular places. No valid reason had been assigned for the motion ; which, if the House sanctioned it, would do more to destroy the privilege of Parliament, and place unconstitutional power in the hands of a party who could command a majority, than had ever been done before.

A measure of this kind should be done by a legislative enactment, not by a mere vote of this House ; yet the argument of the noble Lord was, that by a simple vote this House was to prevent a borough from returning a Member, whatever might be the opinion of the two other branches of the Legislature.

The House of had considered that no case had been made out against

the borough of Warwick. There had been no denial of justice to the party—

there had been no impediment offered to the proof of their case ; money had been

furnished by Government (lie did not mention this as a matter of charge against the Government, but to show that every facility had been given to induce wit nesses to come forward), and indemnity had been offered to witnesses. Yet, with all these advantages' their Lordships bad c one to a solemn decision, without hearing the case ot the opponents of the bill, and had delivered an explicit opinion that the case seas not proved. The Lord Chancellor, who was not likely to be a partisan in favour of the b }rough, had concurred in this opinion. So fa, then, as to the bill which had been sent up to the other House; the

Borough of Warwick stood perfectly free; why then should it be denied the right of sending another Member to Parliament ? Yet, Lord John Russell proposed to deny the borough the benefit of an acquittal, because a Member of this House, not then in Ids place, had intimated his intention, in the next session et Parliament, to bring :n some other measure which might experience the same hte as the present. The having two 31embers for this borough would not interftsre with the intended measure.

Mr. PouEETT Tuomsom denied that the borough of Warwick was acquitted ; it had been convicted in this house, though exculpated in the other ; and it did not follow that the other House was rtglit and this wroog. The House of Commons should not reverse its decision in a hurt y, without considering and scrutinizing the evidence on which the Lords had decided. Besides, Warwick would not lose much by having no Members during the recess.

Mr. HUME was for suspending the writ. Mr. Goulburn might have his OtYli reasons for opposing the motion. Ile should not be surprised if he saw a handbill at the next election, recommending one Edward Gonlburn to the voters.

Mr. Rol.FE, Mr. SHAW, Captain GoanoN, Mr. HALcoma, Sir GEOR6E MURRAY, and Mr. HEitairs, were for issuing the writ. The latter gentleman read an extract from the speech of Lord Brougham, on moving the rejection of the IVarwick Bill, to the effect that use hoped the writ would not be suspended much longer, but that the House would hasten to complete its numbers.

Mr. TIIOMAS DUNCOMBE, Sir F. VINCENT, Mr. WARBURTON, and Mr. MARK. Prumues, supported the motion.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied ; and said, with reference to the quotation from Lord Brougham's speech, that Lord Brougham had no more right to tell the House to complete its numbers, than they would have to tell him to pass the bill.

The Ilonse then divided ; and agreed to suspend the writ, by 67 to 18.

5. COUNTY CORONERS BILL.

The House of Commons, on Wednesday, rejected an amendment made in this bill by the Peers, which would enable Coroners to keep the public out of their courts. A conference with their Lordships was consequently requested: on Thursday it took place, and the bill r 7 left with the Lords.

Last night, Lord BROUGHAM defended the amendment of the Pt on the ground that obstruction to justice would sometimes arise 1.am opening Coroners' Courts.

The Marquis of WESTMINSTER was decidedly of opinion that Coroners' Courts should be open. He remarked, that after the rejee' of the Warwick Bill, the Dissenters University Admission Bill, the measure for the removal of Jewish Disabilities, he did not wom._r the House of Commons felt sore.

The Duke of WELLINGTON contended, that these remarks were uncalled for, and that the House of Commons had no right to feel sore.

Lord BROUGHAM complained of the remarks that had been made on his conduct in reference to the Warwick Bill. Such remarks would have no effect upon him : he had merely done his duty in summing up the evidence and delivering his opinion ; in every %void of which, Lord Radnor, who was friendly to the bill, concurred,—though this circumstance had been unfairly suppressed in the newspaper report he alluded to. Lord Radnor had attended the proceedings from first to last, when Lord Durham was obliged, by illness and other causes, to be absent. Yet it was said that he had conspired to t brow out the bill, to spite Lord Durham,—one of the oldest, most intimate, and most valued of his friends ; with whom, in political matters, he agreed much better than he did with many others.

It was then resolveed, that a Committee should be appointed to draw up a statement of their Lordships' reasons for adhering to their amendment of the County Coroners Bill.

6. BRIBERY BILL.

In the Commons, on Thursday, the order of the day for taking into consideration the Lords' amendments on this bill having been read,

Lord JouN RUSSELL stated, that the amendments were so extensive as almost to render the bill an entirely new measure. There appeared to I. little chance of framing a bill on which both Houses would con e The object of the Commons was to secure a fair and impartial tribunal before which charges of bribery could be tried. This he proposed to effect by the appointment of a Select Co iiiii iittee of impartial men ; the evidence before them to be taken on oath, and then sent up to the Peers.

