NEWS OF THE WEEK.

LAST night, the Chancellor of the Exchequer disclosed his budget. The plans of Ministers present on this as on other occasions, a strange mixture of principle and no principle,—as if they had been concocted after the manner of a King's speech, every man contributing his modicum. A tax is taken off punted calicoes, because it presses on the poor; a tax is put on all cali- coes, printed or plain, which will imposed still more heavily. A pro- perty-tax is refused, but a duty is on transfers of property, —as if the principle were not precisely the same. A voyager to Richmond by the steam-boat pays at peesent is. 6d.; the Chan- cellor of the Exchequer would charge him a shilling of tax, which raises the fare to half-a-crown. You can go by coach for two shillings. All this is done to benefit the poor. The reduction on the newspapers and on the advertisements is good ; the abolition of the coal and candle taxes excellent ; the wine equalization is also a most proper measure ; and the tobacco we have recommended, with others. The new impositions are al- most all bad; and one of them, at least, will be abandoned, or Ministers will abandon their places. If they had imposed a pro- perty-tax at once, they might have retained them, and the bless- ings of the country, for years. Their successors will impose it.

The other proceedings of Parliament during the week, though sufficiently multifarious have attracted little interest on the whole : the speeches have lacked eloquence. Tithes and the clergy have formed the standing topic of the Upper House. They were intro- duced on Monday by Lord KING, and have been more or less dis- cussed every evening during the week, Wednesday excepted. The Bench of Bishops seemed tohave rather the worst of the argu- ment, when the Earl of WINCHILSEA and Lord WYNFORD came gallantly forward to relieve them.

In the Commons, on Monday, the principal subject of debate was the barilla duties ; in which. Mr. POULETT THOMSON, Mr. Alderman WarrumAle, and Mr. SADLER, figured as political econo- mists, each in his own way. Lord ALTHOIU. has announced, that the pensioners on the Civil List have an equitable claim to their allowances under the new King as under the old (by the common law of England, we presume, which forbids established abuses to be otherwise than cautiously handled): no reduction is.therefore likely to take place. Mr. FOWELL Burrosbegged Lord ALTHORP to postpone the Reform iluestion, in order that his motion touch- ing Negro Slavery, which also stood for the 1st March, might be properly discussed. If the bill justify the anticipations of the friends and the enemies of Reform, the request of Mr. BoxTox will hardly he looked on as unreasonable.

There were two grand debates on Tuesday,—one of Mr. HUNT'S raising, on the rioters ; the principal object of which seems to have been to clear the character of that gentleman from the im- putation of having indirectly encouraged disturbances which, ac- cording to his solemn declaration, he sincerely deprecates; and another of the member for Clare, of which it would be somewhat difficult to say what were the objects, principal or subordinate, except the bearding of the member for Limerick, and the chal- lenging of Sir CHARLES WETHERELL—rather an unapt subject for single combat.

Wednesday presented nothing but petitions. Mr. P. HOWARD, the member for Carlisle, mule a learned attack on the ballot, against which he quoted CICERO. The petition of Captain OGILVY against Mr. JEFFREY'S return for Forfar, which had been detained by the snow until the law- ful time was past, was received on Thursday, on the mo- tion of Sir CHARLES FORBES, supported by evidence at the bar, and the intercession of Lord ALTHORP. Mr. WYNN did not think the snow had any right to control the regulations of the House. We see, indeed, no reason why the Commons should not be omnipotent over the elements as over every thing, else. It would have triumphed over common sense had 21.1r. Wvisx's argument pfelaileri, for the only precedent cited by that gentleman was shown by Sir GEORGE CLERK to be inapplicable. On the same day, the King's printer's patent was referred to a committee, on the motion of Mr. HUME. The worthy member was extremely hoarse ; and his compelled silence produced more laughter in the House than his brightest periods had ever done before. Mr. JEFFREY and Mr. HUNT, the polisher of periods and the polisher of shoes, are Members of Mr. HUME'S Committee! The end of the world is doubtless approaching, and nigh at hand. The Rideau Canal has also been referred to a committee; Lord ALTHORP fairly mooting the question, whether it may not be wiser to pause than to go on with that great undertaking. Mr. BARING thinks it would be well to give up some of our expensive colonies altogether, but he can by no means agree to part with Canada. He highly approved of the committee on the canal, but stated that it could do no good, for the money was all spent. Mr. HUNT wag again before the House on Thursday, with a motion for a copy of the Salisbury Gaol regulations, which every one in the House agreed in condemning. The House seem to have considered that the speeches on the subject would be found sufficient to effect Mr. HUNT'S purpose of preventing such regulations from being acted on in future. Yet the same House, on Monday, had de- clared, that to state even in a court of justice, one word of what passed within its walls, would be a high breach of privilege. An important announcement was made by Lord ALTHORP on Thurs- day, touching the Game-Laws. His Lordship intends introducing a bill for amending [abolishing?] those laws, of a more satisfac- tory character than that patronized by the remedy-of-abuses-as- they- arise gentlemen. Will it pass ?

I. THE BUDGET. In a Committee of Supply last night, Lord ALTHORP made his first essay as Chancellor of the Exchequer, by submitting to the House of Commons a statement of his scheme of finance for the year. He made this statement earlier than usual, as the country was anxious for information on the sub- ject. The relief which his Lordship proposes to give the public comes in two shapes—the abolition of places, and the reduction of taxes. The places abolished, or intended, with the aid of Parlia- ment, to be abolished, are- Vice-Treasurer of Ireland . . 1 Lieutenant-General of the Ordnance

Clerk of Delivery - ditto 1 Auditor of the Civil List . .

• Treasurer of the Military College . 1 Ditto Military Asylum Resident Surveyor 1 • King's Stationer, Ireland ; . . 1 • Clerks of Privy Seal 4 Commissioners of Victualling . .

Ditto Navy . • . . . 2 Superintendent of Transport . . . 1 Paymaster of Marines . . . • Officers of Dockyards . . . . 78

Husband of 4 per cent. Duties . . 1

Inspector of Stamps, Manchester . . 1

Receiver-General, Scotland . . . 1

Receivers-General, England . . . 46 Conimissioners of Sufferers' Claims at St. Domingo

Paymaster of American, &c. officers 1 Unenumerated126

• • • • Total . ' 273

The taxes to be reduced or removed are—

Tobacco, reduction of 50 per cent. Newspapers, stamp-paper duty reduced to 2d. a advertisement duty reduced to Is. for advertisements of

less than 10, and 2s. 6d. for such as are of more than 10 lines. Coals and slate, taxes abolished.

Candles, tax abolished.

Printed cottons, tax abolished.

Glass, tax abolished. •

Sales of land by auction, and miscellanies, in all 263 articles, taxes abolished.

The whole amount of the relief to the public on these various items is estimated at 4,160.0001.; ofloss to the revenue, 3,200,0004 The loss Lord Althorp proposed to 'make up by an equalization of the duties on wines, which he would change from 78. 3d -for French, 4s. 10d. for Peninsular, and 2s. 3d. for Cape, by an addition to the timber-duty, by which that 'en the load of European timber will be raised to 50s., and on td," e load of Canadian, to 208.; a new duty of W. per lb. on rar,. cOtton imported, with a drawback of equal amount ; a t on steam-boat passengers, where the distance does not eaceed 20 miles, is., from 20 to 30, 2s., above 30 miles, 2s. (al 10s. per cent. on the actual sale of landed property, and-1'0s. per cent, on the actualtransfer of funded property. The 'whole calculated amount of these new taxes-is 2,740,000/, Lord Althorp acknowledged, with his usual candour, that he

was indebted to the admirable work of Sir Hen TY Parnell, for his plan of finance. His first object was to relieve the labouring classes, and he did not think this object could be accomplished so well by a reduction of taxes on articles consumed by them, as their condition prevented the use of many taxable articles. He preferred, therefore, to effect the reductions upon articles of manu- facture in more general use ; from the increased consumption of which they would derive more employment. This principle had led him to adopt the tax on funded property. It would be ob- jected by the monied interest, that the proposed measure was a violation of the public faith. He did not regard it in that light, and he saw no reason why that species of property should he less free from taxation-than land. It might be said that it was only a beginning ; but the fact that land:was similarly taxed was some security against the extension of it. He did not propose to tax the transfer of stock when it was only a security for a loan of money, as that would have been a source of great inconvenience to the commercial world. Besides the reduction of places already alluded to, the Lord Chancellor also contemplated great reductions in his department ; and the Colonial Sectetary entertained similar expectations. The Chancellor of the Exchequer did not put for- ward these reductions as points of economy, but to illustrate what the Government had done and intended to do to reduce patronage, which they had always contended ought not to be the support of Government.

