Debates anb Vrottebings in glarliaincni.

PRINCIPAL RUSLVESS OF THE WEER.

Nauss Or LORDS, Monday, June 25. Spanish Relations: Conversation—Irish En- Cumbered Estates Bill, passed through Committee -Adjourned at 7 h. 40 m. Tuesday, June 26. Parliamentary Oaths Bill, thrown out on second reading—Adjourned at 12 h. 30m. (Wednesday morning.) Thursday. June 28. Affairs of Rome: Conversation— Irish Encumbered Estates Bill, read a third time and passed—Adjourned at 6h. 40 tn. Friday. June 29. Administration of Justice (Vancouver's Island) Bill, second reading —Adjourned at 7 h. Sin.

[Time occupied In the four sittings, 1311.55 m.

since the beginning of the Session, 185 h. 53m.) House or Commons. Monday, June 25. Irish Transportation for Treason Bill, read a third time and passed—Irish Poor-relief BM, in Committee—Australian Colonies; Bill, 'Withdrawn by Mr. Hawes, for informality, and Australian Colonies (No. 2) Bill ordered to be brought In—Adjourned at III. 15 in. (Tuesday morning.) Tuesday. June 26; extra noon-sitting till 4 ti evening sitting commenced. at Sim. 30 m. Irish Poor- Relief Bill, In Committee—Tim Colonies: Sir William Molesworth's Motion, de- bated and negatived—Adjourned at 111. (Wednesday morning.) Wednesday. June 27; noon sitting. New Writ for London, on Mr. Rothschild's acceptance of the Chil- tern Hundreds—Prison Discipline : Mr. Pearson's Motion and Sir Henry Halford's Amendment withdrawn—Bankrupt and Insolvent Members Bill: Doubt raised by Mr. Goulburn—PrOtection Of Women Mill: debate on second reading, Interrupted by Ad- jOurnment of the House at 611. Thursday, June 28. Irish Poor-Relief Bill, in Com- =Mee— Counted out at I h. 45 in. (Friday morning.) Friday. June 29. Diplomatic Intercourse with Spain: Statement by Lord Palmerston—Irish Poor-Belief Bill, in 'Committee—Small Debts Act Amendment Bill (to abolish PalaCeCeurt), read a second time—Adjourned at I h. SO m. Saturday morning, till noon.

[Time occupied in the six sittings, 45 h. 50 m. since the beginning of the Session, 712h. 7 ft.] PARLIAMENTARY OATHS.

The second reading-of the Parliamentary Oath Bill in the House of Peers was moved by the Earl of CARLISLE, in a persuasive speech, which acalt more particularly with the religious objection, and closed with this peroration- * Believing the view which, to the best of my ability, I have been enabled to form, namely, that that Christianity which we profess, and which we regard as Oor brightest inheritance andlest possession, needs nut any outward bulwark or guarantee, but that it ought to be as expansive as heaven itself, from whence we derive it, or, as was eloquently said by Mr. Fox, ' Toque prior, ta parse, genus qui dads Olympo '— veuturiMg to think that Christianity may show most of her own spirit when she associates with her and lifts to her own level what may be most repulsive to her, applying to high places the same beautiful maxim that ought to pervade the coin: moo concerns of daily life, 4,Do unto others asyou would that others do unto yon'; I feel that I am tendering no advice which it is unbecoming of your Lordships either as Peers of Parliament or as Fathers of the Church to follow, when I eau qpon you to admit to Parliament this long oppressed race, as a great measure cc retribution for the wrongs and errors of the past." The second reading was supported by the Duke of CLEVELAND; who had changed the opinion he formerly held, because two of the three main objections which influenced him to oppose the bill introduced in 1830 were removed; other subjects having no better right than the Jews to sit in Par_ Bement are no longer excluded, and it is no longer true that persona whose Christianity may be doubted are excluded; from Parliament. The Arch. bishop of DUBLIN deemed the question before the House to be, not whether the Jew is a tit person to sit in Parliament, but whether the electors she'uld be tied by restrictions. Heaven forbid we should think of depriving mea of all the rights they might possibly abusel Having already admitted per_ sons who make use of their places to disparage and damage the Established Church, we must either go forward or retrace our steps—must again ex- clude all, or remove this last barrier. The Earl of WICKLOW supported the bill, on the ground that the second oath presses on members of their Lordships' House who cannot take their seats without taking the oaths; and he observed that the 5th clause, which alone concerns Jews, might be rejected in Committee. The Earl of SHREWSBURY regarded the measure as a necessary carrying out of the great principle of civil and religious liberty, now so interwoven with our constitution. The Duke of ARGYLL contended, that inasmuch as the House had already admitted every school of philosophical opinion—one school indeed, namely the Unitarian, which he did not think Christian—this remaining exclusion was irrational and unjust.

