IDEbates anb Vrotetbings in parliament.

ADMISSION OF JEWS TO PARLIAMENT.

In the House of Lords, on Thursday, the second reading of the Jewish Disabilities Removal Bill was moved by the Marquis of LANSDOWNE, with a clear and temperate recapitulation of the grounds for the measure, and arguments in its favour much like those employed by Lord John Russell in the House of Commons. He especially dwelt on the facts that the exclu- sdon of the Jews was an innovation, no measure of the kind appearing in our legislation until lately; that the very declaration "on the true faith of a Christian," which now operates to their exclusion, was not originally directed against Jews, but against Popish recusants in the time of James the First; that from its earliest institution Christianity had repudiated the connexion of religions faith and politics; and that the general admis- sion of Jews to civil offices renders their exclusion from Parliament incon- sistent and inexpedient. The Earl of ELLErizonottou rose amid loud cheering to move that the bill be read a second time that day six months. He took his stand against the bill on the ground of Christianity; insisting that the Jew is not only of a distinct nation, but also of a class having scarcely any social relation with the community—

In an agricultural and manufacturing nation, the Jew was neither an agricul- turist nor a manufacturer. He did not labour; he only bought and sold, at a small profit, the labour of others. There were few rich men among his persua- sion, but some very rich. They could not intermarry with the people of this country; and, except among the higher classes, they mixed but little socially with the members of other religious persuasions. They were citizens of the world rather than of any particular country. Though they were not aliens in the sense of owing allegiance to another country, there were no people who could transfer themselves to another country with the same facility as the Jews. Wherever the Jew went he found his own people; the same religion and the same language were common to them all; and when he removed to another canary he found persons of his own nation engaged in transactions similar to his own. Lord Ellenborough quoted from the Memoirs of Sir Fowell Buxton the table anecdote related by Mr. Rothschild, the founder of the house in London; who said that he first came to England from Frankfort because an English manufacturer had re- fused to show his patterns, and who boasted of having acted on the Most selfish principles: such was the origin of the great house of Rothschild, and of this bill.

Lord Ellenborough warned the House against the public danger of acceding to the measure, after warnings of Providence in the shape of famine and distress— nations convulsed on every side—the most ancient and powerful dynasties of Europe crushed in one day—the great empire of Austria broken in pieces like a potter's vessel—the disruption of some of the most ancient and important alliances of states—the present forgetting the history of the past- How could this country hope to escape the contamination of these principles, except by oh- taming aid from above; and he trusted that they would not deprive themsel—v of Heavenly aid by giving up the distinction which had hitherto belonged las this country of the exclusively Christian character of the British Le - ture. (Cheers.) Jews, could not consent to admit them into Parliament, so long as this A long debate ensued; -in -which the standing arguments on The Duke of CAMBRIDGE, professing great personal respect for the either side were urged, for the most part with a cairn reasoning manner—in favour of the bill, by Viscount CANNING, the Duke of ARGYLL, the Bishop of ST. DAVID'S, the Earl of Sr. GERMANS, Lord LYTTELTON, the Eszl YARBOROUGH, and the Earl of ELLESMERE; against the bill, by the A. bishop of CANTE'RBURY, the Earl of WINCHILSEA, the Bishop of °anus, the Earl of HARROWBY, the Earl of DESART, and Lord STANLEY. Li the case of the more telling speeches, the effect was obtained by a process of argumentative elaboration of which our limits forbid all attempt at abridg- ment; and, therefore, we proceed less to describe the debate as a whole than to characterize its more remarkable features, large or small. The Earl of WINCHILSEA distinguished himself by the heat of his language: he declared the bill to be a greater insult to the honour and glory of God than any which had been brought before the House; he protested against admitting one rich Jew to Parliament imorder to reward him for favours rendered to the Ministers of the day; and he hoped that none of the Bishops would vote in fa- vour of the bill, for if it passed, within a year not one of them would have a seat in that House. The Doke of ARGYLL made his maiden speech, and favourably distinguished himself by calm earnest argumentation. The Bishop of St. Davnis spoke in a style of historic investigation, warming towards the close into exhortation but still dignified and argumentative. He re- viewed the relations of Jews and exhortation, doctrinally and socially; traced the effects of mutual persecutions in still surviving asperities' showed how much they have in common, originally of faith, but now in this country of social and political sentiment; and maintained that the real crime of this country in respect to the Jews was the old persecutions, not the recent indulgence. The Bishop of OXFORD spoke in the very opposite spirit, though still for the most part in a quiet and argumentative manner. He maintained that the sitting in Parliament is no right, but a trust conferred at the will of the constituents, who have a perfect title to exclude Jews from that trust. He quoted documents, especially A Manual of Judaism by Mr. Joshua van Oven, to show that Jews are really a distinct and alien race, and that the earnest men among them depre- cate any social or political connexion with other nations, as weaning the affection of the Hebrew people from the true Jerusalem and Canaan. That people bad gone on for 1800 years, receiving a weakened tradition from their half mibe_ loving fathers; and how could it be expected that a race immersed in the pur- suit of gain, with nothing to counteract that passion but a belief in the truth of their religion, would be benefited by an admission into the British Parliament? Abhorring, as he did, the cruelty with which the forefathers (so called incorrectly) of the Jews were treated, he contended that that cruelty was based upon truth, and was kinder than the false lutmanity which would teach this people that the revelation made to them was either false or an immaterial trifle.