Lord Althorp concluded with the following general view of the whole subject. The income for the year 1830 was 50,060,000/. If from this sum were deducted the loss by the taxes taken off in 1830, which amounted to 2,910,000L, the income left for the present year would be 47,150,000/. Now he found that, owing to the increased consumption which had been created of several articles by the reduction of the taxes upon them, there was an arrear due to the Excise of 580,000/. at the beginning of this year more than there was at the commencement of the last. He might there- fore reckon upon that sum as part of the increased revenue for the year, and then it was 47,730,000/. He deducted from this sum the taxes which he had taken off, and which he estimated at 3,190,0001.; and this left 44,540,000/. for the revenue of the year. He added to this sum 2,740,000/. for the amount of the new taxes which were to be imposed ; and that ' raised the income to 47,280,000/. Deducting from this sum the estimated expenditure for the year, which he had before shown would be 46,850,000/., it would leave a clear surplus of 430,000/. These were the propositions which he intended to submit to the consideration of the House. It happened that he had shown them that very morning to a gentleman who was well skilled in matters of finance, and had asked him what he believed would be the result of them upon the country. His friend told him that the monied interest of the coun- try would not like them, but that the manufacturing interest would. He. thought that this was the greatest praise which his system could re- ceive. If either of these interests were not to like it, his object was that the manufacturing interest should like it. He hoped that the House, when it took into its consideration the effect which would be produced upon the country by taking off the taxes on tobacco, coals, candles, cot- ton, glass, 8:e., and when it reflected on the great coin' ensation which the revenue would receive for its apparent loss in the increased consump- tion of those articles, and in the greater employment of the people, would not withhold its approbation from the experiment—and he admitted it to be a bold experiment---which he now recommended it to make for the public benefit. It was an experiment which he believed in his conscience would succeed ; and if it did succeed, it would increase the prosperity of the country to a great amount.

Mr. GOULBURN deprecated the distinction which, for the first time by a Minister of the Crown,was sought to be draain between the monied and manufacturing property of the country. From the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he could almost sup- pose that he had not read the words of the contract entered into with the public creditor. Lord ALTHORP—:" I have it here before me, written on a slip of Naer : it was from mere oversight that I did. tivt read it to t1W House."

Mr. GOULBURN repeated his objections to the proposed transfer- duty, as contrary to the faith of contracts, by which it was ex- pressly provided that such transfers should bear no stamp. He insisted-that the proposition was not only a breach of public faith, and as such grossly unjust, but as impolitic as it was unjust. The grand cause why our funded property was so frequently trans- ferred, was the facility with which the transfers were made; and if Lord Althorp thought he could preserve the rapidity while he clogged the transaction with a tax, he would find himself greatly deceived. To the Savings Banks the tax would instantly prove fatal ; and it would drive larger capitalists to invest their property in Foreign Funds. The other, items of his Lordship's scheme, Mr. Goulburn said he must consider as almost equally objectionable. The noble Lord said that he removed the duties on printed calicoes, because they added to the taxation which pressed most heavily upon the lower classes, whose dress principally consisted of that article. But whilst

'Niche,. noble Lord felt so much for the taxation imposed on one species of , ' he imposed on all cottons unprinted, in the raw material, another c""°'„" "-% would operate as heavily, and perhaps more heavily, than that wdu3'c'hwhheicr4e-mo'",• . "4" . When the noble Lord afforded relief to articles which *he industry of the people, it was inconsistent to ii- were the produce 01 'vein another shape. It appeared to him, that the pose fresh Mxes upon thes.. mbeLvfou.ld add greatly to the expense of

imposition of a new tax upon .

.it.t when they came to examine the

erettions and buildings, He believt.7. as gained in glass they lost in t

the transfei*-tax• t, that having-

expended such e were bound to give :it the Air- s. He objected strongly ugal—a country which took 0? orFrance—whfch took nothing e tax on raw cottons a fair tax,

subject, they would find timber. _(A laugh.)

Mr. WARD W8S

Alderman WAS vast sums in forti thqr-defences of

ince the duties on

inueh from ug,fin from us at all. but that- on transfers of stock quite impracticable. He asked why the noble Lord did not come forward with a property-tax at once—the man of property, while he kept it to himself, paid the country nothing. Why- were not ground-rents and mortgages taxed, why not absentees ? Mr. JOHN SMITH said he would sooner see a tax of 20 per cent.. on all property above a certain amount, than see faith broken with the public creditor as the noble Lord proposed, and in a way that could not possibly be productive of benefit to the revenue.

He had heard of this proposition of the noble Lord's before it was made; and he communicated it to a friend of his whom he did not then see in his place, he meant the honourable member for Callington. The honourable member could not credit the report ; his answer was, " Nonsense, it can't be true : you are imposed on by some stockjobbing lie." (Hear and laugh.. ter.) Mr. MABERLY could , not see how that could be considered as a violation of national faith, which was no more than the passing of an act of Parliament to amend another. He said, at the same time, he would have-preferred other means of supplying the defi- ciency. He thought it might have been supplied by an additional duty on spirits, and on coals at the pit-mouth. (Loud cries of " No !") Mr. KEITH DOUGLAS deprecated the transfer-tax ; and lamented that nothing was to be done for the West Indies. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON said, the announcement of the trans- fer-tax would carry alarm and dismay throughout the country. He was persuaded the people would sooner keep the coal-tax and all the other taxes than submit to that proposed.

Sir JOHN WROTTESLEY reminded the House of two facts which they seemed to have forgotten,—first, that the proposed transfer- tax was equally imposed on the holder of land and the holder of money ; and next, that the question of public faith had been set- tled by the imposition of the income-tax, which was a much heavier burden on the fundholder than the one now proposed. Sir ROBERT PEEL gave a qualified approval to some of the ar- rangements proposed, but decidedly objected to the transfer-tax, as a stain on the fair fame of the country.

"Can words be more expressive or explicit, than those which we find in one of the acts of Parliament,—and they all contain the same provision, —I allude to the act passed in 1813 for raising 27,000,0001. by way of an- nuity ? That act expressly guarantees to the public creditor the power to transfer his stock in the funds on the express condition that no stamp- duties whatever shall be charged in such transfer. (Loud cries of Hear.) It is quite impossible that we can evade such terms as these. We may adopt the proposition of the noble Lord, but we can only do so by -vio- lating this condition,—we can only do so by violating the public faith, and descending from that proud position, as regards publicitfaith, in which we had stood in contradistinction to every other country in the world up to the present time. (Hear, hear.) No ingenuity of argument can possibly get rid of the force of the obligation, or justify a departure from the terms of the contract. But, said the honourable member for Staf- fordshire,—' This is no violation of the contract with the public creditor, for that has been already violated by the imposition of the property tax.' Is the defence, then, that because the act of Parliament has been violated, they shall be at liberty to violate it again? I fear that that at all events will be the inference which will be drawn hereafter from this violation of the public faith, if it be once permitted. (Loud cheers.) If, in these times when, according to the admission of the noble Lord, the productive indus- try of the country is in a state of steady and progressive improvement,—if in a time of peace, and with no pressure upon the productive industry of the country,—if at such a time, and under such circumstances, in direct violation and contempt of numerous acts of Parliament, you shall impose a duty of per cent, upon the transfer of funded property, what security will the public creditor have if times shall return like those of 1797 or 1798,— times when, unappalled by the dangers which surrounded us, we fear- lessly adhered to the maintenance of the public faith, and by doing so were enabled to surmount all the difficulties by which we were encom- passed, I say, Sir, if such times shall again return, what security will the - public creditor have if, in the present circumstances of the country, we iinpoSe a duty, in violation of the condition of the act of Parliament, upon the transfer of his property,—what security, I repeat, will he have, that we shall not, under the pressure of a foriegn war, and of more adverse circumstances, resort to him and qUote this violation of the public faith as a justification for our violating it again ? (Loud cheers.) This is not a question of policy or prudence : it is a question of morality. If the state is not prepared to keep its engagements with the public creditor, shut up your courts of justice at once, and do not call upon individuals to fulfil theirs. (Hear, hear.) I have heard, Sir, of public writers who have claimed, On account of the altered circumstances of the times and the country, a right to refuse to keep their engagements or to pay their debts, and I have never heard such a doctrine mentioned that it has not been mentioned with abhorrence. But where is the difference between an individual and the state in such circumstances ? And if the state, without any pressure of difficulties (and I can conceive no pressure of dif- ficulties which could justify such a step), be prepared to violate its solemn engagements with the public creditor, should we be surprised if an indi- vidual should follow our example and do so also? (Hear, hear.)" Sir Robert considered the impolicy of the tax to be as great as' its injustice. Had it not been for the perfect faith kept with the• public creditor, the reductions of the Five per Cents, in one in- stance,' and of the Four per Cents, in another, by which the nation gained nearly three millions per annum, could never have-been accomplished.

