Debates anti Vrocubings in Varlianunt.

THE STATE OF IRELAND: THE ARMS BILL.

In the House of Lords, on Tuesday, the Earl of RODEN drew atten- tion to the state of Ireland, and to a petition which he had to present on that subject— It emanated from upwards of 5,000 of her Majesty's Protestant loyal sub- jects residing in the district of Rathfriland, in the county of Down. It desired the House to take measures for repressing the rebellious spirit in Ireland; ex- pressed great surprise at seeing the marked difference made between Protest- ants and Roman Catholics in respect of the enforcement of the law against processions; many of the Protestants having been sent to gaol for celebrating the anniversay of the battle of the Boyne, while meetings for the Repeal of the Union were being held almost daily without the Roman Catholics who attended them being punished in any way. The petitioners prayed, first, that the House would take into immediate consideration the present alarming state of Ireland, and the dangerous situation in which Protestants in that Country were placed; that they would adopt such measures as would prevent a civil war ; and that they would repeal, or not renew, the Procession Act, and permit the Protestants of Ireland, who had sworn to maintain the house of Hanover on the throne of these realms, to celebrate the anniversary of the delivery of their countrymen. Lord Roden supported this petition in a long speech. The Procession Act was introduced by the Whig Ministers in 1832: it was at the time per- fectly understood that it should apply, not only to the Protestant processions in Ireland, but to all processions connected with any class or denomination of the inhabitants; and he himself had for some time engaged in persuading the Orangemen of that fact. Under that act, the mere fact of appearing in proces- sion was constituted a crime, no matter whether any overt act, any violent or dangerous conduct, had occurred on the part of the persons composing such procession. Two young men who took part in a procession at Dromore, in July last year, were sentenced to six months' imprisonment, and actually en- dured five; one of them having infirm parents, who were dependent on his exertions. They were the only defaulters in a population of 6,000; while in others the most flagrant breaches of the law were overlooked. A petition for a mitigation of their sentence was forwarded to the Lord-Lieutenant : but the answer was, that the law must take its course; and it was received by them in sorrowful submission. Enlarging on the peaceable conduct of his Protestant brethren in Ulster during the last month, Lord Roden contended that it would only be justice to repeal the act, or extend it to all classes and denominations.

Thence be passed to the disturbed state of Ireland; which has arrested im-

provement of every kind ; and improvements being abandoned by the higher classes, many of the humbler classes are deprived of employment. He dwelt upon the military organisation of the Repeaters; who are taught to assemble and move by command of their officers. He mentioned the case of persons professing to go forth at night for the purpose of obtaining a certain kind of fish, marching in three divisions, with all the regularity of soldiers, and headed by a person who drilled them as they marched. It was no wonder if an idea prevailed that these bodies of men were drilled for a purpose to which lie would not more particularly allude. It also appeared that a large number of foreigners—whether officers or not was not ascertained—had re- cently passed over into Ireland, mixing with the people, and many of them attending the meetings to which he had alluded. Another fact calculated to excite apprehension was this: it happened that, during the present summer, very few of the peasantry of Ireland had come over to this country for the pur- pose of obtaining employment during the harvest ; and he thought that the reapers were kept in Ireland for some purpose or other. Little regard, however, would have been paid to these things, alarming and frightful though they might be, had the Protestants of Ireland seen the rulers of this country, her Majesty's Government, active and energetic. He knew that the Duke of Wellington, as Commander-in-Chief, had done all in his power, by sending bodies of troops over to Ireland, to prevent and meet any sanguinary outbreak: but that was not sufficient; other measures were also necessary. He consi- dered that it was advisable and necessary to enlist on the side of the Govern- ment, to aid in repressing the proceedings to which he had called their Lord- ships' attention all persons, of every denomination, who were willing to asso- ciate with the Object of maintaining peace and tranquillity. He would under- take to say, even some priests themselves had been induced to unite in the Re- peal movement, who would not have done so had Government taken a bold and determined course. He related an instance of a Catholic farmer, who held 500 acres of land, who had been reluctantly compelled to join in a Repeal meeting at Kens, in April. At that meeting, Mr. O'Connell and Mr. Belly, a priest, denounced the Poor-law in such terms that the collectors refused to act, and other collectors could with difficulty be obtained. Emissaries went about ordering Roman Catholics to become Repealers or " to take the conse- quences," and customers were turned away from the shops of those who refused to join the movement. The correspondent who communicated these facts to Lord Roden, a Magistrate of twenty years' sanding in one of the inland conn- ties, said —" This I communicated to the Irish Government. I am sorry to say, the middle and bumbler class of Protestants are so dissatisfied with Go- vernment, and feel themselves and their interests so sacrificed to the vain endeavour to conciliate their enemies, that nothing but self-preservation would now induce them to step forward, and I fear some have joined the Repeal ranks from disgust." • • • " Such is the state of our country now ; all the well-disposed are driven to be Ripealerg, whether they will or not. At the time I gave my humble advice, that by energy and the least show of determination the movement could then be stopped, a message from the Queen would have done it ; and it was moat anxiously looked for as much by the Roman Catholics as Protestants. It came not ; and those who at that time would willingly have caught at any ex- pressed wish of Government to shelter themselves under, are now so identhfied with the Repeal movement, either from inclination or intimidation, that 1 fear it would now be a hopeless attempt to separate them." Lord Roden exhorted Government to imitate Lord Anglesea, and to adopt a course still left open to them—to call out and arm the Yeomam7. If the present agitation made head in Ireland, let them not suppose that its effects would exhaust themselves there ; for although it was an old saying, as old as the days of Elizabeth, yet true it was,

" Ile that would England win Must with Ireland tint begin."

The Duke of WELLINGTON did not dispute the statements made in the latter part of Lord Roden's speech : it was his opinion that Lord Roden had by no means exaggerated the evils of the existing state of things in Ireland : but he would draw attention to the prayer of the petition itself— First, however, the Duke paid a tribute of praise to the conduct of the Pro- testants in the North of Ireland, in abstaining from processions and the cele- bration of days to the memory of which they were attached. " My Lords, I applaud this conduct. Not only do I applaud it, but I approve of the motives for it; and I anxiously hope that they will persevere in that conduct, aiding the measures of the Government to preserve the peace of the country, and ultimately the integrity of this mighty empire. (Loud cheers.) But, my Lords, I think that my noble friend and the petitioners labour underat mistakes, in supposing that the act of Parliament to which my noble friegrend has adverted, and which he calls upon us to bring in a bill to repeal, applies to processions other than those particularly described in its preamble—' proces- sions for the purpose of celebrating or commemorating any festival, anniversary, or particular event relating to or connected with any religious or other dis- tinctions or differences between any class of his Majesty: subjects.' That is the nature of the processions which are prohibited under the act of Parliament ; and, my Lords, it is a question of law which I don't mean to decide or give my opinion on, because it is worth nothing—it is a question of law, which those mast have considered whose duty it is to put the law into execution, whe- ther those other processions to which my noble friend has adverted—those other carryings of banners and marching, with music (whatever may he the degree of criminality attaching to such acts)—fall under the provisions of the act.' Indeed, when the act was passed, it was proposed, in both Houses of Parliament, to extend itsprovisions ; but Parliament refused to do so. Admitting the truth of Lord Roden's description as to the state to which these criminal agitations had brought Ireland—admitting that Government were responsible for every act they did, as well as for every omission—he was not then able to state what the intentions of Government were. "My Lords, I do not think it desirable that they should be stated : but what I do say is this— that I, whose duty it is to superintend one of those offices on which the execu- tion of the measures of the Government depends—I feel confident that every- thing that could be done has been done—(Cheers)--in order to enable the Government to preserve the peace of the country—(Loud cheers)—and to meet all misfortunes and consequences which may result from the violence of the passions of those men who unfortunately guide the multitude in Ireland. (Loud cheers.) My Lords, I do not dispute the extent of the conspiracy ; I do not dispute the dangers resulting from organization in that country : I have stated it publicly on more than one occasion—I do not deny—it is notorious, it is avowed, it is published in every paper all over the world—I do not deny the assistance received from foreigners—not from foreign governments, I have no right to say so, but from foreigners of nearly all nations—for there are disturbed and disturbing spirits everywhere—(A laugh)—who arc anxious to have an opportunity of injuring and deteriorating the great prosperity of this country. (Cheers.) I don't deny all this: but still I say, I feel confident that the measures adopted by the Government have been such that they will be enabled to resist all, and ultimately to preserve the peace of the country. (Loud cheers.) And if it should turn out that that is the case, I believe it is best that we should persevere in the course in which we are proceeding, and not attempt to adopt other measures until it becomes absolutely necessary to take them."

