NEWS OF THE WEEK.

THE Bill still lingers. We had a faint hope that when the first Schedule was got.over, the second would be a matter of compa- rative brevity—that the opposition to partial would be less than to absolute disfranchisement : on the contrary, it seems to be the fate of the country, to encounter more delay in Schedule B than in Schedule A. The whole of Wednesday and Thursday were con- sumed in discussing the merits of fourteen boroughs ! Last night the progress was in a slight degree accelerated, and eleven more were put on the half-pay list. The concession of Ministers m the case of Saltash, which they allowed, nay recommended, to be transferred from A to B, seems to have given fresh vigour to their opponents. Sir ROBERT PEEL made a speech on Thurs- day, declaring his intention to say nothing, more on the details of the clause; and on the very next case, he made a second speech of half an hour long! Mr. CROKER attempted to beg off Cocker- mouth and a few more ; and very modestly assured the Mi- nisters, that if they granted his request, he would, in return for their kindness, only dispute the question of all the rest. The most amusing exhibition, however, was on Thursday night, when the Ministers having been attacked by one Reformer and defended by five Anti-Reformers, finished the farce by joining the new friends in order to persuade their old friends to adjourn. We have, hitherto, had one strong assurance of Ministerial fidelity in the ribald attacks of their enemies and the people's. We hope they will still continue to enjoy and to deserve such enmity. The praise of Messrs. CROKER and SIBTHORP and Sir ROBERT INGLIS is, however,-suspicious : non defensoribus istis. The last rumour afloat is, that, in the' House of Lords, the Bill will not be discus- sed at all ; but that it will be postponed on account of the lateness of the season, and that Ministers will agree to the postponement. If they do, it will be, we presume, on the understanding that the postponement is to be sine die. The Speech of the King . of France has been the occasion of considerable animadversion in Parliament, particularly in the Up- per House. The Duke of WELLINGTON has discovered that the Belgic fortresses were not meant to menace France—they were only intended to punish her if she misbehaved. His Grace has also discovered that the King of Holland should have been a party to their demolition ; which, considering the mutual kindliness that subsists between him and his late subjects, would no doubt have been equally agreeable to both parties. The Duke declares that he blushed when he heard of our permitting France to whip Don MIGUEL into decency of behaviour; a fact which proves, that there is grace among the Anti-Reformers still, notwithstanding the strong doubts which their conduct has given rise to. Of course, the Duke felt no such painful emotion when the Duke D'ANGOULEME was permitted to march from the Pyrenees to Cadiz —that was an attack for the purpose of punishing the people. The Bishop of WELLS has been again attacking the beer- houses. He would fain reduce their privileges. We think, as the beer has been so much reduced, the houses may be permitted to remain as they are. The House of Commons, notwithstanding the earnest cry and prayer of Sir JAMES SCARLETT, have resolved that if a member of Parliament spit in a judge's face, he may be lawfully bound over to his better behaviour, privilegio non obstante. Mr. WELLES- LEY is now abandoned to Lord 'BROUGHAM'S discretion.

There are some six or seven more notices of motion about the Bill; one of them is to give a vote to women. The Quarterly Review had said that all the women are against it; this is meant, we suppose, to bring' them over. Sir RoBEEr PEEL intends (he has not yet given notice) to move, in the case of Schedule C, that the population lists of 1621 be used instead of 1821; which, he avers, is the only Wily of fairly' bahincing the Noithein and Southern por- tions of the island. /he weather is -distressingly warm;.the debates are 'aces- . sively dull. Sir CHARLES WETHERELL was compared On Thurs- day to PAGANINI, because of his exploits upon a single string: But the Italian gives us a finger accompaniment on the other three ; with Sir CHARLES it is all base.

The House sits to-day, from two o'clock till eight.

1. THE REFORM BILL. On Tuesday, before going into Com- mittee, Colonel EVANS expressed himself strongly on the delay that the Bill had been subjected to. It had already produced a feeling in the country which might be attended with the most dangerous consequences.

A conference had been held between the Political Unions of Birming- ham, Manchester, and Glasgow, as to the steps which, according to their sense of duty, they ought to take in case these proceedings were pro- tracted in the same slow and tardy manner. He had heard several ex- clamations from the other side of the House as to the impropriety, of haste on a Bill of this importance ; but in other cases, when the matter was not so important, but infinitely more dangerous,—he meant those measures which removed all protection from the liberty of the subject, by suspending the Habeas Corpus Act,—in those cases, he re- peated, greater precipitancy had been shown than that now proposed, without exciting a murmur on the part of those who were now so indig- nant. The atrocious Six Acts were passed with a rapidity perfectly un- exampled.

He was sorry that Lord Althorp had agreed to so late an hour as five for the commencement of business. Unless they proceeded at a quicker pace, he would, in a night or two, move to examine evidence at the bar, to show the House the danger arising front - this course of delay. (Hear, hear!) Mr. JOHN SMITH also complained of the delay. • He was certain that many gentlemen who opposed the Bill, and made speeches against it over and over again in the very same words, did so for delay alone. (Great cheering.) No man could be blind to the feeling of society on this measure. As far as his observation went, and it was not confined or scanty, the whole nation participated in a sentiment favour- able to the Reform Bill. If we continued to go on as we had done, we might sit here all the summer, and at the end of it find that we had done nothing. If this question were to be decided by a trial of physical strength, the young, who could sit out the old and sickly, must ultimately gain the victory ; but then it would be victory not creditable either to the party who gained it or to the character of the House. He could assure the House, that the anger of the population in Scotland at the delays thrown in the way of the Bill was such, that if the House did not alter its course, it would shortly show itself in something stronger than words. He wished that Lord Althorp would move that the House should meet for the despatch of business at a much earlier than its usual hour. No one would feel greater inconvenience than himself from such an arrangement, but on an occasion like the present all private feelings ought to give way. If the noble Lord would let the House meet at twelve o'clock, he would promise the noble Lord to be constant in his attendance at that hour, provided he was not sick. He wished from his heart that the noble Lord would take some step to satisfy the public mind, which he could assure him was at present highly dissatisfied.

Mr. HUNT denied that the people were at all anxious about this Bill. Among the middling classes, there might be a feeling in its favour, but the lower classes cared nothing about it. [Mr. Hunt was loudly cheered, as he usually is, by the Opposition.] Mr. H. EULWER said he had a petition from Coventry on the very subject. He deprecated the ill-timed jokes, personal attacks, and endless repetitions, that accompanied the debates on the Bill. Lord ALTHORP observed, that the discussion of that night was not much calculated to expedite the progress of the measure. Nothing could be more improper than to endeavour to stifle discussion upon this Bill. ("Hear! hear ! from the Opposition.) By the present arrangement, they now sat from five o'clock till one o'clock in the morn- ing. They thus sat eight hours on the Bill ; and he thought it impossible that by any arrangement they could sit a longer time. Sir ROBERT PEEL thought the Committees now sitting made such an arrangement as was proposed impracticable. He hoped the time had not yet come when the deliberations of the House were to be influenced by that external pressure of which so much had been said of late. He could not admit that too much time had been consumed in discussing the important detaild of the Bill ; and for much that had occurred Ministers themselves were re- sponsible.

If they had appointed a select committee, for the purpose of reporting on the details of the parishes and the local peculiarities on which the ap- plication of the measure was in a great degree to depend, all the time consumed in disputing about the cases of Appleby, Downton, St. Ger:- mains, and other boroughs, would easily have been saved. If the House, instead of acting as they had done, had allowed the Bill to pass without any investigation, leaving the whole of these important points to be settled elsewhere, their conduct would have merited much more serious animadversion. They were now sitting four days in the week, and eight hours each day; and he really could not imagine how the constitutions of aged and infirm members could be expected to undergo additional fatigue, without incurring a very considerable sacrifice of health.

The House having gone into committee, the remainder of Sche- dule A, with the exception of Saltash, which was placed in &he.. dule B, was disposed of. Qiieenborough dropped without one word of commemoration from its members.

Sik EDWARD Daum% made a stand for New Romney. He_k'+:---112.41--4* Wished to connect with it Lydd and Old Romney. He saw no Teason why a conjunction should not take place in the case of Romney, as well as in that of Sandwich.

Colonel EVANS denied that there was the slightest resemblance in the two cases.

Sir CHARLES WETHERELL said, there was nomunicipal distinc- tion between Sandwich and Romney. He added, that if the pro- visions of the Bill were not sufficiently investigated in the Com- awns, they would in the Lords. Lord JOHN RUSSELL repeated an explanation previously given—

Falmouth had been united with Penryn, and Deal with Sandwich, be- cause Falmouth and Deal were populous and flourishing towns, making, in both cases, a population of ten thousand inhabitants.

