itSebateli an Praceetiingii in Parliament. IRISH TITHES,

Lord JOHN RUSSELL, on Monday, directed the attention of the . House of Commons to the settlement of the Irish Tithe question. of course, be said, after the debate last week on the subject of the Mil- lion Loan, Members would expect a statement of the determination of

Ministers in reference to that important matter. He bad already stated three objections to the plan proposed by Mr. O'Connell, and supported, with little variation, by Lord Stanley— He stated, first, that no amount had been mentioned which was likely to satisfy the claims due. He stated, in the second place, that by Mr. O'Coa. cell's own statement it was not likely that this would be considered by the great body of the Roman Catholic people of Ireland a final and satisfactory settlement of the question relating to the Church and tithes ; and that, there. fore, it would be inexpedient to make a large sacrifice of public money on that account. He stated, in the third place, that he thought, as to the future wink- ing of the measure, that it would be a bad precedent to begin with a grant to the tithe-owners, which must likewise be a remission to all those who had re- sisted the law, and who bed refused to pay tithes in compliance with the pro. visions of the law, while those who had complied with the law and who had paid their tithes wete to be losers by so doing. He had stated also, that one consequence he thought would be, that in any future collectionel rent-charge, the landlord would be likely to look to Parliament in ease of a deficiency, or in case of obstacles being damn in the way of the collection ; Parliament having once before in such a case intetfered, and by a grant from the public treasury satisfied the debt.

The House did not appear to attach the same importance that he did to these objections ; the first of which, however, Sir Robert Peel had in part met, by proposing to limit the amount to be granted. A mode of arranging the settlement of this question had also been suggested by Sir Robert Peel. Seeing that the prevailing opinion in the House was that some such plan should be adopted, Ministers had resolved to modify the course they bad in the first instance chosen. Lord John then explained the Ministerial proposition— The first part of the subject with which the Committee would have to deal, would be the amount of 640,000f., which had been advanced under the autho- rity of a former act of Parliament to the tithe-owners. Combining, as he in• tended to combine, this pioposition with the arrears which had accrued since the passing of that Act, it did not appear right to him to do away altogether withothe payments by instalments. He thought, however, that they should 1* entirely remitted and forgiven to the occupying tenants, but that the landlords who owed them should still be obliged to pay them, and that the Treasury should be enipowered to collect them from the landlords. But when he said, that with respect to the nunis due from the landlords, the Tteasuty should lie empowered to collect then), he did not mean to say that the Treasury should collect them for the benefit of the State, or as payments that were to remain finally with the Exchequer. On the contrary, he proponed that they ollould go in satisfaction to those who claimed the arrears of tithes that had accrued since the passing of Him* acts. The next pair of the question with which the Committee would have to deal, was the question respecting the remainder of the million as connected with the arrears of tithe-c. position. The amount of those arrears was rather different from that which had been treated in the de- bate of a former day. There was, as he had already said, 640,000/. actually advanced to the owners of tithes under the Million Art. There was also s further sum which had been advanced under a sulesquent Act, and in come- quence of a loan which had been advanced by the Exchequer out of the nun voted for public works to the Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Purposes in lie' land. As the Co ttttt rinsionern for Eccleniretical Put pones had ma realized at that time any funds, they were enabled to take 100,0001. mit lit the Treasury ; and by a oubsequent act, that sum, which had not yet been repaid by the Ecclesi. astical Commissioners, was given to public oorks OUL of the million ineviou.ly advanced by Parliament. Si, that theme was a .11111 ilf 740 IMO/. now applied by Parliament. The remainder, then, which wits still imapplied. was 260,0001. Now, he proposed that that sum, and the remains's.' ot t lir 640,000/. which IVO to he recovered from the landlords, should be applied to low:date the arrears of tithes for the years 18364111d 1837, together with any inst. ■lilients which might have been received in payment of the sum. advanced. Ile had already men. tioncd that which he now wished to mention mme explicol?, that the sum of 260.0001., and the further sum which had been repaid, were only to go In liquidation of the arrears due f the occupying tenant*. As to the land• fordo, who, under the act of Lord Stanley, were billow to the payment of the tithe-composition, and as to the other landlorda from whom tithe-consposo thin was due, he would at once declare, that to those persons no remission if arrears would be given. There could be little doubt in that House as to the propriety of such a proposition ; because, an they had now pot a rent•charge on those latalloids who were not liable for arreals, it would ma be iight to make any remission to those whip were liable for them. The amount, then, of this proposition was, that towards the payment of the arrears of rithe-composition for the yearn 18:36 and 1837, due front the occupying 'manta, there be applied the built of 260,0001., aud the whole of the 640 000/. due Irmo the landlords, and from the lay impropriators of tithes who might happen to be proprietors of land as well as tithe.owners. It was imposnible to uncertain precisely the amount of the BUM to be added to the 260,000/., hut he thought that it might be eotimated as exceeding 300,0001. ; that is, when added to the 260.0001. He did not consider that this proposition, though called for by men of all parties in the House, would be favourable to he Church of Ire- land. He admitted that the interference in favour of those who had

refused to pay tithes must encourage resistance in future, and diminish the security of that species of property. With respect to the peace and harmony which would accrue to Ireland from the measure, he -would refer to some recent proceedings in the North of Ireland_

By a letter which he had only received that morning from the Lord-Lieute. cant f Ireland, he was informed that not only had Orange flag.' been recently exhibited from the steeples of the churches in that part of Ireland, but that guns and muskets had also been tired from them. It might not have been in the power of the clergy, even had they taken pains, to prevent this in all cases ; and if they prepared themaelves to look under this act or under any future act like it for the future peace of Ireland, he was afraid that they would find that there would he hostilities between the Roman Catholic people and the Protestants of Ireland, so long as the Protestant clergy continued to heap in- sults upon their feelings Whatever might be the feelings of the people and of the landloula with regard to the collection of this rent-charge, he thought that there would be no chance of any future peace in Ireland unless some disposition could be created on both sides to show forbearance with respect to their old di. visions and contests; and he was convinced that it was only by the creation of such a spirit, and not by the expenditure of ten times 300,0001., that the final and permanent tranquillity of that country could be "tamed.

Lord John moved that the House should go into Committee on the Act 3d and 4th William the Fourth (the Million Loan Act.) Mr. HUME put it to Lord John Russell, whether the House had ever entered upon a vote of a million of the public money without previous notice ? Lord JOHN RUSSELL admitted that the objection was valid in point of form ; but he considered that for all useful purposes sufficient notice had been given.

Mr. HUME said, it was the Chancellor of the Exchequer's duty to oppose the motion ; but as that officer connived at the contemplated act of robbery, he felt it his duty to stand forward in behalf of the public—

Ile was ready to make any sacrifice which might fairly be expected to lead to permanent peace in Ireland ; but he was so convinced that the peace which would be purchased by this grant would only be a truce of a very few months, that he could not for a moment think of consenting to it. It was not upon a mere matter of form that his objection was founded on the present occasion. It was manifestly against all the principle and practice of Parliamentary deal- ingto be hurried into grants of this large description without due previous notice. From Lord John Russell's statements, it appeared that the whole of this proposition was in reality that of the Member for Tamworth, and not of her Majesty's Ministers. Lord John Russell had now thought proper to come into the suggestion of the right honourable baronet ; but he totally differed from the noble lord as to the sufficiency of the grounds upon which be had done so. All he could say was, that if the two great bodies of Whigs and Tories now joined in thus attempting this act of robbery, they ought at least to give them sufficient notice of it. Under these circumstances, he threw himself upon the House, and begged the protection of its universal rule and practice on the present occasion.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said that Mr. Hume had acted unjustly in de- claring that Ministers had adopted his (Sir Robert's) proposition—

His proposition, as he stated it the other day, was to the following effect. There was about 307,000/ remaining out of the million grant, which they had yet to deal with this sum, or rather a larger sum, 500,0001., he proposed to place in the hands of a Commission, who would then proceed to take a review of the arrears due from occupying tenants for the last two years, and, having ascertained their amount, draw a proportion between that amount and the 500,000/. in their hands, and, according to that proportion, ascertain what rateable portion per cent. could be offered to the tithe-owners on account of their arrears : supposing that the Comnahsioners found they would be able to offer 60/. in the 1001., the tithe-owners would be offered this amount ; to whom it would be quite optional eithel to accept the composition or to resort to the law to recover their whole claim.

