tb t anti Prareetiim/4 in Parliament.

1. FINANCIAL STATEMENT.

Lord ALTIIORP having moved last night, that the House of Commons should resolve itself into a Committee of Ways and Means, proceeded to give a statement of his financial plans for the ensuing year. He first reminded the House of the state of the national income and expendi- ture in former years, and of the large reductions of taxation which had been made. The surplus of income on the 5th of January last was 1,513,0001. He thought he might safely calculate upon a continuance of prosperity, and that the surplus would be augmented rather than di- minished at the close of the financial year on the 5th April. There would be a reduction also on the Estimates of 500,00(11.; which, when added to the surplus revenue, would raise it to two millions. - There was another source from which he expected an increase of revenue.

" The House is aware that, according to the arrangement that took place on the renewal of the Charter of the East India Company, the mode in which the tax has been levied upon Tea has been altered. It is no longer an ad valorem duty : though it was very capable of being collected in that shape while the tea was sold by the East India Company, it would be very difficult to collect an ad valorem duty when tea is sold freely by the public. Therefore a change was made, as far as could be calculated at the time, viz. in June last ; and the revenue was fixed ata rated duty, pressing with the same weight upon the tea trade as the ad valorem duty. It must be evident to the House, that though that might have been the case in June, if the price of tea, from any circumstance, as I hope and believe it will, should be reduced, the rated duty will hear a larger proportion to the article than the ad valorem duty. I believe that will be the cam; but still the amount of duty, per pound of tea, will not be.greater than at the date to which I allude. The effect, however, of this change is material in another. point of view : if, by bringing a large quantity of tea into the market under the old system, the price was diminished, the duty also would be diminished ; but, ac- cording to the new system under a rated duty, any increase in the amount of tea consumed will produce a comparative increase to the revenue." }'midi the cessation of the monopoly, Le might expect, the duty being the same, that the tea would be reduced in price. He was quite sure ;hat there would be an increase Una year at all events ; for the East India Company, at their next four quarterly sales, intend to being forward nine instead of eight millions of pounds.

This, he would remark, is an object of great impala/tee, totally unconnected kith the general revenue of the country. it will he of great importance that the stook of tea in the hands of the Company should be diminislu .1 as fat as it can, so .14 not to interfere with the general trader in the spring of 18:15, when he conies into the market. The change was not adopted, however, in order to occasion an increase in the revenue, butt on the broad principles of commerce. The average amount of the produce of the Tea duty has hitherto been a,o0t).000/. No doubt, as much will be brought to market by the Board of Control next year, and by the private trader afterwards, as will amount to thirty-six millions of pounds of tea, and the duty upon it, instead of being, as at present, 3,300,0001. will be 3,900,0001.: giving an addition of 600,000/. to the revenue.

Lord Althorp then stated the additional call which would be made on the revenue.

" The main additional call—indeed I may say the only one—is the money that must be provided to pay the iuterest of the loan to be raised for the grant to the West India proprietors. That loan, the House knows, amounts to twenty mil lions sterling, and we cannot estimate the interest upon it at less tl.an 800,000/. I have stated that the amount of the surplus revenue, if nothing i e taken from it, toil! he '2,600,0001. ; but we are obliged to deduct from that the 800,000.. for tle i'it. r...t of the loan of twenty millions, which will then leave a surplus epis• I I,S00000/. I will :Omit at once, that flu 1111111 Who has heard me my opinions on such subjects in this place would fed much doubt that say upon this prospect, that, having a surplus of 1,800,000/., a

rcdue- taxes ought to be made."

ThP tax be intended to reduce was the House-tax; which, as it amounted to 1,200,000/., absorbed the whole of the surplus which he intended to apply to the purpose of reduction. He then said- " If the House concurs in the fitness of repealing the House-tax, I earnestly hope it will support me in resisting the reduction of any large amount of taxa- tion. It is not my intention at the present moment to introduce any bill for the .uhrogation of the House-tax. I wish first to see how certain questions, regard ing whirls notices have been given, are disposed of. ( Cheers and laughter.) I must take care not to reduce the tax until I am quite certain of those that remain ; and I shall not reduce it until I am sure I shall not be forced to reduce ("Hear!" and laughter.) I know that in discussimas upon these subj..tos, the House-tax and the Window-tax have always been coupled. They or lmth taxes upon dwelling louses, but some objections always urged to the Hibuse•tax do not apply to the Windowatax. I do not admit that the House- tlx bears really unfairly, though it does so apparently, upon the lower class er houses : it certainly applies rather to houses in towns than to houses in the e .'ry ; but he that as it may, the Objection cannot be urged against the Window-

x. rsinee the year 1822, the amount of the Window. tax has been reduced no

than 1,4;0,376/. Thus great relief has already been given as far us respects the Wiudowstax ; and the sum at present derived from it is 1,273,000/. If, t'..aelsre, the House. has the regard to the wants and credit of the country, it wi!I not add the repeal of the Window-tax to that of the House-tax. If I were silo at this simply as a financial question, I think there are other taxes the 1.1.0110f which is more desirable. ( Continued cheers.) But I have stated on fennel. occasions, and I feel it very strongly, that it is one of the ingredients in tin impropriety of a tax that it is utmost exceedingly unpopular."

Ile reminded the House, that in 1792, the golden :era of the lieformnersand Whigs, the Window-taxes yielded 1,129,0001. It was now very little more, notwithstanding the enormous increase in the number anal collie of houses. He then referred to the claims which he expected would be made upon him by the landed interest, whose distress had been referred to in the King's Speech.

He dared to say he should he told that he was giving relief to the trading in- terest, while lie was giving none to the landed interest, the distress of which had hart admitted and recognized by the Government. He could not deny the force tit that statement ; and it woMil be for the Ilouse to decide whether it would adopt the suggestion Ile had thrown out of relieving the country to the amount et 1,210,000/. by the repeal of the !louse-tax, or apply. the reduction of taxation to th.:t amount in some other way. As to the lauded interest, he might how- ever observe, that the pressure upon it did not arise so much from general taxa- tion, us l'rout local burdens. This was not merely his own opinion, but was that many persons connected with that interest. It would appear that Mi- tMters were not unmindful of that interest, for it was their intention to bring ferward a bill to relieve it from the payment of Tithes. (Loud cheers front sere- r■,1 !wits of the House, in whielt those of Mr. Cobbett were eery distinct.) sure the honourable Member for Oldham, and those others who joined in th,t cheer, must know that by what he had said, lie did not mean the aboli- tion of the payment of tithes to the Clergy altogether. He meant no such ; but what he did mean was, that a measure would he introduced for the concoct ition of tithes, which would be found a great relief to the occupiers of

laud, it would relieve them from a pressure which was now generally felt in tin• mode collecting. This, though it would still give the tithe to the Clergy, woehl, he was sure, be found a great relief to the occupiers of land.

The other measure for the relief of the landed interest would be one fur the amendment of the Poor-laws.

Ile wits certain, that if they were enabled to brim* forward a measure of this kind which might be satisfmtory to Parliament and the country, they would be doing more to relieve the presmre on the landed interest than by any small re- da:.; ion of general taxation which the present state of the Merriam of the country could afford.

With respect to Ireland—

Be was not at that moment prepared to state the nature of the measures which the Governtnent had in contemplation. He might say, however, that a measure would be proposed which would be found a relief to that country, without, he hoped, any reduction of the revenue. It would not be proper for him to state any particulars of the bill until he should be ia a condition to lay tie: whole of them before the Horse.

Mr. ROBINSON thought that the remaining 600,0001. out of the sur- plus of 1,800,000/. ought to be applied towards a reduction of taxation. Lord ALTHORP explained. He had said that there were smaller taxes which he had not named which would bear reduction.