That proposal, however, was not assented to by their Lordships. They had proposed, instead of it, a tribunal totally new in its chatacter ; consisting of five of their Lordships, and seven of the House of Commons, who, together, should form a court to try such matters. Ile did not think that a court constituted as he had described, of seven members of that House and five of the Lords, would form a bad or unfair tribunal for the trial of bribery cases. Another change had been proposed in the bill,—namely, that one of the Judges should preside in that court. Now, he owned that even admitting some persons of legal knowledge ought to assist the deliberations of such a court, he shou:d Live greatly wished the House of Lords had not chosen one of the Judges of the laud for that purpose.

So far, however, he thought they might agree in the amendments ; but there were some other proposals which the House could not agree to.

It was preposed that the Judge should have the sole power of admitting or rejecting eviiknce; a proposal which he thought must have the effect of restricting the inquiries of Parliament within improper limits, and subjecting them to rules to which they haul never submitted, anl which might prove extremely injurious as far as the prevention of bribery and corruption was concerned, lie therefore proposed that they should disagree from that amendment ; and he proposed instead, that the Court of twelve members should decide on any question as to whether evidence should be received or rejected, and that only in eases of an equality of votes the Judge should have the power of determiniug. There was another proposal with respect to the Judge which he thought highly objectionable,—namely, that the Court of twelve members having come to a species of finding, the Judge should declare whether or not he was satisfied with st. He did not think that members of the highest judicial tribunals in the kingdom should be subject to the remarks of the Judge, provided he were not sat isLed with their finding. But he had a still stronger objection to that proposal. With respict to themselves, whether Members of that or the other House of P•arliatuent, acting with respect to political affairs, it was to be expected that

tlwy must submit to whatever censuses or imputations Knight be thrown upon them by public opinion or the press for the course of conduct which they might pursue; and it was quite fair that they should be subject to that censure; but he should very much drca I the case of a Judge, who usually kept himself flee from such imputations, being placed in such a situation, where public opinion should be disposed to impute political bias or partiality of conduct with respect to any of those boroughs which might conic under the jurisdiction of the Court.

The Peers had also left out, purposely as be thought, the clause which made the cost of such inquiries payable out of the Treasury ; but he thought it extremely unfair that complainants, with a good and sufficient cause for taking the trouble of instituting an inquiry, should be condemned to pay the cost of it.

There was another amendment with respect to a clause which, although it had not been altogether introdueed, was very much added to—he alluded to the inquiries now going on before Parliament with regard to Carrickfergus, Li%erpool, and Staffiad. The clause to which he alluded only mentioned inquiries with respect to bribery at the last election. Now he thought that there should helm inquiry, unless a giouud for it were made with reference to the last election ; but an inquiry having been granted, it should, he thought, be allowed to extend further back. The House would clearly understand the ground upon which he put this, when lie referred to the gross, notorious, and scandalous corruption which had taken place at former elections in Liverpool, anti which they would agree with him in thinking should be comprised within the jurisdiction of the Court. Ile had therefore to propose, that instead of limiting the inquiry to the last election, it should be extended to the last and previous election.

He concluded with expressing his regret that the House should be called upon to deal with so important a subject at this late period of the session, and by moving that the amendments should be taken into consideration.

Mr. WARBURTON moved that the amendments be considered that day six months.

It was clear, that if any justice was to be done to the public, if an opportunity was to be Abided of disfranchising a borough in which bribery prevailed, some new mode of conducting the process had become absolutely necessary. Ile considered, however, if those amendments were agreed to, they must abandon not only all hope, but the very possibility, of succeeding in such an attempt. Mr. O'CONNELL seconded this motion.

Tim great complaint of the People of England, as to the state of the repre. seutatiou before the Reform Bill, arose from the intermeddling of Peers with the election of Members to that House; but it was bad logic to reason with the view of preventing the interference, to allow them in the first place to decide whether a particular borough should return a Member. Then as to the Judge, all his legal notions were to be outraged, for Ile was not to decide on questies of evidence, as in Westminster Hall. He was to go into the vulgar obtrus;on and bustle of a Committee room, and they would drag the ermine of the Judge through the filth and corruption of contested elections.

Mr. HARDY supported Mr. Warburton's amendment; and Lord JOHN RUSSELL withdrew the bill.

[In the House of Peers, on the same evening, Lord Baottc.itan incidentally remarked, in the discussion on the Poor-Law Bill, that he had no doubt the House of Commons had rejected a very well-eonsi. dereal amendment made by the Peers in the Bribery Bill, relative to the Court of Judicature, because there was no time to discuss it.) 7. AMENDMENT OF THE BEER ACT.

The bill to amend the Beer Act passed the House of Commons on Wednesday; with some amendments proposed by Lord ALTHOM, which will enable Magistrates to permit the keeping open of becr-houscs from four in the morning to eleven at night; and another by Mr. G. AV. WOOD, which prevents licences being granted in towns to houses whose annual value is below ten pounds.

