il3tbatri anti VractetringilIn Slatlittntnt. hum MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, the order of the day having been read for the further consideration of the report on the Irish Me. nicipal Corporations Bill, Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that as the bill had passed through the Committee with very little discussion, he thought that the most con- venient course would be to recommit the bill ; and he accordingly moved that " Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair."

Mr. O'CONNELL said, that he had several reasons to allege why the bill should not be recommitted at that time. He could show that the proposal to test the qualification by rating at all would be inconvenient in Ireland ; and that to connect rating with a 101. franchise would pro- duce the greatest injustice. At present, the introduction of the Eng. lish franchise, which required triennial residence and payment of rates, would be a perfect absurdity, because in Ireland there were no pow. rates; but the Scotch plan, which required residence in a house of 10h annual value, without rating, was simpler ; and he was ready to accept that franchise cheerfully and gratefully. Were time allowed him, he could produce documents to prove that the disfranchising operation of the 101. franchise, together with rating, would be very extensive in Dublin. The population of Dublin was 265,000, besides 40,000 or 50,000 who did not reside within the Parliamentary boundaries. The Parliamentary constituency was under 7,000; of these the householders amounted to 2,482; who, with leaseholders and freeholders qualified by residence, would make the municipal constituency amount to between 2,500 and 3,000—much too smell a number for so large a city. In Leeds, with a population not much more than half that of Dublin, the municipal voters were 25,000. The reason why the constituency in Dublin would not be more extended, was to be found in the no. merous local taxes—the watching, jury, paving, wide-street, pipe water, and other rates, to which a poor-rate was now to be added. The disfranchising effect of these taxes would be seen from the fact that the Commissioners appointed by Sir Robert Peel to value pro- perty in Dublin in 1828, reported that there were 14,640 10/. houses. Let this large number be compared with the miserable return of the householder constituency of Dublin. He only wanted to be put on an equality with Scotland. Had not Ireland been sufficiently degraded and insulted ? He asked for a short delay, in order to show the House that the proposition for a 10/. franchise with rating would give in Dub- lin a municipal constituency of probably not more than 2,500 or 3,090. He moved, as an amendment on Lord John Russell's motion, "that this House will, on Monday next, resolve itself into the said Corn. mittee."

Mr. HUME seconded the motion.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL had no objection to the delay, if the House wished it.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that Lord John Russell was Leader of the House, and bad the care of the bill ; and it was for him to decide whether its progress should be delayed.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought it would be better to proceed with the consideration of the general question. At a future stage, Mr. O'Con- nell might have an opportunity of stating the facts respecting Dublin which he was anxious to lay before the House.

Mr. O'CONNET.L withdrew his amendment; the Speaker left the chair; and the House being in Committee, Mr. O'CONNELL moved, but withdrew after a very brief discussion, an amendment to the 4th elau.e, to prevent the Corporation of Dublin from rejecting without reason assigned persons claiming to be registered as freemen.

The debate then commenced upon the 6th, or qualification clause ; which, as it stood, gave the franchise to occupants of houses rated to the poor at the " net annual value of five pounds."

Sir ROBERT PEE!. rose to move that the word "ten " be substituted for "five." In support of his motion, Sir Robert went over much of the gtound on which he relied when the same question was pre- viously under discussion. He professed, that so far from having any intention to insult or degrade Ireland, as Mr. O'Connell pretended, his ardent wish was to promote an arrangement honourable and advanta- geous to till parties. It was impossible that he could have been mis- understood when he first proposed the uniform franchise of ten pounds, with the test of rating. Yet that proposition, now denounced as in- sulting to Ireland, was then hailed as conciliatory; and he had every reason to expect, from the manlier of its reception, that there would have been no serious opposition to it. He would not use the word "compromise." It was not as such that he had proposed his plan for settling the Corporation question. He wished Members opposite woul,\ recollect, that without any bargain their Tithe Bill would be rejected b, the inherent strength of the Conservatives. He did not wish to tnumph over gentlemen opposite, but it was well for them to understand their actual position. Now, with respect to his proposition of an uniform franchise with rating for the Irish corporate towns, how could it be said that he intended to make an invidious distinction against Ireland? Was not the rul.. uniform in Scotland and in England—he meant as regarded the Municipal franchise in the different towns ? There was not a 20/. franchise in London and a 10/. franchise in the smallertowns. He considered that the three years' residence and rating in bugland brought up the Municipal franchise to an equality with the Parliamen- tary one. In Scotland, the Municipal and Parliamentary franchise was the same ; and Sir Robert quoted passages from the speeches of Lord Advocate Jeffrey and Mr. Abercromby, in favour of the uniform fran- chise for both classes of electors. So tnuch for the uniformity. Now for the test of rating. It had been adopted in the first English Reform Bill, as uffording the best criterion of value ; and had been abandoned, not because it was offensive to the English people, but in consequence of the various modes of rating in the different towns in England. kits _•I11 was to make the new franchise about to be cunferred on the Irish °that which Parliament intended it should be—the occupancy of pre. mites fully and fairly worth 10/. a year. It could not be pretended that the rate would not be a better test of value than the statement or opinion of the claimant of the franchise. If any person bad doubts on bia point, he would refer him to the evidence of Mr. James Lane, a sup.. torter of the Liberal Members for Cork, Messrs. Beamish and Cal- fghan, before the Fictitious Votes Committee. In Cork there was a valuation of property, and every house under 3/. annual value was exempt from the payment of certain local taxes ; but it appeared from Mr. Lane's evidence, that 363 persons were registered as 10/. voters whose houses were valued at less than 101.; 119, whose houses were not put down in the valuation for local purposes, being worth under 3L ; and 53 who had been assessed, and had asked to be excused from payment of rates, on the ground that they did not not live in houses worth 3/. Now with these facts before him, was be to be contented with the statements of the parties themselves respecting the value of' their houses? It was said that his plan would exclude the great bulk of the Roman Catholics from the corporate bodies ; and, were this true, he would admit it to be a valid objection ; but were they not constantly told of the increasing wealth of the Roman Catholics in Ireland? did not Mr. O'Connell boast that the large majority of householders in

