ilIcbatrit anis liteartrbinatt in Parliament. AMENDMENT OF THE SLAVE ENIANCTPATION

ACT, The Lords were occupied on Tuesday with a discussion on Lord Glenelg's bill for amending the Slave Emancipation Act. A long speech by Lord GLENELG was devoted to proofs of the necessity of taking effectual measures for compelling obedience to the Act of 1833; which the planters in the West Indies generally, but especially in Jamaica, have succeeded to a great degree in frustrating, by means of their predominance in the local Legislatures. By extracts from de- spatches of the British Governors in the West Indies, and reference to recorded acts of the Assemblies, Lord Glenelg demonstrated the necessity of the proposed interference. The explanation of the chief provisions of the bill was little more than a recapitulation of his speech on Lord Brougham's resolutions for the abolition of slavery. The bill will provide that the Negro apprentice has sufficient time for the cultivation of his own garden: that Special Justices shall be protected from vexatious actions of the planters ; that the decrees of inferior courts shall be revised by Courts of Error ; that a fair elassification of the Negroes into domestic and agricultural shall be made; that cor- poral punishment of females shall be abolished ; and that the "cus- tomary indulgences" to the Negroes—consisting chiefly of medical attendance and cooking for the sick, and supplies of water to drink when at work—shall be continued. Lord BROUGHAM, the Marquis of &me, the Duke of WELLINGTON, and Lord RIPON condemned the conduct of the planters, and agreed in the necessity of some measure to enforce obedience to the Emancipation Act ; but Lord BROUGHAM maintained, that nothing short of entire abolition of slavery would really protect the Negro from his White oppressors_ There was one remedy, and but one alone—a remedy pointed out by the wise reflection of Mr. Burke, and confirmed by the atilt mote eloquent and pointed expression in which Mr. Canning, also dealing with the same subject, clothed the same profound observation—the reault of knowledge of the nature of man as well as of experience of the past,—uamely, that no laws could be trusted which were made to regulate slavery, because none of those laws ever did or ever could catty along with them an executory principle—that Waa say, such a principle as would enable them to execute themselves. Nothing could he more obvious; for it was plain that all measures of this description must be executed by the Whites with respect to the Blacks—must be executed by a superior and predominant caste against, and over, and to the subjugation of, an inferior and servile class; and these two classes, thus separated from each other by the relation of master and apprentice, were also, unhappily, separated by the contrast of colour, diversity of habits, and difference of race. So that to think of procuring an impartial and an effectual administration of justice, by trusting the happiness, the comforts, and the rights of the one class exclusively in the hands of the other class, was about as hopeless a dream as ever a lawgiver indulged in. Expressing his strong conviction upon that point, he might per. haps be asked what remedy be would propose and what executory principle he would introduce into any measure he might devise for the purpose of attaining the ends desired ? IIis answer would be brief and plain. Free the Blacks, emancipate the apprentices, abolish the intermediate or qualified state of slavery which was yet permitted to remain ; and then an executory principle would be procured ; for the Negro would then liar s aff in his own hands—we‘d

then be able to work out his own safet ult from his master, to fill an independent station, and play an independent

The bill was read a second time; and, on Lord GLENELG'S MO was ordered to be committed on Thursday the 22d of this month.

APPOINTMENT OF MR. PRIMROSE.