By Lord John Russell's proposition, there was no option given to the tithe-owners. He would only add, that be heard the latter part of Lord John Russell's speech with regret. With the imperfect information he possessed on the subject of the disturbances in the North of Ireland, Lord John Russell would have done well to avoid any statement of the kind he had made, although questioned on the mat- ter by Members ot the House.

Mr. Lima had received a letter from Lisburne, stating that there had been no party manifestation in that town on the 12th instant.

Mr. O'CONNELL said, that in Belfast, not far from Lisburne, win- dows of the Catholic clergy had been broken, and the troops called in. A MEMBER said, the windows were broken by a few boys or glaziers : the affair was not of a serious character.

Mr. WARD did not believe that the Ministerial plan would lead to a " final " or "satisfactory" settlement of the Irish Church question. On the contrary, he considered it a delusion on the people of Ireland and the people of England. Mr. HARVEY said, the plan was an astounding one. Thursday was quite as early a day as could fairly be named for the consideration of the proposed vote. He predicted that the country would be astonished at it, arid that Lord John Russell would only get an increase of un- popularity by taking this leaf out of Sir Robert Peel's book : he would gam nothing, but suffer much by an ingenious contrivance of the enemy. It was decided, after more conversation, that the House should go into Committee on the Loan Act, but that the further consideration of the grant be postponed. Afterwards, the House resolved itself into Committee on the Tithe Bill.

A debate ensued, on a motion by Mr. LEFROY to omit the clauses which authorized the reopening of the tithe-composition in certain eases.

Mr. SHEIL and Mr. HUME supported the clauses. Sir ROBERT PEEL wished them to be expunged, as tending to shake Parliamentary titles to property.

Mr. O'CONNELL said, all that WAS asked was the power of appeal When 20 per cent. more than the value was given to the tithe-owner. Lord Stanley's act gave no appeal. Why was not this subject taken UP in a fair and charitable spirit ? Tithes had been sprinkled with blood at Ratheormac. Were those murders to be repeated? Lord STANLEY would inform the House, that the clauses permitted then reopening of the compositions where the sum paid was, not 20 Per ee

r., but a single halfpenny more than should be paid justly and. reasonably—. It had been sail that the act he hail the honour to anivauce gave nu right of appeal ; but what was the fact? Eight hundred and twenty compositions had been entered into under that act : there had been no less than eighty ap- peals, in twenty-four of which alterations had been made of the amount fixed under the act ; in fourteen the composition had been lowered, and in ten raised. An operative and valid appeal had therefore been given by the act.

Sir EDWARD SUGDEN denied that there was any murder committed at Rathcormae. Mr. O'Connell was wrong in his law.

Mr. O'CONNELL would stand by the professional opinion he had given. A more horrible murder had never been committed than that of widow Ryan's son : he had been basely and horridly murdered. The ease was this. The fields were enclosed—(" No, no "from Sir Edward Sugden)—Mr. O'Connell continued—

The evidence at the inquest was to that effect. If the fields were enclosed, they had no right to break in to distrain ; and the entire question of murder or no murder rested on the question of enclosure. It was sworn positively by no less than eleven witnesses, that the fields were enclosed: and he defied the right honourable and learned gentleman to point out a single witness who swore to the contrary. The patty broke into the field, and were resisted as trespassers ; and the result was an unavenged murder.

Sir EDWARD SUCHEN knet, as a matter of fact, that there was no enclosure in the case—

The walls were broken down, and there was a fair and clear access for a hundred persons to the place; but in the mean time, those who bad opposed the law had drawn up cart iages so as to block up and interrupt the passage, and had formed an illegal barrier. That was in itse7f an unlawful act; and therefore there was no murder committed at Ratbcormac.

Mr. O'CONNELL Said, there was a gentleman in the House who could state of his own knowledge whether there was an enclosure or not—

Let this fact, however, be remembered. It now stood recorded, on the authority of a barrister of as high legal reputation as any who ever flourished at the Chancery bar of England, that if there was an enclosure at Widow Ryan's, the affair at Rathcormac was a murder ; and that it was an enclosure, was as well known in Ireland as it was that the House of Commons was an enclosure, and that gentlemen met within its four walls.

Mr. E. B. Rocas: knew Widow Ryan's haggard as well as his own father's house; and it was an enclosure. It was so before, it was so after the day of Ratheormae. Whether it \VAS so on that day, he could not state, for he was not present; but he recollected that every witness swore that the haggard was enclosed. Whatever it might be legally, in a moral point of view a fouler murder never was committed.

The Committee divided—

For the clauses 103 Against them 88 Majority 15 The remaining clanger, with the preamble, were agreed to; and the report was ordered to be received on Thursday.

The discussion on the Million Loan, and the payment of Irish tithe arrears, was resumed on Thursday, in a Committee of the whole House; the question put from the chair, on the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, being, " That Exchequer Bills, to an amount not exceeding the residue of the Sum of one million, remaining unappropriated under an act of the :kl and 4th of King William the Fourth, chapter 100, and under an act of the 6th and 7th year of his said Majesty, chapter 108, be issued and applied, together with the instalments paid, or which may be paid, under the first-mentioned act, to the relief of the owners of compositions for tithes in Ireland, for the years 1836 and 1837; and that the Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury be authorized to remit such instalments in such cases."

Mr. HUME rose and moved the following amendment- " That the proposed grant of 640,000/., which had been advanced from the treasury of the United Kingdom as a loan to the clergy of the Established Church and the ha- proprietors of tithes in Ireland—M.(4 the additional grimes oi 100,000/. and '200,000/.. now proposed to be made for the Church of Ireland, making in the whole one mmiillion sterling,—will be highly unjust to the people of England and Scotland, and subversive of those principles on which good government and equ il justice can alone be maintained."

The effect of the proposed grant, Mr. Hume contended, would be a hollow truce for a short time, till the money was expended. It would prolong, not cure, the discontent, of which the Church Establishment in Ireland was the cause. It would hold out a premium to resistance to the law ; and convince the Irish people, that if they would only persevere for two or three years in refusing payment of tithes, the Le- gislature would come to their assistance and discharge their debts. Sir Robert Peel, in 1833, pointedly condemned "the vulgar expedient of solving political difficulties" by dipping into the public pocket; and Sir Robert Inglis had truly said, that in this as in every other case, the demand and the supply would regulate each other, amid that the amount of the reward would be proportionate to the strength of the resistance. But now, both these Members were for dipping into the public purse. To obtain peace for Ireland, Mr. Hume would willingly 'nuke great sacrifices ; but he would oppose the present scheme, as delusive, extra- vagant, and unjust.