S. REDUCTION OF THE DUTY ON SPIRITS.

The bill to reduce the duty on Irish spirits from f3s. 4d. to 2s. 4d. a gallon, was read a second time on Thursday. Mr. GOULBURN disputed the truth of Lord Althorp's statement, that the amount of spirits consumed in Ireland was twelve or fourteen millions of gallons, although the quantity brought to charge was only eight millions. He considered the measure unjust to Scotland, and a premium on illicit Lord ALTIIORP said, the reason why Ireland alone was to have the benefit of this reduction was, that Government were anxious to pat down illicit distillation in that country.

The right honourable gentleman wishes to know why there is illicit distillation in Ireland and not in Scotland. The Commissioners, who haul lately investigated the suliject, stated that such was the fact ; which they ascribed to various causes. But the right honourable gentleman says that the effect of the measure will be to encourage illicit distillation. Why, lie did not see what encouragement it could afford to the smuggler to have the duty on regularly-dis-. tilled whisky taken off. (A Laugh.) Complaints were also made it the injury which would be done to the morals of the people of Ireland by this measure. Ile recollected perfectly well, that when the Catholic question was under discussion, he, and the party with whom he acted, held a very different opinion. Sir Robert Peel, in a very able speech which he made on that occasion, told the House that the removal of the Catholic disabilities would afford no relief to the people of Ireland; and that the only measure winch would benefit that country would be one which would have the effect of suppressing illicit distillation. (Laughter.) The present measure must have that effect— it would not increase, but put down illicit distillation.

9. REPORT OF TIIE COMMITTEE ON DRUNKENNESS.

Mr. BUCKINGHAM brought up this report on Tuesday, and move that it be printed. Mr. HAwEs opposed the printing of this most extraordinary report.

Ile was aware that this course was unusual, but the report itself was of a most extraordinary nature; it was opposed to the interests of the public in ge. moral, to the interests of his constituents in particular, and it was a flagrant violation of private rights. That it was so would appear from some of the strange recommendations by which the whole trade of licensed victuallers would be destroyed, including a body of 100.000 persons. They were to enter into an engagement to sell nothing but spirits, wumile spirit-shops were to be made as open and liable to the inspection of the public as the shops of butchers or bakers. They were also not to be allowed to sell more than a quart at a time. Mr. BUCKINGHAM interrupted Mr. Hawes to say, that his observations applied merely to the rough draft of the report.

Mr. HAWES continued—

Ile appealed to the copy on the table, which further suggested that the im.

portation of spirits $hould be prohibited. W'hat then, he asked, was to become of the West India planters and their rum ? Another clause went the extravagant length of recommending that no spirits should hereafter be allowed to be distilled in the United Kingdom ; and the Committee Lad core-idered whether it would not be expedieut to allow only beer of a certain strength to be brewed, which was to be sold at a fixed price. Then the duty on tea awl coffee was to be reduced, and by a system of universal education, children were to be taught to abhor the use of ardent spirits. The provisions of the report were to be printed in a portable volume, and it was thought that it would be an invaluable aecompaniment of the Poor-Law Report. In country towns, the ilia, were to be paid their %yaps on market. days, Avbich sometimes happened three times a week ; and no meetings of clubs or benefit societies were to be permitted to be held at public. houses, or places where intoxicating liquors were sold. (Laughter.) Mr. BUCKINGHAM charged Mr. Hawes with misrepresenting the report— Mr. Hawes had attended the Committee only three or four Clues ; and when be did attend, his object seemed to be to brow-beat, confound, and puzzle the witnesses, in order to show that no legislative retnedy could be applied to the evil. Mr. Buckingham would not attempt an analysis of the report, because he might be as partial one way as the honourable Member had been the other, and because he wished the house to judge for itself when it was Kinted. Alr. Hawes had spoken as if he concentred in his own person all the wisdom of the Committee; when the fact was, that whenever he had divided that body lie had stood in a minority of one. He took leave to say that the ( on mittes: did not recommend that no spirits should be either imported or distilled : non-iniportation and non distiltition were only spoken of hypothetically is a possible result with the progress of knowledge and the increase of morality, when the people at large should become convinced of the evil of ardent spirits. That the Committee had taken pains to obtain the best lihrniation was evident, from the witnesses examined,—consisting of three police magistrates, the lawoughreeve of Manchester, three sub-sheliffs from Ireland, one jihysician-general to the Army, /Mee physicians of London, three surgeons, a colonel and a captain of the Army, a captain, and a lieutenant of the Navy, a spirit. seller upon Holborn Hill, and an eatinghouse-heeper in the Borough. A Commissioner of the Poor-Laws, when called, had deposed that rot eh of the pauperism of the country was attributable to habits of Intoxication.

Mr. O'Dweea after remarking that to find a sober Sub-Sheriffin eland was quite impossible, moved, that the portion of the report headed " Ultimate and Prospective Remedies," be read. It was read accordingly, and fully bore out the representations of Mr. Hawes. It excited mueli latiell ter.

Mr. BAINES remarked, that what was said in the report about nonimportation, non-distillation, and such matters was merely on the suggestion of witnesses ; and the ridicule attempted to be thrown on the report was very disrespectful to the great number of persons who had petitioned the House on the subject.

Mr. O'Coxsan.i. hoped that the House would coolly reject the report, which Mr. Baines so warmly defended.