He moat here remark, that every Jew who was now in England had come to England (or his immediate ancestors) within the last two hundred years; and they had come on the condition that they should have shelter and kindness, but not political privileges.

No doubt, there might have been in certain cases certain advantages derivable from the election of Jewish Representatives. Far be it from him, however, to say that he knew any such instance. He professed to have no knowledge of those "secrets of the prison-house." (" Hear!" from Lord Clatiricanie.) He repeated, for the information of the noble Marquis, that though he knew nothing about the secrets of the late election for the city of London, yet that he was not without some knowledge of the public history of that transaction. (Loud cheers.) It was pretty well known that the Prime Minister's election for that city was not a feat of very easy accomplishment, and that there were no small difficulties to be over- come where there was a good deal of character on the one side and much capital on the other. ("Hear, hear") Deelafations in favour of removing Jewish disabi- lities might under such circumstances have been found exceedingly convenient-

He called upon the House to beware of doing what this measure would do—unchristianize the country; a measure which would yield nothing in return —not the smallest accession of strength, or of consistency, or of character—a measure which would injure all and strengthen none.

The Earl of ELLESMERE contended that the English Jew never shelters himself from civil responsibility and patriotic duties under the plea of being an alien: and that it is not safe to exclude from the making of the laws one who has so large a share in the interests of the country.

Lord STANLEY contended against the admission as a right. If there was no law before the time of James the First to exclude Jews from Parliament, it was because no Jew had a right to set his foot in the country; while the statute which now operates to his exclusion was suspended, during the reign of William and Mary, he could not obtain letters of naturalization; and if born here he could possess no freehold qualification. It is inexpedient to admit Jews, because a sincere Jew must desire to see our religion trodden under foot.

Lord BROUGHAM especially replied to the Bishop of Oxford. He denied the alleged partnership at the London election, between Lord John Russell and Baron Rothschild: it was slanderously said, and if a Bishop had rot, said it he should have said that it was false. (Laughter and cheers.) Laid John had always refused to be a party to the putting forward of Baron Rothschild, because cf the contest it would provoke; so that Ins only "obligation" to Baron Rothschild waS the injury which he sustained by the contest which ensued. As to the danger of admitting the Jews, Lord Brougham pointed to the analo- gous case of the Roman Catholics since Emancipation—the Protestant Establish- ment has been as efficiently vindicated as ever. As to the fear of " unchris- tianizing " the Commons, they were unchriatianized already. (Laughter.) Would the Commons come to the bar of that House by message, or in any other way, and by their words, acts, or desires, pretend to call themselves a Christian assembly? He did not know what would become of them; but assuredly it was not to be denied that we had a motley sort of legislation, half Infidel, half Chris- tian. (Laughter.) Of her Majesty he would only say, may God long preserve her in her Christian character to reign over a tolerant and enlightened people. As for the Ministry, they were undoubtedly nearly as unchristian as the Corn • mons. (Laughter.) So that he was afraid they must stand before the world as half Christian, half Pagan—a Pagan House of Commons and a perfectly Christian House of Lords. (Laughter.) He saw little use, therefore, of so much argument about unehristianizing the Legislature. The Bishop of °as-mu explained. He regretted that any words should have fallen from him in the warmth of debate which might appear susceptible of the meaning which his noble and learned friend had affixed to them. He had not the smallest idea that the noble Lord at the head of the Government had been Kir/ to any bribery whatever—Lord John had supported the admission of Jews into. Parliament long before; and the Bishop heartily regretted having, in the midst of a grave argument, used words that might be construed to bear such a

