Manta atilt Prereebingl in Parliament.

I. THE BUDGET. Last night, the House of Commons having gone into Committee of Supply, Lord ALTHORP rose to make his financial statement. He admitted. frankly that his views of the future were not sanguine, nor would his recapitulation of the past be congratulatory. His duty, however, was to state his case fairly, without disguise or concealment. He went in the first place into a statement of the receipts and expenditure of the years 1830 and 1831- " The national income of the year 1830 (ending 5th of January 1831), was 50,056,6161., and the expenditure was 47,142,943/., leaving a surplus of 2,913,673/. The expenditure of 1831 was within 19,6461. the same as that of 1830; that is to say, the expenditure of 1831 was 47,123,297/. This similarity of amount does not arise from the equality of the votes of the two years (for the votes of 1831 exceeded those of 1830), but is owing to there being a saving in 1831 from the reduction of the 44 per Cents, to the amountof 777,433/. To account for the increased expenditure, I ought to state, that there is an increase in the Army Estimates of 225,1301. on the Navy Estimates of 280,252/., and on the Miscellaneous Estimates of 238,008/. This gives an apparent increase of 743,390/.; but from this we have to deduct a part of the charge on the Civil List, which has been transferred to the amount of 322,61 U., and then we shall have a remaining excess of 420,7791. In the Ordnance Estimates there is a decrease of 149,374/. From 'the Unclaimed Dividends we have a sum of 127,400/. All these together leave for an excess in the votes of the House during that year 757.,797/., which makes a difference, as I have already stated, of 19,646/. The net income of 1830 was 50,056,6161., and the net income of 1831 was 46,424,440!.; leaving a deficiency for the year 1831 of 3,632,1761. This diminution has taken place principally in items of the Customs-and Excise, there being a deficiency in the Customs of 1,025,052/.9 and in the Excise of 2,340,360/. ; there has also been a decrease in the Stamps of 110,2921., and on the general taxes, owing to a delay in their collection, of 149,062!.; in addition to which there is a deficiency in the Miscellaneous, to the amount of 113,0301., owing to the payment on account of the Four per Cents., and of the hereditary revenues in Scotland,—these three items together making a deficiency of 372,384/, or, taken in conjunction with the deficiencies in the Customs and Excise, of 3,737,726/. On the other hand, there has been an increase in the Post Office 91 64,1941., and on the Unpaid Dividends of 41,426/. These items refer to the year ending 5th of January. The House is aware, as I have already stated, that the expenditure of 1831 amounted to 47,123,2971., ind the income to 46,424,440L; consequently there was a defi. ciency of 698,857/. I have already shown that the diminution of the income of the year was 3,632,1761- ; and we now see that the deficiency was 698,8571. Of course, we must deduct the amount of the surplus, in order to thaw the de- ficiency of the year ; and it tberefore appeals that the state of dm revenue at the commencement of 1832 was, instead of having a surplus of 2,973,000/. as in 1831, a deficiency to the amount of about 700,0001."

He enumerated the causes of this falling off-

" A large reduction was made by my predecessor, in 1830, a considerable por- tion of which came into the income of 1831 ; and I myself also made large reductions—reductions which have turned out larger than the ircome of the country could afford. The reduction in the Customs on Coals and Slates has been about 900,000/, on Barilla 90,000/., and on Sugar and Molassts 300,00W., besides which, there has been a deficiency in the Corn Duties of about 200,0001.; making altogether a deficiency of 1,485,000/. In the Excise, the reductions have been still greater : the reduction in the Beer Tax amounts to 2,350,000/.; on Leather to 200,000/, on Cider to 50,0001., and on Printed Calicoes (in- cluding the drawback) to 675,000/. ; besides which, there was a diminution in the Candle Duty to the amount of 20,000/., chiefly arising from an expectation having been formed that some reduction in that duty would take place. Alto- gether, these reductions amount to 3,295,0001., which, added to the Customs, make the reduction, as compared with the former year, 4,780,000. But the deficiency of the Revenue, as I have already stated, is 3,632,176/. ; and, there- fore, the statement that I have just made proves that there has been a consider- able increase in the consumption of other taxable articles during the year."

Lord Althorp having observed that this statement included only the year down to the 5th of January, proceeded to give the statement down to the end of the April quarter-

" It is now my duty to state, that the deficiency which existed at the end of the year ivas considerably augmented at the end of "the April quarter; the reason of this is, that a large portion of the Estimates voted in the preceding year came to be expended during the first quarter of the year 1832, and, consequently, the Estimates that had reference to the first quarter were not diminished in their amount. It is owing to this circumstance that the deficiency on the 5th of April amounted to 1,240,000/. The mode in which the Government has en- deavoured to meet this deficiency has not been by the proposal of any new taxes ; but we have tried to the very utmost to make reductions in the Estimates of the year : these reductions, however, could not take effect previous to the month of April, and therefore as yet they have not been brought to bear upon the defici- ency I have just stated. We have reduced the Estimates, as the House is aware, upwards of two millions. We have also looked to reduction, as far as we could, In the amount of the expenses of the different public offices. With respect to the late Administration, I must do them the justice to say that they acted with great vigour in this way. On referring to their labours, I find that in 1829, the first year of the Duke of Wellington's Administration, the reductions effected amounted to 188,9411.; in 1829 they were 42,0191.; in 1830 they were 109,129/. ; making together 340,0891. This certainly was a large reduction, and of course rendered it the more difficult for us to continue and extend these diminutions. The reductions however, which we were able to make during the first year that we were in Office amounted to 234,3531.; and during the pre- sent year, I think that I am below the mark when I state that thessavill amount to 100,000!. I therefore think that we have a fair claim to say that we have exerted ourselves to some effect as far as we have gone, and I trust that we shall find ourselves able to go on in the same course."

If these continued reductions proved insufficient, his Lordship ob- served the Government must of course appeal to Parliament for an augmentation of the revenue ; the deficiency, however, was not as yet such as justified any extraordinary alarm. Lord Althorp then went on to compare the state of the revenue down to April this year, with its state down to April last year.

" The interest and expenses of the Public Debt will amount to 27,826,000/. ; the interest on Exchequer Bills to 662,934/. ; the other charges on the manage- ment of the Consolidated Fund will amount to 1,741,000/. • the cost of main- taining the Army, to 7,876,0001.; the Navy, to 5,842,8351.; the Ordnance, to 1,478,000/. ; the Miscellaneous, to 2,930,000!.; the total being 47,858,427/. The interest of the Debt then remaining the same as before, there would be but a difference of 3,000/. in the payments upon Exchequer Bills. The whole in- terest both upon the Funded Debt and the Exchequer Bills, the House will ob- serve, amounts to 28,365,000!., and the other charges upon the management of the Debt to 1,971,000/, making, as I said before, the expenditure of the last year amount to 47,853,4271. -The Estimates for the present year altogether amount to 45,696,376/. This, I beg to say, is an amount less by 2,000,000/. than the Estimates of last year."

Be next stated the probable produce of taxation for the current year, and the plans of Government for meeting what deficiencies it might offer- " I shall begin this Fart of the subject by stating that the Customs' duties for theyear ending the 5th of April last, produced a revenue of 16,275,000/. I ex- pect that in the year ending the 5th of April 1833, the duty On imported cot- ton will cause an increase amounting to 260,0001.; that the saving from the discontinuance of the linen bounties will amount to 100,0001. I also expect a considerable increase of revenue from the duty on tobacco. The duty on this article has gone on regularly increasing for a long time past : in the year 1830 it was 2,858,0001.; in 1831, it amounted to 2,910,000!.; and in the year 1832, it rose to 2,995,000/. I think I am justified in expecting in the present year an increased revenue from tobacco that will yield 35,000/. ; and I think the House will agree with me that lam also warranted in anticipating from the wine-duties arc equal amount. True it is that in the last year there was no increase; but that is easily accounted for by the circumstance, that people being aware that a clatage was about to be effected in the scale of duties, availed themselves of the long notice to lay in large stocks; and therefore I think I have a full right to expect that in the course of the ensuing year there will be an increase, and I think it will be admitted that I am not going too far in stating that increase at 35,000/. Taking then 260,000/. for cotton and 70,0001. for the other two, I may calculate that we shall have in the Customs a total increase of 430,000!.; that being added to 16,2'75,000/., gives the whole amount of Customs at 16,705,000/. We must, however, deduct from that a sum of 500,000/. being the amount of duties received upon corn, which I hope we shall hear nothing of thisiear,—the prospect from the harvest being so good, that I trust we shall this season have no necessity for any importation of foreign corn. I hexe further in this place to observe, that we must make a reduction of 100,000/. more on account of the diminutions consequent on the new scale of duties contained in the sche- dule to the Customs Duties' Bill; and there must also be a deduction of 80,000/. on account of Sugar Duties. We shall then have a total of 830,000!.; which being deducted 'from the gross sum of 16,705,0001, leaves a remainder of 15,871,0001."

He alluded to the causes which had, during the last eighteen months, seriously pressed upon the revenue-

." The causes to which I allude are the political excitement which has for some time past prevailed throughout the country; and the other, though one to which I never attached much importance, yet it did materially affect the Cus- toms—I mean the prevalence of Cholera. I am sorry to say that that cause still continues, but we have every reason to hope that its operation will not be of long duration. The third cause to which I attach the most importance, as having tended to depress the revenue,t,is the state of the currency. It is well known that during the past year the currency has been gradually contracting that throughout the whole of that period the exchanges have been decidedly against this country, and that has, of course produced a considerable stagnation of trade ; but, fortunately, it is a cause which no longer exists, and is not likely in future to operate. The exchanges are now in favour of this country, and thus that which I regarded as the principal cause of decline may now be consi- dered at an end."

He went on to notice the Excise—

The Excise to the 5th of April 1832, amounted to 16,516,632/. Os. 10d. e and he expected an increase on the malt and hops duty to the amount of 156,000/. There would be a saving on certain drawbacks to the amount of 165,000/. He also looked forward to an increase on the duties on spirits and some other articles to the amount of 160,000/. The reason why he calculated on an increase in the spirits' duty was, because no effect, in lowering the amount of revenue derivable from that source, had been produced by the Manion@ duty laid on in 1830 ; but, on the contrary, an improvement had taken place in the amount. But little diminution had taken place in the consumption of spirits. The stock on band, he believed, was extremely small, and the mantifiteturers were likely to extend their operations. In the different duties on hawkers' li- cences, starch, tea, and vinegar, there was a considerable increase.

