13cbatrg anti VrurrettittO fn Varliatnent.

1. DISTRESS OF THE COUNTRY. When the order of the day was read, on Thursday, for the House going into a Committee on the Irish Disturbances Bill,

Mr. THOMAS ATWOOD opposed the motion that the Speaker do leave the chair. He considered it extremely dangerous that the time of the House should be further occupied in discussing a measure which concerned the English people so slightly. He would therefore bring forward his motion for a Select Committee to inquire into the distresses of the country. Nothing, be regretted to say, had been done by the Reformed Parliament, after having been nine weeks in Session, to relieve the distresses of the working classes ; who were not, like the mobility, created for mere ornament, but were the backbone of the nation. The sufferings of these classes were worse now than in 1816 and 1819. The petitions of the people were neglected. The House paid not a single hour's attention to the millions of petitions that were sent to it.

Humble as he was, he would speak the truth, caring little how it was re- ceived by any party. What he wanted was, that the cause of distress should be discovered, and when discovered, a remedy should be applied. One half of the working population toiled with scarcely any benefit to themselves, and an- other half had no employment at all. One half were dying by inches, and the other half were wandering from door to door, claiming charitable relief. The labourer that cultivated the soil, by his labour alone produced one quarter of the produce of it, whilst, with the aid of machinery, he produced four times more of the good things of life than were necessary for himself. Yet his ungrateful country, when he gave bread to four families, refused to him a sufficient quan- tity to support one. At the present time, working-men consumed three quar- ters less flesh-meat than they did at the time of the war.

The.agriculturalinterest, the cotton trade, the shipping business, were all on the brink of ruin.

The shipping of the mighty port of London might be said to be in the hands of the mortgagees. To his knowledge, two thirds of the shipping in that port were mortgaged; and that state of rum was approaching to its final close for the mortgagees were in many instances about to foreclose, and to sell the slips for whatever the/ might fetch. If that was a fact,—and he was ready to prove that it was so,—he thought that of itself made out a case for inquiry. He would then beg them to look to the state of the East and West Indies, and all our other Colonies. They were running rapidly to ruin. Then if they looked at the state of our poor, what would they see? The poors-rates were double what they were fifteen years ago. Double the number of bushels of wheat were paid weekly to them, that was paid at the conclusion of the war ; and it would have been easier for the people of England to pay four times as much to the sup- port of the poor as they actually did pay, than it would be for them now to pay double the amount they then paid. The state of millions in this country was so dreadful that tbeylooked with joy at the death of their neighbours, in the hope that their pro- perty might become their own. The country was divided into two- classes, the affluent and the distressed. The affluent fundholders who had every 601. of capital raised to the value of 90/. were the only pros- perous people. Landed property was deeply mortgaged. Tradesmen were in a state of ruin, and could not pay the taxes. The time was come to inquire into the causes of this state of things-- He thought that the time had then come when they were bound to inquire why, at the end of seventeen years of profound peace, they were in a worse state than after an equal period of war. He attributed it to the change made in the currency ;.and the Government admitted that in that measure they had com- mitted a gigantic error, but said it was now too late to retreat. They admitted that they had brought the country to such a state by that measure, that it would now be ruin to retreat, ruin to go forward, and ruin to stand still. He had said the same thing fifteen years ago, and had foretold them at the same time such would be the result of the change. Even Sir Robert Peel had said that the country was in such a state that it could neither bear the disease nor the remedy for it. After stating that much, it was hardly necessary for him to say that the question was one which required deliberation and inquiry.

The agricultural classes were driven, two years ago, by extreme- misery into open insurrection. The farmer had been compelled to in- crease wages, and by so doing had sunk his capital. The people were reduced to the same state as the murderers employed by Macbeth—" so weary with disasters, and tugged with fortune, that they would set their lives- on any chance to mend them or be rid of them." It was asserted, by the delegates from nine parishes of Westminster, about three months ago, that the trade of the metropolis had been carried on without profit for a series of years. A resolution to the same effect was passed at a large meeting of tradesmen of the Ward of Cheap.

He could state it as a positive fact, which he was ready to prove, that 100,000 persons were then out of employment in the metropolis alone who were willing to work but were unable to get it. Wages had been dimished to such a degree, that the most efficient men were not able to get more than 8s. who formerly earned 13s. That was not sufficient to support the labourer. But man should be allowed to live by his labour. That was one of the great bonds of society, without which, indeed, society could not exist; and it was the duty of Govern- ment to see that it was maintained, or it could not expect obedience from the people.

He then adverted to the dreadful state of Ireland. He attributed the evils of that country, as well as all the misery of England, to Peel's - Bill. The landlords could not reduce rents while they had the interest of mortgages to pay, the amount of which interest was in fact doubled, though it was pretended that it would only be raised four per cent, by the change in the currency. They were therefore forced to press upon the tenant; and the consequence was crime, wretchedness, and emigra- tion. He reminded the House of the vast number of petitions which had been sent up in 1822, 1827, and 1829, and of the little attention which those petitions had received. The whole of the distress com- plained of was intimately connected with the currency question. There would be an end of agitation, if the petitions of the people received proper attention from Ministers and Parliament. It was said that agitation was a profitable trade— He was an agitator, and he would say that he found the calling not profitable in his small way, more than Hampden found it in his large one. It had occasioned him the coolness of friends, the loss of connexions; even the dungeon and the scaffold were placed before his eyes: but he braved all—he felt that he was act- ing justly, and he feared not ; he looked only to the restoration of liberty and to the relief of the distress which afflicted his country.

He concluded by imploring the House to grant the Committee.

Mr. Guam/4 seconded the motion. Inquiry was necessary; for he believed that the House was unacquainted with the overwhelming misery of the lower classes. Was it wonderful that discontent should exist, when in many instances, a man could earn only 5s. 4d. per week, out of which he bed to support himself and family, to educate his chidren, and to pay his rent? The depression of prices generally might be inferred from a reference to one article, denominated Pullicates. In 1814, the price per yard for weaving Pullicates was 9d. ; in 1815, 7d.; • in 1816 (when there was a stagnation of trade), 4d. ; in 1818, 1819, and 1820, 5d.; from 1822 to 1825 the average was 4d. ; in 1826, 21d.; in 1827, 3d.; and now, in 1833, what did the House suppose the workman received ?—why ; being little more than one fourth of what he received in 1814.

He trusted that Ministers would not disdain to institute an inquiry into the causes of the present distress.

Lord ALTHORP was far from thinking that the question should not be discussed, although the time selected by Mr. Attwood for bringing it forward was inconvenient. As for inquiry, he was confident that his own opinion on the currency question, on which he had made up his mind, would be confirmed by it. It was very clear that Mr. Attwood's motion was plainly and directly aimed at the currency. It was very easy to say, as Mr. Attwood had said, that the distress of 1833 was caused by the bill of 1819; but admitting that to be true, what remedy was to be proposed in the Committee for those evils? Mr. Attwood had drawn a shocking picture of the state of the waling classes : he did not, he could not believe it to be a correct one. Ile denied that the labouring classes were in greater distress than they had ever been before.

He believed that there was more employment, more work, at the present time, and consequently less distress, than at many former periods. He felt that with respect to a certain class considerable distress prevailed—he alluded to the hand loom weavers. But the reason of that distress was not to be traced to.the state of the currency, nor to-any thin of that sort, but to the increase of machinery.

In some parts of the country, also, he admitted that great distress prevailed amongst the agricultural labourers; but this was by no means general. Mr. Attwirod had stated, that in consequence of the disturbances of 18t..0, the wages of the agricultural labourers had been raised very high. If ti at were the fact, how was it consistent with the distress of which he had spoken so largely ? There was distress, he admitted ; but that distress had nothing to do with the currency. It arose from other causes—causes to the consideration of which it was, of course, the duty of that House to apply itself.