Lord ALTHORP explamed-

.

"The wording of the act, previous to the property tax, was, that (the annuity should be free of all taxes and charges whatsoever.' He admitted that the wording of the act of Parliament, with respect to the stamps,,- was as strong as it could be, but not a whit stronger than in the other case. Mr. Pitt had ever contemplated the act of Parliament in this waye when he imposed a property-tax, for he argued the question in a man' ner to show this. He said that he imposed the tax upon the funds, not as funded property, distinct from any other, bat as a part of the

general property of the etoiy. „4-1-iprp now proceeded upon precisely the same principle, and he used the same argument. He had a. 'right ;a) attach property in ihe bads as well as property ,of any er de; seription. The enly 9,1-101404 te be considered was, •

just or is it

unjust to lay on this stamp duty ?' If it were just, it would be in vain to

go into the act of Parliament." •

Mr. CHARLES GRANT, in opposition to some statements of Mr. PRESHFIELD, quoted the speech of Mr. Pitt, for the purpose of showing, that in"terms, as well as in import, the reasoning of that great financier was precisely analogous to that of Lord Althorp. Sir EDWARD SUGDEN was strongly opposed to the transfer duty.

He said to the noble Lord—" Put one 5s. on the transfer of ROI. of stock, and you will commit as great a breach of faith as Revolutiorary France ever did." He called upon the noble Lord, if he imposed this transfer- duty, to recite the acts of Parliament protecting the fundbolder; and introduce a clause in his bill repealing them by name. After that, let him impose his transfer-duty.

Mr. WARBURTON was opposed to the steam-boat tax, as going to crush a rising branch of industry and commerce. He did not think the transfer-tax would involve any principle of public faith, but it was objectionable for its partiality of operation. The mime- rous transfers of the funds were in small sums, and the duty would consequently Mt most heavilywhere it ought to be least felt. Ha property-tax of any kind as this was were to be imposed, it ought to press on all alike. Mr. ROBINSON said he would have liked to see the soap-tax reduced ; and Colonel TYRRELL regretted that the duty on malt had received no consideration.

Mr. D. W. HARVEY said it was quite clear, if the transfer-tax were resisted, the country must give up all hope of fiscal aid from funded property. Mr. HUNT said- " Instead of laying a trifling tax on transfers in the funds, he wished that his Majesty's Ministers had taken off the malt-tax, the tax on soap

and candles, and other taxes that pressed on the poor, and had laid on a property-tax ; but probably they had been left in such a state by the late Government that they were unable to do inure. As far as the taking off taxes went, the present Government should have his support, but not in laying on a single tax, till all places, and. sinecures, and pensions, were done away."

2. TimEs. In presentimr a petition on Monday, against what is called the Union of Window', Lord KING took occasion to enter at some length into the question of tithes ; which his Lord- ship considered to operate as a great bar to the improvement of land, to the employment of the poor, and the beneficial investment of capital. The evils of their operation were now so generally and deeply felt, that a composition would no longer be accepted as a sufficient remedy : the public would insist on a commutation—a conversion of what was at present an intolerable tax on gross produce, into a fixed rent. The Bishop of LINCOLN denied that tithes were public property, or established by the State for a state service.

In many cases they were granted by individuals who had the power, in order to provide for the due performance of religious service in every parish in the kingdom. The individuals who granted tithes did not intend them to be the property of the State. The question was, what was pro- perty? The law gave power to men to appropriate and use certain things.

It gave a power to the tithe-owner—a property in the tithes, as it gave to the landowner a property in his land. Tithes, therefore, stood upon the same footing as other property. He remembered that at the period of the French Revolution, the people who argued against tithes also contended that the landlords were nothing more than the stewards for the people, and that rent was the salary which was paid to them for distributing the produce of the land. He did not know why the Church property should be subject to attacks more than other property, unless it could be show., that it weighed heavier than other property on the springs of national industry. Was that the case? He believed not. Was land free from tithes better cultivated than land subject to tithes ? He denied that it bas. He quoted a communication from a clergyman, to show that the tithes were only in his parish one sixth of therent. The clergyman stated that he had had several communications with land-surveyors and other persons, who assured him that, generally, the clergymen took from 20 to 30 per cent. less than their due claim for tithes. The agriculturists, the clergyman stated, were not injured by tithes ; .for, generally, tithe-free land was not better, or so well cultivated as land subject to tithes. In those parishes, too, he stated, which were exempted from tithes, the poor- rates were higher than in parishes which had tithes, though he did not state that the high rates were connected with the exemption of tithes. For himself, he doubted therefore that the tithe system was so noxious as the noble Baron described it.

The Bishop admitted, it the same time, that a general commu- tation would be desirable for all parties ; and, sooner than the present form of collecting what he could not but look on as the property of the Church, should be a cause of disunion between its ministers and the people, he Would not only consent to a commu- tation, but do all in his power to forward it. , The Bishop of BATH and WELLS also expressed himself favour- able to a commutation.

Lord KING described the non-residence of the clergy as the worst feature in the system. Was it not a fact, that out of 10,500 parishes, there were not more, if so many; as 6000 resident clergy? Was this answering the pious purposes of those who left this kind of property? Let their Lordships look to Scotland, and see whether any such evil was allowed to exist,— and he put-this as an argument ad verecundiam to the right reverend Pre-

lates,—did not they manage the care of their parishes, as to religious 0 instruction by resident clergy, without the costly apparatus of a hierarchy?

, The Bishop of LinColn had contended that tithes were the pri- vate property of the Church, and he had asked whether it was not useful that it should be so considered: "I ask, in turn," said Lord King, "is it useful that tithes should be a tax on the gross produce of the soil, and on the capital, industry, and en- terprise of the person by whom it was cultivated ? The operation of such a tam is so injurious to the general interests of the community, that I contend the State would be perfectly justified in altering it from its pre- sent.character, and giving remuneration to the clergy in any other shape." The Bithop Of LINCOLN—" By a commutation, I mean a grant of land im lieu of the tithe now leviable upon it." The Bishop of LONDON said, the evil of non-residence was in a great measure attributable to the lay patrons. If the remedy had been in the power of the Church, it would have been applied long ago; but the endeavours of the Church were opposed by the noblemen and commoners in whose hands was so large a share of the Church patronage.

On Tuesday, Lord KING, on presenting some more petitions, said, as he had been challenged to produce a plan for the mainten- ance of the Church in lieu of tithes, he would give the reverend Prelates three instead of one.

The first was, to charge the tithe as a fixed sum on land, the value to be taken by the average amount of the last years, and to let it remain at that value without any alteration. The second was, to fix a corn rent to he settled by a certain quantity of corn, to he decided by the average of the last years, and to remain without alteration at that rate for ever. The third was, to take the tithe at is highest value, let it be sold at that va- lue, and the produce be taken into the hands of Government, and from that fund let the clergy be provided with a suitable maintenance; and if an overplus remained, as no doubt a considerable one would remain, let it go to the public, or let it be bestowed in improving the condition of those who were really the working clergy. Whether any of these, or some other plan, were to be adopted, one thing was certain, that some means should be taken to remove that most injurious of all taXes, the tax on gross produce,—a tax on the capital add industry employed in raising it.

Lord 17.-INcitasEA corroborated the statement of the Bishop of London with regard to non-residence. If the Lcf:i.lature should pass an act to restore to the Church all the property that ought to belong to it, that, he thought, would do a great ser- vice to the Church. fle was the proprietor of some tithes, and he should be glad if the Legislature would pass a law to compel him and all those who possessed the property of the Church to restore it. Ile could con- scientiously say that he was in possession of property which ought not justly to be his.