The sum of the whole stood thus— Taking the Customs to the 5th of April 1833, at 15,870.0007. • the Excise, deducting the duty on candles, at 16,850,00W. ; Stamps at 7,000,000/. ; Taxes at 5,000.000/. ; Post-office at 1,500,000/. ; and Miscellaneous at 250,0004 these items formed a total of 46,470,000/. Deduct from that 45,696,376/. as the amount of expenditure, tnil it left a surplusjor the year ended in April 1833, of 773,624/. There was, however, to be set against that, the deficiency of 1832, amounting to 1,240,413/. Take from that sum the surplus of 773,6241., for 1833, and it would leave a deficiency, on the two yaws, of 466,789/. Be was not at all sanguine when he calculated that there would he a surplus of about 770,000/. on the year which was now going on. He was, however, perfectly aware that that surplus was to a certain extent imputable to deferred payments of the last year coming in ; but, on the other hand, it should be observed that part of the payments of the present year might in like manner fall into the sub- sequent veer. He had now, he believed, so far as he could recollect, stated every thing that was necessary on this occasion; but lie would be most ready to give any explanation' with respect to his view of the revenue, that might be required of him. As lie had before intimated, it was his intention to move for a renewal of the sugar-duties. He did not think, that, in the present state of the country, it would be justifiable for him to call for any very large vote.

He concluded by moving a resolution for the continuing the sugar and molasses duties.

Some conversation took place between Mr. Got:mint:4 and Lord ALTHORP as to whether there was an actual deficiency or not. Lord ALTHORP made a distinction between the current year, in which there was a surplus, and the past, in which there was a deficiency.

Mr. GOULBURN insisted the distinction did not mend the case— If he had a limited income, and in one year got so much into debt that he could not pay off that debt in the ensuing year, would not his means, to that ex- tent, be deficient ? It was obvious, notwithstanding this alleged surplus, that at the end of the second year, a certain portion of debt would still remain.

He proceeded to enlarge on the advantages of a large revenue, and the imposing attitude which it enabled the country to assume and maintain. He remarked on the alterations in the wine-duties and their effects— When the noble Lord proposed an alteration of the wine-duties, it was tinctly stated to him that the course which he was pursuing, although intended to benefit the revenue, was not likely to have any such effect. Mr. Goulbarn then said, "If you place an additional duty on those wines which are consumed by the middle and lower orders while you are reducing the duty on the wines that are drank by the higher classes, you will find, in the end, that the revenue will not be, by such a course, rendered more productive." This, he was con- vinced, would be an assertion, the justice of which every day would more and more confirm. The noble Lord had this year the benefit of the duties on the stock of wine on hand. But Mr. Goulburn knew, from persons intimately con- nected with that branch of trade, that up to the 14th of the present month, the decrease in the importation of Spanish and Portuguese wines amounted to 274,000 gallons, while the increase of the importation of French wines was only 14,000 gallons. Here was, on the one hand, a sacrifice of duties to the amount of 180,000/. ; while, on the other, the new system was not likely to produce, up to April 1833, a sum of more than 35,0001. Mr. Goulburn had expressed, in the outset of his address, a fear that the Deficiency Bills would not this year be paid at the ordinary. term. Lord ALTIIORP stated that the fear was wholly unfounded.

Mr. K. DOUGLAS complained, that after the declaration in Lord Goderich's circular, no measure of relief for the West India Colonise had been brought forward.

Lord ALTHORP answered, that the relief, it was well known, depended- on the acceptance of the Orders in Council.

Sir HENRY PARNELL said, that in the year 1830 it was possible to have made a reduction of five millions,—farst, by abolishing the Sinks ing Fund; second, by reducing the expenditure; and one million liy.• the reduction of the Four per Cents. Mr. Goulburn had directed all. his efforts to one point only, and had merely reduced the Four per- Cents. When that gentleman complained of the deficiency of the re:. venue, he ought to recollect, and the House would suffer him to remind' it, that the Budget of his noble friend was not carried into effect. MO noble friend had proposed not so much a reduction as a transfer of taxation ; the loss from the reduction of taxes he proposed to make good by other taxes. But the House refused, and that was the camp, why the revenue was deficient. Sir Henry anticipated, if Lord Al.. thorp remained in office for another year, a large saving from such* consolidation of the other Government offices as had been effected iirt the Admiralty department. He especially hoped that the same prais - ciple would speedily be extended to the scattered departments of the Army. If such reductions were also Made in many of our imposts as ta put down smuggling, not only might a million now spent in its prayer& tion be saved, but the revenue might be augmented by the reduction. Sir ROBERT PEEL noticed some facts, which gave a More cheerfut view of the state of the country than many were disposed to take— From the papers before the House, it appeared that in the year 1832, enemas- pared with the returns of the three preceding years there had been a decreased 726,225/. in the auction-duties. There had also been an increase in the duties on bricks, though there was a decrease of the duties on tiles, which might be attributed to the preference which was given by builders to slates. It was highly gratifying to find, from the statement of the noble Lord, that there had been, during the past year, such a considerable increase in the consumption of malt. When he heard the Beer Bill dIscus.sed in connexion with the late hours and the dissipation and idleness sshich its opponents described it as producing, he must say that he did not think that a fair way of treating the subject ; but this he would say, that when lie saw the population consuming so much of that which might he considered as one of the necessaries of life, he would appeal to that fact as a proof and test of the increasing comforts of the great mass of the population of this country. The additional consumption of an article so necessary as this was to the comtorts of the industrious classes of the community afforded him, he re- peated, the greatest possible gratification, for this, amongst other reasons,—be- cause he saw in it a strong proof afforded that the national resources of the country- were not in the least deteriorated, awl that they 'were ready, if neces- sary, to support the noble Lord bereaftel, even in an increase of the taxation, if such a thing should, under any future circumstances, be called for.

He afterwards went into an argument on the causes to which Lord Althorp attributed, in some measure, the falling off which he had an- nounced. Sir Robert attributed more to the Cholera than the Chan- cellor of the Exchequer was disposed to do. With respect to the political excitement, there seemed no great prospect of its abatement, at least in Ireland.

Lord Aimione—" The revenue of Ireland has increased during the last year."

Sir ROBERT PEEI. was glad to hear it : it was a novel effect of such a cause. Sir Robert afte,- wards entered at considerable length into the third cause noticed by Lord Althorp, the currency—

Taking for granted that the noble Lord's statement on this head was not ex- aggemtell,—and assuming with him that the contraction of the currency during

the past year, and the. circumstance of the foreign exchanges being against us,

had contributed to the extent lie represented in diminishing the revenue,—that fact would appear to hint an additional and convincing reason why we should, svithout loss of time, establish a foundation on which the currency might rest ; it appeared to him a convincing reason why they should not part without the noble Lord's publicly recording his decided opinion, and that of the Government, as to the footing on which the currency and the banking concerns of this coun-

try should for the future stand. They were now about to separate ; and it was extremely probable that they would do so without having a report from the Secret Committee on the Bank Charter ; and unless the present Parliament should meet again for a short session in October or November (which was ex- ceedingly improbable), six months at least must elapse before a Parliament could assemble again. At the very earliest, the elections could not take place until December next ; and as, in spite even of the new Constitution, snows and storms would prevail then, At least in the North of England, it was not likely that the elections would occur until the commencement of the new year six months must therefore elapse before Parliament would meet again ; and under such cir- cumstances, he would urge upon the nolle Lord the propriety, before they sepa- rated, of stating, without entering into details, the general views of the Govern- ment on this subject. If such an important subject should he left for such a period in a state of uncertainty, it was not improbable that the Bank, for its own protection, would contract its issues; and did the noble Lord suppose that the foreign exchanges would, under such circumstances, continue to be in our favour?

Sir Robert remarked on the defective information afforded by Go- vernment respecting the Colonies ; the only fact stated being, that the Order in Council was not to be enforced. He regretted also the want of information on another most important subject, the foreign relations of the country— He wished the noble Lord would tell them whether the King of Holland would assent to the final treaty proposed to him by the Conference or whether, if such were not the case, that most dreadful alternative, the uniting the forces of England and France for the purpose of compelling him to do so, was the only course left to this country to pursue? He thought they had every right, also, to complain of the course which had been adopted towards Portugal. A civil war now prevailed there, and a contest was now in progress for the throne of that country; and he was persuaded that neither one nor the other would have ever existed there but for the direct encouragement of this country. A contest for the throne of Portugal, when encourged by England, was a thing that must always be deprecated as being totally opposed to the true policy and best interests of this country. If the treaty should not be ratified, and if Hol- land should not consent to it, and if a war in consequence should take place, the expenditure which that House alight be called upon to sanction with a view to maintain that war, would be an expenditure incurred against the true policy of England. Lord Moaerni, Mr. ROBINSON, MI. COURTENAY, Lord SANDON, Colonel SIBTHORP, and Mr. BURGE, offered each a few remarks on Lord Althorp's speech. Lord ALTHORP replied— Sir Henry Parnell had complained that Lord Althorp had not brought for- ward any Colonial budget. The, utmost diligence had been used, and he had effected his object in respect to one colony, and two or three others were in a forward state; and he hoped, before the next session of Parliament, that the whole would be completed. Lord Sandon had asked what relief he proposed to offer to those colonies which adopted the Orders in Council. He answered, that the relief he proposed was a reduction of taxation on colonial articles. Sir Robert Peel asked if it was intended to grant the benefit to colonies that resisted the Orders in Council. Certainly it was not. Mr. Courtenay had asked whe- ther Government intended to take any step respecting the conversion of the perpetual to terminable annuities. The only step taken by Government was this--According to the calculation of terms, lives above eighty had an unfair advantage, and consequently, it had been found that there was a larger number of annuities purchased on lives of eighty-five years and upwards, and this became a regular speculation in the stock-market; finding that the Government was taken an unfair advantage of, the tables had been altered, limiting their extent to eighty years. Mr. Courtenay had also asked if there was any hope that the Government of France would consent to any commercial arrangement with this country. He was not prepared to say that she had relaxed them, but he hoped she would. With respect to the finances of the country, Lord Althorp was inclined to con- cur with much of what Sir Robert Peel bad said; though he did not go so far as he did in respect to the policy of changing one bad tax for another, he admit- ted the change was an evil. Sir Robert said that he had not given sufficient weight to the effect -of the cholera on the trade of the country. Perhaps he had not; but Sir Robert's opinion only tended to confirm the statement he had nitride. Sir Robert said, that he had laid too much weight on the contraction of the currency. He could not agree with him in that ; he was of opinion that the contraction must have had great effect upon the trade of the country. Sir Robert said further that he ought to state the opinion of Government on the ques- tion of the Bank Charter. In this he could not agree; be considered it would be disadvantageous for Government to state its opinion of what the Legislature ought to do on this important subject before the examination of it was concluded, With respect to the foreign relations of the conntry, the House must be aware why they were in such a state of ignorance,—because the negotiations were not concluded, and Government would not be justified in such a state of things, if they were to make disclosures which might lead to inconveniences and bad re- sults. He would, however, state thus far—that he hoped and trusted that there was nothing in the state of the negotiations to lead him to despair of their being brought to an amicable conclusion, and that there was no prospect that they would lead to war. On the contrary, he had great hopes that the conclusion would be favourable.