It was said that tradesmen had been living on their capital for seve- ral years. This assertion disproved itself; for if it were true, trade would soon be annihilated. He thought that the distress 11hich really did exist, would be augmented by granting a Committee. What must be the effect on every in of credit, private as well as public, if a Committee were appointed, and an inquiry made n that House, the purpose of which would evidently be to effect, if possible, a ifepreciation of the currency ? Was there any gentleman in that House, or any gentleman in the country, who owed more money than he could pay on the moment, that would net be affected by such a proceeding? Every man who was not prepared to pay his mortgage next week, every man who was not prepared to pay whatsoever debts he owed immediately, must suffer by it. The consequence of taking such a step was quite clear—every creditor, fearing that the debt due to him would be decreased m value, would immediately and peremptorily enforce his demand. Therefore, he contended that the appointment of such a Committee must necessarily cause a general stagnation of credit.

He concluded by saying, that to return to a depreciatcd currency, would be to inflict the greatest conceivable injustice. He thought it right to state his opinion explicitly on this part. He therefore would oppose the motion.

Mr. Coaarrr would oppose a motion for a Committee to inquire whether the currency should be changed or not ; but he saw no reason to oppose one for inquiry into the distress of the country, and the means of alleviating it, although an alteration in the currency might be pro- posed as one of those means.

Mr. E. L. BULIVER would vote against a Committee, moved for by persons known to entertain certain opinions on the currency question. The effect of such a Committee would be to shake the confidence of the country. Much of the distress complained of arose from a bad ad- ministration of the poor-laws ; into which, he was glad to learn, a Commission had been appointed to inquire.

Mr. ScriouserEEn dwelt upon the distress of the commercial and manufacturing classes.

With the exertion of his best energies, he could make no profit in trade at the present time. ("Hear!" and a laugh.) Gentlemen who laughed might find it difficult to refute him. He did not state the fact with a view to excite compassion, being independent of commercial speculations, but for the purpose of showing that the distress was not, as Lord Althorp appeared to suppose, ex- clusively confined to the labouring classes. (Lord Althorp—" I said chiefly.' ") In his opinion, the lower part of the middle class of society suf- fered most. Shopkeepers were in a very bad condition. Going from Charing Cross to the Royal Exchange, it would be found that three fourths of the shop- keepers on both sides of the way were in a state of insolvency, if called on to make good their engagements.

He read extracts from letters, showing the distressed state of the Birmingham people, and the increase in the amount of the poor-rates. He concluded by expressing his intention to vote for the motion.

The motion was supported by Mr. MAXWELL and by Mr. G. Yorfcc, who said, that in the Tower Hamlets the distress of the labouring classes was greater than it had been for twenty years.

Sir J. WROTTESLEY admitted the existence of great distress among the people. The bill of 1819 was a great mistake : there ought to have been an equitable adjustment at that time. The bill of 1826 aggra- vated the effects of that mistake. But he would vote against the appointment of a Committee, which could do no good unless its duties were thoroughly defined. He was of opinion also, that Mr. Attwood ought not to hold out expectations to the people which could not be realized. He thought that a reduction of taxation would really effect much good, and that it ought to be pressed upon the Government.

Mr. CLAY would oppose the motion, as not likely to lead to any practical good.

Mr. CAYLEY would vote for the motion, if it were pressed ; but he thought it would be best to withdraw it, as many members had left the House, not supposing that it would be brought forward.

Mr. BARING said, it would be best to postpone the consideration of the currency question, till the motion of which Mr. Matthias Att- wood had given notice should be brought forward. He attributed much of the existing distress to the misconduct of Ministers.

such was the state of the uncertainty in which everything was at present in- volved in consequence of the conduct of his Majesty's ministers—such was the uncertainty that existed with regard to the West India trade, the East India trade, and the Canada trade, that no one would just now dare to risk his capital in them. Lord Althorp must be aware that no one would at present risk a six- pence in the West India trade, until the West India question was settled ; that no one would embark his capital in the East India trade, until it was deter- mined whether it was still to be carried on by a monopoly, or to be thrown open to mercantile speculation at large • and that an equal disinclination existed to invest capital in the Canada trade, until the Canada question SIMS settled. It was this state of uncertainty, and the consequent present languish- ing condition of trade and business, that mainly caused the distress that pre- vailed throughout the country.

He referred to the accounts of the distress which prevailed in Paris, as a proof that the poor in this country were not so much distressed as in others. Out of 24,000 deaths in Paris, 8,000 took place in hospi- tals; out of 25,000 births, 10,00 were illegitimate, and half of these were foundlings. He objected to an alteration in the currency as a means of relieving the distress of the country.

He objected to it, because he did not think that such a remedy would be at- tended by aught but mischievous consequences; he objected to it, because he could never bring his mind to understand how, because money had been made the measure of commodities, an increase could be effected in the wealth of the country by altering the nature of that measure. It might as well be said, if there was a want of corn in the country—(" Ay, ay,"from Mr. Attwood)— that the quantity of corn could be increased by going back to the use of the old measure of the Winchester bushel, instead of the Imperial bushel. He would as soon believe that, as that any gentleman could by altering the nature of the circulation increase the wealth of the Country. ' He would not object to going into the Committee asked for, if that Committee should confine its inquiries to the question whether a double standard, one of silver and one of gold, might not be advantageousluesorted to. Mr. Baring was of opinion, ani so were many gentlemen at the time, that we committed a great mistake in fixing upon a single standard, that of gold.

But when the object of those who wished for a Committee was to tredeuce the pound to fifteen shillings in value, he would vote against them.

Mr. M. Arrwoon said, the House was called upon to grant this Committee.

Lord Althorp had said that the distress that prevailed in the country was in no respect owing to the state of the currency, but that it was owing, amongst other things, to the power-looms. Now, the power-loom was an invention of more than thirty years standing ; so that it could not be fairly chargeable as one one of the causes of the exist; ng distress.

Mr. BEAUMONT would vote against the Committee, because he fully confided in Ministers, who would take the first opportunity to b forward measures for the relief of the country.

Mr. PIELDEN said, it was the great and bounden duty of the Repre- sentatives of the People to inquire into the causes of their sufferings. If justice were denied to the people, he trembled for the consequences.

Mr. PEASE would support the motion, because great distress did certainly exist in the country. He should feel it his duty to vote for it, because this Parliament ought not to imitate the the example of Unreformed Parliaments, which had been accused of want of sympa- thy with the sufferings of the people.

Mr. WAnararoN said, the discussion of that evening was wasteful and desultory, and would lead to no practical good.

If a motion of this kind should be carried, it would be the duty of Adminis- tration to quit their places to-morrow. ( Cries of " Hear, hear!" and " No, no!) That House constituted in itself a Committee of inquiry into the general grievances of the country, and if any gentleman thought that any particular grievance ought to be inquired into, it was for him to bring it before the House. But an inquiry such as that which was now asked for—an inquiry, in truth, de omnibus rebus—was one that could possibly lead to no good. He for one could never bring himself to be a party to such a monstrous system of injustice, as that of breaking all existing contracts because at two former periods the Legis- lature had acted with injustice—because in 1797 it had lowered, and because in 1819 it had raised the standard of the currency.

Mr. O'CoxsEEE, said, the single question was, whether inquiry should be instituted into the causes of distress, which was admitted to exist to a great extent. If there were no reason for the inquiry, it would be a sufficient one that the people were most anxious for it.

He could not help thinking that Mr. Warburton, in the view he had taken of the question, had stated but half of the case. The contracts to which he had alluded existed during a period of the greatest depreciation of the currency, and in his (Mr. O'Connell's) country more mischief had been done by enhancing the currency than could have been effected by any social revolution. That en- hancement bad, in fact, made Ireland a debtor country. Many were still strug- gling under the effects which had followed that step, and were actually paying 50 per cent, more than they really ought to have been doing, according to the real nature of their contracts.

The House ought to avail itself of the information and experience of those members who were personally acquainted with the districts where the distress existed. He would certaintly vote for the Committee.

Mr. D. W. HARVEY would oppose the motion, which if carried would only shift the responsibility from the shoulders of Ministers, who were now bound to do something to relieve the sufferings of an overtaxed people. The question of the currency, which had been raised that night, appeared to him to be a question of the greatest fallacy. There was no lack of money. The only object was its profitable application. The money of the country was piled up in great heaps and masses and driven in large shoals by the drifts of acci- dent. For his part, he would oblige those who had the most ample means to contribute most amply to the burdens of the State. Mr. ROBINSON and Mr. TooKE supported the motion.