Dublin voted for the Liberal candidates? In Cork, Galway, and Limerick, surely it would not be said that a 10/. bond fide franchise would exclude Catholics from the Corporations. He did not desire to exclude them ; but neither would he by establishing a W. franchise give Catholics the power of excluding Protestants.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL opposed Sir Robert Peel's amendment, for the same reasons which induced Sir Robert to bring it forward—namely,

with a view to secure an amicable settlement of the Corporation ques- tion ; for he did think that it would make an invidious distinction be- tween Ireland and England and between Ireland and Scotland. It was said that the ten-pound qualification, with rating, had been proposed for Parliamentary voters in England, and only abandoned in consequence of the inconvenience arising from the various modes of rating; but a stronger reason bad been stated by Lord Althorp and himself—that the rating would diminish the constituency too much, and deprive those of the franchise to whom the Government intended to give it. The English Reform Bill afforded Sir Robert Peel no precedent for his proposition. Neither did the Scotch Municipal Act help him ; for in Scotland no rating was required for the Municipal franchise, The amendment went, therefore, to establish a higher qualification_ whetherfor better or worse—than Parliament had hitherto thought

right to require. Of that simple fact there could be TIO doubt. He

admitted that there would be uniformity ; but what kind of uniformity ? There might be a uniform diet of wheaten bread or of potatoes. It was vain to pretend that the rating would not raise the qualification. Be found by reference to an act passed two years ago, entitled " An Act to Regulate Parochial Assessments," that in rating houses deduc- tion was to be made for repairs, insurance, and other annual expenses ; the effect of which was to put the sums at which houses were rated below the rents. In Ireland the combined operation of renting and rating would reduce the municipal below the Parliamentary constitu- ency; which latter in Ennis, Dungannon,Kinsale, Lisburne and other places, was now only a little above, if not less than two hundred. As Sir Robert Peel was so determined to adhere to his own proposition, Lord John Russell felt that it would be useless to suggest any other to him, and therefore he should content himself with simply negativing the amendment.

At the conclusion of Lord John Russell's speech, there were loud cries of " Divide;" and the House listened with much impatience to

the long and tiresome debate which followed. Mr. BERNAL, the

Chairman of the Committee, could not maintain order ; and every speaker, without exception, was assailed with continual cries of" Ques-

tion !" Sir EDWARD SUGDEN, Sir WILLIAM FOLLETT, and Mr. EMERSON TENNENT laboured to show that the rating would not raise the qualification above 10/. • and Sir WILLIAM FOLLETT offered to take precautions to prevent that effect. Sir ROBERT PEEL confirmed Sir William Follett's offer, and again protested that all he wanted was a bond fide 101. franchise.

Sir JOHN CAMPBELL, Sir ROBERT ROLFE, Sergeant WOULVE, and Mr. Pour.err SCROPE insisted upon the notorious fact, that houses

were rated at about '25 per cent, less than the rental. Such, they averred, must be the system under the Irish Poor.law ; and the conse- quence would be that persons paying a rent of 10/. would be rated at only EV., and so lose the franchise.

Mr. SHELL charged Sir Robert Peel with inconsistency— When he was in office in 1828, lie introduced a bill to provide for the paving and lighting of towos in Ireland. Now, powers were given by this act to the persons under whose charge the paving and lighting was placed, to make rates, and to provide for other matters which were as important duties as some of the functions of the officers of the corporations. Now, what was the rating under that hill ?—Why, a M. rate was the qualification. The act was the 9th George IV. c. 82. He would refer the right honourable baronet to it. But Why should that rating be introduced in Cloninel, under the bill to which he

lad alluded, and why should 101. be the amount of rating substituted in the

present bill? He saw no equity in that—no equality in it—no sound reason in it. A uniformity was wanted between Dublin and Cork, between Water- ford and Limerick, between Clonmel and Drogheda; he wanted a nobler uni- formity—a uniformity between England and Ireland. That was the uniformity be asked—on which he insisted—on which he knew he should prevail.

Mr. O'Coansreta. said, that a principal reason why Sir Robert Peel insisted upon rating was, that the Irish were so prone to perjury : that was the inference to be drawn from his reading the extracts respecting the fictitious votes in Cork. Let not Sir Robert say that he did not insult the Irish ; he did insult them by his actions, if not in words. Why should not the safeguards against fraud sufficient in Scotland be equipotent in Ireland ?