The order of the day bad been moved; on Monday, for the House of Commons to go into a Committee of Supply, when Mr. Hole brought under discussion the appointment of the Honourable Bourerie • Primrose to the office of Cashier and Receiver-General of the Edin. burgh Post-office. Mr. Hume confined his objections to the irregu- larity of the transaction,—which, he contended, was at direct variance with the regulation made by the Duke of Richmond in 1831, that pro. motions in the Post-office should be made from persons who hadserved in the office and possessed experience of its duties: and he moved a resolution censuring the appointment of Mr. Primroge on that ground. The defence of Ministers, put forth by Mr. SPRING RftE, war that the Duke's regulation did not apply to such offices as that conferit on Mr. Primrose, which was one of check and superintendence, not re- quiring Previous experience in the routine of Post-office business; and Colonel ANSON maintained that it ought to be filled by "a man of some rank in life," not by a junior clerk. s.Alr. Primrose, moreover, was a man of business, "he had bee% brea to the law, and, must therefore be considered competent to the discharge of the duties im- posed upon him." The salary was _Aig,4001. a year. The disinte- restedness of the Duke of Richmon11111rrelyilpg to promote his own connexions to office was highly praised by ISW.IIING RICE and Co- lonel ANSON; but Mr. WALLACE, who denounced Mr. Primrose's appointment as a "job," reminded the House, that the Duke bud made his brother, Loud Sussex Lennox, Postmaster-General of Jamaica, with a salary of 2,500/. a year. Sir JAMES GRAHAM wished Mr. Hume would bring forward a geliega. charge against Ministers of abusing their patronage, he would support such a motion, and would prove that no government had ever used stheir patronage so exclusively with the view to extend their partyiniluence : but Ile considered it an encroachment on the Royal prerogative to attack any particular appoint. meat to an office not a sinecure. Mr. F. T. BARING professed him- self ready to meet Sir James on that ground ; and the House divided on Mr. Hume's motion: for it, 29; against it, 202.

DUTIES ON FIRE INSURANCE.

The motion before the House being still for going into a Committee of Supply, Colonel Sibthorp moved that the duties on fire insurance be reduced one half. Mr. SPRING Rice pointed to the state of the revenue in January last, exhibiting a deficiency of 633,0001. ; and could not venture under such circumstances to repeal a tax, the produce of which was annually increasing. Sir EDWARD KNATCHRULL, Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR, and Lord MarioN advised Colonel Sibthorp to withdraw his motions: but the Colonel persisted in dividing the House; when the numbers were 20 for, and 93 against the motion.

The house then went into a Committee of Supply on

Tire ARMY ESTIMATES Lord HOWICK explained the principal items, but not so clearly or fully as to enable the reader to understand them, unless he had the Estimates themselves in his hands. In substance, Lord Howick stated that there was an increase of 113,000/., after making various de- ductions and additions on the Estimates of lust year. The number of men was greater by 8.000—accordilsg to the Estimates; but Lord Howick said that actually the augmentation was much less—how much less, he does not seem to have specified. The whole number of "bet Majesty's Land Forces " was 89,303 men. A diseusr;ion followed on a motion of Mr. HUNIE to reduce the number by 10,000 men,—chiefly supported on the ground that, if Ministerial statements were true, Ireland no longer needed so large a standing army ; and that under the Duke of Wellington's Administration fewer soldiers were required. Lord JOHN RUSSELL gal& that 3,000 men had been taken from Ire- land; but did not mention to what quarter they had been chiefly re- moved. Some conversation occurred respecting Lord Durham's Cana- dian mission ; the expenses of which were not to be limited, but left to Lord Durham's discretion.—a bad practice, Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL thought, which pledged the House to an expenditure beyond their con- trol. Lord HOWICK incidentally informed the House, that in his Estimates no account was given of the expenses already incurred in putting down the Canadian revolt: a supplementary grant—he feared it would be a heavy one—would be required, when the details of the expenditure were ascertained.

Mr. Hume's motion was rejected, by 121 to 11; and the Comraittee, with great rapidity, voted about four millions and a half for the military expenses of the present year.

CAMPAIGN OF THE LEGION IN SPAIN.