Mr. Wane, seconded the amendment. He entirely objected to the Government plan ; which seemed to him to have every fault that a plan could have. It was inconsistent with hopes long held out and pledges solemnly given ; and it was certain to prove delusive and inef.. kettle' in its results. He felt that nothing had ever so shaken public confidence in public men, as the singular and inexplicable changes, on his side of the House, on this Irish Church question. It was not enough for a Minister to say that his opinions remained unaltered. There must be some conformity between privats conviction and p:rblie acts, to inspire confidence and command respect. The new principle, "video meliora, proboque, deteriora sequor," would do neither. , With respect to the proposed grant, be looked upon it as the commencement of a series of subsidies to the Church—a new page in the Irish Esti- mates. On this point the Irish Members did not attempt to mislead the House. They admitted that the 640,0001 had settled nothing, and they foretold that the additional 360,0801. would settle nothing. They said, fairly enough, "If you insist upon keeping up a national church, among us, which is not our church, you must pay for it." Mr. O'Connell said, "The plan is not my plan, but your plan ; try it by all means, but I am not responsible for the issue." Mr. Ward was most anxious to settle the Irish questions, for they stood in the way of all other business; but he looked to a permanent and satiefactory set- tlement, which no settlement could be that was not honourable. Was the Municipal Bill included in the proposed settlement, altered as that bill had been by Lord Lyndhurst ? It ought to be rejected, and then the only inducement to pass a bad Tithe Bill would be taken away. He asked the Scotch Members, who so strenuously opposed additional endowment of their own Church, on what principle they could lavish so large a turn on the Irish Establishment ; the existence of which, three years ago, they declared to be incompatible with the peace of the empire ? How could English Members justify the sacrifice of so large a sum, when their own leader told them that sacrifice would be ineffectual ? It wag not the Home Secretary who deluded his fol- lowers, but his followers misled him. Ile asked the House, by its vote that night, to prevent Ministers from proceeding in a useless, costly, and discreditable course.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that as Parliament had resolved by a very large majority to attempt the settlement of the Tithe question with- out the principle of Appropriation, be would not enter into that topic. Mr. Hume bad charged him with inconsistency; but he maintained, that on this matter of the million loan at least, he had been consistent. Though not expecting repayment of the money, be had voted in favour of the loan of 640,000/. ; and where was the inconsistency between that vote and his support of a plan for making over that and an addi- tional sum to the Irish tithe-owners ? To collect the arrears of tithe for which the 640,000/. was advanced, would be utterly impossible; and in the way of collecting the arrears which bad since accrued there were immense difficulties. To overcome these difficulties, so as not to compel the clergy to have recourse to legal proceedings to recover their dues, and at the same time not to give Parliamentary sanction to the refusal to pay, by preventing the clergy from using the law, he had pro- posed a scheme, which gave the tithe-owners the option of attempting the recovery of their debts, or of accepting a composition in lieu of the arrears. But he hould vote for the resolution as it stood ; though he felt considerable difficulty in pledging himself to support the details of the plan by which it must be put in execution—

If the noble lord asked him whether he would, on the part of the Church, with the understanding that the sum of 260,000/. should be applied as a per- centage, payable on account of the amnia due within the last two years, con- sent to a law which should deprive the clergy of all right to recover the whole of what was due to them ; although he might doubt whether such a proposi- tion, if acceded to, would not give a pecuniary benefit, yet he did thiuk that the principle which it involved was so dangerous, that he felt bound to de- clare that he should prefer leaving the clergy the power which they possessed under their present legal remedy—truatiog to the natural interest and inclina- tion of the Government to enforce the law—than sanction an absolute re- mission of all the arrears in lieu of a sum so limited as 260,000!.

Mr. HARVEY considered it especially incumbent on Members who disapproved of the Government scheme, to express their disapproba- tion, because Lord John Russell had justified his support of the scheme on the ground of the universality of its adoption. It was called for by Sir Robert Peel on one side of the House, and Mr. O'Connell on the other ; and Lord John thereupon declared that he knew no principle more just and constitutional than to recognize the voice of the People, unanimously expressed by their Representatives, as the basis of sound legislation. He wished Lord John would pur- sue the same course on intimations less open to suspicion ; at the same time, to quote the old adage, he would "give the Devil his due :" the Ministers were not, Sir Robert Peel was, the author of the mischief. He was the originator of the plan, from the consequences of which he seemed to be preparing a retreat for himself. It was impossible to Listen to the speeches delivered on this subject without coming to the conclusion, that instead of an adjustment of Irish differences, the House was only on the threshold of difficulty. For what was the pro- position?—

That a sum of 260,0001., the alleged balance of the million loan, should be placed in the hands of unpaid mai to a great degreee irresponsible Commis- sioaers, to be doled out to those persons whose tithes were in arrear for the years 1836 and 1837, at the same time that it is intimated that sonic allowance should be made for those who had arrears remaining unpaid for the years 1834 and 1833. That advertisement must bring before the Commission, whoever corn- posed it and wherever it sat, pretty much the same accounts as resulted from the advertisement which was announced in the year 1833, and which proclaimed to all persons, lay and ecclesiastical, who had arrears of tithes due for the years 1831, 1832, and 1833, however contingent or doubtful their demands, and

whatever unsettled accounts there might be between debtor and creditor, that they should bring in every claim they could, because the House of Commons, in the fruition of its benevolence, had issued a million of money to be scrambled for in the city of Dublin. (Laughter.) And what was the result of that proclama- tion? Why, that something more than a million of money was required, not in pounda only, but often to the uttermost farthing. Noble lords, right reverend deans, and right reverend fathers in God, all sent in claims, sonic for one year,

some for two years, and some for three years ; amounting in many instances to pence and farthings. Well, then, when all that could be heaped into the bureau of that Commission was so expended, was there any fair ground for supposing

that it would be otherwise in the present case? Why, the amount to be met must

be much larger ; because up to 1833 there might have been the impression that agitation might do mischief to the object of the parties who resisted tithes ; and, at all events, it only tended to keep alive the hope that it would ultimately prove triumphant : but since that year, an intimation had been given from the highest quarter, that all tithes were to be extinguished ; and, accordingly, no tithes had been paid. If, therefore, in the years 1831, 1832, and 1833, they

found a million of tithes in arrear, was there any thing unjust in the inference, that for the years 1e35, 1836, 1837, and 1838, they would have ultimately to

vote, us a provision for arrears, a million and a halt? Ile said 1838, for this reason, because as they were now legislating precisely at the same period as that at which they had provided in 1833 for the arrears of that year, it was not too much to suppose that, as tithe.owners had taken credit for arrears in the former period before they were due, they would pursue the same course now when the circumstances were similar.

He for one did not understand how justice to Ireland could be based on injustice to England

Nor could be suppose that the Representatives of Ireland would be guilty of such low and filthy meanness as to intimate their readiness to take money simply because it was offered to them. They might as well say that it was the act of an honest man if a turnpike-keeper had kept a halfsovereign instead of a six- pence, and when he was detected, pleaded as an excuse that he was not asked fin change. That was a speciee of vulgar legislation against which be pro-

tested, and to which Le was sure the Irish Representatives would not be fouled willing to subscribe.

He maintained that the money could be collected from the part's* who had borrowed it. The law gave a remedy which might be en. forced. He would ask Lord Morpeth, whether he had attempted to recover the money since 1834? ( Here there was much interruption la the House.) Mr. Harvey continued— He knew very well he was addressing many gentlemen who had received this money ; and he was also perfectly aware that the principle a the measure was one which many English Members would be glad to have carried into opt. ration in this country ; because it would be a very convenient thing if land. lords and tithe-owners, not finding their demands supplied with the prompt'. tude which their wants suggested, were to have some device for clearing od their arrears by way of a loan, to be repaid in five instalment., and then, by a juggling between all parties, agreed to be remitted altogether. He therefore admitted that he was addressing an unwilling audience ; but that should not prevent him from saying that the people of this country were almost sick with the cry of " justice to Ireland," when It was found ta iesolve itself into this— that they should pay their tithes and rent (for that would be the next demand) to the landlords of Ireland. (Cheers.)