Mr. CORBETT asked, if Lord Althorp was not encouraging resistance to taxation, when he said he would wait and see the determination of the House on some measures which were to come under discussion before he stated finally what course he would pursue. lie complained that no relief. was given to the farmer---no part of time duty on Malt or Bops taken off. Unless there was some reduction of the amount paid ill tithes and poor-rates, the change in the mode of payment would give no relief. Sir ROBERT PEEL ft it some doubts as to the expo etcd increase of the revenue to be derived from tea.

Lord Althorp had said that the difference would arise from the Government bringing 9,000,00011m of tea into the market at the quarterly sales of the tea in the Company's stores, instead of HM110,000114 But did he know that the pub- lic would take the 9,000,00011h? If 8,000,0001b. were found sufficient for the quarterly consumption of the pu!die hitherto, was it so certain that it would take the additional million ? Ile thought it would by a reduction of the price; but did it not occur to him, that if the Government gained in the amount of the duty, it W011111 lose by the reduction of the price? This tea was now the pre- perty of the public, as transfe: ref by the East ludic Company with its other property ; and if the Government, by its mode of sale, reduced the price below what it would probably have brought in the Company's sales, would not the difference in the price be so much loss to the country ; and that loss tnust be de- ducted from the gain which the noble lord seemed to think the Government would make in the duty ? This item of 600,000/, therefore, he did not think was by any means so certain as Lord Althorp scented to anticipate.

With respect to the reduction of the I louse-tax, he regretted that re- lief should have been given to the disobedient who resisted the law while the patient agriculturists got nothing.

Mr. O'CONNELL called time reduction of the House-tax a peddling reduction. Nothing was done for irelmmud. The project for commut- ing the tithe would not be popular there. He was for taking tiff a half per cent. from the interest of the National Debt, which would give a saving of four and a hell millions.

Mr. HUME considered the reduction of half a million in the Esti- mates by far too small ; and complained of the large military and naval establishments which were still to be kept up. As for the landed in- terest, the only measure which could give them relief —an alteration in the Corn-laws—had certainly been neglected. lie utterly repudiated Mr. O'Connell's project of meddling with the National Debt. The Marquis of CIIAND0S thought the landed interest had not justice done to it. He rejoiced that the House-tax was to be taken off. He had voted for its repeal last year; he hoped that when he brought for- ward a measure for relieving the landowners and the farmer, he should receive help in return.

Mr. C. FERGUSSON differed with Mr. Mune as to the necessity for a repeal of time Corn-laws. He feared that the repeal of the House- tax had been yielded to clamour and threats.

Sir S. WHALLEY reminded Mr. Fergusson of the incendiarism and threats of the agriculturists. He thought that Lord Althorp's statement would not give that satisfaction out of doors which it had given within.

Sir JOHN TYRELL, Mr. BENETT, and Mr. DUNCOMBE spoke briefly against any alteration in time Corn-laws ; and expressed their regret that nothing bad been done for the agriculturists.

Colonel TORRENS expressed his surprise at the assertion of Mr. Cobbett, that an amendment of time Poor-laws and a commutation of tithes would afford no relief to the landed interest. He contended that substantial benefit would result from those measures.

Lord MORPETH was in favour of a material alteration in the Corn- laws. He approved on the whole of the reduction of the House-tax, and complimented Lord Althorp on the faithful and satisfactory aceolint he had given of his stewardship.

Here the discussion closed. The report of the Committee of Ways and Means was ordered to be received on Alonday.

2. CHARGE AGAINST THE IRISH MEMBERS.

Time House of Commons was occupied time whole of Alonday evening with Mr. O'Connell's motion for a Committee of Privileges to inquire into the truth of the charge against Mr. Shell. Previously, however, to Mr. O'Connell's rising to make his motion, Mr. SHELL requested to be heard for a few minutes. He disclaimed all intention of joining in the debate, but took the opportunity of repeating, "with the simple strenuousness of one whose conscience was pure, that he was innocent of the charge imputed to him." He was willing to leave his fate in the hands of the Members of the Houe ; he threw himself with perfect confidence as to the result on Britigh generosity and good faith ; and hoped that the spirit of partisanship, and the acrimoniousness which had displayed itself a few days ago, would not again be exhibited. It was impossible not to complain of the severity of some remarks which had then been made.

This last observation being felt to apply to Mr. Stanley's speech of Thursday last,—setting forth the consequences to Mr. Sheil if the in- quiry should not terminate in his exculpation,—Mr. STANLEY imme- diately rose to disclaim all intention of wounding Mr. Shell's feelings. He also observed that it was important to ascertain the precise nature of the charge, the truth of which the House was about to investigate. The statement by Lord Althorp was, that Mr. Sheil had used language out of the House which was at variance with his avowed sentiments m it. Mr. Stanley wished to know whether Mr. Shell viewed the charge in that light ; and whether his denial was intended to apply to the suite- ment thus made?

Mr. O'CONNELL objected to Mr. Sheil's being induced to reply to this question, which he designated as an insidious attempt to shun the real merits of the case : lie gave no credit .to Mr. Stanley for the mo- tives which had brought him forward. Ile then proceeded to explain, that he had, in the hurry of the moment, confounded the charge brought by Mr. Hill with that of Lord Althorp ; while in point of fact they were very different. He was too hasty in acquitting Mr. Hill of stating what he was unable to prove. He now challenged Mr. Hill to justify his statement, or retract his injurious- expressions. ' Mr. Hill's charge, however, was limited in extent ; but Lord Althorp had gone further, and included many Members in his charge.

Lord ALTIIORP here said—" Some."

Mr. O'CONNELL—some! Oh, he could make very little distinction between "some" and "many." The scale which other Members might use to measure the difference, -was too nicely balanced for"his

feeble understanding. Mr. O'Connell then read the extract from'Alr. Hill's Hull speech, as given in the Examiner; and referred to the letter he bad received from Mr. George Jackson of Hull, whose account tallied with.that given in the paper. He contended, • that in his subse- quent correspondence with the Irish' ?vfernbers, Mr:111111 adopted lac report of his.speeeh in the 'Hull-paper as his own. The way in which Lord. Althorp bad answered' the questions rat to'hink had invested'the

subject with tenfold interest. It was not until Mr. Stanley had pointed out the distinctions which existed between the charge made by Mr.

Hill and that advanced by Lord Althorp, 4' in broad and defined masses," that he had paid much attention to them. It seemed that the communication was not made to a Cabinet Minister ; but if made at all,

what did it matter to whom? He was astonished that Lord Althorp thought so nnieh of what had passed at a conversation. Conversations were very inaccurate things. Lord Althorp had more than once been misunderstood by persons, by deputations, who had held conversations with him, and who had understood him to say the reverse of what he did say. If the conversations reported bud passed in confidence, the person who reported them would come before the House with a moral tarnish ; and it would be felt that the man who could violate confidence, was also capable of inventing the calumny. Mr. O'Connell, after an interruption by the Speaker, proceeded to read an extract from the de- cision of the Court-martial on Captain Wathen, respecting Lord Bru- denall's practice of having confidential conversations taken down in the Orderly-room. Ile then passed a warm eulogium on the talents, pub: ic services, mid high character of Mr. Shed; and concluded by moviog that a Committee of Privileges should be appointed, to exunine into and report upon the matter of complaint.