The Committee had been appointed not to report the opinions of witness.-s, lint their own ; and it really seemed as if, when the report was ilrawn up, they bad been muddled : perhaps, like one of the heroes of the Dunciu,/, they were "halt hen:used with beer ;" or, if that were too strong, as if at all events they heal drunk nothing but muddy water. (Laughter.) The two propositiens, that no spirits should be imported or distilled were outrageous absurdities. How any witnesses could be found so silly or so insane as to recommend them, he knew not, but this he kr.cw, that after hearing such suggestion, the Committee ought in charity to have sent for the relatives of the witness, and told them that at this quarter of the moon he ought to be carefully watched, if not provided with a keeper. (Laughter.) Such a man could not be competent to the management of his own affairs. He apologized for detaining the House about such trash and nonsense. To encourage such drivelling was to encourage people to send into the House some snail-paeed legislator, who would produce a bill to prevent the destruction of fruit and the consumption of grocery by flies, or to deprive men by law of their propensity to fighting. (('heers and laughter.)

Several Members, among whom was Lord Jonx Ressm.r., expressed their hope that the House would not refuse the usual courtesy of printing the report.

Air. SINCLAIR, One Of the Committee, said that, . . . . .. whenever he objected to the impracticability of any part of the report, he had been told by the Chairman that the evidence which had been given in his absence fully justified it, and he was obliged, finding that his lemonstrances were ineffectual, to withdraw altogether from the Committee.

Mr. MARK Pitman's said, that nothing short of a coercion bill could carry the recommendations of the report into effect.

It was agreed, on a division of 63 to 31, that the report should be printed.

10. CUSTOM DUTIES BILL.

This bill was read a third time on Wednesday, and passed, with an additional clause authorizing the East India Company to warehouse and manage goods, the property of the other persons, until the final close of their commercial character. A clause proposed by Mr. CRAWFORD to reduce the duty of Congou and:Twankay tea from2s. 2d. to '2a. was rejected.

IL NEW HOUSE OF COMMONS..

The House being in Committee on the sessional orders on Thursday, Mr. Home complained of the dreadful manner in which Members were crowded together on interesting nights. The air where he sat was pestilential: he was almost poisoned by it.

It was hard to see barracks erecting here and buildings going on there and

vet no fit edifice prepared for the accommoi ' ation of the Representatives of the 'People. Much of the disturbance and confusion which took place in. the House, and which impeded the progress of public business, arose from the im

patience of honourable gentlemen, who found it absolutely impossible to hear what occurred in the course of debate. If. the noble Lord would only change his position in the House, and sit a few yards further down, he wOuld-find that he would not be able to hear much of what was spoken in the upper part of the House.

Lord ALTHORP would not oppose the general wishes of the House, if they were for a new building ; but there were now few Members in town to take part in the discussion.

He admitted, that when there was a full attendance of Members, there was inconvenience felt ; but they were bound to look at the ordinary attendance; and if they did so, they would find that little or rather no inconvenience was the resalt. If the House were larger than it was at present, it would, in his Opinion, be more inconvenient, for then they would sutler quite as much from a Id a they did now from heat.

Colonel Davms ii, there was no accommodation for Alembens, either in the liotne t. out of it.

Mr. WARBURTON said, that the seats were irksome and ineonvenient, and that they had a bad smell! Mr. BENETT Was surprised to find gentlemen, so eager after economy, ready to put the country to the expense of a new house of Commons. The seats could not he very inconvenient, as be hail seen in the coarse of his experience many gentlemen sleeping very comfortably upon them. He was afraid that if they were rendered less irksome, the only result would be that, what with easy seats and dullish speeches, the propensity of Members to sleep would be still further poinoted. Mr. EWART, Mr. G. F. Yotrxn, Mr. BUCKINGHAM, Mr. MARK PHILIPS, Mr. LENNARD, Mr. HAWES, and Mr. AGLIONBV, all pressed Lord .Althorp to adopt Mr. Hume's suggestion. Mr. AGLIONBY also recommended the appointment of a board for the purpose of drawing up bills before they were presented to the House.

Mr. WARD made a curious disclosure— On a former occasion, when the Member for Middlesex brought forward ts distinat motion on the subject, he, and many others, voted against it from pique. But if the same motion were brought forward in another session, lw should be inclined to support it ; and he had no doubt, from the change which had taken place in the opinions of other Members also, that a different result from tine last would be then produced.

Mr. GOULBURN was opposed to the proposition.

Ale. Hums: complained of the taunt Mr. Benett had thrown out against him : he never objected to laying out money well.

Mr. BENETT said that he did not intend to throw any taunts on Air. flume ; but he would not consent to the destruction of the House, on account of the asloehltions connected with it.

anvil gentlemen complained of their health being affected by it, he impt say that it appeared to him that it was not the shop, but the work that was done in in the shop, that acted injuriously on their constitutions. ("Hear !')

Lord .Aurtione refused to give any promise on the subject ; whick, he said, ought to be decided in a full House. He would not use any Government influence respecting it.