The Earl of WINCHILSEA supported the motion. He found that Mr. O'Connell had said in 1832, that such processions were never to take place in Ireland; and perhaps that lured many into voting for the measure. If those who attended Repeal meetings were dismissed from the Magistracy, what should be done to those who spoke of getting rid of the "Saxon yoke "?—sedition and treason, if ever these were to be found.

The Earl of WICKLOW approved the conduct of Government in not introducing new coercive measures ; but thought that the act against processions should not be renewed on its expiry next session— He regretted that the Roman Catholic hierarchy should, though not univer- sally, yet so generally, have allied themselves with the agitators. It was im- possible, however, that the example of the priesthood could have produced such an effect upon the population, if there had not been some-deep-rooted evil. It was for the Government to act so as to remove the source of this evil ; and, if they could not prevent the priesthood from having their influence upon the population, they most take measures to improve that body itself: and for that reason, he was anxious that Government should bring forward measures for raising the character of the Roman Catholic priesthood.

The Marquis of CLANRIcARDE contrasted Lord Roden's resolutions of 1837, his attacks on Lord Normanby, and application of the maxim " Qui facit per :ilium facit per se," with his present lame falling-off- He concurred in what had fallen from the Duke of Wellington at the end of his speech, and from the Earl of Wicklow, about coercion; and in the opinion that there would be no civil war : but he should like to hear the opinion of Government as to what was to be the end of things in Ireland, and as to the prospect of any amelioration. In Irelaud they were apt, as it had been observed, to look too much to the Government; they considered the misgovernment all-important, and they looked generally to the Government for carrying on public works. It was, therefore, in this respect that the Irish Government ought to pay more attention to the general welfare of the country than was necessary for England ; and it was on this ground that they had the more right to complain, that the only measures brought forward; by the Government were the Irish Arms Bill and the Poor-law Amendment Bill. There was no pros- pect of measures for the employment of the poor ; of any plan of emigration ; or of :ay improvement of the Grand Jury law.

Lord Baotrasen, alluding to the universal spread of almost dis-

organization through the influence of one or two individuals, descanted on the difficulty in determining what should be done to check the mis- chief- It appeared that every precaution had been taken to maintain the law as it stood: rje tord Clanncarde said that the only remedy really to better the

condition of the people of Ireland was one that would find them employment. "Here I confess I pause ; because I do not exactly see my way to any measure that can put an end to the present state of things. The remedy which my noble friend proposes is one which Parliament undoubtedly has a right to call on the Government to propose ; but at the same time, it is necessarily one that must be slow and remote in its operation. It is a remedy that will take years to carry it out ; and now our talk is of months and weeks. My noble friend has also told us, that one reason why Ireland is not prosperous is, that capital does not flow into the country. Unhappily this is too true. But why be surprised at it ? Is it likely that any capitalist will send his capital to a country where he does not know that there may not be an outbreak before be gets his first quarter's payment ? Suppose, however, that the capitalist has no fear of a rebellion, and is satisfied with the course taken by Government, still it is likely he would say, I should like my capital to be invested in a place where 1 can go over and look after it, and where, if necessary, I can send a person to attend to it without the fear of his being mobbed, and where there is no reason to fear that the next cry may be for fixity of capital, as it has already been of fixity of tenure' ; for that may be the next cry ; and as the tendency to fixity of tenure is to convert the tenant into the landlord, so the tendency of fixity of capital' might be to convert the borrower into the lender. (Laughter.) A capitalist does not like to send his capital to a country where a doctrine like this might be established, on the model of another so very similar which has already been set up there. (Laughter.) Yet is there such a glut of capital that it perpetually seeks investment in foreign speculations. There is also this other thing which alarms capitalists. They hear these friends of the Irish people boasting of their meetings, and of their being able to command their hundreds of thousands of men. They see the power which they thus boast of used for the purpose of conveying the most vehement attacks on the Government, and the most violent abuse of the nation to which those capital- ists themselves belong. The Celtic capital being little and the poverty exces- sive, and the demand of the Celt for the capital of the Saxon being extreme—the wise Celt having for his object to lessen that excessive poverty, and draw some portion of the Saxon capital to supply the Celtic wants—this wise and judi- cious friend of Ireland, in order to effect his object, deals, from one end of the year to the other, in the moat gross and unrestrained abuse of every thing Saxon, and proclaims Saxon England as the determined enemy of Celtic Ire- land. This is the Irish way of inducing English capitalists to send over their money to Ireland. Now, your capitalist likes large masses of produce, of gold or silver, but not large masses of people—large masses of people, too, who are collected together under a pretence which he knows must necessarily be false. For when a man tells me of his addressing 200,000 men, I find it impossible to believe him. When he tells me that the 200,000 men whom he proposes to addrees meet calmly to discuss a great national question, I at once turn with contempt, scorn, and disgust from such a statement, because I know it to be physically impossible that at a meeting composed of such immense numbers any thing like discussion can take place. I very well know what that object is, but the

capitalist thinks it is for the purpose of breaking the peace. I do nut my- self believe so. I think that so long as the agitators can hold the issue of

those meetings in their hands, they will be the last to risk their own safety. But this system of intimidation is not without its effects. It deters the lawful and well-disposed from coming forward and doing their duty to the country and rallying round the Government. It prevents them from raising their voice, as they would do, against RepeaL" Lord Brougham alluded to means no longer in existence of repressing such meetings. " I remember well some eight or nine years ago, when I was in the Ministry, a system of organized meetings was going on, and was threatened during the whole vacation, after Parliament was up. I gave, however, an inti- mation in my place, that the conveners of those meetings were reckoning with- out their host if they thought that they could carry them on with impunity at the imminent risk of the public peace. I was the object of abuse for three months; but there were no more meetings. The parties knew well that the threat came from a quarter where it was likely to be followed up. Personal prudence prevailed. But what enabled me to do it ? A law which was then in existence, but which has now expired. That law gave the Government a power to change the venue, and try such offences in Dublin, in whatever part of the country they might have been committed. It was because I was forti- fied with that act that I ventured to make the declaration I have referred to.

That act expired in 1840. A single clause of ten lines might have renewed it, but it was not done. The same law prevails as to Excise prosecutions in Eng- land; and also in the common law of Scotland, where Edinburgh was what might be called a commune forum for all the country, when occasion required it. This was the law of Great Britain : why, on the principle of equal laws, should it not also be the law of Ireland ?" He deprecated the calling out of the Yeo- manry, as tending to collision of the loyal, peaceable inhabitants of the North, with the unfortunate, misguided people elsewhere—who, be believed, were more sinned against by bad advice than sinning. If he were to predict at all though it was always hazardous to do so, he should say that this storm would blow over, and that coercive measures would only have a tendency to add fuel to an expiring flame. He exhorted the Irish people to relinquish their fatal agitation. Alluding to French sympathy, he said that Louis Philippe, his Ministers, and the mass of good society in the French capital, were only moved to pity at the late demonstration in favour of Repeal. In America, the Re- peal sympathy was almost entirely confined to emigrants; and as to the part taken by Mr. Robert Tyler, said to be a relation of the President, no one was answerable for the excessive fooleries any of his family might please to commit. Repeal was an Irish doctrine, and not likely to cross the Channel ; but " fixity of tenure "—that is, confiscation of land—was as likely to spread in England as in Ireland. Let all England beware of it. " I should not have said so much on this point if I had not understood that something has been said in the other House of Parliament—which, coming from the quarter whence it proceeded, did, I confess, astonish me not a little—about fixity of tenure being, if not a thing to be adopted, at least a subject for consideration. A subject for consideration! Ay, my Lords, it is, for alarmed consideration. It strikes at the root of society ; it strikes at the root of all government ; and if it be not at once put down with a firm hand and a strong and unhesitating judgment, it will outstrip all'the efforts of all the enemies of our native land in working the rain and destruction of the empire." (Cheers.) The Earl of GLENGILLL confirmed what Lord Brougham had said as to the necessity of retaining to the Gaverument a power of changing the venue ; referring to repeated acquittals of notorious murderers in Ire- land; verdicts being found in cases of murder of women, or for plunder, but not where the victim is an agent or an offender against the agra- rian laws of the, murderers.

The petition was ordered to lie on the table.