Sir ROBERT PEEL had never heard of any allegation that fictitious votes had been created in Scotland, though there might have been an improper division of property. Mr. O'Connell felt that his ( Sir Robert's) position was impregnable, or he would not have imputed motives and drawn unfair inferences.

Mr. O'CONNELL referred Sir Robert Peel to Mr. Horsman's speech on moving for a Committee to inquire into the prat:rive ut making fictitious votes, for proof that in Scotland eases of the grossest fraud occurred, and were not confined to the poorer classes.

In reply to some observations from Mr. BEAMISH and Mr. CAT, LAGHAN, Sir ROBERT PEEL again read the evidence respecting the Cork fictitious votes: he disavowed any wish to treat Cork with dis- respect.

The Committee divided on the question that" 5/. stand part of the clause "—

For the 5/. qualification _46:41

Against it Majority 20

The Chairman then reported progress ; the Committee to sit again on Friday.

IRISH TITHES.

The House went into Committee on Irish Tithes, and agreed to the following resolutions.

" 1. That it is expedient to aladish compositions for tithes in Ireland, sad to sub. stitute rent-charges in lieu thereof. "!2. Teat provision be made, out of the Consolidated Fund of the United K in4dorst of Great Britain and Irelanol, for defraying the expnises which may be iiiciirr,l in the revision of tithe.composit ions iii Ireland."

No discussion arose ; and the House adjourned at half-past twelve.

NATIONAL EDUCATION.

On Thursday, Mr. WYSE presented petitions in favour of a system of national education, from Liverpool, Preston, and several other places. He then rose to move- " That an humble address he presented to her Majesty, praying that she will he graciously pleased to appoint a Board of commissioners of Education in England, with the view especially of providing fur ene wi.e, equitable, and effi • cient application °Isom granted or ti be granted Mr the advauceinent of edu. cation by Parliament, and for the immediate establishment of schools for the education of teachers, in accord with the intention already expressed by the Legislature."

Mr. WYSE. said, that his motion would give Ministers an opportunity of stating distinctly their intentions on a subject which was daily

attracting more of public interest. At present the means of education in England were grievously deficient. There were 1,1197,692 children in England and Wales between the ages of seven und fourteen, who received no instruction whatever, and 1.200,000 between the ages of three and seven who were similarly neglected. The connexion between ignorance and crime was admitted, arid there were ample statistical facts to prove it. In the United States, iii Prussia, Wirtembure, Bavaria, and Holland, the educatiou of all chases was cxtendieg. England was almost the only country of Europe in which there was not a 13oard of Edu- cation. A small amount of morrey-1,(X)01. per annum—was granted by Parliament for education in England, but this money was expended in the very worst manner. It was indeed impossible for the Treasury to see that the sums granted were judiciously applied. His object was to establish a Board of Education, representing as fur as possible the different par- ties and feelings in the country, and Local Boards in communication with a central and principal one. Ile wished that Ministers would take up the subject. They had established a Board of Education in Ire- land without an act of Parliament. Even within these few days violent outrages had occurred, arising from the gross ignorance of the people, which proved the necessity of Government interference on this subject, for the preservation of life and property. He hoped it might yet be said that though the present session bad been disgraced by petty party squabbles, it had not been allowed to pass without one measure for the general improvement of the people and the benefit of posterity. Mr. HOME seconded the motion.

Mr. COLQUIIMIN dwelt upon the successful operation of the National Society and the British and Foreign Society. Upwards of 300,000

persons had been educated by the National, and a very large number by the British arid Foreign. He thought that before the establishment of a Board of Education, Mr. Wyse should move for a Committee to as- certain on what articles of religious faith all sects could agree ; for he put it to the House, whether the peoplt of England would sanction a system of national education from which religion was excluded.

Mr. SLANEY did not understand that Mr. Wyse denied the necessity of basing education upon religion. He thought it better to extend and enlarge the existing system than to create one entirely new.

Mr. CLAY, Mr. HAWES, Mr. BAINES, and Mr. Bitontrattore briefly supported the motion. Sir Roulatt INGLIS opposed it ; and took the opportunity of asserting the supremacy of the Church of Eng- gland over other sects.

Lord JOHN Resser.t. fully admitted the great importance of the sub- ject which Mr. Wyse had brought under the notice of the House ; but before he made the few observations which he had to offer respecting it, he must demur to Mr. 1Vyse's remarks on the distribution of the fund placed by Parliament at the disposal of Ministers. The prin- ciple on which the Treasury proceeded was this— They did not divide the 20,000/. which hail bc-en granted, in the first in-

stance, between the two societies-10,000/. to each ; but, without looking at the respective claims or merits of either, they thought it their duty to proceed in

such a manner as seemed likely to obtain the greatest possible amount of edu-

cation to the country. With this view, therefore, the Treasury considered the amount of money subscribed by each, and then gave a proportionate grant.