The Archbishop of CANTERBURY wished to inform Lord King, that he intended to bring forward or to promote a bill for the composition of tithes.

He would take leave to suggest that great inconvenience arose from discussions of so important a nature on the presenting petitions. If the noble Lord did enter into such discussions, he would, no doubt, have a great number of such petitions placed in his hands ; but it would be bet- ter if the noble Lord would bring forward some specific measure, which would be more consistent with the dignity of their Lordships, than to argue such an important question on the presenting petitions.

Immediately after this remark, Lord KING presented two other petitions, of the same sort, from Somersetshire.

He had no doubt that the right reverend Prelates found the discassion very inconvenient, but he was afraid that they would be subject to these inconveniences de die in diem. The Bishop of London found great fairlt with the lay impropriators, as having caused all the evils of the Church. This was something new. Hitherto he had always understood that the lay impropriators were the prop and stay and bulwark of the Church. He had always heard that the clergy were glad that a part of the Church property was in the hands of laymen, because they would fight their own battles, arid the Church might find shelter under their guns. The right reverend Prelate found that the abuses of the Church property, the rob- bery—he begged pardon, the abstraction, as the right reverend Prelate called it—of the property of the Church, was the cause of the non-resi- dence. But the property the right reverend Prelate complained of having been abstracted from the Church, was not given to the e Church, but to the Catholic Church. Before the Reformation all that property belonged to the Catholic Church. The Reformation gave its property to the English Church. The Church Establishment of England, as formed at the.Reformation, was entirely the creature of the State. The right reverend Prelate, perhaps, wished to make it cut that the Church was superior to the State; but he most contend that it was made by the State : he did not mean the Church in the large sense—the assem- bly of the faithful—hut the Church Establishment, which was different. The right reverend Prelate' said that the bill prohibiting pluralities, and enforcing residence, was supported by the Bishops, and opposed by the proprietors of lay advowsons. The times, however, were now changed; let the Bishops now bring forward such a Bill, and it would be more successful. Such a measure should have his support. It was not creditable to the Church of England—it was not creditable to those who had the management of it, that they should yet suffer to exist the vice of pluralities. Lord King had also a plan to secure residence :

In fact nothing was more simple—it was only necessary to make the fact of residence a legal receipt for the tithes and the other sinecures. That would do the business effectually, far better than all the Bishops.

He alluded to a case of plurality, in the person of a young man, the son of the Bishop of Bath and Wells, who had received the "best thing" in the Bishop's gift, and, at a tender age, had attained the venerable dignity of Archdeacon. The Bishop of BATH and WELLS explained the specialties of the case, and stated that his son was a young man of very great merit.

The Earl of CARNARvoN deprecated, in strong terms, the prac- tice of making, night after night, in these times of troubles and disturbances, such attacks on the Church. He was-convinced—and he was sure that the great body of the peoplg- were of the same opinion—that a more estimable body of men than Ufa Clergymen of the Church of England could not exist. There was no class of men in the country who distributed so large a part of their reve- nue in charity, or were so devoted to good works, arid no class of men who conferred so much benefit on the country at large. If he had some- times differed from the members of the Church, it was on questions of religious liberty, in which they thought their security was involved. and which he thought they ought to have conceded for their own safety. Now that no such questions existed, he was bound to say that it was most important to uphold the Established Church as it at present existed in this country. In reference to the measure for the composition of tithes, he recommended that a commutation should be at once accom- plished, as it would- be most inconvenient to open up the tithe question again at the end of twenty-one years. With fespect to residence, he thought, that if that were to be strictly enforced to the injury of the exemplary body of curates who had grown up within the last ten oi fifteen years, it would probably do the Church a great injury. To compel

residence, might deprive these curates of employment, and substitute for them incumbents who were not so competent to the performance of the duties.

Lord KING wished to set himself right with Lord Carnarvon- he had not said a word against either the Church or the Clergy.

He admitted that the great body of the Clergy were an exemplary body of men, and he wished to make them more efficient. Pluralities were acknowledged to be an abuse, non-residence was acknowledged to be an abuse, and lie wanted to remove these abuses. The same object was proposed by his noble friend. He was not disposed to take their property from the Clergy, and had proposed to grant them a corn rent emial to their revenue on the average of the last seven years. Wishing to put his right reverend friends at their case, as to the petitions be had yet to present, he should imitate the Church in old times, which established what was called the " peace of the Church" from Friday to Monday. In presenting petitions, he should follow this example, and should add Wednesday ; so that on Wednesday, Saturday, and Sunday, there would be peace to the Church from the war of petitions.

On Thursday, Lord King returned to the charge. He said the Bishops had given a very obscure and unintelligible account of the Residence Bill, whose vitiation they had attributed to the lay patrons. The facts were as follows- " About twenty-five years ago, an attorney had made himself extremely active in instituting qui tam informations against several clergymen for non-residence on their livings. The thing created great consternation at the time ; and several eminent lawyers, civilians, and churchmen, of that day, had put their heads together, to see how the inconvenience of such a state of the law might be averted. A bill was introduced on the subject by Lord Stowell, then Sir William Scott. The bill, after receiving all the light which could be thrown upon it in town, was sent down to Oxford for farther illumination. Though the pretext of the bill was more strictly to enforce-residence, its real object was to prevent residence being so strictly enforced ; and it had succeeded most effectually in attaining that object, by taking away the qui tam, and leaving the enforcing of residence to other means, which were in every respect less successful. Lord WINCHILSEA attacked Lord King for his observations on these subjects from night to night.

He was constrained to say, that he could not give him the credit of sin- cerity in the professions he continually made of intending, by his obser- vations, to promote the interest of the Church. He had spoken con- temptuously of every thing connected with religion ; which made it doubtful whether, as the noble Baron could see nothing good in the Esta- blished Church, he meant to correct abuses. Whatever the noble Baron might say of the effects of religion, in his humble judgment the Clergy of the Established Church were a most respectable class of men ; and he maintained that religion was the only sure ground for private virtue and public honesty. It was high time that the noble Lord's attacks, which might cause a pernicious effect if they remained unanswered, should be noticed; and he, for one, was determined not to allow attacks to be un- answered which he believed to be most injurious to the best interests of the Church and the country. No individual could trace the conduct of the Established Church for the last twenty years without being convinced that it had made very great improvements, owing to the exertions of the members of the Bench to enforce the residence of inferior clergy. He was convinced that the clergymen of the Established Church stood as high in general estimation as the clergymen of any church in the world. Would to God that the upper classes possessed an equal influence ! He spoke not of the influence of wealth, but of that influence which was founded on character ; and he heartily wished that the upper classes pos- sessed as much influence of that kind as the clergy were proved to possess in the late disturbed districts among the misguided peasantry. He would only add, that he would not stand up for abuses, and was prepared to say, that many alterations might take place to improve the Church ; but he had no doubt, from the exertions already made by the members of the Bench, that the individuals of that body would correct abuses, and would place the Established Church on the very best footing.

Lord KING denied that he had shown any disrespect to religion.

Was tithe religion ? Were all the abuses of the tithe system, pluralities and non-residence, religion ? Did the noble Earl mean to say that abuses were not to be attacked ? He had stated that there were pluralities amongst the Bishops ; that they had secured the benefit of that Bill brought into the House to prevent pluralities, in reply to the accusation that laymen had prevented its being effectual: Was that personal ? He had recommended prudence, and recommended the Prelates to accept a reasonable proposition as the best security for their property. Was that a wish to overthrow the Church ? He stated that some measure in the present state of the country was necessary to satisfy the people, and that the measure of the last year would not satisfy the people.

Lord WINCHILSEA asserted that Lord King had spoken con- temptuously of the Church, by using such phrases as "lawn sleeves." Lord KING disclaimed the use of such phrases.

Lord WINCHILSEA explained, that it was three or four years ago ! Lord WYNFORD deprecated Lord King's desultory observations ; he deprecated attacks on the Clergy without notice ; he deprecated attacks on Lord Stowell ; but above all he deprecated attacks on tithes—

He would maintain that tithes were no more a tax on productive indus- try than rent was; and the same power that would destroy tithes in one week, would not scruple to interfere with any other property in the next. The noble Lord would find that, instead of adducing arguments against tithes, he had furnished the strongest reasoning in their favour. The President Jefferson said, that "all property was the creature of the law, supported only by society." If this were so, which did the noble Lord think was the oldest title, the temporal or the spiritual ? Was there any landholder in England who could produce a title so old as the Church could produce ?

