Banta; nub firattetring in parliament.

1. Taisa DISTURBANCES BILL. The adjourned debate on the first reading of this bill was resumed on Monday.

Dr. BALDWIN was willing to rest the whole question of the expediency or propriety of passing the bill upon this point,—had or had not the ordinary modes of obtaining a due obedience to the laws been resorted to? He maintained most strenuously that they had not. He protested against the injustice of submitting a whole country to the dominion of such tyrannical enactments, when the greater part of that country was confessedly tranquil. He warned Ministers against trust. ing to the hollow support of Sir Robert Peel and his friends. It was clear that Sir Robert wished to inflict a deep stain upon the political character of the Whigs, which in the warfare of party he might afterwards make subservient to his own purposes. The speech of Sir Robert :Peel on Thursday last was nothing but a tissue of most artful sophisms. It ought to excite suspicion in the minds of the Ministerial supporters that the member for Tamworth lent them his assistance. For when had they ever found him the advocate of any one principle of liberty ? He said that many useful and excellent societies, which had for their object the promotion of the trade and prosperity of Ireland, would be put down by this bill. He did trust that the glaring impolicy of passing the measure would at length strike the English members. What was the situation of the Irish peasantry?

There was an immense population and a limited territory, and that population had no means of employment but that which was derived from the land. In that state of things they approached a landlord, determined to outbid each other; they borrowed, or otherwise procured, the means of offering him a premium for a lease • and they not only offered him that, but a rent for his land which he must know to be above the value. Were these temptations such as men in the situation of Irish landowners could be expected to resist? These unhappy and misguided tenants, so obtaining possession of the land, obtained upon credit the means of stocking it with cattle : what then ? they were, perhaps, able to pay the first gale of rent; but the notes they had passed for the cattle were put into the hands of a lawyer, and with costs probably came upon them before any profitable use could be made of the cattle, and before the landlord's second gale of rent was paid. By the summary process which the law now enabled the landlord to use, the unfortunate tenant was driven from his land— sent out a beggar on the world.

The Irish peasantry would be exasperated by this measure almost beyond the power of endurance. They would confine themselves to the growth of the potato, and leave the landlord to get his rent in the best way he could. It might be said, the landlords can eject them. Yes, but they would have a whole nation to eject. He warned Ministers in addition, that the whole Irish people were determined, in case this bill was passed, to run upon the banks for gold. He implored IVIinisters, for the sake of peace and safety, to withdraw their infernal measure.

Lord CASTLEREAGH would leave it to Ministers to rebut the menaces of Dr. Baldwin. He felt shame and compunction that the state of Ireland required the geasure which was now brought forward. The Government was mdbli to blame They had encouraged agitation! How could they expect people to pay tithes, after what Mr. Stanley had said during the last session about:their extinction ? He would vote with Min' isters, but it was with the deepest. sorrow that he should do so.

Major FANCOURT denounced the bill as unconstitutional ; as tending to increase agitation ; and to throw power into the bands of the Repeelers. He thought that he perceived symptoms of Russian influence in this measure. He could not forget Lord. Durham's mission to Russia. The proposed bill would drive millions of Irishmen into worse than Siberian slavery.

. A Member said, that he would vote for any measures which Ministers would propose for subduing the power of Mr. O'Connell. The statements of the outrages which had taken place in Ireland, not one of which were disproved, justified the passing of the present bill.

Sir ROBERT BATESON said, the lower classes in the North of Ireland were unanimously in favour of the bill. He was persuaded that it was necessary. He was ready to support Ministers in bringing forward a measure for putting down, by name, the Chief Agitator, who goaded the wretched peasantry to their destruction. He was an independent member, and not sent to the House the slave of a faction, the tool of a mob, the organ of a bigoted priesthood.

Mr. FINN called Sir Robert Bateson to order.

The SPEAKER said, there was a difference between what Mr. Finn might consider good taste, and what the House considered out of order.

Sir ROBERT BATESON meant to allude to those members only who came into the House pledged to measures before hearing them reasoned upon or discussed.

Mr. BARRON opposed the bill, from a sincere conviction of its dangerous tendency, not from any personal motives. He protested against the bill, as tending to separate England from Ireland. Coercion had been tried without mercy for two hundred and fifty years, and had always failed to produce more than a temporary and deceitful tranquillity. The suspension of the Habeas Corpus and the Insurrection Acts bad never done any good.

The Special Commissions however, which had been sent to Clare and Queen's County, had restored tranquillity there ; and if a second Special Commission had been sent to Queen's County, he had no doubt that tranquillity would have been completely restored. It was the opinion of Chief Justice Bushe, that the ordinary law was always sufficient to suppress disturbances, when it was vigorously executed. It had been sufficient to preserve the peace whenever firmly carried into effect. In Clare' an insurrection was almost ready to break out; but two Assizes and one Special Commission had been found sufficient to put that down, and he believed that tranquillity was now completely established. That was the opinion of Chief Justice Bushe as given in a charge to the Grand Jury in the latter end of 1632. He was ready, however, to grant additional powers to put down disturbance, as recommended by the Committee appointed at the instance of Sir Henry Parnell; whose absence from that House he deeply regretted. If that honest and upright Irishman had a seat on those benches, the present bill, he was sure, would never be passed.

He denied that the Government had proved that juries did not do their duty. They had nothing to adduce but the doubtful case of Carrickshaugh. Upon that single case, they justified their measures for changing the Venue and abolishing the Trial by Jury.

To show what was the siate of the country, lie would quote some unexceptionable testimony,—not that of Agitators, but of Conservatives and men of property. He would quote the testimony of Colonel Rochford, who was a Conservative. He said in his evidence, that there had been no difficulty found in conducting prosecutions—none whatever. He was asked if the Jurors were ill treated, and he said that it was a rare circumstance. Why did not the Ministry act upon the report of that Committee? Was the evidence taken only to delude and betray? It was proved by the testimony of Police Magistrates and country gentlemen, who had been brought over here to give testimony, and particularly by the testimony (d Major Singleton, that the ordinary law was sufficient to repress disturbances. When it had been found that a Special Commission had repressed disturbances in other counties, why was not one sent to Kilkenny? He deplored the state of the country—he had never countenanced murder—far from him be such an act. (Laughter.) He maintained that Ireland was generally tranquil; and asked if Ministers had any evidence of outrages committed there equal to the riots of Bristol and Nottingham : and yet no one ever would have thought of passing such a bill as this for the coercion of England. Ulster and Munster, he maintained, were perfectly tranquil. He called upon the Government to abandon their coercive measures, and strike at the root of the evil—to direct their attention to the subject of tithes and their appropriation.

Ireland for many years had been subject to the power of corrupt corporations, Orange ascendancy, gagging bills, and suspensions of the Habeas Corpus. Was this to be continued ? He could tell them that Ireland was all in a flame—and with reason. The House must quench that flame by striking at the root of the evils which excited it. At the last Doneraile Assizes, there had been no less than 1,200 processes for tithes, none of which were for more than six shillings. (Cries of" Oh, oh l"—much uproar ; one gentleman entertaining the honourable members, according to the Chronicle report, with an exceedingly natural imitation of the braying of an ass.) Mr. CHAPMAN would oppose the bill, from a deep conviction that it was unnecessary, and that the powers which it conferred upon the Executive were highly dangerous. Besides, Ministers were not prepared to introduce any measures of permanent remedy.

Mr. LAMBERT acknowledged that the moment was come when it must be decided whether the King's Government or agitation must be put down. He considered it his paramount duty to support the bill, and would do so. He must say, however, that if any other mode of trial equally efficient could be substituted for Courts-martial, he should prefer it. He knew that he should be denounced in Ireland, but he would never consent to live under the despotism of confederated ruffians, or the searching, vindictive, self-constituted, and irresponsible power of political associations. Mr. TENNANT would support the bill, because there was no possibility without it of putting the present law into force.

It was said—Reform the abuses of Ireland, remedy the evils which exist in its government, and these outrages will cease. That, indeed, might remove political agitation; but how, he inquired, would it put a stop to priedial disturbance? Would the murderer withhold his knife because tithes were abolished? or the robber forego his trade because the Grand Jury laws were amended? No. The proviaions of the law were already sufficiently extensive to reach these crimes; but such was the force of intimidation, that witnesses dared not give their testimony, nor jurors convict. The nature of the necessity for additional powers was the impunity, not the amount of offences.

Mr. FITZGERALD opposed the bill, but was for the most part mandible.

Viscount DUNCANNON felt himself compelled, by evidence which he had received of the state of the country, to support the bill. He had been asked if the state of Carlow was such as to require this measure? He should answer that it certainly was ; and with the exception of Kilkenny, the amount of crimes committed there had increased more dreadfully than in any other part of Ireland. He instanced the intimidation practised upon farmers who were constantly terrified by notices to quit, the fear which jurors and witnesses had of doing their duty, and the extensive combination against tithes, as evidence of the necessity for fresh measures of coercion and protection. He concluded by saying— Unless there were an alteration in the tithe system, he for one thought they could never hope for tranquillity in Ireland. He was convinced also—although he differed in that from many of his colleagues—that there were imperative reasons that Parliament should be called upon to make some provision for the poor (" Hear, hear, hear!") Mr. BUCKINGHAM rose to speak, but was so much annoyed by cries and confusion from all parts of the House, that he moved an adjournment; which, however, he subsequently withdrew, and recommenced speaking, though he was scarcely audible. He was opposed to the bill, because it gave to Ministers and the Lord-Lieutenant powers which were unnecessary and might be abused.

Mr. Wane said, the majority of English members wished to do well for Ireland, and therefore they supported this measure. He wished to know why the brunt of this debate had been thrown upon the small fry of the House, of which he admitted that be was one ?

Mr. BAYNTUN was decidedly opposed to the bill.

If the object of the Government was, as it was professed, to put an end to agitation, why did they not introduce remedial measures, not merely such as they had proposed, but such as the wretched state of that country absolutely required? He saw no other end but that:of tyranny in these measures; and he was reminded of an eloquent passage of Chatham, who, on a similar 'occasion, said, "It is true, that there is violence—that there is excitement—that there is even sedition; but no man can persuade me that there is not liberty on one side and tyranny on the other."

Coercive laws would be of little avail when the criminals were a discontented people.

He objected to the principle of the bill. He objected to it because the case was not made out justifying such a measure. He objected to it because it exhibited this first Reform Parliament in the ungracious act of holding over the people a rod of iron, instead of extending towards them the hand of charity.

Mr. O'Dwveit reminded Sir Robert Peel and the House, that the assertions of Ministers respecting the state of Ireland were not confirmed by those who had the best opportunities of knowing the real state of things there—he meant the Judges.