Sir GEORGE DE LACY EVANS moved, on Tuesday, for copies of letters from the Queen of Spain expressing any opinion of the conduct of the British Legion in Spain. Colonel Evans prefaced this mom, by a speech which occupied between two and three hours in the deli He laboured to prove that the troops under his con mend bad 0, 'suffered extraordinary distress—not more than the Duke of ‘Vel. lington's soldiers; that they hail not been ill-treated by tl e Spanish Government ; that their state of discipline, considering that so large a proportion were raw recruits, was extremely good ; that the men had been flogged only according to the practice of armies in ti c field, as sanctioned by the Duke ot Wellington ; and that their eat rtions and his own had been crowned with success. Finally, Colonel Evans assured the House that the Queen's cause must prosper, and deserved the sympathy and support of Englishmen. Sir HENRY HARDINGE, in reply to Colonel Evans, recapitulated the old charges of cruel and irregular punishments, defeats ocessiotied by want of generalship, and the miserable condition of the Legion when in gpain. From works of different persons who had witnessed the misery they described, he quoted passages to prove that the soldiers of the Legion had been infamously neglected, till they became "a moving mass of vermin and filth ;" from Colonel Evans's own desratches he showed, that there was want of necessary communication between the opeesnders of different di.i. ;ons of the Queen's forces, si ho yet no derteok expeditions—such as the attack on Hernani—whit h required regular cooperation; by reference to the real practice of flogeing in the • Bake of Wellington's army, he proved that in the Legion it was more general, and liable to be inflicted at the instance of subaltern officers, who would never have been intrusted with such power in a well-disci- plined army. Sir HUSSEY VIVIAN and Mr. TENNYSON 1.1EYNCOURT took part with Colonel Evans; and Lord PALMERSTON lauded his generalship and defended brisfly the Spanish policy of AliMsters—re- serving, however, his more elaborate justification to meet a formal mo- tion on the subject, of which Lord ELIOT gave notice for an early day. Colonel Evans's formal motion for papers, in the mean time, was agreed to.

REGISTRATION OF IRISH VOTERS.

Mr. Sergeant WOULIE obtained leave, on Tuesday, to bri lig in a bill tosmend the law which regulates the registration of Irish voters. It proposed that in future, persons on the Irish registries may be struck off on proof of disqualifying acts subsequent to the period of regis- tration, instead of being allowed, as at present, to retain the franchise on their oath that they retain the original qualification ; for quarterly, annual sittings of Registration Courts are to be substituted ; the regis- tering officer to be a Judge, appointed by the Crown, who is not to act two successive years in the same county ; controverted points of law to be determined by the Judges in Dublin, on the registering officer's statement : questions of fat—those relating to value, for instance— to be decided by a Court to sit in each county, and to consist of two Assistant Barristers. The bill likewise contains declaratory clauses respecting doubtful parts of former acts. With respect to opening the registry, it is intended, that up to the time of registiation there shall be no inquiry, but that evidence of disqualifying acts after the registration may be given beforeCommittees of the House of Commons ; at the first registration after the passing of the act, the right of persons now on the register may be questioned. The Members who followed

Sergeant Woulfe, including Lord STANLEY, Sir!uVII.LIAM FOLLETT, Sir ROBERT BATESON, and Mr. MORGAN JOHN O'CoNNELL, agreed that the law imperatively required amendment, as it Was in a shock- ing state. Lord STANLEY especially dwelt upon the injustice arising from the refusal of Committees to open the registries Oind declared, that were he on an Irish Election Committee, his very first vote would be to open the registry. Sir WIt.taast FOLLETT distinctly warned Mr. Woulfe, that the success of his bill, " even in that House," would mainly depend upon the manner in which his clauses relative to value were framed— Nothing would induce English gentlemen to admit the principle that although the property might not be worth Mt or even 2/. a year, a party swearing that to him as a shopkeeper it was worth more than la or 50/. a year, should be admitted to the registry. Such a bill, he warned the right honourable gentleman, he never would carry even through that House. The mode proposed as a test was no criterion of value, and would open the door to a continuation of that perjury which had appeared before the Assistant Barrister O n registration, and which had disgraced every Committee before whom a question of value had been raised. Ile had seen at himself sworn over and over again before Committees of the House, by a party with a house of 2/. annual nice, that by reason of his occupation or beneficial interest it was of the value which gave the party swearing the right to the franchise. Such things had never been attempted in England : in this country it had never been attempted, eon in the times of the gleattest excitement, to venture upon such a system of increasing value.