Lord RADNOR said, that the description of Lord Stowell's bill was perfectly correct. Mr. Wyndham had opposed it in every stage, and described it precisely as Lord King did, as a bill to encourage, not prevent non-residence.

The Duke of Bucxixwetas echoed Lord Wynford's senti- ments—

The Church need not apprehend danger in respect to its tithes; the Clergy had as much right to that property as the noble Lord had to his estate; and if the church property were taken away, he knew not by what mode the noble Lord would effect the preservation of his own.

• 3..THE SPECIAL COMMISSIONS. Mr. HUNT, on Tuesdajr, in moving an address. for extending the Royal 'mercy to the persons convicted under the Special Commissions, spoke between two and three hours, in a somewhat rambling style, but with considerable talent and command of temper. He attributed the disturbances, in their origin, to the vicious course of taxation, and to the oppres- sion exercised towards the labourers. The country gentlemen had screwed the people so long, that at length, like a patent screw, they had drawn the cork out of the bottle, and its contents were spouted in their faces. The disturbances, Mr. Hunt said, were also cherished by the foolish and mistaken lenity with which the first offenders were treated. Had the magistrates in that case where Sir Edward Knatchbull presided—where they condemned a number of machine-breakers to a few days' imprisonment, and dis- missed a number unpunished—acted with snore severity, and shown to the offenders that they had incurred the penalties of fe- lony, in all probability the Special Commissions would never have been called for. The origin of the thrasliing-machine-breakings, Mr. Hunt attributed to the farmers themselves ; and he declared he could prove at the bar, that some of them brought them out, and called to the mob to destroy them, that all the farmers might be on an equality. This infamous encouragement brought him to the proximate cause of the battle of Salisbury. About one hundred and fifty persons, in the neighbourhood of that city, having procured 9/. among the farmers, went and got drunk with the money ; when, flushed with liquor, they became riotous, and to quell the riots the valiant constabulary of the town showed their martial fronts in vain. To aid them, the yeomanry were summoned to arms; but even these doughty heroes failed to conquer—their feats being confined to one of them shooting a comrade through the body by accident, and to another of the combatants jumping, with most unusual agility, over the garden-wall of the honourable member for Salisbury, and there changing his clothes, that he n.ight creep home in safety. (Hear, and laughter.) The rioters were, as the House was aware, after that cap- tured in detail by the military, tried, and many transported; and thus ended the battle of Salisbury.

The general impression of the country peoplewas, that the only object of calling out the yeomanry was to keep down the wages. With respect to the refusing to serve as special constables, Mr. Hunt said he would give the House the answer of one of the recu- sants.

He was a tall, muscular, but half-starved young man of thirty ; and his answer was worth repeating for the benefit of those members with whom sonorous phrases had in general more weight than fact or argu- ment. "You tell me," said he, "that our refusing to be sworn in special constables is un-English. I admit it is, but I ask you if it is the only un- English grievance in existence ? I have a wife and five children, I am able and willing to work, and yet all I can procure to support them and myself is 7s. per week. Is that English? Is it English that on a Sunday I amn frequently obliged to lie in bed in order that my share of our scanty victuals may go to support my poor infants and their mother? Is it English that while I, in common with many others like me, am thus stinted in the very.

necessaries of life, the parson', who abounds in its luxuries, should refuse with anger to abate one penny of his tithes ? This is what I call un-

English. (Hear, hear.) And when you remove these un-English griev- ances, I'll admit that my conduct, in refusing to protect the property of those who have hitherto shown so little regard to my interest, is un- English also."

Mr. Hunt entered at great length into the case of Looker, and also those of Withers and Lush; and contended that their cases, if no other, called for an inquiry. He complained much, in the course of his address, of the misrepresentations of Mr. Benett, who had, he said, described the riots as originating in the speeches of Hunt and the writings of Cobbett. He had gone into the country in the pursuit of his ordinary business ; and on the only occasion that he had spoken to the people at all, he had been . solicited to do so by the magistrates and farmers themselves. Mr. GEORGE LAMB resisted Mr. Hunt's motion, on the ground that it would be an improper act of interference with the preroga- tive of mercy vested in the Crown ; and that to address the Crown in behalf of the men at present suffering punishment, would be tantamount to declaring that those who hadbeen executed had been executed improperly, if not unjustly. Mr. Lamb said, Mr. Hunt was the most unfortunate peaceful traveller he had ever heard of ; since he had contrived, in the course of his journey, to stumble on the riots of three counties. In fact, it was the general impression throughout the country., that wherever he went, a riot was sure to be the consequence. The people of each town that he passed through said, "Hunt has been here, we shall have a riot ." and the anticipation was invariably realized. BENETT, in reply to the personal allusions of Mr. Hunt, defended himself from the charges of cruel or harsh procedure to- wards the rioters, either during the riots, or after they were suppressed. He had said the riots generally were in part pro- voked by the writings of Cobbett and the speeches of Hunt, and he repeated the assertion ; but he had never said that any parti- cular riot was specially instigated by either. Mr. Benett said he was happy to see Mr. Hunt in the House ; where his talents, which were great, might do much good, and could do no harm. He hoped he would in future limit his oratory to that audience ; front which he would receive more attention than he had ever commanded from any mob he had addressed.

Sir JOSEPH YORKE advised the member for Preston not to speak too 'often, or too long at a time. He complimented the mem- ber on his good looks, and Condescended to allude to his profes- sion of blacking-maker. The gallant Admiral was also extremely witty on the case of. Cooper, the man that was executed • but could not possibly discover why he had assumed the name of Hunt —a name so different from his own. - Lord MORPETH spoke against the motion ; and so did Mr. LONG

WELLESLEY. •

Sir Tuomes DENII.Csi (the Attorney-General) entered into an 4. GAOL REGULA.TIONS. Mr. HUNT moved on Thursday for a copy of the regulations of Salisbury Gaol, by which the private communications of a prisoner and his attorney are subjected to the inspection of the gaoler,—with a view to the putting down of one of the most iniquitous practices, looking to the general principles on which English prosecutions are by law and custom conducted, that can possibly be imagined, and whose only issue must be to deprive both innocent and guilty of the advantage of legal advice where it is most essential that they should have it. In the course of his speech, Mr. Hunt censured in strong terms the general . indisposition of the House to listen to the petitions of the people, exemplified as it had been that night by laughing down Mr. Hume, merely because he happened to labour under a severe cold. Mr. Hunt's own speech was repeatedly interrupted by expressions of impatience much ruder than laughter.

• The laughter of the House, he said, might not be so meant; yet he must observe, that the way in which the petitions of the people, descriptive of their sufferings, were treated in that House, was calculated to make the people of England believe that their sufferings were quite disregarded there. (Loud cries of" No, no.") That would be the impression of any one who had seen what he had seen since he entered the House. He had • himself presented several petitions that evening describing the sufferings of the people in the most affecting terms, sufficient to draw tears from the eyes of any humane man ; and yet in that assembly they were passed over, if not with ridicule, with neglect. He had a great many similar petitions to present, but they might as well be at once thrust into the clerk's bag at the table.

Mr. WARBURTON, in seconding the motion, attributed the im- patience of the House to the speeches of the presenters of peti- tions, and the weariness caused by their length and number. He thought all petitions ought to be classified, and so presented, when members could have an opportunity of expressing their sentiments for once and all on the subject of the petitions. Mr. GEORGE LAMB, in allusion to Lush's case, said he had the authority of Lord Radnor for saying that Lush's confession was not drawn up in the presence of the turnkey; and that it was merely glanced at by the gaoler, in order to ascertain that it was a

bona fide communication to the attorney, and this with the attor- ney's full consent. It was never seen by the law-officers of the

Crown. He and all the other members deprecated the rule esta- blished at Salisbury Gaol, in consequence of which the intercourse of prisoners and counsel was interfered with.

Mr. HUNT repeated, that the paper had been three days in the gaoler's possession; and declared that the Home-Office had been grossly, though he believed unintentionally, imposed on. After • the condemnation, however, that the practice had obtained, he did not consider it necessary to press his motion.