1. DISCONTENT IN CANADA.

Mr. FIUME, on Monday, presented a petition signed by ISAIS:3 vidLials residing in the county of Quebec, Lower Canada, containing. ninety-two distinct grounds of complaint against the government of

the province.

Alr. SPRING BICE admitted that there was much irritation in Lower Canada, which he would most seriously sti ive to allay. It was of the first importance to maintain a friendly feeling between the Colony and

the Aiother Country.

Entertaining such opinions, he could not help feeling the deepest regret that the sentitnents euntaimil in a letter which had appeared in the public papers, purporting to have been wtitten by the honourable Member for Middlesex, should have emanated front any meinter of the British Senate. (" Hear, Jour! ") He then read thi following extract from the letter alluded to. " A crisis is fast approachitig in the affairs of the Canadas, which will terminate in independence and freedom from the baneful domination of the Mother Ccuotry, and the tyrannical conduct of a small and despicable fiction in the Colony." If a Member of the British Parliament took upon himself to address such hutpage to an individual in the station that Mr. M'Kenzie held in the colony, and denounced the Government of Great Britain a; a " baneful domination," so far from reconciling the party animosities and allaying the discontent that might exist against the Mother Country, lie was ministering to the angry passions mf the maleeontents, and made himself responsible for the consequences that might ensue. He was not prepared to say in his own mind whether, if such language had been made use of by a subject of the colony, he would not be liable to .a prosecution for high treason. Mr. HUME said, it was necessary he should explain the origin of that letter; he was quite prepared to defend its contents— Although he had been the subject of the vilest abuse of the press,—although all manner of lies had been circulated against him on this subject, and particularly by the Times newspaper, garblittethe real facts of the case, and not giving one-half of the truth,—still he was perfectly prepared to defend every sentence of the letter ; it being his custom not to write a letter, public or plicate, that he was ashamed to avow. Mr. Ryerson, being unable to obtain redress of a grievance arising out of the Colonial Government, applied to him for his assistance; and he immediately went with Mr. Ryerson to Lord Goderich, and obtained for him a fair hearing of his case and the redress he sought. That individual, however, turned round upon him most ungratefully, and did him all the injnry in his power. the thought, therefore, that he had just reason for saying " that of all the renegades and apostates from public principle and private 'honour which during a long course of public life he had ever known (and he regretted to say he had known many), he never knew a more worthless hypocrite or so base a man as Mr. Ryerson had proved himself to be." He admitted the language to be rather strong—(" Hear " and laughter)—but it was justly applied. Then with regard to that part of the letter to which Mr. Rice alluded, it applied entirely to the measures of Mr. Stanley, and not to the dominion of Great Britain over the Colonies. He said (and he was of the same opinion still), that if the pernicious measures of Mr. Stanley were persevered in, it would be, very likelyto produce the same effect in the Colonies as the Government of Mr. Pitt did in America, between 177:1 and 1782. The wise and liberal Government of the C doilies under the direction of Lord Goderich has insured for that nobleman the universal gratitude of both Canadas; but no sooner did Mr. Stanley come into office, than he began to undo all that had been so judiciously and beneficially begun by Lord Goderich. Mr. Hume then particularized several of the acts of bad policy to which he had generally referred ; laying much stress upon the appointment of a Judge at Nova Scotia, and an Attorney-General in another pro

vine. When he witnessed such glaring instances of misrule, he did call it a

system of arbitrary government, that would drive men to desperation, and make them endeavour to take the government into their own hands. Why did be say "a crisis is fast approaching in the affairs of the Canadas," ft/c., but became

meetings were taking place in every district of each province to reprobate the measures of Mr. Stanley? He did say, that the misrule of so many years was vowing too oppressive to he supported, and that " the tyranny of a despicable faction" could not much longer be borne; and had he not reason to do so, when the House bad been informed that a gentleman had been five times elected for

one of the districts in Canada by the almost unanimous will of the people, and had been five times rejected by the Assembly, through the influence of bribery and corruption? He thought when such circumstances as these came under his

knowledge, he gave very wholesome advice to Mr. ArKenzie in the letter he had

itten. He would say to Canada what he had said to Ireland, "If you cannot obtain the redress of great and acknowledged grievances, then resistance became a virtue, though the difficulty was where to draw the line." He was as much interested in the peace and welfare of the Canadie as any man in that Houle; but he cautil not sitcrifice his priheq.'es, and what he conceived to bir kis public character, on any private cola-Aeration.

Mr. Rice contended, that a gtoolonan living in security in Bryanstone square WaS not in a fair situation to recounneud measures of resistance to a distant colony—.

Why did he nut take the field aml expose biniself to the consequences, instead of playing the part of the trumpeter in safety at home? Let hun incite resist. ance ; but if he preached it contrary to law, he hoped the law would lay hold of ham (" Hear !" and laughter.) Mr. lace then read an address, numerously sigaed, from some of the most respectable inhabitants of Upper Canada, depretatting the sentiments contained in the petition, and expressing the most perfect Satisfaction with the British Government.