On Thursday, Lord Buotnanwr, avowing that he acted without con- cert with the Government or any other person, introduced a bill to re- gulate trials for seditious proceedings in Ireland. His immediate incen- tive was the recent atrocious attempt upon the loyalty of the sergeants in

the Army. The Earl of Wictmow expressed high approval of the mea- sure ; which, so far from being coercive, would prevent the necessity of coercive measures. Lord CAMPBELL objected, that it ought to ema- nate from the Government—of which Lord Brougham was not yet a member ; and took some exceptions to the details. This Lord 13110mi:tem attributed to his not having read the bill ; for it was similar to one which Lord Campbell himself drew up, as Solicitor- General, in 1833. The bill was read a first time, and ordered to be printed. In the House of Commons, on Wednesday, in reply to Lord NORTH- LAND. Sir ROBERT PEEL said that Government had no intention of re- pealing the act against processions : it would expire next session, and then Government would consider the course to be pursued : nothing would be more gratifying to Government than the absence of any ne- cessity for its renewal. He praised the forbearance of the Ulster Pro- testants in strong terms.

On the same day, Lord ELIOT moved the third reading of the Arms Bill. Upon which Lord CLEMENTS mired tbat it be read a third time that day six months ; Captain BERNAL and Mr. BARING WALL supporting the amendment. Mr. MONCKTON MILNER opposed it ; at the same time telling Sir Robert Peel that the support which the measure had met with was not owing to the conviction that Arms Bills alone were necessary for Ireland.

Mr. DISRAELI criticised the position of Sir Robert Peel—

During the protracted period when Sir Robert was in Opposition, he se- lected two points upon which his policy was to turn—Irish municipal reform, and the registration of Irish voters. After a struggle of many years, whatever might be said about the Budget, be virtually entered Governm,:a upon that question of Ireland. But the moment he was inoffice, he fixed upon Lord Eliot as Secretary for Ireland, that nobleman having taken a most decided line of policy against Lord Stanley's Registration Bill, and Sir Robert announ- ced, not only that that measure would not be pursued, but that he and his colleagues had discovered they were diametrically wrong in the line they had taken, and that those who bad quitted office were correct. If he thought the line he had taken in Opposition was not one which a Minister of this country should adopt, he acted as a wise and prudent statesman in not adopting it ; only, as regarded Irish policy, those who were supporters of the right honour- able gentleman were left in the lurch. The only course open to them was, to recur to the original principles of the party of which they were members ; and in the principles of that party he could not find that hostility to the Irish people was a distinctive ingredient of what was called Tory policy. The Whigs, indeed, who for more than seventy years commanded in this country, pursued a course of policy hostile to the Roman Catholics of Ireland ; and at that time the Roman Catholics claimed the support of the Tories. Nothing could be more strange in the history of this country, than that the gentlemen of England, the descendants of the Cavaliers, should be already advocates for governing Ireland on the principles of the Roundheads. He believed that there were dissensions in the Cabinet : there were dissensions in all Cabinets but in the present instance they resulted from an imbecility of the most remarkable nature. Ireland, however, had arrived at that state that required a great man to have recourse to great remedial measures. You must reorganize the Govern- ment, and not the Government alone but the whole social state of Ireland. No merely temporary measures of relief or of coercion would be of any avail. If he were to use a harsh term he should call the Arms Bill, as applied to the present state of Ireland, contemptible ; but the opposition to it had also been contemptible. Some measures there were which to introduce was disgraceful, and to oppose degrading. On the Arms Bill he had hitherto given no vote one way or other, and be should continue to mime the same course. He believed that the time would come when a party would be formed in this coun- try on the principle of justice to Ireland—not by quailing before agitation, but by really putting an end to that misery which lung misgovernment had produced.

Colonel VERNER expressed satisfaction at the praise which Sir Robert Peel and the Duke of Wellington had awarded to the Protestants of Ireland ; and hoped that when the proper moment arrived Government would not be found wanting iu vigour. Among other proofs of the necessity of the Arms Bill, he stated that a case of buckhorn -handled knives, without forks, had been landed at Belfast.

Mr. CHARLES BULLER, arguing against the necessity for an Arms Bill, took Colonel Verner's expectation of vigour as an indication of the spirit in which the bill would be enforced by subordinate officers in Ireland. He laughed at the Colonel's alarm about the knives : a buck- handled knife might be innocent in itself, but a buck-handled knife without the fork was death !

Mr. SMYTHE followed up Mr. Disraeli's attack ; and charged Sir Ro- bert Peel with saying, " You have no right to pursue any course ex- cept that which I—I—I may entertain."

Mr. SEEM applied Sir Robert Peel's remark against the Reform Bill to the Arms Bill—resistance might be unavailing, but it would not be fruitless. He proceeded in a long speech, characterized by his usual manner, to attack the measure— He contrasted the tranquillity of Ireland under the 'Whigs—a tranquillity which made up for the inability of that Government to legislate for Ire- land as they would—with its present state; all the Catholics and their priest- hood confederated in one struggle ; and France and America showing sym- pathy. The matter for wonder to Sir Robert Peel's friends was the philosophical composure which he maintained. " We do not attribute this conduct to a feel- ing of false security : we rather attribute it to a disinclination to yield to the advice of pernicious councillors, who would hurry the right honour- able baronet into severe and coercive acts." Sir Robert Peerknew, from his experience of Ireland, that coercion would only convert discontent into disaffection. Mr. Shell applauded the course which Sir Robert had pursued : but if he thought that the Repeal agitation wonld subside of its own accord, he was mistaken. In England no sufficient idea is entertained of the influ- ence of the Catholic priest in Ireland. This remark led to a description of the priest, his popular origin, stalwart energy, Celtic temperament, scholastic accomplishments, and irrreproachable morality. Such was the class, com- prising 3,000 individuals, that English policy forced to be politicians. Mr. Shea recommended the granting of glebe-houses and glebe-lands to the Roman Catholic clergy—attached to the office and not to the individual—and the building of houses of worship for the Irish Catholics. He thought also that the Irish might derive through the Imperial Parliament some part of the advan- tages which they expected from a domestic Parliament : on all Imperial ques- tions the Minister must necessarily abide by the gross majority in the House, but on questions relating exclusively to the interests of Ireland, the Minister was bound to take into the most serious account the opinions of the majority of Members for Ireland. Ile concluded by suggesting to Sir Peel, that he should invite his true and sincere friends, expound to them the state of Ireland, and obtain their assent to govern Ireland on the same principle as that on which Canada is now governed ; or to break those ties of party, those ligaments which hound him to servitude, and reverse what had been said of Burke, that, born for the universe, he gave himself up to party.

Sir ROBERT PEEL, acknowledging Mr. Shell's habitual eloquence and the tone of courtesy to himself, desired to sever the consideration of the Arms Bill from that of the general question of Ireland—

Mr. Shell had desired him to conform to the feelings of Irish Members on local matters. Now, Mr. Sheil himself had borne disinterested testimony to the

state of Ireland, when he proposed to compose criminal juries in Ireland of persons not equals in rank with the offenders, but superiors—a greater de- parture from constitutional principles than an Arms Bill ; and to provide in the

Colonies an asylum for witnesses against torture and death. What a picture of society did that present I Again, the great objection to the Arms Bill was the distinction which it drew between two parts of the empire : the offer bad re-

peatedly been made to Ministers, that if they would simply renew the Arms Bill of 1840, no opposition would be offered: that bill, however, constituted a separate law for Ireland; and if a separate law existed—he lamented its ne- cessity—nothing could be more absurd than not to make it efficient. He then adverted to Mr. Smythe's remarks; explaining, that so far from reproaching him with his vote against the Arms Bill, he had expressly told