The charge of every Judge at every Assizes had been delivered in support of the principle that the existing laws were sufficient to meet the exigencies of the occasion. At the Clare Assizes, Judge Jobb "congratulated the Jury on the essential difference between the condition of the county then and when he had last addressed them. There was then a Special Commission, which had been called for on account of its disturbed state, but now it was perfectly peaceable. As to the crimes which be saw in the calendar, there were none that might not be expected in every state and in every country." (" Hear, hear, hear! ") At the Assizes at Meath, Chief Justice Doherty told the Grand Jury, that "nothing appeared on the face of the calendar, nor m the entries in the Crown book, to call for any observations front him." At the Longford Assizes, Judge Moore "congratulated the Grand Jury on the quiet state of the county ; and hoped to see a state of peace existing, by the operation of the laws of the land, without having recourse to any measures that were not consistent with the principles of the Constitution." (" Hear, hear, hear I") Then again the Chief Justice himself, addressing the Grand Jury of Drogheda, expressed himself in similar terms. Now Drogheda was locally situate in the county of Louth—in that very county in which Mr. Stanley had found so much cause for asking for extraordinary powers to be conferred on the Government, because one man had actually refused another a winnowing-machine that had been lent hint for twenty years before. (A laugh.) He ought to mention besides, that the gaol of Drogheda had not been delivered for the last twelve months.

He then referred to the charge of Baron Smith, as, in fact, containing opinions to the same effect. He read a letter from the Catholic Primate, Dr. Kelly, who gave evidence as to the peaceable condition of Drogheda and the neighbouring country, and expressed his belief that the present laws were sufficient for the punishment of criminals, if actively enforced.

Mr. Anwoon moved an adjournment ; which, after some remarks from Lord ALTHORP and Mr. O'CoNNELL, was agreed to, and the House adjourned at one o'clock.

Mr. LEFROY opened the adjourned debate on Tuesday. He contended that a ease had been made out by Government, which justified the House in granting them the additional powers asked for by the bill. The necessity which existed for issuing one special commission after another, in order to keep the peasantry in awe of the law, proved that those commissions were inefficient for the repression of crimes of an insurrectionary character. It was impossible for Government to make use of any but military tribunals for the trial of these offences, since Mr. O'Connell had himself declared, in his speech on the Address, that the Judges and Magistrates were looked upon in Ireland with a jealous and distrustful eye. He denied, however, that the Irish Magistracy were justly liable to the charges of partiality and subserviency, which were constantly brought against them. The administration of Justice had failed because the witnesses were intimidated and tampered with. He thought that this bill would afford them some security against such practices. He trusted that Ministers would not allow the more important clauses of the bill to be frittered away in Committee.

Mr. RUTIIVEN complained of the indecent manner in which this bill was hurried through the House. (Loud laughter.) He admitted the commission of a great many outrages, but he did not think that the way to repress them was to annihilate the constitution. He detailed a case of oppression by a clergyman named Dwyer, towards a poor woman who owed him tithe-money. The clergyman made use of the

grossest language to the woman, and knocked her against the bannisters at his house.

Colonel PERCEITAL spoke to order. He defended the character of Mr. Dwyer, and objected to the gross language which Mr. Ruthven made use of.

Mr. RUTHVEN said, he only repeated the words of the clergyman. The SPEAKER decided, that language which would be disorderly if spoken, was not orderly because it was merely quoted.

Mr. RUTIIVEN proceeded to say, that Mr. Dwyer was fined ten pounds by the Assistant Barrister, for his gross behaviour. He theu alluded to the support which Ministers had received from the Birmingham and other Political unions ; and complained that the Irish Associations were put down, not because they were more illegal or dangerous than the English ones, but because they did not support the Whigs. He then mentioned the case of a soldier who had been ill-treated by his officer in Ireland, by having a bridle thrust into his mouth, which be was forced to wear. This outrage was committed in the regiment of Sir W. W. Wynn.

Sir W. W. WYNN started up, and with great vehemence denied the truth of this story, amidst shouts of laughter. His regim.ent never had been in Ireland.

Mr. RUTHVEN—" It was. I saw it myself."

The SPEAKER said, it was disorderly to persevere in a statement which had been denied by another member.

Mr. RUTHVEN apologized ; and concluded his speech by quoting sonic opinions formerly delivered by Lord Altborp, which he contended were quite inconsistent with his present measures.

Lord ACEIESON supported the bill; and declared that the mass of intelligence and property in the county of Armagh, which he represented, was decidedly in favour of it. He did not wish the measure, however, to be unnecessarily severe ; and objected to the Court-martial clause.

Sir CHARLES COOTE defended the Magistracy of Queen's County from the attacks which were made upon them. They had conic forward manfully, and had done every thing in their power to restore tranquillity to the county. But their efforts had been in a great measure unavailing. He then detailed several instances of the insubordination and cruelty of the peasantry. Those members who owed their election to agitation would wish to keep agitation alive, no doubt. He wished to live in peace and security, and therefore he supported the bill, which he hoped would put agitation down.

Mr. DAUNT said, that Ministers had raked together all the Newgate Calendars of Ireland, in order to frighten the House into suspending the Flabeas Corpus. Mr. Stanley had pathetically recited a ballad to influence their passions ; to have made the thing complete he ought to have sung it. Sir Robert Peel had also told a moving story of an outrage committed fourteen years ago ; thus proving how hard he was pushed to make out a case, when he was obliged to go back fourteen years for a fact to justify his vote. Ireland had been likened to a ship which had struck upon a rock : that comparison might be just— But the conduct of the Ministers reminded him of the Irish pilot that ran the ship upon the rock. Paddy was asked by an American captain, that had arrived off one of the Irish ports, if he knew all the rocks and shoals of the harbour? " Faith and I do,' said Pat, "every one of them." The Captain accordingly gave him the ship in charge which soon after ran bump upon a rock. " Hurra!" said Paddy, "did I not tell you I knew all the rocks? and there is one of them !" (Laughter.) The Ministers were blindly running the ship upon the rocks. Mr. O'CoNNELI., who was loudly 'called for, began to address the House very slowly and emphatically. The question before them was, whether the bill should now be read a first time. The amendment was very well calculated to elicit the fact, that a fortnight's delay was considered by Ministers as fatal to their unconstitutional and unnecessary measure.

He begged to call the serious attention of the House to two questions which that Legislature had to decide. The measure then before them was one of vital importance to every part of the British empire; it was one that was intimately connected with the nature of the future government of Ireland. He would ask, then, were they to follow the precedents of former British Governments with respect to their conduct towards Ireland ? were they to continue the old and oppressive system ? or were they at leng.h to allow Ireland to be a part of the British empire ? He would respectfully implore gentlemen to consider well the next question. Had Ireland, he demanded, ever benefited by her connexion with England ? Let gentlemen ask themselves, and say, what benefit she had derived from the connexion ? If she had been totally separated from England, could she have, by possibility, been thrown into a worse situation than that in which (as was admitted on all hands) she was placed at present ? What had been the result of that connexion ? Poverty, distress, misery, and crime were constantly foremost in the description given of Ireland. How, then, by possibility, could Ireland be made worse than she was, according to the statements which came from both sides of the House ? What had England done for her? what benefits had she conferred on Ireland ? If, on the other hand, be were asked, what crimes had been perpetrated against her, he could at once say, that the black catalogue was most abundantly supplied. He would take different parts of the history of the two countries ; he could show that the most horrible atrocities, that the deepest treacheries that ever stained the annals of one country in reference to its dealings with another, had been perpetrated by England towards Ireland.

He quoted the declaration of the Earl of Clare, that the property of Ireland had been three times confiscated to three sets of English adventurers. What did the English Parliament now propose to do to repair this monstrous injustice—to heal the wounds which it had inflicted ? The healing measure was this precious act, which was presented to Ireland instead of the constitution.

"I shall be told," said Mr. O'Connell, "that the Act is not before the House. But have we not been talking about it and about it ?' Has it not passed the other House?—has it not received the sanction of the present Government?— has it not come warm to us from the praises of those mighty lawyers and statesmen who are distinguished through the world by the steadiness of their affection for freedom, and their undeviating regard for the great interests of humanity? —does it not, in short, come stamped with the approbation of the hereditary wisdom of the nation? I will not detain the House by proving how incom. sistent the present conduct of some of those individuals is with their former declarations : that may be of some consequence to themselves,—it may be desirable for them to show to foreign states and the world that they hold the same place in principle and public estimation, and are still the advocates of liberty ; but I care not in what words they wrap their purposes, while they violate the substance of freedom, nor shall I stoop to expose the fallacy."

The Act in the first place took away the Trial by Jury. It had been said by speculative writeis, that the Civil List was voted, the taxes

raised, the Army and Navy maintained, and both Houses of Parliament assembled, all but in order that twelve men might get into a jury-box, with a judge to guide them, at perfect liberty to adjudicate upon life and property.

" The Constitution, therefore, is at an end, for this Act utterly annihilates Trial by Jury. I can never believe that the noble lord opposite (Althorp), so long the representative of the popular Nobility, and the link of confidence and regard between them and the People—whose unaffected simplicity of heart and manner endears him to all, while it sheds a grace even upon his high dignity of . rank—I will never believe that he has consented to this assassination of the Constitution." ( Cheering.)

Mr. O'Connell then proceeded to enlarge upon the tyrannical nature of those clauses which suspended the Habeas Corpus Act, prevented public meetings, and destroyed the right of petitioning. The liberty of the press, too, was completely subverted by it. He felt bound to let the House fully understand what sort of a bill:it was which they were about to pass.

" The language of this cruel, ensnaring Act, is exceedingly loose ; I never met any so utterly untechnical and indefinite in its phraseology. From the high opinion I entertain of his profound knowledge and legal accuracy, I feel a perfect conviction—though I admit grounded on nothing more than that opinion—that the Solicitor-General never saw this Act. I do not know ; but if he has seen it, I confess my. astonishment. The looseness of the language is surprising. In the 14th section, it is directed that every person charged with any of the offences hereinafter mentioned or referred to, may be, and such per • sone shall be, summarily tried by Courts-martial.' Any of the offences hereinafter mentioned! What a specification in so dangerous a statute ! The same vagueness prevails in the 17th section ; but I come to the 27th, which takes away personal liberty—by which any person may be arrested, committed, or detained in custody, and the sole return to a writ of Habeas Corpus is that the act was done under the bill. This section further empowers the prisoner to be confined wheresoever his gaoler or keeper pleases. What ! the man is not to be imprisoned in the King's gaols, where Sheriffs, Magistrates, responsible officers, may see him : lie may be Rung into the black-hole of a barrack, or into its filthhole. (A laugh.) You smile; but can you deny the fact ? He might have pro. tection if confined in an ordinary gaol; the Sheriff is a responsible officer ; his relations would have access to him ; but by this inhuman and tyrannical bill, any place in Ireland which any one delegated by authority-.chooses may be his gaol. (, Hear, hear!') Can I be blamed if my temper does not always exhibit perfect equanimity, when such laws are to be enacted for Ireland?"

Surely, a provision by which a man may be dragged from his house and imprisoned wherever his gaoler pleases, must have been framed by some distinguished Equity lawyer, whose whole life has been devoted to those ennobling studies which purify and soften the heart.

He then denounced the establishment of Courts-martial.