Mr. HUME read a letter from a similar body, which had been adopted at a. meeting called to support Government, but which decided by a maaonty to reprobate its conduct.

Ile declared again, that it was the "baneful domination " of Downing Street, awl oat the domination of this c..aintry, against which he so strongly protested. Et was always ready to avow the sentine uts he entertained, whatever migta be the result. Mr. kw° had accusal him of fearing to enceunter the danger to which his advice might expose his pet.oti ; but he had never shrunk, nor ever would shrink, from the performauce of his duty. When there was a necessity, Ire would ask, who took the lead what air. Rice and his friends stool quietly by ? Ile had taken the same pail in the proceedings of May letal, and expressed the same opinions at that crisis that he spoke at this. Then Mr. Rice did not complain, because they were all in his favour ; but now it suited his puipose to denounce them.

The petition was then laid on the table.

13. Foutoo a Ptratev.

The Marquis of LONDONDERAY Monday, in the house of

Peers, for certain papers relative tu ii Quadruple Treaty. He prefaced his motion by a long speech ealiaionnittory of the policy adopted by Ministers in all parts of the world. Lord altaarouitas: replied, that on most of the topics on whii lt Lord Londonderry enlarged, he was :is well informed, and the collet: a oeneratIly was as well inflamed, as Ministers themselves. He did not think it consistent with the advantage of the public service to give t la papers moved for. The Duke of WELLINGTON took the same view as hird Londonderry of our foreign policy, and contended that the princial.‘ of non-intervention had been grossly violated by the proceeding., in tlie Peninsula. The Marquis of Latesoowsee replied to the Duke of Wellington; and the motion was negatived without a division.

14. PROXIES or PEERS.

The Marquis of WESTMINTER made some observata. us, on Wednesday, relative to their Lordships' privilege of voting by proxy.

When he gave notice of his intentb.a to intrmitice that important subject to their Lordships' notice this session, lut was fully prepared to bring it on ; but he had been prevented by one accident or another, till the unsettled state of the Government compelled him for a time again to postpone it ; and since the Ad-. ministration had been organized, the iiiie-ussum of even more important topiei had left no time for the consiiaration of this question. Ile ti usted, however, that when it was brought before their Lordships, as he intended, they would have no hesitation in foregoing tlwir pl.-sent privilege. lk trusted, too, to see other measures adopted. That east disgraceful statute, the !!ieptennial Act, imght to be brought to an end ; and he trusted that reheat' would It car. into itious abuses in the most pieniing and searching manner. Unless tles,i gat stunts were undertaken with a Misire to settle Own' properly by the Giae :meta, they would not sati*, the reasoriail• id the inhabitants a the Country, and they would not lung be able to hold their places.

13. MISCELLANEurs St'

MIScELLANEOTS ESTIMATES. The Hon,of Commons, oil Mon slay, in a committee of simply, votea several -mils in tliv Miscellaneous Estimates. One was la4,000/. for the caecnscs of the Corporation Commission. Some conversation arose epee this vote ; iii the course of which, Lord ALTHORP stated, that he shetail be ready to follow up the report of the Commission with a practical measure next sesaion. The stim of 78,500 was voted to defray the expenses of criminal ;To w:a:ions in Ireland for the last year. Some debate arose on ti, vote. Mr. HOME asked, if it were true that the Government bad ceo. d to pay the expenses of the prosecution of the Sussex Magistrates : -iet the Brighton Guardian? Lord ALGtotte, Mr. F. Hatilao, tied Mr. SZILING RICE, denied that any tttttt bad been issued for such a purpose. Mr. HUME said, he would take it for granted that no I nktgeincnt of the kind had been made ; but the Ministers shook their 'lauds at this.

The next item on which discussion arose, was the grant of 20,0:10/. for establishing a steam communication with India. Mr. Huote asked what course Government meant to adopt ?

Mr. CHARLES GRANT said, that the grant resulted from the recommendations of a Select Committee of that House, nalose report was on the table of the House.

The Committee had applied themselves with groat assiduity to the subject. They had examined the two lines,—tirst, that by the Red Sca ; and, secondly, by the Euphrates and the Persian Gulf. As to the first, from experiments, it was fund that during eight months that line of commode ition would be impreeticable. As to the Euphrates and by the Persian Gulf, they said there had not been sufficient experiments. The East India Company having expended 60,000/. or 70,000/. on expeeinients at the Red Sea, the Committee recommended that the further experiluesus on the Euphrates should be at the expense of the British Governmeut. That had caused this proposition. The subject excited notch interest there, but it had caused intense interest in India ; and that could not surprise when they recollected the velocity with which improve • meats proceeded and interests espandi.sd.

On Tuesday, Lord Ai:moue stated, that be found upon inquiry that the expenses of the prosecution of the Brighton Guardian had been paid by the Treasury, as had frequently been the Vasa in regard to other prosecutions since 1819. Mr. Waantataost objected to the practice : it was one which might lead to gross injustice and oppression of iedividuals. Mr. StooL and Mr. O'Dwviot also reprobated the practice, which Mr. STRING RICE said was not unusual. The Home Secretary applied to the Treasury to pay the expenses of such prosecutions, and the Treasury generally gave the money.