5. STATE OF IRELAND. The motion of Mr. O'GORMAN MAHON* . for copies of the proclamations lately issued, commenced with a stormy and schoolboy-like dispute between the mover, the House, and the Speaker. The member for Clare having described his motion as unsavoury, the House laughed ; he repeated the epithet unsavoury, and Mr. SPRING Rica joined the laugh. A ridiculous scene ensued ; of which the following account is given by the Times.

O'GORMAN MAHON thanked the honourable member for Limerick for that sneer; he promised the honourable member that it should be remem- bered, that he, on the Treasury Bench—(Cries of Order!)

The SPEAKER said that he rose to intercept what, if persevered in, might prove disorderly. (Hear !) O'GORMAN MAHON felt grateful to the Speaker for the intimation ; but complained of the interruption, because he had not been guilty of any breach of order. The Speaker, he said, had only risen to respond to an

*It is the fashion of the reporters to drop the Mr. In recording the appearances of this Irish Gentleman; and, strangely enough, the same affectation has crept into the Journals of the House of Commons. Till we know by what right the gentlemen of the Gallery and of the Clerk's table confer new titles of courtesy, or dispense with those that have been established in England forages, we shall follow the coin- Lion usage, and retain the Mr. able vindication of the Special Commissions, and of the conduct of those who had taken part in them. Upwards of one thou- sand persons had been tried ; and they were selected from a much larger number of persons who had rendered themselves amenable to the law. Of the great number of cases tried, only three could in any way be called in question, and these were much misunder- stood. Ile explained the cases of Withers, Lush, and Looker ; showing that these instances were free from any just ground of complaint. Knowing full well the circumstances which had given rise to the Commissions, and how they had been conducted, he confessed he had been surprised by the language of the press, es- pecially as he met with no one in private life who did not think the measure of the Special Commissions necessary to the instant pro- tection of life and property in the country. Ile begged the House to compare the present state of the country with its state six weeks ago ; and to consider that the Government had, without any new powers, but. simply by adminigtering the law as it stood, quelled these wiNspread disturbances. In similar circumstances, in other times, the Government had appealed for assistance to a suspension of law and the constitution.

The House was extremely impatient on Mr. HUNT'S reply, which it endeavoured to cough down ; a practice so rude and indecorous, that it renders the threats of personal chastisement to which the members were exposed on the next question for the night (the inquiry into the state of Ireland) almost a necessary retaliation. In conse- quence of the repeated cries of" question," and the coughing, but a small portion of Mr. Hunt's reply was heard. The motion was rejected by 269 to 2,—only Mr. Hunt and Mr. Hume, the seconder, having divided for it.

unmeaning cry ; because he could not say that he (O'Gorman MahOh) had been disorderly. (Lold cries of Order )

Sir C. WETHERELL then addressed the Speaker.—" After the masterly and dignified manner in which you, Sir, have announced the rule of order,—avoiding all severity and harshness of manner, so as to do credit to yourself, and to correspond with the feelings of the house, I am sur- prised that that intimation has had no effect. If it shall not prove effec- tive, you, Sir, will he again required to rise from your chair, and assert the dignity of the House." (Hear ! )

O'Goam,tmDzIazioN—" The honourable member for Boroughbridge has called upon you, Sir, to rise from your chair. (No, no.) 1 say he did. (" No.") Let any one stand forth who pretends to say he did not." (Cries (1 Order !") The SPEAKER—" I am quite sure that the honourable member must feel, on reflection, that when I interrupt the course of any honourable gentleman's speech, I always do so with the greatest lenity of manner consistent with the discharge of my duty. (Loud cheers.) The honour- able member will not be the single exception, as I trust, in this House, to believe that I interfered when I was not satisfied that the honourable member was out of order ; and if I abstain from expressing myself in strong terms, it is not only from a hope, but from a confidence, that the honourable member will take the hint, and not oblige me to discharge a most arduous and painful duty." (Loud cheers.) O'GORMAN MAHON—" I thank you, Sir, for not having contra- dictel, and, consequently, having confirmed what I asserted. (` No ! no I') Thank you for your 'noes But I ask this simple question—why do not those who cry out ' no!' stand up in their individual capacities and say so. The honourable member for Boroughbridge did call upon the Speaker to rise and put me down. The honourable member accused me of having been disorderly ; and with that tact and ingenuity which belong to his profession, to pervert any truth, however palpable, into quite the oppo- site—" (Order ! order ! question !) The SPEAKER—" I still cannot but persuade myself that the honourable gentleman, on a moment's reflection, will see that he has been disorderlv on two grounds—first, for addressing himself to a subject not connected with the question he is about to submit to the House; and, secondly, for accusing another honourable member of a wilful and professional perversion a truth." (Hear, hear !) O'GORMAN MAHON— ROI now precluded from alluding any more to the member for Boroughbridge in this House, bza I may meet him again elsewhere. (" Order.") How am I out of order ? I am no more out of order now, than when I alluded to a peculiarity which I considered par- ticularly applicable to the member for Boroughbridge. As the Speaker abstained from saying I was disorderly then, 1 have his testimony in my favour." (Cries of" Order!") The SPEAKER—" I am quite sure the honourable member will feel, and if the honourable member does not, I hope the rest of the House will feel, what is due to its own dignity. (Hear, hear !) I claim nothing for myself personally ; but I do claim something for the dignity of the chair. (Cheers.) 1 tell the honourable member that he was out of order on two occasions ; and I tell him further, that this House never has been in the habit of submitting to the manner in which the honourable mem ber is now pleased to address the House (loud cheers). The House always takes care to give full notice to any honourable member, who may be in error through mistake, to retrace his steps ; but if he persevere in an objectionable course, then the Speaker, in he exercise of his duty, would be bound to take that step which alone remained, and call upon the honourable member by name, who would be then brought before the House, and have to make an explanation of his conduct." (Hear, hear !)

This exhibition over, Mr. O'Goitarner MAtioet proceeded with Ins motion for the production of the proclamations. In the course of his remarks, he alluded to the distresses of the Irish peasantry.

Two magistrates had declared on their oath, on the 10th of January, that in the county of Mayo, there were 3,031 souls without food or raiment, and that they worked from sunrise to sunset for 2(1. per day. Their dis- tresses were aggravated by the weather, for the country was covered with snow. These people wanted no meat—all they desired was potatoes and salt, and that they could not obtain. In this state they had remained since the 10th of January, without aparticle of food to maintain them. (A laugh.) Before the 1st of March 2,000 more indivichfals would be reduced to the same situation. (Laughter.) This was the condition of the country which England wished to have united to her. Now was the time to act. Let not the House be deceived. Ireland bad no confidence in England. This country must now endeavour to effect a compromise through the instrumentality of one man, between a total repeal of the Union and the holding of sittings alternately in the capitals of the two countries. (Laughter.) He almost lamented that he was not born of a pugnacious disposition, that he might meet the response indicated in that cheer. Did those honourable members who thus conducted themselves imagine that they could prevent the unfortunate men who were five feet under the snow from thinking that they could better their condition by a repeal of the Union? (Great laughter.) It might be said that England had not caused the snow, but the people had the snow on them, and they thought that their con. nexion with England had reduced them to the state in which they now were. (A laugh.) Whether that was true or not, they believed it to be so, and would act on their belief. Lord ALTHORP observed, that he had stated to the mover, pri- vately, that no objection would be made to the production of the papers, but at the same time expressed a wish that the question of Ireland should be left to be discussed on another opportunity; which he regretted the honourable member had not complied with. He considered the proclamations as not only perfectly just, but absolutely necessary. Lord Althorp concluded thus— "Sir. I sincerely hope that the object of those who are in favour of the repeal of the Union will not succeed ; and, knowing that they cannot succeed, except by successful war, I must say, that though no man is more averse from war, and particularly a civil war, than I am, yet I must confess, that to me even civil war would be preferable to the dis- memberment and destruction of the empire." (Loud and continued cheers from both sides of the House.) Sir ROBERT PEEL said he must regret the discussion that had taken place, in the necessary absence of the gentleman (Mr. Stanley) whom it principally regarded. The time however, was come, when every man who had ever taken a prominent part in the debates in that House must make up his mind on a subject like the dismemberment of the empire, and stand by the Exe- cutive and support it resolutely in dealing with a question of such para- mount importance. For his own part, he would freely declare, that he should for ever feel ashamed of himself were he to suffer himself to be deterred by party spleen or political animosity from proffering on this occasion his cordial, steadfast, and sincere support to the existing Ministers of England. (Cheers.) He would not now look out jealously for any slips or trifling oversights which those Ministers might have in other respects committed; for the artifices and unworthy evasions by which their eww tions to promote the tranquillity of the country had been met, ren- dered it . obligatory on every man of loyalty and honour to make common cause with any Government so circumstanced. (Cheers.) It was his duty to support them in all extremities, even in that dreadful one to which the noble Lord had so energetically alluded. There was manifestly no alter- native before them but the maintenance of the Union ; and if in securing that it would be justifiable to resort to force eventually, how much more Justifiable was,it to adopt every practicable expedient which might pos- sibly prevent so deplorable a consummation ? Mr. HUME said, he was sorry to find the House so much disposed to the risk of a civil war. He would remove the Lord Lieutenant and the Church, and leave the Protestants to manage their religious matters as they pleased. He believed the sole ob- ject of Mr. O'Connell was to procure a Parliament for the purpose of regulating the internal polity of Ireland, and to leave its external polity to be regulated by the Imperial Parliament; and so far he perfectly agreed with him. Lord PALMERSTON said—