The financial discussion here terminated.

Q. SINECURES IN CHANCERY. On the motion for going into Corn- mitten on the Customs' Bill on Wednesday, Sir EDWARD SUCDEN expressed his regret that the Lord Chancellor had filled up the situa- tions held by the late Mr. Scott [Mr. James Brougham is appointed Registrar of Affidavits], which the public had understood were to be abolished. He also complained of the delay in introducing the bill for the regulation of the Chancellor's salary. Sir Edward said, there were at least nine-tenths of the Bankruptcy Act which he was de- sirous of repealing ; but he did not wish to moot the question until the Chancellor's salary was settled. When the noble and learned Lord was out of office, the House was occupied with nothing but discussions respecting the scandalous fees taken by officers of the Court of Chancery ; but the fees continued to he taken, and nothing was said about them, because they found their way into the pockets of gentlemen op- posed to those with whom Sir Edward Su,gden was politically connected.

Lord Auriloar deprecated the attack upon Lord Brougham made by Sir Edward Sugden. The offices in question were in the Chancellor's gift ; there were certain duties annexed to them ; and until abolished, which could only be done by Parliament, they must be filled up. The salary of the Chancellor had hitherto been delayed from the pressure of other business.

Sir ROBERT PEEL alluded to the evidence of Lord Brougham before the Crown Offices Committee, to show that his Lordship's intention was to divest the Lord Chancellor's office of all sinecure appointments. Under such circumstances, the appointment must, Sir Robert con- tended, be considered as provisional. Of course, the Lord Chancellor would be compensated for this relinquishment of patronage.

The conversation respecting the appointments in question was re- newed subsequent to the discussion on the Customs' Duties Bill; when Sir THOMAS DENMAN stated, that a bill for carrying into effect Lord Brougham's views respecting these and similar appointments had been prepared, and would have been introduced, but for circumstances over which Lord Brougham had no control.

The death of Mr. Scott had made no alteration in the noble and learned Lord's intention to proceed with that bill, one of the provisions of which was to abolish the offices lately held by that gentleman. He ought to state to the House, that the duties of those offices were of a very important nature, and that it was necessary to fill them up until the new arrangements were completed. The Lord Chancellor had, therefore, felt it his duty to give it to some one ; and he had accordingly given it to his own brother,—a person who had undoubtedly great claims upon him. But this was not at all inconsistent with the statement made by the noble and learned Lord before the Committee of that House, and in nowise bound him not to proceed with the bill of which he had given notice.

Lord ALmiont. confirmed the Attorney- General's statement. Mr. James Brougham would hold the office until the bill contemplated by Government was passed, and no longer. His Lordship added, that he meant to bring the salary of the Lord Chancellor under the notice of the House, along with the civil charges which would be moved, next week.

The question of Mr. James Brougham's appointment was introduced in the House of Lords on Thursday, by the Lord Chancellor. Lord BROUGHAM stated at some length the objectionable manner in which the Chancellor was remunerated,—partly by salary, partly by fees, partly by patronage ; all of which were equally intended for the susten- tation of the dignity of his high office. He remarked on the irregu- larity of this remuneration. Lord Thurlow was eight years in office, and during that period no office of emolument in the Chancellor's gift became vacant; his successor bad not to wait eight 'months until a va- cancy occurred. The practice of making patronage a part of the Lord Chancellor's payment, furnished him with a strong motive for the per- petuation of useless and overpaid offices. Lord Brougham's own opi- nion was, and always had been, that such a species of official remunera- tion sinned against every rule according to which a public functionary should be paid— It was uncertain, variable, unfair to the individual Chancellor—this one get- ting too much under it, that one nothing at all; and unfair and prejudicial, in- asmuch as it held up an individual to public contempt, whom it was the public interest to hold in respect, by its investing him with an interest to perpetuate abuses, sinecures, and irresponsible outlays of the public money. Holding these opinions as he did, and having there and elsewhere given free and unmeasured expression to them,—always taking care to fix the blame upon the system, and not the individual,—it was perhaps unnecessary for him to add, that since his accession to office, it had been and still was his fixed and unalterable determina- tion to endeavour to induce Parliament to abolish those sinecures.

Lord Brougham went on to state, that the bill which was to be laid before Parliament next week, was but an enlargement of the bill of last session : it had been submitted to the revision of his professional brethren, and embraced the abolition of the offices in question, as well as certain provisions for hearing appeals under the Chief Baron. He noticed more particularly the appointment out of which the discussion had arisen. Repeating his objections to the mode of remunerating the Chancellor, and his determination to amend it, still it was ridiculous to suppose that, previous to its being amended, he must refrain from taking possession of the emoluments of his office— Such a proposition was absurd, and never could enter the head of any man possessing brains. He was convinced, therefore, that the question put by a learned gentleman in another place, and which seemed to insinuate that he (Lord Brougham) was violating his pledge by filling up the appointment, had no such meaning, and wholly originated from a laudable anxiety to "elicit in- formation on a matter affecting the character of the highest law authority." (A laugh.) "Yes," Continued Lord Brougham, "I am bound to believe—nay, I cannot for a moment doubt, that the learned gentleman was wholly influented by this most praiseworthy desire of information. How could I think otherwite, knowing as I 6, in column with that eminent 'high law -authority,' that phi- losophers have long since eulogized this laudable thirst of knowledge as the most distinguished attribute of humanity, and as the most distinguished feature of an ingenuous and lofty intellect? ( Cheers and laughter.) Yes, my Lords, we have all read, that it is this heaven-born thirst of information, and its condi- tion—at least its invariable concomitant, a self-disregarding and candid mind, that most distinguishes man from the crawling reptile—that most distinguishes nian from the wasp that stings, and from the insect that fidn would but cannot sting. (Loud cheers.) Ay, distinguishes man froaa not only the reptile that crawls and the wasp that stings, but from that more powerful, because more offensive creature, the bug,—which, powerful and offensive though it be, is, after all, but so much loathsome vermin. ( Continued cheers and laughter.) Yes, I say, it was this laudable propensity, upon which humanity justly pfides itself, which I have no doubt solely influenced the learned geatleman to whom I allude, to seek for information which it would be cruel to stingily grtitify."

1Vith respect to the bill which he meant to introduce, he noticed a fact which he said would be sufficient to guard him front the misinter- pretation of little cavilling minds— He had living witnesses in that House and elsewhere to testify, that heffire the melancholy occasion of the vacancies, and forty-eight hours iffiter they had occurred, he had expressed his firm determination to go on with the self-sarne sinecure-abolishing bill, precisely as if these vacancies were not likely to (mare, or never had occurred. ( Cheers from the Treasury bench.) There would be some differences between that and the bill he had formerly spoken of as in pro- gress of maturation ; but this he pledged himself to; that neither in letter, spirit, form, nor figure, should the most insect aud microscopic eye detect the re- motest change in that portion of the bill under which the two offices at issue would be totally abolished.

Lord Brougham afterwards defended the appointment of his brother, rather than another man, to the office in question— It was necessary to the public business that the office of Registrar of Affidavits should be promptly filled up ; a case having occurred within forty-eight hours after the vacancy, which compelled him to make himself responsible for the ne- cessary registering of a very important affidavit. It was found, on inquiry, that this could only be legally performed by the Deputy Registrar ; and as there could be no deputy where there was no principal, it became necessary to appoint a principal, for him to invest the deputy with the proper functional authority. Then the question was, whom should he appoint ? In the first place, he li;til a hill in progress for doing away with the office altogether ; in other words, the appointment should be merely temporary, to be valid only till the bill had passed into a law. He therefore took especial care to appoint a gentleman upon whom he could exercise great influence, and in whom he had implicit confidence, that when he gave the word he would at once vacate the office, without the re- motest whisper or insinuation of a complaint of violation of vested rights, or any other slang set up by the defenders of sinecures and obsolete institutions. He therefore appointed his own brother ; vho, in accepting the appointment, was put to more inconvenience than, perhaps, his cavillers would be ready to expose themselves, anxious as they were to preserve immaculate die character of the dispensers of justice in hioir places. The very vacating his seat in the Com- mons was in itself no slight inconvenience,—the more to be felt, as the fees which he would have to pay on assuming the functions of office would exceed the probable emoluments of his office between the date of his accession and the passmg of the measure which would abolish those offices.

The Earl of Er.nox stated, on his professional experience, that Lord Brougham could not, without violating his duty to the public, omit lhing up the appointments alluded to.

Earl GREY corroborated the statement of Lord Brougham, that he had both before and after the vacancy communicated his determination to go on with his sinecure abolition bill.

The Duke of WELLINGTON said, it was time that some steps should be taken to fix the remuneration of the Lord Chancellor—

The present was not the only sacrifice made by that noble and learned Lord; and though two years had nearly passed since these sacrifices were first made, no provision had been yet made for the officer who held the Great Seals. For his own part, he had always thought that Parliament and the country had a deep interest in seeing that the Lord Chancellor was sufficiently remunerated. He therefore rose to call upon Earl Grey to take some steps to regulate the remu- neration which should be given to the Lord Chancellor.

Earl GREY mentioned the intention of Lord Althorp on that subject.

The conversation in the Lords concluded by an observation from Lord BROUGHAM, that he had taken no part in the deliberations of his colleagues on the question of remuneration— He protested against the doctrine which asserted the necessity of a large salary being annexed to the office of Chancellor. Whenever the intended measure should come before them, he would undertake to satisfy Parliameut and the public, that an overgrown salary was by no means essential to securing the ser- vices of able and honest men, not only for the office of Chancellor, but of every other high office.

In the Commons, on Thursday, the question was again introduced, by a motion of Captain BOLDERO for a copy of the minute of appoint- ment.

Sir EDWARD Soonum adverted to the objection taken to his pre- - vious remarks on the ground of notice not being given : the Lord Chancellor had always plenty of friends in the House to render notice unnecessary. Sir Edward stated his intention of recurring to the sub- ject when Lord Althorp brought forward his motion.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in allusion to Sir Edward's not giving notice, said he merely regretted that he was not in the House at the time, because if he had, he could have given the refutation in two minutes after the charge was made.