i m He had no intention whatever to slander the noble Lord, and he begged to his words. (Cheers.)

In his reply, the Marquis of LANSDOWNE also touched on tins point. -He stated that not a shilling of those expenses of the city of London election which ceght to have been paid by Lord John Russell had been left by him unpaid. In that election Lord John Russell had kept his interest and his affairs perfectly âiatinct from those of any other candidate; and he received the reward of his high character and uniform consistency, in receiving from the citizens of the Me- tropolis the highest distinction which it was in their power to bestow. The House then divided, with the following resu1t-1

Content [Present, 96; Proxies, 32] 128 Non-Content [Present, 125; Proxies, 383 163

Majority against the bill 35

PUBLIC EXPENDITURE.

On Monday, the Earl of ELLENBOROUGH moved for accounts of all charges voted out of the public revenue in 1838 and paid from the Con- solidated Fund in 1847, and voted from the Consolidated Fund in 1838 and paid out of the public revenue in 1847; and the same for each year between those dates. Lord f.11enborough took the opportunity to criticize in detail the enormous in- crease which had taken place in the Miscellaneous Estimates during the last ten sears. After all additions and reductions had been balanced, there appeared in 1847 an increase of 805,0001. over the year 1838. Under the bead of Public Works and Buildings there bad been a great general increase. The Houses in which their Lordehips sat had already called for 844,7001. in ten years. Lord Ellenthrough observed such increasing expenses with great regret. " Un. doubtedly, it would be well to have a magnificent palace if we could afford it; but when he looked around him he could uot but express the opinion that the style of building was not adapted to a nation in the maturity of its strength, but was rather suited to the vain-glory of a declining country. He would prefer to such a building as they now possessed a plain structure, suited to the plain ha- bits of their ancestors; and he could only hope that business would be as well conducted in that splendid hall as in the plain and ordinary house in which their forefathers had met." ("Hear, hear! ")

There was another topic of regret. He was most desirous that the Sovereign should be placed in a position of the utmost possible comfort; but he could not avoid giving expression to his sorrow that the charge of 50,0001. for Buckingham palace should have fallen in 1847, a year of perhaps the greatest public distress ever known. It would be most satisfactory to receive an assurance from the Go- eernment that no further votes under that head would be proposed until at least the revenue equalled the expenditure. The charge of 22,0001. for a palm-house at Kew he thought most indefensible in these tunes. He passed to the beading "Salaries, &c., Public Departments." The Poor-law charges bad in 1847 increased 88,5671. over 1888. But a most enormous increase was that in the charges for printing and stationery, which ran thus—in 1844., 217,2741.; in 1845, 226,5881.; in 1846, 249,0761.; and last year no less than 295,5181. The Record Commission cost 2,063/. in 1838, and nearly 13,0001. last year. A very singular increase was that for the Privy Council Of- fice and Office for Trade. While the charge for these two offices had increased by about 12,0001. in the course of ten years, the charge for 1847 was greater than for 1846, although in the latter year the Railway Department was removed from the Board of Trade.

He could hardly come across an item not increased. Under the bead "Law and Justice" there was an apparent increase of 444,3931.; and, if the transferred charges were deducted, a real increase of 176,3931. To this, however, mast be added law charges for England, on an average of three years, 27,6661., making a total increase of 201,0591. under the head of "Law and Justice." The excess in the charges for prisons and convicts alone amounted to 167,7381. Under the head "Education, Science, and Art," the charge in 1838 for general expenditure was 70,0001.; in 1847 it was 200,0001. The Mail-packet service had called for no less than 335,0001. a year additional. The disembodied Militia, a force quite unlikely to be employed, still called for 150,0001. a year, in this time of our financial diffi- culties.