He declared himself in favour of a distinct and independent tribunal for the trial of election petitions- " I am of ppinion that it may be wise for this House to part with the right it claim of adjudicating matters of election : at all events, I am not prepared to nay with the noble lord at the head of the !fume Office, that the House would be doing a rash act in coming to such a determination; for I think that we never eau decide eases of the kind satisfactorily to ourselves, or to others, until we do part with that power." There was nothing else remarkable in the discussion.

THE CORN-LAWS.

Many petitions for the repeal of the Corn.laws having been presented on Thursday, Air. VILLIERS rose and moved,

" That this House resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, to eon. older the Act of 9th George the Fourth, chapter 60, relating to the importation of cote,.

Mr. Villiers said, he was aware that his motion had no prospect of "cease in a Legislature constituted as the present was but he thought taat there was nearly sufficient intelligence out of the House to make the serious discussion of the subject in Parliament salutary and neces- Illi_ ,s _There was no excitement, it was said, on the Cons-laws; but otheved the day to be not far distant when there would be more ex- citement on the subject than would be agreeable to those who were

so much struck with the absence of excitement— But for his OW13 part, when he saw so many thousands of mono in the etultary depeudent on relief--when commissions were issued tolliquire into the Pievous di iu ram._ stress prevalent throughout the country—and when bitch anxiety

ed to promote the emigration of our lab um labouring classes—he et

that these circumstances arPootsd to him to indicate a state of things fur

from healthy, or of a character to preclude the neces.ity el tal.ing this subject into consideration. It seemed to him, indeed, a peculiarly favourable point of time on which to agitate tie question, when he reflected how many persons there were in Parliament and out of Parliament who stepped forth out of their class in society as the warm advocates of the poor, as the bitter opponents of the tyranny of workhouses and the severity of factories ; nune of which noble- lemen and gentlemen cou!si consistently hesitate to staud forward as the sup- porters of a proposition which directly tended to tile welfare of the poorer classes, to lower the price and increase the supply of the principal aiticle of

food. • . _ Ile replied to some of the arguments usually adduced in defence of the Corn-laws. As to the right of the landowners to a protectihg duty on their produce, in consequence of heavier taxation, he maintained that land was favoured, not overburdened—

The fact was, that there were no landowners in Europe who were es t. • e.

from taxation as ours; and the operation of the Coin-laws was greatly to lunit the resources of the revenue. Ile had often sought for some excels° for them t he should. indeed, be glad to find a tolerable pretext fur their existence, because he could not now help considering them an insult as well as an in;ury to the country. Would honourable gentlemen show what branch of the revenue was more contributed to by the landowners than by the other classes? Was it the Customs, the Excise, or the Assessed Taxes? They were exempted from paying for their servants, their slogs, al their cat ts. Land paesed by descent ; there- fore the landowners woe exempt from the legacy and the probate duty. Their proportion of the whole revenue Wa9 2'; per cent. ; but he would take the cal- culation of one fouttli ; and lie would ask, (lid they pay that proportion to the general taxation ? If thee did, let them prove it. Ile asserted the contrary; lie was neatly to prove to the etmtrary. They did not pay the same proportion even of the county-rates or highway-rates au the tradesman nnd househelder. Within the last three years, they had obtained relief to a moot extraordinary extent. Half the county-rate was charged to the Consolidated Fund, the Poor-rates bad been diminished nearly one-half, aiel the value of land had been greatly increased by the Tithe Commutation Act. When the landowneta were Indemnified, he claimed some relief for those who suffered by the Cora-laws. The more intelligent of the landowner,: referred to the existence of the malt-tax as a reason why the Corn-laws ought to be defended. They at geed, " If von take off the :Malt-tax, people still consume more barley." Ile %would say, if they took off tile duty on glass, the coneumption if that at tiele would be increased. If the Malt-tax pressed on the agriculturists, did not the Bread-tax preee on the other classes of the community ? If the coneequence of takine off the Malt-tax were that there wolild be an increase in tbc &mini for barhs- •:• followed that if

they repealed the duty on sewn the people witeld conseme wheat. Unfor. tunately, the landowneis had the monopoly Of both wheat "tariff ; they hadi the monopoly both of Ilw market and of the laud.