The money had been obtained on false pretences. Lord Althorp had said that the million ought not to be voted unless there was a res. sonable expectation of its recovery ; and Mr. Littleton assured the House, that it would be practicable and easy to obtain repayment of the loans. But now it appeared that the money could not be recovered. It would, however, purchase tranquillity in Ireland : that was Lord John Russell's suggestion ; and to whom did he turn for confirmation of the delightful assurance ?- Why, he turned to the Representatives of Ireland,. be turned to the Repis. sentatwe of all Ireland. And what did he say ? Why this—" We are reedy to take your money, if it was double the amouut ; and we should have no oh.

jection If the charges were double the amount, provided they were defrayed for the benefit of our country at your expense. This is practical justice to Ireland. ( Cheers and laughter.) But when you fancy that you purchase pens,

do not suppose that we are tube insulted. We are ready to take your money; but we want to be disburdened of a church of hideous magnitude, not as duties, but in point of resources, and from which we dissent in doctrine, disci.

pline and worship ; and we shall never be satisfied, give us what you may... a million this year, or two the next, advancing by millions as your cowardice increases—( Opposition cheers)— until you have stripped the Church of la gorgeous revenues, and placed it on such a footing as is consistent with the rights of a free people in matters of religion.'" (Cheers.)

Did the Opposition, who in the last century bud provoked a rebel. lion in Ireland and fertilized her soil with the blood of her soot, believe that now, when she felt her great power, Ireland would be bribed by a few instalments and the addition of some arrears ?— Was this British legislation? was this the school of statesmen? Were they to be told that no man was fit to govern this country but one of large posse. shins, of sounding titles, and hereditary connexions ; and that those who hid common understandings and fair attainments were unfit to enter the cabinet of great men, who, let thent do what they would, let them make what blunder they might, found an easy remedy in the state bribery which now seemed to be considered a panacea for all evils ? Why not come at once to the bump of the grievances which afflicted Ireland, distracted both countries, and inter. rupted the useful flow of quiet and valuable legislation? It was because they would keep up—but with all their efforts they could not long succeed—a Pro. testant Church with only 600,000 members within its bosom, whilst those who profess an opposite and different faith amounted to nearly 8,000,000. That was a gross monstrosity which could not long exist.

Who were the persons who had received the money voted by Par. liament? Of 1260 persons, it appeared from the returns that only 460 were resident clergymen— Who were the other people? Many of them Peers of the realm, with their 30,000/. and 40,0001. a year; many of them large landed proprietors, with their 1C,000/. and 20,000/. a year : all these persons had taken advantage of the advance of 1,000,0001., and yet the money returned did not amount n 4,000/. The fact was, that no attempt had been made on the part of the 6o. vernment to recover any portion of this money. If any such attempt had beer made, what reason on earth was there why 300,0001. or 400,000/. should not have been recovered. Ile repeated, that it was most disgraceful and sends bus, first, under false pretences, to obtain this money, and then' under another

pretence, to keep it He maintained, too, that this prodigal expenditure of the money of the people of England would not give peace to Ireland, but would merely serve to foster discontent and encourage resistance to the law.

Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN supported the Ministerial resolution.

Mr. GROTE protested against this large additional charge upon the revenue without the prospect or pretence that it would secure any per. manent advantage to Ireland. He had not intended to take any pan in the discussion of the Irish Church question for, since the abandon. ment of the Appropriation principle, he took little interest in it ; bet Lord John Russell's proposition was so monstrous and mischievout that he could not abstain from saying a few words against it. Su Robert Peel might well exult when he saw the Whig Ministers It 1838 bring forward a measure based on his own bill of 1835— He recollected the rematks of Sir Robert Peel in 1834, referring to the the intended measure of the Government of that day—that of all time vulgar error, of a Government, that of trying to solve every difficulty in which it might fini itself by dipping its bands into the pockets of the public was the meanest as most contemptible, and was always Indicative of great weakness in the Govert ment which had recourse to it. Never was that remark more applicable the to the measure now before the House. The Government found a difficulty': carrying outs tithe measure, and they tried to get aid of that difficulty byi fresh demand on the pockets of the people. But would that demand, dee. red, get rid of the whole difficulty? He rather thought the greater part uf: would still remain. The clergy might relinquish their claim to the arrears de to them ; but these arrears would not be extinguished. The Governme might still claim them. Had the advance of 640,000/. produced a remission:, the arrears? The clergyman might still claim, unless his claim was bailed 'tf the act of the Legislature, lie certainly thought it a strange argument to 04 that because 640,000/. bad been advanced on a former occasion, they 'boa now advance a further sum of 260,000/. What a lesson was here taught to du people of Ireland—whether of those obedient to, or those disobedient CO lit law ! Was there not thusheld out an encouragement to those who resisted law? Let him ask the supporters of this measure, on what principle it wo, that they proposed to pay up a part and leave the rest unliquidated? Woo' this give satisfaction to all parties? He was sure it would not. " The odic lord's attempt to settle the Irish Church question without the Appropriatis clause, is discreditable enough; but the addition of this grant makes at it.' worse," Lord Joint RUSSELL admitted that great difficulties lay in the way of the settlement of this question ; but he was not prepared to admit that it was discreditable to apply his mind in the best way lie could to the difficulties of Ireland in 1838—to attempt the best solution of those difficulties—and to look to the peace and prosperity of Ireland as his chief guide with respect to this question. Instead, therefore, of reply. jog' t length to some of the objections which had been raised by Mr. et.Sntle, lie would direct himself to the observations which Sir Robert ps.ei had made. Lord .1bI1in proceeded to contend, that his phut was preferable to Sir Robert Peel's ; mainly on the ground that the latter Would leave open the question of arrears, whereas the Government scheme would erevent C winued litigation, by compelling the tithe. oweer to take the sum offered. Were the proportion which the yt.riitluriit would be enabled to offer only fifty or sixty per vent., the

tithe swnsr who thought be could recover seventy or eighty per cent., 'mail I prefer recourse to legal proceedings, and thus irritation would be in lefieitcly prolonged. The Guvernment plan went to extinguish ths ri:ht to arrears' where's s Sir Robert Peel's tlid hot; and therefore

be ci n red the former far preferable. Ile was aware that ()Nee- tii no in ght be raised to his proposal ; and so they would to any other, met: al y by so able and eloquent a Member as Mr. Harvey, who was not responsible for auy plan he might himself propose. Much as lie admired Sir. Harvey's ability, Lord John considered him an unsafe guide to follow. Mush stress had been laid by Mr. Grote on Sir Robert Peel's protest, so popular in the House, against solving poli- tical difficulties by dipping into the public purse ; but Sir Robert himself was not rcmaikable for adhering in practice to the principle be laid down. Ile had proposed to relinquish the whole million to the Irish tithe owners, also a large grant to the Church of Scotlatd, and to r), i chmelwates out of the Consolidated Fund. Lord John then re- cried to Mr. Ward's recommendation to give up the Tithe Bill, since they had no hope of obtaioing a good Municipal Bill—

No doubt, it was a very easy course to recommend, the giving up of the Tithe Bill on the ground that they could not obtain all they required or the rejecting the Municipal Bill, when it should be returned to them by the other House of Pat liament, on the ground that it was not that which had been origi- flu y propo.ed. But he did not see that which Ile thought lie ought to see be. fire he could agree with the honourable gentleman, namely, that he should he

able either the next year, or the following year, to say that he could promise to carry measures for Ireland that would be more beneficial than those he should reject in the pre,, n year. He thought he was bound to consider, both with respect to this Intl and with respect to any other measures relating to Ireland, what were those measures winch they were likely to be able to carry, a,„1 whether the effect of theta would be the improvement of the ptebent ven-

dee's o! the attain; of !related. If it would,—if they would improve that ceenoly,—if they would not make things worse, nor even leaving them in their present bad state,— he certainly for one should corsider himself en-

titled to adopt and to assist in such legislation. (Cheers.) He did not think it would he Lit duty to Call.). 01. the contest either in the House of Commons, or between that llotie and the other House of Parliament, with respect to measstes relating to Ireland, unlyss he saw that by some Imam or other he was likely to improve by delay the condition of the affairs of that country, or the mama,' which he slain Iii be able thereafter to carry. Ile had no doubt, in. deed, that he &fried with Mr. AVard on this point ; he lad no iliubt that Ilt. Gime would elm tiler the course he this took a wrong one. But it did kool to him, th it lid pie-tins engaged in govetning a country, their that ditty was t eomider the situati n mid the interests of that roundly ; iiod it their duty even to bear pet mond reproach, if by so heating reproach the condition of that country might be improved, rather titan that, by slit inking hack in oiler not to incur teproach, the routlition of the country might he made worse. ((heers.) !laving that opinion of his duty, rather than entertainiog the view taken by Mr. Ward, he should endeavour to the utmost of his power to im- prove the measures which had been brought forwaid ; and while putting them IS the best practicable shape, he should endeavour to reconcile himself to their adoption, rather than seek for reasons that might justify their rejection. (Cheers.) 3Ir. WituaritToN considered that the tithe revenue was in fact abandoned, when Parliament offered a premium for resistance to the payment of it. This being the case, he would at once tell the public so- • Let the Government say, "If you mean to support the clergy of the Church in heland, you must put the charge for their support in the Budget ;" and then the people of England might be plainly asked whether they were willing o grant a vote for the support of the Irish clergy. That weuld be dealing rally with the people of England.