The suppression of the Slave-trade,.„jn,ddToo to the charges of keeping twenty-six vessels on the African coast, imel'others elsewhere, cost us 7,7501. re- muneration for special services, 23,0001. for Commissions, 10,0001. for the main- tenance of captured Negroes, and 41,600L for Justices in the West Indies; making a total of 82,3501. In conclusion, Lord Ellenborough urged, that in these times of financial diffi- why it was absolutely necessary for the Government to postpone every charge which could be postponed without great detriment to the public service.

Lord LANSDOWNE made some brief defensive and explanatory comments on Lord Elleoborough's criticisms, and consented to the returns.

CLERGY OF LINCOLN: MR. HORSMAN'S FACTS.

On the Same day, the Bishop of LINCOLN, replying to Earl Ithowwww, noticed some assertions reported by the Times to have been made in Par- liament by Mr. Horsman, that two clergymen in Lincoln or its neighbour- hood lately died of starvation.

On reading the Times report, the Bishop had written to Mr. Horsman for the names of the two clergymen; and had received a reply from that gentleman sta- ting that the report was incorrect—he "did not state that two clergymen had died of starvation, but that he could give instances of clergymen who had died in such a state of destitution that it would hardly be too much to say that it was bordering on starvation." On being asked for two cases, Mr. Horsman had sent him the particulars of the case of the Reverend Mr. Watkins, Vicar of the parish of Anborne, six miles and a quarter from Lincoln, who died in the year 1834; and the case of Mr. Baker, incumbent of a parish two miles from the Cathedral. Mr. Watkins's income had been 541., not always regularly paid: he suffered from a terrible cancer, the agony of which drove him to habits of opium-eating to pro- cure stupefaction. The church services were neglected—no service for weeks together—no administration of the sacrament in a period of two years. A Dis- senting chapel sprang up. Mr. Watkins had no servant, and was forced to beg the smallest gifts of money, or even his daily bread. , When death ended the agony of his body, mind, and spirit, he was buried atthe cost of the clergy of the adjacent villages. Mr. Baker's income Mr. Horsman stated, was 95/. His death was occasioned by his own excesses. He and hili'Wife became ill. The only per- son they had in the house was a workhouse girl, some sixteen years of age,—a dreadful beginning of life indeed for her. Mr. Horsman's statement continued "In the middle of the night this child was waked by the poor man's groans. She went to his room, found him writhing in extreme agony, threw a sheet over him, and left him to expire. A dog could scarcely have died more wretchedly. It was not till late in the evening that any one could be not to approach the wretched deathbed. When they searched the house, not a single coin of any kind, nor a single article of food, was to be found. The body of this clergyman of the Esta- blished Church of England and Ireland was interred at the cost of Archdeacon Bonney."

The Bishop of Lincoln observed on these representations, that the first of the two cases occurred fourteen years ago, before his residence in the county. He believed Mr. Watkins had been very poor, and had even been in gaol for debt; but he was confident that the neighbouring clergy could never have allowed Mr. Watkins to die of starvation. The second case was recent. "Mr. Baker," said the Bishop, "died in circumstances of extreme destitution; but he had contracted inveterate habits of drinking, and his death was the consequence of those habits. I know that he had borrowed money of the Dean of Lincoln within six weeks or two months of his death: but if a clergyman spends all that he receives in the purchase of intoxicating liquors, how can he do otherwise than die in extreme destitution ? "

Mr. Horsman bad quoted, in his speech, a correspondent's account of a clergy- man who rode over the country performing several duties on Sabbath, at churches very remote from each other. The Bishop believed this statement related to facts which occurred some years ago; and he thought that if the honourable gentleman's correspondents had communicated the facts to the Bishop of the diocese at the time when they took place, in order that means might be taken to prevent their recurrence, he would have shown a more sincere desire to correct the abuses in the Church than by the course which he had taken.

SaNaroav BILL.