him, that as his opinions and his speech were adverse, it would be more friendly

to Government to give his vote against them too. He knew that party con- nexions could not exist without occasional sacrifices of opinion ; but Irish ques- tions are an exception, and party considerations ought not to influence men to support an Arms Bill if they believed that a Government could be formed better to administer affairs in Ireland, or if they thought that the Arms Bill would be inefficacious. Mr. Disraeli also bad expressed a strong opinion upon what ought to be the principles of Government in Irish affairs. (Cries of "He's gone!" pllwred by much laughter.) " Some great roan, it seems, is to arise with some comprehensive measures. (Laughter.) I was in hopes that the honourable gentleman was about to explain them, and I was looking for some indication of the coming man in his explanation. (Laughter.) But considering that the honourable gentleman came to the conclusion with respect to the Arms Bill, that, upon the whole, it is better to give no vote at all, I am afraid I cannot infer that the honourable gentleman is about to realize his vision of a great statesman." (awl; and laughter.) The speeches that bad been made in the course of this discussion, convinced him how difficult it is for any Minister wishing upon the whole to steer a safe course between contending parties, to do that which may upon the whole he the best for the general interests of the empire. " The right honourable gen- tleman says he is surprised at the apparent apathy and calm composure with which I view the present state of things in that country. I assure the right honourable gentleman, I view that state of things',with no other feelings than those of deep anxiety and pain. I know that I have done all I could. I bad a hope that there was a gradual abatement of animosities on account of religious differ- ences. I thought I saw even in the intercourse of Members of this House a kindly and reciprocal feeling. I thought I saw the gradual influence of those laws which removed the political disabilities of Roman Catholics and esta- blished civil equality. I thought I saw, in some respects, a great moral and social improvement; that the commercial intercourse of Ireland with this country was increasing: that there was a hope of increasing tranquillity in Ireland, and of a diminution of crime; that the redundant and superfluous capital of this country, which was seeking a vent in foreign speculations of the most precarious nature, would be applied to a sphere more legitimate and more productive—the increasing improvement of Ireland. The agitation has blasted all those hopes." Mr. Sheil talked of a "disciplined phalanx of ecclesiastics " : did he foresee that in 1838 ; or if he had foreseen it, would he have avowed it ? As to provision for the Roman Catholic clergy, they themselves showed no anxiety for the boon in 1825; and after Mr. Sheil's vote for Mr. Ward's sweep- ing motion to confiscate the property of the Established Church to the Roman Catholic clergy, it was a shabby falling-off to come down and talk of glebe and glebe-houses, as if that were all that the priesthood wanted. Mr. Shell recom- mended him to summon the friends on whom he relied, and expound to them the ineffectual character of past changes in Ireland : looking, however, at the extent of those political changes, at the abstinence of the Protestants from irritating demonstrations, at the removal of commercial disadvantages, and at the fact that all distinctions of every sort and kind between Protestant and Roman Catholic had ceased to exist, was he not justified in entertaining a hope that all dissensions would subside, and that all parties would rally round the common interests of their country ? He would not notice unfounded spe- culations about dissensions in the Cabinet. All the members of that Cabinet are actuated by one common desire to further the best interests of the nation ; taking any alternative rather than resort to physical force; at the same time that they would leave nothing undone to maintain the integrity of the em- pire—essential to our greatness, our prosperity, and our glory.

After a few words from Mr. M. J. O'CoNNEEE, in opposition to the bill, the House divided—For the third reading, 125 ; against it, 59 ; majority, 66.

IRISH LAW OF LANDLORD AND TENANT.

In the House of Commons, on Wednesday, Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD moved the second reading of his Landlord and Tenant Bill— It was of the utmost importance to amend the law on that head. Under the present system, the tenant was compelled to take his land upon any terms the landlord or his agent thought fit to impose ; and he was obliged to erect buildings and make every improvement at his own risk and cost ; and in case of his removal, lie could obtain no compensation for the outlay both of capital -and industry which he had made. Further evils arise from the customs of letting lands to middlemen, of letting land to four or five men in partnership, each being liable for the whole rent, and of conacre. Mr. Crawford read ex- tracts from the Report of the Commissioners of Irish Poor-law Inquiry, to bear out his statement, that after prosecuting a special inquiry in fourteen districts, they pronounced in favour of an amendment of the landlord and tenant law, rendering the landlord responsible for the value of useful improvements made by the tenant. The existence of an extensive system of ejectment had already been proved to the House. The bill proposed to oblige the landlord, on ejecting a tenant, to make compensation for valuable or useful improvements: its object was, to encourage the leasing under long tenures ; but it did not neglect to protect the landlord. If, however, Government or Members of the House wished more time for consideration, he would not press the second reading.

Sir ROBERT PEEL, fully recognizing the excellence of Mr. Crawford's motives, objected to any expression of opinion on the subject, leaving the matter for several months in a vague state.

He should be strongly disposed to advise the House not in one session to avow a principle, to be carried into effect in another session. He took some ex- ception to details in the bill. The provisions of the bill were such, that the tenant, without the consent of the landlord, or without consulting him, might lay out an unlimited sum under his own superintendence, in draining and im- provement of the land, and at the expiration of the lease he might recover from the landlord the amount of that expenditure. That would make an im- portant distinction between the law of England and that of Ireland ; and, for the sake of all parties interested, the measure should not be agreed to without due consideration. Since Mr. Crawford first gave notice of his intention, the Government had directed a careful review of the law of England and Ireland in respect to this subject to be made; and in stating that the Government would be disposed to give a fair consideration to the subject, be must at the same time say, that they would discountenance any expectation that they meant to recognize in any shape that which was called "fixity of tenure," or any aliena- tion of the rights of the landlord; being satisfied that the maintenance of the just rights of property was the great characteristic of social improvement, and that any attempt to control or interfere with the just and legitimate zightsaf property must Intercept the accumulation of property, and must be the greatest blow to industry and the accumulation of wealth that could possibly be given. Therefore he exhorted Mr. Crawford not to ask for a vote upon the second reading, but to allow an opportunity for the consideration of the subject during the interval of the present and the next session of Parliament.

Mr. MORE °TERRILL". concurred with Sir Robert Peel as to the im- policy of a discussion on such a subject so late in the session. Sir A. BROOKE and Sir DENHAM NORREYS concurred in the principle of the bill. Mr. MORGAN JOHN O'CONNELL regarded the debate as one of the very few gratifying discussions that had occurred this session respecting Ireland.

Mr. CRAWFORD, acting upon the advice that had been given, with- drew the bill.

CUSTOMS BILL.

On Saturday, the House of Commons went into Committee on the Customs Bill. Mr. GEORGE BANKES said that the agricultural portion

of the community attached much importance to the last clause ; and he desired a statement as to the objects of the measure generally. He wished to know whether part of it had been framed to remedy the exten- sive system of fraud which had been discovered in the Customhouse

The first enacting provision of the bill related to the increased power which was to be given to the Commissioners of Customs to administer oaths. Now, he wanted to know how this provision could be defended ; for it had been the

policy of the Legislature for some years past to endeavonr as much as possible to diminish the power of administering oaths in our public offices, and above all in the departments connected with the receipt of the public revenue. He would be glad, therefore, to know on what principle it was now proposed to give additional powers to the Customhouse authorities to administer oaths. The next section referred to goods entered to be landed or examined by bill of sight, with a proviso that a deposit was to be made equal to the duties. Were

not the duties, then, paid directly on the goods being taken out for consump- tion ? He was not aware of a different mode of payment. At any rate, some explanation must be looked for on this point. The second head in the bill was entitled " Smuggling." Now, he found no regulation in the bill respecting the illicit introduction and landing of goods by parties who were appointed to pre- vent such illicit landing. He thought this a great omission in the bilL He believed that it was a matter of perfect notoriety, that the smuggling carried on in the silk-trade on the coast had only been resorted to as a disguise to cover the frauds that had been carried on in the Customs department. The last (the 25th) clause proposed to enact that the produce of the forest and agricultural produce of those parts of the State of Maine watered by the river St. John and its tributaries should be treated, as respects duties, navigation, and custom- laws, as the province of New Brunswick; and it affected to be introduced into this bill for the purpose of carrying out an article in the treaty of Washington. It had been said, that as that treaty bad been adopted, it became the duty of the House to take steps so as to insure its provisions being fairly and fully carried out. If that were to be the doctrine to be held by Parliament, then they would sit to very little purpose with reference to those treaties, because those treaties were generally passed when Parliament could have no cognizance of their provisions—whets they had no power either of withholding or giving their consent to them. But indeed, the clause went far beyond the treaty ; and, looking into Lord Ashburton's correspondence, be found that it did not refer to agricultural produce; though as far as regarded timber and staves he lamented that it did justify the words in the clause. But the terms of the clause were exceedingly vague, and he should like to know w 'tat meaning Ministers attached to them : what was to prevent the produce o' other States being sent into Maine, and thence sent down the river St. J.Ain into our colonial possessions, where it would be treated as the produce of that country ?