The House divided : for the original question, that the Speaker do leave the Chair, 192; for Mr. Attwood's amendment, 158; Ministe- rial majority, 34. The announcement of the minority was received with loud cheers.

At a quarter before one o'clock the House adjourned, without enter- ing upon the Irish Disturbance Bill.

2. lassie DISTURBANCES Brix. Lord ALTBORP, on Monday, moved the order of the day for the House resolving itself into a Committee on this bill.

On the question that the Speaker do leave the chair,

Mr. COBBETT said, that the present bill transcended in infamous preeminence all the deeds of Pitt, Addington, and Castlereagh. A miritary tribunal was to supersede all law; and, by a remarkable omis- sion in the bill, any member of Parliament who from necessity or accident should go to Ireland, might be arrested, confined, and sent to Botany Bay, by one of the red-coat tribunals which were about to be established ; any of the gentlemen by whom he was surrounded, and who had so nobly defended the rights of the Irish nation, might be transported at the beck of a red-coat court of Justice. He maintained that similar measures were contemplated for England. The Irish Constabulary and the Metropolitan Police—who at first were to be unarmed, but who now marched about with swords and pistols—were parts of the same combination against the liberties of the people. His grand objection to the bill was, that it went clearly to establish a mili- tary government in England as well as Ireland. He was satisfied, how- ever, that the people of England would resist and defeat the base and unworthy schemes of Ministers. They were taught by nature to resist such an act as the present. Mr. Stanley could not deny that there was such a right as the right of resistance. He instanced the case of our own Revolution in 1688, and that of the Americans, which had beer: admitted to be justifiable, as proof of the existence of such a right. He maintained that the Irish Aristocracy, who had possessed them-, selves of the Church property—who held the Church property of two hundred and fifty parishes—were more to blame than the Clergy. That property had no more to do with religion than the waves of the sea and the sharks that live therein—it belonged to about forty families of the Aristocracy. He said that the Aristocracy were about to throw the Clergy overboard ; and read some extracts from a pamphlet of the Reverend Mr. Townsend, Prebendary of Durham, and Rector of Northallerton, in proof of this assertion. Mr. Cobbett was inter. rupted, while reading these extracts, bycries of " Question." He main- tained that he was speaking to the question, because he was about to show how the right of resistance to this measure would arise from the fact of its being a scheme to plunder the Church, and worse than any thing that James the Second or George the Third were accused of doing. He would now epnclude--(Loud cries of " Hear, hear !")—Y et, since that would give so much satisfaction, he would go on. He then proceeded, amidst cries of " Question !" to remark upon the power of resistance which the system of paper-money gave to the People, who could stop the Government by demanding gold. He did not accuse Ministers of being tyrants by nature—they, were tyrants half by nature and half by necessity. (" Question !") " Who's that who bawled out question,' said Mr. Cobbett. "I'll make it a very long question for him, if he don't mind." He concluded by conjuring the People of England, for their own sakes, to resist this bill.

The House:then resolved itself into a Committee.

The fourth clause was read, which authorizes the Lord-Lieutenant to proclaim any disturbed district.

Mr. LAMBERT said, he intended to move an amendment, to the effect that such power should not be made use of in any way to enforce the payment of tithes.

Lord ALTHORP said that this amendment .vould be unnecessary—

Ministers had it in contemplation to introduce a measure by which it would not be necessary to resort to the act passed in the last session for the collection of the arrears of tithes. By this measure, while the peasantry of Ireland would be exempted from all further collection of those arrears, the clergy would have that which was their fair due.

Mr. O'CoNNELL asked, why the collection of tithes was not imme- diately suspended ? He also said, that when the police carried off goods or property of any kind for the payment of tithes they gave no vouchera for it.

Lord ALTHORP said, it would be premature to suspend the collection of lithe arrears, until they knew whether Parliament would adopt their proposed measures on the subject.

Mr. STANLEY thought that the statement respecting the refusal of the police to give vouchers was incorrect.

Mr. O'CONNELL reasserted his statement; which was confirmed by O'CONNOR Dorf.

Mr. SHAW said, it never was the object of the bill to enforce the collection of *tithe ; but were the Clergy to be placed out of the pale of the Jaw? This would be the case if the perpetrators of outrages against the Clergy were not to be punished by the Courts-martial.

Lord ALTHORP said, that outrages against the colleetion of tithes, which took place in a proclaimed district, would be cognizable by the courts-martial, as outrages, not as tithe cases.

Mr. SHELL said, the bill embodied several acts, and declared that all offences against any of those acts should be cognizable by courts-martial. Now, amongst those acts was the 27th George III. In the last section of that act there was a clause relating to tithes and to offences in op- posing their collection. Was be right in this, or not? Lord Althorp said that the bill was for the protection of property in general ; but if so, and if the peculiar protection of tithes were not intended, why em- body this act?

Mr. STANLEY said, the act referred to was called the Whiteboy Act, and was passed for the suppression of outrages. Ministers did not wish to interfere by the present measure with tithes, but it would be absurd and unjust to deny the Clergy the same protection for their pro- perty which was enjoyed by other persons.

Mr. SHELL, Mr. FINN, DT. BALDWIN, and Mr. H. GRATTAN were averse to granting power to the Lord-Lieutenant to proclaim cities, such as Dublin, Cork, and Limerick, under this act. What amazing tyranny it was urged, would it be to confine such a population to their houses during the hours mentioned in the bill !

Mr. LAMBERT proposed the following amendment, or proviso, to the clause under discussion.

"Provided always, and be it hereby enacted, that it shall not be lawful for the Lord-Lieutenant or other Chief Governor or Governors of Ireland, to apply the powers conferred by this act in any way to any county or district merely because tithes shall not be paid in such county or district ; and be it further enacted, that the provisions of this act shall not be applied in any way for the purpose of levying tithes, or enforcing the payment thereof."

Mr. WARBURTON seconded the amendment. Personal acts of vio- lence against clergymen might be punished by this bill, but it ought not not to be applied to any case that could be met by civil process.

Lord ALTHORP would not oppose the first part of the proposed amendment ; but he objected to the second, on the ground that it would do away with all offences resulting from combined and forcible resist- ance to the payment of tithe—those offences to which alone the act of 27th George the Third, which was embodied in the bill, applied. There was no instance, during a period of forty-six years, of the simple refusal to pay tithe, unaccompanied by acts of violence, having been prosecuted as a misdemeanour under that act.

Mr. LEPROY conjured Lord Althorp to resist the introduction of this. proviso.

Mr. C. FERGUSSON wished the consideration of the amendment to be postponed till they came to the Court-martial clause. The mem- bers of a court-martial should not be constituted judges to try what was a conspiracy to defraud the clergy.

Mr. PRYME, Mr. WARBURTON, Mr. Sergeant PERRIN supported, and Mr. &law and Mr. FINCH opposed the amendment.

Mr. STANLEY hoped that Mr. Lambert would withdraw his amend- ment. He had himself prepared a proviso to be added to the 17th clause of the bill, one of the clauses relating to courts-martial, to this effect— "Provided always that nothing herein eontained shall authorize or enable any such court-martial to try any persons charged under the aforesaid act with any conspiracy or combination unaccompanied by violence or threats."

Mr. LAMBERT persisted in putting the first part of his amendment— to the effect that it should not• be lawful—" for the Lord-Lieutenant, Governor or Governors, to apply the powers of this act to any county or district merely because tithes are not paid in such county or district." Mr. SHAW divided the Committee on this amendment : for it, 284; against it, 81 ; Ministerial majority, 203.

During the exclusion of strangers, Sir ROBERT PEEL asked the So- licitor-General ( Sir .1. Campbell), whether the amendment was not ridiculous ? The clause required a district to be in a state of insubor- dination before the provision of the act could be applied to it. It was a:manifest absurdity to add to that clause that the Lord-Lieutenant should not proclaim the district merely because tithe was not paid within it. Did it mean that if cess, or rent, or any other payment was withheld, except that.of tithe, the Lord-Lieutenant was to proclaim the district ?