Mr. CROKER animadverted on the fact, that Colonel Evans, vvho had been so earnest to cut short the discussions on the Bill, should have found it necessary to rise on the question of the very second borough proposed for disfranchisement. He repeated Sir Charles's argument that there was no distinction between the cases of Penryn and Sandwich and that under consideration. In conclusion, he said he would like to know when the arrangement respecting Sandwich was gone into ?

Lord JOHN RussELL declined answering this question ; and Mr. CROKER proceeded to relate a story from one of the news. papers—how that, when Sir Thomas Troubridge went down to canvass Sandwich, the electors asked him how he could ask them for a vote which would disfranchise them, and that they then pointed out the propriety of uniting Deal and Weimer with Sand- wich. To this tale, Sir THOMAS TROUBRIDGE gave a flat contra- diction.

Some further conversation took place ; in the course of which Colonel EVANS said, that he had only spoken once on the subject, while Mr. Croker had spoken not less than five-and-forty times. The gallant Colonel happening to say that the ex-Secretary had been two or three times contradicted, Mr. CROKER took a distinc- tion—he had not been contradicted, it was only what he had stated from newspaper report that had been contradicted. New Romney was at length added to Schedule A. Mr. C. Ross spoke in defence of St. Germains. In respect to population, it resembled Downton ; but it differed from it an this—it was impossible, at any convenient distance, to get the required mumber of electors for Downton, and in the amount of Assessed Taxes it was much below St. Germains. Now St. Germains was in one of the richest parishes in Cornwall ; in the borough alone there were 100 houses, and it would be easy to make up the required number of 300 in the neigh- bourhood. It paid 3411. in Assessed Taxes; which was more than that paid by St. Ives or Malmesbury, as much as Oakbampton, and treble the amount paid by Downton.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said—

There were only eight houses in the borough, and four in the parish, rated to the house-duty at 101. and upwards, and this at two-thirds of their annual value; and only fifteen houses in the borough of the annual value of 101. and upwards. In such a town and neighbourhood it would be impossible to get a proper constituency.

Mr. PRAED claimed, as representative of St. Germains, a right to. be heard in its behalf both as counsel and witness. The infor.

;nation given by the members and that of the anonymous author of the return entitled " Farther Information," were different, and that was a sufficient reason for examination. He could not see the justice of disfranchising boroughs for ever because at one period they might have been corrupt—

He had heard, in the case of the Greek Loan, in which the honourable member for Middlesex took an active part, that on application being made to an individual to subscribe in aid of the Greeks, he declined it, alleging as his reason that he would have nothing to do with them, as he understood they had once behaved very ill to the Trojans. With as much justice might it be urged that we shoulddisfranchise these small boroughs, in, order to visit on them the sins of their ancestors.

Mr. STANLEY stated the circumstances of St. Germains, from an actual survey of the Portreeve in January last.

The borough contained 40 acres, the town 50 acres, the parish 9,029 acres. The number of houses in the borough was 99, and the number of male inhabitants 247; so that the male and female population might be taken as being under 500. The remainder of the parish, including the village of Hessenford, contained no less than 1,800 or 1,900 inhabitants. This was in 1821. According to the late returns, the town contained 672 inhabitants, and the other part of the parish 1,914. If this borough were to be thrown into the parish, what was to prevent such a principle being carried to an absurdity ? According to the same rule, why should not a circle be drawn round Old Sarum, which did not contain one inhabitant, and the elective franchise distributed in the surrounding district?

Sir CHARLES WETHERELL did not consider the case of St. Ger- mains as at all answered. He again adverted to.Knaresborough and Caine, and concluded by declaring that Maeedon and Old Sarum had as much connexion as Old Sarum and St. Germains.

Mr. LAMBERT made an appeal to the Reformers, which was not beard by the reporters. It called up Sir ROBERT PEEL, who addressed the House at some length. He supposed Colonel Evans would report Mr. Lambert to the Manchester Political Union, which would denounce him for introducing irrelevant to- pics into the discussion of the Bill. Mr. Lambert called on the different Reformers to stand forward and defend their principles, and thus laid the foundation of an interminable debate. It was fair that for any future delay which the Bill might experience, the vengeance of the Union should fall on Mr. Lambert's head alone. After the example of Christchurch, where an area of 1,700 acres was included with the borough, Sir Robert did not see how St. Germains could be included in Schedule A.

Sir Tames. DENMAN said, the only difficulty Ministers had found in applying the principle of the Bill, was their havin& paid too much_consideastion to the boroughs in the hands of their op- yonents. Mr. CROKER contended that the parishes had been included with the boroughs solely for the purpose of preserving Caine. He said he would propose to remedy the numerous acts of injustice committed in respect of the various boroughs, when the proper time arrived.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL observed, that of fifteen boroughs in Sche- dule B, all of them in the same condition as Caine, only three were Whig boroughs. The Committee at length divided ; when the disfranchisement was carried by 260 to 212—Ministerial majority 48. St. Mawes and St. Michael's followed.

On the question of Saltash, Lord ALTHORP admitted that the case was a weak one in the opinion of Ministers themselves. Lord MILTON did not consider Saltash ought to be made an exception. Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought it ought. Saltash was, accordingly, excluded from Schedule A, by 231 to 150 ; 49 of the Ministerial side, including Lord Althorp, Lord John Russell, the Grants, Sir J. Graham, and indeed nearly all the official persons in the House, voting in the majority. Sir CHARLES FORBES,. on the question being put, rose, amidst loud laughter, to defend Old Sarum. He quoted a passage from a treatise of Lord John Russell on the subject.

Mr. O'CONNELL expressed his satisfaction that this line of de- fence had been adopted ; he was afraid, as they had just been lis- tening to a parish which was juxta Saltash, that Sir Charles had discovered some hitherto unknown parish juxta Sarum. Mr. O'Connell having alluded to the story of Lord Camelford threat- ening to give his black servant a seat for this borough, Mr.WYNNE stated that the anecdote was without foundation ; Lord Camelford had denied it by advertisement in the newspapers. Sir CHARLES WETHERELL spoke in defence of Old Sarum as a burgage-tenure borough ; and Mr. ATTWOOD mentioned that it had returned the elderPitt to Parliament.

It was condemned, notwithstanding this appeal.

Seaford followed, after a few words from Mr. LYON, in defence, not of Seaford, but of himself; he had, he said, obtained his seat by no improper means, either of influence or purchase. On Sleyning being put, Sir CHARLES WETHERELL complained of Sussex being shorn of its honours without a word in their de- fence. He would almost suppose that the county had been de- prived of its county as well as borough members. Lord G. LENNOX said, he had not been absent on one occasion on which the Bill was discussed.

True, he had not risen to say a word with regard to any of these bo- roughs; and he would tell Sir Charles Wetherell the reason—he had not confidence enough to rise in the defence of a bad cause ; and he was quite sure that his constituents did not wish him courage for such a task. (Cheers.) Sir Charles was himself one of the constituency of Sussex, and he had taken care that these boroughs should not pass without one free- holder of the county, at least, having a speech upon each of them. (Cheers and laughter.) Mr. CURTEIS, from the Gallery, said— He would tell Sir Charles why he had suffered the condemnation of these boroughs to pass without observation. It was because he thought them a disgrace to the county. (Cheers.) The members who had been returned for these boroughs had seldom any connexion with the county, and they had seldom done any good to the county ; so that it was not likely to suffer much from the loss of the boroughs. Sir CHARLES WETHERELL said, he believed if Sussex were polled, the freeholders would be found not to be in favour of Reform.

Lord G. LENNOX- " My firm conviction is, that ninety-nine out of every one hundred of the freeholders are in favour of Reform. I was for some length of time engaged in canvassing every town and village in the county, and I think I have had better means of ascertaining the opinions of the freeholders than the honourable and learned gentleman can have had."

Steyning was added to Schedule A. Nothing was said of Stockbridge. Mr. GEORGE BANKES spoke for Wareham ; but Mr. GRA.NBY CALCRAFr, the member for the borough, frankly acknowledged that he could make out no case.

Wendover, Weobly, Whit church, and Winchelsea followed. Lord STORMONT, when Woodstock came to be discussed, put in a plea for it: New Woodstock, he said, contained a population of 1,451, Old Woodstock of 403, and the parish of Bladen of 510. Lord JOHN RUSSELL observed, that Bladen had nothing to do with the borough. Woodstock followed the rest.