Mr. GLADSTONE said, that it would be almost impossible to give a general explanation of the bill, which had almost as many intentions as clauses— Some clauses did refer to the recent frauds in the Customs ; but he did not mean to say that they formed an adequate remedy. These frauds had been investigated by two tribunals—by the Commission appointed by the Board of Customs; and by a Commission appointed by his right honourable friend, on his accession to office, for the purpose of examining the entire state of the Customs revenue. The information obtained by the latter tribunal was of such a varied and extensive character, that it had been found impossible to di- gest the whole of the evidence with the view of adopting effectual steps fur the prevention of fraud. The clauses, therefore, which had been introduced into the bill with the view of preventing smuggling, were only partial, and touched upon isolated points, and by no means constituted any thing like the com- prehensive change which the Government intended to bring forward with the view of preventing those frauds. At present there was in the Customs de- partment a power of examining upon oath ; but, by a singular anomaly, that power was vested not in the Commissioners, but in the subordinate officer, the Surveyor-GeneraL The 25th clause could be best discussed in Committee.

The House went into Committee, and the clauses down to the 9th were agreed to. Clause 10th proposed to repeal the prohibition to import clocks and watches not having the foreign maker's name on the frame and face, or in an incomplete state : on the motion of Mr. GLADSTONE it was struck out of the bill, as, at this late period of the session, it would be impossible to remove the unfounded apprehensions which the clause had excited in the trade.

Clause 14th enacted that the manufactures of Gibraltar, Malta, and Heligoland, made of foreign materials, be charged as foreign. Mr MILNER GIBsoN desired our European colonies to be placed on the same footing as others. Why should they not allow foreign corn to be ground or manufactured into flour in Heligoland and imported into this country, as well as allow American corn to be imported into Canada and there ground ? Mr. F. T. BARING and Mr. HAWES sup- ported the same view. Mr. GLADSTONE had no objection to the intro- duction of the bond fide manufactures of the colony ; but certain manufactures appeared to be taken up for the purpose of affording facilities to evade the revenue-laws : the clause was meant to put a stop to the introduction of articles made from sugar into this country from Malta and Heligoland, which were produced with the view of evading the payment of duty. The clause was affirmed, by 87 to 14.

Clauses to the 18th were agreed to. The 19th repealed the provision in the Act 5 and 6 Victoria, c. 47, which required a bond on the ex- portation of wine. Mr. F. T. BARING objected to making alterations for the benefit of one particular trade and excepting others. Mr. GLAD- STONE explained, that the wine-trade was in a peculiar position ; antici- pation of changes for the last three years had much affected the trade, and a large quantity of wine had been left in bond. In 1841, there had been a falling-off in the home consumption to the amount of 300,000 gallons ; and while the quantity consumed in 1840 was 3,000,000, in 1842 it was only 1,400,000. In the course of further discussion, in reply to Dr. BOWRING, Sir ROBERT PEEL said that negotiations for a commercial treaty with France were still pending. The clause was affirmed ; as well as the four next.

On the 25th clause, Mr. GLADSTONE made some explanation— It was said that agricultural produce was not specifically named in the treaty : he contended not only that it was, but that the explanatory documents accompanying the treaty left no doubt on the matter. The treaty directly declared, that "that all the produce of the forest, in logs, lumber, timber, boards, staves, or shingles, or of agriculture, not being manufactured, grown on any of those parts of the State of Maine watered by the river St. John, or by its tributaries, of which fact reasonable evidence shall, if required, be produced, shall have free access into and through the said river and its said tributaries, having their source within the State of Maine." Mr. Webster alluded to the transmission of "agricultural products," and Lord Ashburton accepted the terms of the letter in which the expression occurred.

Mr. F. T. BanING wished distinctly to know whether the treaty would admit corn and timber to this country at the same rate as the produce of New Brunswick, and whether the change would consist with the Customs Act of last year ?

Lord STANLEY said, that the terms of the treaty were unequivocal ; but in point of fact no corn was grown in the territory to which it re- lated— Timber once brought into the port of St. John was treated as British-Ame- rican produce. Indeed, all attempts to ascertain on which side of the river the timber had grown would be useless. Should it be necessary to alter the Cus- toms Act of last year for the purpose, a bill would be brought in. This treaty must be regarded as nothing to the State of Maine, as such, but as merely re- lating to those districts which formerly constituted what was called the dis- puted territory, and which were essentially British, and as such enjoyed the same privileges as other colonies of Great Britain ; and now, although it had passed under foreign sovereignty, it had claims upon this country, and these had been confirmed by the treaty of Washington. The effect of this clause of the treaty also would insure to the large town of St. John, in New Brunswick, a large share of that trade which she now possessed, and to which a stop would have been effectually put if this free trade down the river St. John was not continued by the treaty. The question also was, whether upon this new basis it was not better to allow the produce of this district to be introduced as British produce, instead of giving the Americans the right of admission at all times to the harbour of St. John to carry away their produce. He believed, however, that the effect of the clause had been greatly magnified; and he confessed, as regarded the agricultural produce of Maine, be did not regard it as of much consequence one way or the other. It appeared from a statistical account of the State of Maine, drawn up in America, that it was an importing instead of an exporting country, and that it imported more than one-half the bread-stuffs that were used there.

Mr. GEORGE BANKES was by no means satisfied, and he proposed an amendment to "except the produce of agriculture."

Mr. F. T. BARING would be glad to know, whether Sweden and those countries with whom there was a reciprocity of treaties, would not have a right to demand the same advantages, that their produce should be placed on the same footing as the produce of this portion of the State of Maine? He very much doubted whether they had the power of giving to any territory which had been added to another power by treaty the rights and privileges of a British colony.

Sir ROBERT PEEL contended that the clause was necessary to main- tain faith with the United States— If Mr. Bankes's objection were sustained, the United States would have good reason for saying, You are willing to preserve the treaty as regards timber, but you have some peculiar sensitiveness regarding corn, therefore you wish to leave it out, and to put a different interpretation on the terms than that used by the negotiators. As to Mr. Baring's doubt, it was impossible to say, as parties to reciprocity-treaties an closely watched each other, what might be claimed under those treaties. In the present case, he thought that the pe- culiar circumstances of the case should be considered : it should be recollected that this territory, until very recently, bad been British territory ; the inhabit- ants were desirous of remaining British subjects; and when we passed them over to the foreign state, we certainly were justified in securing to the produce the same privileges as if it had continued to be British produce. Besides, the port of shipment for this produce was a port in one of our colonies, and it would be rained if deprived of this trade.

Mr. BANKES said, that after what had passed, he would not divide the House on his amendment. (" Oh, oh ! " and laughter.)

The amendment was negatived, without a division ; the clause was agreed to ; and the House resumed.

IMPORT-DUTIES : CUSTOMS FRAUDS.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, on the motion for going into Committee of Supply, Mr. EWART moved as an amendment the follow- ing resolution- " That it is expedient that the principles and suggestions contained in the evidence taken before the Import-duties Committee of session 1840 be carried into general effect ; and that the trade and industry of the country require further and more effectual relief, by the removal or reduction of duties which press on the raw material of manufacture and encourage smuggling, and on articles of interchange with foreign nations, as well as on the means of sub- sistence of the people." The present session, he said, had been one of large promises and paltry performances. In accordance with the recommendation of Mr. Deacon Hume, as given in his evidence before the Committee, the duties were to be taken off the raw materials of manufacture; but what had been done? The duties on drugs, colours, and other articles of a minor description, had been reduced ; but Ministers stopped there, and no further steps were taken. The duties on the important articles of wool and cotton were still retained; and the dutftiis-e.otton had practically been raised in proportion to the value of the article, since the price had of late fallen very materially. Mr. Ewart quoted and dilated upon various sayings in favour of free trade—such as Mr. Deacon Hume's; as Sir Robert Peel's, that a nation should buy in the chearest markets and sell in the dearest ; and the recent maxim, "take care of the im- ports and the exports will take care of themselves ": he asserted that there had been no reduction of duties upon those imports which would prove beneficial to the great mass of the people; and urged the reduction of the duties on corn, sugar, tea, batter, and cheese. He contended that our manufactures were excluded from America by our refusal to take American corn in return. In a report which had lately been laid before the Emperor of the Brazils by his Minister of Finance, it was recommended that if we continued our high duties on their produce they should meet us by the imposition of high duties on our manufactures, and endeavour to manufacture for themselves the articles which they had hitherto got from this country. They even threatened to impose a duty of 60 per cent on our cotton fabrics : but the threat would be defeated if we consented to accept their articles of produce in return for our manufactures. It was desirable also, for the sake of morality as well as trade, to reduce the duties on those articles which were extensively smuggled into this country— especially tobacco, silk, lace, gloves, and brandy.