All who had any thing to lose had sided with the friends of the undi- vided empire ; but if, nevertheless, it was fated that Ireland should be deluged with blood, assuredly that blood would he visited on those who had malignantly and guiltily brought about such a catastrophe ; while Government, who had done their utmost to avert it, in the eyes of God and their country would stand absolved from responsibility. (Loud and prolonged cheers.)

Mr. Witss said, the present agitation had been excited by the recent events in France and Belgium ; and it was by no means unanimously approved of by the people of Ireland. Sir FRANCIS BURDETT spoke against the motion. The species of support which the Ministers received from such allies as the honourable member for Clare, certainly placed them in rather an awkward predicament. If honourable gentlemen "called that backing of their friends, a plague upon such backing." The honourable member, in the course of his very eloquent and edifying speech, merrily laid about him on friend and foe indiscriminately, in a manner that reminded him of the proverbial dexterity of his countrymen in handling a shilelagh at Donnybrook ; but he must say that he could not point out any thing in the honourable gentleman's speech which appeared to him deserving of an answer. Why he should have so fiercely attacked the best friends of Ireland in the English Whigs, who had made so many sacrifices for the Irish people, he was quite at a loss to imagine. They had anticipated a somewhat more crateful return; but, as Dean Swift said, that which was true everywhere else was not true in Ireland, and he supposed that in that country, instead of looking for gratitude without end, they should have expected gratitude without beginning. (Great laughter.) On the great question of Emancipation, his own sentiments were now what they had always been ; for the advocates of that measure had never predicted favourable effects to the extent of the overstatements which had origi- nated with its opponents. But the best results had flowed from it already, and were daily in progress of operation. Mr. O'Connell could not now agitate the country in the manner in which he had done previous to its enactment. As to the repeal of the Union, the interest of the Protestants as well as their inclinations were with England*; whilst the Catholics, who debated it, were very much divided in opinion on its expediency. But the honourable and learned gentleman who principally urged it was doubtless of opinion with Sir Lucius in the comedy, that as the quarrel was a very pretty quarrel as it stood, they had best fight first, and explain afterwards. The conduct of the Irish towards Lord Anglesey was a pretty good evidence that they had but short memories, when they could so soon forget his services and his sacrifices for the promotion of their in- terests. He had even gone so far on their account as to hazard his friendship with his Sovereign, and stake all that was dear to him as a public character. The honourable gentleman professed pacific intentions, but his professions and his practice were at great variance ; " the voice was the voice of Jacob, but the hand was the hand of Esau." (Laurhter.) Mr. O'GORMAN MAHON, ill reply, said, that till lately the ap- peal to force for the repeal of the Union was the last thing which the people of Ireland dreamt of.

Whether that would be the case after the declaration made by the English Ministry that night, he would not venture to determine. This only he would say—if blood were shed, the guilt of that blood must he on the Ministry of England. "But this I tell you, Englishmen, you will have enough to do abroad, without breaking your spears on the bodies of us Irishmen, who have neither forgotten nor forgiven the days of Ninety-eight."

The motion was agreed to.

day into a defence of his conduct, in answer to the imputations of noticed the very general dissatisfaction which prevailed at the re- a petition presented against him by Mr. O'Gorman Mahon the day solution of Ministers respecting these pensions, and the high sala- after he had left the House to return to his duties in Dublin. The ries proposed to be given to the officers of the Household under the petition seems to have been a fine specimen of Irish documents. new arrangements. Out of fifteen signatures, fourteen were forged. The petitioner, Was he right- in supposing that the plan Which the noble Lord had Andrew M`Donnell, complained that a clergyman had refused to brought forward was to be considered only as the suggestion of his Ma- visit him ; though the truth was, the clergyman had come down jesty's Government, to be dealt with by the House as the House might to the gaol for that purpose ; and M`Donnell, who described him- think fit, unbiassed by any interference on the part of Government, or by self as dying and a Protestant, but who was fighting alive, and a any Ministerial influence ? Were his Majesty's Government disposed to yield to the wishes of the House, if the House should be disposed to treat Catholic, would not see him. M`Donnell also complained that the question in a manner different from that in which it had been treated he had not been admitted to bail ; whereas it appeared that bail by Government? Did they mean to leave the House at perfect liberty on was ready to be accepted, but M`Donnell refused to enter into the subject? securities, because, if he remained in gaol, Lord ALTFIORP said— He should be able to bring the Recorder all the way from England to His Majesty's Ministerswerequite prepared toabideby the responsibility try him, and to have all the officers of the court and gaol dismissed which had been incurred, but would by no means undertake to say that it through the means of the honourable member for Clare. (A laugh.) was not perfectly competent for that House, or their Committee, to alter, When taken into custody, he was placed on the debtors' side; but he modify, or altogether rescind, any decision to which a Government might knocked down all around him, shut out the gaoler, and set the furniture possibly arrive. He had already said, and he would now repeat, that he on fire with a red-hot poker. He was then removed to the felons' side; did not conceive it the duty of Ministers to take advantage of a technical at which he said he was perfectly satisfied, for all he wanted was to get point of law in order to do what would be unjust and inequitable. These The felons to sign a petition praying for the repeal of the Union. When he pensions had been created on the understanding that they were to be was brought up to trial, he endeavoured to get up a mutiny in the dock, granted for life ; and although their abrogation would certainly be legally where he called out to the prisoners to give three cheers for the repeal of unimpeachable, he put it to the House, he put it to the country, whether the Union. (A laugh.) Mr. Shaw added, it was probably the extraor- so trifling a saving as could thus be effected, would be worth incurring dinary appearance of the man, if the honourable member for Clare had the discredit which such a measure must attach to any Government that seen him, that so warmly excited his sympathy. He wore a loose coat, no consented to its adoption. He would await with deference the decision of

waistcoat, a coloured shirt, no neckcloth, and hair all over his face. IA laugh.)

Mr. Shaw denied that he had neglected his judicial for his legis- lative duties : the court over which he presided had not been in so well-regulated a state for thirty years past as it then was. Mr. O'GORMAN IVIAlioN said 11I'Donnell was descended from one of the first families in Ireland He was described as a maniac. He might be so ; but Inas he guilty or innocent? The Recorder had neglected to state that, but he would. This man, maniac or not, was arraigned before the Recorder; he was put upon his defence, and he received a triumphant acquittal. If he was a madman, he was an innocent madman. But was he a madman because he did not happen to be decked out like the Recorder ? He had no waist-. coat, to be sure,—the greater misfortune was it to be confined ten or twelve days in that inclement season, without waistcoat or cravat, and then to be told, " I will have you arraigned—Put him to the bar: jury, look at that madman; he has no waistcoat or cravat; is he not as mad as a March hare ?—Is he not an Irishman?" (Laughter.) Mr. O'Gorman Mahon said he could testify; to the inconve- nience of Mr. Shaw's absence from Dublin— Before he left Ireland, he wished to register a freehold, and went to the Recorder's Court for that purpose ; but the Recorder not being there, he could not register. The House had just refused Mr. Lefroy leave of ab- sence for a fortnight ; and would they let the Recorder go when he pleased?