When Wootton Basset was put to the Committee, Lord MAHON and Lord PORCHESTER spoke a few words in its favour. Mr. O'Coniver.a. mentioned the case of Walsh, the swindling stock-broker, who ran away with Sir Thomas Plomer's 15,0001., and the discovery in Walsh's accounts of his Wootton Basset bar- gain of 201. per vote : a noble Lord, it was reported, had after wards raised the price to 251. Lord MAHON spoke of Mr. O'Connell's blundering personalities, and declared that he did not believe one word of the story about Walsh. ' Mr. HUME observed that the circumstances of the case were no.; torious. Mr. O'CoNwer.r. denied that he had used one expression that was at all personal. There was, however, no risk in using harsh language to him. Lord Mazox declared that he also meant nothing personal; and the conversation and Wootton Basset dropped together. Yarrnouthasle of Wight) completed the Schedule, being the nineteenth borough disposed of in the course of the night. Mr. PRAED wished an adjournment on the question " that the clause, as amended, should stand part of the Bill ;" and threatened to insist upon it ; but gave way to Sir CHARLES WETHERELL, who thought a better opportunity would present itself; and to Sir ROBERT PEEL, who thought the question had already been dis- cussed, on his motion that "each" be taken out of the clause. In the Committee on Wednesday, before entering on the consi- deration of Schedule B, Sir ROBERT PEEL raised the general ques- tion, whether all the boroughs in the Schedule should not continue to return two members, by moving that " two" instead of " one"

should stand as part of the clause.

If the House affirmed his proposition, then each of the boroughs would return two members ; and if, on the other hand, the 1-louse derided that the word " one" stand part of the clause, then he would abtain from raising the question again, in the case of each individual borough. He thought, therefore, that the course he proposed to follow would tend to save the time of the House ; and he entreated the calm, impartial, and disinterested attention of all parties.

Sir Robert's argument was, that these boroughs were not no- mination boroughs, because, in that case, they ought not, accord- ing to the principle of the Bill, to return any members at all ; that by assigning two members to each, local irritation would be greatly kept down, inasmuch as each party would be able to return its member; that it was only by permitting them to retain two members that the proper equality could be maintained between the agricultural and manufacturing parts of the country. In illustrat- ing this last point, Sir Robert said he would draw a line from the mouth of the Severn to the Wash in Lincolnshire, leaving nearly all the agricultural portion of the kingdom on the south, and the manufacturing portion on the north :

In the northern division would be found Northumberland, Cumber- land, Durham, Yorkshire, Lancashire, Cheshire, Derbyshire, Nottingham- shire, Leicestershire, Staffordshire, Shropshire, Worcestershire, War- wickshire, Herefordshire, Westmorland, Lincolnshire, and Rutland. The four last might be considered agricultural counties, but the first thirteen were the chief seats of English manufactures. To the south of the line were the agricultural counties—Hertfordshire, Norfolk, Suffolk, Cam- bridgeshire,Buckinghamshire, Northamptonshire, Huntingdonshire, Es- sex, Bedfordshire, Gloucestershire, Oxfordshire, Somersetsh ire, Wiltshire, Berkshire, Middlesex, Sorry, Kent, Sussex, Hampshire, Devonshire, Cornwall, and Dorsetshire. Schedule A comprised 56 boroughs, return- ing 111 members. How were these boroughs situated with respect to the districts north and south of the line ? The district north of the line lost only 5 boroughs out of the 56 ; the district south of the linelost 51. The dis- tricttothe north of the line lost 10 members,—the district to thesouthlost 101. So much for Schedule A. He now came to Schedule B, which con- tained 41 boroughs, including Saltash. Out of these 41 boroughs, 8 were to the north of the line, and 33 to the south. By the combined operation of Schedules A and B, the manufacturing district lost 18 members, and the agricultural district lost 134.

Sir Robert then proceeded to notice the new boroughs created under the Bill. Of Schedule C, which contained 12 new boroughs, the whole, except Devonport and the metropolitan districts, were to the north of the line : of Schedule D, 24 were to the north and

2 to the south. The result was a.,0-ain to the northern division of 36, and to the southern of 14. [The reporters make Sir Robert

say 33 and 7, but this does not correspond with the schedules he was discussing.] Sir Robert went on to say that the new Bill would bring into the House men of talent, but of tremendously ac- tive talent, and that men of retired and modest disposition would shrink from contested elections in populous places. He therefore entreated the House to pause ere it consented to the reduction of these boroughs..

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, the assertion that the permission to return but one member would lead to violent contests, was dis- proved by experience. More bitter contests had ever taken place in Dublin, where there were two members, than in any of the open boroughs, where there was-but one member returnable. In every other case, this had been the rule. There was always a greater contest where there were two, than where there was one. To the principle of boroughs returning but one member there could be no possible objection, when members looked to the state of the Welsh, Scotch, and Irish boroughs generally. Lord John went into a statement to show that in the distribution of members no injustice had been done. Cornwall, with 257,000 inhabitants, would retain 13 members ; Durham, with 205,000, would have 9 ; Dorsetshire, with a population of 140,000, would retain 9; while Lancashire, with a population of a million, had only 19. As to gentlemen of retired habits, of whom Mr. Sturges Bourne was mentioned as an example, Lord John said he could see no reason why the most retired might not venture on addressing a constitu- ency of 300 or 400 persons, as at Lymington or Christchurch.

Sir ROBERT PEEL—" The noble Lord mistakes my meaning. I complained that the number of these boroughs was too small, not that persons such as Mr. Bourne would find any difficulty in ad- dressing the constituency of Lymington."

Lord JOHN RUSSELL—" The number is quite large enough to accommodate all the gentlemen of retired habits." Mr. SADLER spoke at length against the principle of the Bill. He entered into several calculations to show that it gave an unfair preponderance to the town over the country districts.

The town population did not amount to more than 4,500,000 persons, whereas the rural population amounted to upwards of 7,000,000. Sup- pose that property was selected as the basis of this new constitution, how did it bear on the question ? The houses, according to the last return of property, averaged 15,000,0001. per annum, while the land reached 30,000,000/. per annum. Again, if they looked to contribution, they would find the same inequality. The houses in this kingdom, including mills and manufactories, according to the last report made to that House, paid 2,000,0001. to the poor-rates, while the land paid no less than 0,800,0001. Yet, under these circumstances, according to the Bill, about 300 members would be given to the towns and 150 to the coun- ties ; a ratio the very reverse of Cromwell's, which gave 150 to the towns and 350 to the country districts. After alluding to the feelings of his own most respectable constituents, in regard to the immeasurable wrong they suffered under the Bill, Mr. Sadler concluded by stating that he would take another opportunity of speaking at length on the principle of the Bill. Mr. DOMINICK BROWNE said, by the census, if population were taken as a test, every 24,000 souls ought to return a member ; if property were taken, then, by the Assessed Tax returns, every 10,000/. should return a member. He would like to know which of the boroughs in Schedule B, to which Mr. Sadler would give the privilege of returning two members, contained 2-1,000 inhabi- tants, or paid 10,000/. of Assessed Taxes. After some further re- marks from Mr. WASON, Sr THOMAS FREMANTLE, "a mem- ber," [Mr. HAWKINS ?] Lord EASTNOR, and Mr. C. PE LHA :sr, the Committee divided—for the amendment, I15; against it, 182; majority, 67. On the question being put, that Aldborough stand part of the clause, Mr. SADLER said, no town in England had a more respect- able constituency ; it had returned 1lie great Lord Chatham.

Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE said, he regretted that it had not been continued in Schedule A.

It was the greatest farce in the world to talk of this borough as pos- sessing a population which should entitle it to he exempted from the operation of this Bill. That population could only be made out for it by culling it from four or five adjoining parishes, which had a population that in 1821 they did not possess. He would defy any set of Parlia- mentary Commissioners to find a constituency of three hundred electors for Aldborough. It would be a most monstrous thing that the country gentlemen and farmers in the neighbourhood of this borough should be deprived of their votes for the county on account of the preservation of this rotten, stinking borough of Aldborough. It would be perfectly mon- strous and nonsensical to entertain such a proposition as that. If the member for Westminster were in his place, he could prove that the seats for this borough had been bought and sold, for that baronet had himself purchased his seat for this borough during the minority of the noble duke to whom it belonged. This was one of those boroughs which, ac- cording to the preamble of the Bill, should be totally disfranchised; and he would therefore move, as an amendment, " that the borough of Ald- borough be returned to Schedule A."

Mr. SADLER said, the Duke of Newcastle had had no control over the boroughs for many years.

Lord STORMONT said, Mr. Duncombe's brother was a freeman of Aldborough:

Mr. DUNCOMBE—" He is not."

Lord STORMONT said, when he was member for Aldborough, Mr. Duncombe's brother voted for him. He retorted, that Hert- ford was one of the most corrupt constituencies in the kingdom.