He calculated that the loss to the country by the Cormlaws, sup- posing the enhanced price to be 1.2s. per quarter, was no less than L5,600,000/. ; supporting his statements by reference to Lord Fitzwil- liam's pamphlet. The immense cost of the last war was defraye • chiefly by the mattufileturers ; but lit the Congress of Vienna their intei ,as were neglected by the British Ministers ; and the consequences predicted by Mr. Huskisson, were severely felt now VI the restrictions on foreign trade— lie appealed to the honourable Members for Nottingham anti Derbyshire, it the distressed state of their manufactures was mutt soused by their being unable to compete in cheapness with the foreign maisaf.citnes? In France. in Swi:zerlatel, aud in the United States, capital had been employed in the production of cotton goods, which was a most import lint branch of the trade of this country. It ball been proved, too, that many who had been employed in the hardware manufacture in shelliell were now engages! in fl issia and in other parts of the Continent. What was the value of their foreign tiade ?— that was the question. He hoped the mania:tourers in that House would speak out on this occasion. III private, the manufacturers had no hesitation in saying that the Corn-law was destroying their trade : he hoped, then, they would declare openly what was their candid opinion upon this iplestion ; for they had now come to this point, that they must make up their minds whether they would abandon their foreign trade or their Corn-law.

The manufacturers had been injured, but the landed interest had not been benefited. Frequently since ISI5 had Pal liament been engaged in inquiries into the distress of the landed interest ; and in the Report of the Committee of l$l, it was more than implied that the Corn- laws had aggravated the distress. The present Cormlaws secured un- steadiness of price, when the great object of the farmer was a steady price for his produce. Increase of rent followed a rise in the price of corn ; consequently the tentiet had nun interest in high prices. Was the labourer ititerested in a high price of corn ?-

In 1510, were the labourers prosperous? In nine cocci+ out of ten in that

year, were they not paupers ? as not labour declai ed to be redundant? Were not some of the labmirere charged with tallewes against the law, by the breaking if machinery, wine!) had thrown them out of employment ? The labourer, then, in I sear ettuld not be an advocate for the Curn-law, when he was in such ,L miserable condition.

Many persons attempted to show that the landowner would nut lose by abolishing the Corn-laws ; but he took up no such ground— Ile, however, asked landlords themselves, if they hoped they could maintain a position u hich was fount! to be injurious to the general interests? They owed their poeition to a different state of society ; and they could not but fed that with the increase of intelligence their influence must he diminished. Even they thein.elvee were obliged to contribute to the education of the people. It became them, then, to cunsider whether their position could be maintained hay any other than by moral influence, or whether it was not more likely that they would be controlled by public opinion than be able to guide it. If the land- lords pereevereil in maintaining the present law, they would provoke a struggle either to have it telltales], or to obtain the means by which it must be repealed. It beeline, in his opini )))) , the duty of every public man to use all his efforts for the purimee of procuring substantial advantages for the people, and not at least to allow the hard-working portion of the community to be deprived of the fruits and rewards of their own industry.

Sir WILLIAM Aloteswonvw seconded the motion ; and entered into a close arginnetit, the different parts of which will not bear separation by extract, to prove that the poverty or wealth of a country depended mainly upon the amount of its disposable population—that is, upon the number of hands that could be spared for other employments over and above those needed to raise food ; Ilea the Corn-laws gave an un- natural stimulus to the least profitable employment—that of tilling the earth, and reduced the laminas of the disposable population ; and that by a repeal of the Corn. laws, rents, profits, arid wages would be raised, Iftes11■■., the menefucturing and e1/111111t.rrid I classes would be secure of full -employment and a steady demand, and then would become tenants or purchasers of land for building and other purposes, paying a much

higher price for it than if their object was simply the raising of agri- cultural produce. Inflict, the competition for land would be exces- sively increased ; for the size of towns would rapidly extend with a free trade in corn, causing a perpetually increasing demand for the products of manufacturing industry_

" Not only, therefore, did the landlords injure all other classes of the corn.