Mr. W. BaouGnam thought, in all cases where the putting of a question implied censure on an individual, courtesy, if not right, called for notice.

Mr. SPENCE observed, that the delay in the Sinecure Abolition Bill was solely due to him, and not to the Lord Chancellor.

The return was agreed to., Last night, Sir EDWARD SUGDEN rose to complain of the expressions .respecting him attributed to the Lord Chancellor-

- "I find that in another place, a noble and learned lord, in the course of some observations made with reference to my conduct, has thought fit to use expres- sions towarde me, which no gentleman who has a regard for his own personal honour, nor any one whose acts could be influenced by personal fear, would have ventured to direct towards any other gentleman. These expressions are so far removed from any thing that one meets with in society—they are so different from what one should expect from a person of his exalted station, and especially from that place in which he ought to set an example of decorum to all others— that, with reference to the person by whom they were uttered, and the place in which they were uttered, they are either so degrading to tiv, -rson making the attack, or to the person against whom that attack is level!: I--"

Mr. STANLEY here rose to order; and after a she;' ,iscussion on the point, the Sr r AKER. laid down the rule—that no member was entitled to assume front newspaper reports of speeches, that the language they attributed to members of either House had been actually used by them, kim.

Sir EDWARD SUGDEN, after acknowledging the authority due to the Chair, complained strongly of Mr. Stanley's interruption ; which alone, he said, put him out of order. He then proceeded to animad- vert on the Chancellor's speech-

" I have been personally insulted and abused in the grossest manner, by the use of offensive epithets from a vulgar vocabulary in language, which no private gentleman should utter on the one hand or submit to on the other ; and yet I am not to be allowed to answer this abuse ; but I am to be told that, if I attempt to do so, I a in breaking th ro igh the privileges of this and the other House of Parliament. As regards the language, I shall carefully abstain from following the example that has been set me. I: have always spoken of the noble and learned Lord and of Ins conduct publicly, openly, smut manfully, never using with respect to him any ex- pre-ion that any one roan could take exception to ; and I will now only say, that these observations, let them be made when they will and how they will, shall never prevent me from investigating charges which I think (nig* to be made agani.t the public conduct of any man. On the occmdon in question, however, I made no charge ; I only ask cq I for information. I never used towards the noble ;ind learned Lord, of whose public conduct I was then speaking. one disrevectfill expression; and if I were now to do otherwise, I speaking, but iniitate his conduct. That noble and learned Lord has attacked use in a place in which I cannot answer him ; the place where the atttack was.made rendered it improper. It was doubly so, as in no place can I answer him ; for he presides as the Judge in the Court in which I chiefly practise, and there I shall not attempt to answer him; for, however I may have lost, as I have lost, all respect for his person, I am yet bound to silence by the respect I entertain for his office. I must, how- ever, when addressing him, feel sensible that I am addressing a man who has forgotten how to act towards me as one gentleman should act towards another. I must say, that in my absence he has used words towards me, which no gen- tleman would have ventured to use towards me in my presence. I am not open to such observations ; I have never done any thing to deserve them. They are painful to a man's family ; they are disagreeable to his children ; they give un- easiness to his friends, and the more so, as the situation of the person uttering them exempts him frmn all responsibility for his conduct. I must say for once and for ever, that I have lost all personal respect for the person who used these exprQsions." Mr. STANLEY said, he had no wish to prevent Sir Edward Sugden from making any explanation ; but when Sir Edward denied that he had attacked Lord Brougham, he must say he did not understand him. He made a charge against that nobleman—a direct, and if true, a most disgraceful charge—one which nothing but the fql!eq °"' fairest de- liberation, and the most ample opportunity of denial, could for a mo- ment justify.

Sir ROBERT PEEL remarked at considerable length on the expres- sions attributed to Lord Brougham in the Times.

Mr. STANLEY Said, Lord Brougham had stated that they were in- accurately reported ; a statement which was afterwards confirmed by Lord ALTHORP.*

GOULBURN also deprecated the offensive expressions.

Sir THOMAS PENMAN regretted exceedingly the manner in which the question of Sir Edward Sugden on Wednesday had been put. All that had followed might have been avoided, had any. one acquainted with the facts been present ; and if proper notice had been given, persons acquainted with the facts would have been present.

Sir ROBERT INGLIS noticed another attack on members of the House of Commons—that on Mr. Gordon, by Lord Plunkett. The attack of Lord Brougham on Sir Edward Sugden reflected dishonour on no one but him that made it.

Mr. :MACAULAY observed, that the gentlemen of the Opposition seemed altogether to forget a fact of some importance—that the first attack was made by Sir Ellward Sugden.

Sir CHARLES WETHERELL spoke of the Lord Chancellor's speech as an attack on the independence of the Bar and the dignity of the Com- mons : if it were permitted to pass unnoticed, both were at an end. Sir Charles argued at great lengths, and with a plentiful mixture of vituperation and slang, that not only was Sir Edward Sugden's question justifiable, hut that no satisfactory answer had been given to it by the Lord Chancellor.

Mr. WIT.T.TANI TiRoUGHAM stated what the Chancellor did say. Sir CHARLES WETHERELL contradicted him.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL noticed the cavil of Sir Charles as to the satisfactoriness of Lord Brougham's answer- " Gentlemen opposite have thought proper to do that which is not ,senerally done, by attacking the Lord Chancellor for language attributed to him in a newspaper, and in some measure disclaimed for him ; at the same time, that they say nothing of the substance of his explanation respecting the offices which he has given to his brother, but speak as if he had not given any reply to the charges brought against him. I beg to remind them, that the substance of his defence was this—that he still maintained the opinion that those offices ought to be abolished ; that he haul prepared a bill for their abolition, which he had not yet had an opportunity of bringing forward; and that, as there were certain duties which some one must perform so long as the offices existed, he had given them to his brother, as a person in whom the most perfect confidence might be placed, and one who would not claim compensation on the ground of vested rights, whenever the Legislature should make the necessary regulations for the abolition of the office. If that be not an answer to the charges brought against my noble and learned friend, I know not what answer could satisfy the consti- tutional and parliamentary- jealousy of honourable gentlemen opposite."

Sir HENRY HAADINGE said, the terms of Lord Brougham's attack were most indecent. Ile adverted also to Lord Plunkett's observation on Mr. Gordon's politics being odious to his constituents ; which he de- scribed as directly contrary to his Lordship's duty as a Peer of Parlia- ment.

The conversation ended by a notice from Mr. C. PELHAm, that he would bring the whole question before the House on Monday.

3. Ma. HOME'S VOTE. On the vote on Monday for 4,973/. to the Government and Civil Establishment of the Bahamas, Mr. HOME • The Times of this morning says, it abides by its report.

strongly objected, on account of the generally distressed state of the Colonies, to giving large salaries to governors.

Mr. HUNT having moved the reduction of the vote in question by 635L, Sir CHARLES WETHERELL rose in great heat to oppose the proposi- tion. He asked—

Could any man, who on a former evening heard Mr. Htune vote that black was white, in assenting to take three millions from the pockets of the people, in order that Ministers might keep their places, now hear, without contempt and

scorn, his miserable, dirty, petty, farthing-cavilling about the salaries of men who were devoting their time and feasting their health in distant and often un- healthy colonies, in the public service, and who were at expenses which required very frequently what their salaries did not cover? Such a course as that Fair- sued by Mr. Hume on the occasion alluded to, when contrasted with his objec- tion on the present, could only excite the scorn and contempt of the House. How durst he insult the House by talking of miserable, wan.), savings of the salaries of officers abroad, as necessary to economy, after such a vote of millions as he consented to the other evening, when, according to his own avowal, he was voting that black was white ?

Mr. HUME said, he was so accustomed to bear from Sir Charles Wetherell language which no other member would use, that he was not surprised to hear him speak in this manner on the present occasion.

" I will, however," Mr. Hume continued, " take the liberty of telling him this—that before he finds fault, he should learn to speak the truth ; for the vote to which he has alluded had nothing to do with economy whatever, but the question was made up entirely of party feeling, to serve party purposes. (Loud cheers.) The fact, however, is, that the honourable and learned gentleman and his friends feel that their scheme has completely failed ; and they were so sore under it, that, now they are smartiug, they are ready to take this or any other mode of exhibiting their sensations. I beg to tell the home,' Ade =I learned gentleman, that I shall dare to state to the House whatever I may think proper and right ; and in so doing, not be guided by his .pinion as to whether I am insulting Parliament. If any one has insulted the House of Connuons, it is the honourable arid learned gentle.man himself (Loud cheers); nay, further, if any one has made himself absurd, inconsisteut, awl ridiculous in tl:is House, it is the honourable and learned gentleman (Lana/are mut, rhvers)- and as to treating the House in a contemptuous timelier, I hope no one feels diet any thing of that sort has ever proceeded from me. With respect to this being a miserable reduc- tion, I do not believe that the honourable and learned gentleman knows any thing about it : he has come in in the middle of the discussion, and talked on a subject concerning which he knows nothing. My observations went to the Colonies in general; and my argument was, that it was a bad example to be paying the offi- cers high salaries, while the Colonists themselves were suffering from distress. I therefore say, that the honourable and learned gentleman's observations were unworthy of the House of Commons, and that he is continually attempting- to state what is not the fact. In the debate on the Russian Dutch Loan, what I stated was, that I bad frequently voted against my conviction in the progress of the Reform Bill, for the sake of carrying the whole of that measure ; that my aim was, not to throw obstacles in the way, for, God knows, there was enough of them from the ntber quarter. I further stated, at it appeared to me that the honourable and learned gentleman and his friends were calling on the House for its vote, under the plea of econemy, and Heiler rIo. threat of an appeal to the hustings, though the real object was to place the Minieters in a minority, and so to force them to resign ; and in proof of my ieeertion, I called on the honourable member for Thetford and the right lionourol)h, ii earner for Tamworth to state Whether, if they were in office to-morrow, th•-y ould refuse the money to Rus- sia? That appeal was not answered ; and I I Liek :hat alone is quite suliicient to set aside all questions of economy. Tile IL131,livl- ill il:o hoommddeand learned gentleman cominuallv ings up this topic, only shows low he is smarting under his defeat : and, to speak honestly, I ani very glad of it." (Laughter and cheers.) Sir CHARLES' Weertioaeer. repeated h h: objections to Jr. Hume's vote ; and declared that there was a time when, lied sueli words as Mr. Hume's been uttered in the House, they would have been taken down for censure.

Mr. HUME again expressed his opinion that economy had nothing to do with the question alluded to. What right had Sir Che ries Wetherell to talk of economy ? What measure of economy, or indeed of public utility in any way, had he ever voted during all the time he bad sat in the House ?