Mr. Him. reminded the House, that in the previous debate-on this subject, after Lord Althorp's answer to Mr. Sheil's question had been given, Mr. O'Connell, in terms which he then thought baud- some and sincere, stated that lie had been " perfectly justified" ill every thing that he bad said. Mr. O'Connell now wished to mo- dify that retractation : but he would not accept half a retractation—he Would have the whole, or none. Mr. O'Connell had let loose the Irish press upon him—bed charged hint with fabricating a calumny. But what evidence had he of that? Accomplished as he was in ca- suistry, the Member for Dublin would find it hard to prove the practical moral difference between stating what was false, arid stating what be did not know to be true. Mr. llill then showed, by refereuse to the letter of Mr. Fergus O'Connor, that the charge was matter of 1. aoriety among the Irish Members, and that Mr. Shell had been pointed at for mouths previous to his speech at Hull. Yet, after Mr. O'Connell had seen this letter, which he characterized at a public dinner as a very foolish one, he wrote again to Mr. Hill's constituents, charging their Representative with having fabricated the story. Mr. Hill expressed his hope that a full investigation would take place. For himself, he deeply deplored having made the statement which had given rise to all this difficulty. As long as he was treated with insult and defiance, of course he could make no concession ; but now he was differently situ- ated, and felt himself called upon to express his regret. As it was considered to be desirable to have the precise charge stated, he would, if the House thought proper, reduce it to writing ; if not, he would re- fer to the statement he had made on Wednesday last, which was to be found in the reports. He concluded by seconding, as he had promised, the motion for a Committee of Inquiry; though he would decline acting the part of public accuser.

Colonel Evaies considered the subject the most miserable and con- temptible that had ever come under the consideration of the House. He viewed with indignation the attempt that had heen made to run

down a man's character by secret insinuations, founded on reports of conversations in private. He alluded to Mr. Stanley's solemn annuli-

elution of the consequences to Mr. Sheil, in case he was not cleared by

the investigation ; the plain inference to be drawn from which was, that expulsion might be the result. It appeared to him, that if expulsion

were to be the result of this absurd affair,—and it was anticipated in re- ference to Mr. Sheil,—it might with as much justice be anticipated with regard to Mr. Hill or Lord Althorp. The quarrel should rest between these two Members, whose statements were so much at vari- ance ; and they should be allowed to settle the matter between them- selves.

Mr. H. GRATTAN spoke at length in vindication of Mr. Shell ; and expressed his full confidence in his innocence of the charge against him.

Sir Faesaas BURDETT regretted extremely that this subject had been stiffened to occupy the House. He was convinced of Mr. Sheil's in-

nocence. He did not see how the Committee were to get at what passed in private converilation. Were he examined, he should plead a defect of memory of all private conversation. It by no means followed, that by speaking and voting in the House differently from what he had spoken in private intercourse, that a Member had been guilty of a dere- liction of principle. There was no charge, no accuser, nothing for a Committee to go upon. He hoped that Mr. Sheil would not insist upon an inquiry ; that he would be satisfied, and that the House would be satisfied to let the matter drop, and proceed to public business; and be would move the previous question.

Mr. STANLEY took the same line of argument With Sir Francis Bur- dett. - He did not think that an inquiry Was necessary for Mr. Sheil's

vindication ' • but let an inquiry come, and he had no doubt as to the re-

sult. Mr. Hill was not the man to shrink from • the avowal of any word or deed for which be ought to be responsiblehe was not the man to let his publisher suffer. ( This sneer was aimed at Mr. O'Connell's conduct in the case of the Pilot and Mr. Barrett.) Mr. Stanley expressed his deep sense of the evil consequences which an inquiry would cause, and hoped that the matter might be stopped where it was ; though if it were still demanded by Mr. Sbeil, in justice to him it must proceed.

Sir ROBERT PEEL remarked upon the mischief of devoting so much important time to a merely personal affair ; and then went on to justify

the common practice among Members of Parliament, of holding one language out of the House and another within its walls. It was gross hypocrisy to pretend that this was not often done. How could busi-

ness be carried on, if the minority of a Cabinet did not publicly coope- rate with the majority? He was unable to see how the subject could be got rid of without an inquiry. If Mr. Sheil called for it, upon the obvious principles of justice it must be granted; though be put faith in Mr. Shell's asseveration of his innocence.

A division took place upon Sir Francis Burdett's amendment ; which was negatived by 192 to 54. The Committee was then agreed to; and the members appointed as follows.

Lord Granville Somerset, Sir Francis Burdett, Sir Edward Knatchbull, Sir Bardly Wilmot, Sir Henry Hardinp, Mr. Romilly, Colonel Verner, Mr. - - Hawkins, Mr. Shaw (of Dublin), Mr. Hume, Mr. Kemis Tyute junior, Mr. (Anon, Major Fancourt, Mr. Shaw Lefevre, Mr. Warburton, Alr. Grote, Mr. Parrott, Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Abercromby, Mr. Strutt. Five to be the quaill hl.

This debate excited a good deal of public interest. The Gallery and the space below the Bar were occupied by strangers long before the usual time. Those, however, who expected to hear eloquent speeches or sharp debating, must have been disappointed ; as the oratory does not seem to have been of a very superior description, and it was also

more free from personality than could have been anticipated. We se. lest a few of the best specimens from the reports in the Daily Papers.

Mr. HILL punished Mr. O'Connell severely for his "retractation" of his apology.

The honourable Member for Dublin complained that he hail not entered into a newspaper controversy with him. He was not in the habit of entering into a controversy of that nature with any persons, and certainly the Member for Dublin was the last person with respect to whom he would be induced to infract the rule which he had prescribed to himself upon this point. Ile had not the pre- sumption to consider himself equal to him in the display of skill with which he favoured the public. Mn. O'Connell's talent for invective and vituperation was unparalleled ; and lie did not choose to enter into a contest in which he knew beforehand that he should be worsted. Besides, why should he do so? The fictions which the Member for Dublin for a moment deceived himself into believing, were too monstrous to require refutation. They generally answered themselves. 'They were perishable commodities. Air. O'Connell should throw more of the alloy cf truth into them if lie wished them to wear twill. In time present case, he had refuted himself, with his charges followed by retractatiezi, and the retractation nibbled away in order to set up the charges again. He now said, that when he made the retractation he was taken by surprise—that he really thought ,when Lord Althorp made his statement, that it seas in sub. stance the same as Mr. Hill's, and that therefore, acting on the impulse of the moment, he made au sample apology, and offered to repeat it out of the house. It seemed that he was undeceived- by the speech which had fallen from Mr. Stanley ; but as that speech was delivered on Thursday, why did not Mr. O'Connell then withdraw his retractation? This conduct was calculated to ex- cite only one feeling in his mind.

In reference to the charge of holding one language in the House aid another out of it, Sir FRANCIS BURDETT said— What took place in the discussions on the Reform question, particularly in former Parliaments, when the majorities against that measure were very great. and when the Anti-Reformers were making great exertions, and a firm stand against the progress of the question? Why, it was a common thing to taunt the Members who supported the measure, and say " That is nut your omen own private opinion ; you speak from intimidation, and are afraid to avow what you think ;” but he had never understood that by any such language a chaige was meant to be conveyed that the party so alluded to was guilty of any derelic- tion of public principle. Ile himself had often voted for measures, which, but for their being connected with some other important object, he would never have sanctioned—measures for which, if taken in the abstract, no consideration could induce him to vote ; and he did not conceive that in so doing he violated ally honest or independent principle.

On Wednesday, Mr. GROTE, who had been appointed Chairman of the Committee, applied to the House for leave to add the name of Mr. O'Connell to the list of its members. It was most important that Mr. Shell should have some one gentleman on the Committee in whom he could confide ; and, indeed, unless Mr. O'Connell were added to their number, the Committee felt that their labours would be useless. Mr.

Sheil had nothing whatever to do with this application. Mr. ROBIN- SON, Mr. StlAw, Sir ROBERT PEEL, and Mr. WARBURTON, all mem-

bers of the Committee, concurred in deeming Mr. O'Connell's assist. ance absolutely necessary.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL wished for time to consider the propriety of granting this request : and suggested that the decision should be post- poned for a day. Mr. FERGUS O'CONNOR thought this a very ridicu- lous proposition ; and Mr. GROTE said it was a very extraordinary one. It was then suggested by Lord Joins RUSSELL, that Mr. Hill's charm- ter was as deeply implicated as Mr. Shell's ; arid that it was therefore only fair that some friend of his should also be added to the Commit- tee. No one, however, was then proposed. It was carried that Mr. O'Connell should become a member; that gentleman having expressed his willingness to serve.