The consideration of the Health of Towns Bill in Committee was re- sumed in the House of Commons on Monday, with clause 57; which was verbally amended and agreed to.

Clause 58 provided that the local surveyor might order the opening of a window in each inhabited cellar: Lord DUNCAN, Sir ROBERT INGLIS, and other speakers, hoped that this window might be exempt from tax. Lord MORPETH promised to confer with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the point of revenue.

A discussion arose on the other part of the clause, which restricted the letting of cellars except under certain conditions, and on the suggestion that occupants should have a time allowed to seek new dwellings. A pro- viso was introduced saving present occupants from the operation of the bill for twelve months after its passing.

Clause 59 was amended so as to include " lighting" among the duties of the local board.

Clause 61 directed local boards to declare streets to be highways which had been sewered and paved to their satisfaction: Mr. GRANGER, Mr. HENLEY, and other Members, objected, that private owners ought to have an option in such cases, and proposed a proviso requiring their consent. Lord MorirErn agreed.

Clause 63, giving the power to regulate the width of streets, &c., but granting an appeal from the local to the central board, provoked an amend ment from Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD; who Was supported by Mr. Hew LEY in his objection to any control of the local board. Lord 'Asmara% Mr. Unorrnairr, and Mr. SPOONER, thought there should be an appeal, hut differed as to the tribunal to which it should be carried. A division was taken, and the clause as it stood was carried by 85 to 19. . Clause 64 authorizes measures for the improvement of streets. Lord LIN- COLN suggested the allowance of an appeal to a certain number of dissentient rate-payers; and Lord MORPETH promised his consideration of the point.

Clause 65 empowers local boards to provide places of 'public recreation. On the suggestion of Mr. HENLEY, Lord MORPETR consented to insert words requiring that the rate-payers should have six months' notice of the exercise of the powers.

Clause 66 enables local boards, among other things, to enter houses' to judge of the supply of water, and to take means to secure a sufficient and constant stream: Mr. HENLEY objected to such extensive powers—con- trol should be given to the rate-payers. Sir JAMES GRAHAM compli- mented Lord Morpeth on the good temper and sense of his conduct of the bill, and Mr. Henley on the many improvements he had originated. Sir James, however, objected to the very great powers of this and the follow- ing clause; which furthermore assumed, as certain, some mechanical prin- ciples not agreed on by hydraulic engineers. Lord MoithErn granted tlust the powers in question were somewhat tyrannical, but doubted if such stringent provisions were not justified by the facts collected by the Sana- tory Commisshin: still, he Was undesirous to force any system not fully ascertained, and would ainend the Clause so that it should not be obliga- tory but recommendatory oft the beard to provide that water be supplied by high and constant pressure.—Agteed to. Clause 67 was objected to is tofu by Sir JAMES GRANalt. Was14 meant that the local boards should enter each house, and, against the will of the owner, fix the quantity of water his house should pay for? It should be remembered that the cost would invariably be thrown on the poor occupier as increased rent. Sir James objected to such interference with the domestic habits of the lower classes: indeed, excellent as the bill generally was, a tendency to excessive interference was its great vice. Some words from the ATTORNEY-GENERAL failed to reconcile Sir James, and called up Mr. MILES in opposition. Lord MORPETLI agreed to postpone and reconsider the clause: he felt that the questions it involved were very difficult. Sir Jas GRAHAM again expressed his admiration of Lord Morpeth's conciliatory spirit. Clauses 72 to 78, referring to the purchase of water-works from existing companies, were objected to by Mr. HENLEY, as 'tending to monopoly. Lord MORPETH consented to their erasure; and it was provided that the bill should not apply in places where a water company already existed. Clause 80 prohibits burials in any burial-ground certified by the general Board to be dangerous to public health: Mr. MacKinnon urged going further than this clause, and giving a power to provide extra cemeteries. Lord MORPETH explained, that more extensive provisions had originally been contemplated; but it had been found that the subject would involve so great an amount of additional complex legialation, as would endanger the present bill. The Board would not grant a certificate without full in- quiry whether some other available place of burial was in the neighbour- hood of the prohibited ground. Mr. HENLEY asked for the prohibition to be confined to places where the parishioners had a legal right to burial else- where than in the prohibited ground: for there were hundreds of places where no cemeteries existed, and where the parishioners had no right of burial beyond their own parishes. Lord Moithain consented to insert words restricting the prohibition to places- "where sufficient means of in- terment exist within a convenient distance from such burying-ground or church." Hr. HENLEY said, such words would improve the clause, but would not remove all difficulty. The clause was so amended, and agreed to.