4. IRISH REFORM BILL. On Monday, Lord 'MELBOURNE, itt moving the second reading of the Bill, entered into a brief description of the qualifications which it was proposed to substitute for those al- ready existing in the boroughs and counties of Ireland..

The Duke of WELLINGTON stated his objections to the Bill. He thought Scotland and England might have been reformed without touching Ireland. The political state of Ireland was considered in 1800, and again in 1829, when the representation of the different in- terests in that country was adjusted, and, as lie had thought, finally set- - tied.. The measure then passed was based on another measure—the abolition of the forty. shilling freeholders, in order to put an end to the • influence of the Catholic priests. Even if, for the sake of uniformity, Reform were extended to Ireland, the principle of the Emancipation Bill, and not the new-fangled notions of representation ought to have been followed. Because this rule had not been observe), he meant to oppose the Irish Bill. The Duke noticed a marked dietinction in the two measures. By the Emancipation Bill, the forty-shilling free- holders of cities being counties were preserved as a balance to the powers of the corporations in creating freemen ; but this balance the Reform Bill entirely destroyed, by cutting off non-resident freemen, and thus gave a dangerous preponderance to the Catholics. The Bill was equally objectionable in its abrogation of the charters of boroughs : if nomination boroughs were to be opened, the principle of the Eman- cipation Bill ought still to be adhered to. The nomination boroughs ought to be secured to Protestant interest, by giving proper influence to the Crown and the Church. The Duke concluded—

The Bill would transfer to the Catholics the power which was, for the wisest purposes, vested in corporations, for the purpose of preserving the Protestant interests in Ireland, and investing property with its just influence ; and, by so doing, would endanger the safetv of that country, so far as the means of connect- . mg its fortunes with those of England was concerned. It was in vain for Lord Melbourne to say be was merely following the example laid down in the English Bill, while he was thus effecting a change that seriously involved the very stabi- lity of the Crown and the dearest interests of the country.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE expressed his regret that the Duke of Wellington, whose greatest act Emancipation was, should now endea- yOur to revive religious distinctions which it was the object of Eman- cipation to destroy. The whole of the Duke's complaint in respect

of the present Bill amounted merely to this, that the people of Ireland were chiefly Catholics.

The Earl of LIMERICK agreed with the Duke of Wellington, that the Reform Bill would overthrow the balance established at the Union. The Bill was a convincing proof, he said, of the accuracy of Lord Plun- kett's predictions, that all the existing institutions of Ireland would be immolated at the shrine of the mother country.

Lord PLUNKETT said, in reference to his predictions respecting the effects of the Union, he had lived to see them falsified ; and he was now as ready to avow, as he was once to contend for the contrary doctrine, that Ireland had been treated by the Imperial Parliament not merely with fairness but with partiality. He went on to criticise the argu- ment of the Duke of Wellington. The Duke said he was now sada- fied that some change in the English and Scotch representative system was expedient ; why then did he cavil at a similar change in the Irish ?

Did he mean to tell the people of Ireland, that what is an abuse in Scotland and England was not an abuse in Ireland? Or did he mean to imply that the Irish must put up with a grievance which he was prepared to remedy so far as it affected the people of this country ? Here were the nomination boroughs always felt and pronounced to be a.foul ulcer eating its cancerous way to the very heartof the constitution, met and remedied by an admirable measure of re- generation; and yet when the same sore, with the same malignant'symptores, is pointed out as existing in the Irish body politic, the noble Duke turns round and says " You Irish must not partake of the remedy which your English and Scotch fellow-subjects have received with gratitude." Was this statesmanlike? —was it just ?—was it prudent?

Such a mode of arfruing went farther to teach a more disastrous lesson to the people of Ireland than all the declamation of the most reckless brawler for the repeal could. The Duke's speech tended to tarnish irremediably the fame he had acquired from passing the Emancipation Bil I.

He was infatuated enough to argue the principle of the Bill as if it were a mere question between Catholic and Protestant. Now, it would not be a very difficult task to demonstrate that the Protestant would derive as much advantage from the Bill as the Catholic ; but he would not condescend to thus argue a great legislative measure. For what, lie would ask the noble Duke, did he sup- port the Catholic Relief Bill? Was it not to put an end to those religious dis- tinctions which had too long disfigured the face of the prosperity of Ireland ? And what was there now to induce the noble Duke to forget what was due to his reputation and consistency, to attempt to undo that great healing measure, and, for the sake of opposing the policy of his successors in office, thus endeavour to revive religious prejudices with all their baleful consequences ?

The Duke's facts were as unfounded as his argument. There was not the slightest ground for assuming that the thirty-four boroughs were retained for the purpose of supporting the Protestant interest—L.

During the whole progress of the Union discussion, a single syllable did not escape from either its friends or its foes which implied that those boroughs were retained as a support of the Protestant interest ; and had such a scheme been for a moment contemplated, those foes and friends were lynx-eyed and anxious enough to find it out, and use it as an argument pro cr con. The fact was, thoee boroughs (he meant thirty-three of them, for he, for obvious reasons, need not take the University representatien into account) were selected because their inhabitants at the time amounted to SC0,000 smile, and because they were places of considerable commercial importance ; and till that moment, he never heard the selection at all ccnnected with the n:aintenance of the Protestant interest, and he was a pretty close and interested observer of what was going on. The noble Duke's credulity had been grievously impesed upon as to the circurtt- etances which influenced the selection of those boroughs.

Lord Plunkett noticed the present state of these boroughs : the members of seventeen of them, poesesiiig a joint population of 170,000 persons, were in reality nominated by seventeen individuals-- Y,:t, to put an end to this iniquitous and disgraceful system, theywere, for- sooth, violating the articles of the Union, and overturning the Protestant insti- tutions of the country. This was ratiocination and statesmanlike loftiness of vision with a vengeance. Then it seems, that besides violating the Union Act;

m

they were also departing from the principles of the measure. of 1829. He denied the fact. He also denied the assumption of the noble Duke, that the forty- shilling were disfranchised ou that occasion weedy for the purpose of maintaining the Protestant interests in Ireland. The forty-shilling freeholders evere disfranchised, not because they were what is called "Popish electors," but because they were in such indigent circumstances as precluded their exercising their suffrage right independently, and as free agents. If their existence was no dangerous to the Protestant establishments, he would ask the noble Duke, why were they so carefully preserved at the passing of the Union ? And again, if the privilege of making freemen of corporations was bestowed wholly with a view to preserve the Protestant institutions in Ireland against the Catholics, why did the law make the Catholics equally eligible to he freemen with their Protestant brethren? And still more, why did the nublo Duke himself do _ away, in 1829, with the only obstacle—the oath of supremacy—to their filling every corporate office? That the Catholics were not freemen, those "bulwarks of the Protestant interests," was not owing to a want of legaIeligibility, but in consequence of the unjust monopoly and most intolerant usurpation of the cor- poration dignitaries—those great shields of the Protestant citadel. And if the noble Duke thought otherwise, and in 1829 contemplated the continued exclu- sion of the Catholics from corporations, he could only tell him, that the Catho- lics were unfairly dealt with, and his bill of 1829 was a cruel mockery, and his advocacy of it a political fraud. Lord Plunkett vindicated the character of the Roman Catholic priests from the insinuations that noble Lords were disposed to indulge in respecting them— No persons were less disposed to support any project of a mischievous separa- tion of the two countries, than was that calumniated bode-. Indeed, only those acquainted with the facts could appreciate the amount of their services in re- storing and preserving the peace of Ireland. He spoke these truths of the

Catholic clergy as a body, not meaning to deny that in their ranks • were to be

found Many mischievous agitators. But surely the hotly should not be respon- sible or censured for the improper acts of some of its members. As well might they, on the other side, hold the Protestant clergy—for whose merits as a body Ire had the deepest respect—responsible for the improper conduct of some of its members. If there were Catholic priests who assisted in disturbing the public peace, they should recollect also, that there were Protestant priests equally &- noxious to the charge,—persons as violently controversial, uncharitable, arro- gant, fawning, blustering, and reckless of every quality in an assertion, save its immediate efficacy, as could be found in the ranks of Catholic agitators.

He concluded by stating his opinion, that the true way to remedy the disturbances of Ireland was to remove the grievances of Ireland.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH said, the House had not bad leisure to make themselves masters of the provisions of the Bill; and the debate would. be best taken on Thursday, on the motion for committing it. tin the-committal-of -the Bill on Thursday, Lord ORIEL Objected to that part by which the rights of freemen were made to terminate with the life of their possessor. Lord ELLENBOROUGH opposed the Bill, on the ground that it de- stroyed the balance between the Protestant and Catholic interests. He particularly objected to the leasehold qualification in counties, and the disfranchisement of non-resident freemen in boroughs. By the latter alteration in the suffrage, the return would be thrown into the hands of the Catholic freeholders, whose privileges were preserved. He repeated the assertion of the Duke of Wellington, that it was never meant by the framers of the Emancipaton Bill to give the re- presentation to the Catholics-

On the contrary, the object of disfranchising the for w-shilling freeholders was to restore the representation to Protestant property in lie counties; the boroughs and towns being already Protestant in their constituency, by reason of their corporations and freemen. It was to the circumstance of the representation being Protestant, that the authors of the bill of 1829 looked as a security for the Protestant interest.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE ridiculed the notion that Protestanism would be more secure in Ireland if their Lordships refused to pass the Bill, or that it could be supported against the Irish people by the representatives of sixteen close boroughs. He denied that the Catholics generally were favourable to the repeal of the Union they were mostly agriculturists, and aware of the importance of the connexion with England,-which was disliked by few of the Irish people, except the Dublin shopkeepers.

Lord MELnouitxr did not believe that either Catholics or Protestants were inclined to a repeal of the Union, notwithstanding the language used by a reverend head of the latter.

The Archbishop of ARMAGH spoke of the preservation of the close boroughs, at the time of the Union, for the support of the Protestant interest, as a well-known fact.

Lord RODEN described the Bill as the last scene of a deep tragedy, which would end in the ruin and destruction of Ireland. If Lord Anglesey would only open his eyes, and call to his assistance the honest Protestant Yeomanry of Ireland, "the disturbance, clamours, and com- motion prevailing there, might be put down in three months." ( Cheers from the Duke of Wellington.)

Clauses 1st, 2d, and 3d, were agreed to without discussion.

On Clause 4th being read, Lord WvNroan wished to introduce the words "or other building," as in the English Bill ; but the House did not approve of the addition.

A motion of the Duke of CUMBERLAND, to insert the words "pro- vided all such voters shall have but one vote," was not pressed.