Sir J. CAMPBELL said, certainly the amendment would only encumber the clause.

Mr. WYNN urged upon Ministers the absurdity of dividing in favour of a clause which their own Solicitor-General declared to be injurious to the bill.

Mr. STANLEY said, undoubtedly the clause would be better without the amendment ; which was agreed to merely in deference to Mr. Lambert.

[ Sir J. Wrottesley, Sir M. W. Ridley, Mr. Sandford, Mr. Brown, and other Ministerialists, voted against Ministers on this occasion.]

Mr. O'CONNELL, when strangers were readmitted, was found arguing in support of an amendment, to the effect that, if Parliament were not setting, a list of the crimes committed ii a district about to be pro- claimed should be published in the Dublin Gazette, or during the Ses- sion laid before Parliament.

Lord Aranoar opposed the amendment, as invidious and unneces- sary.

Sir R. PEEL observed, ironically, that the clause as it stood enabled the Lord- Lieutenant to proclaim a district or county for every offence other than •" the non-payment of tithes :" all, therefore, that was wanting to the perfection of the clause, was the including "rents and county cess." Mr. O'CONNELL admitted that the amendment for which he had just voted was as nonsensical as any which he had ever supported. He should divide the Committee, however, upon the amendment now pro- posed.

The House then divided, for the amendment, 77; against it, 235; Ministerial majority, 158.

The fifth clause was agreed to.

The sixth was amended, so that instead of a district being considered as proclaimed from the date of the publication of the proclamation, it would not be considered till two days after.

The seventh clause—which authorizes all justices, constables, and commissioned officers, to search for and arrest all offenders within the proclaimed district—was objected to by Mr. O'CONNELL, on account of the power it gave to Yeomanry officers. He proposed an amend- ment, by which they were excluded from exercising such powers.

In the course of the conversation that ensued upon this clause, Mr. STANLEY stated an amendment which was to be proposed on the tenth clause, relating to courts-martial, to the effect that no officer under the rank of Captain should sit upon courts-martial, nor any. officer of any rank who had been on regular military duty in the district within the month. It was also the intention of the Government to send only officers of high rank to serve upon these courts-martial.

Mr. SHEIL said, the amendment was important, and shewed the bene- fit of the pertinacious resistance made by the Irish members to this bill.

The House divided : for the amendment, 40; against it, 205; Ministerial majority, 165.

Mr. RUTHVEN moved an adjournment.

Mr. DivvrT and Lord ALTHORP opposed it.

Mr. HOWARD, proposed a compromise, of half an hour, in a speech which appears to have excited much laughter, from some cause not in- telligible in the printed reports. . The Gallery was then cleared for a division, but none took place. On the readmission of strangers, Mr. O'Cornatr. was found objecting to the first part of the seventh clause, which authorizes peace- officers to take the most vigorous and effectual steps to suppress dis- turbances. It would induce the commission of lawless acts.

It was agreed that the word " vigorous " should.be struck out. Mr. HAWES then moved that no search-warrant should be put in executicai unless signed by one or more Magistrates. A desultory conversation took place on this amendment. Eventually the clause was agreed to, with an understanding, on the part of Lord Althorp, that be would take into consideration the merits of the amendment proposed by Mr. Hawes before the bringing up of the report.

The eighth clause was also agreed to. The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and the other orders of the day were then disposed of, and at three o'clock the House adjourned. On Tuesday, when Lord ALTHORP made the usual motion for going into Committee on the bill, Mr. THOMAS ATTWOOD expressed his fears, that if the bill should pass, the House of Lords would throw out the remedial measures. It would be a poor consolation to find that Ministers had resigned in con- sequence of such a defeat. He therefore proposed, as an amendment to Lord Althorp's motion that all further proceedings on the bill should be suspended until the remedial measures should be passed into a law.

Mr. HUME seconded the motion.

Mr. STANLEY opposed it ; and hoped the House would pass the bill with the least possible delay. Mr. D. W. HARVEY called upon the Irish members to withdraw their ineffectual hostility to the bill, and let the responsibility of carry- ing it rest with the Government. He wished the House to proceed to the discussion of other matters on which public attention was firmly fixed.

Mr. O'Cornam. totally, and distinctly-disclaimed such advice. He should consider it an unpardonable dereliction of duty to follow it. He

warned Ministers of the consequences of passing this bin ; and assured them, that it had created a feeling of disgust in the minds of the upper and middling classes in Ireland.

Mr. Attwood's amendment was negatived, and the House went into Committee.

The ninth clause, which prohibits public meetings, unless held by the permission of the Lord-Lieutenant, was then read by the Chairman.

Mr. STANLEY said, he intended to add two provisos to this clause, which would have the effect of restraining the Lord-Lieutenant from prohibiting meetings duly convened by the local authorities, and also of preventing the attendance of strangers and non-residents in the dis- tricts, when such meetings were held.

The clause, after a few words from Mr. O'CONNELL, WS agreed to. The tenth (or Court-martial) clause was then put.

Mr. STANLEY recapitulated the alterations he had previously stated that Ministers were prepared to make in this clause,—namely, the pro- hibition of any officer under the rank of Captain, and of any officer, who was actively engaged on regimental duty in the district where the courts-martial were held, from being a member of them. In courts- martial of nine, seven members must agree to a verdict. When the court consisted of seven members or less, five must agree. He also stated, that the fifteenth clause, which empowers courts-martial to issue orders for the apprehension of offenders to be tried before them, should be so modified as to throw that duty upon the Lord-Lieutenant. With regard to the description of offences which were to come under the cognizance of the Courts-martial, it was intended, by an amendment to the 17th clause, to exclude all those, even though of an insurrection- ary character, which were not attended with actual violence. He would also exclude from the jurisdiction of courts-martial all offences of a li- bellous description —such as publishing, hawking, or selling seditious placards or pamphlets.

Mr. CUTLAR FERGUSSON opposed the clause altogether. The es- tablishment of courts-martial was unprecedented and unnecessary. It was a most violent inroad upon the Constitution, and one to which he never would consent. He entirely denied that any case had been made out which established the necessity of abolishing trial by jury. Minis- ters had totally failed in making it appear that jurymen had not per- formed or would not perform their duty. But this bill not merely de- prived the subject of the benefit of trial by jury; it also took away from him the assistance of a judge, without which trial by jury was more a curse than a blessing. Besides, the members of a court-mar- tial were not responsible for their conduct to any civil tribunal—they were only responsible to courts-martial. Thus the subject, who was unjustly treated, was deprived of the protection which he would other- wise have by appealing to the ordinary tribunals of this country against such oppression. He denounced in the strongest manner the mon- strous doctrine, that when you violated the Constitution, the more you violated it the better. It might be supposed to be introduced for the purpose of allowing others to infringe the Constitution hereafter with impunity. He concluded by deploring the tendency of this measure to change the feelings of the Irish towards the Army ; and he deeply regretted that such a bill should have been resorted to for the pacifica- tion of Ireland.

Colonel DAVIES defended, and Mr. TAYLEURE objected to the clause, on the ground that military men were not qualified to act as judges.

Mr. Sergeant PERRIN said, the Ministers had failed in proving the necessity of introducing so arbitrary a clause into the bill. He denied the efficacy of courts-martial to protect jurors or witnesses, admitting that they required protection.

It would, however, appear by this clause, that Ministers did not put con- fidence in the other provisions of the bill ; that they did not think they would put down agitation, protect the peaceable, and secure the property of the country. And yet, if the other parts of the bill were good for any thing, they ought to be efficient for those purposes. Ministers had all the aid which the Special Con- stables' Act of last session, which a greatly increased military force, and a native police, could give. If these could not secure the safety of jurors' if these could not protect property, what was the use of this measure? If such available powers as these were not sufficient to put an end to disorder, how were courts- martial to effect that object?

Instead of military courts, be would suggest that a continual session should be held, by adjournment, in those districts where disturbances continued. The law was strong enough to cope with the evils com- plained of, if it were fairly, fully, and firmly administered.