The Treasury thought that, supposing 5,000/. had been subscribed on the one hand and 10,000/. on the other, it would rather be their duty to give 5,000/. to the latter, in order to make up 15,0001., than to the former, to make up only 10,000/. for the purposes of education. So the greatest possible amount of education was obtained. With respect to the results which had been obtained, he did not think them altogether unsatisfactory. In 1833, the number of scholars for which money was given by the Treasury, was 30,366 ; and the total amount of money raised was 48,0001., and the Treasury gave 20,484/. ; in 1834, there were 41,000 scholars, the total amount of money was 59,619/. ; and the money granted by the Treasury was 19,3691. Thus, for 40,000/.. of the public money, nearly 100,000/. had been expended ; and accommodation was provided for 70,000. In 1835, the number of scholars was 45,321, the total money applied was 71,3711., and only 21,659/. was paid out of the Trea- sury grants. The population among whom these grants were distributed was in the first year 1,1:39,000; in the second year the population was 1,840,000; and in the third year it was 1,915,000. Now, he owned that he could not see how so small a Run) as that voted by Parliament could be applied in a more cor- rect or more useful manner, nor in a way in which a greater number of scholars could have been obtained.

He admitted the connexion between ignorance and crime—

It might be inferred from various tables and statements which had been made with regard to education, that it produced a certain degree of good effect in the prevention of crime. Others might deny this ; but he thought that whatever differences might exist on this point, yet that it would be allowed that the State ought to afford the means for every petson to have the choice whether he should be educated or not ; that he alintild be made aware of what his religious and moral duties were ; awl that, if there were any deviation from these duties, the State should not be charged with the responsibility of never having affordtd any the slightest means to its subjects of learning these duties. With these sentiments, therefore, he thought that there were required means of educatiou which neither the different societies which were now in existence,:nor the State, by the small grant which it every year made, had provided ; and even sup- posing that the grant had been distributed, as he believed that it had been, with the best judgment and discretion, yet it was obvious that many poor districts

had not sufficient means of education. or was this defect cured by the exer- tions of Churchmen or Dissenters, although much money had been raised by independent and voluntary contributions of the inhabitants of the district. Therefore it was that he was ready to give his assent now, as he had before done on vat ious occasions, particularly two years ago, that the part of the State, with regard to the education of the people, had not yet been fulfilled.

He could not, however, and lie said it with regret, point out any means by which Parliament could increase the aid it already afforded. There was a great difference of opinion among the promoters of edu- cation as to the best mode of Legislative interference ; and it would be better to wait till there was something like agreement among them be- fore adopting the measure proposed in the address— Supposing a commission were named by the Crown, one of two courses must be taken. There was on the one part the opinions held by the members of the Church, opinions promoted by the British and Foreign School Society, and opinions held by petsons who differed from each. As far as he had heard, these differences would not easily be reconciled ; and, from what be knew, he did not think that they were likely to be allayed by calling in the services of a central board. If persons of different opinions were to act at the board, there would break out differences of opinion, and the board would be inoperative : if the board, on the other band, consisted only of one of the different classes, although the board would be far mole active, sod would produce a more certain and speedy decision, yet a great portion of the community must be dissatisfied, and they would exert themselves to operate upon the decisions of the board.

It had been proposed that the education given in the National Schools should be entirely secular, and that the clergy of each sect should give religious instructies it different places and at different times from those in which the secular education was carried on, to the children of their respective flocks. This scheme was plausible ; but he doubted, in the first place, whether it would give satisfaction to the people of this country ; and, secondly, whether it would be successful in implanting moral and religious principles in the minds of the young. He was deeply impressed with the necessity of making a better provision for teachers— He knew that the best men educated at the British and Foreign School So- ciety, and he had no doubt that it was the same in others, who were best fitted for the conducting school education, found that there was some other pro- fession in which their talents could procure a larger income, and it was not worth while to continue in that profession, which, though it was not now well paid, yet was one of the :noblest awl the most :honest ;professions which any man Au the state could undertake ; and nothing would in his opinion be better than to raise for the profession an adequate income, and to make its pursuit a passage to future reward, and instead of allowing a man with 40/. or 501. a year to pine away in the drudgery of teaching, they ought to give him the prospect of an honourable retreat, or a chance of other advancement. (Cheers.) Although he was not prepared to agree to Mr. Wyse's proposal, because he thought that Government ought not to adopt the motion without making up their minds at once to take some useful step towards giving a good education, yet he declared that he conceived that it was the duty of Parliament and of the State to give full encouragetnent to education generally.

Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN regretted that Government would not take the opportunity of conferring a great boon and benefit on the country. He thoughtGovernment had acted unwisely in giving so much aid to the National Society. He was satisfied that religious prejudices would not prevent the beneficial action of a Board of Education ; and trusted that Mr. Wyse would persevere in his motion.

Mr. SPRING RICE wished to impress on Mr. Wyse the inexpediency of dividing the House upon the question, when all were solanxious to forward education. He thought more good might be done by awaken- ing public attention to the great importance of the subject, than by en- forcing the measure proposed by Mr. Wyse. It was a matter for con. sideration whether private exertions would not be paralyzed if Parlia- ment were to step in and vote the full amount required to support a system of national education. In some respects the system of the so- cieties at present aided by Government might require improvement, but he was satisfied that an account of the proceedings of those societies would justify the Government in aiding their efforts with the public money.

Dr. LIJSIIINGTON considered the exertions made to educate the people very inadequate ; and this subject should not be postponed for ever. The present system did not work well— He would instance a case where, in one parish, Ihe inhabitants who were rich, might, by subscribing the requisite sum, easily procure the assistance of Government, when perhaps in the adjoining parish, which was poor, although the people were necessarily in greater want of education, because the requisite means could not be found, the aid of Government could not be extended to them.