Mr. GROTE then immediately rose to move for—some timber retur»s —not to propose some friend who should act for Mr. Hill, as all pre- sent seemed to expect. This occasioned considerable laughter.

Mr. GROTE last night brought up the following Report of the Com-

mittee.

" The Committee of Privileges to whom the matter of complaint was re- ferred;arising out of a paragraph in the Examiner newspaper, dated November 10, 1830, stated that they had agreed upon a Report, which they now submitted to the Honourable House.

" The paragraph in question, purporting to form part of the report of a speech publicly delivered by Matthew Davenport Hill, Esq., Member of Par- liament for the borough of Hull, was as follows.

^ ' It is impossible for those not actually in the House to know all the secret ma• chinery by which votes are obtained 1 happen to know this (and 1 could appeal. if necessary, to a person well known and much respected by yourselves), that an Irch Member, who spoke with great violence against every part of that Bill, and voted against every clause of it, went to Ministers and said, " Don t bate one single atom of that Bill, or it will be impossible for any man to live in Ireland." " What ! " said they, this from you, who speak and vote against the Bill?" " Yes," he replied, " that is necessary, for if I do not come into 'Parliament for Ireland I must be out allogeher, and that I do not choose. (Cries of " Naile I " and ".No ! ") Consider for a moment—can I do it ? (" No!." " Yes ! ") That is a point for my consideration. I have a great respect for every one here; but if every one in the room was to hold Ur his hand for it. I would not do it. The secret is not my own. If be had told it to me I would have said, " Mark, I will keep no such secret as this ; I will publish it to the world." Hut if I name the Member, I put it in the power of the individual who made that declaration, to know the gentleman who told me.' " The Committee then proceeded to state, that, in entering on the delicate and embarrassing duty imposed upon them, they ascertained from Mr. Hill that, though he could not admit the entire accuracy of the above paragraph, as a report of what he had publicly spoken at Hull, he nevertheless recollected to have publicly charged an Irish Member of Parliament with conduct similar in substance to that which the paragraph described. The Irish Member so alluded to, was Richard Lalor Sheil, Esq., M.P. for the county of Tipperary ; and Mr. Hill stated the charge to the best of his belief to have been substantially as follows. "' That Mr. Shell made communications respecting the Irish Coercion Bill to persons connected with the Government, and others, with the intention thereby of promoting the passing of the Coercion Bill, and having a direct ten- dency to produce that effect, whilst his speeches and votes in the House were directed to t1M defeat of the Coercion Bill.' " Into the substance of this allegation the Committee proceeded to into re. Two witnesses were called before them at the suggestion of Mr. Hill, and others were about to he examined, when Mr. Hill himself, finding the testimony ah ally heard very different from what he had expected, freely and spontaneously made the following communication to the Committee. 44 That he had come to the conviction, that his charge against Mr. Sheil, of having directly or indirectly cornmunisated, or intended to communicate to the Government, any private opinions in opposition to those which he expressed in the House of Commons, had no foundation in fact ; that such charge was nut aerely incapable of formal proof, but was, in his present sincere belief, totally and flt,olutely unfounded ; that he had originally been induced to make mention if it in a hasty and unpremeditated speerh, under a firm persuasion that lie hi ,1 received it on undeniable evidence ; but that, being now satisfied of the mistake into which he had fallen, and convinced that the charge was wholly untrue, he came forward to express his deep and unfeigned sorrow for having ever contri- buted to give it circulation.' Mr. Hill added, 'that if there were any way con- sistent with honour, by which he could make reparation to Mr. Sheil, he slum] deem no sacrifice too great to heal the wound which his erroneous statement hail

inflicted.'

" The Committee continued—' It is with the highest gratification that the Committee found themselves enabled thus to exonerate an accused 'Member of Parliament from imputations alike painful and undeserved. The voluntary avowal of an erroneous statement on the part of Mr. 'fill, puts it now in their power to pronounce a decided opinion and to close the present inquiry. Neither of the witnesses who appeared before the Committee deposed to any facts calcu- lated to bear out the allegation against Mr. Shell, nor did their testimony go to impeach his character and honour in any way or as to any matter whatever. The Committee had no hesitation in declaring their deliberate conviction, that the innocence of Mr. Sheil, in respect to the whole matter of coiiiplaint referred 1 to their investigation, was entire and unquestionable. . 44 The Committee felt bound at the same time to express their full confidence in Mr. Hill's declaration, that the statement impeaching Mr. Sheil's character was made by him at Hull under a sincere, though mistaken, persuasion of its accuracy. They derived this confidence as well from the tone of generous re- gret which characterized his communication at the close of their proceeding, as from the candid admissions and the evident anxiety to avoid all exaggeration and misstatements which they had observed throughout his testimony as delivered in their presence."

After the Clerk had finished reading this Report, there was a loud call for Lord A LTIIORP : who came forward and said, that he did not know why he should be first culled upon after the Report which had just been read : no man, however, rejoiced at its contents more than he did. He then stated his reasons for going further in his answer to Mr. Sheil's question than might appear necessary. He had read in the newspapt rs the attacks upon Mr. Hill, and was certain that they w, re about to be followed up in the House ; and he felt that if he stopped short at the simple answer to Mr. Shell's inquiry, he should encourage those attacks. He admitted that he had acted imprudently as a Minis- ter and as a man ; but he felt that his character as a Minister was put in competition with his character as a gentleman--und how could he hesitate to prefer the latter ? He was ready to apologize to Mr. Shed ; but lie wished to know, having received his informaion from a person on whose word he relied, whether Mr. Shell meant to deny that be had used language respecting the Coercion Bill, in private, different from that which lie used in the House? He felt bound to say, that after conversing with his informant on the subject, be found, that although his words were literally true, the impression produced on his mind, and which he conveyed to the House, was not borne out.

Mr. O'Coxiaei.r. could not allow Mr. Shell to repeat his former denial, which needed no confirmation.

Lord ALTHORP then said, that if Mr. Sheil's solemn denial was meant to apply to his statement in the House, then he could not disbe- lieve a declaration so solemnly made, and begged to apologize to Mr. Sheil.

Mr. COBRETT said, that Lord Althorp's conduct was just what might have been expected from him. Mr. O'DWYER wished the Mi- nisterial declaration had been more exculpatory and explicit. Mr. Hill, he thought, had done himself great honour by the manner in which he had conducted this case before the Committee. Mr. CUTLAR FERGUSSON rejoiced at the termination of this affair: it was just what he had expected. Colonel LEITH HAY congratulated Mr. Sheil ; and said that the statement he had made was on authority he believed to have been unquestionable previous to Mr. Sheil's denial : it' he Iliad been deceived, it was in common with fifty other Members of the House ; but he now believed the report on which he relied to be un- founded, and expressed regret for what he had formerly said.

There were then loud calls for Mr. SHEIL, who came forward, and said, that lie now felt entirely exonerated from the one great charge made against him.

The honourable and learned Member for Hull, in Committee that morning, after the examination of two witnesses—for the Committee left to him the conduct of what might almost be termed a prosecution—himself stated, in a manner calculated to make him the fullest reparation, not only that the charge was not true, but that it was utterly destitute of foundation. The honourable and learned Member turned to hint, with a countenance expressive of strong emotion, and begged he would forgive him for the wrong which he had done him. The moment those words passed his lips, he told him, that whatever his faults and follies might be, resentment was not amongst them, and he at once forgave him. (Cheers.) That gentleman had been instrumental in putting into circulation a report which he now admitted to be without foundation : he had undertaken to establish the charge, and he failed ; and this he admitted in a manner which, in his humble judgment, reflected on him the greatest praise. ( Cheers.)