Mr. ROLFE maintained that the clause was necessary, and he would give it a reluctant support.

The Earl of DARLINGTON considered that the amendments which Ministers proposed to make in the bill destroyed its efficacy; and if they were adopted, he should oppose it.

Major BEAUCLERK said that courts-martial were directly under the influence of the Horse-Guards. He instanced, as an illustration of this subserviency, the general disuse of the lash, because, though the military law was the same as formerly, officers composing regimental courts-martial, knew that the lash was no longer patronized at head- quarters.

Lord HOTHAM, Mr. WARBURTON, and Major HANDLEY, declared their determination to vote against the clause ; and Lord ALTHORP de-

fended it. He said that the Lord-Lieutenant would have the power of mitigating, not of increasing the punishments ordained by courts- martial.

Mr. Wvsro suggested, that the Sergeant-at-Law should be President of the court, instead of acting as Judge Advocate.

Mr. ABERCROMBY said, he had hitherto given a reluctant assent to the bill; but he would oppose this clause by every means in his power ;

and he would do it on the ground that the necessity for its enactment bad not been proved. He thought Mr. O'ConneLl's powerful argu- ments against this clause remained unanswered.

He really could find neither such amount of intimidation, nor such systematic efforts to carry it into execution, to satisfy his mind that they were justified in pronouncing the ordinary tribunals of the country inefficient. Nor could he agree with the argument which he had often before heard used, that when you overstepped the limas of the Constitution, you should do it boldly. He con- fessed, that though he had heard attempts to justify that doctrine, they carried little weight in his mind—he was not convinced by such arguments—but, on the contrary, considered that whenever the barrier of the Constitution was passed without sufficient reason without the direst and most manifest necessity, a gross injustice was committed on the rights and liberties of the nation. 'It was a plausible argument, in answer to which he would say—let those who are overstepping the threshold of the Constitution beware, that in so doing they at least carry along with them the sympathy of all considerate and reasonable men. That which was intended as the source of terror to the people, he would predict might become a source of weakness to the Ministers.

He maintained, that the occurrences at the Assizes in Ireland justi- fied his argument that there was no occasion to enforce the dangerous provisions of that clause. He approved of Sergeant Perrin's suggestion of sending a person of authority in the law to a proclaimed district, and that only after the failure of ordinary measures should the extraordi- nary powers of the bill be resorted to. He concluded by saying, that he entertained a deep and overwhelming conviction, that there could not be a more dangerous and mistaken policy than to make use of officers of the Army in cases in which the political feelings of the peo- ple were concerned. [Mr. Abercromby's short speech was much cheered, and made a great impression on the House.]

Mr. STANLEY very much regretted the opposition of Mr. .Abercrom- by to the bill. He was aware of the great weight which it would have. He said it was not fair in him to impute to Ministers the inten- tion of making use of courts-martia I for the trial of political offences, when all such offences, including all relating to libel, had been expressly excluded from the operation of the clause. He then argued at consi- derable length, that the difficulty of obtaining Juries, and the intimida- tion of witnesses, justified the introduction of the Court-martial clause. Special commissions, he maintained, would be of service when the in- surgents had begun to give way—when once the corner was turned, they would be productive of great benefit, but not before.

Mr. Suaw said, that he and his friends had been induced to support this bill mainly on the ground that its provisions were to be used for the punishment of political offences ; which it now appeared was not to be the case. He had gloomy anticipations with regard to Ireland. He believed that it would soon be separated from England.

Mr. O'CONNELL spoke at some length against the clause.

Lord INGESTRIE and Colonel PERCEVAL considered that the bill was rendered ineffective by the alteration which had been made in it, and no longer felt any inclination to support it.

The House divided : for the clause, 270; against it, 130; Ministe- rial majority, 140.

The 11th clause was then read. It regulates the rank and number of officers who are to compose courts-martial.

Mr. R. WASON proposed that the courts-martial should be unanimous in their finding and sentence on the accused.

This was opposed by Lord .ALTsione; and rejected, on a division, by 144 to 42.

Mr. WARBURTON proposed that no verdict of acquittal should be re- vised by the Court-martial which delivert d it or by any other court- martial.

This amendment was agreed to, and the clause passed.

The House adjourned at three o'clock.

In the Committtee, on Wednesday, when the 12th clause was read,

Mr. O'CONNELL moved an amendment, to allow the Government to select as Judge-Advocates to the Courts-martial any barrister of not less than live years' standing, instead of restricting them to King's ser- geants and King's counsel. This amendment was agreed to.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that the tribunals which were created by the bill in reality differed very materially from courts-martial; and he re- commended Ministers to get rid of the obnoxious appellation, and sub- stitute another.

Lord ALTIIORP said, the suggestion came too late, the clauses having been already passed.

Mr. O'CONNELL then proposed another amendment, by which the courts-martial are to be open courts, and the counsel for the prisoner is to be allowed to take notes. The Court may be closed when the members are considering their verdict.

The clause, as amended, was ordered to stand part of the bill. The 13th, 14th, and 15th clauses were also agreed to.

Mr. STANLEY moved an amendment to the 16th clause, which ren- ders it necessary that warrants against persons refusing to attend to give evidence should be issued by the whole Court, and not by any single member thereof.

Mr. O'CONNELL also moved an amendment, to the effect that the Court might issue their warrants for the defence as well as for the pro- secution; and that no person should be examined before the Courts- martial, who could not legally be examined before courts of law.

The clause, with these amendments, were agreed to.

Mr. O'CONNELL proposed an amendment to the 17th clause, by which corporal punishment of every description is prohibited, and the retrospective operation of the bill destroyed.

Mr. STANLEY proposed to add a proviso to the clause, by which the

Courts-martial are deprived of the power of trying any person charged with publishing or circulating libels or with entering into any combi- nation to resist the enforcing of the law, unless such combination cr obstruction shall be accompanied by force or threats ; with this excep- tion, all such offences to remain triable according to the course of com- mon law.

The clause, with these amendments, was agreed to.

Mr. STANLEY agreed, at the suggestion of Mr. O'CONNELL and Mr. C. FERGUSSON, to amend the 18th clause, in such a way as to allow bail to be taken for the appearance of persons found out at night in the proclaimed districts, and to prevent any person from being arrested, unless under circumstances of suspicion.

The 18th clause then passed.

Sir J. CAMPBELL (the Solicitor- General) moved an amendment to the 19th clause, which authorizes domiciliary visits. The effect of the amendment is to forbid the soldiery or police from forcibly entering a house under any circumstances. If the inmate, on being summoned, refuses to answer, he is to be held as absent. The names of the in-

mates of the house are to be written upon the door; and each 'Pers'on is to be summoned by name. This last addition was suggested by Mr. 0' Connell.

Captain YORKE said, that the bill had been so altered and modified since its introduction, that it could answer no useful purpose whatever. Indeed, its only effect would be to add to the irritation of the Irish people; so that the sooner* was thrown into the fire the better.

Mr. O'CostNELL said, he would second such a motion with the greatest pleasure. (Laughter.) The 19th clause passed as amended.

The 20th clause, after some verbal amendments, also passed.

The 21st clause, which went to enact that persons selling seditious papers in a proclaimed district should be triable by courts-martial, was struck out.

The 22d and 23d clauses were agreed to, after some verbal and un- important amendments.

The House adjourned at half-past two.

Before the House went into Committee on Friday, Mr. STANLEY, in answer to a question by Mr. H. GRATTAN, stated that Lord Mil- town hadnet been dismissed, but his resignation as a Deputy-Lieuten- ant had been accepted, because the Government disapproved of his con- duct in enrolling himself among the Volunteers, which was inconsis- tent with his duty as a Magistrate.

' Mr. H. GRATTAN said, he should on Tuesday, next move for copies of all correspondence on the subject. If Lord 1VIiltown was removed for taking part in the matter with the people, others ought to be re- moved who had taken part against them.