Lord Jotur RUSSELL did not say that the appointment of a commis- sion should be postponed" for ever," but that the present was not a favourable opportunity for carrying Mr. Wyse's project into effect.

Mr. WISE said, that as he had not received any satisfactory as. surances from Government, he should press his motion to a division. The House accordingly divided—

For the motion 70 Against it 74 Majority 4

COERCION OF VOTERS IN WALES.

On Tuesday, Mr. WARBURTON called the attention of the House a the interference of the Earl of Cawdor's steward in the last decries for the county of Carmarthen. The complaint was stated in a poi, tion from two electors of the county, and was to the effect, that Lori Cawdor had, through his agent, exercised improper influence over the voters. The petitioners, Mr. Hull and Mr. Adams junior, were active partisans of Sir James Williams, whom Lord Cawdor opposed. Ths acts complained of took place in the Newcastle Emlvii Polling district, and in the Llandilo district. With respect to the Newcastle district, he should say nothing, because it was manifest that a memorial, incot. porated in the petition, and professing to be addressed to Lord Caadcr by his tenantry, had really been got up for them. He would proceed to the statement of Mr. Adams relative to the transactions in the Llandile district. Mr. Warburton then read letters from Mr. Richard Bowel Williams, Lord Cawdor's steward, to several of that nobleman's the approaching election, who is the only candidate supported by your lanlionl. tenants. They were all in reality in the same language asitt.liiie. fohlol " Mr. Dash! Hopkins, I shall rely upon your gi% ing a plumper fur Colonel Teetotal and tell them that as they are so very independent, and so very ungrateful or the it. "Your weliwisher. One of the tenants, Evan Evans, humbly asked permission to split his vote with Sir James Williams, whom be had supported at the pre. vious election by Lord Cawdon's desire. To this application the lowing reply was given— been wiffidrawn from Sir James Williams; so that I cannot comply a ith ,vour reTtesk and I hope to so that you shall hate plumped for the Colonel. " Sir—Your noble landlonrs interest is given to Colonel Trevor. and all suelut " Your wells islier, It, IS. WILLIA)10 Some of the tenants proved restive; and Daniel Rees, a sort of sub. steward to Richard Bowen IVilliams, the " wellwisher," called foe of them into a private room, and read to them a letter he bad received from Mr. Williams, dated Slackpole Court, 2d August 1837— " Mr. Daniel Bees—You had better see Evan Evans of Llatulybie Mill, Da;il Stephen, milli, Stephen Griffith of Dry ngwynne, awl William Morris of Ahertrivaut, doh:epee and favour shown to them by their laudlonl, that I It Jpe to reeeke their rists to Dtplptlay last on my return to Llandilo, and then I shall see a It it further is tabs done in the matter. I ant glad that the other parties are safe; and I nun very malt pleased with Mr. Daniel Thomas's exertions, who can tell the parson that he hull hots attend to his own coneetna, and leave the Earl's tenants alone. We wi.,11 every eta to plumy for Colonel Trevor. • • • • • • Be shalp, and very ciltr.elistal NINTitL1LieutImaly.tal polling. In have, your wellwisher.

The result was, that these men split their votes between William and Trevor, instead of plumping for Williams, as they wished them. selves. Now if these facts were made out, the question was, what course should be taken. Mr. Warburton confessed that he did not lay much stress on the resolution of the House against tl:e interference ot Peers in elections; but he wished to call attention to acts in a Peet which would have been highly blameable in a commoner. Pains and penalties, it was said, could not check intimidation, and that we must trust to moral reprobation ; but when so blameless a nobleman as Lord Cawdor did not scruple to intimidate his dependents what reliance could be placed on the moral sense of others ? It would be said, per- haps, that Lord Cawdor, as a Conservative, had only continued what he had formerly done as a Whig; but if so, that showed the versality of the practice. There was but one remedy to enable the electors to give their votes in secrecy. He would move that the petition be referred to a Committee of Privileges, but would not divide the House on his motion.

Mr. AGLIONBY seconded the motion.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM, said he was prepared with a complete answer