No one rising for a few moments, there was a cry of " Question, question]" when Mr. MILNER GinsoN rose, merely to say that he supposed some member of the Government would reply, and therefore he would give way to the President of the Board of Trade. No one res- ponded to that hint ; and Mr. Gibson again rose— He reproached the Government with continued apathy, while distress, poverty, and discontent, were spread over the land ; and then be entered upon a somewhat discursive support of the amendment. Sir Robert Peel, speaking of national improvement, referred to the increased export of cotton ; but if the manufacturer exported a coarser description of goods, a larger quantity of the raw material was needed; so that no increase of wages or employment was im- plied. The very cheapness of raw cotton, too, might have induced many to make large investments, and to take the article out of bond fur the purpose of placing it in their stores. But supposing there was an improvement in trade, was trade so good as it might be? The question was, whether by their re- strictive system they kept out of employment any portion of the population. What had been the labours of the session ? Had a single practical measure for the benefit of the people been passed ?

Mr. GLADSTONE said, that if he had not risen, it was out of no dis- respect to Mr. Ewart ; but he was of opinion, that so far from good, ab- solute mischief would arise from a discussion of the kind at that period of the session— He asked Mr. Milner Gibson, if be anticipated any immediate good, even if his own views were carried out ? But the state of the House itself showed the physical and mental exhaustion of the Members to be unequal to the discussion of the many questions involved in the motion. Moreover, Mr. Ewart could not have failed to notice, that the disposition of his ow n side of the House was peculiarly unfavourable to the discussion of the question : he believed that at the time the honourable Member was addressing the House, the number on the Ministerial side was more than three or four times equal to the number on the opposite side. He defended Ministers from the charge of doing nothing except under compulsion ; appealing to history to prove that the legislation of last year was not the result of pressure ; and to go back to times anterior to his own political existence, the commercial legislation with which Sir Robert Peel had been identified, bad not been undertaken from pressure, but from a view to the circumstances of the country, and in opposition to the general tone of the popular feeling that prevailed at that time. Mr. Ewart had raised questions affecting six or seven millions of revenue ; and if the removal of restrictions would lead to increased consumption, extraordinary 'finan- cial expedients must be resorted to in order to supply a deficiency of at least 4,000,0001. which would arise from the sweeping alterations recommended. Mr. Ewart had complained that Government had not introduced any further changes in the direction of those made last year : but any Government was to be deprecated which so little knew its own mind and the interests of the country as to make other great changes before those already made had had sufficient time to operate so as to test their consequences. Nothing would create greater confusion than the course proposed by Mr. Ewart. It would paralyze trade, diminish employment, and increase the number of paupers al- ready crowding our workhouses, if his right honourable friend were to rise in his place and throw out intimations, either vague or specific, of measures that he might think it fit to .propose in a future session of Parliament. Of course, these things would receive the consideration of the Government; but no altera- tions could be proposed except at a proper opportunity, and upon a conviction of the necessity of them.

Mr. HUME pronounced Government to be retrograding from the principles to which they last year announced their adherence. Mr. Gladstone had gone back very fast ; for be had introduced measures founded upon the worst principle, that of monopoly, and was opposed to all sudden and great changes— What would be the state of the country in a few years if trade continued in its present paralyzed state? What would pay the National Debt? How were the taxes to be paid? Would the laud support the country ? No; it never had done so. Commerce was its best, its only true support. But what was the state of commerce? Look at our shipping. The docks were crowded with vessels which were waiting, and waiting in vain, to be freighted. Such were the results of the impediments to trade caused by high duties.

Mr. BRIGFIT, who bad been called for, rose to disclaim any part- nership concern with a party in that House who had suffered six months to elapse without having done any thing to ameliorate the con- dition of the people— He felt that it was his bounden duty to his constituents, the largest portion of whom were men of the working-classes, who bad no property whatsoever but their labour and no income but their wages—men who told him when he shook hands with them, that their hands were harder than his, and to whom he replied, " Yes, and I shall be glad to be the representative of men who have hard hands, for I think the rich in this country have representatives enough in that House, and that the interests of the poor are too much neglected." He agreed with the honourable gentleman who bad spoken last, that the condition of the country was calculated to inspire the must gloomy anticipations ; and he must say, he thought that condition brought great disgrace on the Minister and those who acted with him. He was not there as an advocate for a change of men ; for both sides of the House were much too fond of relying on the ex- ploded and rotten system of protection. He felt hound to make this declara- tion of his opinion, as he had taken an active part in the agitation for the re- peal of the Corn-laws, and he might therefore be looked upon not only as the representative of the city of Durham, but also of that powerful and benevolent organization the Anti-Corn-law Lesgue. ("Hear!" and a laugh.) Some time ago he met a large farmer in Yorkshire, who said that he would be glad if the Corn-laws were repealed, and that all commercial monopoly were broken down ; being convinced that the farmers would not suffer, but be benefited thereby. Many crimes against man and sins against God had been com- mitted under very amiable titles; and the term "protection had concealed one of the most heinous offences ;hat it was possible for governments to com- mit, though the pretexts upon which that protection was based were the most plausible that could be. He had heard and read the debates of that House, but he never found any argument for a protection for labour and the rights of industry. The greater portion of the produce of the working-classes was taken away from them to be put into the pockets of the landholder, and no attempt was made in that House to alter that state of things. The House, then, must be considered as a partial and interested body as long as things remained as they were. The Corn-laws were a great mass of appropriation-clauses for the purpose of raising rents and benefiting landholders. He went on to urge many of the usual arguments ; occasionally touching upon a religious point. For instance, he said, that the first night he took his seat in that House he heard prayers read at the table ; and beautiful prayers they were, and beautifully read. There was something in them about legislating for the interests of the people and disregarding the interests of classes; and it struck him that many a one in that House, and perhaps himself among the rest, who heard those prayers, would afterwards disregard them, and vote not for the general benefit but for the benefit of a class or of classes. Again, he asked, had Providence given them only the surface of the land ? Had He not appropriated to their use what was below as well as what was above the ground ? If their coal and their iron had only been properly worked up into manufactured articles, and they had been able to export those articles to foreign countries, would they not have brought back, not cotton only, but corn, which was even more urgently wanted by the people ? He referred to the state of discontent in Ireland, the usurpation of the National Church in Scotland, and the toll-riots in Wales. In England the state of things was even worse. In Northumberland and Durham, the other day, 20,000 pitmen met, and agreed not to pay more than 4-,d. per pound for meat, and for all other things in proportion. It was bad that this state of things should come to pass; and perhaps for no class was it so bad as for the class which thus attempted to regulate prices. That House, however, must recollect that the principle was as bad in one case as in another ; that if it was irrational for pit- men to attempt to control prices, it was equally irrational fur landlords to seek to control them. The truth was, they had been sowing curses; and now that it was their time to reap them, they must not be surprised at finding their seed yield its fruit. They had sown dragon's teeth, and the dragons were now springing up. He made some passing criticisms on Ministers,—Sir James Graham, who once held opinions which coincided with those of the League; Lord Stanley, who at Durham had displayed the profoundest ignorance M the question ; and coming to Sir Robert Peel, he said that he should be glad to see him not only what he was termed, the Queen's Minister, but the People's Minister. He should be glad to see him disconnect himself from a party with which he did not agree, and appear to bear in mind not only the source from which he had sprung, but the fact that what had made him had also made much of the wealth and power of the empire. As for others in that House, he would beg them to reflect that such thiugs as the overthrowing of oligarchies had taken place.

On a division, the amendment was rejected, by 52 to 25.

Mr. Borthwick's motion for papers respecting Don Carlos (to which we refer separately) having been rejected, Mr. HUME and other Mem- bers urged the production of the evidence taken by the Commissioners of Inquiry into the Customhouse frauds ; Dr. BOWEING remarking, that the responsibility of the department had better be concentrated in one person at its head : " boards " always serve as screens. The House then went into Committee. The first vote was 821,0201. for the cost of the expedition to China. The vote of 25,3001. "for the service in Canada, consequent upon the late insurrection," was resisted by Mr. HUME who asked why this country should pay a farthing for military force in a colony which had been at peace for some time ? The vote was carried by 90 to 18. The vote of 5,000/. on account of the Caledonian Canal was carried, by 137 to 13. On the vote of 1,5001. for monuments to Sir Sidney Smith, Lord Exmouth, and Admiral de Saumarez, Mr. HAWES suggested that the Government should avail themselves of the Royal Commission of Fine Arts for the purpose of ascertaining the best mode of erecting memo- rials to men distinguished in literature and science. He did not see why the military and naval profession should engross all the national monuments.