Mr. DUNCOMBE replied, in point of fact, there was but one elector for Aldborough, and that was the Duke of Newcastle. It was asked, would the Reform Bill give the nation better members than they now had? He answered, why should it not ?— He should like to know in what consisted the superiority of the New- castle nominees over members freely chosen by the people. He could tell the noble Lord that it was not enough for him to extol his own services. Another tribunal must put a value upon them,—the public were estimating the costs as well as the nature of the services of the Boroughmongers, and he could tell them that the result would not be very flattering to their vanity. The sense and virtue of an insulted peOple had risen against them, and he would advise the noble Lord not to be indifferent to the fact.

Sir CHARLES WETHERELL entered into a long discussion about the expense of an election at Hertford. It cost, he said, not less than 3,0001. or 4,0001.; while his only expense was an election- dinner, which did not cost a centesimal part of that sum. [The reporters say a cendecimal. Sir Charles is fond of coining new words ; perhaps he really meant a hundred and tenth part.]

Mr. DUNCOMBE at length withdrew his amendment, and Ald- borough was allowed to remain in Schedule B. Amersham, Arundel, Ashburton, and Bodmin were next added to the Schedule with hardly any opposition.

Bridport was defended by Sir H. ST. PAUL ; but his statement was contradicted by Mr. WARBURTON, the other member. Sir EDWARD SUGDEN, amidst great interruption and much laughter, insisted at great length on the inconsistency of allowing two members to Truro, and only one to Bridport, and none to Appleby. Sir Edward turned at length from the borough to the members, for the purpose of administering a rebuke to theirill- timed mirth.

The uproarious bursts of laughter which he then heard around him, struck him as one of the worst signs of the times. (Laughter and cheers.) Judging from what then took place, he expected, when the Reformed Parliament assembled, to see every measure carried by acclamation. No man would dare to get up in the Reformed House and speak sensibly. (Roars of laughter.) He supposed that he had said something very fool- ish ; but he was not aware of it, and he was only speaking the conviction of his mind. (" Oh, oh ! ") Were not these signs to lead the House to the conclusion that a Reformed Parliament would carry by acclamation measures which could not be carried by sound judgment ? He felt con- vinced that when the Reformed Parliament met with the inclination of a new body to alter every thing in the old Constitution which it did not like, they would have measures perpetually carried, not by calm reason- ing, but by clamour, intimidation, and violence. The rebuke seems only to have called forth fresh bursts of laughter, and Sir Edward sat down. Lord JOHN RUSSELL wished to calm the fears of Sir Edward. He happened to have ten years' longer experience of that House:than the learned gentleman, and begged leave to state, for his information, that there was nothing peculiar in the conduct of mmbers during these debates which could in any degree justify his sneers`or animadversions. When dry and uninteresting details were under consideration, gentlemen

bad always been in the habit of conversing with one another, as they had done now in the presence of Sir Edward; so that he might set his mind at rest with respect to such apprehended revolutionary symptoms.

Bridport was disposed of without any division. Nothing was said upon Buckingham.

Captain BOLDER() put in a claim for Chippenham. In 1821, it contained 4,411 inhabitants ; although the return only gave 3,506. He asked to be allowed to prove on oath that 155 houses had been omitted in the return of 1821. He thought its case a much stronger one than that of Caine. Mr. STANLEY said, it ought in that case to he discussed on its own merits. As Caine had been so repeatedly alluded to, he felt im- pelled to state, that the Marquis of Lansdowne was owner only of 3 out of the 208 houses which would give a vote under the Bill.

Sir ROBERT PEEL observed, that there must be some mistake in the return of houses in 1821, which was 576,—as in 1811 it was 668.

Lord ALTHORP said, there might be a mistake of houses, but there hardly could be A population, which was proved to be cor- rect by the previous statement of 1801.

A long conversation ensued,—in which the Opposition pleaded for delay and examination of evidence ; while the Ministerial side contended that there was no case for either. At last the House divided—for continuing the borough in Schedule B, 251; against it, 181 ; Ministerial majority, 70.

On Thursday, on the question of Clitheroe, Mr. LESTER con- tended, that with the adjacent townships, Clitheroe contained more than 4,000 inhabitants; and in the neighbourhood, if it were re- quired, a population of 20,000 might be procured. Mr. CROKER declared that he had never spoken but in conformity with the principle of the Bill; and on that principle the borough of Clitheroe ought to merge in the parish. Nothing could he more ab- surd than that this rule should be departed from merely because the borough and parish were of different names. At Northallerton, they had gone sixteen miles to get a population of 4,100: why then not go to this beehive of a parish, where they could get 87,000 ? Mr. Croker went on to say, that if Clitheroe were given up, the only other boroughs which it would carry along with it were Cockermouth, Helston, and Lymington. Cockermouth, with its parish of Brigham, contained 6,037 inhabitants ; Wendover, in which Helston was situated, contained 6,814 ; and St. Mary's, in which Lymington was situated, contained 5,384. By excluding thesefrom the Schedule, the Bill would be strengthened, as they would jus- tify the cases of Caine, Malton, and Knaresborough. If his sug- gestion were adopted, his only objection to the remainder of the clause would be to its principle. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, in the cases cited, there was not only a separation of names, but of jurisdiction. Helston had no more to do with the parish in which it was accidentally situated than with any other. At Lymington, so far were the inhabitants from Ending fault with the proposed reduction, that they had agreed by 10 to 1 to support the Bill. Mr. KNIGHT contended, that the only argument for refusing two members to Clitheroe was, that the name of the parish was Whalley, and not Clitheroe. He said, that even viewed in itself, the chapelry of Clitheroe, which consisted of three townships, con- tained 4,032 inhabitants.

Mr. STANLEY asked for Mr. Knight's authority; but Mr. KNIGHT very sharply refused to give it—if the fact were doubted, he de- manded an inquiry. Mr. STANLEY said, Mr. Knight was a young member, else he would have known that the inquiry he had made ought to have been answered in another manner.

It certainly was not in accordance with the courtesy of that House that the honourable and learned member, when asked a question, should draw himself up, and putting himself in a posture, with folded arms, should say, " You have your population returns ; but I have my assertion ; and if you ask me on what authority it rests, all I shall tell you is, that I will not tell, and you may go where you can find it." As he had not the honourable and learned member's authority for the statement, all he should say of it was, that it would be much better to rely upon the population returns, which gave no such account as the honourable and learned member had read.

Sir CHARLES WETHERELL said, to be out of argument was worse than to be out of temper. The argument of the difference of the name was one that a schoolboy would not answer. But even that argument was met by Mr. Knight's statement. The argument, founded on the parish not being of the same name as the borough, was the argument of a fiddler, or a quibbler, or a mounte- bank ; for a man who would attempt to legislate on such absurdity would deserve the application of all those terms, and worse. Such quibbling and quackery, such mountebank legislation, such silly fooleries, such ab- surd fiddling, such contemptible gasconade, such fiddling upon a broken fiddle, such downright and contemptible puerilities, might be of some consequence perhaps if addressed to a new House of Commons, but they would never pass in the present. Were they to tell the people of England that one of the principles of this Bill was, that the franchise was not to be extended to a populous parish, because it happened not to be of the same name as the borough—because the name of the parish was Whalley, and that of the borough was Clitheroe? He should be glad to hear—not from the right honourable gentleman, who took upon himself the office of Attorney-General with regard to this Bill—but he should like to hear from some lawyer—from the Attorney-General, who was bound to maintain the law of England—he called on him to state whether such contemptible puerilities were to be the foundation of a legislative measure. Mr. STANLEY retorted on Sir Charles.

If there was any fiddler in the case, it was the honourable and learned member himself, who, in point of gesture, and for rubbing continually on one string, might beat Paganini himself. Whether the allusion with re- spect to the mountebank also applied to the honourable and learned mem- ber, he should say nothing. With respect to the charge that he usurped the place of Attor- ney-General to the Bill, Mr. Stanley added—

The honourable and learned gentleman had himself shown, by the course which he pursued, that the habit of intolerablegarrulity—of eter- nal and inexhaustible trifling—of constantly repeating the same things, varied in a thousand forms, and brought forward without intermission night after night, might still adhere to an Attorney-General, after he had ceased to sit on the Ministerial side of the House.

After a few words from Mr. CUST and Mr. PRAED,

Lord JOHN RUSSELL observed on the language of Sir Charles Wetherell.

He spoke of appealing to the people. The people saw through his ar- guments ; the people saw that the honourable and learned gentleman's play upon words, and his endeavours to make distinctions where there was really no difference, were merely attempts to gain time. The corn- mon sense of the country would distinguish between the conduct of those who were honestly persisting in the Reform measure as it was originally formed, and the course of proceeding adopted by the honourable and learned gentleman.