Mr. COBBETT then gave notice, that on the 23th April he should more "For an ;tumble Address to his Majesty, that he would be pleased t.; realwe Sir 'Robert Peel, Bart., from his place among the members of the Pt ivy (..'t.un- eil—(Bursts of laughter from all sides of Vie House)—on account of the pro- ceedings of that right honourable gentleman relative to the Currency Acts of 1819 and 1826." (Renewed laughter.)

The House went into Committee.

The 24th clause, which prohibits fires, bonfires, and smoke from being used as signals, was objected to by Mr. O'CoNsrEu., who wished the smoke to be left out. Sir J. CAMPBELL said, it would be neces- sary to prove that these signals or fires were used with a malicious and

• illegal intent, before those who made them could be punished. The clause then passed.

The 25th clause was agreed to.

The 26th clause, which enacts that all officers and soldiers acting under the authority :of-the bill shall be responsible only to courts- martial, was warmly opposed by Mr. Ismilam, lkIr. O'CONNELL, Mr. C. FERGUSSON, Mr. SHEIL, Mr. H. GRATTAN, Mr. O'DWV.E.R, Mr. LYNCH, and Mr. PRYME,—on the ground, principally, that it gave irresponsible power to the military, who would never be brougla; IO answer for their misconduct. That portion of the clause which in- demnified all Magistrates and persons acting under the authority of the Lord-Lieutenant from all proceedings except those instieee;:by the Attorney-General, was particularly objected to by Mr. Mr. Snair., and Mr. 0' CONNELL. Several amendments to tl:..viouse were put and negatived; Mr. IL GRANT and Mr. STANLEY C011 re a di ng, that only unwilling or ignorant offenders would be indemnified by the clause, and that all offences committed by those acting under the bill could be brought under the cognizance of the Courts-martial, whose officers would be subject to a junsdiction if they did wrong, as an application to a judge would entitle him to interfere, and, if he thought it right, send the case to a jury, who would decide whether the persons accused had acted band fide or maid fide. The Committee divided on the ques- tion that the clause stand part of the bill: ayes, 141; noes, 67; majority, 74. The clause then passed.

The 27th clause, which relates to persons arrested, was amended so as to prevent a prisoner's confinement, against his own consent, for more than forty-eight hours in any other place except a public gaol. The clause then passed as amended.

Clause 28th was struck out.

Clause 29th was agreed to.

Clause 30th was opposed by Mr. RUTHVEN ; who said he would re- sist a bill for depriving his country of the protection of the fli:beas Corpus, to the last extremity. The Committee divided : for the chaise, 156; against it, 64; majority, 92.

Clauses 31st and 32d were agreed to.

Clause 33d was amended, by striking out the words which em- powered magistrates of counties of towns and counties of cities to act under this bill; Mr. STANLEY agreeing with Mr. RUTHVEN and Mr. O'CoNNELL, that as they were appointed by corporations, they were directly responsible to them, and not to the Government, who ought to have the appointment of all the subordinate officers under this act. The clause thus amended was agreed to.

Clauses 34th to 41st were passed, with some verbal amendments.

Mr. STANLEY then proposed two clauses, which enact that lists with the names of the inmates of cottages I hove the ages of fourteen shall be posted on the door-ways, and that a fine of a shilling a day shall be paid by those who neglect to have such lists posted; and that the ex- pense of printed forms, to be supplied for the purpose, shall be de- frayed by a Grand Jury assessment.

Mr. STANLEY also proposed to add a clause to legalize meetings for public purposes called by the local authorities, and to prohibit non-re- sidents from attending them ; and another to regulate the majority on courts-martial which shall be necessary to render a verdict valid.

These additional clauses having been agreed to, the report was brought up, and ordered to be taken into consideration on Tuesday next.

3. IRISH CHURCH REFORM BILL. Sir M. W. RIDLEY, on Tues- day, brought up the report of the Committee appointed to examine pre- cedents on the subject of this bill. The Committee had found no pre., cedents in point ; and recommended, that as the bill was a tax-bill, it should be introduced in a Committee of the whole House. Lord Althorp then withdrew the bill, and gave notice that he should move, alt Moinla* next", for a Committee of the whole House on the subject of the Irish Church.

4'.. Law EDUCATION.' The Earl of RODEH, on Tuesday, presented several petitions from places in Ireland, praying for an alteration in the

system of national education in that country. At the time when this system was established, his Lordship said, there were 1621 schools under the direction of the Kildare Street Society, which afforded the means of education to 137,639 children, the great majorityof whom were Roman Catholics. Ministers objected to these schools, that the Scriptures were read in them indiscriminately—that was their vital defect. With regard to the Ministerial plan, he maintained that it could never answer—that it would ever be impossible to combine Protestant with Catholic instruction. The Board of Education had given treble the salaries to the teachers of their schools that had ever been paid to those of the Kildare Street Society. He mentioned several schools to which grants had been made in which there was not a single Protestant scholar. In all, there were forty-nine schools to which this remark would apply. The sole object of Ministers seemed to be to support the Roman Catholic religion. There had been two

hundred and nine applications for schools from Roman Catholic, and only twenty-nine from Protestants ; and some of those were made by Socinians. It was a consolation to him, that seventeen out of twenty- two of the Irish Bishops concurred with him in reprobating the system adopted by the new Board. The Presbyterians and Methodists were also opposed to it.. In Scotland too, where the Bible was so much loved, the indignation was general at the conduct pursued by Mithsters in this matter. Among others, Dr. Chalmers had used strong language respecting it. The tendency of the system was to subvert the rights of the Protestant clergy, and deluge the country with Protestant blood. It was awful to see the Ministers of the Crown prepared to sacrifice the Book of Truth—to see them adopting means for the spread of what they knew and had sworn to be error, for the sake of some supposed temporary advantage.

The Archbishop of DUBLIN said, it appeared he was to be placed upon his trial in consequence of his intimate connexion with the Irish Beard of Education. He was accused not only of Romanism, but also of having, in conjunction with his colleagues, used the funds of the Board for the purposes of bribery and corruption. The fact, however, was, that he had joined the Board upon the invitation of Ministers, in order to effect some good for the country. He found that the accounts rela- tive to the state and progress of the Kildare Street Schools, and the good which they effected, were very contradictory. He was therefore under the necessity of collecting facts for himself; and he had, upon making due inquiry, arrived at the conclusion, that, in consequence of the religious dissension which prevailed in Irelaud, it would be best to leave a certain portion of each week to the minister of each denomina- tion to educate the children belonging to his flock. He contended that the system had not had a fair trial. Those who maintained that the Kil- dare Street Society had not had sufficient time allowed them to bring their plans into full play, would hardly deny this. Theirs had been in existence for fifteen years—the new one was scarcely a year old. It was said that there were forty-nine schools exclusively Roman Catholic. Supposing that to be a correct statement, still they were only about a teilth of the whole number-479—which lied been established.

All he could say was, that they had exerted every care and pains to conduct their business in the most economical and the most effectual manner, and all this in the midst of a system of persecution and delusion which would have been enough to deter most men from proceeding. Not only the Connui.ssioners and agents of the Institution, but those who sent their children to the schools, had been designated as infidels, apostates, everything opprobrious that language could supply. They dared not publish their names, because their characters were liable to a species of moral assassination. One of the obnoxious parties said he thought the buntings in the South of Ireland not worse than the persecution OR account of these schools in the North ; and he mentioned one or more Presby- tot congregations which had been set against their pastors, and had been in- duced to insult them in the streets.

He defended the plan adopted in the schools established by the Board, of teaching children to read certain extracts from the Bible. This was no mutilation of the Bible, for the extracts were not given as the Bible itself. There were at least five or six libels a week pub- lished on this subject. A system of terrorism was regularly acted upon. All sorts of scandalously fuse assertions were put forth as to altera- tion being made in the text of the Bible to suit the Roman Catholic creed.

He declared that he and his colleagues had been assailed by every kind of mis- representation and falsehood, violence, and intemperance of language; which appeared to him far, very far, from being consonant to the spirit of 'Scriptural education. All those who endeavoured to aid in the introduction of this system, had met with the most severe persecution—their motives had been assailed and their characters hunted down. This was the species of Scriptural mutilation to which be objected—that practical mutilation of the Scriptures which made men resist that important precept—" Do as you would wish to be done by." Nor had this agitation been confined to Ireland. In England—in London, meetings had been held at a place—Exeter Hall, he believed it was called ; at Bath, Liverpool, and other towns. But how were these meetings got up ? They were founded upon a system—the exclusion of all persons who did not come there prepared to oppose the Government plan. In this way there could. be no difficulty in getting up petitions for or against any measure.