" I cannot adequately express my contempt for Courts-martial as tribunals to try the people. Five or nine ensigns or lieutenants, with one field-officer, form the Court ; and the presence of this field-officer is the first guarantee of impartiality. There is another precaution ; to be sure, the subalterns are to be twentyone years of age ; but, on the other. hand, they must be two years in the Army, in order to learn that obedience is the first Virtue of a soldier. The Reformed Parliament turns the Judge out of the box—the Judge who had studied human nature for years, by experience had learned to distinguish the clashing diversities of guilt and innocence, and to pour the drop of mercy into the prisoner's scale, when it wavered in doubt. His viginti annorunt lueubrationes are thrown aside as useless, and he himself is removed to make way for the fieldofficer. If a British subject commits an offence, he is tried by twelve jurors, and he may object to any twenty-one on the panel if he only dislikes their countenances; but let an Irishman utter a word against any of the four ensigns ! They are to decide the case ; they were ordered to come, and they are there— their business is to obey orders, and the prisoner must be content with them. The right honourable Secretary triumphs—he may well do so; Ireland is his domain, he rules her with uncontrolled power. Wo to the man that will dare to sneer or smile at him ! Three ensigns may, under this bill, convict any man."

He mentioned several cases of atrocity which had occurred in Ireland during the Rebellion, when martial-law was in force, and declared that he expected similar or worse proceedings now. He maintained that by the 16th section of the act, any Englishman might be taken to Ireland and tried by the Courts-martial there. Nothing, in fact—no Insurrection or Arms Act—ever approached this in tyranny or horror. He was certain that if the Irish Reform Bill bad been framed in a spirit of fairness, nothing more would have been said about the Repeal question. It was the duty of Ministers, it was the duty of Sir Robert Peel, from whom some statesmanlike arguments might have been expected, to prove their assertion that there existed some connexion between pixdial and political agitation. They had totally failed in doing so. It was the duty of Government to provide some remedy for the distress by which the agrarian outrages were produced ; but their bill would do nothing of the sort. It gave mere power to the clergyman and the landlord, but did not relieve the distress of the peasantry. He had not yet used his influence to drive the Government to a new Bank Restriction Act, and the providing of a cheaper currency; but he was inclined to think that some relief might be afforded in that way. Something should be done to relieve the people, and a different plan from the institution Of Courts-martial should be adopted for the punishment of marauders. Special commissions had almost always succeeded, and they ought to have been tried this time. He very much suspected the credibility of the witnesses whose evidence was contained in the red box upon the table. He could not tell how many Parson Dwyers there might be among -them. With regard to illegal notices, about which so much had been said, "I will tell you," said Mr. O'Connell, "a little of the history of some of these illegal notices. in the county of Wieldow, a number of these notices were sent to ladies and their husbands. Among others, one was addressed to the son of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland—he would not call him one of the young Hannibals, but the Vicar of Bray, for he was the Vicar of Bray. He possessed something of his father's shrewdness, and observed, I think I know that hand. He set to work, and traced it to a Protestant, a poor Orangeman who was soliciting a place in the Police. Thus the Reverend Mr. Plunkett seemed to know a little of the nature of these notices. It always happens, that when the number of these notices are numerous in aisy district, that district is considered disturbed, and the amber of the Police is in consequence increased. It is, theiefore, the

interest of all whe are desirous, and have any hopes of being so employed, to Make the number of such notices as great as possible.

It was admitted that only a small portion of Ireland was disturbed—. a.population of about five hundred thousand out of eight millions. Yet the whole country was to be outlawed. He utterly denied that this enactment was required for the protection of witnesses. Some instances had occurred where they were maltreated and intimidated ; but there was a multitude of other instances which proved that men who had prosecuted Whitefeet to conviction might live in perfect safety in thatched cottages among the friends and relatives of the men whom their evidence had sent to the gallows.

"Listen to the evidence of Mr. Barrington, on the point of the discrimination which the peasantry exercise in these matters. He distinctly states, that he knew no instance of hostility to jurors on the part of the people. This is the evidence of a man who, for seventeen years, bad the best opportunities of judging on the subject, and the business of whose life, during that long period of it, had been to attend to these things. At the same time his evidence had proved that persons acting under the Insurrection Act had certainly been attacked and suffered injury ; but there was not the slightest hostility against jurors. English Reformers, this is the evidence of a man in the confidence of his Majesty's Government. If he be not so, why do they not dismiss him?"

He laughed to scorn the assertion that jurors were, intimidated. Whenever the evidence was found insufficient to convict a man, and he was consequently acquitted, it was laid to the intimidation of the jury; but it was all an old woman's tale. He would ask, what had the Government been doing in Ireland during the last twelve months ? He would tell them. They had been goading the people to madness by enforcing the collection of tithes ; going from parish to parish with horse, foot, and artillery, and turning the Lord-Lieutenant into a proctor-general. Yet while they had been doing all this to drive the peasantry into insurrection, they had taken no measures, at once vigorous and constitutional, to procure order among them.

"The wrongs of my country have been mixed up with attacks on me. Why not banish me fora year and a half? I tell you what—I will consent to it. YOu Shall banish me—but do not thus oppress my country,. (' Hear, hear, hear!') What is this Reformed Parliament, the representative of the great and generous people of England—what is it doing ? Disguise it as you will, you arc legislating against a single individual. I really: pity you. You do this because

m i

y name s made to rhyme with a line of a miserable ballad. Oh, it was excellent wit !—it was superabundant cause of merriment ! You may delude yourselves with this, but you will not delude the sensible people of Ireland and England. They will see that this atrocious bill of pains and penalties is passed against me. There are many men existing who think—I am one who say that if you cannot do without such a measure, you ought to abdicate. If you cannot govern Ireland without it, it is most necessary that you should abdicate. The advantage Of England calls for your abdication. What will become of your National Debt and its interest if you oppress us till you drive us into a servile war? Do you think you can preserve Ireland in the teeth of this injustice ? You come for these measures—you do not tell us what their effect will be after you get them."

Much had been said about his political agitation being the main cause of the existing disturbances. The facts proved the direct:contrary.

The following statement would prove to the House, that since the establishment of the Catholic Association, in 1822; up to the present year, during which period political agitation had prevailed to a great extent, those offences which are more .peculiarly. directed against the state, And which mark an in

surrectionaiy h:ave also deereased in a most striking manner, as would be perceived froni the following figures.

He defended Mr. Steele's character. He said that he was an excellent and amiable man, and a good classical scholar--with a strain of occasional wildness in his character. But what has Mr. Steele done ?

"I will tell the House what Mr. Steele did.' In a midnight affray, one of the Whitefeet was shot, and died of his wounds. Mr. Steele attended the inquest; and in the presence of the man's relations, made a speech over the body where it lay, showing the folly of his conduct, and the misery which it was calculated to inflict. The place was a mountain-pass.Mr. Steele stopped the weeping and wailing of those who surrounded the b.ody, then harangued the people.; and while he expressed his abhorrence of the political system under which they were suffering, bestowed the highest praise upon the temperate conduct of Major Brown, and on the efforts made by that gentleman to maintain the peace of the neighbouring country. Yet it was by Major Brown's hand that the •man before 'him liad fallen ; or at least Major Brown commanded the party by whom he had been shot. Such was the conduct of Mr. Steele. There Jay the dead body—there stood the afflicted wife and child; and the man by whom the husband and the father fell was praised by this calumniated agitator." • Mr. O'Connell concluded by declaring, that the disturbances were prmdial in their character—such as had existed for more than forty years ; that they had nothing whatever to do with political agitation ; that the whole policy of this country had been such as to create the distress from which those disturbances sprung. He warned them, that until they did justice, and redressed grievances, instead of passing bills for their perpetuation and increase, generations might pass away, but agitation would never cease.

Mr. CORBETT moved an adjournment ; which he afterwards withdrew, upon the representation of Lord ALTHORP, that it was an understanding that the debate should close on that night.

Lord ALTHORP, in his reply, assured the .House of the deep reluctance which he felt to advocate so severe a measure as the one before them. He maintained, however, in common with the other members of the Government; that it was absolutely necessary.

It had been made a matter of reproach against the present Government, that they were not prepared to propose the introduction of Poor-laws into Ireland. Certainly the Government entertained no wish to introduce into Ireland the system of Poor-laws which had been established in England. Many persons,. of the highest authority, had expressed a strong conviction that the introduction into Ireland of any system of Poor-laws could not but be attended with the worst effects; and worst of all, the introduction of the English system. Was there any one in that. Muse whb.recommended thinfrochiction'of the English sYstem. Of Poor-kW? -There certaialthild' beguile dttitiOn on the part of

Government against the introduction of Poor-laws into Ireland ; but at the same time, there had been no decision in favour of any measure of that nature. They certainly had not decided that such a measure would be improper ; bat they had quite made up their minds that the English system would not do.

He admitted that in. the Reformed Parliament it did not become Ministers to assume that they had lost the confidence of the House of Commons whenever they happened to be in a minority. The bill would go to remedy one of the principal evils under which Ireland suffered—that of the extreme insecurity which rendered life and property of little or no value there ; and as to further and other remedies, Government was most anxious to adopt as many of them as possible for the relief of that afflicted country.

The House then divided : for the first reading of the bill, .466; against it, 89; majority, 377.

The bill was then read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Friday.

The House adjourned at a quarter past two o'clock.

On Friday, Lord ALTHORP moved the order of the day for the second reading of this bill.

Mr. HUME said, it was with great regret he felt himself bound to oppose the Ministers, with whom he had so long been acting. But they seemed to have forgotten all the principles which they had professed for twenty-five years, and were now introducing a measure which their opponents would never have dared to attempt. He denied that the bill was required by the state of Ireland. That country had been since August last in a state of peace and tranquillity greater than it had witnessed for many years. Admitting, however, that Whitefoot outrages were committed to a considerable extent, he would ask to what cause were they to be attributed ? From the confession of Mr. Stanley himself, it was to his measures for the exaction of tithes, after his promise that they should be extinguished had been broken. Sir Hussey Vivian had declared that the organization of the peasantry was for the extinction of tithe. Mr. Stanley was the "great agitator; " and before taking any other step, the House should address the King for the removal of that evil counsellor. Tens of thousands of arrests had been made for tithes,—cows, pigs, and in one instance a stack of hay which had been sold to pay the tithe amounting to a few shillings, had been maliciously burnt. As if to outrage and inflame the feelings of the Irish, the property of a Catholic clergyman was the first that was seized. In short, the enormous Church Establishment was the cause of the Irish disturbances. He denied that there was evidence sufficient to prove the inefficiency of the existing laws for putting down the disturbers of the public peace. There was no evidence from the Lords-Lieutenant. The Government had procured their information from the hired police and starving clergymen. Ilad the Irish People called for the protection which this bill was intended to afford ?—No. There had been only one meeting held for that purpose. No stronger argument could be adduced for the repeal of the Union than this bill would supply.

It would be an act of the grossest misconduct to injure a whole nation for the sake of upholding one signal abuse—the Church Establishment. He put it to every Scotchman who heard him, what would he have done had England persevered in forcing upon Scotland against her wishes a Church Establishment ? Would he not have done as his countrymen had done before him, resist such an attempt ; aye, and resist it to the death, and drive the presumptuous invaders from the borders ? Why were not the Irish to do the same ? They were equally generous, equally zealous, equally courageous, and he trusted would be ultimately equally victorious.

The title of this bill ought to be "a bill to put down Daniel O'Connell, and to keep up the Military and Church Establishments of Ireland." It was a bill brought forward chiefly at the instance of a man who had lost the confidence of the people, though he might retain that of a majority in the House—which was by no means the same thing. The bill was brought forward to gratify a feeling of political rivalry. He concluded by moving, as an amendment, the following resolution " That while the House deeply lamented the existence of disturbances in some districts of Ireland, they were of opinion that it had not been satisfactorily shown that the existing laws were insufficient for the purpose of putting an end to them; and that therefore the House could not consent to a bill which placed Ireland out of the pale of the British Constitution."