Clause 84, authorizing the levy of rates for paving and making sewers, &c., was amended by the insertion of " local " for "general" Board.

Further clauses, up to the 10411h, were agreed to, some of them after verbal amendments; and the House resumed; to sit again in Committee oxt the following Thursday.

On Thursday, the remaining clauses of the bill provoked but little dis- cussion, and were agreed to with verbal or other trifling alterations.

The postponed 67th clause, imposing the obligation on owners to tar- nish constant water in their houses, was agreed to, with the proviso that the owner should only be so obliged where water can be obtained at the rate of twopence per week. The House resumed, and the report was received amidst some cheering.

CUSTOMS-DUTIES.

On Tuesday, Lord Gmanon RENTINCK moved for a variety of returns showing the reductions of duties of late years on Timber and Silks; and flowing the quantities of those things, and of a great many other manu- factured imports, which have been brought into this country under the changed tariff-duties of the last five or six years.

He enforced his motion by a speech of great length and detail, directed chiefly to make out that the reduction of the Timber-duties in 1842 had been followed by a ruinous fall in the price of Canadian timber, an exorbitant advance in that of Bal- tic timber, with the further misfortune that the Baltic trade is also rapidly going into foreip hands, our own ships having fallen off while those of the foreigner have trebled since 1845. He also endeavoured to make out that the alteration of the eilk-duties in 1842 and following years has been the cause of the great dis- tress which has been prevalent in Spitelfields since those changes. Mr. GLADSTONE took up the cudgels for the late Government, which had orginatecl the changes impugned, in a speech of argument and facts. Be showed that the tabulated results of Lord George's calculations, with regard to the timber and silk trade, were totally fallacious: that they were drawn from too narrow premises and were in truth the results of special years, selected because of their exaggerated complexion. An extended average showed results of exactly the contrary character. The Colonial timber-trade could not be ruined, for the shipping in it was increasing; and the price of Baltic timber had not increased enormously, but only some 4i per cent; while the duty had been lowered so much that the importations and consumption bad increased from 130,000 to 420,000 loads. The same was the case with the silk-trade: there had been a general increase in every one of its departments. As to the general distress, it had not needed such ela- borate proof—it was self-evident and acknowledged; but nothing could be more slender and trivial than the attempts made to connect the existing distress with the legislation said to be the cause of it.

Ministers thought Mr. Gladstone's defence very efficient, and added little to the discussion. The returns were agreed to.

PARLLAMENTARY REFORM.

On Tuesday, when the debate on Lord George Bentinck's motion for Customs returns terminated, after eleven o'clock, Mr. HUME stated, with regret, that he could not at that late hour proceed with his motion on the Subject of Parliamentary Reform— He had been waiting the whole evening in order to bring the question forward; and no person was more disappointed than he was at not being able to do so. He found that the first open day would be the 20th of June. ("Hear, hear!" and laughterfeymi the Opposition benches.) He would fix the motion for that day, and he hoped he would then meet with no impediment. (Laughter.) - Mr. Fnannus O'Coxxoa moved the adjournment of the House, in order that he might speak— On a former occasion he had come a great distance to join in a discussion, and it should not be his fault if Mr. Hume ever deceived him again. (Laughter and cheers.) The motion was but "a tub to the whale." The honourable Member for Montrose asked the working classes to fraternize with the middle classes; and he himself had come to the conclusion—but with great violence to his feelings— to abate a great portion of the principles he had always strenuously advocated, and which he would continue to advocate. After the working classes had been so appealed to for union, and after their having been before deluded by the middle classes, he asked the honourable Member for Montrose whether he thought it likely that he for one, or that the working classes, would confide in him? (Cheers from the Opposition.) He had juggled the people for the last month, and was now going to postpone their question for anotlaer month. He was not surprised that honourable gentlemen opposite should think they obtained a great triumph, " and that they, should smile and treat with derision the position in which the honourable Member had placed his constituents. (Laughter.) He would not be a party td each "a delusion, mockery, and snare.' (.• Bear, hear!" from the Opposition.) He would not he-n party. to counselling the working classed to *ee conlidepoe in men who he believed in his soul and conscience Only intended to use them for their own purposes. (Loud °Opposition cheers.)