Sir CHARLES WETHERELL retaliated with much bitterness on Mr. Stanley— Sir Charles remembered that the First Lord of the Admiralty had, on one occasion, designated a certain officer in that House by the title of Ajax fiagellifer. Now he told the honourable Secretary for Ireland, that if he desired to be aflagellifer, he must first possess the requisite strength. The honourable Secretary, who had not answered one of the arguments which had been brought forward, might possess a good deal of the dispo- sition of a flagellifer, yet he did not think that the honourable Secretary was an Ajax. He hoped, therefore, that while the Bill was being dis- cussed, the honourable Secretary would hang up his whipcord, and that the noble Lord would restrain his dull censures ; for do what they might, they would not impede him from discharging his duty.

Sir GEORGE MURRAY said a word in favour of Clitheroe; and Lord ALTHORP defended Mr. Stanley, the estimation of whose talents, he said, did not entirely depend on the fiat of Sir Charles Wetherell.

After some more conversation,—in which Mr. KNIGHT took oc- casion to say, that he detested the principles of the Administration as much as he respected the private virtues of Mr. STANLEY, and concluded by charging Ministers %lit h being influenced by the Gods of the Gallery [the Reporters ?:1,—Clitheroe was then added to Schedule B.

On the question of Cockermouth, Sir ROBERT PEEL said, after the facts that had come out respecting Chippenham the previous evening, he would not trouble the House any more on the details of the boroughs in Schedule B. The House divided on Cocker- mouth ; when there appeared for keeping it in the Schedule 233, avainst it 151. 6A long conversation took place on Dorchester ; in which, as in every other borough hitherto discussed, it was contended that it did not come within the Ministerial rule. The only novel argu- ment in behalf of Dorchester was, that it ought to be spared be- cause it was a county town. Mr. A. BARING ventured to assert, that the late Major Cartwright's hair wou:d have stood on end at a proposal to disfranchise a county town. The advocates for Dorchester were, besides Mr. Baring, Lord ASHLEY, Mr. R. WILLIAMS, Sir GEORGE WARRENDER, Mr. G. BANKES, Sir ROBERT PEEL (notwithstanding his declaration, half an hour be- fore, that he would say no more on the details of Schedule B), Mr. CROKER, and Mr. HUNT. The members who supported its being retained in the Schedule were, Lord ALTHORP, Mr. J. STANLEY, Sir THOMAS DENMAN, and Lord JOHN RUSSELL.

The Attorney-General spoke at considerable length. He said— It was extremely difficult for gentlemen on his side the House to know what course they ought to pursue. If they made speeches in reply as long as the provocative speeches of their adversaries, it was quite clear that they should be playing the game of their adversaries. Then again, although this House of Commons, or, at least, that part of it opposite, affected to be shocked by nothing so much as by bad manners,—it did not or, at least, that part of it opposite did not—always treat gentlemen, who rose to answer their arguments, in the most polished manner. The gentlemen opposite had more than once insinuated that this House of Commons was to leave a kind of testamentary example to their succes- sors, who, as they were to be members of Reformed Parliaments, must of necessity, as it seemed to the gentlemen opposite, be vastly ungenteel ; but if those gentlemen thought that the example of this Parliament would be of so much importance to succeeding ones, let him suggest to them, that it might be as well not to receive the speeches of their opponents with laughter—not to interrupt a gentleman in the middle.ola sentence with a vociferous cheer, nor to conduct themselies. in other respects in such a manner as to sully that reputation for gentility and good breeding which they so frequently boasted that this Parliament possessed, and which they prognosticated that no succeeding Parliament, because re- formed, could possess, in any thing like an equal degree. Another mode of treating the arguments from that the Ministerial) side of the House was by replying, " Oh ! that's no answer at all." Now such answers happened to be the best they could give, though they were gene- rally shortly expressed, and not in that plausible and solemn manner, nor at that wearisome length, with which, on the other side, one and the same string of arguments against the Bill were so constantly repeated upon every part of the details of the Bill. Sir Thomas noticed the county-town argument— Mr. A. Baring had exclaimed in agony and astonishment, " Good God! you are about to disfranchise a county town." This, however, was a mis- take; they weregoing to do no such thing. They were merely going to

deprive a county town of one member; and they were 'going to do this because the return of one member was as much as its fair. share in the general representation of the country. But suppose they had been going

to disfranchise a county town, what then ? Pray where had Mr. Baring found, in his constitutional reading, that there was any necessary -con- nexion between representation and a-county town ?' Chelmsford, which was the county town of .Esseic returned no members ; Mansfield was the county.town of IiOttinghamshire, and it returned no-members ; the same

was true of other county towns, and he had never heard that they were the worse for not returning members, any more than he had ever heard that Wilton was the better because it did return members.

They were told, if they added another town to Dorchester, they would get a population of 4,018 ; but he would put it to the House if this would be abiding by the straightforward line they had laid down. If they departed from it in one case, how could they avoid departing from it in another ? One concession only led to the demand of another concession; he therefore hoped no farther concession would be made. With respect to the line which had been adopted— Sir Rohert Peel had characterized the line as an absurd one, because it passed over a particular class of voters ; but, in the name of common sense, must not every line do the same ?—must not some persons ever be excluded, whatever arrangement might he made, if that arrangement stopped short of univer‘al suffrage? He supposed that Sir Robert did not wish that any persons under the age of twenty-one should be entitled to vote at elections ; but might not the young gentlemen of twenty and a half adopt the argument of the right honourable Baronet, and say that they were heartlessly and arbitrarily used? Might not these young gen- tlemen, who wanted so little of the legal age, who came so near to what they might think the legal line absurd,—might not one of these say, as the friends of the borough of Dorchester said, " How hard is my case? I am stronger and taller than my brother, who is twenty-one; I earn more money than he does ; I know more than he does ; I am in a more flourishing condition than he is ; and yet, because I am six months younger, I am not to be allowed a vote, though he has one." The argu- ment of such a gentleman would be quite as good as the areumenein favour of Dorchester ; and such a young gentleman would have just as much show of reasoning in calling the law heartless, arbitrary, and absurd, as the right honourable Baronet had in applying those epithets to the line which excluded Dorchester from returning two members to Parliament.

Dorchester was added to the rest of the clause, after a division of 233 to 151.

Droitwich and Evesham followed.

Captain HARRIS spoke in behalf of Great Grimsby, and pro- voked a good deal of laughter.

Great Grimsby was an ancient borough, and had a right to victual the fleet in time of war. It was a port which had excavated a large basin. He had not heard any borough defended in a similar manner.

No division took place, though Mr. SIBTHORP threatened one. Mr. CRESSETT PELHAM spoke of the ruin of the British Consti- tution.

Sir J. M. DOYLE replied- " If we go on in this way from night to night during this hot weather, some of us making, and others of us listening to speeches which have been repeated over and over again, and almost without variation, du- ring the whole course of the present session, I am sure that it will ter- minate in the ruin of all our Constitutions." (Cheers and laughter.) When the Chairman put the question on East Grinstead, a num- ber of members exclaimed, " Adjourn !" It was then about half- past one o'clock. Lord ALTHORP said, he thought the Committee might take this borough, and so stop at Guildford, on which there would be a debate. lf, however, the wish for adjournment was decided, he would not oppose it. Colonel DAVIES opposed the adjournment.

Though he knew that the gentlemen opposite would disclaim all dispo- sition to delay unnecessarily the progress of this Bill, still he must say, that if they persisted in pursuing the same career that night, which they had pursued previously, lie should give but very little credit to their dis- claimer. He must also tell the members of his Majesty's Government, that if they allowed themselves to be beaten every night on this ques- tion of adjournment, and if they allowed gentlemen, holding situations under them, to make long speeches in reply to arguments which had been advanced and refuted till they had become as rotten as the bo- roughs which they were used to defend, they must not expect to escape the censure of the country. He was sorry to say that there was too great a disposition to speechify on this Bill, on the part of the Government. The country felt this, and was desirous to see more of action and less oratory on the part of the Ministers. (Outcry.) He was not to be put down by clamour. He was as independent as any of the members oppo- site—[the gallant officer spoke from the Ministerial benches]—and pos- sessed what they did not, a large constituency. He therefore claimed, in their name and in his own, the right to be heard on this subject. He would tell Ministers fairly, that if they did not wish to be considered as parties to the delay of which the country was hourly complaining, and If they did not wish to be denounced as lukewarm advocates of Reform, tkey must adopt a very different system towards the Opposition from that which they had hitherto pursued. Mr. CROKER, Lord PORCHESTER, Mr. PUSSY, Sir ROBERT INGLIS, and Mr. SIBTHORP defended the Ministers. Ultimately, the adjournment was agreed to, Colonel DAVIES declining to divide.