BANK OF ENGLAND DEBT BILL. This bill VVEIS read 8 third time Just night; when Lord Ammo. took occasion to defend his financial operations for payiog the debt due to the Hank, and his proceeding ielative to the conversion of permanent into terminable annuities. GRANT FOR Putme Woass. On Wednesday, the following resolution was adopted, on the motion of Lord A LTHORP " That Lis M.sjesty be enabled to dio•ct Exchequer Hills to an amount not exceeding one million, t I be issued to Cummis.,ioners, to be by them advanced towards the CUM. pletiou of woe:a uf a public nature, or for the encouragement or the fisheries, or the employment or the pour, on due security being given for the repayment of the sum so advanced."

SOUTH AUSTRALIAN BILL. It was agreed in the House of Peers last night, that the second reading of this bill should be postponed till Monday, as several of their Lordships expressed a wish for more time to examine its provisions. The Duke of WELLINGTON said that he had made himself acquainted with the bill ; and was of opinion that it ought to pass this session, if at all.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENTS BILL. The House of Commons, on Thurs. day, agreed, after some discussion, to the Lord's Amendments. Great dissatisfaction was expressed at the way in which it was niutilated ; but, as something was gained by it—as the crime of returning from transportation was no longer to be punishable by deatla—it was thought best on the whole, not to lose the bill.

POST. OFFICE CHARGES. Mr. ROBERT WALLACE, on presenting a petition, on Monday, for a Post-office communication by steam to and from the Clyde, complained of an irregularity on the part of the Post-office %%lath had occurred that morning. A Member of the House had, he said, been allowed to receive thirty letters post-free. Mr. Wallaee conmlained of this to Sir Francis Freeling ; who said that only fifteen letters could be delivered posofree to a Member of Parliament. Mr. Wallace also thought, that ivheri the postage of a letter was paid, security should be given for its seta delivery.

Lord W. Lasteox contended, that every security was given by the present system for the safe delivery of letters.

MT. VERNON SMITH said, the post travelled at the rate of eleven miles an hour from Glasgow to Greenock ; and he did not think the Post-office should be rolled neon to establish steam-boats for the con. venience of gentlemen travelling in taut part of Scotland. He thought there must ae some mistake about the delivery of the thirty letters that morning. Mr. Soew said, that he bad certainly received more than fifteen letters, on a representation to the Post-office that he was entitled to receive on Sunday letters addressed to him from Dublin on Friday; and not getting them on Sunday, he ought to have them post-free on Monday.

Mr. HUME contended, that a Member of Parliament ought to receive his letters free of postage on Sunday; but if not, he ought certainly to receive them free on Monday.

Whenever he had been charged with postage for a Icon which had arrived on a Sunday, and not delivered until the following day, he had always done so under a protest. Ile believed the view taken by the Postuthee to be contrary to law ; and lie would, if he had the honour of a seat in that House in the next session of Parliament, make a serious stand against it.

After a few remarks from Mr. Ilatuttes, Mr. Ewana, and other Members, the petition presented by Mr. Wallace was laid on the table.

In the House of Peers, on Wednesday, the Earl of Gosronn having presented a petition from the Chamber of Commerce at Greeilork, revetoing the conveyance of the mails, the Duke of IliCIIMOND said he would take that opporttinity of making some remarks on the subject. The petitioners complained titat letters were not transmitted by steam-pas-I:0i along the Clyde, front which they averred that great inconvchicbce aros.e. Now the tact really wits, that the Post .office took the opportuni,y, whenever it maild lei done with advantage, of transmitting letters by the steampackets. This pe t ition he had every t CiLS011 to believe was got up by an who hail ilistiny u i-lied lam-self elsewhere by his opposition to the Post-office depie want; an opposition which the facts did not by any means warrant, fin he believed that there was not a department under the Government in o Lich more zeal was displayed. In touching on that point, he felt it necessary to notice a publication sent forth by Nir. Barrow ; and he wiadd state there, in his place, that that publication was not a report of a speech purporting to have been made in emetics place. It was cot recited by the individual to whom he had alluded, and was a garbled statement of what he really said. It contained no less than forty-one charges against the Post. office department. Ile wished that the individual who ntade them could induce some one of their Lordships to bring those forty-one charges under consideration. In that case, he would undertake to prove, to the satisfaction of the House, that there was no truth in any one of them.

The reason why French letters were not delivered on Sunday, and it had been made matter of complaint against the Post-office that they were not, was not to allow Sir Francis lareeling liberty to enjoy himself at his country-house, but to preomt the desecration of the Sabbath. He would not allow Sir Francis Freeling to be attacked, without standing up in his defence— Ile was an individual who on every occasion deserved, and who on many occasions had received, the approbation of the country at large. It was too had, that an individual, after having been for such a long time a faithful servant of the public, but who was nut in Parliament, and therefore could not defend himself, was to be attacked in this manner. The Duke concluded by assuring the House, that he had no personal hostility to Mr. Wallace ; though, as Mr. Wallace had used him ill, he might in consequence, as was often the ease, entertain a greater degree of hostility towards him whom he had injured. It was possible, and lie hoped it was the case, that Mr. Wallace, WAS merely the dupe of designing persons. The Marquis of CONYNGHAM fully concurred in all that fell from the Duke of Richmond ; and here the matter was dropped.