Lord HOWICK believed now, as heretofore, that the difficulty of the question arose from the natural hostility of the great bulk of the Irish people to the support of the Church of the small minority. In their situation, he should most strongly entertain the same objection. It was the purpose for which tithes were collected, and not the amount, which constituted the evil. 1"he Irish people had only claimed what he considered their clear and undoubted right. With them it was not only a question of substantial interests, but a feeling of wounded pride and Irritated honour. Ile supported the present proposition to get rid of the immediate bitterness of the dispute and to postpone the struggle as to whether the Church in Ireland should exist or not. During the last three years, men's minds had become so much irrituted on this question, that it was perfectly visionary to suppose that the grant of 50,000/. a year for education would now have the effect formerly anticipated from it. He foresaw, and he deeply deplored it, that a far more difficult, a far larger question with respect to the Irish Establishment, would come some day or other to be agitated in that House. That gave the real importance to the Appropriation-clause. He did think that practical good hod flowed from the resolutions of 1833, inasmuch as they had proved to the people of Ireland that the Government of this country sympa- thized with them. He fully admitted that to the preeent plan there were great objections; but be supported it because he thought that the adjournment of great differences was tnost desirable. By the present measure, the great question of Irish Tithes would not be settled, only adjourned; and he could not expect the people of Ireland to be satis- fied while forced to maintain a Church which in some districts alien. ated 95 per cent, of the people. Mr. HAVES said, it appeared from Lord Howick's speech that the question was whether they should vote a million of tnoney for the purpose of merely adjourning the Irish Church question ; and he up- pealed to the English and Scotch Members whether they would con- sent to the grant on that ground? They were told that though their money would be taken, the Irish would not cease to agitate for the an. nihilatien of tithes. Now he could not concur in the morality of Mr. O'Colinell, who had said this. Their money was to he taken, but would not have the effect it was intended to produce. Why then pus this, the tnost profligate IntitRlIre that ever was adopted ?- It WAS only by the aid of a large military force that the Irish Church WAS tioW tiplo,i11; and he let3,4 say, that lie eonsidered a church thug supported not to he the choler!' of Christ, hut the church of bayonets. (" !fear, hear I ") He understood flout the trible lord, that the polies; of the Goverument was to be changed—that the Irish polc niss to lie nior'e pliable than It hitherto had been ; and he winch re:iroteit it.' lic thought that in the Appropriation-clause lie sviis strti:.T.ling far p, god ple which. tvhen engrafted on the minds of the

people, wouhl have hi pr,:ctival result ; and therefore he regretted that the noble hod hail not urn the lit es,int oceasion adopted an honest and straight- fin ward coulse of poliey. (•• Iliac, hear I ")

He would net suppott Nlinisters merely as one party struggling agaiest another ; Ice would support them only when they were really strivieg for a clear :aid rrietical el mrse of government. from which the country might flerive clear, praetical, and intelligible advanteges.

Lord :lows Ilt's,,Edt. did nut see why Mr. Hawes should use such harsh expressions. when the totestion was not whether the Appropria- tion principle shonlil be au indimvii, hut whether it should be engrafted on this bill. Sir 'Ebonies Aclature motion had givett him an opportu- nity of reatrandeg bis °pillions with respect to the Appropriation principle.

Mr. LANGDALE opposed the Ministerial plan, because it would only temporarily heal a o ound cc lath would hereafter break out worse.

Sir Beesastis: HALL, amidA much interruption, opposed the reso- lution.

Mr. VILLIERS, acknowledging a large debt to Ireland for her long misgovernment by Englinol, would willingly vote a much larger sum than a million for a pernotnent hash; of is settlement of her wrongs. But in the total uhsence of all hope of this kind, he would oppose the misapproprietion of the public money—

If the vote hail been pr

distribution, what lie: :me of the plea l'he a hole question turned upon this— hail any honourable :Member ventured to state that the destination was not what was objerted to? And when that was the ground for resisting the pay- ment of the al rents whieh woe due, he would ask whether England ought to be called upon to pay them ? The bill in no way provided for the better manapernent or disposition of the tithes, and them etore he objected to it. And what answer could they give to the people of England why they voted away the etiossea. is tillition to the 640 0001. already lent, without a prospect of bene- thing It el and, or of relieving her from any of' her grievauces ? Was not every education of the people—W.1S ha a heater ineatis iit internal communication— species of reform in England stopped for the want of ni iy ? Was not the was not an miitorni tutu of post—oll stopped because they could nut 100.000/. ? And et they were now cilleil upon to vote away a larger amount of the public Iti(e4 y flit a toeless purples,— a purpose whoih, if he were called

moo', Ii vii il .r,,' i isone I, r enciowaging in one party resistance to all

: • : Ir:•li toad., and ol!,. to ti rhselny the Ine. t.Catiers. )

1! eil i..■ ": stat:. that his countiymen would

. ,;:liii,10 for the aholition of nss ! • s HO Ont. defehel•- ' ..111•It phifltl.114 III Eogland had done under the ve ¶ cit there was sue!, 4 difro ewe between

t

5.1111.' ':1 the ii1 .;cicoil int II ltd1 cLthuuliicas tll lead tll

a ill. :oet r.. t,.in. Ei:, Ie.:sews had been offered to have the cha, :! .-ohdatcd Fund, hut they had said that they would not all0w ld tins: th, y ue•ted that Church-rates should be alto- gether abolished. Bur, if they Itail adopttal the Irish suggestion, they ndght have taken the money flout the public fund alai still have coutinued to agitate

for the abolition of the rates. (..• Hear, ! ") And he was bore that the English peeple would ermaider it a dangelous aial serious violation of the secu- rity of ptoperty, and of the principles of justice, if they sanctioned this arbi- trary resistance to the law.

Mr. O'Coestast, said, be had never heard a more unfounded attack than that made by Mr. Villiers on the people of Ireland. He would prove that the uttack was unfounded, on Mr. Villiers's own principles. The people of Ireland did not insist upon the people of England paying Church-rates, and therefore it would be most unjust to charge

them with the payment of Churelerates ; but on tlie other hand, the people of Englund, did insist upon the people of Ireland supporting a Protestant Church—

Ile appealed to honourable gentlemen on the other side, whether the people of England had not sent a great majmity of Members there pledged to support

the Protestant Church in Ireland. He thought they mere wrong in doing so.