to Mr. Warburton ; whose ground failed him altogether, when be

abandoned the charge against a Peer of Parliament, and maintained that similar conduct to Lord Cawdor's would be unjustifiable in a com- moner. He begged leave to state that Lord Cawdor, though absent from England during the election, did not disown the acts of his agent. There were 3,300 electors in Carmarthenshire, but the petition had been signed only by two; one of them Mr. Adams, son of a gentle- man who had formerly represented the county. And would it be believed, that in the election of 1832 the father of this petitioner actually applied to Lord Cawdor to give him his interest and support? Lord Cawdor supported him, and he was returned; and Mr. Adams acknow- ledged the obligation in a letter couched in warm terms of gratitude. The other petitioner, Mr. Hull, a barrister, bad also been ready enough to seek Lord Cawdor's assistance in former times. He bad applied to the culprit agent of Lord Cawdor for permission to canvass the Car- diganshire tenantry for Mr. Price, This petition had been got up with a flourish of trumpets, and a deputation consisting of Lord Ebring- ton, Mr. George Wilbraham, and Mr. Ellice, who had applied to the Speaker to present the petition as relating to a high breach of privi- lege ; but the Speaker declined to present it. Sir James Graham pro- ceeded to read a correspondence between Sir James NVilliums and Lord Cawdor, which proved that the latter supported Sir James Williams only on the condition that he should consider the Reform Act a final measure and oppose the Ballot and Triennial Parliaments ; and that be determined to oppose him when he took a decided part with the Libe- rals, voted for the expulsion of the Bishops from Parliament, and aided Mr. Leader in the election for Westminster. Sir James Graham then ridiculed the attempt to bold up Lord Cawdor to particular obloquy, when it was perfectly notorious that Whig as well as Tory Peers em- ployed their influence to secure the return of their friends. It was quite certain that the legitimate influence of property, in whatever hands it was lodged, must be felt in elections ; and be thought it should be felt. None of Lord Cawdor's tenants had suffered for their votes. Indeed, one of them, David Stephen, had since been made an exciseman in Carmarthen. Lord EBRINGTON had no objection to the legitimate influence of property, but that was distinct from intimidation. With respect to Lord Cawdor personally, he knew him to be incapable of committing a harsh action, and never would have allowed his agent to write such foolish letters, could he have prevented him. Mr. AGLIONBY observed, that the greater part of Sir JamesGrabeml speech, and the letters he had read, were irre:evant to the subject. TIe main charges were fully admitted, and he loped the exposure woof have the effect of convincing Membtrs of ti e necessity of resortinro

the secret vote.

1

Lord FRANCIS EGERTON deprecated the practice of getting up trumpery cases to blacken the character of individuals. Mr. HUME said, the present case was a gross specimen of the nomi-

nation system.

Mr. Bice Taman denied that his election was owing to Lord Caw- dot's support. He had been returned at the bead of the poll when Lord Cawdor opposed him— With regard to the influence exercised by the noble lord, it was such as was generally used throughout the country : it was not only proper but advantage- ous that they should exercise such an influence upon thew poorer neighbour, od it was as much in use amongst the gentlemen who were opposed to him in the county he represented as by those with whose support he had been honomed. That petition, which had been sent in the name of persons scarcely conversant with the English language, and yet contained so many magniloquent phrases, feid been allowed to remain before the public seven months uncontradieted.

He knew that many electors were exceedingly embarrassed as to the part they should take, from the fear of offendius influential persons in the county on one or both sides.

Mr. Weill) hoped that the discussion would be of service in forward- ing the Ballot, and that Members would not forget the humiliating pic- ture that had been drawn of the condition of Carmarthenshire. Sir JOHN OWEN asked Mr. Ward, whether the master manufacturers of Sheffield did not drive voters like sheep to the poll? He believed that were ballot-voting established, Mr. Ward would not be the Mem- ber for Sheffield.

Lord WORSLEY said, that the present discussion proved to him that he was wrong in having voted for the 30/. tenant-at-will clause.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL admitted that it was quite impossible to punish in a Peer what was allowed to be practised by every landowner in the country; hut he questioned the propriety of rescinding the resolution of the House against the interference of Peers in elections, as the formal removal of the resolution would seem to imply a sanction of the practice— With respect to this particular case, he found nothing worthy of remark ex- cept the melancholy picture of Lord Cawdor's tenantry, described by :Mr. Trevor as being utterly in despair how they should vote. (" Thor!" and a laugh.) He had the deepest pity and commiseration for such; but after all, be felt very sceptical about the remedy proposed ; indeed, he was rather inclined to believe that the Ballot would increase their embarrassment and unhappiness at the prospect of a new election.

With respect to David Stephen, Lord John was glad to find such encouragement given to independence. The reward given to that voter was the only useful result of the whole proceeding.

Lord STANLEY said, that at least one voter had been made a convert against the Ballot—David Stephen, the exciseman.

The motion was then pu4 and negatived.

IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT.

The order of the day for the third reading of the Imprisonment for Debt Bill was read in the House of Lords on Tuesday and

Lord Chancellor COTTENIIAM rose to cell the attention of the House to the bill us amended by the Select Committee of the Lords to whom it had been referred. He stated that the bill in its original shape con- tained provisions fur abolishing arrest for debt on mesne process and in execution. There was little objection to the abolition of arrest on toesne process ; but with respect to the abolition of imprisonment in execution, there was much difficulty; and he had himself become con- vinced that the total abolition of imprisonment would leave the cre- ditor without means of obtaining property not tangible by any legal process, and only to be got by pressure on the person. It was also necessary to give effect to the pills:diction of the courts for the recovery of small debt. The persons sued there had seldom property that could be seized in execution ; and if arrest of the person were prohi- bited, these courts, now beneficial to the public, would become ineffi- cient. Having resolved that imprisonment for debt could not be wholly abolished, the Committee turned their attention to the best mode of lessening the term of imprisonment, and of inducing the cre- ditor to resort to that mode of redress in the fewest possible cases. It was in this part of the bill that the chief alteration was made. At present a creditor took by writ of elegit one half of the profits of the estate of the debtor ; another might take another moiety ; and so on till the whole were nearly but never quite exhausted, because the law rendered it necessary that something should be left against which the writ of &flit might be issued. To remedy this most absurd proceeding, it was proposed in the bill that the creditor might take all the profits towards the discharge of the debt ; and the Lords Committee had added another provision to give the creditor, juilgment having been re- gularly entered up, an equitable lien on the estate itself, to be enforced through the instrumentality of the Court of Chancery :iii this way the creditor might ultimately obtain not may the profits but the free- hold itself of the estate. The interests of the debtor were, however, protected ; for a whole year was allowed him after judgment had been entered up to raise money on his estate for the discharge of the debt, unless the debt equalled or exceeded the value of the entire estate, in which ease it was certainly just that the creditor should have the power to sell it and recover his debt. Copyliold property was made subject to the same provisions as freehold. At present the creditor could not touch money in the Funds or shares in any company ; but it was in- tended that after judgment bad been regularly entered up, the creditor should have the same lien upon this kind of property as upon freehold and copyhuld estates. With respect to bills or promissory notes, the Sheriff would be empowered to enforce payment of them, and apply the proceeds towards the discharge of the debt, and be accountable for the surplus, if any. These securities having been given to time creditor, the Lords Committee unanimously agreed to abolish imprisonment for debt on mesne process. It was, however, possible that the creditor, after having taken all the means pointed out by the bill, might not, after all, be able to find property beloaging to the debtor ; who might,