Many persons whose names he dared not mention, were prevented by intimidation from sanctioning the plans of the Society.

He hoped that all persons who wished men to enjoy true liberty, and the un- molested right of expressing their sentiments according to their own conscience, would exert themselves to put an end to that system Of intimidation and agita- tion which was kept up in Ireland. Agitation lie said it was—for what was it but agitation to go about through every parish in Ireland, setting not only Catholics against Protestants, but Protestants against each other, and denounc- ing all the supporters of the national system of education as idoittors, atheists, apostates, in short, heaping upon them almost every term of abuse which the language supplied.

The Bishop of EXETER said, the system which the Ministers had adopted for the education of the Irish never could prosper, for it was not founded upon the principles of Protestantism. The object of Mi- nisters was proved, by Mr. Stanley's letter, to be political. The Board. had not scrupled in effect to promote the designs of the Catholic priest- hood. The whole scheme had been a signal failure, and no modifica- tion of it could ever fit it to be a scheme of national education. . _ . • The Bishop of BRISTOL concurred in the opinion expressed by the Bishop of Exeter.

Lord PLUNKETT said, that Lord Roden was one of those persons who first assumed their own premises wholly independent of fact, and next drew their own conclusions, wholly regardless of their being of logical inference.

The worst was that those illogical conclusions were put forth as facts, under the most plausible pretences of religion. For example, Lord Roden and his party had all along assumed, and though a thousand times confounded and set right, persisted in assuming and asserting, that the object of Ministers in esta- blishing the present system of national education in Ireland was neither more nor less than upturning the Protestant Church in that country. An assertion more contrary to fact, more unfounded, and more incapable of proof, was never broached, even by that party who would fain monopolize every principle of the Christian religion save its amity and regard for truth. And yet it was upon such assertions that an outcry against the Irish education system had been at- tempted to be raised.

He defended the plan adopted by the Board ; and said that the ques- tion was, whether the people of Ireland were to be educated at all. Did Lord Roden or the Bishop of Exeter really mean to assert that the object of Ministers was to molest. Protestant children in their reading of the Bible ?

The thing was impossible: no man not actually demented could believe such an absurdity ; and no man not steeped in the dregs of fanaticism and rancorous controversy could utter such a proposition- with a view to its being successful. The misfortune, however, was, that these absurd calumnies did produce much inzschief among the well-meaning ignorant.

The object of Ministers was to raise up a moral, religious, and truly Christian population in Ireland. The cause was toosacred to be viewed through the mists of party or sectarian distinction.

It was any thing but just, it was any thing but feeling, in the present state of -that unfortunate country, to denounce the exertions of those who were endea-

vouring to benefit her. What right had Lord Roden to say that they did not en- deavour to protect the interests of the Protestants? and what right had he to put himself forward as the sole advocate of their rights? He did not know that the noble Lord's pretensions were superior to his own, or that lie had done the Pro- testant Church in Ireland greater novice than lie (Lord Plunkett) had done. Such aspersions were the offspring of rank and bitter jealousy.

The Earl of WICKLOW spoke against, and the Earl of GOSFORD and Lord CLONCURRY in favour of the new plan.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE remarked, that the number of children educated in the schools established by the Board was 86,440, and that the number would very soon be increased to 120,000.

The Earl of RODEN said a few words in reply. He said he was a friend to toleration, but not to the encouragement of Roman Catholi- cism. He was sorry to find that the number of schools under the new system was increasing.

• 5. IRISH JURIES. Lord PLUNKETT, on Thursday, brought in a bill for consolidating and amending the Irish Grand Jury laws. The bill was framed with the concurrence of the Judges. Its object was to assimulate the laws relative to Juries in Ireland to the laws of Eng- land. The qualification of Jurors were these— In counties at large, and in counties of cities, and counties of towns, jurors, in order to be considered qualified, should be possessed of property in land of the value of 15/. per annum in fee-simple, or fee-tail, or of leasehold property, originally for a period of not less than twenty-one years, and all twenty-pound householders in towns.

The barony collectors are to ascertain the qualification of jurors, thus furnishing the Sheriffs with the means of forming their panels. The Judges should have the power of directing a Special Jury to be empanneled. The sons of Peers being qualified, Baronets, Knights, and Magistrates, and persons proposed of certain property, or who had served on Grand Juries, should be the persons from among Whom Special Juries should be formed. Five pounds for the whole Jury, instead of one pound to each Juryman, should be the largest sum allowed by the Court.

The Earl of WICKLOW approved of the Bill, which he was happy to learn had been framed with the concurrence of the Judges.

It was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Monday next.

6. DISTURBANCES IN THE COUNTY OF MAYO. Lord TEYNHAM, on Monday, brought forward his charges against the Marquis of Sligo, the Lord-Lieutenant of the county of Mayo, for having procured the en- forcement of the Peace Preservation Act in the barony of Gallen in that county. He read a number of statements, tending to prove that no necessity existed for such a measure ; and maintained, that whatever disturbances had taken place, were mainly occasioned by the active in- terference of the Marquis of Sligo, and the partisans of Government generally, to defeat the election of Sir William Brabazon. He also as- serted, that the accounts of the outrages in Gallen were in many in- stances exaggerations and misstatements.

The Marquis of SLIGO defended his conduct; and said that he was only one of sixty magistrates who concurred in demanding extra powers. He read a number of documents to prove the disordered state of the country.

Lord PLUNKETT maintained, that Lord Sligo's conduct had been discreet, and that the extraordinary powers demanded by him were ab- solutely necessary for the protection of life and property.

Lord TEYNIIAM spoke a few words in reply and withdrew his motion.

7. OBSERVANCE OF TIIE SA_BBATIL Sir A. AGNEW, On 'Wednes- day, obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend the law relating to the observance of the Lord's day in England. The bill was brought in, read a first time, ordered to be printed, and to be read a second time on the 30th of April. Sir A. Agnew also gave notice of a similar bill for Scotland.

Petitions for the better observance of the Sabbath were presented on Wednesday, by Mr. ROEBUCK from Bath ; by Sir J. Jonsisroxs from Scarborough ; by Mr. HOPE JOHNSTONE from several places in the county of Dumfries ; by Sir G. SKIPWITH from several places in War-. wickshire ; and by Mr. SINCLAIR from Caithness. Lord ALTHOFP also presented a petition from two Dissenting ministers of Kettering; but would not consent to curtail the innocent enjoyments of the poor. Petitions were presented, on Monday, by Mr. BYNG, from vitriol* places in 'Middlesex, Mr. E. L. BULWER front Staffordshire, Aka STRUTT from Derbyshire, Mr. HODGSON from Northumberland, Mr. A. JOHNSTONE from a number of places in Scotland, and from Nots- tingham, and Mr. Alderman Wows from London, for a better ob, servance of the Sabbath. On Friday, Mr. HARCOURT presented one from Henley-upon-Thames, and the Southern division of Oxfordshire. He expressed a wish to return to the ancient policy with regard to the observance of the Sabbath. Mr. COBBETT observed that the ancient practice of the country was that fairs and markets should be held on the Sabbath : so much for bringing back the modern to the ancient practice. He was clearly of opinion that harm instead of good would arise from legislating on this subject.

8. JEWISH DISABILITIES. The Marquis of WESTMINSTER, On Tuesday, presented a petition, most respectably signed by 1,500 inha-

bitants of London, praying for the admission of the Jews to an equality of civil privileges. He remarked, that in Hanover, Jamaica, Canada, and in other British dependencies, the Jews bad been emancipated, and

there had never been the slightest reason to complain of that conces- sion to them. He thought that 1,800 years was a term of persecution sufficiently long, and that it was time for it to cease.