Mr. Alderman Woon seconded the amendment. He said that the magistracy and landlords of Ireland were to blame for much of the evil which existed. He never would consent to Courts-martial. He had sat in seven Parliaments, and had never given a vote against the People, and he never would.

Mr. TANCRED differed from Alderman Wood. Society, he was convinced, was on the point of being dissolved in Ireland. He would vote for the second reading of the bill, in order that the poor and defenceless might be protected. He had perused the evidence on the state of Ireland with great care, and was convinced that her troubles were owing to moral and physical causes, not to political ones. Want of employment was the cause of crime in Ireland. It could not be from poverty that the Irish peasant was more prone to crime, but rather from immorality and want of employment ; for it appeared by the evidence of Mr. Fielden, the member for Oldham, that on an average the English labourer was as badly off as the Irish labourer. The toleration of vagrancy and mendicity were also main causes of Irish rioting and distress. The suspension of the Habeas Corpus would be a greater protection to the Irish than its continuance ; and the nightly visits of the Police were preferable to those of assassins.

Colonel CONOLLY mlaintained, that as long as Mr. O'Connell could hold out impunity to the agitators of Ireland, the laws would never be enforced. He called upon Government to "catch the lion, as well as the little animals and jackals who surrounded him."

Mr. RICHARDS would never vote away a single tittle of the liberties of the People, without stating the reason why he did so. He thought that no set of men should be allowed to form societies dangerous to the State, and to individuals; and he would vote for their suppression wheresoever they were found.

He felt himself bound, from the expetience he had of that House, to state that never was there a set of gentlemen more anxious to remove any distress that might be pointed out to them. There was not on the face of the earth a set of men iess interested and more intellectual—(A laugh)—than those who somposed that assembly, or more eager' to promote the good of their ceuntry,

He maintained that the distress of the peasantry—their starving condition—prompted them to the commission of outrages. (Cries of " Hear!" and " Question !")

Would the honourable member who interrupted hint with his cry of "Question" say that he did not speak to the question now ? (" Hear !" and a laugh.) If he had the power and eloquence of Sir Robert Peel, he would describe, to the gentleman who interrupted hint, the situation of the miserable Irish peasant, sitting half naked in his smoky cabin, surrounded by his half-starved children, without a morsel of food to allay their hunger, and, sad and silent, pondering how to relieve their distress. He would describe how that peasant would turn to the splendid mansion in the neighbourhood as his last resource, and his despair at the recollection that no relief was to be expected there, because the owner was in England or in France. He would describe his dismay when he discovered that this resource was cut off, and that no legal provision was made to prevent himself and his children from starving. All these things he would describe ; and further, he would show the crimes into which misery would drive him—crimes at which humanity would weep. (" Hear' hear !") He would beg to ask the honourable gentleman who bad interrupted him, if he now spoke to the question ? (Loud laughter.) He despised those sneers and that laughter : he felt himself standing there in the honourable capacity of Member of the House of Commons, and clothed in the majesty with which the character of a Representative invested him (Renewed laughter); and since he had come into the House, he felt that he had a much humbler opinion of himself than formerly. (Continued laughter.)

He said that he was as tired of the debate on this Irish question as Juvenal said the Roman soldiers were of sour cabbages. fie maintained that neither Lord Althorp, nor Mr. Stanley who followed him in the debate, with more eloquence but less sincerity, had made out a ease which ought to convince the House of the necessity of passing this Richards was here interrupted by noise from all sides of the House. The Speaker interfered at last to procure silence ; and Mr. Richards, who was much excited, called out

" The House will not listen to me. I am no noble lord ; I have no aristocratic blood circulating in my veins ; but I am here as the representative of a respectable constituency, fearless and regardless of the interruptions with which the remarks which I venture to make on this important bill may be received ; and I treat those interruptions with contumelious contempt. (Cheers and laughter.) He was prepared to prove—but he dared not and would not wait to do so in the present temper of the House—he was prepared to prove that the alteration in the value of money, and the want of poor-laws, were the real cause of the outrages and misery of Ireland ; and he thought that those who attributed the outrages to any thing done by Mr. O'Connell, or any other man, were far from knowing the lea] cause of the evils of that country. ( Cheers.) Lord OXMANTOWN said, that every person acquainted with the real state of Ireland must see the necessity of the present measure. He detailed, at great length, the outrages committed by the Terry AIM, and the organized system of plunder which they pursued. He said that Mr. O'Connell was the general, arid the Terry Alts were the forces, in the Irish war of agitation ; and he would support the bill as the only way to put both down.

Mr. RONAYXE complained of the mysterious mode in which the evidence in favour of the bill was communicated to the House. He thought it a very suspicious circumstance, that when Mr. Stanley could produce the letter of a really respectable man, such as Sir Patrick Bellew, he made no secret of his name—there was no fear of intimidation then. The fair inference from this conduct was, that their witnesses were persons. whose names would not add much credit to their testimony. He attributed the disorders of Ireland to the tithe system, and the Church Establishment.

The Irish poet was a prophet as well as a poet. Mr. Moore said, most justly

" As long as Popish spade and scythe

Shall dig and cut the Sassanagles tithe, And Popish purses pay the tolls On Heal en's road for Sassanagh souls— So long the merry reign shall be Of Captain Rock and his family."

Mr. JOHN BROWNE said, that all classes in Ireland were desirous of balling the hill; which he would support, as the only means of rescuing Ireland from the terrible tyranny which oppressed her.

Sir Jot-IN KEY would support the bill, because it was necessary that coercive should precede remedial measures : at the same time, he would not pledge himself to vote for every clause in it.

Mr. MOORE O'PERRALL said, there was nothing but very flimsy evidence to show the connexion between crime and agitation. In Queen's County, and in other districts, he knew that the clearance of estates had been the real cause of disturbances.

Lord A LTHORP remarked, that the whole of the present debate had been, not whether the bill should be read a second time, but wlether the order of the day directing that second reading should be read ; and thus no progress had yet been made. He then proceeded to reply to the arguments and assertions of Mr. Hume and other members, and to defend the Government for what they had done in regard to the Extinction of Tithes Bill and the Irish Jury Bill. With regard to the connexion between prwdial and political agitation, he said, No man believed, or would admit more fully than himself, that the political agitators, so far from intentionally stimulating these crimes, held them in the utmost abhorrence ("Hear, hear !"from the Irish members); but the effect of political agitation was such as necessarily to produce irritation and discontent ; and this irritation and discontent, operating upon a population in a state of great misery and distress, necessarily led to the commission of crime and outrage. (Cheers.) And certainty, though they may not wish to do so, the consequence of their conduct is the encouragement of criminal outrages.

Mr. JAMES GRAT'TAN and Mr. N. FITZSIMON opposed the bill, and Colonel PERCEVAL supported it. Mr. C. BULLER moved an adjournment.

Lord Atergoite said that, in his experience of twenty-nine years, he had known of no instance of an adjournment of a debate on the order of the day.

Mr. WARBURTON said, that Mr. Hume, who was absent, and in attendance upon a sick mernber of the House, had authorized him to withdraw his amendment, should it be thought more convenient, as it would be equally agreeable to him to take the division on the second reading. (" Hear, hear!" and great laughter.) He was at a loss to discover what caused the merriment of ilae House. Sir Joins SEBRIGHT said, he dlit riot know any right which any tnefil"ber had to bring a message from an absent member. (Laughter.)

He could not speak eloquently, buP he would speak frankly. Mr. Hume took up as much time as any member of the House when present, and laid down the law in a manner which he had never seen done by any one. (" Hear, hear, hear I")

Mr. Coital= rose to order—

He understood that the question was whether the debate shoal be adjourned;

and he did not understand that the observations of Sir John bright respecting the Member for Middlesex, however well expressed, could have aught to do with that question.

The SPEAKER said, that Sir John Sebright must have misunderstood what fell from Mr. Warburton. He merely mentioned that Mr. Hume would consent to withdraw his amendment. Now, a motion once made could not be withdrawn without the consent of the House, nor very conveniently without the consent of the member who made it. That consent Mr. Warburton was authorized to give on behalf of Mr. Hume; in which there was no impropriety whatever.

With respect to the question of dividing upon the order of the day, the House would see how inconsistent it would be to adjourn to Monday upon the question—whether the order of the day for the continuance of the adjourned debate should be read and proceeded upon on Friday., ("Hear, hear 1") The proper course was to have the order of the day read, and adjourn it then to Monday.

Sir Jour; SEBRIGHT apologized. He only objected to Mr. Hume's making a speech by proxy. Mr. O'CONNELL wished to knowyhether the debate should close on Monday ?

Lord Aramonr asked whether Mr. O'Connell intended that it should close on that day?

Mr. O'CONNELL thought it would be great presumption in so humble an individual as himself to say when a debate should close ; but he would concur in Lord Althorp's opinion that it ought to close en that day.

The Order of the Day was then read for the second reading of the bill on Monday; and the House adjourned at a quarter to one.

On Wednesday, Mr. MAURICE 0' CoNstErt. presented a numhs,r of petitions from various places in Ireland against the Disturbances Bill. Colonel DAVIES presented a similar one from the Political Union of Worcester. Mr. Iricoas presented several petitions from Carlow and Wexford against the bill. On Thursday, the early sitting of which day was set apart for receiving petitions relative to the Disturbances Bill, Mr. Roam presented two petitions from the Political Union of Dunfermline, and from the inhabitants of Forfar, against the bill. These should have been presented by Mr. Kinloch, but that gentleman was obliged to confide them to the care of Mr. Hume, in consequence of being disabled by illness from attending himself. Dr. BALDIVIN presented a petition from Cork signed by 20,000 persons against the bill, and eight others to the same effect from different places in Ireland. Mr. CURTEIS presented one from Battle in Sussex, against the bill. Mr. Bam-ms presented one from Dublin, and three from Waterford, against the hi Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL presented a similar one from Youghall. r. HALL presented one from Newport. Mr. T. Arrwoon pre: ,Iti.d petitions front Birmingham, Wediresbury, lVmtlsall, S toli, • --1:; Trent, Marylebone, two places in Warwickshire and We,: e,ter_ shire, and from three places in Ireland, against it. Mr. 11 cati: presented six from England, and one from Scotland, agai:::4 the bill. Sir W. For.KEs presented one from Norfolk in favour of it. Mr. Famines O'Cosixon, a number from different places in Ireland, against the bill. Mr. BUCKINGHAM, one from Sheffield, against the bill. Mr. C. BULLER, one from Liskeard, against the bill. Mr. Lawn., a number from Queen's County, against the bill. Mr. Buonieterox, one from Salford, against it. Sir J. CAMPBELL, one from Dudley in favour of, and one against the bill. Colonel BUTLER, six from Kilkenny, against the bill. Mr. SULLIVAN, a number from Kilkenny, to the same effect. Mr. RunivEx, a similar one from Kilkenny. Mr. J. Maxima, one from Oldham, Roytorn. and Mayo, against the bill.