Mr. Sheil felt, he said, that he had been snatched from the verge of a precipice which yawned for his destruction. When Lord Althorp stated that he was one of the Members who were alluded to in the ca- lumnious report, he felt it was not so much the charge, as the character of him who made it—the instrument, not the weight of the blow— which wounded him so deeply. He might have said—he certainly had said—that measures must be adopted to repress the excesses in the South of Ireland ; but this was not giving approbation to the Coercion Bill. He declared for the last time, that he was innocent of every charge ; and were he on his death-bed at that moment, he would go before his God with this denial on his lips.

Mr. STANLEY considered that Mr. Sheil was fully and completely exonerated.

They had from the honourable and learned Member for Tipperary a positive and strict deoial that he had on any occasion, out of that House, held language with respect to tl e Ceercem Bill different front that which he lo.d he'd witl "la tie walls of the House. Mr. Stanley repeated tl is over and over again, te- e/lose it must be recollected, that his noble friend brrught no charge of any thing further against the honourable and learned gentleman ; because it was true that his noble friend had stated his belief in that supposition, in consequence of hav- ing received his information from certain individuals on whose veracity he could rely ; and because the question was not whether the reports were true or false, but whether the direct denial which had been given of them was well- founded. He was bound to say, that the honourable and learned gentleman had a full right to claim the advantage of the position in which he stood. He had it full right to claim it from the circumstance that there was no evidence in sup- port of the charge against him. Nay further, lie had a full right to claim it, even if any unguarded conversation might have occurred, width, with a trifling colouring. might bear out his noble friend in the supposition that he had enter- tained, and at the same time hear out the statement of the honourable and learned gentleman. lie did not state this with a view to derogate one atom of the full vindication of his character which the honourable and learned gentleman :had obtained, in consequence of his bold, honest, and manly demand for inquiry. Sir HENRY HARDINGE could not remain silent after Mr. Stanley's speech. It was the opinion of the Committee that Mr. Shea was ex- onerated not only from Mr. Hill's charge, but from every imputation w hatever.

Mr. STANLEY said he meant to give Mr. Sheil the full benefit of the exculpation, not only with regard to Mr. Hill's charge, but to every Other whatever.

Sir HENRY HARDINGE added, that Lord Althorp's informant excul- pated Mr. Shell in the most frank, honourable, arid generous manner. He even said that he had heard Mr. Shell strongly deprecate the Coer- cion Bill.

Lord ALTHORP said, that Mr. John Wood, the person alluded to, was not his only informant ; though he now felt convinced that his other informant (whom he would not name) was mistaken. Mr. O'CONNELL wished the discussion might terminate, as all impu- tation was removed from Mr. Sheil. Mr. FERGUS O'Consicia was not satisfied. His business lay with Colonel Leith Hay, who had stated that he believed the reports against the Irish Members.

Colonel LEITH HAY—" I made no assertion of the kind. I confined my remarks exclusively to Mr. Shell."

Mr. O'CONNOR" Oh, then, I've done!"

3. CONDUCT OF BARON SMITH.

Two serious charges of misconduct were brought against Baron Sir William Smith, of the Irish Bench, by Mr. O'CONNELL, OD 'Thurs- day. The first charge was, that he did not usually take his seat in court till the middle of the (fay ; and that, when on the Ulster circuit, he had tried, at Armagh, fourteen prisoners, between the hours of six in the evening and six in the morning—the trial of more than one of them commencing triter midnight. Of the fourteen thus tried, only two had been convicted. In many instances, a most material delay of justice was occasioned by the Judge's late habits. The second ground of complaint referred to Baron Smith's famous charge delivered at the close of last year to the Special Commission which sat in Dublin. Al- though the district contained 3'20,000 souls, there were only seventeen prisoners in the calendar. Of these, three or four were for cow-stealing, some for pig-stealing, one or two for larcenies ; one was a case of bigamy, and another of fraud committed by an attorney. With this calendar before him, Baron Smith delivered the charge in question, which was sent to the newspapers for publication corrected by himself. This charge was a violent political harangue : to use the Judge's own words, he had thought it necessary to "sound the tocsin ;" and to censure " the audacity of factious leaders." When the law and constitution were tottering, Baron Smith said, "they ought to be propped by the Judges of the land." He discussed the right of petitioning, the abase of which was the turbulent epidemic of the day. He referred to the speeches of members of the Legislature for the purpose of censure. The Catholics, be asserted, hailed with delight the reduction of the num- ber of Irish Bishops ; and he denounced the conspiracy which he said had been formed against tithes, rents, salaries, and our most venerable institu- tions. Mr. O'Connell argued, that be had made i out,by these statements, a sufficient ground for a Committee of Inquiry in respect to Baron Smith's conduct as a Judge, and also as to the introduction of politics into his charge to the Grand Jury; which Committee he then moved for.

Mr. O'DWYER, in seconding the motion, remarked that Baron Smith had falsely accused him of sacrificing truth to antithesis, in a speech which he had made in the House of Commons.

A very long debate then ensued. Mr. LITTLETON said, that he had• determined to oppose the motion of which Mr. O'Connell had given. notice, which was for a Committee to inquire into the conduct of Baron. Smith with a view to his removal. To have acceded to this motion, would have been to prejudge the case ; but he thought that sufficient grounds had been adduced by Mr. O'Connell to justify the appoint- ment of a Committee of Inquiry, and therefore he was prepared to vote for the motion. The impropriety of putting prisoners upon their trial at late hours, was evident. With respect to the charge complained of, he felt bound to concur with many of Mr. O'Connell's animadversions upon it. It was a political speech, without one word in reference to the calendar. It might become the duty of a Judge, when the crimes for which the prisoners were to be tried were those of Whiteboyism, ‘Vhitefootism, Inc. to address the Grand Jury on their enormity, their causes, and their consequences ; but there was no excuse for Baron Smith's charge at the time it was made. There was one passage in that production which Mr. O'Connell had overlooked, and which had excited his extreme astonishment : the Judge, after alluding in severe terms to the Catholic inhabitants of that part of Ireland, asked, " Did the Catholic population embrace the moral, the intellectual force of the country, or merely the vulgar and brute force ?" Here was a Judge ad- dressing a Jury in this manner, in a country the great majority of whose inhabitants were Catholics, and in a metropolis where two thirds of the population were Catholics ! It was as impossible that any Catholic could deem such a Judge impartial, as that any Catholic gentleman could remain on the Jury after such an imputation.

The grounds of the motion having been thus stated, Mr. &Law zea- busty actended the Judge. He explained to the House, that the pritotice of keeping late hours wag universal, and of long standing among

the Irish Judges. It was not a good practice ; but it was unfair to sin- gle out Baron Smith for censure because he among others had yielded to it. By a reference to the returns of the number of hours which the Judges had sat, he found that the average times were from hull-past eleven in the morning to six or seven in the evening. He then de- fended the Judge's charge ; and referred to the King's Speech, in which hie Majesty stated his deep regret and just indignation at the conduct

of the Agitators: he maintained that the Judges of the land were not to be excluded from raising their voices against the deluders, when the Speech from the Throne contained such language, and the whole coun- try rang with accounts of the outrages to which political agitation led. This motion originated in the personal animosity of Mr. O.( 'onnell,

who had been pointed out as a man who was doing much mischief. to Ore country. It was a question which would be decided that night, whether Government would take part with the Agitators against the Irish Bench. If the Committee were granted, it would be a virtual condemnation of the Judge. He charged the Irish Government with want 0f vigour ; and asserted, that it did not possess the confidence of any party. Ile would not have objected to the inquiry had there been the slightest imputation of partiality or corruption against the Judge in the exerciee of his duties. But there was nothing of the sort ; there- fOre be would strenuously oppose the appointment of the Committee. Ministers quailed before Mr. O'Connell in this instance, there would be an end to all law and justice in Ireland. These grounds of defence were adopted and enforced, with little va- riation, by all the opponents of the motion among whom, Sir ROBERT

PEEL, Sir R. INC.LIS, Mr. SINCLAIR, Sir JAMES SUAitLE'r I', Sergeant StoANKIE, and Mr. ALEXANDER BARING, and, to the surprise of the Bouee, Sir JAMES GRAHAM, were most conspicuous. Mr. STANLEY, Lord ALTHORP, Sir JOHN CAMPBELL, Lord JOHN BUSS :1.I., and 11r.