Mr. SHAW explained.

He had sat in the Recorder's Court in October, and had adjourned it till November, when he sat again, and adjourned it till December. As the court was adjourned till the end of December, he had no power to sit again till that time. As to the petition, it bore internal evidence of in- sanity. The petitioner had been discharged from a lunatic asylum.

7. BLoony SPEECHES.—Previous to the House on Friday going into the finance statement, Mr. O'GORMAN MAHON made a furious attack on Ministers, on account of a riot in Mayo, where a man had unfortunately been killed. He said a Mayo Magistrate had called a Catholic priest "a bloody rebel;" Government had issued a "bloody declaration ;" the Act under which Mr. O'Connell was prosecuted was a "bloody Act ;" and Ministers were guilty of uttering "bloody-minded expressions ;" which, however, he hoped they would retract. He concluded his speech of blood by declaring, that—

If Ministers imprisoned Mr. O'Connell, he would be looked upon as a martyr by his fellow-countrymen, and the table of the House of Com- mons would creak beneath the weight of petitions for his liberation. Fully 7,000,000 of hearts would insist on going into prison along with him, but it was to be hoped that Government would relent, in consideration of his being the father of a family.

The honourable member.was censured by the Speaker for his xpressions, and questioned by the House touching his authority. e declared in apology to the Speaker, that he did not believe Ministers to be more bloody-minded than himself, and, in answer to the House, that lie spoke from the report of an Irish news- paper.

8. GENERAL FAST. On the presentation, on Monday, of some petitions calling for the appointment of a national fast, Mr. HUNT asked, whether those who called for the appointment of a day for this purpose, were aware that one third of the people of Eng- land fasted every day of the year? Mr. PERCEVAL—" Does the honourable member know to whom we ought to look up as the disposer of all blessings and the author of all goodness ?" Mr. Hear —" I am perfectly aware who is the giver of all goodness; and I am also aware that the honourable member and others who take away from the poor what is theirs, are the persons who deprive the poor of the benefits which the Almighty intended for them." Mr. PERCEVAL—" I shall always make a great distinction between any personal attack which the honourable gentleman may be pleased to make upon me., and any attack made on the motion itself. The one I shall en- deavour to reply to, the other I shall pass over in silence."

Mr. lierser—" I disclaim any intention of making a personal attack on the honourable member, whose name before to-night I did not even know ; all I can say is, if the cap fit the honourable gentleman, let him wear it."

Mr. Hums trustad, that when the motion for a national fast come on, it would not be confined to the question of religion, but embrace the causes of the distress of the country.

6. THE RECORDER OF Donuiv. Mr. SHAW entered on Thurs- 9. PENSIONS ON THE CIVIL LIST. Mr. PORTMAN, on Monday, the Committee, who of course were entitled to make what alteration they. -thought fit ; but he would never submit to be bound by any Committee, • or by the House itself, to do what he believed in his conscience to be Unjust. (Loud Cheers.) The salaries alluded to were under the conside- ration of the Committee, who might diminish them to any amount which • they should deem fair and reasonable; and he, for one, would fully as- . sent to their arrangements in all that was compatible with his own views of equity and justice. (Cheers.)

His Lordship afterwards stated, in explanation, that he was by no means wedded to his classification of the Civil List Pensions— he was quite willing to separate from them the Scotch and Irish names, or to enter into any other arrangement the House might deem best.

Mr. LENNARD also expressed his dissatisfaction.

With respect to the Pension List, his great objection to the noble Lord's plan was, that it perverted the grant from the purpose for which it was originally intended, and instead of enabling his Majesty to gratify his own feelings in the reward of services, was calculated to give Ministers the means of corruption and boroughmongering. He had a great objection to a private Pension List ; so great, indeed, that he would rather have the large Pension List of the late Government open to inspection, than the Pension List of 73,000/. now proposed, to be kept in secret. The renun- ciation of her pension by the Duchess of Newcastle as soon as the matter came before the public was a proof of the advantage of publicity.

10. BARILLA DUTIES. On Monday, Mr. BANKS, the member for Dorsetshire, severely reprehended Ministers for an unconsti- tutional interference, by a Treasury minute, with the taxing pri- vileges of Parliament, in the case of the barilla duties.

Mr. POULETT Tnostsox admitted, that the measure complained of would have been better avoided ; but there were circumstances which would palliate, if they did not justify it. Within a few days after he came into office, pressing representations were made of the hardships which had fallen upon persons engaged in the ba- rilla trade, by the present state of the law. Upon inquiry, he found those representations were well founded ; and having examined analogous cases, he discovered, in many acts of the late Government, relative to the same and other duties, precedents for the mea- sure which the member for Dorsetshire so severely censured ; and, in fact, he found a Treasury minute of the 16th of December, for the same objects, which had only not been put in force on ac- count of the state of the Government. He was aware that the re- solutions of the House should have been referred to ; yet it was natural that a Government new to office should fall into a mis- take, which would have been committed by their late predecessors if they had :remained in office a few days longer. However, the duties had not been remitted ; a portion were paid, and the re- mainder secured by bonds, to be enforced, if Parliament did not sanction the reductions.

Mr. DAMON and Mr. HERRIES admitted that occasions often arose in which it was incumbent on the Executive Government, upon its own responsibility, to remit duties which would create peculiar hardships: the immense commercial concerns of this country could not be carried on, if the Government were not per- mitted to !exercise such discretionary authority. Still, such cases should always be inquired into and explained to this House.

In the Committee, Mr. POULETT Tnomson explained the operation of these duties ; the depression to the barilla trade which had been caused by them ; and that it occasioned an in- crease of the price of soap and other articles, without any corre- sponding benefit to the rival manufacturers of similar articles in this country. Sir GEORGE CLERK pleaded for forty thousand per- sons engaged in the manufacture of kelp in Scotland, all of whom, he contended, would be thrown out of employment. Sir MAT- THEW RIDLEY advocated the interests of the manufacturers of Newcastle ; and Mr. HUME and Mr. HUNT pleaded for the con- sumers.

Mr. SADLER spoke very vehemently against the political econo- mists; and contended, that every sacrifice of free-trade principles should be made to the object of securing employment of our own people. Mr. Anwoou echoed the speech of the member for Newark, decrying free-trade and novel principles-. Mr. Mosuson detailed, apparently to the conviction of the House, a number of facts in proof of the positive benefits result- ing from free trade. The introduction of French goods in this country had excited a successful competition with them. The articles were so closely imitated, that they found as ready a mar- ket as the original manufacture. In consequence, at Manchester and in Spitalfields, not a weaver, who could work, was out of em- ployment. These circumstances clearly showed that free trade was favourable to the employment of the labouring classes.

The resolutions were afterwards agreed to.

11, PRIVILEGE OF PARLIAMENT. Mr. D. W. HARVEY presented on Monday a petition from Mr. Walker, an attorney of Bristol, praying that the House would order a copy of a petition presented two years ago, against the conduct of Sir John Nichol, by a per- son named Peddle, to be produced on a trial in the Court of King's Bench. The petition had called forth some remarks from Dr. Lushington, whose speech was reported in the Mirror of Parlia- ment ; and Mr. Walker prosecuted the ;proprietors of that work for an alleged libel contained in the speech. The motion for the production of the petition was refused. Mr. HUME said he was -subpcenaed on the trial, and asked the Speaker what he should -do. The SPEAKER stated, that a member was bound to refuse to declare in a court of justice what had passed in the House.

12. REFORM OF PARLIAMENT. Lord FearmAK, on presenting a petition last night, in favour of triennial Parliaments, extended suffrage, and vote by ballot, expressed his dissent from this view of the question, but his willingness to discuss it fairly, when Ministers should bring it forward. He did not think that Parlia- ment would be justified in going to the decision of the question in the present state of their information. His Lordship suggested, that either by returns, or by a committee of inquiry, that informa- tion should be furnished. They ought to know the state of the franchise in the different places returning members, on other authority than that of articles in reviews and newspapers. Earl GREY said, he would not oppose such returns, as were ac- cessible, or that could convey information on any specific point : but he must decidedly object to any Committee. The question had been agitated for more than forty years ; and if the Parlia- ment was unable to proceed now on the notoriety of the case, it never would be able.