2. IRISH JURY SYSTEM. Lord ALTHORP, on Thursday, mentioned that Ministers intended to bring in a bill to amend the Jury-laws of Ireland, which would be similar in principle, though not exactly the same in detail, as the one which was dropped in the House of Lords during the last session. Perhaps, therefore, Mr. O'Connell would not consider it necessary to introduce the measure of which he had given notice.

' Mr. O'CONNELL said, he placed unlimited confidence in the good faith of Lord Althorp on this point; and he knew that it was owing to no fault on his part that the bill which was introduced last session was not carried. The bill which he was now about to introduce differed in some respects from that of last session ; and therefore he thought that he had better explain its objects to the House ; and then, if Lord Althorp would adopt it, he would most gladly see it placed in the 114nds of the Government. Mr. O'Connell then stated, that the principal objects of his bill were to assimilate the law of Ireland, as regards the appointment of special juries, to that of England; and to provide for the choice of juries by ballot in criminal cases, according to the old practice. The abuses which prevailed in Ireland in the election of juries were notorious.

He knew that at one particular trial, the Crown had set aside no fewer than one hundred aud thirty-two jurors. In cases of misdemeanours, private prosecutors had the same advantage, and the effect of the practice was most pernicious. A most respectable solicitor, practising in the Court of Chancery, was tried for conspiring to evade the bankrupt-laws, and the party prosecuting hint took pains to set aside almost every one of the jurors who did not belong to a society called the "Friendly Brothers." There were eleven of these filendly brothers on the Jury; and that respectable solicitor, in the teeth of the clearest evidence of his innocence, was convicted. Lord Manners looked over the whole of the evidence produced on the trial ; and so convinced was he that that gentleman had been wrongly condemned, that he at once restored his name on the roll, and the other Judges followed his Lordship's example. This was a very strong instance of the bad effects resulting from the existing practice; and he Ansisted that it was a state of law that ought not to be continued.

• Lord ALTHORP would not oppose the introduction of the bill, but svould consult his colleagues before promising to support it.

Mr. Lancia' said, the most Mischievous consequences would arise from the proposed alteration.

Sir J. CAMPBELL (Solicitor-General) approved of the bill as far as it went to assimilate the Irish to the English practice.

Be did not pretend to be well acquainted with the practical administration of the law in Ireland ; but this he knew, that a Jury selected by officers of the Court would never command the confidence of the country,. It was most desirable, therefore, that juries should be chosen by ballot. He was of opinion, however, that the Crown ought to he allowed peremptory challenges ; and he had no objection that the prisoner should enjoy the same advantage, in all cases of felony, as far as related to twenty jurors.

Colonel CONOLLY opposed, and Mr. O'DwvER supported the measure.

Leave was given to bring in the bill.

3. laisse DISTRESS. The Earl of RODEN, on Tuesday, presented a petition from a person residing in the county of Wexford, complaining of the outrages which be had suffered from the Wbitefeet, who had endeavoured to prevent him from taking a farm in that county, had fired shot into his house, and intimidated the labourers from getting in his crops. Lord CLIFDEN confirmed the statement of the petitioner, who was his tenant.

The Marquis of WESTMEATH denied that the disturbances of Ireland proceeded/tom distress. They proceeded from sheer wickedness, stimulated by a standing committee of mischief.

4. ENGLISH CHURCH REFORM. In answer to a question by Mr. E. A. SANFORD, on Monday, Lord Amionr said, that as regarded pluralities and non-residence, Ministers would be prepared to bring in a bill for the reform of the Church during the present session. He said that every other question relative to Church Reform was under the consideration of Government.

5. NON-RESIDENCE or THE CLERGY. On the presentation of a petition by Mr. Vinous, from a place in Ireland, praying for the abolition of tithes Mr. CORBETT stated some facts which he derived from a return laid before the House in 1827 relative to the non-residence of the clergy. These facts, he maintained, bore him out in the charge which he had made against the clergy, and which bad drawn upon him the animadversions of Mr. atcourt, the member for Oxford University. From that return it appeared, that in 1827 there were 10,53:3 benefices, and only 4,413 resident incumbents. In 1828 he had no returns; but in 1829 the returns showed (and these were the last that had been made) that there were then 10,528 benefices, and but 4,316 resident incumbents. These were the general returns. He should now mention some particular cases. In the diocese of Winchester, which was amply endowed, there were stated to he 3,369 benefices, and only 177 resident incumbents. In the diocese of Lincoln, there were l,•273 benefices, and 503 resident incumbents; in that of Norwich, there were 1,076 benefices, and 360 resident incumbents.

Mr. ESTCOURT said, that Mr. Cobbett had not stated the matter fairly. He found by the returns of 1816, that there were then 10,300 benefices, and 3,793 incumbents constantly residing in their parsonage-houses. To these must be added 1,990, who were resident in their parishes, though not in parsonageIonises ; and that was the case not only in that year, but in the four years preceiling thc time of that return. Besides these, again, there were 1,9°0 curates, who were constantly residing in the places where they held their cures. All the taken together made a number of 7,688, either living in their parsonagehouses or in houses in their parishes. Besides this, titre were 227 livings vacant during that year, and that number must also be added to the 7,688 ; for the clergymen who died in the course of the year, would not, of course' be put down amongst those constantly resident ; nor would his successor, wIto probably was not appointed at the moment the returns were made up. And yet it might be perfectly true that the parish had always had the benefit of a constantly resident clergyman. This gave a return of about 8,000 clergymen constantly doing duty and residing in their parishes.

6. STATE OF THE CHURCH IN WALES. Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR, on Monday, presented a petition from Chester, praying for inquiry into the state of the Church in Wales. The petitioners complained that the Rectors in Wales were frequently persons not in orders ; that they derived large incomes from the property of the Church, but paid them curates very small salaries ; that the Bishops, especially those of Bangor and St. Asaph, were overpaid; that a great proportion of the clergy were non-resident; and that in consequence of these abuses, out of 2,200 places of worship in Wales, not more than one third belonged to the Establishment.

Mr. C. IV. IVvsna said, it was highly important that the Welsh incumbents should understand the Welsh language ; which was not generally the case.

Mr. WILBRAHAM reprobated the practice of appointing Englishmen to Welsh Bishoprics. There was not a single instance of a native Welshman having been appointed to a Bishopric in the Principality since George the First ascended the throne. The cure of souls was out of the question, when sermons were preached in a language which the people did not understand. This important fact he knew, that one gentleman in North Wales was in possession of no less than eleven pieces of preferment—nnie livings and two sinecures. There were, he was sorry, to say, two religions—one for the rich, and. another for the poor—one for the aristocracy, and another for the natives of the country—one for the Cambro-Briton, the other for their Saxon masters. Suck a church, he did not hesitate to say, drove from its bosom a vast body of people, who would otherwise feel in no way disinclined to adopt its tenets.

Sir JOHN WROTTESLEY said, that the great. evil in the Church was non-residence. A most improvident act was passed, because non-residence was found to press severely on clergymen whe'had large families and small livings. That act, instead of insisting upon and enforcing residence, in some cases legalized non-residence' and placedthe whole of the power in the hands of the Bishops; who, he hoped, used it well and properly; but he was much afraid they too often allowed, themselves to be led away by their kindness of heart Mr. COBBETT said, when that act was passed, he had warned the country that it would be the ruin of the Church ; for it quashed seven or eight hundred informations which had been laid against non-resident clergymen under the act of the 8th year of Elizabeth, which enforced residence. For his own part, his attachment to the Established Church was not to be questionedyfor he had a certificate of it from a Bishop. Yes, the Bishop a Salisbury, in a pamphlet he published in 1813, stated that he knew of no lay writer who was a friend to the Established Church. In the second edition, however, he said in a note, " I beg Mr. Cobbett's pardon, for I do believe him to be a friend to the Established Church." (" Hear, hear!" and laughter.) Having this under the hand of a Bishop, he need not put forward any professions of attachment to the Charch.

This infamous act allowed clergymen to traffic, to rent lands, and go to market ; and if he wanted a man to buy or sell sheep for him, or a good pig-poker, he should always pick out a parson for the business. There were only four thousand resident incumbents out of ten thousand in the English Church. He recommended the adoption of the American plan for the support of the Church. Things would never go on right in this country till the tithing system and the Church Establishment were altered.

A Member said, that upwards of fourteen hundred chapels, all belonging to Dissenters, had been built in Wales Mr. EsTcouier denied that the proportion of non-resident clergymen was so great as Mr: Cobbett had stated.

Mr. COBBETT said that he had taken his statement from official returns which were not then at hand.

Mr. CUTLAR FERGUSSON said that Mr. Cobbett's Tstatement on a former evening, respecting certain religious practices of the Jews— such as burning the Saviour in effigy—was untrue. The Chief Rabbi had informed him that it was utterly unfounded in fact.

7. TITHE OF HERRINGS. The Bishop of BATH and WELLS, on Thursday, mentioned, that he had received letters from the Rector of Borebam, and other gentlemen in his neighbourhood, stating that the tithe of herrings had never been formally demanded, but was merely the subject of casual conversation between the Rector and some fishermen. He trusted that Lord King would express his sorrow for having calumniated the Rector.

Lord KING said, that no part of his statement was contradicted by the letters.

Why in none of those letters had a word been said of the burning in effigy of the Rector's proctor? The letter from the Rector, indeed, stated that be had merely a casual conversation with the fishermen. Now, Lord King had distinctly stated, that on the demand of tithe on the fish, the Rector's proctor bad been burnt in effigy. Why, it might as well be said that the burning was a casual meeting between the effigy and the fire, as that the demand was a casual conversation between the Rector and the fishermen.

8. TAXATION. On the motion for going into a Committee of Ways and Means on Thursday, Mr. CcomErr rose to say that he would postpone his resolutions on the subject of the Stamp-duties- He had already mentioned that there was a mass of taxation amounting to eight millions annually, of which the nobility, clergy, and great landowners, paid little or nothing, but which fell almost exclusively upon the tradesman, the termer, the workman, and the industrious classes generally. He had proposed to bring forward a resolution, recommending the House to take this subject into their consideration. It had since occurred to him, that whilst the unfortunate question of Irish affairs was before the House, it would be better for him to defer bringing forward his motiou until that great question was finally settled. He mentioned this lest the House should imagine that he meant to abandon his motion.

Mr. SPRING RICE rose, apparently under considerable excitement, and with peculiar vehemence, said, be wished Mr. Cobbett had brought forward his motion, or, at least, that he had not intimated his intention of abandoning it in such a manlier as to propound an argument, and cause an inference.

He disputed the argument, and he denied the inference. He would tell the honourable gentleman, that all he asked of the House and of him, was a clear stage and no favour. He would dispute every inch with the honourable gentleman. He denied that there had been on the part of the Parliament, any disposition to oppress the people. It might suit the object of the honourable gentleman to make such statements. (Loud cheers.) But he would meet him—aye, he would meet him—he was not afraid to cope with him—(Lauohter from the Opposition)—yes he would cope with him foot to foot, and shoulder to shoulder, and God defend the right ! (Renewed laughter.) The honourable member might take the privilege of Parliament—he might put any thing in print for the purpose of deluding the people; but such a system should be exposed—he would expose it, by himself be would do so. (Laughter from the Opposition.) The honourable member for Oldham had made one assertion, he would make another—he declared open hostility on the subject ; let the discussion come, and then the public will decide.