Lord WYNFORD wished to annul that part of Clause 6th which pre- serves the rights of forty-shilling freeholders for towns.

Lord PLUNKETT observed, that it was only a life right ; other rights were treated in the same way.

The Duke of WELLINGTON denied that the rights of all freemen were preserved for their lives, for the rights of freemen made since March 1831 were not preserved. Unless this proviso were struck out, it was quite clear the Protestant interest must give way to the Catholic. (" Hear, hear!") Lord RODEN again noticed the religious distinctions of the voters- It was a gross injustice to preserve their rights to those forty-shilling free- holders, because they were Catholics, and to take away their rights from the freemen, because they were Protestants.

The Duke of RICHMOND remarked on this-

The noble Earl was continually introducing the words " Catholics" and "Protestants" into those discussions, to serve his own purposes. Was the noble Earl aware that the principal supporter of the rights of those freemen in the other House was Mr. O'Connell? He would put it to the noble Earl whe- ther Mr. O'Cont ell would advocate the preservation of their rights if he thought it was likely to promote that exclusive Protestant interest of which the noble Earl was so enamoured.

The Duke regretted the practice of bringing forward the question of Catholic and Protestant in these debates : why- should Lord Roden ar- rogate to himself the title of sole representative of the Protestant in- terests? The Bill was advocated by as sincere Protestants as Lord Roden, or any one that acted and voted with him.

The Duke of CUMBERLAND said, it was of no consequence whether Mr. O'Connell or any other person supported the proposition; the real question was, whether the statements that the Protestant interest was in danger were correct or not. The Duke of Richmond had voted against the Catholic Bill; but he seemed to have abandoned his Pro- testant feelings. ("Hear! hear!") The Duke of RICHMOND said, the Duke of Cumberland seemed to suppose that there was no friend of Protestantism in the House save himself and one or two Noble Lords with whom he acted. ( Cheers.) He challenged the Duke or any other Peer to show that he had ever . given a vote in opposition to Protestant interests-

He did vote against the Catholic Relief Bill, because he was opposed to it at the time; but the Bill having been once carried, he gave his hearty cooperation to carry it into effect. This, however, he must say, that he considered the only • benefit that would arise from that Bill was the doing away with all religious dis- tinctions. Buthow could that desirable object be carried into effect when, night • after night, they heard from the lips of noble lords Roman Catholics denounced,

and Brunswick Lodges and Orange Meetings were found followire, their ex-

ample ? How could the peace of Ireland be preserved, when such grossmis- representations of the conduct and intentions of Government were held out ? At one of the meetings in the North of Ireland, he understood this was the Ian- -guage used-" My boys, keep the Bible safe in your hands, and take care that your powder is dry." ("Hear ! hear!") His only wonder was, that when such Unguage as this was held, Ireland was not in a state of rebellion.

Lord RODEN having again charged the supporters of the Bill as pullers down of the Protestant and setters up of the Catholic interests, fell tinder the censure of Lord PLuNKETT who asked- - Did the noble Earl imagine he was the only person in that House to support the Protestant interest? Did he suppose there were no Protestants in the House but himself? He could assure the noble Lord that he was mistaken : 4 Vixere fortes ante Agamemnona." He must cease to arrogate to himself a monopoly of Protestantism, as he must cease to arrogate to himself a monopoly of making Protestant members of Par- liament. The noble Lord held the borough of Dundalk, which contained11000s inhabitants, not one of whom had the slightest share in returning a member for Dundalk. He made the return; and he might select a person not only totilly unknown but odious to them. With respect to Mr. Gordon, he meant to say nothing disrespectful of him ; he was no doubt as sincere as the noble Lord, and therefore the fittest representative of him (Laughter); but he was a person whose politics were odious to the great majority of the people of Dundalk. Lord Plunkett would not desire any other test of the existing state of the repre- sentation in Ireland, than the power possessed by the noble Earl of returning for Dundalk, a place containing 10,000 inhabitants, the great proportion of Whore were Roman Catholics, a person whose life was spent in dissensions with she Catholics of Ireland.

Lord RODEN put Lord Plunkett right with respect to the consti- tuents of Mr. Gordon- Ile had the unanimous voice of his constituents. (Laughter.) And who were they ? (Laughter.) The freemen and burgesses were his constituents- (La tighter.) The Duke of WELLINGTON afterwards proposed a clause preservh4 the rights of freemen in perpetuity, as in the English Bill ; but it was not pressed.

The remaining clauses were then agreed to, and the report Orden& to be received next day.

The report was considered last night. Some verbal amendments- were offered by the Duke of WELLINGTON and others ; but the greater number were postponed to the third reading; which takes place on. Monday.

5. IRISH Trams. On the motion for committing this bill, Mr.' SHEIL moved an instruction to the Committee to insert in the pie- amble, " That the tithe composition should be extended, with a view to the levying-of first-fruits according to their real value, and to such future appropriation to the purposes of religion, education, and charity, as, after making a due provision for the maintenance of the Church, should to Parliament seem proper.

He said, the introduction of such words in the preamble would miti- gate its bad effects. He adverted for a moment to the history of the measure-

It was necessary to go back to the King's Speech, where it was stated, that the just causes of complaint against tithes should be removed, and internal con- cord should be promoted. In pursuance of this recommendation, a Committee was appointed. He should pass over all the unfortunate incidents connected with its function. They reported that measures of coercien should be adopted.. TheChancellor of the Exchequer declared that he should never assent to mea- sures of coercion, unless they were to be followed by measures of relief. What are the measures of relief? Here they are. A receiver is to be sent on our estates in default of payment; a new remedy is to be given to the Church; its lmwers are to be trebled, and its ascendancy to be raised into more secure and. complete domination. It is almost an offence to common reason to designate such a proceeding as the means of conferring concord on. Ireland, and removmg " the just complaints of the people." What are the complaints of the people ? The enormous opulence of an establishment belonging to a minority designated as miser.ilde by the honourable member for Harwich, in a speech which a fevr nights ano astonished the House by the evidences of miraculousconyersion which. it•cli,played. Is that complaint just ? He thought so, aud was convinced that- internal concord never would be produced until the abuses of the Establishment were corrected.

After noticing the difference of sentiment between Lord John Rus- sell and Mr. Stanley on the subject of the Irish Establishment,-arni asking whether Ireland was to be sacrificed in order to prevent a split in the Cabinet, and whether its members were prepared to offer up their consistency and the good of the country to the prejudices of the Irk Secretary,-Mr. Shea noticed the argument derived from the presumed sacredness of Church property- He should not go back to the history of this country, and show the numerous instances in which the State had not only modified, but appropriated the Eccle- siastical revenues ; he should not appeal to the many proofs afforded by the example of Continental nations, that personal property would not be endangered by an interference with the estates of the Church ; he would content himself • with referring to an act of Parliament in his hand-the bill for the establishment of an University at Durham out of the estates of the Dean and Chapter. What was this but an interference with Church property, and a diversion of it frona the purposes to which it was nourdevoted F Would any man contend that the institution of Professorships of Mathematics, and of Chemistry, and Natiiral Philosophy, and of Latin and Greek, and of the Oriental languages, waS ant appropriation to the purposes of the Established religion ? It was idle to say the Dean and Chapter consented. They could not consent. They have but life estates. They have no right, according to churchmen, to rob their successors:. They can but make leases for twenty-one years. The estates vested in them are the property of the great corporation of the Church of England. Yet here we have an act of Parliament authorizing the sale of their estates, to build colleges, and establish a profane and purely temporal institution. What said pima Protestants touching this most important measure ? lie had before him lord

Henley's pamphlet, complaining of this proceeding as a violation of the ri i ghts.

of the Church. " Here, then, s a triumphant precedent ; here is a case dis- tinctly in point, which is far more valuable than any ratiocination; here is a decision of the Legislature, in which all parties concurred, which must shut the mouth of any minister, and strike him dumb, who maintains the sacred intan- gibility of corporate property. And mark the conclusion : if in a couutry?. where the religion of the state is the religion of the people-where the weatk of the clergy is not in such gross disproportion with their duties-you have put off a part of the opulence of the Church,-good God ! will you hold, that where there are 8,000,000 of one religion, and 700,000 of another, you are hot to lay a sacrilegious finger on an institution, which may be regarded oaths greatest moral monster that was ever yet set up in the name of the Christiany religion?" Mr. WALLACE supported Mr. Shell's amendment ; and in doing so commented at considerable length on the injustice of the bill in impbs- ing entirely on the landlord a tax which had hitherto been entirely flu- posed on the produce of the land. Mr. STANLEY observed, in reply, that the chief evil of the prese' nt system was that it formed a grievous tax upon produce, and in that war upon the industry of the country. He objected to Mr. Shell's amend- ment, because of the pledge which it necessarily implied. If such -an amendment were carried, they would immediately be told that Church- rates were abolished. The amendment was besides objectionable in point of time and place. He could not consent to declare that to' be the object of the bill which was not the object of the bill, however Pro- bably it might be effected by its passing.

The house at length divided : for the amendment, 79 ; against it, 18; majority for the original motion, 61. The bill then passed through Committee.

6. IRISH EDUCATION. Mr. J. E. GORDON, on Monday, opposed the grant of 37,500/. in aid of the Government schools in Ireland. Mr. Gordon went over the usual arguments urged against the Government Titan ; and concluded by reading, from his book of extracts, the Second Commandment, in which, to please the Catholics, " image " had been changed into " thing ;" and the note on the promise to Adam, con- cerning the " seed of the woman," which was the subject of much learned comment when the schools were first instituted.

Sir A. JoitiasToNn put a question to Mr. Stanley respecting Bible classes in the new schools, agreeably to the prayer of the Scotch Ge- neral Assembly.

Mr. STANLEY said, there was nothing in the scheme to preclude a Bible class in every school for the Protestants in attendance ; but this would depend on the Protestants themselves. If Government insisted on a Bible class in every school, they would be insisting on a regulation -which could not be complied with in some cases, and would be evaded in others.

Mr. MACNAMARA alluded to the returns quoted by Mr. Gordon, mid questioned their accuracy : in one of them, he felt certain, the mune of the party was forged.

Mr. GORDON defended the returns— It could not be expected that be should be acquainted with the handwriting of every schoolmaster in Ireland ; nevertheless, he believed that the signature of the honest man in question was authentic.

Mr. MAGNAMAIIA—" It is not the name of an honest man, but of an honest woman (Laughter); and I repeat that the signature is a forgery."

After some further conversation, the Committee divided on the - grant ; which was carried by .51 to 17.

7. MAYNOOTLI COLLEGE. The vote for this institution, which had been postponed, was carried last night, on a division, by 55 to S. Mr. Gordon was not in the minority.