Sir ROBERT PEEL thought it very desirable, that in the case of very eminent scientific men, public monuments should be erected to their memory— He saw no reason why the country should pay that tribute only to dis- tinguished naval and military men ; on the contrary, it would be a great in- centive to exertion in science if monuments were erected to the most eminent of her sons. Ile had given a good deal of consideration to this subject since it had been mentioned last year by the honourable Member for Lambeth. The first difficulty which struck him was as to the place where such monuments should be erected. There was very great objection to placing them in ecclesiastical edifices, for unless the public had free access to them no great public object would be attained. If they did not erect them in any edifice— if they erected them out of doors—it was almost necessary that they should be of bronze : then the expense would be enormous; and a statue in bronze was not always a very great ornament. He always hoped that there might be some portion of that great building which was now being erected for the Houses of Parliament that might be appropriated to the statues of eminent men—not merely of men of political character, but of persons distinguished in litera- ture and science; and if he were assured that there could be any part of that edifice so appropriated, he should not have the slightest difficulty in referring the matter to the Commission which had been alluded to, and which had dis- charged its duty with the greatest credit to itself. Mr. VERNON SMITH understood that Westminster Hall was to form an access to the new Houses of Parliament ; and if that were so, he asked why might not that Hall be appropriated to the reception of these statues ?

Mr. HUME urged the propriety of giving the public better access to monuments.

The vote was agreed to ; and the House resumed.

When the report of the resolutions was brought up, on Tuesday, Mr. HUME returned to the subject of the report on the Customs frauds ; vigorously attacking the constitution of the Board of Customs— Of the nine Commissioners, only one was supposed to know any thing about the business of the office. The whole thing was an affair of patronage. If there was a son of the Chancellor of the Exchequer—(" Hear!" and a laugh)—who was fit for nothing else, he was made a Commissioner of Customs. (Cheers.) Millions of money were trusted to the management of persons utterly incapable of the duty. He moved for the production of the evidence, with a view to measures for putting an end to the fraudulent proceedings.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opposed the motion ; declared that every thing had been done thoroughly to investigate the frauds ; and pronounced the Commissioners free from all charges. The motion was supported by Mr. FORSTER, Mr. WILLIAM WILLIAMS, Dr. Bow- =VG, and Sir JAMES DUKE. Mr. STUART WORTLEY opposed it ; but concurred in Mr. Hume's remarks on the Board of Customs. Mr. F. T. Ramiro thought that it-might be advisable to withhold the evidence for a time. Mr. THOMAS DUNC031BE would reduce the number of Commissioners to three : the Board as at present constituted was a mere piece of patronage to reward electioneering services—the villain Burnby had got his appointment for assisting at an election in Canter. bury. Sir GEORGE CLERK promised that the evidence should be pro- duced next session. Lord GRANvILLE SOMERSET said that its pro- duction would materially assist the fraudulent parties. On that show- ing, Mr. HUME withdrew his motion. Mr. Tnoxias Duseostee moved a resolution requiring the instructions of the Treasury, Board of Trade, and Commissioners of Customs, to be entered in minute-books kept in the Long-room, and printed and pub- lished monthly. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had no objection to the former part of the resolution, but opposed the latter part. Mr. Dr:aconite pressed it to a division ; and it was rejected, by 57 to 19.

The report of the Committee of Supply was then received.

EXPORTATION OF MACHINERY.

In the House of Commons, on Thursday, Mr. GLADSTONE moved the second reading of the Machinery Exportation Bill— The prohibition to export machinery originated in the belief that if machi- nery were detained at home, the goods to be made by it would be produced in this country, and thus trade would be increased. But in fact the law is nuga- tory; and the authorities of the Customs, ever since 1824, have pronounced such a law to be impracticable • so easy is it to export machinery in parts, or under cover of the coasting-trade. The effect of the law has been simply to enhance the cost of British machinery to the foreign purchaser; and the consequence is, that to a great extent the trade has passed from us to Belgium, where there is an increasing trade. It is one almost indigenous with us, meriting as much encouragement as other manufactures; and its export is opposed by no arguments that will not equally apply, for instance, to the ex- port of yarns. Mr. Gladstone quoted authorities in favour of removing the prohibition; and mentioned the case of a Leeds machine-maker whom it had deprived of extensive oilers for Sardinia, which ha I been transferred to Bel- gium. Another effect of the present law is to drive the inventor—and the Americans have obtained:a name for invention—from resorting to this country, where they could get their work best executed.

Mr. HINDLEY professed his concurrence in the Free-trade principle of the bill ; sneered at the Ministers who prepared it, after turning their predecessors out of office for a slight approach to similar principles; declared it ridiculous to pretend that smuggling of machinery could not be prevented ; and objected to obliging the manufacturer, with the millstone of the Corn-laws round his neck, to swim against the un- shackled foreigner. He moved as an amendment, that a Select Com- mittee be appointed to consider the laws relating to the exportation of machinery. Mr. STUART WORTLEY began by expressing dislike to the bill, and ended by saying that he would vote for it, as gradual relaxations of the law had left very little protection to fight for. Mr. LABOUCHERE rejoiced in assisting at the removal of the last prohibition that deformed the statute- book. Mr. COBDEN was sorry that any Free-trader opposed the bill : he supported it on the broad ground that it did away with one of the monopolies of the age. It received the like support from Mr. BRO- THERTON, Mr. Ross, Mr. HUME, Mr. DUNCAN, and Dr. Biki4RING. Mr. WILLIA.M WILLIAMS doubted its policy ; Sir ROBERT FERGUSON op- posed it altogether. Sir ROBERT PEEL read extracts from a letter by Mr. Birdman, of Belfast, showing that the new French tariff had driven France from competition in foreign markets with our linens, and in- creased the price to the French consumer ; and the new restriction of Belgium on our yarns had had the effect 'of losing that country every market but France : so there was a prospect that experience and self- interest would cause a revision of " hostile tariffs."

The second reading was affirmed, by 96 to 18.

CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.

In the House of Commons, on Thursday, the order of the day having been read for going into Committee on the Church of Scotland Benefices Bill, Mr. P. M. STEWART contended that time ought to be allowed for the General Assembly to consider the measure. He sneered at the paternity of the bill ; Lord Aberdeen's family (the Gordon's of Haddo) having obtained all their titles by unremitting opposition to the Presby- terians and Covenanters ; and asked who of the law authorities was in its favour, excepting the Solicitor-General ? Moving that the bill be committed that day three months, he quoted the couplet addressed by Wyndham to a former Ministry- " Your faults, they are but two—

There's nothing right you ever say, there's nothing right you do."

Sir JAMES GRAHAM replied to Mr. Stewart, that the bill was the measure of an united Cabinet ; though Lord Aberdeen, the only Presby- terian in the Ministry, had the charge of it ; and it was drawn up by the Lord Advocate. It gave effect to the Nonintrusion principle, the grand Presbyterian principle of the Church of Scotland. He had already no- minated fifty ministers, and nearly forty Crown livings remained to be filled ; and not one of the ministers so nominated had yet been inducted. It was under such a state of things that he wished the bill to pass ; and the General Assembly had already declared its confidence in Govern- ment.

The original motion was supported by Mr. PerNoLe ; opposed by Mr. HUME, Mr. BOYD, and Mr. Coeeerr. On a division, it was carried, by 85 to 54.

ARMING OF CHELSEA PENSIONERS.

The order for going into Committee on the Chelsea Hospital Ont- Pensioners Bill was moved in the House of Commons on Thursday. Sir HENRY HARDINGE stated that the object of the bill was, that Chelsea Pensioners, who can now only be employed as special constables, should be properly armed and employed as soldiers, under the command of the half-pay officers by whom they are paid, on the requisition of the civil authorities of the district. An armed and disciplined body would thus be provided in large towns. In consideration of that new liability, the pensioners would be relieved from garrison-duty. Mr. THOMAS DUNCOISBE disliked this insidious encroachment under plau- sible pretences—this attempt to put down by bayonets the distressed operatives in disturbed districts : he moved that the bill be read a second time that day three months. The original motion, supported by Sir ROBERT PEEL, Mr. G. W. WOOD, and Mr. SCOTT, and opposed by Mr. HAWES and Mr. M. J. O'Coxseis., was carried, by 53 to 4.

SPAIN : ESPARTERO : CARLOS.