nevertheless, be able to discharge the debt. For instance, be might remove his property to the Foreign Funds, which the Sheriff could not get at ; and in that case pressure upon the person must be resorted to: it was the only remedy against that description of fraud. By an act Which would expire during the present year, a debtor might be released from prison by means of the Insolvent Debtors Court, upon condition

of givil g ums all his property to his ercditors at large. It Was im- possible at the present day mu 'allow the law to rill' se limo the state it was pre% iously to the Insolvent Debtors Act ; but under that act is species of fraud might be committed against whitim it WdS nece:sitry to guard. A mnamm having property might go to prison, set his crediturs at defiance, and have every imidulgence accessible to prisoners for debt. The creditor had no means of enforciug the Insolvent Debtors Act, which could only be put in operation on the motion of the debtors himself. It wits therefore provided that. the creditor should also, under certain restrictions, have time power of putting the act in ope- ration ; but in the first place, of course, be must imprison the debtor. Indueements were held out to time creditor not to take the person of the debtor if be could get property, inasmuch as the credi- tor would have the right to apply all the property he could seize for payment of his individual debt ; but if he put the debtor into prison, the latter would be allowed twenty-one days, duting which he alone could put the Insolvent Debtors Act into operation, and thus cause his property to be equally divided among his creditors. At the expi- ration of the twenty-one days, the creditor would have the same power, but for the benefit of all the creditors as well as his own.Lord Cot- termites)) briefly recapitulated time chief provisions of the bill; and then moved that it be read a third time.

Lord ASHBURTON admitted that the bill had been much improved, but still thought that personal arrest for debt was in some cases abso- lutely necessary— It appeared to Lim to be iinpossible that an honest debtor, who was prepared to surrender all his Acts, could long remain in prison ; and he could see no reason, therefore, for not putting the check of a fear of imprisonment on those who were ready rash rashly to incur debt, without possessing the 111CVIS of tion. They were ready to punish With imprisonment a man who merely stole mlpocketdiandkerellief, and they were unwilling to visit with the same punish- ment a man who incurred a tfebt of considerable amount, when he knew he bail not the means of ntying. It was a good maxim that misfortune ought not to he punished as if it were guilt ; but there was a great and prevailing delusion with respect to the distinction between misfortune and guilt.

Lord BROUGHAM said, that this fallacy ran through Lord Ashbur- ton's reaaoning—that a person arrested tor debt could always find tins means of paying it, if he chose to do so. Now this be denied. The strongest and best possible evidence iti favour of abolishing arrest fur debt on mesne process had been given before the Committee. The bill had been much improved, and made very different from what it originally was. There were many little points which he objected to; but 011 time whole he cordially approved of it. He did not understand why the measure should not be extended to Ireland. Ile expected that the bill would be very useful in limiting credit. Shopkeepers exhibited the utmost recklessness in trusting persons, and they made the parties Nrho did pay reimburse them for their losses by those who did not pay. A respectable tradesman had actually shown him how much he was in the habit of adding to his ( Lord Brougham's) bills to make up for time deficiencies of other customers.

Lord Wiestr.ow gave notice that he should move a clause which would extend the operation of the bill to Ireland.

Lord ARINGEtt was aware that the bill had been much improved ; but lie questioned whether it would give general satisfaction. Credi- tors had not petitioned for it, and they would not be satisfied with it, because the security for the recovery of debts was impaired. It was absurd to suppose that the credit system could be abolished ; and he was inclined to think that time liability to personal punishtnent rendered per- sons more cautious in abusing their credit, and more ready to deliver imp their property in payment of their debts. What would the creditors aain by proceeding against clerks in Government offices and merchants' clerks under this bill? Nothing. He gave his assent to time measure. with great doubt, and chiefly because the incessant agitation of the sub- ject elsewhere called for legislation.

'lime Duke of IViaaane.ron suggested that a clause should be bi.. scitm ii,givi lig compensation to those who would lose lees by the opera- tion ut the VI.

The bill was read a third time; and time house rose.

MiscfmaeNrous.