Mr. COBBETT rose, amidst loud cries of "Spoke, spoke !" He intimated a desire to explain.

The SPEAKER—" Mr. Cobbett, in explanation."

Mr. COBBETT—" I omitted to say"—(" Oh! Spoke, spoke !") Mr. O'CONNELL said, the right honourable gentleman who intimated so eager a desire for the discussion, appeared, from his state of preparation, to have an advantage over those on that side of the House. (A laugh.) In sober sadness, however, (" Hear, hear !") did the right honourable gentleman mean to deny that the honourable member for Oldham had abstracted the schedules to the Stamp Act correctly ? If he had done so, why, let him remember that vulgar arithmetic never fails. It was not denied by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that he had abstracted them correctly. The only defence which he set up was, that many other taxes were in the same situation. It was, however, of no consequence. He did not fear, although the right honourable gentleman was so chivalrous as to dare the honourable member for Oldham to the combat. Common sense would triumph over Treasury dexterity. There was another 'part of the: Stamp Act which he would just allude to: the stamp mpon arbitration was 20s. If the matter in dispute was worth 50,0001., it was no more. The poor man was prevented from getting questions, which were to him of importance, decided in a cheap way, because the stamp would frequently -amount to as much or more than the value of the subject in dispute.

Mr. SPRING RICE said, he had a question to put to his learned friend. (Loud cries of " Spoke, spoke!" amidst which Mr. Spring Rice sat down.) Mr. HUME hoped both combatants would choose an early day for deciding the question between them. He must say, that Mr. Spring Rice would be a much more clever man than they had yet given him credit for on that side of the House, if he could refute the proposition that the taxes on Stamps pressed unequally, and that the principal burden was thrown upon the poorer classes. They had often heard of the influence which property ought to possess in this and that case—of the deference which was due to property, and so forth; but he thought it high time that the , House should hear something about property bearing its fair share of the bib... dens of the country. He would back Mr. Cobbett, and did not fear thatle would shrink from the fight, although he was challenged to such fearful cdstiguity as foot to foot and shoulder to shoulder. (A laugh.) Mr. FRYER complained that the landlords bad, on all occasions, thrown the burdens of the State upon the people.

Mr. HOWARD rose and spoke for some time amidst continued roars of laughter.

" The scene," says the Chronicle, " which occurred during the honourable member's speech is, indeed, indescribable." He appeared to urge upon the Ministers the propriety of repealing the House and Window Taxes. He then said that he hoped s when the Budget was brought forward on the 5th April, it would be found that Ministers paid some attention to this point. ( Sir Jam Hobhouse said—" the 1st of April.) He begged pardon ; he hoped that when the Budget was brought forward on the 1st April_( Great laughter)—really, he must complain of the want of courtesy of the right honourable Secretary at War. (Laughter.) Mr. COBBETT afterwards took an opportunity, when a new motion was before the House, to supply the omission in his previous statement— He had said that the nobility, clergy, and landowners, had for many years thrown the burden of 8,000,000/. of taxes upon the industrious classesof the community, bearing a very small past of it themselves. He omitted to say, but he would now say it, and he was prepared to prove it, that they had done so premeditatedly, designedly, and dishonestly. ("Aro, no !" and " Hear, hear!")

Mr. A. SANDFORD hoped Mr. Cobbett would not forget to mention on the other side, all the taxes which were borne exclusively by the landed interest, and which they had imposed on themselves.

Mr. COBBETT—" I den it."

9. TRADE WITH BRAZILS. Lord SANDON, on Wednesday, presented a petition from a commercial body in Liverpool, called the Brazilian Association, praying for a remittance of the excessive duties on sugar im ported from the Brazils for the purpose of refining. The petitioners stated, that the exports to Brazils amounted to three millions annually;

but the Brazilian products were so heavily taxed, that their importation was almost prohibited; that a bounty equal to 8s. per cwt. was given upon the exportation of the refined sugar of our Colonies, and yet the trade was not flourishing; that this state of things was extremely injurious to British shipping ; that it could not be expected that the Brazilians would continue long to admit our manufactures on the most favourable terms while we acted so unfairly towards them ; and that the French Government were about to admit the sugar of all countries without distinction, for the encouragement of their refineries, by which means France would become the emporium for the sugar-refining business. The petition was signed by every person in Liverpool connected with the Brazilian trade.

Mr. POCIETT THOMSON said that this subject had received much attention from Government.

A plsn might be devi,ed—a plan which he was anxious to see in operation— by which foreign sugar might be allowed to be imForted into this country, and refined actually under bond. Unless some such principle as this were adopted, it would be impossible, he feared, to afford any relief. Unfortunately, the refiners were of opinion that such a plan as be now proposed w.,old afford them no relief, and that they would reap no advantage from it unless they were allowed to mix the sugars, which could not pos.ibly be doue. If any plan could he suggested whereby the refining of foreign sugars might be confined to this country without hurting the revenue, it would receive the utmost attention of Government. What had been stated about the Brazilian trade ought to be taken into considera

twit

by those who harped -upon the subject of the evils of free trade. In Brazil they saw a country which took from them almost all of their manufactures, and. from which they refused to take any thing at all. ("Hear, hear ! ") Those gentlemen ought to bear in mind, that reciprocity meant an advantage to both sides, and that it was possible the Brazils might at a future day turn the tables upon this country. Mr. M. PHILLIPS said that there had been an alarming decrease in the number of sugar refineries in Liverpool— During the last year they had decreased from S60 to GO; and in consequence of the restrictions which prevented Brazil from sending her produce in return for our manufactures, no less than fifty vessels which had sailed from the port of Liverpool with full cargoes had returned empty. Mr. EWART, MT. STRICKLAND, and Mr. G. W. WOOD, all supported. the prayer of the petition.

10. BRIBERY AT LIVERPOOL. Lord SANDON, on Wednesday, presented a petition from the Committee for conducting his late election at

Liverpool, in which he said they courted inquiry into their conduct, and denied that they had practised any bribery at the late election, although they confessed that they had been engaged in bribery formerly. Lord. Sandon afterwards said that the prayer of the petition was against disfranchisement, not for investigation.

Colonel Wn.r.rasis spoke in favour of inquiry.

He had known Liverpool for thirty years, and he had been a good deal concerned there in election business—(".Hear, hear !" and laughter); and he could, assure the House, that for the last thirty years there had been a greater system of bribery and corruption carried on in Liverpool than had ever disgraced any rotten borough. It was very proper that this system of corruption should be taken notice of before the General Committee now appointed to inquire into the state of Corporations; and when the Corporation of Liverpool caune before the Committee, he was confident it would meet with full justice.

Mr. BENETT, on Wednesday, moved for a Select Committee to inquire into the corrupt state of the borough of Liverpool. The corrup

tion practised in the election of Mayors and Members of Parliament for that place was notorious. At the election for 1831, three thousand persons were bribed, and the expense to the bribing parties was eighty thousand pounds. In demanding an inquiry into these proceedings, he asked for no more than justice.

Mr. RIGBY WASON seconded the motion.

Lord SANDON denied that there had been any bribery at the last election. It had cost him only between fourteen and fifteen hundred pounds. The election before the last had only cost eighteen hundred

give pounds. He had no patronage, no influence, nor money to his voters, who had proved that they preferred principle to patronage. The

reason why so many of the old freemen had come up to vote on the second day was, that they objected to vote with the householders. He considered a Committee of the House, not elected by ballot nor sworn to do justice, an unfair tribunal before which to try the question. It was a political. triuunue emu a must noquitous one. He defended the Corporation of Liverpool from the charge that they had appropriated their funds, and the revenues arising from the Docks, to the purposes of corruption. He concluded by quoting the declaration of the Reverend William Shepperd, with whose name the House was well acquainted— That reverend gentleman confessed that he himself had been a corrupter; not that he had received bribes, but that his pockets had been considerably lightened by the sums he had distributed for purchasing the votes of others. Having done this, it was not his intentionio put on a hypocritical face, and set to work prosecuting others for the very offence of which he himself was guilty. No; he should assume the humility of penitence for what he had been obliged to do, and sin no more.

Mr. ROBINSON said, the subject of the petition ought to be investigated before a Municipal Committee, not before the House. He de

nied that any case had been made out for granting the prayer of the petition, which would cost the country eight or ten thousaed pounds. There was more important business to be attended to. '

Mr. R. Wasoe said, the opposition to the Committee was a shield to corruption. He detailed several circumstances which proved the existence of the grossest system of corruption at Liverpool ; and reminded the House that a former House of Commons had refused to issue a writ for that town on account of the bribery of the electors. He had no idea that the investigation would occupy much time.

Mr. O'CONNELL, Mr. P. THOMSON, Mr. HUME, and Lord JOHN Russets. supported the motion ; Sir J. IVROTTESLEY, Lord W. LENNOX, Sir H. WILLOUGHBY, and Mr. GOULBURN opposed it.

Lord Aramorte said, it appeared that the House was agreed as to the propriety of examining the last election proceedings; but he thought the Committee should be instructed not to confine its inquiries to that alone.

If the place should be found free from bribery for the last three elections— particularly taking into account the late infusion of householders—he thought the case should proceed no further ; but if bribery had been employed at the last election, it was only just and fair they should suffer for offences aggravated by being committed after Reform.

A Committee was then appointed ; to consist of fifteen members, two to be named by the House, and thirteen to be ballotted for ; and the ballot to take place on the 21st of March.

H. SUGAR-DUTIES. In a Committee of Supply, on Wednesday, Lord AI.THORP proposed the renewal of the Sugar-duties for one year It was out of his power to propose a large reduction of the duties, so as to give effectual relief to the West India interest ; and he felt that a small one would be of little or no advantage. He therefore proposed the continuance of the present duties.

Mr. Hume was surprised at the thin attendance of members, upon this the first occasion which the Reformed Parliameut bad to impose taxes. He was more especially surprised at the absence of Mr. Cobbett. He regretted that the old system of the Sager-duties was to be persevered in, and that the duties on East and West India sugar were not to be equalized. Ile would make a motion to that effect upon the bringing up of the report.

Mr. %V. %%Timmons would support the proposition for equalizing the duties.

Lord ALTHORP objected, that it was an improper time for introducing such a measure, when the renewal of the East India Charter was under consideration, and when the subject of slavery was also to be brought forward so soon.

Mr. Commits congnaulated the country on the bright prospect held out to it by the first financial measure brought before it by Ministers.

In the time of former Parliaments, it was usual fir the objects to which the taxes were to be applied to be stated before the taa,-4 were voted ; but it was re

served for a Reformed Parliament to see the taxes voted first, and their objects —whether for the Army. Navy, or other service—left to be determined afterwards. The usual course being so different from the present, lie hoped Lord Althorp would excuse his few observations. Ile ought. before proposing a vote for a tax, to have made a statement of the burdens under which the...country already labours.

Lord ALTHORP replied, that Mr. Goulburn's objection was merely one of form.

The Navy Estimates had already been presented ; but there was no vacant day for taking them into consideration. The postponement of the alteration of the Sugar-duties till the 5th of April, would throw it one day beyond the expiration of the financial year. It was impossible for him to state what he could reduce, until he could tell what was required for the support of the Government, and what would be the state of the revenue.

Mr. Wannewron said, it was an inconvenient mode to vote millions without knowing what the gross am nint of taxation was.