RUMS spoke in favour of the inquiry; enlarging upon the necessity of regular habits, and- a freedom from political bias, in a Judge. In the

-eourse or the debate, it came out that Mr. Littleton had held a conver- sation with Mr. Shaw on the subject of Mr. O'Connell's motion, and lad told him diet Ministers intended to resist it: this determiisition Was communicated to Baron Smith by Mr. Shaw. Mr. LITTLETON explained, that he had no idea, till Mr. O'Connell finished speaking, shat he had altered his motion from one for removal of the Judge, to one of inquiry only into his conduct. This latter motion he felt bound So accede to, 111.1111E1M to all parties, Baron Smith among them. - A division took place on "the previous question" moved by Sir Roemer Istous : it was negatived, by 1b7 to 74.

Although the arguments used in this debate were principally the tame as those used by Mr. O'Connell and Mr. Littleton for the mo- tion, and by Mr. Shaw against it, there were several passages in the ispeeches of those who succeeded them which are worth extracting. In eeference to the duties of a Judge, at a time when political agitation Was productive of crime, Mr. Sreehev mend- Thei e was nothia4 more in accordance with the duties of a criminal sothing more in accord.tt with the duties of every mart possessing inincr.ice, ihau to pliut out to the deluded victim of the instruments iif agitation, the de- Attar-60n to which the agitators were hurrying them. But was it to he pre- tended, that became ri f et ence to political matters:not only migla with prop, rety, :tat ought in strict justice, in such a case, to he introduced the char.,.! 01a Jadge to a Jury, that such matter should on all occasions, or on slighto:•casio(b, as in the instance before the Muse; he so introduced ? It had bent: iriivinireil to justify the introduction of political matter into the charge in tple,i on the ground that, in the two last speeches of his Alajesty to that reference Ned been made to the agitation and disturbances which existed in Thcie mould not be any thing more preposterous than to plead the precc.t..,,:r of the IKing's Speech in such a case. There was no similarity whatever between the eases.

Sir ROBERT PEEL dwelt upon the dangerous precedent which the House was about to establish ; and ridiculed the making so much of a petty irregularity.

Similar plausible eases would be made out in abundance for arraigning the conduct of Judges. I: s" ••b a precedent were only once established, they might pumas many la, a ^.$ they pleased for securing the independence of Judges, but all those laws would be ineffectual ; that independence would be notliag better than a phantom. Judges would, in such a case, have no security t■:r their seats, and the interests of justice would he deeply affected by the hireutaistauce. . . Because the learned Baron might have sat a little later than usual, was this a suffi- tient ground for bringing him under the rod of Parliament ? Suppose it should appear that the calendar of the Armagh Assizes in (petition w&s.foller than *ttal, and that in addition to this, the holding of the hillowing Assizes was named far an early period ; and should it appear that the Judge's anxiety not to detaiu the prisoners longer than necessary had induced him to commit this 'eighty irregularity, if it indeed were one, of sitting a little later than was customary; was this ground sufficient for bringing him over from Ireland to take his vial before a Committee of the !louse, like a criminal—to degrade hint to a position from which, whether the Committee found hint guilty or innocent, it would be extremely' difficult, if not impossible, for hint to rise to the honour- able and unimpeached name he had hitherto enjoyed. The mere fact of such an inquiry being permitted by the House, would-be an imputation from which the learned Baron could not recover.

Sir Janes SCARLETT having referred to thepractice of the English JUdges, who during the late war delivered political charges, Lord JOHN RusseLL with much animation, and amidst general cheering, de- bounced the idea of referring to such times and the conduct of such Wien for precedents to guide the behaviour of Judges of the present day.

• He knew not what might have been thought of such a course at that time, Wet this he did know, that to the period of the French war—a pet iod of great misery and:degradation—to that period, he for one, could only kok back with &gest and indignation ; for never was persecution more heartless or more un- just; and he hoped the House and time country would ever and firmly refuse to draw Muir notions of governmeut from so dreaded an sera—an sera, be it remembered, estilea it was only owing to the splernlid energies of an Erskine that SIOIlle of the swot innocent and upright of mankind escaped death on the scaffold. lie hoped, that if they wanted, precedentes they would look to purer sources, and to better tunas—to those liter periods whoa Judges were not in the habit of making tisal harangues. that they .did not talk of the superior wealth of the one, or make odious au: invidious' comment/m-0n the hapless poverty of the other ; that his ignorance or his desperation were neither known nor thou& of, lint that the only question was, the guile or innocence of the !lefty accused—the only object of the Judge to administer right and justice with au even hand, and do hisduty conscientiously.

Mr. Sergeant SPANKIE jut t Baron Smith, by a reference to the

charges delivered by Judge Bailey and Lord Wynford in later times. Many examples of political charges had been referred to; and he would ask

the House whether they, seeing these examples, should thus turn on this vene- rable Judge in his latter days, and by calling on him for a defence of his conduct before a Committee, stamp his declining years with bitterness anti degradation? He did not approve of Judges delivering political harangues, but he would ask were such things so exceedingly rare? Did they not know that Mr. Justice Bailey made a panegyric on the National Debt? and had nut another Judge Lord Wynford, in the West, uttered at least twenty addresses all more or less political ; and yet who ever heard any man propose that they should be punished for so doing.

The consequences of granting this inquiry would be fatal to the in. dependence of the Bench.

Let them read history. Let them go back about two centuries. They would

find by Lord Clarendon, that one of the first acts of an usurping House of Coat. atolls was to seize the Judges on the bench. Every man then saw that the I louse of Commons was too powerful to contend against, and none would venture to oppose them. This was the first step towards subjecting the moral character of the Judges to the wishes of the House of Commons • and it would, if fol- lowed up, have the effect of lowering the character of the Bench, and make the administrators of the law dependent on the more popular opinion of the day.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, that Ministers had in the first instance determined to resist the motion. Some of them lad changed that opinion ; but he could not change his, and would therefore, although it gave him great pain to differ with his colleagues, still vote against the motion.

He had come down to the I louse, as a Minister, determined to oppose the mo- tion he had not changer) his opinion, and lie should therefore vote fur the amendment of Sir Robert Inglis. ( Cheers and marks of astonishment.) Them were few things which, m his opinion, ought to he more carefully guarded than the independence of the Judges. In the present instance, there was au addi- tional consideration, which to him personally was still more dear—the mainte- nance of his OW11 independence and character. If the alleged facts were proved before the Committee, the House must proceed to ;uhlrers the Crown to dismiss the learned Judge. Anti yet, if all those facts were proved, such a proposition would, in his opinion, be most inexpedient, and most unjust. So thinking,* as an honest man, and as an individual, however humble, whose character was dear to him, he felt compelled to give the most painful vote he had ever given in his life; dith:ring in it as he did from those friends with whom lie had so lung and cordially acted. Feeling, however, that the arguments of Sergeant Spagic were entirely• irresistible—thinking the proposition of Air. O'Connell C1.1:001- ingly dangerous—satisfied in his own private judgment that there were uo grounds for further proceeding—lie should heti ay his own honour and character, and should never forgive himself if he did not discharge that cxetedingly

duty, of wide!' he could acquit himself only by voting against the original motion.

Mr. Hume was surprised to find Sir James Graham influenced hy such a speech as that delivered by Sergeant Spankie.

A nwre unconstitutional and Tory speech lie bail never heard since lie sat in that House. Entertaining the opinion which lie entertained of the conduct the learned judge in question, he thought the course ad-pted by his lAiajesty':: (inverument did them great honour. the put it to Sir Janes Graham, ttiiii what consistency or with what regard to 'character, havinr, advised his Maier.tv to denounce in his Speech fenn the Throne the political agitation ascribe.; to one party. in Ireland, he could now refrain frG10 doing equal justice, and from showing his disapprobation of the political agitation occasioned by the other party.