In the House of Lords, on Monday, the Marquis of Lora:eel:entity put a question to the Secretary for Foreign Affairs— He was anxious to know whether the Secretary of State had received any accounts which stated that Espartero had deserted his country and station, and had been received on board an English ship of war ; because, if this coun- try could show any countenance to a man who had been guilty of the basest treachery, and of the violation of duty again and again—who had deserted his country and duty, and means of defence, after bombarding the fairest city of Andalusia—still be thought he ought not to have met with protection, and been received on board an English ship of war. The Earl of ABERDEEN said, he had received no further information on the subject than was possessed by their Lordships ; but there was no reason to doubt the accuracy of the report. So far from there being any hesitation at receiving the Regent on board a British sloop of war, he should be astonished if he was not treated with the regard and dis- tinction to which he was entitled.

In the House of Commons, on the same night, Mr. BORTHWICK moved " for copies or extracts of any correspondence which had taken place between the Governments of Great Britain and France relative to the detention of Don Carlos in France "-

Which of the two, Queen Christina or Don Carlos, both in France, would be more likely to engage in plots to unsettle the peace of Spain or Europe? Christina was allowed unrestrained liberty in Paris, whilst Carlos was confined at Bourges, in order that what were called " Liberal institutions" might be forced upon Spain. Whilst Queen Christina was engaged in in- trigues and issuing proclamations, Don Carlos had issued orders to his Gene- rals requesting them to take no part in the feud.

Mr. BAILLIE COCHRANE seconded the motion ' • saying that he had been told by Don Carlos at Bourges, that Louis Philippe had assured him that he should be treated as a Prince malheureux : now, it was well known that he had not been treated as became a Prince.

Sir ROBERT PEEL believed that Don Carlos was not subject to more restraint than was necessary for his detention. If he wished to go to Austria, lie was at liberty to do so. He could not consent to the pro- duction of the correspondence.

Dr. Bownpro deprecated interference in Spain, and the idea that what is excellent at home must necessarily be acceptable abroad. There were but two kinds of government which would be acceptable in that country : the one was a local and provisional government ; the other was one of universal suffrage, such as had been established in 1812. Lord JonN MANNERS advocated the cause of Don Carlos ; drawing a parallel between his career and that of Prince Charles Edward— Of what cause was Don Carlos the exponent ? It was the cause of order, of religion, and legitimacy : the principles opposed to him were those of anarchy and revolution. The results of anarchical and revolutionary principle had left in ruins the ancient church and monarchy of Spain. Those alone were op- posed to him, and looked with satisfaction on his imprisonment, who sympa- thized with the Canadian rebellion, the Polish refugee, the Democrat, and the Chartist; who saw nothing to admire or respect in the character of a Spanish prince and a Chistian cavalier; and who saw nothing worth cherishing in those feelings of loyalty and religion on which the institutions of the country de- pended.

Lord PALMERSTON entirely concurred in what fell from Sir Robert Peel. When Don Carlos was in Portugal, he was saved from being taken into custody by British agents ; and it was a clear understanding, that on his coming to England he was not to take advantage of the protection afforded to him and return to Spain for the purpose of kindling a civil war. He was therefore virtually guilty of a breach of faith.

The motion was negatived, without a division.

MLsor..r.r.4 NEOUS.

STATE. OF. THE NATIONAL FINANCES. Lord. MONTEAGLE has given notice, that on Monday next he will bring forward a motion in the House of Lords respecting the finances of the country.

DURHAM. ELECTION. A petition. has been presented against the return of Mr. John Bright.

THE ROYAL ASSENT was given by Commission, on Thursday, to the Limitation of Actions (Ireland) Bill, the Controverted Elections Bill, and several unopposed and private bills.

THE Poem RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL was considered in Committee by the Commons on Monday ; various amendments being moved, and principally rejected.

THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND) BILL, the object of which is to correct certain technical' errors and defects in the existing law, passed through Committee in the House of Commons on Thursday ; divers amend- ments being made, and more rejected.

LORD LUCAN'S DISMISSAL FROM THE IRISH MAGISTRACY. The Earl of LUCAN, moving for papers, drew the attention of the Lords, on Thursday, to

the circumstances under which he had been dismissed from the commission of

the peace in Ireland. He had occasion, two years since, to dismiss from the agency of his estates Mr. St. Clair O'Malley ; who had subsequently pursued a

system of annoyance, and insisted on shooting over the Earl's estate. He

prosecuted Mr. O'Malley, who was also in the commission, before the Magis- trates; when the defendant used the most insulting language, brandishing a stick, and calling the Earl a " scoundrel, coward, and blackguard." Ineffec- tually claiming the protection of the Bench, and after long provocation, the Earl called his assailant a " miscreant : " and the Lord Chancellor of Ireland dismissed them both from the commission. Lord WHAENCLIFFE assented to the production of the papers, but withheld any opinion on the special case. Lord BROUGHAM, the Earl of WICKLOW, the Earl of WINCHILSEA, and the Earl of GLENGALL, expressed strong sympathy with Lord Lucan. An address to the Crown, asking for papers on the subject, was agreed to.

THE COALWHIPPERS BILL passed through the Commons Committee on Wednesday. Several divisions took place : the first, Mr. Hume's motion that

the bill be committed that day three months, was rejected by 40 to 15; and other amendments moved by the opponents of the bill were rejected by still larger majorities.

REFORM or COUNTY GEOGRAPHY. In the House of Commons, on Mon- day, Mr. ROBERT SCOTT obtained leave to introduce a bill to declare that every detached part of a county iu England:and Wales, entirely surrounded by one other county, shall form part of the county by which it is surrounded. The bill is for consideration during the recess.

Tile CORONERS Bill. Tee second reading of the Coroners Bill was moved in the House of Lords on Monday, by Lord Bactuomam. The Marquis of Sams- BURY opposed the motion, on the ground that the bill would throw additional charges on the county-rates : he moved that it be read a second time that day six months. The amendment was supported by the Marquis of LONDON- DERRY, Lord BEAUMONT, and Lord WHARNCLIFFE the bill by Lord CAMP - Bilts. On a division, the amendment was carried, by 31 to 7 ; the bill being lost.

THE SCOTCH UNIVERSITIES PROFESSORS BILL stood for the second read- ing on Monday; when Lord CAMPBELL stated, that its object was to suspend the operation of the law for twelve months, in the belief that during that period some threatened litigation between the Presbytery of St. Andrew's and Sir David. Brewster, a Professor in St. Andrew's University, (whom the Pres- bytery desired to eject from his post because he had seceded from the Church,) would be prevented by a return to reason, common sense, and mutual forbear- ance. The Earl of &ADDINGTON could not join in that anticipation : the bill would amount to a complete breach of the Act of Union ; and he moved that it be read a second time that day six months. The amendment was carried, without division.

BRITISH IN CHINA. In the House of Lords, on Monday, the Earl of ABERDEEN moved the second reading of the Intercourse with China Bill ; the object of which was to enable the Governor and Council of Hong-kong to make laws and ordinances for the British territory and for British subjects in. China. Lord CAMPBELL objected to the measure, as unprecedented ; since Governors in Council had never yet been permitted to legislate beyond the bounds of* the territory which they governed. The Duke of WELLINGTON instanced the case of India. The motion was affirmed.

INDIAN CRIMINAL Law. In reply to Mr. HUME, on Monday, Mr. BING.. Ham BARING said that a criminal code for India was in progress.

OREGON TERRITORY. In reply to Mr. SHEIL, on Thursday, Sir ROBERT PEEL objected to produce correspondence relative to the disputed Oregon ter- ritory ; but expressed a strong hope that the question would be amicably settled.

PATENT THEATRES. On Tuesday, Lord BEAUMONT presented to the Peers a petition from Mr. W. C. Macready, complaining of the conduct of the Patent Theatres. The patents, originally grouted to improve the literature of the country, have become jobs in the hands of those who cannot appreciate the merits of Shakspere ; the theatres are occupied with monstrous productions and gorgeous shows, aided by horses and wild animals; and while the holders of the patents neglect to perform Shakspere themselves, they prevent licences from being given to other theatres. The petitioner prayed, either to extend the licence to represent Shakspere to the other theatres, or to restrict the licences of the Patent Theatres to that object, so as to exclude buffoonery and living animals. The Earl of GLENGALL said, that as the petition attacked the proprietors of the Patent Theatres, he must say lie considered the petition to be the very greatest compound of vanity, self- sati4action, and absurdity.

Homat000 PARK BILL was read a second time on Thursday, in spite of Mr. HOME'S opposition. He declared that it was a job to give 30,0001. to Lord Haddington, in compensation for that to which he had no right. The Earl of LINCOLN said, that Lord Haddington's right was affirmed by the highest law authorities in Scotland; and Holyrood Park would be thrown open to the public, instead of being monopolized by a few graziers. The second reading was carried, by 45 to 5.