The Bishop of LONDON said, that when the Test and Corporation Acts were repealed, the Legislature ceased to be exclusively a Church of England Legislature ; when the Catholics were emancipated it ceased to be an exclusively Protestant Legislature ; but they had not yet, ostensibly at least, ceased to be a Christian Legislature. As this was not the proper time for it, he would not enter into a discussion of the general question.

Lord SUFFIELD presented a similar petition from Manchester, and the Marquis of LANSDOWNE one from Bath, mid another from Livers- pool, to the same effect.

Sir J. CAMPBELL, on Thursday, presented a petition from Dudley in favour of the removal of Jewish disabilities. He was proud of having been instrumental, on a late occasion, in obtaining for a-gentle- man of that persuasion his admission to the bar. Mr. R. POTTEX supported the prayer of the petition. Mr. A. JOHNSTONE opposed it ; and said, that when a Jew entered the House, it would be no longer e Christian Legislature.

9. PUNISHMENT OF DEATH. Lord SUFFIELD, on Monday, pre- seated a petition from the bankers, merchants, shipowners, mid other inhabitants of Liverpool, praying for the abolition of the punishment of death for crimes against property. The severity of the law, the peti- tioners maintained, created an insecurity to property, as great repug- nance was felt to prosecute capitally for offences of this nature, and. s consequently the offender very often escaped all punishment.

10. SLAVERY. Mr: FOWELL BUXTON, on Tuesday, postponed his motion relative the abolition of slavery in the Colonies, upon the ex- press understanding with Lord Althorp that Ministers would be pre- pared to bring forward a measure on the subject on Tuesday the 23c1 of April next.

11. TRADE WITH BRAZILS AND THE EAST INDIES. Mr. Ewaar, - on Wednesday, presented a petition signed by a numerous body of shipowners a Liverpool, proprietors of upwards of 100,000 tons of British shipping, complaining of the restrictions under which their trade with Brazils and the Indian Archipelago laboured, and praying the House to take measures for relieving them from many burdensome im- posts, and more espeeially to allow the importation of the produce of the Brazils and other countries, which was now excluded by the mono., poly possessed by the Colonies. Lord SANDON supported the prayer of the petition, and particularly objected to the injudicious duty on marine insurances.

12. SUGAR AND PENSIONS DUTIES BILL. This bill Was read a third time last night, and passed.

I3.' TIIE MALT-DUTY. Sir W. IsTarsav' though earnestly pressed by Lord ALTHORP to postpone his motion for the repeal of the tali on Malt, persevered in bringing it forward on Thursday. He said that the duty was first laid on malt in the reign of William the Third ; that it was gradually increased through the reigns of George the Second and Third, till it reached 5s. per bushel, or 2/. per quarter. Though barley was now only 20s. a quarter in Norfolk, it would cost 3/. before it could be brewed into beer. The tax was a most ruinous one in a pecuniary and also in a moral point of view. The farmer was no longer able to give his workmen the real old English John Barleycorn ; and conse- quently they were driven to those nests of iniquity called Tom and Jerry shops, which were the nurseries of thieves and vagabonds. The Beer Bill answered the purpose of brutalizing the people most com- pletely. He would say nothing about the duty on hops, for the gentle- men from the hop country wished to make that a separate question : but he trusted that Lord Althorp, when he took off the duty on malt, would throw the hop-duty into the bargain, for the object was to get good and cheap beer, which could not be made without good and cheap hops. He concluded by moving for leave to bring in a bill for the repeal of the Malt-tax.

Major BEALTLERK seconded the motion. He strongly advocated the necessity of taking off a tax of this description' in order to increase the comforts and allay the growing discontent of the people. He wished, however, that the motion had been postponed till after Lord Althorp's financial statement.

Lord ALTHORP said, that be must give the same answer to the pro- posal for taking off the Malt-duty which he lisd given when applied to for the repeal of other taxes. He could make no promises till the financial year was closed, and the state of the revenue ascertained. He did not wish to meet the motion by the ungracious mode of a direct negative ; nor could he very well move the previous question, for that would bring on Mr. Attwood's motion on the state of the country, which stood for that evening, and which he wished also to have posts poned. He should therefore move that the House go into Committee on the Irish Disturbances Bill. (Much laughter.) Mr. BARING thought that the agricultural population was not fairly dealt with, and that it needed some relief. He was of opinion that some alteration might be made with respect to the Malt and Beer. Is es, by which the revenue would not sutler. he winaa io:e algainst

the simple repeal of the Malt-tax. "

Mr. Hum could not' vote for the motion without further inquiry. He was of opinion that one half the duty might be taken off with ad- vantage to the revenue and the Consumer. This was not a good time for bringing forward the motion, and he hoped it would be withdrawn.

Mr. Wannowrosr andvSir E. KNATCHBULL both recommended Sir W. Ingilby to withdraw his motion.

Mr. M. Arrwoon was surprised that a question of such great im- portance to the middling classes should be treated so cavalierly by Mi- nisters. With regard to this motion and that of Mr. T. Atwood on the state of the country, Ministers showed themselves less respectful to the House than any Administration within his time.

Lord ALTHORP said that Mr. Attwood's remarks were unprovoked and unjustifiable. He would leave it the House to say whether he treated it with disrespect. (Loud cries of" No, no r) The Marquis of CHANDOS would vote :for the motion if it were pressed.

Mr. R. PALMER said, Sir W. Ingilby would act wisely towards the agricultural interest if he withdrew it.

Sir W. INGILBY then withdrew it.

14. SOAP-DUTIES. Alderman WOOD, on Monday, presented a peti- tion from the dealers in and manufacturers of soap in London and the vicinity, complaining of the heavy duties on soap. He remarked that the common soap used by the poorer classes was taxed 120 per cent., while that which was used by the rich was taxed only 50 per cent.

Mr. Cornier? said, the best way to make Lord Althorp do without the soap-duties, was not to let him have them. He liked these mid- day sessions. The short speeches that were made did much good. He subsequently remarked, that the commonest paper used by the poor people for their snuff and tobacco paid the same duty as the finest gilt- edged paper used by the rich.

15. FACTORIES REGULATION Btu- Petitions were presented, on Wednesday, in favour of this bill, by Mr. STRICKI.AND from Leeds, signed by 16,000 persons ; by Mr. ROEBUCK from Bath, by Mr. WILES from Ashburton, by Colonel WILLIAMS from Ashton, by Mr. Gria.oi4 from Falkland and Dundee. On Friday, Mr. E. J. STANLEY presented one from the master manufacturers of Stockport, praying,for further inquiry_ before the bill should pass. Lord MOLYNEUX, Mr. HOWARD, Mr. WILBRAHAM, and Sir GEORGE Pittman also were in favour of further inquiry. Mr. WILSON PATTER observed that the subject would be regularly brought before Parliament, and an opportunity for dis- oussion allowed.

16. BIRMINGHAM AND LONDON RAILWAY BILL. Sir GREY SKIP- WITH, on Monday, brought up the report from the Committee on this bill, which was ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. CARTWRIGHT presented a petition from the trustees of a road in Warwickshire praying to be heard by counsel against it.

17. BRIBERY AT STAFFORD. Mr. ELLICE, 011 Friday, moved the order of the day for going into a Committee on the bill for indemni- fying persons who would give evidence as to the bribery of the Staf- ford electors.

Mr. BARING opposed the bill, which he said was unnecessary. He did not see why the case of Stafford should not be dealt with in a com- mon Election Committee, like all others. The bill, too, would enable a member of that House who, by his own confession, could prove that 624 out of 526 of the electors had been bribed, to retain his seat in that House, notwithstanding. He objected to the bill on this account also.

Mr. SHAW, Sir J. WROTTESLEY, and Sir R. INGLIS opposed the bill ; and Mr. ELLICE, Mr. LITTLETON, and Mr. R. GORDON Sup- ported it.

The House decided upon going into the Committee, by a majority

• f84 to 16.

Some verbal amendments were then made in the bill, and the report was ordered to be brought up on Monday.

18. DOVER ELECTION. Mr. Halcomb, the new member for Dover, took his seat on Wednesday. On the same day a petition against his return was presented.