He wished Mr. Nolen Thomson had been in the House, as he had intended to ask him what had been the result of the experiments on sugar, with a view of classifying the various qualities, so as to admit of an ad valorem duty. Loud Ainaloite replied, that the experiments had not afronitd reason to expect that any system of the kind referred to could be adopted. The whole result showed that there had been an error in the bounties on refined sugar, hut the experiments varied considerably.

A Member said, that neither the West Indian nor the East Indian interest would thank Mr. Hume for his interference on the present occasion.

His proceeding upon the present occasion was another symptom of an ambition, more tit oublesome than successful, which had distinguished him during the present session. (A laugh.) Mr. HUME concluded, from these observations, that tile West India . interest had entered into a bargain with Government, by which the interests of the People were to be sacrificed. ("No.") The honourable member hail said that he would not receive the thanks of the West India or East India interests. He wanted not their thanks. The interests of parties had been too long attended to in that House; it was time that the interests of the People should be attended to.

After some further conversation, Mr. RUTHVEN moved an adjournment; which was negatived by 86 to 8, and the resolution proposed by Lord Althorp was agreed to.

The House sat till one o'clock. •

On Thursday, when the report of the Committee of Ways and Means was brought up, Mr..HUME moved as an amendment, that in

future all imported mported from the Colonies should pay a duty of 15s. instead of 24s. The reduction would be advantageous to the West India interest, as well as to the nation at large.

Mr. HERMES said, that if the reports were true that Government had some measures in preparation for the relief of the West India interest and the settlement of the Slavery question, it was not right to bring forward the present resolution. The whole proceeding was irregular. The. House ought not to be called to vote money before the way in which it was to be expended was pointed out.

Lord Aurnone could not agree to the reduction proposed by Mr. Hume. That reduction would affect the revenue to the extent of 1,800,000/. The revenue had lost the whole of the reduction from 27s. to 24.s. ; which bad not been made up by increased consumption. He had not brought forward his financial statement ',ecause be had not the return of the revenue for the pending quarter ; which last year madea difference of 600,000/. as compared with the corresponding one of 1831. He was certain that the financial statement for 1833 would be satisfactory.

Mr. Hume's resolution was negatived without a division.

1'2. REDUCTION OF OFFICIAL SALARIES. Mr. HUDSON, on Thursday, moved a resolution for "a graduated reduction in the pay and salaries of all persons employed in the public service, and in all superannuation allowances, half-pay, and pensions, paid out of the public money." Mr. 'F. ATWOOD seconded the motion, with. regret. He knew that its effect, if acted upon, would be to create great distress. But all other classes were suffering, and it was necessary to do something for their relief. It was not fair that the soldiers, whose pay was raised from sixpence to thirteenpence a day on account of the alteration in the currency, should continue to receive the same pay now.

Mr. .EltraiE was aware that considerable reduction had been made-in official salaries, in conformity with a resolution of the House that they should all be lowered so as to approximate to the scale of 1702.

It appeared to him that it would be impolitic to adopt the rule proposed by Mr. Attwool. He thought that the House should adopt the rule of reducing all the salaries which had been increased in 1808 and 1811 on account of the depression of the currency, and the increased price of the necessaries of life, down to the smite at which they store at that period. He did not know how far that hail been done already ; he knew that the Treasury had acted upon it to a• certain extent ; but to carry that rule into full effect, a Committee must again. Lie appointed. He could nut, upon principle, agree to the yroposition that the same amount of reduction should be applied to all salaries without distinction.

It Might to be the first duty of Parliament to overhaul the retiring pensions, which were a greater abuse than the salaries attached to the offices themselves. He suggested to Mr. Attwood to withdraw his motion for the present.

Mr. RoseAnns insisted upon the necessity of making very considerable reduction in the public expenditure. The distress of the people was very great.

The middle classes of England were a loyal and orderly race; they wished' to be governed by the Court of St. James's, and not by the mob of St. Giles's ; but urdess they had better means of providing themselves with subsistence, he

was afraid that these orderly liadings would not long exist on their part. He then proceeded to complain 'of the alteration of prices which had been created hy Peel's Bill. That bill bad produced a depression of prices amounting.. to 'Jill per cent. II ow could that take place without producing general distressand confusion ?

Lord A I.THORP agreed with Mr. Hume in objecting to the motion of' Mr. Hudson. He thought that, at present, Government officers were not too highly paid for the good of the country. He had made a number of reductions, and inore were contemplated.

Besides, there was a Committee appointed to look into the Board of Excise ; and the House would he satisfied that the inquiry would be properly made, and that regulations would be adopted, whereby, if it were possible, many officers would be reduced, when he mentioned that the gentleman appointed to that commission was Sir H. Parnell. With tespect to the Board of Stamps, and to the collection of taxes, it was intended that in die country the distribution of the one :aid die collection of the other should become the duties of one officer. In both these hitter departments, it was intended to reduce several of the Corn. missioners. These were the intentions of Government—these the views of economy it had. Without for a moment considering patronage, Government was resolved to make a reduction of officers wherever it could be made and to make that reduction immediately, without postponing it to such a period that its original intentions might be forgotten.

Mr. Roarsisoe complained of the system of superannuations.

He knew a remarkable instance of an officer of the Customs, who had, after twenty-three years' enjoyment of the office and its salary, been superannuated on the ground of deafuess, he having been always subject to this deafness: the salary was 1,400/. a year, and they had allowerl. him to take a superannuation allowance of 1,2041/. a year, although the gentleman had a private fortune of not less titan 10,000/. a year.

Mr. COBBETT said, he had but one observation to make- The present discussion had convinced him more than ever of the natural dislike the vti lugs had to he three in a bed. But whenever they made room, it was for their own convenience, and not for that of others. Yes, what he had to complain of was, that many persons had been turned out of their employment by the Wings, for no other purpose than dint the Whigs might get some of themselves ill. (" oh ! " and cries of" Name !") Well, since the House was so very eager to have names—since they pressed him so hotly to give a name—he would give one. They had turned out Sir Charles Saxton, Commis

sioner of the Plymouth Dork-yard, in order to put in his stead Sir George Grey, one of themselves. The fact was related to him by Sir Charles Saxton, who

besides stated, that be was still able to perthrm the duties of his office. The Whigs turned hint out, notwithstanding; giving him It retiring pension of 8001. a year after theyhad done so. Mr. FIELDEN (of Oldham) said, that time great reduction which had taken place in the wages of the labouring classes ought to betaken into

consideration when the question of superannuation and allowances was before the House. He said that be now paid only Is. 3d. for weaving apiece of calico of the same size.and material for which he paid 8s. in 1814.

A Member stated, that in the neighbourhood of Dukinfield the weavers were extremely well off.. They earned, men, women, and children, upon the average, 10s. per week each.

Mr. BROCKLEHURST, Mr. MARSHALL, and Mr. WYNN ELLIS confirmed the statements of the very great reduction which had taken place in wages, and of the distress of the operatives:

Mr Hudson's motion was finally withdrawn.

• la, MASTER 07 REPORTS OFFICE. In answer to 8 question by Mr. HUME, on Thursday, Lord ALTHORP stated, that the Senior Registrar of the Court of Chancery was appointed to this office pro ternpore ; that within a few days, however, the office would be done away with, and its duties transferred to another department ; and that the Senior Registrar would receive a retiring pension in the place of the Master's Office, to which, according to the old practice, he would have certainly succeeded. The office of Senior Registrar was worth nearly as much as that of the Master of Reports,—namely, between 4,0001. and 5,000/. per annum ; but the former was a laborious employ. ment, and the latter nearly a sinecure. The Registrar had been fortyseven years in office, and might have secured a retiring pension two years ago. He thought that no objection, under these circumstances, would be made to the pension proposed to be given him.

14. DISTRIBUTION OF THE ARMY. Mr. HUME moved on Thursday for returns of the distribution of the regular military force in 1833.

Lord Ai:mons objected to grant the returns, because if it became the practice to do so it might be difficult to resist giving the information when it might be dangerous to the public service.

Colonel DAViES said, the excuse was a poor one. He wished to know why the information could not be given ?

Sir JOHN HOBIIOUSE said, there was sufficient information given for all purposes of argument upon the Estimates. It would be the grossest imprudence to publish to the world what number of troops we had stationed in our various Colonies.

Mr. O'CONNELL trusted that the House would insist upon having the information : without it, the House was only able to guess at the expense. Sir Jome HOBHOUSE said, the aggregate was given.

Mr. O'CONNELL wished to have the details, in order that the expense of a single drummer or fifer might be saved.

Mr. WYNN never recollected an instance of information being re

• quired when the Minister of the Crown said that it would be dangerous to the public service to give it.

Mr. HUME was surprised at the observations of Lord Althorp and Sir John Hobhouse. The House was told that the country might be ,attacked if the information which he moved for was granted ; but, in the name of common sense, by whom was it to be attacked ? By and by, when the Estimates should be under discussion, if he were to move for a reduction of the Army, Ministers would ask him to show how any part of the force could be spared ; and yet they refused him the only means by which he would be enabled to do so. He should like to know, for instance, how many troops were maintained at the Ionian Islands, because he might feel it his (hay to propose that not a single soldier should be retained there. (Mr. W. Brougham—" What! not one?") Mr. Brougham was pleased to be merry. Perhaps it was supposed, in Southwark, that the Ionian Islands belonged to this country ; but he could assure Mr. Brougham that that was not the fact. ("Hear, hear ! ') He should certainly take the sense of the House upon the motion. (" Question.") Oh, yes, they should have questions enough soon. There were some members of that House who would not suffer observations to be made, or even a question to be asked, without crying "Question;" but that would

• change soon.

Lord PALMF.RSTON was opposed to granting the information, because its production might be detrimental to the public service.

The House then divided : for the motion, 23; against it, 201; majority, 178.

15. WANT OF Room IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. WYNN, 011 Wednesday, complained of the practice which had become so general among members, of attending merely to take their places and then immediately leaving the House.

To correct that, he would move, "that upon Election Committee days no member should be allowed to take any place for himself, unless he shall have attended the service of the House."

Mr. W. WHITMORE was glad that the subject was brought before the House.

He might safely say, for himself, that he had not had a seat in the House the whole of the session: he had sat for a few minutes in some other member's seat, from which he was very soon turned off. It was very evident that there was not sufficient room in that House to carry on the public business. ( Great cheering.) He hoped that, among other reforms, they would make such arrangements as would enable all the members to do their duty to the constituency who had sent them there.

Mr. WARBURTON said, that Mr. Hume had a motion on the books respecting a new House, which he hoped would be supported by the members who were so sensible of the inconvenience of the present one.

-Mr. BARING said, as the practice of taking seats in the House had fallen into great abuse, be should take this opportunity of moving that it be altogether discontinued. As to the form of service, of reading prayers, it was a piece of the most hypocritical formality. He would take the sense of the House on the propriety of discontinuing entirely the practice of taking seats.

.At the suggestion of Mr. HUME, Mr. Baring agreed to postpone his motion until the result of Mr. Hume's proposal for a new House was known.

16. NEW HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. HUME, on Thursday, moved that the report of the Committee of last session relative to the erection of a New House of Commons should be referred to a Select Committee. The accommodation afforded by the present House was not sufficient for one half the members. The evidence taken before the Committee of last session proved, that as regarded space, ventilation, and other conveniences, it would be impossible to procure them by any alteration in the present House.