The House was unable last night to enter on the discussion of the Bill until a much later houithan usual. First, there was a long debate on the question whether a new ballot should take place for the Dublin election ; Colonel White being accounted an improper member of Committee, in consequence of his having voted at the election. The question for a new ballot was not de- cided in the affirmative until half-past six o'clock. Then there was a long conversation on the propriety of meeting this day ; it being understood that the members of both Houses should have a holy- day on Monday to see London Bridge opened. The proposition to meet to-day came from Lord ALTHORP. Mr. WYNNE spoke of the expense in election committees consequent on meeting this day, especially Coleraine, Carnarvon, Dublin, and Great Grimsby. Mr. Dixon put the point to rest in respect of Coleraine ; the Committee had already agreed to meet at ten and rise at twelve. To another objection of Mr. WYNNE, that it was hard that the Bill should stand still because Ministers were about to dine with the Lord Mayor, Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied, that the Bill had not hitherto been discussed on a Monday. After a great many members had spoken in favour or against the plan of meeting to- day, Mr. J. KNIGHT objected, that it would interfere with profes- sional business. Mr. D. W. HARVEY said, members who could not attend to Parliamentary duties in consequence of their profes- sional engagements, should resign their seats. Mr. O'CoNNELL asked what professional men sacrificed by such attendance", com- pared with what he sacrificed ? Mr. KNIGHT said he did not make the objection for the sake of professional men, but the people who were interested in their labours. Mr. ATTWOOD threatened to divide the House ; but no division took place.

On the House going into Committee, East Grinstead was added to Schedule B without comment.

On Guildford being put to the Committee, Mr. DENISON, mem- ber for Surry, objected to its being placed in the Schedule. He contended that the return of 1821 was erroneous; instead of 3,161, it ought to have been 4,212. The jurisdiction of the magistrates of Guildford extended not only over the three parishes of Trinity, St. Mary, and St. Nicholas, but also over that of Stoke. The number of 1 01. houses within the borough was 213, and out of the borough 102. Mr. Denison also put in a plea for the purity of the electors and the beauty of the town. The two members, Mr. MANGLES and Mr. LORTON, followed Mr. Denison.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, the population, by the return, was below the line; and if Guildford was made an exception, an evident injustice would be done to the other boroughs similarly situated. The fact was, the whole population that could be fairly claimed was 3,723 ; there was no proof or allegation that the other 489 that were claimed were within the borough. Sir CHARLES WETHERELL spoke at length against the disfran- chisement. He declared that he would not submit to the press, though it had described him as only speaking for delay. Having pursued this point at great length, Sir Charles went into a recon- sideration of the cases of Chippenham, Bridport, and Dorchester; he then proceeded to discuss the demolition of the Belgic fortresses, Mons and Tournay, and afterwards entertained the House with a lecture on the Greek tenses, from Dr. Clarke: the time assigned for the reception of evidence and information by the Ministry was, he said, the paulo-post future of the commentator. Sir JAMES SCARLETT spoke to the respectability of Guildford. Lord ALTHORP did not think, looking to the rest of the country, Guildford was of sufficient importance to return two members. The case was exactly analogous to that of Dorchester. Mr. HUNT spoke of Caine as not to be named with Guildford, and intimated his intention of moving that it be put in Schedule B at least.

A division at length took place ; when the numbers were 253 to 186,leaving a majority of 67 for including Guildford in the Sche- dule.

Helston was carried nem. con.

On the question of Honiton, Sir GEORGE WARRENDER ob-; served, that several members had stated to him only that day, that Dorchester was a hard case, but they were pledged to the Bill. There was a cry of Name! " but Sir George would not answer it. He went on to say, that if Schedule A were persevered in, it would be the ruin of the Bill ; and Schedule B could not be per- severed in, notwi.hstanding the hustings jargon of "the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill." Sir jargon expressed his confident reliance on the House of Lords to remedy all these matters— It was consolatory to him to think that there was a place elsewhere, which was intrusted with a wise jurisdiction, and which, when acts of spoliation had been attempted in other Parliaments, had protected the rights of individuals. He looked to that other place where private wrongs were redressed, in the full hope that justice would be done in a case of

public wrong hat, in the exercise of a wise discretion, it would grant to the aggrieved subjects of this country that security and protection which it had heretofore afforded in cases of private injury.

Mr. GISBORNE defended the independence of the Reformers: they followed the Ministers only in the sense that the King fol- lowed Madame Biaize. The division of 150 of them against Minis- ters, in the case of Saltash, sufficiently showed what their senti- ments were.

Honiton was then added ; as was Huntingdon, after a few words from Mr. J. PEEL.

Hythe

On Launceston, Sir J. MALCOLM observed, that it and New- port, which had been put in Schedule A, 'brined but one town, and their joint population was in 1821, 4,600. Sir H. HARDINGE advised Sir John not to divide the Com- mittee— It would be useless to make a division upon it in a pledged Parliament, and in the teeth of such a pliant majority as they had seen that even- ing. He was convinced that at this moment there were not a dozen of members who understood any thing of the principle of the Bill.

Liskeard, Lyme Regis, and Lymington, were next voted.

Mr. QUINTIN DICK spoke a few words in favour of Malden, but they were not heard. Mr. SIBTHORP opposed the disfranchise- ment, as calculated to lessen the agricultural influence. Sir F. VINCENT said, Malden was a sea-port town, and not an agricultural district; and besides, the county of Essex atlarge would secure two additional members under the Bill.

After Malden had been disposed of, on the Chairman putting the usual question of reporting progress, Sir ROBERT PEEL opened once more the discussion on the propriety of sitting to-day. He complained of being taken by surprise. Many members • had paired off, and gone into the country, on the faith of the arrange- ments formerly entered into. Lord ALTHORP said, the House was so full when he intimated his intention, that it was not very likely that any one could be takes by surprise. Sir H. HARDINGE, Mr. PERCEVAL, Mr. ATTWOOD, Lord VAL- LETORT, and Mr. WYNN declared, if no other answer were obtained, that they would be driven to the measure of repeated adjournments, in order to defeat the majority. This was strenu- ously pressed on Ministers by Mr. ATTWOOD. On the House having resumed, Lord ALTHORP persisted; when Sir ROBERT PEEL declared, that in that case he would not attend. Sir C. WETHERELL was determined to sacrifice nothing to the public press ; and he particularly recommended Lord Althorp to make no such sacrifice. After sonic farther conversation, the House divided; when the adjournment to this day was carried by 216 to 143. The discussion on the adjournment, from first to last, occupied nearly four hours.

2. SPEECH OF THE KING OF FRANCE. The Marquis Of CHANDOS, on Monday, put a question to Ministers respecting the passage in the French Kings Speech in which the Belgian fortresses are said to be about to he demolished.

Lord ALTHORP, in answer, observed—

By the treaty of 1815, it was provided that these fortresses should be garrisoned by the troops of different countries ; but then the question naturally arose, whether it would be of advantage to any power to keep up so large a number of fortresses (for the whole of them were not to be demolished) with a view to protection, when, unless they were properly garrisoned, they would become, in case of war, instead of a protection against France, a basis for her operations. This being the state of the case, it did not appear so important, as it had formerly been considered, to keep up• the whole line of fortresses ; and therefore an agreement had been entered into for dismantling part of them. He did not think that, by such a proceeding, the security of Europe against attack from France would be at all impaired ; because he considered that the acknowledg- ment and guarantee, by all the great Powers of Europe, of the neutrality of Belgium, formed a still better security. He was ready to admit, that a guarantee of neutrality, simply so considered, might almost be called waste paper ; but it was a different matter when it became the interest of all parties to maintain the guarantee. Such was the case with respect to the neutrality of Belgium.

The Marquis wished to know if there were any truth in the statement of the speech, that the tricoloured flag floated on the walls of Lisbon ?

Lord ALTHORP—" The speech says under the walls of Lisbon, not on them."

Lord STORMONT was anxious for a night to discuss foreign poli- tics ; which he was told by Lord ALTHORP he could have, if he had any motion to make respecting them. Lord STORMONT said he would make a motion, but did not slate of what kind, or whin.

This subject was brought under the notice of the Peers on Tuesday, by Lord ABERDEEN. In noticing the speech, Lord Aberdeen particularly adverted to two topics—the demand of re- paration from Porti4a1, and the demolition of the fortresses in Belgium. 1-le expressed himself anxious to obtain from Govern- ment some information on these points.

Earl GREY declined entering into any discussion : but said he was ready, if it were brought forward as a regular motion, to defend the Government, in respect to either topic, from any attempt to impugn it. He was ready to admit all the force of the treaties that bound the country to Portugal, but he could not admit that they bound England to interfere whenever a third party saw fit to Seek redress for injuries wantonly inflicted by Portugal. Lord Aberdeen had said it might be a subject of congratulation to the Government to be informed that the French fleet rode triumphant in the Tagus.