Mr. ,Conosa counselled Mr. Hunae,to pay no regard to the words of Mr. O'Connor.

No reasonable man would think of bringing forward such a question at the then hour of the night—if it had come on at five o'clock, a whole evening would scarcely have sufficed for its full discussion. Mr. Cobden advised the rejection of the advice offered in no courteous or complimentary terms, and equally the avoidance of all imitation of Mr. O'Connor's courses. He gave his own advice, founded on a long experience of Mr. O'Connor's tactics; advice grounded on no personal feelings, for no man had lavished sir many compliments on Mr. Cobden as the Member for Nottingham. "For seven years I bad directed against me the relentless hostility of the honourable gentleman, while advocating what I believed then, and what I believe still to be, the cause of the working classes—I mean the abolition of the tax on food. That honourable gen- tleman did all he could to array the working classes against me on that -subject; and I had more hostility to encounter from him and his party than I had from the Duke of Buckingham and all his followers. What was the result? I never fraternized with the honourable gentleman or his myrmidons—I never fraternized or succumbed to them for a moment. I always treated him as the leader of a small, insignificant, and powerless party. I never identified him with the mass of the working classes of the country. I treated him then, as I treat him now, not as the leader of the working classes of the country, but as the leader of an organized faction of the smallest portion of the community. I never failed to beat him and his followers in public assem- blies in every county in the kingdom. I speak for myself, and only for myself; bat in any agitation which I enter upon for the political franchises of the work- ing classes, as I never have, I never will, fraternize with the honourable gentle- man or his organized followers; and, as I said before a hundred times, I say again, that I set them at defiance now. I exhort my honourable friend not to be deluded by anything that falls from the honourable gentleman as to his power with the working classes of the country. As he was weak before, he is powerless now; and as to his authority with them, it is equally unimportant and uninfluen- tial with respect to any political question. (" Hear, hear! ") My honourable friend may feel assured, notwithstanding the unwarrantable and ferocious attack of the honourable gentleman, that the people of this country would not withdraw that confidence which the great mass of the nation bad in him." (Loud cheers.) Mr. O'Cosirroa and Mr. COBDEN having exchanged explanations on a point of fact, the discussion was closed by this declaration from Lord JOHN RUssELL- "I cannot see that there is any objection, or anything unusual, in the honour- able Member for Montrose postponing his motion till a future opportunity, as he was not able to bring it on tonight. With regard to the other question which the honourable Members raised between themselves, the honourable Member for Not- tingham saying that the working classes had no confidence in the motion of the honourable Member for Montrose, and the honourable - Member for the West Riding saying that no confidence ought to be placed in the honourable Mem- ber for Nottingham,—without making any observation on this question of personal confidence--(Laughter)—I must say, that my belief is, that the middle and the working classes of the country neither wish for the one great reform nor the other; that they are neither anxious for the People's Charter, nor for this sreat plan of reform which comes near the Charter, as proposed by the honourable Member for Montrose. (Cheers.) I believe they wish neither one nor the other; and that they see their true intemt is that there should be a gradual progress of reform, and that this Home should give its attention to the questions before as, and that in the peace and quiet of the country lies their true interest." (Loud Msnuiteria: and O. sition cheers.) SuGo EiatcrioN: Connurr Dsktneos.