Sir James Graham was not the only Member of the Administration who voted with theOpposition; Mr. Spring Rice's name also Appears in the list, though he did riot speak during the debate.

4. MODE OF TAKING THE DIVISIONS.

The House of Commons has at length appointed a Committee to inquire into the best mode of obtaining correct and authentic lists of the divisions. This subject was brought forward on Tuesday, in a very able manner, by Mr. WARD; who remarked, that when it was discussed last session, on the motion of Mr. Harvey, it had not re- ceived the attention which its importance demanded. Ile considered it absolutely necessary that the public should be put in possession authentically of the votes of their Representatives, which were the tangible and substantial witnesses upon whose evidence they must be finally judged by their constituents. Ile differed tote ado with Lord Stormont, who had said that members were sent to the Ilouse to repre- sent their own opinions. It was right that every Member should exer- cise his own judgment ; but he was responsible to his constituents for the mode in which be exercised it. Mr. Ward was for publicity—the foundation of the whole of the representative constitution—the corner- stone of the system of checks ; without which, as Jefferson had said, men were divided into only two classes of wolves and sheep ; although, he believed, wolves were now at a discount, while they bad to deal with a flock unwilling to part with their fleeces. Sir Robert Peel had said that there was already publicity enough ; but there was only a half- and-half publicity ; for the lists published in the papers were full of errors. The old Members, who were attached to the old system, would be naturally reluctant to any change, which would_ do away with the privacy of divisions,—one of the advantages of the old system ; and he himself would be the last person to wish for the admission of strangers while the divisions were taken ; but the plan he :bad to pro- pose would not be liable to this objection. The only body to whom the publication of divisions would be very inconvenient, Would he the body of. habitual absentees, who liked to have their non-attendance concealed.; but to the great majority of the House, as well as no the public, it would be productive of decided practical advantage.. In the, course of. his speech, Mr. Ward alluded to the mistake Me. Hanes/ had committed last session, in giving the details of his plane and said that. he would not full into the same error, and thus furnish weapo'ts to the opponents of his motions Notwithstanding his promised caution, however, Mr. Ward, when loudly called upon, seemed to ha just on the point of detailing his own flan; but he miecked himself., and said,

occupied by that It would not take up five nenutes more time than wag the present imperfect mode.

Mr, HANES', M4.. Urea, and Mr. WAnnuaTobi SICtsagly eupporteml

• - •

.

returning-officers. Thus, in Middlesex, the candidates at the last sition. Mr. Robinson's motion was finally acceded to. election had to pay 600/. ; in Berkshire, 752/. ; in the Lindsey division

of Lincolnshire, 1,0651. ; in West Norfolk, nothing ; in Chester, 801. ; 8. MEDICAL PROFESSION.

Sir S. WHALLEY, Colonel Evass, Lord JOHN RUSSELL. and Lord the education and practice of various branches of the medical profession .Auritotte, expressed their satisfaction with the motion ; which was ac- in the United Kingdom." In the brief debate which ensued on this cordingly carried. In the course of the discussion, several Members motion, the restrictions imposed by the Apothecaries Act were men- stated their opinion, that the county, not the candidates, should pay the tinned as the principal cause of complaint; and to the propriety of nio- - returning-officer's charges ; but Lord JouN Itcsseia. said, that in difyieg these, the attention of the Committee will be directed. Colonel that case, the number of frivolous and vexatious contests would be Woon was the only opponent of the motion. Mr. Hume thought it of the law, and the petitioner to the House for redress. His ease was 9. AriseessaNsous SUBJE■'IS.

payment of the fund since the death of Fauntleroy, and for the appointment of a new trustee in his situation, as answer was returned by the Batik that the pro- being the opinion of many that the property had become escheated to the Crown, CHINA TRADE ORDERS. ID reply to a question from Mr. Ewan?, he was advised to permit an inquest to be held, not to oppose it, but to accept on Wednesday, 11r. l'outaxr Titomsox said, that a correspondence back the property from the Crown. An inquest was accordingly held (he on the subject of the lute Orders in Council for regulating the China

would not say in what manner the inquest Was conducted—whether in some

dark hole or corner of the City, with a Jury who acted just as they were told trade, was in progress between Earl Grey, and certain gentlemen ; and by the Crown officers, or otherwise, he was not able to say), and the property that fre hoped it would be in his power in a few days to give a distinct was declared to have become an escheat to the Crown ; and in conformity with answer to Mr. Ewart. that decision it had been escheated. When the party came to inquire how LOCAL COURTS BILL. Lord ALTHORP stated on Tuesday, that the. property was to be obtained hack from the Crown, he found upon an exami- a bill for the establishment of Local Courts would be introduced nation of the Stamp Act, that though in cases of real property the transfer was during the present session into the House of Commons. only subject to a duty of 1/. 15s., yet in cases of chattel property an ad valorem tax of 3/. per cent. was imposed. So that iu the present case the duty alone upon the transfer would amount to no less than 400/. or 500/. to bring in a or to remove technical di..ni.:::It es in the way of the ad- These proceedings took place in 1824. The Treasury getilleMen mi.!!..:trnt..i3r. of justice by Magistrates ;. to confer upon them greater promised that the Stamp Act should be so amended as to equalize time latitude of power in fixing the amount of penalties obtained by common tax-duty on the transfer of chattel, with that on the transfer of real informers ; and for the more effectual suppression of gaming-houses. property ; but though the promise was made nearly ten years ago, CARRICKFERGUS AND STAFFORD. After some opposition from Mr. nothing had been done. According to law, the escheated property HALCOMB, bills for the d''C'''' '. as ten years had nearly elapsed since the pronerl:," ...,""as escheated. Mr. ,n,—ti first by, Mr. O'CONNELL, the second by Sir T. FREMANTLE, Warburton mentioned another 4.-..;:tenee in which F'aunderoy had been on Tuesday. They were read a first time, ordered to be printed, and only a co-trustee: es....1 will be reed a second time on Wednesday the 5th March. In which an application had been made to the Bank to •• '' BOROUGHS OF WARWICK AND LIVERPOOL. Sir RONALD FERGUSON .. meow another to be appointed in his place; bp'. the Bank, brought in a bill, on Thursday, to prevents bribery and corruption in the :rifting upon the advice of their counsel, refused to allot*this ; that the part of the stock held by ea equals alleging borough of Warwick; and Mr. BENETT introduced another to deprive Crown, although the dividends had been equal v he, escheated to the the freemen of Liverpool of the privilege of voting. 1 hey were both whole period since his execution. Mr. Wee:mi. paid on it during the read a first time, and ordered for a second reading on the 20th instant. Mr. Hatchet's ease the Bank acted legaP:y, but ton considered that in AUDITOR OF THE EXCHEQUER. Lord ALTHORP stated on Wednes- Mr. He said that many were not so in the one last day, that Lord Auckland, who had been appointed Auditor of the Pim".. . in a similar predicament ; and if the Government would concur, h Exchequer, would receive no salary from that office as long as he's --e would introduce a bill to remedy the evil and injustice complaine's Y remained President of the Board of Trade; and that, under the new d of. lie had already obtained the

sanction of the Solicitor- arrangement, the salary of the Auditor would be reduced from 4,0001. Geiveral; who said that the measure should