Honourable gentlemen opposite thought that the Englibh people were right. There was no disputing the fact. Then what did it come to? The people of England sent their representatives there to insist that an overwhelming ma- jority of Irishmen—that 6,500,000 men should pay tithes for the benefit merely of 600,000 persons. Was not this the fact—the admitted fact ? And ought not, then, the people of Eugland to pay for that? (('heers and laughter.) Ile turned then as to the morality of the thing, and asked 31r. Villiers what morality or what justice could there be in the people of England sending a ma- jority of Members there to secure that the Church of the few should be sup- ported by the many, and then rt foiling, when they were called upon, to pay for that which they themselves had wished for. The Church of the few in Ireland was an English luxury at the expense of Ireland, and it was only fair that a little of the expense should now be borne by England. Ile then turned round upon them, and asked them if the people of Ireland were bttong enough to maintain the Catholic Chttich in this country, and to appropriate to it all the revenues, tithes, and wealth now possessed by the Established Church—If the Irish were strong enough to do this, and to send bayonets into this country to uphold the Choi eh, its the honourable Member for Lambeth had called the Irish establishineut " the elturch of b 'youths "—and if they made the English Protestants pay tithea to the Roman Catholics, they being the one-sixteenth of the population of England—then he said that nothing could be more just than that the people of Ireland bhuuld pay for compelling the people of England to contribute to the Church of the minority.

He did not say that the remedy proposed would be a radical one; but surely the people of England should contribute some of their wealth to soften the evil that oppressed Ireland—

The enormous grievance of the tithe question was, that it compelled the n:ne•teuthe to pay for the support of the Church of the one•teoth. That was the evil, that the original sin, that the original injustice ; and it was to that they ought to apply the proper remedies. Seven millions of Catholics and Dissenters paid for the Church of one million—nay, not for so many, as the members of the Established Church did not exceed 800,000. They might so far degrade the Irish that they could extinguish their resistance for a time, U they had done, when they had abominably violated the treaty of Limerick. After 1759, not less than seventy-four capital felonies had been placed on the statute.book for resistance to tithes. For the forty years following, during the Irish Parliament, the resistance to tithes continued ; and now for thirty eight years, since the Union, it hail been persevered in. It had lulled for a time. They might attempt to put it down by brute force ; but it would rise again. Both sides were agreed that they ought to put an end to the exieting state of things. At least they ought now to attempt the expet intent. But how were they to go on with it, if they were to leave the arreare to be collected ? In that ease, it would be impossible for them to succeed ; anti he did not say they would succeed, even if they paid the arrears; for the original injustice remained.

The Ministry were taunted with not currying out the Appropriation principle; but what chalice had they of carrying it further than they had done ?— No delusion, in his opinion, could be greater than that which would tell the people of Ireland that the Ministry could catty the Appropriation principle. He desired that the present experiment should be made feirly. It might he said that a large sum was asked for ; but if not granted, would they not have to pay a larger sum for the maintenence of the Army and Artillery in Ireland ? f hey must have a system of force, or of conciliation; and that of conciliation would require the smaller sacrifice from them. Were they determine.' by force to compel the people of Ireland to eubinit to the exaction in its ureeent form ? He hoped not. Were they prepared to refuse the bill ? He did not think so. Were they resolved upon refusing the grant ? He did not suppose so. But then, if they had faith in their own nostrum, to make the experiment by conciliation, at length they ought tech) so, and for the first time in Ireland.

The Committee divided—

For Mr. flume's amendment 61 Against it 170 Majority 109

The main question was put, and agreed to, and the Committee rose.

IRISII CORPORATIONS.

Lord AIELBOURNE, on Tuesday, moved the Lords to receive the re- port on the Irish Corporation Reform Bill. The amendments already made and to be proposed by Lord Lyndhurst, were eery important— many of them complicated and technical; and during the short time allowed for their consideration, it bad been impossible for himself and the Lord Chancellor to form any decided opinion respecting some of those amendments. If, however, they should be all adopted, be would slot abandon the measure. His greatest objection to the bill, as it stood, was the high qualification it required_ They all well knew that the actual value of a tenement was far beyond the value at which it was rated. He bad seen statements that in Belfast, Dublin, Limericle, and other towns, this rule was borne out, and that the actual value was far beyond the rated value. Such, he apprehended, ti as the CZAbe every. where; such, he apprehended, always would be the case; such it was in Eng- land, such it was in Ireland ; and unquestionably the probability would Ina that for a ten-pouud rate the real value of the house would be te (dee poilude, or et thirteen pounds, or even fifteen pounds a year. It was evident, therefore, that the proposed qualification would he a great deal higher than the qualifica- tion in this country ; anti he feared that the governing Itojies in the new corpo- rations would not be niueli less exclusive than those ohich they at present pos- sessed. Ile thought that the intention of the Legielatuie would tint be answered; that the measure would not be satisfactory ; and that the corpora- tions would not answer the cud for which they were established, of giving to the towns a regulAr municipal government, based upon popular election, and in. eluding in the sphere of their operation those persona in the town who were generally respectable, and who ought to have a share in the local government. He believed that their Lordships, in the amendment which they bad intio- duced, had acted upon the supposition that a high qualification would assist those principles which were generally called Coneervative, lie did not exactly know the ground on which their Lordships bad ferule(' this opinion, or had come to the conclusion; but he knew that already a similar experiment had been made in Ireland, when the Parliamentary franchise in the counties was raised from forty shillings to ten pounds; and, making all allowalice for the manner in which this qualification might have been lowered by the perjury which it was said had been committed, and for the false valuations which it was said had been palmed upon the Revising Barristers, still it was impossible to deny that the consequence had been the raising of the franchise; and he begged their Lordships to consider well, whether the effect hal been to produce the good which had been anticipated—whether the effect hind been to strengthen those principles which it was their Lordships' wish to strengthen—and whether there was any reason to anticipate any different operation in the towns from a similar measure. He begged to say that lie still disagreed in the amendments; be still thought them objectionable he thought that they would counteract many of the advantages of the bill, that they would be obnoxious to its good working, and that they would probably prevent its being ultimately satisfac- tory : but at the same time, as those amendments had been distinctly advised, and bad been supported by a large majoiity of that House, it was not his mien. lion to stir up the question, to propose any other amendments, or to take the "me of their Lordships again upon the subject; but on the third reading, he would propose the addition of certain towns in schedule A, and also the forma- tion of another schedule of other towns to withal municipal government should be given by the bill, with a lower rate of qualification than was now proposed ; and, except these alterations on the third reading, he would offer no further obstacle to the passiug of the bill.

Lord BROUGHAM confessed that Lord Lyndhurst's amendments had greatly disappointed him. He did think that the towns in schedule B were too numerous—that by granting corporations to all they would be going too low ; but by striking out all the towns in that schedule, they were going too far. The natural line was to give corporations to sill the Parliamentary boroughs. But he had a more serious objection to the qualification. Lord Lyndhurst would include in the ten pounds the landlord's repairs and insurance : he held out, that not a ten-pound house, but one of lower value, would be accepted—perhaps an eight. pound house— Lord LYNDHURST—" By no means ; quite the contrary." He meant only a house which was let for ten pounds bowl fide the tenant paying those taxes which usually fell upon the tenant, and were paid by him.

Lord BROUGHAM said, that be wished especially to caution noble lords from supposing that what was applicable to England was appli- cable in the same degree to Ireland—

be test proposed might, for aught be knew, be excellent in England; but

eitcumstances were different in Ireland. How little effect would repairseed insurance have in raising the value in Ireland? Whoever thought that a tee, pound-tenement would cost much to keep it in repair ? Whoever heard a, landlord in Ireland npairing such a tenement? In the next place, who would lei out much upon its insurance ? But if he did, it was not likely that it would cost more than 2s. tid. per cent. ; and supposing that a ten. pound house was worth 200) the insurance would only be 5s. a year. The fact was, however, that in Ire: land.the rate was only Is. 6d. per cent.,—another instance of a mnst politic tax in England ; and the consequence would be that they would find the qualification to be a very high one, and that it would not be a rated value ef eight pounds, but a real value of more than thirteen pounds or fourteen pounds. But what he wanted to know, and what he could not understand, was win, there WA any qualification? There was none in England, where it was eel; required that the householder should be rated for a certain length of time. le Scotland there was a ten-pound franchise, he admitted ; but why was it neees. stay there? Because there was no rate as a test, and it was considered da suable to establish the same Parliamentary and Municipal qualification topm, vent a double registry. But that was not the case in England ; no qualifice. tiou was nectoaaly here, from the large cities down to the smallest townie being a householder for a certain length of time was sufficient, and every holder of a house hail a right to vote. They had tried the experiment, they had found the result; theme haul been no riot, no confusion; there had been no annoy. once to one class more than another ; there had been no partiality shown ea one class over another ; for although under the excitement of the first election, as under the Reform Bill, one class had been preferred, yet the distinction had become less and less; in Liverpool and other towns, a large proper. lion of the Couneillors included in the new elections, he believed nearly one. half, were of opposite politics. Ile thought that this good working of the . system ought to be well considered and to be freely taken into account frioniug the lush measure. These opinions led hint to think that they ought - to have adhered to the bill as it was sent from the Cumulous.