8. RECORDER OF DUBLIN. Mr. HUME obtained leave, On Tues- day, to bring in a bill for disqualifying the Recorder of Dublin from sitting in Parliament. A conversation of some length took place ; in the course of which Colonel PERCEVAL, Mr. JEKISON, Sir Rontar PEEL, and Mr. LECROY objected to the bill on principle, and Sir ED- WARD SUGDEN and others as too personal in its character.

Mr. LErnov said, the Recorder of Dublin had the power to appoint a deputy ; and thence he argued, his double duties, if too heavy, could easily be lightened.

Mr. WARBURTON observed, that if the duties of Recorder could be efficiently performed by deputy, the plain remedy to the grievance was to make the deputy principal; in which case, the salary might be greatly reduced, as well as the office adequately filled.

There was a division on Mr. Hume's motion : N'lien the numbers were 33 for it, and 16 against it.

-9. TIIE Aron-. Colonel EVANS on Thursday brought forward his motion on the military establishments of the country. He directed the attention of the House to the abuse of patronage in the appointment of improper individuals to offices in the Military Hospitals. He no- ticed the expense of Chelsea and Kilmainham Hospitals ; where 787 pensioners were kept at an expense of 3s. 6d. per day—about three times as much as they received when in active service. He wished the men to live with their friends and relatives. The saving from the reduction of the Governors' salaries would alone amount to 10,000/. a year. In the Military Asylum, an expense of 13,000/. might be saved, be- sides buildings and grounds worth 150,000/, by making an allowance to each separate corps for the same number of children as was now supported in the Asylum. The next item was the Waggon Train ; which was of little use during war, and of no use during peace. The Irish Yeomanry, he recommended to be entirely disbanded ; and to the English Yeomanry he would make no more allowance than was made to the National Guards of France,—namely, their arms and clothes. In the Reserves of which there were fifty-one, at an expense of 2,000/. each—a large diminution was practicable. Of the Recruiting establishments, he would leave only those of London and Dublin. He adverted next to the Government manufactures of stores, and above all to the charges for fortifications abroad— The sum of 15,000,000/. had been expended in Colonial fortifications during -the war. The fortifications of Canada, which were the weakest in the world, had cost the country 2,000,000/. Five hundred miles out of seven hundred, through which the fortifications extended in Canada, were as weak as ever they were. Though 40,000/. had been voted for carrying on those works, not more than 10,000/. had been expended. He would recommend the Govern- ment to stop the works ; whereby a saving of ;30,000/. would be made, together with 180,000/. more, which it was calculated would be called for hereafter.

In the Foreign Half-pay, he conceived a saving might be effected of 100,000/. a year. In the Guards, a reduction of 10,0001. at least might be effected ; and in the Army at large, each battalion might spare a major, a captain, and four subalterns at least. Colonel Evans con- cluded a long speech to a House consisting of fifteen members, by moving the following resolutions— That the strength and security of the empire, and the prospect of internal tranquillity and good order, being now augmented in an unexampled degree by the law which provides for an efficient Representation of the People in Parlia- ment, it is expedient, in the opinion of this House, that the smallest practicable delay should take place in relieving the country from all unnecessary burdens; and especially by carrying into effect every possible reduction in the heaviest branch of the national expenditure, that of the Army. " That it appears to this House, that great reductions may be effected in -the following military establishments, without detriment to the efficiency of the public service, and that some of them maybe altogether abolished,—viz. Chelsea and Kilmainham Hospitals, Military Asylum, and Hibernian Military School, the Waggon Train, the Irish and English Yeomanry, the disembodied Militia of Great Britain and Ireland, Regimental Depot Reserves, District Recruiting Establishments, System of Manufacturing Stores for the Ordnance, in respect

to construction of Colonial Canals and Fortifications, in respect to charge for Alilitary protection of Ceylon and Mauritius, Foreign Half-pay Lists, Household Troops of Cavalry and Foot Guards, and by dimimshing the number of officers on the establishment of Regiments. • " That it appears to this House expedient, that the forces at Malta, New South Wales, Nova Scotia, and Bermuda, should be reduced to the same effective strength at which they were on the 25th January 1825. " That, in the opinion of this House, it is expedient that the forces at home be reduced to the same effective strength at which they were on the 25th January 1831."

Sir JouN Homionae excused himself from travelling over the entire extent of Colonel Evans's speech, from the state of the House, the period of the session, the eurnerous details it embraced, and the fact that most of the topics urged in it had already been noticed in discus- sing the Estimates.

If economy alone were to be consulted, no doubt many of the reductions might be made; but, much as he was thisirous of practical economy, he could not admit that there were not other considerations connected with the reduc- tions which were at present of higher importance than economy. His gallant friend referred to the propriety of remodelling the Army ; but he bogged to tell him, that if we should be so unfortunate as to be compelled to go to war to- morrow, we should he able to send into the field, on the instant, as fine and as well-officered an army as ever was beheld; and, therefore if his gallant friend, when he spoke of remodelling, meant by that something therefore, should make either officers or men more efficient, it seemed probable that that labour was already taken off his hands. With respect to promotion, though it might be true that on some occasions officers who distinguished themselves did not obtain that ad- vance to which their services entitled -them, owing to the great struggle for pre- ferment, in which, as a matter of course, some must be left behind ; yet he did think, that, on the whole, the efficiency of the Army was cal ried into effect on as fair a system, and on as advantageous a method of obtaining the best ability and tdents, as could be devised. And, indeed, he was sure that his gallant friend would admit that there were seine instances of officers of merit, who did not possess any particular interest, receiving very rapid promotion; to which he might add, that there was not a stronger instance of this than in the very ease of his gallant friend himself. Ile held in his hand an account of the dates of the promotions of Colonel Evans; and from that document it appeared, that in the course of five months, his gallant friend had been promoted from lieute- nant to lieutenant-colonel ; and that his entire service (in the course of which, however, be undoubtedly most gallantly distinguished himself) only spread over a term of eight years and three months.

Mr. HUME supported Colonel Evans's resolutions. After remarking on the practice of promoting men because of their political connexions, Mr. Hume noticed what he deemed the great source of complaint— They had too long been acting upon the old military system. What he wanted to see was, the whole military expenditure of the country put under the control of the Secretary at War, and the Commander in Chief acting only as the executive authority for carrying the details into effect. Unfortunately, however, the Commander in Chief had engrossed all the power ; and he believed that the Secretary at liVar was not able to do a single thing without consulting him. This Mr: Hume took for granted, from the whole tenour of his right honourable friend's speech; which seemed to imply that Lord Hill was his master, and that he only came down to the House of Commons to state what that noble lord was willing to comply with. Ey a document which was yesterday laid on the table of the House, it appeared that the expenditure of the country amounted to up- wards of 1,900,000/. above the income—("Hear, hear, hear ! ")-so that now, in the eighteenth year of peace, we were exceeding our receipts by that enor- mous amount. The annual expense of the Army was seven millions and a half; the annual expense of the Ordnance was one million and a half; which, toge- ther, made a total of nine millions in outlay for the support of our standing army. He wished that his gallant friend had pointed this out; for then-he would have been the better entitled to ask whether it was consistent that such an expenditure should be allowed to continue ? If the Ministers had only just entered office, there might be some apology for no diminution having taken place ; but this was now their second year of office; and instead of a diminution, there had been somewhat of an increase in the expenses of the military establish- ment of the country-.

Lord ALTIIORP expressed some surprise at the opinion entertained by the mover and seconder of the resolutions, that they were such as the- House could entertain. They were not merely impracticable at the - present moment, but they were brought forward in a way which ren- dered their reception impossible. He defended Sir John Hobhouse from the imputation of wishing to maintain a large military establish- ment, because he could not without notice and in a moment go into the- question of its reduction. He next alluded to Ireland ; and after ob- serving that all men concurred in the necessity of a large military force • there, asked how the Ministry, while such was the general opinion, could be called on at one and the same time to dismiss the Yeomanry and to reduce the Army? Lord Althorp concluded by noticing Mr. Hume's argument for reduction from the state of the revenue— In laying before the House to-morrow the estimates for the current year, he • thought be would he able to show that the finances of the country were not in, so had a state as some gentlemen were inclined to suppose. Ministers were most anxious to effect a reduction of expenditure; and he could assure the House, that many of the questions which were this night introduced, had already been looked into lw them. Although they found it necessary- to move • the previous question on this occasion, still he could safely assert that they were anxiously investigating every point connected with tile expenditureof the country ; and that expenditure they were determined to reduce so far as it could be done with advantage to the general interest of the empire.

The question of Ireland, to which Lord Althorp had alluded, was again introduced by Mr. Shell, after a brief discussion, in which Sir GEORGE MURRAY, Sir H. PARNELL, and other members took part. Mr. SHEIL said— The maintenance of a large army in Ireland, was connected with the Church Establishment in that country. Let Englishmen bear in mind that the Church of Ireland had 1,000,000 of acres, 600,000/. in tithes, and, moreover, the Go- vernment admitted that a large army was necessary to support that Church. The present Ministers, when they were in opposition, advocated Catholic Eman- cipation as a means of ;educing the expense of the Army in Ireland. That country now required a vast military force, in consequence of the agitation cre- ated by the Church Establishment. Irishmen complained of the Church Esta- blishment as an evil to them; it was at least as great an evil to Englishmen. TInt order to keep twenty-four mitres upright in Ireland, 30,000 bayonets were em- ployed and paid for. The resolutions having been negatived by "the previous question," Colonel Evans moved for a return of all effective officers who were members of the House of Commons. For this return, Sir JonN Hos- noun substituted the following, which was ordered.

"Return of all Lieutenant-Colonels and Majors on full-pay abroad and at home ; distinguishing the date of their first and each commission, whether re- ceiving a pension, or for any wounds; also.specifying the ranks to which pro- moted by service."

• 10. CUSTOMS' DUTIES BILL. This bill was committed on Wednes- aq. Some conversation took place on the 18th clause ; which imposes a penalty of 100/. on importers hiring persons to land goods on which the duty has not been paid for every person so hired. Mr. RosiNsoN proposed to double the penalty on a second offence; but he did not press his amendment. Mr. BURGE brought forward his motion for reducing the duty on toffee from 6d. to 4d. This was resisted by Lord Avirroar, on account of the diminution of revenue which must, necessarily ensue. Government would suffer a loss of at least 200,0001.; which he did not think the increased demand would for many years make up. Mr. BURGE pressed his amendment to a division : for it, 22; against it, 53; majority for the present duty, 31.. An amendment for lowering the duty on Colonial vinegar was with- drawn, on the suggestion of Mr. P. TuomsoN, that the subject would be fully discussed on another occasion. Mr. DIXON proposed to reduce the duty on rum imported into ports in Ireland and Scotland from 9s. to 4s. 10d.