muuity, but they injured themselves likewise, through their ignorance of the effects of the Corn-law. Yet it was to this very class, returned to this House by the servile votes of their dependent tenants, who, by their legislation, had worked the evils he had mentioned—it was to this very landed interest that the noble lord, the liberal and enlightened statesman who framed the Reform Bill, desired to give preponderance by that measure, and in his place in that House bad ventured to assert that upon the preponderance of that interest the sta-

bility of the institutions of this country depended. He denied altogether this position, and he pointed to the Corn-law in refutation of the noble lord's doc- trine. He contended that the stability of this country depended upon the wealth, power, and happiness, of the eammunity ; and that its stability was therefore impaired by the conduct of the landed interest with regard to the Corn-laws; and it was with this feeling and this conviction that he most cor- dially supported and seconded the motion of his honourable friend."

The discussion which followed produced nothing remarkable. The

motion was supported by Sir HENRY PARNELL, (who spoke in a very indistinct and almost inaudible tone,) Mr. CLAY, Mr. MARK PHILLIPS, Mr. JOHN DoteLor, and Mr. EDWARD ROCHE ; but we cannot find a single new argument, or striking statement of an old one, in their speeches. The noise and confusion in the House was almost constant while the advocates of the repeal of the Corn-laws were speaking. The opponents of the motion—the Marquis of CHANDOS, Mr. CRAVEN BERKELEY, the Earl of DARLINGTON, Mr. CAYLEY, Mr. DISRAELI, and Mr. GAILY KNIGHT—were better listened to by their large ma- jority. The Marquis of CHANDOS asserted, that were the Corn-laws repealed, "no farmer in England could exist, and no wages would follow to the agricultural labourer." He was very indignant at Sir

William Molesworth's imputation that the landowners were returned by the servile votes of their dependents. He had been as honourably and nobly returned as Sir William Molesworth himself. On a division, the numbers were For the resolution Against it 95 309 Landed interest majority 205 MISCELLANEOUS.

TRADE WITH FRANCE AND SPAIN.. Mr. POULETT THOMSON stated, on Monday, in reply to questions from Mr. O'CONNELL and Lord SANDON, that representations had been made to the French Government in consequence of the proposed increase of duties on British linens, and that he hoped the French Ministers were "more inclined to refrain from these proceedings than to persist in them." With respect to Spain, representations had been made, without effect, to procure the reduction of prohibitory duties on British manufactures, and other measures must be resorted to.

FACTORIES. Lord JoaiN RUSSELL mentioned, that a bill for the regulation of factories would be introduced in a few days, and pro- ceeded with after Easter.

ELECTION COMMITTEES.

On Monday, Mr. DIVETT, from the Tralee Committee, reported that Mr. John Bateman was not, and that Mr. Maurice O'Connell was, duly elected.

The Carlow County Committee was appointed on Tuesday.

Liberals-6; Tor ies-5 ; Mr. Arthur Kinnaird, Lord Cantelupe,

Mr. Dennistoun, Sir John Owen,

Lord Robert Grosvenor, Mr. alackiunon, Mr. O'Callaghan, Mr. Joseph Neeld, Mr. Edward Rice, Mr. W. A'Court Holmes.

Mr. Mildmay.

The petitioners are Tory electors against the Liberal sitting Mem- bers, Mr. Vigors and Mr. 'Yates.

The Walsall Committee was chosen on the same day.

Tories-3; Mr. Laseelles,

Mr. Master, Mr. Sturt.

Liberals-8;

Mr. W. Villiers Stuart, Mr. Stansfield, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Duff, Mr. Lambton, Mr. Leader, Mr. Thomas Duncombe, Sir Matthew Wood.

The petition is against Mr. Finch, the Liberal Member.

The Dublin Committee, also appointed on Tuesday, consists of

Tories-3'; Mr. C. G. Round,

Mr. E. Stanley,

Mr. J. B. East. Liberals-8 ; Mr. Barnard, Sir James Carrier:, Mr. Byng, Lord Seymour, General Johnson, Mr. W. Evans, Mr, Lister, Mr. French.