As, however, Lord Melbourne did not think it necessary at that stage to propose amendments, Lord Brougham would not trouble theit Lordships with attempts to introduce alterations.

Lord HATHERTON thought that Lord Lyndhurst had taken a cum. brous and inconvenient method of obtaining his object ; but his chief objection to the amendment was, that to a certainty a higher qualifies. tion would be established in Ireland than in England. In proof of this assertion, Lord Hatberton referred to statistical details, which showed that in England the Municipal constituency exceeded the Parliamentary constituency, in places where there were no freemen, from one to two hundred per cent. He considered it foolish, unjust, and shameful, to establish a higher qualification in Ireland than in England ; and there- fore cordially dissented from Lord Lyndhurst's amendment.

The report was received ; and the third reading fixed for Friday the 27th instant.

JUVENILE OFFENDERS.

1

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE, on Tuesday, moved the committal of the bill for the trial of juvenile offenders. He regretted to state, that there was an increase of juvenile offences in every country in Europe, but especially in England— Of course it became a serious question, to what such a state of things could be attributed ; and it was the bounden duty of the Legislature to adopt such measures as appeared best calculated to remedy the evil. It appeared from a return he held In his band, that the number of children who were abandoned ne lost in Manchester during a period of four years, was as follows—in 1832, 1,934; in 1833, 2,140; in 1834, 2,117 ; in 1835, 2,439. Of course, the con. sequence of abandonment by the parents would naturally be a great increase of criminality amongst children of a tender age. In the course of the last two yens, the numbet of children under sixteen years of age who had been committed to prison was 5,174 males and 1,273 females; giving an average of 2,57 males and 637 females. One of the great faults of the existing system was, that however well adapted the prisons might be for the adult offenders, they did not afford the means of treating juvenile offenders in the way best calculated to effect this reformation. (" Hear, hear ! " from Lord Lyndhurst.) It had long been the desire anti intention of the Queen's Government to make an espe. cial piovision for offenders of the latter class: indeed, the subject had claimed the particular attention of the noble lord at the head of the Home Department. Great pains had been taken to find a suitable site for a prison, and in forming a plan for its erection, such as would allow of the adoption of an improved eye. teat, reforming and educational, as well as penal. He trusted that if their Lordships passed the bill now before them, but a short time would elapse before a great change for the better would be observable. It was proposed that the prison should be erected in the Isle of Wight. Another feature of the new Byte tent was, that when the term of imprisonment had expired, the children were not to be be turned out upon society without some provision having been made for them. There existed in this country two admirable institutions, one called the Refuge fur the Destitute, and the other the Children's Friend Society. These valuable bodies had not had the means of effecting all the good which was intended by their benevolent founders, but with their limited resources they had effected a great deal. Though it was not possible to trust them with the execution of a penal sentence, not having the means of enforcing it, never- theless they were bodies to whom he thought might be intrusted with great ad- vantage to society those who had undergoue the full sentence of the law, .or whose sentence had been mitigated: such persons, he thought, might be me trusted to them, to be fitted for those vat ious pursuits—for the colonies, for ex- ample, or for improvement in any of the mechanical arts—for which they might be found peculiarly suited.

The House went into Committee. The only alteration was made on the Duke of Richmond's motion, that the Chaplain should not have the cure of souls elsewhere, but should be sufficiently remunerated to enable him to devote all his time to the instruction of the prisoners. The Duke said, that the bill, if it did nothing else, would effect much good by the abolition of that "worst of abominations the hulks." The report will be received next Tuesday.

NEGRO APPRENTICESHIP.

Lord BROUGHAM, on Monday, presented an immense number of petitions from various parts of the country in favour of the entire aim. lition of Negro slavery in the British Colonies. He proceeded to re- late, with extreme satisfaction, the steps which had been taken by many of the West India Colonies for the entire abolition of the Ap- prenticeship system. Even in Jamaica, as he had been informed,' bill had passed through the House of Assembly for terminating the Apprenticeship on the 1st of August. Altogether, no fewer than 315,000 Negroes, besides non.prredials and children, would be enema. pated by the acts of the Colonial Legislatures. But the unchartered, or Crown colonies, had it not in their power to follow this glorious ea` ample— The Crown was to them what the House of Assembly and the Legislative Council were to Jamaica and Batmadoea. Having no Legislature, they could 32t 0 , even if they would, follow the example which had been set them by some of the other colonies. Let their Lordships only look to the state of Guiana, 'Trinidad, St. Lucia, and Mauritius. Lie said nothing of the Cape, where since the lot of September the slaves had been emancipated by law. Were the slaves of Guiana, and the other colonies which he had named, less fitted for the recep- tion of freedom than those of Jamaica, Barbadoes, and Antigua? Was the lot of the slave under the tropical sun of the Mauritius, or in those other islands which were not blessed with the healthiest climates, one whit lighter than in Jamaica or in Antigua, where they enjoyed all manner of comfurts? Quite the reverse. It was in the savannahs of Trinidad and upon the alluvial soil of Guiana that human life was most prodigally wasted, in ministering to Euro- pea n avarice •' and it was there that it behoved the Mother Country to interpose to put a $101) to the inhuman deaths, to the diseases which were felt to be more cruel than death, to the fatal contamination which the necessity of labouring on those fatally unwholesome plains inflicted on those wretched victims of our

pride. He concluded by moving an address to the Queen praying her Majesty to issue an Order in Council to put an end to Negro Appren- ticeship in the Unchartered Colonies of the Crown.

Lord GLENELG replied at length but the only material point in his speech was that the Governors of the Crown Colonies, in compliance with directions from himself, would propose to the various Legislative Bodies measures for the speedy emancipation of the Negroes ; and that there was a better prospect of the desired effect being produced in this way, than by a direct interference of the Crown, at the instance of Par- liament. There would be no delay respecting the operation of acts passed in the Colonies, as he would send out a despatch to obviate the difficulty.

Lord BROUGHAM, after reminding Lord Glenelg that it was not to the Government, but to the people of England, that the abolition of the apprenticeship in the West Indies was due, proceeded to direct attention to the traffic in Hill Coolies, and the circular of the Calcutta shippers of the Indian labourers he hoped before the session closed an act would be passed to suppress the trade in Hill Coolies. Lord Brougham also mentioned that the slave-trade was largely carried on tinder the flag of Russia. He had a letter from Havannah, stating that on the 13th of March a Russian vessel had landed 354 slaves in Cuba, and that four other Russian vessels with slaves were daily ex- pected.

Lord Brougham's motion was withdrawn.

RECOVERY OF TENEMENTS.

Mr. AGLIONBY, on Wednesday, moved the further consideration of the report on the bill "to facilitate the recovery of possession of tene- ments after due determination of the tenancy."

Sir EDWARD SuoDEsr wished the bill to be postponed till next session.

Mr. AGLIONBY Was determined to press the bill this session.