Lord ALTHORP thought it would be unfair to discuss such a proposi- tion when many members interested in the home manufacture of Ire- land and Scotland were absent. He was quite sure it would meet with the strongest opposition from gentlemen of both those countries. The amendment was withdrawn.

Lord SANDON afterwards proposed to reduce the import-duty on currants from 42s. to 28s.

Mr. P. TrunrsoN said, the reduction involved too serious an amount of revenue to admit of his complying with it.

Mr. GOULBURN observed, that the parties would do well to relieve the trade from the export-duty levied in the Ionian Islands, before they asked relief from the import-duty.

The amendment was not pressed.

Some conversation took place on the practice of levying the duty on sugar, on the quantity of sugar warehoused.

Mr. P. Trromsox said, the subject was under consideration ; and a bill of general regulation in the case of sugar and other goods similarly circumstanced, would be introduced next session.

The bill having passed the Committee, was ordered to be reported on Thursday. • , . LINSTAMPED PUBLICATIONS. Mr. HUME, on Tuesday, moved

for a return of the persons imprisoned for vending unstamped publica- tions, since the 12th December 1831, with their respective periods of imprisonments, and the name of the committing magistrate. He ob- served on the varying punishments for the' same offence: in some in- stances it was seven days, in some twenty-one, in some one month, in some three months. The law, he observed, was bad in principle, irre- gular in working,' and • most unpopular. Many of the penny publica- tions, of which he held in his hand a list to the number of eighteen, he said were exceedingly useful. He subsequently noticed the gross partiality shown by the Stamp Commissioners in the case of the Penny Maga- zine; which contained precisely the same description of articles that others were prosecuted for inserting, and yet was permitted to be pub- lished, and to drive others from the market, with impunity.

Lord ALTHORP put the prosecution of unstamped publications ge- nerally on its fair footing-

. It was well known, that some of those cheap publications contained matters which required a stamp, while others did not ; and he would ask his honour- able friend, what would be the situation of those papers which paid duty, if a free competition were to be allowed against them by papers which paid no duty to the Government?

The only way, he admitted, to discourage, improper cheap publica- tions, was to encourage proper cheap publications ; and this could be done in nowise but by lowering the duty on newspapers. Until that were done,—which in principle he had no objection to,—Government must protect those papers that paid stamps.

Mr. HLTNT remarked. on the absurdity of imprisoning men who had recourse to selling these cheap publications only to avoid starvation, and W110 when imprisoned were provided for at the public expense, and had the credit of martyrs besides.

Sir R. H. INGLIS spoke of the impropriety of making the House of Commons a sort of court of appeal from the decisions of the legally- constituted tribunals of the country.

Mr. STANLEY observed, that the legality of the sentences was not questioned; the object of the motion was to see how the law worked.

Objections were afterwards made to the return of the magistrates' names ; which Mr. Hiram consented to waive. The return thus amended was ordered.

12. MILITARY FLOGGING. Mr. HUNT moved, On Tuesday, for cer- tain returns connected with flogging in the Army; which, as amended by Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE, was granted. The amendment consisted in omitting the names of the regiments and the commanding officers. The return ordered is-

" The establishment of the British .Army in each year from the year 1825 to 1831, each inclusive ; the number of persons tried by court-martial in that time, and sentenced to other than corporal punishment; the number of persons sen- tenced to corporal punishment, and dm number of persons on whom corporal punishment was actually inflicted."

Sir GEORGE.MURRAY, in support of the system of flogging, men- tioned a case where the commanding officer had endeavoured to keep up discipline with'out flogging. Sir George removed the regiment to Dublin, in order that the experiment might be tried under his own eyes; but it failed ; and the consequence was, that on its failure, flogging to a much greater

edextent was found necessary than if the experiment had

never been tai.

Lord-INGE/1MM subsequently declared, that the moment flogging in the Navy was abolished, the downfall of the naval power of England was certain.

13. BANK CHARTER. Some conversation took place on Thursday on this subject, on the motion of Mr. EasTrupeE for certain returns eon. nected with the Bank issues and deposits.

The returns were opposed by Lord ALTHORP, chiefly on the ground that a Secret Committee was now sitting on the Bank question, along with whose report ample information would be furnished to the House, and that until that information was seen to be defective, it was prema- ture to ask for such returns as Mr. Easthope desired. Lord Althorp said, the report of the Committee must be made before the close of the session. On the question of whether the Charter ought to be renewed or not, Ile did not think it a proper occasion to enter.

Mr. Hume said, if the House were assured that the information sought by Mr. Easthope was before the Committee, Lord Althorp's argument would be conclusive.

Mr. IRVING stated that it was.

Sir HENRY PARNELL expressed considerable doubts of the possibility of the Committee making its report previous to the close of the session.

The motion was negatived without a division.

14. E PISCOPACY IN CANADA. On the vote for 27,4381. to defray the charge of the Ecclesiastical Establishment of the- British North Ame- rican Colonies,

Mr. HUME observed, that almost every man in Canada was averse from the grant.

This grant was not for the support of religion generally, but for the Support of a small sect, forming not one-twentieth part of the population. If Lord Howick did not give some assurance that this expense would be reduced, he should make a motion relative to it.

Lord HOWICK—" As the clergy, who are now paid by the Govern- ment, die or are otherwise provided for, the people of Canada will be called on to support their successors."

Mr. HumE—" What ! Bishop and all ?"

Lord HOWICK—" Yes ! Bishop and all."

Sir ROBERT Isaias deprecated the application of the word sect to the Episcopal Church ; it was the established church of every British colony.

Wherever the flag of England waved, the Church of England was there the church established by law ; and lie made not that statement on his own autho- rity alone, but upon the high authority of Mr. Locke.

Mr. DIXON said, the true way to alienate the people of Canada, was to make them pay for church establishments to which they did not belong. - Lord Howrca observed, in reference to what had fallen from Sir R. Inglis, that he did not see why this country should be called upon to maintain a church establishment in Canada, any more than it was called upon to defray the expense of maintaining apolice establishment in that colony. Canada was sufficiently able of itself to support its ecclesiastical establishments, and England should not be burdened with any portion of the expense Connected with their maintenance.

• Mr. LA BOUCII ERE noticed the inaccuracy of Sir Robert's assertion— the 'Catholic religion was, in fact, the established religion of Lower Canada.

Mr. SHEIL said, it was not merely the established church, but it pos- sessed the tithes also, by the 14th Geo. III.

Mr. GOULBURN spoke of the grant as sanctioned by the Practice of Parliament, and therefore not to be reduced.

Mr. SPRING RICE said, the sanction was somewhat incomplete: the fact was, that hitherto a portion of the grant had figured where no one would dream of seeking for it, namely, the Army Estimates.

15. GENERAL DARLING. A conversation took place respecting this officer on Monday, when a petition was presented from John Stephen junior, late Commissioner of Crown Lands, and Registrar of the Court of New South Wales, complaining of having been unjustly deprived of his offices by General Darling's authority.

Lord Homes. said, there was no judgment pronounced on Mr. Stephen : he was not found either guilty or not guilty of any offence— be was merely declared to be unfit to serve the Crown with advantage. It was absolutely necessary to render such a colony tn efficient place of punishment ' • Mr. Stephen was Suspected Of conniving. at the evasion of the convict laws, and refused to submit to interrogatories put to him. It was sufficient for the dismissal of a Government servant, that he was shown to be deficient in zeal for the Government service.

Mr. H. L. BUTNER said, the question was not concerning Mr. Stephen's guilt or innocence, but the legality of his examination.

Mr. HumE said, as Registrar and as a Magistrate, Mr. Stephen's conduct was exemplary. •

He would ask the noble Lord whether any Governor of a colony ought to be at liberty to send and ransack all the private papers of a magistrate, on, as it ap- peared, an unfounded charge against the proprietor of the house in whieh he lodged ?

Mr. Hume read some strong certificates in favour of Mr. Stephen, from the whole of the Judges and the Attorney-General at Sydney.

Mr. DIXON pointed out the grossly unconstitutional conduct observed towards Mr: Stephen—.

If there were no other charge than the having broken open Mr. Stephen's house at midnight, that would be a good ground for investigating the conduct of General Darling. Mr.. Stephen had been told to go back to Sydney, but for what? The office he had held was abolished; so that, even were he exonerated from every suspicion, still his going back would do him no service ; and Mr. Dixon had no doubt that the office was abolished as a punishment to this peti- tioner for daring, to complain. •

Sir CHARLES FORBES spoke highly in favour of Mr. Stephen.

Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice of a motion on the petition ; and Mr. HUME on the general question of Governor Darling.

16. NATIONAL GALLERY. The first item of the Estimates voted on Monday was one of 15,000/. towards the erection of a National Gallery. Sir ROBERT PEEL warmly panegyrised the vote. Sir M. W. RIDLEY having put a question respecting Cleopatra's Needle, Lord ALTHORP said, inquiry was making respecting it, but the general belief was that it was not in such a state as to warrant the expense of removal. Some conversation ensued on the intended plan of the building. Mr. HUME recommended that the by-laws of the Royal Academy should be revised ; its arrangements were not very suitable to a national institution.

17. REPRESENTATION OF AYLESBURY. On Tuesday, Mr. C. Ross, somewhat to the surprise of the House, moved that a new writ be is- sued for Aylesbury, in consequence of the appointment of Lord Nugent to the Chief Commissionership of the Ionian Islands. Mr. SPRING RICE, and subsequently Lord ALTHORP, stated, that Lord Nugent's ap- ivintment, although agreed on, had neither been made out nor accepted. Mr. Ross justified the irregularity of his motion, by alleging a commu- nication which he said he had with Lord Nugent that evening. On Wednesday, the motion became the subject of a short conversation ; when Lord Nugent gave the words of the communication alluded to— Mr. Ross had asked him at the bar whether he had accepted office under the Crown, and he had answered distinctly that he had not. 31r. Ross then asked whether he intended to vote that night or not, and his answer was, " Yes, assuredly."* • Mr. Rocs is one of the nominees for the disfranchised borough of St. Germain's, and what is Wein-al:ally termed " Whipper-in" of the Opposition ; Mr. lIotatzs, who long held the ofliee, having resigned.

18. RUSSIAN LOAN. The report of the resolution having been -brought up on Saturday, without opposition, and a bill ordered to be larought in, the bill was brought in, read a first time on Saturday, a second time on Monday, and committed on Tuesday. On Thursday it passed.