Thejlull Committee was named on Thursday.

Tories-3 ; Sir William Young, Mr. Ralph Gore, Lord Adare. Liberals-8 ;

Mr. Frederick Divides, aluskett, Mr. Langdale, Mr. Cornelius O'Brien, Mr. Nicholas Fitzsimon, Mr. Hastie,

Mr. Samuel White, Sir George Strickland. The petitioners are Liberal electors of Hull against the return of the Tory sitting Members, Sir Walter James and Mr. Wilberforce. The Shafesbury Committee was also appointed.

Libel als-4 ; Tories-7 ; Captain F. Paget, Lord Henniker,

Lord Wortley, laIr. Hurt,

Mr. Sheppard, Mr. Codrnrgton, Mr. Blair,

Mr. Blackstone, Mr. Padre.

The petition is against the return of the Whig sitting Member, Mr. Poulter.

On Thursday, Mr. MILDMAY reported from the Carlow County Committee to the House, that Lord Robert Grosvenor had been taken ill, and was unable to attend to his duties in the Committee, of which be had been elected Chairman. Some conversation arose on two points. It appeared that Mr. Mildmay had been elected Chairman in the room of Lord Robert Grosvenor ; and Mr. MACKINNON argued that the proceeding was informal, and that the Committee had exceeded their powers : they should have waited till Lord Robert's absence had been excused by the House, and not of their own power removed him from the chair. Sir EDWARD SUGDEN and Mr. GOULBURN took this view of the ease. Sir JOHN CamenELL was inclined to a different opinion ; but recommended the Committee to elect a new Chairman. A surgeon was called in, who stated that Lord Robert Grosvenor was suffering under a complaint—" an irritation of a nature that would be aggravated by his coming out." On this several Opposition Members laughed ; and Mr. Sergeant JACKSON pressed the witness for the parti- culars of the complaint. Lord flowice, in warm language, protested against conduct so unusual and so unhandsome. Mr. Sergeant Jct. SON, Mr. GOuLBURN, and Sir ROBERT Ismus, said that Lord Howiek was not justified in using such language ; and Sir Robert Inglis wished the Epeaker to interfere for the protection of his side of the [louse, Lord HOWICK apologized. The House, on the motion of Mr. Mild- may, excused Lord Robert Grosvenor from further attendance on the Committee.

BILLS READ A FIRST TIME IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.

March 12 Scotch Prisons. Mr. Fox Ma ut.E.

Scotch Bankrupts' Estates, Mr MURRAY.

13 New Brunswick and Nova Scotia Laud Company. Sir IS

WOOD and Mr. EAST HOPE. Mutiny Bill. Lord HOWICK.

Registration of Irish Voters. Mr. Sergeant Woutra.

— 114 Newtyle and Cupar Angus Railway. Lord D. G. Haim BURTON and Mr. CHALMERS.

— 15 Irish Sheriffs. Mr. Sergeant WOULFE. Bury Waterworks. Lord FRANCIS EGERTON and MI. WALKER.

BILLS READ A SECOND TIME AND " COMMITTED."

March 12 Fisliguard Harbour—majority 181 to 20. Mr. Poetzir

THOMSON.

13 Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway. Lord WILLIAM BE NTINCRo

SECOND READINGS DEFERRED.

- 12 Scottish Schools. Mr. SPRING RICE. To 23d March, County Rates. Mr, Hem& To 28th March. Intimidation of Voters. To 31st April. - 15 . Irish Chancery. To 21st March.

Election Expenses. Mr. Hume. To 21st March. COMMITTEES DEFERRED,

March 12... Benefices Pluralities. Lord JOHN RUSSELL, to 26th March. Irish Corporation. Lord MORP ETU, to 26th March, BILL WITHDRAWN.

--. 14 Municipal Boundaries. Mr. VERNON Smrrn,

BILL REJECTED.

-- 14 Montgomeryshire Canal—majority 77 to 3. Mr. CLAY. Mr. Elliott, air. Winnington.