Sir EDWARD SUGDF.N Moved to recommit the bill that day three months; and stated his objections to it— The bill drew an invidious distinction between the rich and the poor, and gave the rich vast advantages over the poor. A more iniquitous niii.t.iire. regarded the poor, never had been proposed to that House. 'f he bill is for Turkey, but not at all applicable to the course of justice in this cowl, rv. Hitherto, the pour man could have his title tried by the same tribunal which would decide upon the title of a nchleman's estate, while by this hill his title was to be determined by two Justices of the Peace. He believed the bill !no- ceeded upon a wrong principle, and that, in order to give a summary remedy, it would produce summary injustice.

Mr. AGLIONBY appealed to the House, whether he was a likely per- son to oppress the poor, or legislate in a manner fit only fur Turkey ? He maintained that the measure would be a protection to the poor, and prevent injustice to all parties.

Sir EDWARD SUGDEN'S amendment was rejected, by 112 to 7; and the House proceeded to the consideration of the clauses.

On the first clause being proposed, Sir ROBERT PEEL Moved an amendment which would extend the operation of the bill from tenan- cies of 10/. to those of 20/. a year.

After some discussion, very imperfectly reported, the amendment was agreed to by Mr. AGLIONBY, being in accordance with the bill as he had originally introduced it.

The other clauses were then passed without opposition.

MISCELLANEOUS.

THE BENEFICES PLURALITY BILL passed through a Committee of the Lords, on Monday.

LORD DURHAM'S APPOINTMENTS. Lord WINCIIILSEA asked Lord MELBOURNE whether Mr. Turton had been recalled ? He also wished for information respecting another rumoured appointment by Lord Durham—,

It had been reported that another individual, who had been imprisoned for three years odaccount of a very grave offence, had left this country with a view to an appointment on the same commission. He was ready to make all suet allowances for the failings of individuals, for the weakness of human nature: he did not mean to say, that in consequence of the unpleasant situation in which individuals might place themselves by improper conduct, they ought never to be allowed to hold any appointment under the Government: but this was, in his mind, a most peculiar case; and he must say, that the situation which was filled by the person to whom he alluded ought not to have been conferred on him, connected as it was with the character of the Sovereign of this country. If the second report to which he hail drawn the attention of Lord Melbourne were fact, then he must say, that two persons had been selected for important situations which they were unfit to fill, and from which they ought to be re- moved. He hoped that the rumour was not true; and to elicit the fact he had put his question to the noble viscount.

Lord MELBOURNE said, he had received no account of the last ap- pointment, and there had been no time to communicate with Lord Durham. It would be inconvenient to state at present the course he should pursue.

In the Commons, Lord Joust RUSSELL stated, in reply to Lord CHANDOS, that he believed Lord Durham had made no new appoint- ment to which a salary was attached. On Tuesday, the Earl of WINCHILSEA asked Lord Melbourne if it were true that Lord Durham had appointed Mr. Edward Gibbon Wakefield to the office of Surveyor-General of Lands ? He also wished to know whether Sir John Colborne had resigned the command of the Army in Canada, and whether Lord Durham had applied for an increase of the military force ?

Lord MELBOURNE had received no information respecting the ap- pointment alluded to ; and to the other questions, Lord Winchilses must himself be aware, it would not be proper to give an answer.

Lord WINCHILSEA could see no impropriety in the questions. The country bad a right to information on matters of such importance, especially as Parliament was about to separate. He pressed for dis- tinct answers.

Lord MELBOURNE would not shrink from giving answers, if the questions were pressed—

As to the first question, he would say he felt certain that that appointment hail not taken place. As regarded Sir John Colborne, that distinguished officer certainly had requested that an arrangement shuuld be made by which he might be relieved from the command of the troops. With respect to tile other question, the Government did not think there was any thing in the present state of affairs in Canada that would require an augmentation of the military forces there.

SUPPLIES TO THE QUEEN Or SPAIN. The Marquis of LONDON- DERRY, on Tuesday, not seeing Lord Minto in his place, begged to ask Lord Melbourne, whether Lord Minos, under Lord Melbourne's correction, had changed his opinion relative to the obligations imposed on this country by the Quadruple Treaty?

Lord MELBOURNE said, that Lord Londonderry had better ask that question when Lord Minto himself was present.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY was sorry for Lord M into's absence, and especially if illness occasioned it. Doubtless he had had enough to make him ill. He was anxious, however, to be informed whether it was true that the Athol was then loading in the Thames with 1,000 stand of arms for the service of time Queen of Spain ; and whether the arms would be delivered before it Was known what would be done by the Spanish Government towards discharging the claiins of the officers of the Legion ?

Lord MELBOURNE said, that a commission was investigating these claims, and that the Government would do all it could to obtain their satisfactory adjustment. It did not follow, however, that Government would change its uniform policy towards Spain.

APPOINTMENT OF ENGLISH MAGISTRATES. A discussion on this subject, which Lord WHARNCLIFFE introduced on a motion he after- wards withdrew, occupied the Lords for some time on Tuesday ; but produced little worth notice, except a statement by Lord Chancellor COTTENHAM, which proved that the appointment of Magistrates by Lords Lieutenant was a practical usurpation, and that as far as political partisanship was concerned, the Lords Lieutenant were as likely to act improperly us the Lord Chancellor.

THE OATHS BILL (which allowed certain parties to give evidence on affirmation, not on oath,) was rejected on Thursday, on the motion for the third reading, by a majority of 32 to 16. Subsequently, Lord WICKLOW introduced another nica•ure, "applicable to those persons who had separated from the Society of Friends and become members of the Church of England, but still retained conscientious objections to taking oaths."

BUSINESS OF THE DOUSE OF COMMONS. It was agreed on Mon- day, on Mr. II ems's motion, that Orders of the Day should have prece- dence of Notices of .Motion oil Tuesdays and Thursdays. Mr. Hume's reason for proposing this new regulation was, that it being the evident determination of the House to avoid discussions on motions, and merely to get through necessary business, there might be the usual op- portunity allowed for performing that duty ; which was not the case whet the morning sittings were short, and the House was counted out in the evenings.

THE ROYAL EXCHANGE REBUILDING BILL was read a third time, by a inajority of 102 to 38, and passed.

THE COAL-TRADE BILL AND THE OLASS.DUTIES BILL were read a third time by the Commons, on Tuesday, and passed.

THE EDINBURGH AND LEITH AGREEMENT BILL passed through the same stages.

THE REGISTRATION OF ELECTORS BILL Was " considered " in Committee. The several clauses were agreed to, after a dry discus- sion, with little alteration.

THE POST-OFFICE Btu. was read a second time, by a majority of 48 to 12. Mr. SPRING RICE said he would du his best to forward the measure, in the House of Commons, whatever might be its fate else- where.

THE SCOTCH SCHOOLS BILL was "reported," after some opposition by Mr. OILLON, who divided the House against it ; the numbers being 37 and 12.

THE VESTRIES IN CHURCHES BILL Was thrown out on Thursday. Dr. Nicitou. moved the order of the day for going into Committee on the bill ; which motion was rejected, by 78 to 76. Dr. Nicholl said that he did not despair of carrying a similar bill next session.

THE PAROCHIAL ASSESSMENT BILI. was "Committed," by a majo- rity of 59 to 31; and the clauses being agreed to, the "report" was ordered to be received on Monday next.

THE MAIDSTONE ELECTION COMMITTEE Was balloted for OR Tuesday ; when the following Members were chosen-

Liberals-4. • Turee —7 ;

Mr. T. Martin, Lord Alford, Mr. Otway Cave, Lord Norreys, Lord Charles Fitzroy, Sir George Hose, Mr. Hoskins, Captain Bolden), Marquis of Douro, Colonel Rushlnoke, Mr. Frederick Hodgson.

The petitioners were Liberal electors of Maidstone against the return of Mr. Fector, the Tory sitting Member:.

On Thursday, Colonel Rushbrooke reported that Mr. Fector was

duly elected, and that the petition was frivolous and vexatious. The petitioners averred that Mr. Fector's qualification vras bad ; but their ease broke down immediately.