'at, to -2,0001. Mr. Beale intimated his dissatisfaction that the office should have reference tO past, prase

and future cases. be continued at all. Lord Ar,TiloaP accedes to Mr. Warburton's proposition ; and said

that no formal objectio'd would be made to his introduction of a bill for POST-OFFICE. A conversation arose on Thursday, on a motion of the tempo:se be ranted Mr. WALLACE for some returns relating to the management of the ?. PRINCE LEOPOLD'S ANNUITY. meats effected in that department during the last three years, should be A discassion of some interest arose in the House of Commons on laid on the table. It was stated by Mr. VERNON SMITH and Lord AL- -Tuesday, on the subject of the annuity paid to the King of Belgium. THORP, that the Revenue Commissioners had not properly attended to It was urged first by Mr. ROBINSON, and subsequently by Mr. their duty, as far as the Post-office was concerned ; and that their plan CoavErr, Colonel EVANS, Sir S. WHALLEY, Mr. Hung, Mr. GILLON, would be found to be more costly than the one which was now acted Asa Mr. HARDY, that some inquiry ought to be made into the mode in upon. The Commissioners had not even taken the trouble to go over which the money was expended. Ministers were reminded, that King; the Post-office. Leopold received great credit for giving up all that portion of his an. i the motion. Mr. IVARBLIKTON said, that two or three, or more, addi- nuity that was nut necessary to keep up Claremont, to pay his debts, tional clerks might be employed, if necessary, in order to save time. and provide for his old servants. Yet it appeared that he had drawn This observation excited a laugh. Lord ALTHORP observed that he bad the whole 50,000/. per annum lip to the present time. Was part of this opposed Mr. Harvey's motion last year, because he thought his plan money spent in Belgium ? It was a matter of doubt whether the impracticable, not because he objected to the principle of publicity on pension voted to Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg, then a British which it was founded. He was by no means sanguine that any un. subject, was legally payable to an independent foreign Sovereign. For provement of the present mode of taking the divisions would be de- these reasons, Mr. Romesoe moved for an account of the money, if vised. The present mode was not so objectionable, nor the lists so any, which had been paid into the Exchequer by King Leopold out of inaceurate, as many seemed to imagine. a Mr. HUME here reminded his annuity. Lord Althorp of the labour it occasioned to the Members who took On the other side, Lord ALTHORP and Lord JOHN RUSSELL defended upon themselves the task of furnishing the division-lists, and the great the conduct of King Leopold. Lord Althorp read two letters from the difficulty of furnishing them at all correctly. Mr. HARVEY remarked, Baron de Stockmar, his agent in England, from which it appeared, that his plan of last year was opposed, not because it was objectionable, that Leopold's debts, when he left this country, amounted to 83,000/. ; but because he had brought it forward. He did not belong to either of and that the whole of the sums received on account of the annuity had the two great parties of the House ; and unless a man belonged to one been applied to the liquidation of these debts, and to the keeping up of of them, had he the tongue of an angel, he could not expect his propo- Claremont and Marlborough House; the latter of which was held by sitions to meet with the attention and support called for by their in- an unexpired lease. On the 5th of April next, however, all the in-

trinsic merits. cumbrances will be discharged ; and the first payment will be made The Committee was then appointed. into the Exchequer. The current expenses of Claremont, Marlborough

5 ELECTION EXPENSES. House, &c. amount to about 20,000L per annum ; leaving 30,000/. to The cost of polling-booths, the fees of returning-officers, and other be repaid.Some severe remarks were made upon the large amount of debts electioneering expenses, were brought under consideration of the House contracted by a personage, who was supposed to have lived rather parsi- of Commons on Tuesday, by Mr. HUME • who moved that the returns moniously than otherwise when in this country.

of those expenses should be referred to a Select Committee, with a view Several :Members objected to taxing the people of England for

of fixing a uniform rate of charges, and of considering by whom those keeping up useless palaces ; and thought that King Leopold might have charges should be defrayed. Mr. Hume mentioned a number of in taken his servants away with him. As to taking away the pension, stances to prove the gross irregularity of the amounts charged by however, Lord Althorp said that the House would scout such a propos in the couaty of Buckingham, 801.; in Westminster, 300/. ; and in A Select Committee was appointed on Tuesday, on the motion of Bristol, 8741. Mr. WARBURTON, to " inquire into the laws and regulations regarding Sir S. WHALLEY, Colonel Evass, Lord JOHN RUSSELL. and Lord the education and practice of various branches of the medical profession .Auritotte, expressed their satisfaction with the motion ; which was ac- in the United Kingdom." In the brief debate which ensued on this cordingly carried. In the course of the discussion, several Members motion, the restrictions imposed by the Apothecaries Act were men- stated their opinion, that the county, not the candidates, should pay the tinned as the principal cause of complaint; and to the propriety of nio- - returning-officer's charges ; but Lord JouN Itcsseia. said, that in difyieg these, the attention of the Committee will be directed. Colonel that case, the number of frivolous and vexatious contests would be Woon was the only opponent of the motion. Mr. Hume thought it

intolerable. absurd that surgeons duly qualified should not be allowed to sell medi-

6. ESCHEATS TO THE CROWN. tines. He had himself gone through all his examinations, and consi- A petition was presented to the House of Commons on Wednesday, tiered himself as callable to' dispense medicines as any apothecary, in the by Mr. WARBURTON, in which were stated some curious particulars as land he dared uot. his comet). was in a state of barbarism, as to the mode in which not only the actual property of felons, and of those compared with France, on this subjert. In country towns, it was nes who commit suicide, become forfeited to the Crown, but likewise the cessaty that the surgeon should be allowed to sell medicines ; for it trust property in their names, in which they are not beneficially in- often happened that a country practitioner was physician, surgeon, and tereeted. In the present instance, Mr. Charles Hatchet, who is well apothecary at once. Mr. Ilume's reference to his 0'.V11 medical expe- known as a man of science, vas the party aggrieved by the existing state melee seemed to occasion much amusemeut to the Ilouse.

thus stated by Mr. 1Varburton. It will be observed how unfairly the COMMERCIAL RELATIONS WITH FRANCE. In reply to a question Stamp-duties operate on the transfer of chattel property. from Lord STRANcl'ORD 011 Tuesday, Earl Gaya- stated, that although Mr. Hatchet, of Pell Vile House, Chelsea, bad a benefwial interest in a food he felt sanguine that before long the French people would see the wisdom iu the Bank of England, which stolid in the name of the late Henry Fauntleroy, and advantage of not acting upon a system of repulsion as regards com- as tiustee of the property. Upon an application being made to the Bank for the mereial matters with this country, yet that there was no immediate prospect of the i es trictions on our commerce being relaxed. He perty to whirl, Fauntleroy was trustee, had, by reason tit' his conviction, 1/04:0111e referred to the voluminous Report of the Commissioners appointed to an escheat to the Crown. As soon as this answer was made to the person beau- inquire into this subject by France and England, as containing much ficially interested, be had resort to the advice of counsel, and obtained the very valuable informatiou. The good understanding with France, to which Lest opinion in his purer. There being a considerable difference of opinion reference was made in the Royal Speech, was a political, not a com- among the counsel as to the right construction of the law in such a case, and it mereial one. being the opinion of many that the property had become escheated to the Crown, CHINA TRADE ORDERS. ID reply to a question from Mr. Ewan?, he was advised to permit an inquest to be held, not to oppose it, but to accept on Wednesday, 11r. l'outaxr Titomsox said, that a correspondence back the property from the Crown. An inquest was accordingly held (he on the subject of the lute Orders in Council for regulating the China by the Crown officers, or otherwise, he was not able to say), and the property that fre hoped it would be in his power in a few days to give a distinct was declared to have become an escheat to the Crown ; and in conformity with answer to Mr. Ewart.

JUSTICES OF THE PLACE. Leave has been given to Lord llt-w!=tri

.

would.soou be paid into the hands of the National Debt Commissioe- . . ...,.,ancrusement of these boroughs were brought - -

if the Government would concur, h Exchequer, would receive no salary from that office as long as he's --e would introduce a bill to remedy

Post-office ; which terminated in an order that returns of the improve-

TURNPIKE TRUSTS. A bill, introduced by Lord Howicx into the

house of (mummies for continuing all Turnpike Trust Acts which would expire during the present year, for another year, has been read a first and second time, and passed through the Committee.