MESSAGE FROM TIIE CROWN; IRISH ATTAINDERS. Lord A LTHORP, on Thursday, brought down the following message from the King. . " liar Majesty acquaints the Mouse of Commons. that basing taken into consideration the present state of reversions or remainders of estates in Ireland vested ut the Crown, his Majesty deems it proper that measures may be taken to enable the pro. prietors of estates in Ireland forfeited by attainder, and where the reversion or remainder is vested in the Crown, to bar such reversion or remainder." Lord ALTHORP, in moving an address in answer to this message, observed, that the step taken by his Majesty involved a considerable sacrifice on the part of the Crown. He considered it lo be an act of great kindness and generosity, and one which would be very advantageous to Ireland. Mr. O'CONNELL, Mr. LYNCH, and Mr. SHAW, cordially agreed in the address, and stated that the concession made by his Majesty Would prove of eminent utility to Irish landowners. Great difficulty was

experienced in making out titles, in consequence of the number of reversions, arising from attainders, vested in the Crown.

IRISH COURT OF CHANCERY BILL. On Thursday, this bill was read a third time in the House of Commons, and passed.

COLCHESTER ELECTION. Mr. HARVEY presented Some petitions, on Tuesday, from Colchester, against the Church-rates Bill; and men

tioned at the same time, that when on a former occasion he had stated that he had received no money to defray the expenses of his election in 1832, he alluded to the funds supplied by the Committee of the Crown and Anchor Tavern. He bad his share of the 500/. sent to assist the cause of Reform generally.

COMMON FIELDS ENCLOSURE BILL. The House of Commons, on Tuesday, decided against going into Committee on this bill, by a majority of 34 to 14: it is therefore lost.

KING'S PRINTER. Mr. HUME asked Lord Althorp, on Monday, why the King's Printer had been allowed to recede from the arrange. ment made to publish the Acts of Parliament at twopence a sheet, wbile they might be printed and circulated at a profit for a halfpenny a sheet ? Lord ALTHORP was not aware that any arrangement had been entered into; but if there had, Government ought to interfere to see that it was complied with. In reply to another question from Mr. HOME, Lord ALTHORP said, that no arrangement had been made with respect to the Stationery Office in Scotland; but he would pledge

himself immediately to attend to the subject. •

MILITARY FLOGGING. There was a long conversation in the House of Commons yesterday morning on this subject ; in which Colonel EVANS, Mr. TENNYSON, Sir JOHN BYNG, Sir E. CODRINGTON, and Mr. ELLICE, took part. Mr. Ewer: said that he had, on a former

• occasion, misstated the number of soldiers who had passed through the public gaols_

Theofficers by whom the return was made, calculated the proportion only upon the number of persons serving in the army in England, without including the garrisons in Ireland. When die proportion, therefore, was computed upon the whole army, both in England and Ireland, it was found not to amount to more than hall 'the amount of what he originally stated. But even that result showed a frightful increase of crime.

CASE OF CAPTAIN ROBISON. Mr. O'CONNELL. presented a petition, on Thursday, from Captain Robison, in which were detailed the series of oppressive acts by Governor Darling towards the petitioner, to which the attention of the House has been repeatedly called. Mr. IturnvEN, Mr. Hum, and Dr. LUSHINGTON all contended that the case demanded inquiry.

REMOVAL OF MAJOR PITMAN. In the Commons, last night, Lord EBRINGTON stated, that the Lord Chancellor had felt it his painful duty to remove Major Pitman from the Commission of the Peace for Devonshire.

WITHDRAWAL OF BILLS. The Procurators-Fiscal and Roman Catholic Marriages Bills were withdrawn, on Thursday, as there appeared to be no prospect of their passing this session.

ADMISSION OF DISSENTERS TO UNIVERSITY DEGREES. On Muttday, the Earl of RADNOIt gave notice, in the House of Peers, that he should bring forward a measure early next session to fix the age at which persons entering the Universities should be called upon to subscribe the Thirty-nine Articles. In the Commons, on the same evening, :`.1r. 0. W. Wool) gave notice, that he should introduce the bill for admission of Dissenters to the Universities, eally next session ; and Mr. WiLts said, that, next session, he should move for the appointment of a Select Committee to consider the expediency of establishing one or more National Universities in the Metropolis, and other places in England and Wales.

HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICES BILL. This bill was read a third time in the Commons on Monday, and passed, after some opposition, by a majority 37 to 22.

APPROPRIATION BILL. The Commons passed this bill last night,— after a speech from Mr. Hume, pressing upon Ministers the necessity of undertaking searching reforms and retrenchment of expenditure ; and a reply from Lord Amione, admitting that there had not been as much done during the session as was desirable, but affirming that Ministers were not to blame on that account. His Lordship promised that in every department efficient economy should be observed.