It seemed that 348 individuals not including those in the Strangers' Gallery, might be inconveniently crowdedtogether. But, if the seats were placed at such a distance as to enable gentlemen to pass each other easily (which it was impossible for ordinary-sized men to do at present), then only 294 persons could Bit comfortably. In no place where such important business was transacted was the accommodation so exceedingly bad. On this point he would refer to the experience of every member who recollected what passed a few nights ago. On that occasion every seat below the Gallery was quite full, and yet only 366 members had any thing like accommodation. The space between the Seats under the Gallery was only one-half the ordinary width, so that it was almost inipoesible to pass. The members were, in fact, wedged in, almost like herrings in a barrel. (Laughter.) It was a shame that the business of this great country should be transacted in a situation so extremely uncomfortable.

The inconvenience of the. present House was felt especially when the divisions were taken. From twenty to forty minutes were lost by adhering to the old mode of dividing. Members sometimes remained fast asleep in the House, and were counted as supporting the very motion to which they were opposed. The expense of building a new House would be only 20,0001. more than that of altering the present one. ' Three ideas were thrown out on this subject. One was, to extend the House by taking in the Lobby. Next, it was suggested that it might be enlarged in die direction of Cotton Garden, where the house of Mr. Ley would afford an excellent site for a building. But they wanted proper ventilation ; and in the latter case, the air would be obstructed by the House of Lords and the Long Gallery ; that was, therefore,' objected to. le inally, it was proposed to build in a direct line between the present House and the river. To that proposition he . believed there was scarcely a dissenting vote.

He always wished to keep utility in view ; although he entered into the feelings of gentlemen who cherished fond recollections of events and scenes that had occurred in the present House, and who were on that account anxious that no change should take plaice. The Committee which he proposed would have power to examine plans and estimates, trid report upon them to the House.

There had been a proposition to remove the House to another situation; and he felt satisfied that a better building might be erected elsewhere ; but they could not well alter the situation of the Commons without changing that of the Lords at the same time ; and as he believed they were not prepared to remove the Lords just vet—( Great laughter)—it would be better to preserve the present locality of theHouse of Commons.

Mr. WARBURTON seconded the motion ; and went into calculations to demonstrate the inconvenience to which members were now subjected. He objected to the oblong shape of the House, as inconvenient and every way inferior to a semicircular form, which would admit of a better position for the ipeaker than that which he now occupied. 44 Sir," said Mr. Warburtou, " you have not, like Janus eyes in your head, and therefore cannot always see in every direction. ( Great laughter.) I say, Sir, you have not eyes in the back of your head , and you cannot see what goes on in that part of the House behind the Chair, which is called, I suppose from the superior wisdom of its occupants, Solomon's Porch. (Laughter.) There, and at the bar, there is frequently the greatest disorder, which might be prevented if you could have your eye on every member."

He trusted that a new House would be prepared for them against the opening of next session.

Lord ALTHORP would not oppose the motion, though it would take a great deal of argument to satisfy him of the necessity for altering the situation of the House.

Sir R. INGus doubted the necessity of the alteration.

They ought to consider, not whether the House afforded sufficient accommodation on two or three nights in the year—such as Wednesday last, but whether it was adequate to the transaction of their ordinary every-day business ? The really important business of the country was done by Houses consisting of from ' 150 to 200 members : was there not ample accommodation for that number? It was better to have the House too small for three days in the year than too large on all the remaining days. Had 658 individuals ever formed a deliberative assembly ? Lastly, he objected to any alteration, on the ground of the change olmoral feeling that might be produced by an abolition of ancient associations, and the abandonment of a scene hallowed byrecollections of the noblest patriotism, and the most splendid eloquence.

Mr. C. FERGUSSON said, it was idle to talk of moral feelings and associations, on an occasion where the only question was as to the accommodation of the House.

Mr. P. How:tan objected to the proposed alteration.

He had sat in three Parliaments, and during that time had experienced no deficiency of accommodation in the House. He did not agree with Mr. Warburton in thinking a space of two feet necessary for the accommodation of each member. It was well known, that in the Army men stood within a space of eighteen inches. Why should members of Parliament occupy a larger space? (Great laughter.) The Romans—(Laughter, renewed on Mr. Howard's repeating the words, which he did three several times before the merriment in the House allowed him to proceed )_the Romans never altered the size of the Forum Rornanum. (Prolonged laughter.) He wished to follow the example of the Romans—(Laughter)—he did not want to get rid of the appendages • about him. (Renewed laughter.) He was not disposed to do away with this unassuming House (A laugh); he did not mean the members, he spoke of the House itself. (Laughter.) Mr. O'CONNELL supported the motion— One word in sober sadness. He would ask the House, whether it was not desirable that, in one way or another, the public should be acquainted with the conduct of their representatives in Parliament ? And how was it possible for them to be correctly acquainted with it, if not only the members themselves, but those who reported the proceedings of the House, were unpmvided with proper accommodation ? It was desirable that every facility should be afforded for giving what passed in Parliament to the world, and that their proceedings should no longer go forth as if merely by connivance and sufferance.

With respect to the moral associations and inspiring recollections mentioned by Sir Robert Inglis, he said that Sir Robert had not gone far enough back in his reminiscences— He should have directed attention to the time when this was St. Stephen's Chapel, and when the sacrifice of the mass had been celebrated in it. It was necessary to advert to that circumstance in order to complete the historical recollections which connected the House with times gone by ; but it would not have served Sir Robert's purpose to go so far back. We had come at last to the days of common sense ; and on the present occasion it was not necessary to talk of-Pym or Hampden, when the only point to be decided was that of convenience or inconvenience. If it was resolved not to remedy the defects complained of by an alteration of the House, the only way that remained to remove the inconvenience was to send 105 of the members back to Ireland. (Laughter.) Mr. D. DUNDAS objected to the expense which the alteration would occasion, when the people were starving.

Mr. M. O'CoieNELL observed, that Mr. Dundas made no objection to voting away the public money when Mr. flume's motion on military pensions and sinecures was under discussion, on which occasion he voted in the majority.

Mr. DUNDAS was glad of an opportunity to explain the grounds of that vote. It was admitted that if the motion was agreed to, the Army must be paid more than at present ; but as he thought that it was already sufficiently expensive, he refused to increase that expense by voting for the motion.

Mr. Hume's motion was then agreed to, and the Committee was appointed.

17. PErerross IN ARREAR. Mr. Wass, on Tuesday, said that since the new arrangement had been carried into effect, only sixtyfour petitions had been disposed of. There were now more than three hundred names on the Speaker's list ; which, at the rate they were going on at, would not be diaposed of for six weeks. Colonel DAVIES, Mr. R. Wascnv, and Mr. LITTLETON thought that the many useless speeches which were made were the cause of the delay. The SPEAKEa said, that to discuss the business at that time would not facilitate its accomplishment ; and the conversation dropped, after a suggestion from Mr. CORBETT, that the petitions should all be read at full length, and no speeches be made upon them.

18. LAW REFORM. Lord BROUGHAM, on Thursday, brought in a bill to effect certain reforms in the law, which had been recommended

by the Common Law Commissioners. Its main object was to facili tate the attainment of cheap and speedy justice. He proposed to give the Judges the power to curtail special pleadings ; to limit the time during which actions might be brought for the recovery of bond debts to ten years ; and also to protect those persons who had become sureties for Crown debtors from actions which, under the present law, could be brought against them even forty or fifty years after the death of the debtors themselves. It was by no means uncommon, the principal debtor and his surety being both (lead, to call upon the representative of the surety for the full amount, although the principal debtor might have been in a state of solvency, and had the claim been made earlier, the debt might have been recovered. It was of the highest importance that some limitation should be fixed for calling upon the surety, in the event of the principal failing, and in the event of his not being called upon to discharge his obligation to the Government. This was provided for in the bill. There were other provisions which he would explain more fully when the bill came to he read a second time..

19. LAWS OF REAL PROPERTY. Sir J. CAMPBELL, on Wednesday, brought up a bill for the limitation of suits and actions relative to Real Property ; also a bill to amend the laws relating to Dower ; also a bill to amend the law of Courtesy ; and a fourth to amend the law of Inheritance. They were severally read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Wednesday next.

20. FINES AND RECOVERIES. On the same day, Sir J. CAMPBELL brought in a bill for the abolition of Fines and Recoveries. It was read a first time.

21. Lamm IN FACTORIES. Lord ASHLEY, on Tuesday, obtained leave to bring in a bill to regulate the labour of children in factories.

On Wednesday, several petitions in favour of the measure having been presented, Lord Moargrii took the opportunity of stating, that he did not consider it necessary to proceed with the similar bill of which he had himself given notice.

On the same day, Mr. Witso>r PATTEN gave notice of a motion for the appointment of a " Commission to collect evidence on the subject of children employed in factories."

22. COLONIAL SLAVERY. Lord .ALTHORP, in answer to a question by the Marquis of CHANDOS, on Monday, repeated a declaration which he bad before made, that Government would bring forward what he hoped would prove a satisfactory measure for the abolition of slavery. Lord Althorp declined stating any particulars of the plan. In presenting petitions, on Wednesday, from Weybridge and two places in Wexford, Lord SUFFIELD observed, that the advocates of the emancipation of the Negroes had delayed bringing forward the subject, in order to afford Ministers an opportunity for making some arrangement with the West India body, and introducing a measure into the House of Commons which would prove satisfactory to the nation. It was now notorious, that the West India body had most unadvisedly refused to concur in the Ministerial plan and he therefore gave notice, that very. shortly he should submit to the House a proposition for the emancipation of the Negroes. On the same day, in the House of Commons, Mr. FOWELL Bilx.roN -urged the speedy settlement of the question. He had not withdrawn his notice for the 19th, with regard to Colonial slavery ; and lie would not withdraw it, unless Ministers came forward with a measure of their own which would embrace the entire and immediate abolition of slavery.

23. OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH. Lord SANDON, on Wednesday, presented a petition from Mr. George Forwood, one of the Churchwardens of Liverpool, complaining of the practice of masters paying wages on Saturday nights ; and another signed by four thousand gentry, clergy, merchants, and other inhabitants of Liverpool, praying for the better observance of Sunday. Mr. CORBETT could not let that petition pass without expressing his opinion of the motives by which all the petitions respecting the Lord's Day were got up. A petition was presented, the day before yesterday, from Staines, and two other parishes in the county of Middlesex, expressing the desire of the petitioners to have a'law to protect them against the injury to which they were exposed in consequence of impious traders trading on the Sunday. It was very much like the reason given by Hudibras why the pious should have all the good things of this world—namely, that the godly were entitled to them, but the ungodly were not. The real truth was—and this was the foundation of all those petitions— the rich tradesman went out in his gig on a Sunday, with his lady and children, "on a trisit to their friends at Vichhom ;" and he could tell them that their friends, in many instances, would be glad if a law were passed to make them stay at home. (Laughter.) The rich tradesman could go out on a Sunday to see his children at boarding-school, and therefore he wished to prevent the poor tradesman from selling on a Sunday those articles which he, the rich one, would then be able to sell on the Monday. That was the foundation of all these petitions. In that from Staines the petitioners avowed their motive.