" With respect to the noble Earl's taunt," said Earl Grey, " I will only say that I fling back the imputation with disdain ; and I tell the noble Karl, that not he, nor any man in this House or elsewhere, can be more anxious for the honour and interests of my country than I am. I will tell him more, that the circumstances of the present relations of Portugal with not only England, but every other European state, have been to me a source of deep regret,—not the less so that the present Administration had no share in their formation, and that they are the sole product of the Injudicious policy of our predecessors." With respect to the demolition in part of the fortresses in Bel- gium, Earl Grey read part of a protocol dated the 17th of April last, and signed by the Ambassadors of Austria, Prussia, and Russia, and Lord Palmerston. It was to this effect- " The Plenipotentiaries (of the above-named Powers and Allies) have come to the unanimous opinion, that the fortresses of the Belgian fron- tier are too numerous for the resources of the new kingdom ; and, more- over, did not afford a security for its independence ; and that therefore they should, immediately after the independence of the new kingdom of Bel- gium had been formally recognized by the states-of Europe, enter into negotiations respecting the particular fortresses which it might be ex- pedient to raze'

Lord Grey continued—

This document showed, in the first place, the unanimity of the four Great Powers in reference to the demolition of the Belgian fortresses, spoken of in the King of France's speech ; and it also showed—and this was important to bear in mind—that the proposition did not emanate from the French Government. It also showed, that the negotiation re- specting the particular fortresses to be razed had, or rather would have— for they were not yet formally entered into—for their preliminary condi- tion, the fact of the new King of Belgium being duly recognized by the great Powers of Europe, and the peace of both thereby established. The. four Powers having signed the protocol he had just quoted, proceeded next to announce their determination to the King of France, who had no share in the negotiation ; and accordingly, a letter, dated so recently as the 14th of the present month of July, was addressed to Prince Tal- leyrand on the subject, signed, like the protocol, " Esterhazy, Wessen- burg, Matuseel.vitz, and Palmerston." That Prince Talleyrand lost no time in forwarding the communication to his own court, was evident from the circumstance of its being a prominent topic of the King of trance's speech.

The Duke of WELLINGTON spoke at some length on the subject. By the treaty of peace of 1814, the kingdom of the Netherlands was erected, and guaranteed in its independence ; that immediately after that

treaty had been ratified, it was arranged by the Ministers of his late Ma. jesty and the King of the Netherlands, that a barrier defence of fortresses should be erected on the frontier of Belgium towards France at the ex. pense of England and of Holland. By the subsequent treaty of Paris in 1815, the projected fortresses were approved of by the sovereigns of Austria, Russia, and Prussia, who morever contributed their just share of the expense of their erection, it being felt that all Europe had a com- mon interest in the existence of such a barrier. By this means, these fortresses became the common property of all the states who had assisted in their e..oction,—that is, of England, Holland, Austria, Russia, and Prussia; and, therefore, could not be disposed of or dismantled without the concurrent resolution of all five. France, of all other nations, had the least right to offer any suggestion with reference to them ; for not only had she not contributed a farthing towards the cost of building them, but it was undeniable that it was as a protection against her pos- sible military aggression that they had been erected. The fortresses were maintained on the footing he had specified till the progress, first of the French Revolution, and then of the Belcian, had last year led to the dis- memberment of the kingdom of the Netherlands, established and gua- ranteed by the treaties of 1814 and 1815. The parties to these treaties were pledged to their maintenance; and as the peace of Europe was in- volved in that maintenance, the Great Powers, parties to the treaty, had no alternative. save the conferences held. in London. So far he saw no matter for blame ; nor could he deny that the preservation of the peace of Europe might have required the separation of llolland and Belgium, and the establishment of a new and wholly independent dynasty in the latter kingdom.

His Grace repeated, that France had no ground of interference in respect of these fortresses— Nay, if these fortresses were meant to be what the King of France termed them in his speech, and which the Duke of Wellington most un- qualifiedly denied—namely, fortresses " raised to menace France, and not to protect Belgium,"—he would maintain, that the proposition to raze all, or any of them, ought not to emanate from the French Government. It was not as a menace, but as a defence to the North of Europe against French aggression, that these fortresses had been originally erected; and if the declaration of the Allied Powers to guarantee the independence of Belgium could satisfy that country, a fortiori it ought to satisfy France. The King of Belgium might, if he so thought fit, declare that the expense of all the garrisons on his frontiers would ores', too heavily on the resources of his kingdom ; and the other Powers, parties to the erection of the fortresses—England, Holland, Austria, Russia, and Prussia—might interpose ; but the reason that would authorize their interference entirely shut out France from any participation in it.

The Duke went on to regret, in the strongest terms, the aggres- sions of the French at Lisbon.

When he had read that passage of the speech of the King of France, in which he triumphantly boasts that the Portuguese ships of war are now in his power, and that the tricoloured flag now floats under the walls of Lisbon, he felt his cheek tinge with shame as an English subject, that our must ancient and intimate ally should be thus treated with our permission. Ile did not say this in his military capacity, from having served as an officer in the army of Portugal. The deeds, the glorious deeds of the British army in Vortugal, were now the imperishable subject of history. As an Englishman who had read that history, he felt regret and shame—indeed, lie would say something like indignation—that the English Ministry had taken no active steps towards averting the recent calamity from the unfortunate country endeared to us by so many thrill- ing recollections.

The Duke dwelt on the insignificance of the cause which called forth the vengeance of France—the harsh treatment of a couple of obscure individuals. He thought England ought to have inter- feed on the one side to prevent France from inflicting vengeance, and on the other to induce Miguel to give compensation. The Duke went at length into what he deemed the impolicy of our con- duct,—arguing that Portugal was, taking it altogether, of more importance to England than any other state in Europe. He looked on this act of Government, coupled with the Wine-duty Equalization Bill, as tending wholly to destroy the attachment of the Portuguese nation towards England.

Earl GREY replied— At a proper time he would show that Ministers had not been apathetic spectators of these proceedings, as the noble Duke would insinuate ; and that every thing had been done to avert the consequences, consistent with a just regard to our own permanent interests. At the present mo- ment, he would merely state,—what all men connected with public affairs or acquainted with history well knew to be the fact, and what the noble Duke, who was so anxious for the honour of his country, would be ready to admit,—that points trifling in themselves, if they were closely asso- ciated with the national honour, might/become of the greatest import- ance, nay, of an importance greater than any that could be ascribed to what was ordinarily considered to involve the direct interests of the country.- It was on this principle that satisfaction had been demanded by France : and the duke should be ready to concede to other countries that regard for national honour which he was so ready to claim for his own. The question was discussed in the House of Commons on Wed- nesday, on the presentation, by Lord PALMERSTON, of the proto- col read by Earl Grey ; but no new fact was elicited. To a ques- tion of Mr. ALEXANDER BARING, respecting the continuance of the payment of the debt due to Russia, one half of which was to be paid by Holland, and the other half by England, Lord PAL- MERSTON did not return any specific answer ; he, however, assured Mr. Barino. that Government did not intend to enter into any fresh contracts, but were merely occupied in considering the force and validity of the old. The speech was again brought before the Lords on Thursday, by the Marquis of LONDONDERRY ; a nobleman who on most oc- casions seeks to enforce his argument by strong language. On this occasion, he said—

It appeared that the ancient ally of England had been sacrificed and most basely treated by those who at present were at the head of affairs.. He might venture to say, that Ministers had basely and treacherously sacrificed the ancient ally of the country. After some more remarks in the same strain, Lord Londorw derry said— • -

He toped.that Ministers Were. not truckling and. giving way to France in such negotiations; but he feared they were about to abandon all the

strongholds from the Tagus to the Scheldt, and for no one purpose but to establish what would be a weak, and he would venture to say, a falling government. The whole of our foreign diplomacy exhibited such a pic- ture to Europe as never had been exhibited since he had mixed in the affairs of the country. The King of Holland could make out a case against England, in which ingratitude, a want of faith, and a want of common honesty, was manifest in Ministers to an extraordinary degree.

The Marquis concluded by asking, when Ministers meant to submit any farther papers to the House. Earl GREY said, on that point he had no commands from his Majesty. To the rest of the 'Marquis's speech he should give no answer.

The Marquis accordingly gave a notice for Monday, for the pro- duction of all the papers connected with the late negotiations. Last night he altered the notice to Tuesday.

3. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY. Some conversation took place on Monday, on the vote for Consuls salaries. Mr. R. GORDON con- demned the present system. Mr. K. DOUGLAS, Sir J. NEWPORT, Sir M. W. RIDLEY, and several other members, appeared to think that a remuneration consisting partly of fees properly regulated in amount and number, and a moderate salary, would be better than either the old system or the new.