CRIM;NAL Law. The Earl of DEVON, on Monday, called time at- tention of time Peers to time Thitd Report on Crimimmal Law. He dwelt upon time necessity of wending the system of summary conviction. It appeared that three-fourths of time persons tried at ipmarter.seasione underwent a longer term of imprisonment before trial than the Judge,: would have sentenced them to after conviction. lie mov ml that the report be referred tel a Select Committee, with the vie.t o providimme. by law for time summitry conviction of certain offenders.

Lord DeNatasm confirmed Lord Devon's statement respecting, the sentenees on prisoners. A more fremement gaol delivery Was req aired. Ile gladly supported the motion.

Lord Chancellor C'orrennast doubted whether the proposed plan would remedy the evil the existence of which was umplestionable.

Lord LYNDHURST Wished fur deliberate inquiry, arid would support Lord Devon.

Motion agreed to.

OPERATION OF THE Poon-aaw. A long conversation occurred on Thursday on this subject. Earl STANHOPE presented petitions from several places, complaining of the slavery in which the people were held under time Poor.law, and of the combination of the employers of labour to keels down wages. Lord Srmeitorit slid, that in con- sequence of the hardships they suffered, the race of labourers was decreasing. Lord l3itoucaraar called the attention of time House to the violent language used by Stephens, at the :Manchester and Bradford meetings. Earl STANHOPE said that the language was only allegorical. Lord BROUGHAM thought that nothing could be more tmpoetical than the threat to present a petition in one hand and to present a cocked pistol with the forefinger on the trigger in the other. One of Lord Stanhope's petitions related to an alleged case of oppression in Hampshire—a county under the government of the Duke of Wellington. The Duke of WetutecToN, with great warmth, insisted upon knowing whether his conduct was impugned by Lord Stanhope? Lord STANHOPE said it was not at all. The Duke

of WELLINGTON said he had not been fairly treated ; and be begged the petition might be referred to the Poor-law Committee.

FACTORIES. Lord ASHLEY gave notice in the House of Commons on Monday, that when the order of the day for the second reading of the Factories Bill was moved, on 4he 22d of June, for the purpose of baying it discharged, he would propose resolutions to the effect, that the existing state of things should not longer continue ; and he would divide the House upon his motion, whatever support he might receive.

CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS. Sir ROBERT PEEL introduced his bill for establishing an improved tribunal for the adjudication of disputed elections ; and suggested, that as the bill though brought forward by a private Member, was essentially a public measure, Ministers ought to allow it to be put among the Government bills. Lord JOHN RUSSELL declined to give Sir Robert the assistance he had refused to other pri- vate Members: he could not accede to the proposition, as the House had refused to grant Ministers an additional day for public business. The bill was read a first time, and the second reading fixed for Wed- nesday the :20th instant.

LEITH HARBOUR AND DOCKS. Mr. LABOUCHERE obtained leave, onWeduesday, to bring in a bill to coofirm an agreement made between the City of Edinburgh and its creditors in reference to the harbour and docks at Leith.

THE FREEMEN'S ADMISSION Btu, by which the stamp-duty on the admission of freemen is abolished, went through the Committee.

SCOTCH SPIRIT LICENCES. Mr. GILLON moved that the House should go into Committee on the Scotch Spirit Licences Bill. Sir GEORGE CLERK opposed the motion;; and it was rejected, by a vote of 101 to 70.

Tile Haceeee CARRIAGES (Metropolis) Btu went through the Committee.

BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS. Colonel SIBTHORPE opposed a motion for going into Committee on the bill to prevent bribery at elections ; but on a division, the numbers were 53 to 2 against his motion to post- pone the Committee for three months; and the bill went through the Cotnmittee.

FEMALE APPRENTICES. Mr. O'CONNELL, 011 Thursday, put off Lis motion for the liberation of female apprentices to a mare conve- vient day, to be named on Tuesday next. - •

CONVEYANCE OF MAILS BY RAILWAYS. Mr. Lanovenene moved for leave to bring in a bill to empower the Post-office to run vehicles with letters and a certain number of passengers on railways without payment of tolls, but subject to payment of u bum by way of compen- sation to railway proprietors, to be fixed by arbitrators. Mr. La. bouehere expluined, that without such an enactment, it would be in the power of the railway companies materially to obstruct the convey- ance of letters, or to charge the public too high a price fur it. The bill was founded on the report of a Select Committee appointed to examine the subject. Mr. Kamm': thought that several material objections would occur to the proposed measure. The general sense of the House was in favour of some such plan as Mr. Labouchere proposed ; and leave was given to bring in the bill.

HOUSES or PARLIAMENT. Colonel DAVIES moved " That a Select Committee be appointed to take into consideration the most eligible site for the two new Houses of Parliament." In a lung speech, Co- lonel Davies enlarged upon the inconvenience and costliness of Mr. Barry's plan, and the necessity of reopening the entire question. Mr. Macitiesoe and Mr. HUME supported the motion : it was strongly opposed by Sir ROBERT PELL, Mr. SPRING RICE, Colonel. TRENCH, and Sir HENRY HARDINGE ; and rejected, by 90 to 33.

WOODSTOCiL ELECTION. On Monday, the Chairmun of the Wood- stock Election Committee reported that the Marquis of Blandford had been duly elected.