On Monday, Mr. ORMSBY Goss moved for a Select Committee to in. quire into the allegations of the petition of John Delaney. The petition stated that Charles Towneley, Esq., Was returned for Sligo at the late election by a majority of 7; and that there were two petitions against the re, turn, on the ground of gross undisguised bribery, which were intrusted to Mr. nr Kelly for passing through the proper formalities. Mr. James Coppock, the Par:. liamentary agent of Mr. Towneley, had commenced a negotiation with Mr, &Hy to induce him, for a reward, to withdraw these petitions. He had at last agrejs'i that 1,0001, and a letter promising the Parliamentary influence of Mr. Towneley, and of his brother the Member for Beverley, and of Lord Camoys, to get Kelly good Government place, should be given in exchange for an authority to sm. draw the petitions. Afterwards the letter promising influence was foregone by Kelly, and an extra 5001 agreed on in lieu of it: at last the actual sum of 1,5001 in bank-notes was paid to him oti his handing the unpresented petition, withl; letter to the Speaker withdrawing the petition already presented. A few hours after, Mr. Coppock discovered that Kelly was an unauthorized agent, and inca- pable of withdrawing the petitions; and he hastened back to Kelly and induced him to return the whole 1,5001 Mr. Delaney's petition prayed an inquiry into this transaction, as corrupt and illegal, and as a breach of privilege. Mr. Gore also read a correspondence between Mr. Coppock and the Speakees Secretary, which he thought disclosed conduct on the part of the latter calling for serious and searching inquiry. He concluded by saying that the high cha- racter of Mr. Towneley led him to hope and expect he would be able to clear himself of all share in these charges: he could not say the same of Mr. Coppock, Colonel CONOLLY having seconded the motion for inquiry, Sir Roaenr Nous rose on the instruction of Mr. Towneley to deny that he had "hand or part" in the matters alleged, and to court the fullest, investigation. Sir Robert, however, hoped that, in accordance with usage, no Special Coro. mittee should be appointed till the Committee already sitting on petitions against the Sligo election had reported to the House.

After discussion, this suggestion was approved of by the House; and the motion was withdrawn, to be renewed after the Sligo Committee should have presented its report.

SOTOMAYOR CORRESPONDENCE: SIR HENRY RULWER'S REPULSION FRom MADRID. Ministers in both Houses hive been plied, daily, with questions regarding the late events in Madrid. Their replies were at first by no means explicit. Is the end, however, it was extracted from Lord Parareesrox, that more di- plomatic correspondence had passed in the course of the Sotomayor squabble than had yet been published—more would in fact shortly be made public; and that Sir Henry Bulwer had neither been recalled from liTadrid to receive another embassy elsewhere, nor been requested to leave Spain in consequence of a rupture between the two Cabinets.

Tint WAR ix DENMARK. In reply to Mr. PHILIP HOWARD, on Thursday, Lord PALMERSTON stated, that he had received information that the Prussian Government did not mean to levy a forced contribution in Jutland, which General Wrangel had lately decreed. Both sides were showing a disposition to con ciliation. , THE JOINT STOCK COMPANIES RILL was read a third.time on Thursday; the Arrominv-Cissiiitar. first introducing a rider to give a power to the Lord Chancellor of appointing the Judges of Local Cows to carry out its provisions in cases at his discretion.

THE LAW OF EtilrArt (Sdortaso) I5L„went tbrongh ,Committee on

Thursday ; without material, alteration of,ithy „

LANCASTER EIMdrION. 0104iind, the Laiacaster Election Committee re- ported that Mr. R. B. Armstrong was duly elected roe the borough of Laucaster; and that the names lir certain parties; not having a right to vote, had been struck off the poll by the Committee.

STAMFORD ELECTION: Loop ExierEa's INTERFERENCE. On the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, it was agreed that the Geueral Committee on elections should he instructed to report the names of such Members as they,thought fit per- sons to serve on the Stamford Borough Committee.

ADJOURNMENT OVER TIIE, DERBY DAY. On Tuesday, Lord GEORGE BE:ern:ex moved that the House at its rising be adjourned to Thursday: pre- suming on a 'general and ready concurrence. Bet Mr. HUME and some other Members objected, on the score of the pressure of public business, and particularly in behalf of the Scotch Members in town, whose Enroll Bill had been fixed for Wednesday. Mr. Fox MaimE deplored his unlucky mistake in fixing the Entail Bill discussion on the Derby-day, and begged an early half-day in return, if the House were resolved on taking ita holyday. The House divided on the question, and the motion for adjournment was carried only by a majority of 13; the num- bers being 103 to 90.