The Newfoundland civil establishmentvote was opposed by Mr. ROBINSON, chiefly on the ground that Mr. Hyde Villiers, the agent, was neglectful of the interests of the colonists : and that, having lately accepted office under Government, he could no longer perform the duty of agent satisfactorily. It turned out, when Mr. Robinson had finished rather a long speech, not only that Mr. Villiers had resigned his agency, but that this fact had been dis- tinctly stated, in Mr. Robinson's presence, in answer to a question from Mr. Robert Gordon. Mr. Robinson had another objection to the vote—that taxes were raised in Newfoundland of which no account was ever submitted to Parliament : he contended that Newfoundland ought to have a legislature of its own, as other co- lonies had.

Lord Howlett said, the subject was under consideration ; and the only thine-6 that retarded a settlement was the difficulty, from the nature of the colony, of giving .a legislature in which one part of the colonists should not predominate to the exclusion of the rest.

Mr. SPRING RICE thought a Committee of Supply rather an unfit place for discussing the propriety of granting a new constitu- tion to Newfoundland. He admitted that the estimates generally had been calculated less to instruct than to deceive the House.

The expenditure of the Government House was a proof of this. The ori- ginal estimate for that house, as agreed to by Parliament, was 8,778/. But the whole expenditure, exclusive of stores sent from England, was 30,1581. although the estimate had been only 8,778/. He said exclusive of stores sent from England. Now some of the honourable gentlemen opposite knew a good deal about Newfoundland, and could therefore tell whether there were any stones in the colony.

Several MEMBERS—" Plenty." Mr. S. RICE—Then honourable members would, doubtless, be very much surprised to learn, that granite had been sent from England for this house, (Cries of " Oh!" and laughter.) Mr. J. WOOD thought the Navy Estimates were bad enough, but this was much worse.

Mr. ROBERT GORDON thought, if the Estimates were proposed a year in advance, as in France, it would be a great improvement : they could then be fully discussed. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, in the Navy Estimates he hoped something like this would be effected. In consequence of unap- propriated balances, the supplies would last to the 1st of April, instead of the 1st of January ; by which means he hoped the Estimates might be brought forward before the supplies were ex- hausted.

On the Sierra Leone vote, Lord G. SOMERSET asked if Govern- ment had received any recent intelligence with respect to the salu- brity or insalubrity of Fernando Po? Lord Howicx regretted, that by the last accounts it appeared that this island was not much healthier than Sierra Leone. The plan of transferring the esta- blishment at the latter place to the island had been stopped, by a claim of Spain. That country had even demanded 100,0001. for its right. Government intended, Lord Howick said, to fill, if possible, the civil situations at Sierra Leone with persons of colour from the West Indies ; by which expedient, it was supposed, the mortality, which chiefly affected Europeans, would be got over. Mr. K. DOUGLAS spoke of the enormous expense that the co- lony had cost. Up to the year 1824, the civil expenses of that establishment amounted to 2,263,0001. The same expenses from that time up to 1830, amounted to 1,082,0001. The naval expenses from 1807 to 1824 had been 1,630,0001. The payments to Spain and Portugal amounted to 1,230,0001. The ex- penses on account of captured slaves amounted to 533,0921. The expense incurred for commissions was 198,0001. Altogether, this establishment had cost the country already nearly 8,000,0001. In the course of the further conversation that ensued, Sir JAMES GRAHAM stated, that every effort was making in order to induce the French Government to agree to a right of mutual search, without which the slave trade could not he effectually suppressed. Captain HARRIS said, he had a plan for doing away the slave trade altogether; but Ministers, though he had submitted it to them, would never come to consult him about it.

The grant to the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel was opposed by several members, among whom were Mr. WARBURTON, Mr. Witicss, and Mr. LABOUCHERE. Lord ALTHORP acknow- ledged that the vote was indefensible on principle. It was the in- tention of Ministers gradually to reduce the grant, and by this means to put an end to it altogether. Mr. HUNT moved that the grant (16,0001.) be reduced to 8000/. He defended his amendment by the terms of one moved by Minis- ters previous to taking office, in the minority on which occasion the first name was Lord Althorp, and the last Lord Howick. Mr. Hunt went on to say, that the funds of the society were "risen" partly by subscription. The subscriptions, however, made but se small part of them.

Since 1814, they had amounted to only 33,343/. ; there had been raised in churches by virtue of King's letters, the sum of 55,859/. ; and Parlia- ment had voted 203,0881. A Mr. Griffin was sent by the Society to Prince Edward's Island, and had reported that he had found neither church nor congregation. He was then removed to where he was told that he would find both ; but for a church he had found only a few boards nailed to- gether, and the space they enclosed filled with sheep. For the honesty of his reports he was at last removed altogether, and now no Bishop would license him to preach in England. And how was the money spent by this Society ? Bishop Inglis had a salary of 2,0001. a year, and yet the Society added to it 4001. a year. Archdeacon Willis had a salary of 1,5001. a year, and yet he received 2001. more from the Society. It was the same with Archdeacon Foster and Archdeacon Spencer. The Society possessed two estates in Barbadoes, and 700 negroes, left to it by General Codring- ton ; and the labour of these negroes went to support a college for the education of the sons of placcmen.

Lord Howicx hoped, after the pledge of Ministers to reduce the grant, Mr. Hunt would not persist. Mr. R. GORDON mentioned another fact of the Society's management- 4,3331. was granted for Nova Scotia, and whilst the Bishop was allowed 2,000/. a year, the Presbyterian clergymen received but 751., and yet the Presbyterians were as three to one compared to the Church of hnglandi Sir J. DOYLE suggested to Ministers, to appropriate the income of the Irish Bishopric now vacant, to the purposes of the vote. The Committee at length divided on Mr. Hunt's amendment: for the original grant 165 ; against it, 27. A long conversation took place on the vote (the last one) of 296,0001. for the Rideau Canal ; but the arguments and facts clic! not in any respect differ from what have been brought forward on almost every occasion when the subject has been before the House.

4. PUBLIC WORKS IN GREAT BRITAIN. In a Committee on this subject, Lord ALTHORP, on Monday, moved a resolution em- powering Government to issue 1,000,000/. of Exchequer Bills, in the way of loan. to parishes, for the purpose of carrying on works which would otherwise not he engaged in, and for the employ- ment of the labouring poor; due security being given for repay- ment.

5. STATE OF IRELAND. On Monday night, on the Occa- sion of a petition against the Corn- Laws being presented by Mr. HUNT, and one on the Barilla-Duty by Mr. LEADER, a con- versation took place on the state of Ireland, and the treatment it had experienced from Government. Sir JOHN BRYDGES thought the repeal of the Corn-Laws would raise the price of corn ; and Mr. LEADER thought it would be injurious to Ireland. Mr. Wysig and Mr. O'CONNELL thought Ireland as well as the rest of the empire would benefit by it. Mr. LEADER said, if means were not used to tranquillize Ireland, petitions would soon pour in from all parts of it for the repeal of the Union. Colonel TORRENS thought, among other things, the change of the currency had seriously injured Ireland. He recommended the drainage of the bogs and emigration. Mr. GRATTAN said, a resident gentry was all that Ireland required. Sir J. BRYDGES advocated the intro- duction of Poor-Laws.

Mr. O'CONNELL said—

One great cause of the distressed state of the people of Ireland was, that fifteen out of sixteen of its landed proprietors spent their incomes out of the country. Ireland paid 7,000,0001. of money per annum in this way.. It was not a want of capital that affected Ireland. He would undertake to raise half a million in Dublin in forty-eight hours, on good security; and he would undertake to raise a million in a fortnight, to embark in any spe- culation which had a fair prospect of success. Ireland wanted that en- couragement which could be given only by a resident landed proprietary'; but not only had she to contend against an extensive system of absenteeism, but her difficulties were increased in that way by taking from her most of her public offices. The Board of Excise and Stamps, and other public establishments, down even to the station at Cove, were all removed, or in the course of removal.

He spoke of the feelings of the Grand Juries, and of the Orange processions— What would Englishmen think of a system under which a Grand Jurjr assembled at dinner with opened doors should give such a toast as Hi* of " Our feet on the necks of the Papists," in cold blood; and the health's of " The Yeomanry of Newtonbarry ?" He spoke of the Grand Jury of Wexford. The Government took credit for attempting to put dowit Orange processions. Had they done so ? He had a letter in his pocket which spoke of a large Orange procession in Enniskillen a few days ago. How did this square with the efforts of Government ? Mr. CRAMPTON said, an inquiry was going on, and all officers of privates of Yeomanry who had joined in these processions would be discharged. Lord ALTHORP stated, in answer to Lord CRAM- DOS, that the Registration of Arms Bill would be reproduced, with some modifications.

Here the conversation dropped.