The bill was opposed by the Earl of EDMISTON, as essentially the same that had already been rejected by their Lordships, much to their honour. The Earl of WINCHELSEA, also opposing, took God to witness that he bore no ill feeling against the Jews, but daily remembered them in his prayers. Earl NELSON thought that the Jew himself was his own excluder, by hopes that unite him to an alien nation whose country is in "another hemi- sphere." The bill was also opposed by the Earl of DESART, the Arch- bishop of CANTERBURY, the Bishop of EXETER, and the Bishop of al- FORD. The last-named Prelate urged the risk threatened by the power of money: there was especial danger now in increasing the money power. It might at some future time be of the highest importance to a body of Jews living on the Continent of Europe to have certain members of their body mem- bers of the Legislature in this country. How could their Lordships calculate bow many such members such constituencies as those to which he bad referred might at some future time return to Parliament? There was great danger now in the Legislature being supported by wealth altogether separate from other con- siderations.

He also replied to the argument founded on the present admission of Jews to various offices. A Jew might be intrusted to administer the laws which he might not safely be allowed to make. It was precisely the same thing where they em- ployed a man ta ascertain the measure of goodsof &certain fixed standard weight: all they had to see was, that he had honest intentions and understood the weights. But if they went to the man to make the weights without his knowing the value of those weights, the question was entirely different. These two arguments aroused Lord BROUGHAM, otherwise intending to take no part in the debate, after the fatigue of hearing appeals. So, then, Lord Coke was ignorant of the nature of equity and of law; and judges were mere tools—mere instruments of the law; and, according to his right reverend friend, there was no such thing as discretion in judicature. (Great laughter.) Oh, would that his right reverend friend had sat with them in ap- peals today ! would that he could have tasted tbe ease of a bench of lawl would that be could go for relief into a court of equity! Ile would then find how little a judge was a passive tool, how little he was a fez loguens. He would NOD find how deeply the office of a judge and of a sheriff affected the lives, the liber- ties, the rights and properties, of his fellow subjects. But the Jew was already admitted to the office of elector: he could choose Members of Parliament, and We money had some weight amongst the lawgivers.

The Bishop of Oxsortu—" I spoke of the effect of money upon the constituen- cies."

Lord BROUGHAM thanked his right reverend friend for the admission; for if the Jew's money might have such an effect amongst his fellow Members of Par- liament, he was already an elector, where hi money could have its influence amongst his fellow electors. On a division, the second reading was negatived by 95 to 70 Peers present—majority against the bill, 25; so the bill was lost.

EXEMPTION OF MEMBERS FROM ARREST.

In Committee of the House of Commons on the Bankrupt and Insolvent Members Bill, Mr. GOULBURN mooted a radical point. The exemption from arrest was a privilege of the House not conferred by statute: if the intention were to waive that privilege, as the House had twice declared, the proper way to proceed would be by resolution, and not by act of Par liament. Mr. WYNN, who from infirmity addressed the House sitting, threw his weighty authority on Parliamentary usage into the scale with Mr. Goulburn; and, on the suggestion of Mr. LAW and Sir Josns Rossittv, it was agreed, against the objections of Mr. MOFFATT, to report progress, id order to allow time for considering the subject maturely.

COLONIAL GOVERNMENT.

Before making the motion of which he had given notice, Sir Winntss MOLESWORTH presented a petition which he had just received from Wel- lington in New Zealand- " It is signed by DO fewer than 741 men, a very large proportion of the adult population of that settlement, which contains about 4,000 souls. The petitioners state that their reasonable expectations of obtaining representative institutions have been disappointed; that their Governor has established a form of government repugnant to their feelings and inefficient for good government; and they pray that Parliament will not sanction any measure which will delay the introduction of representative government into the Southern settlements of New Zealand. I heartily support the prayer of this petition; first, because I believe that the pe- titioners are in every way well qualified to enjoy representative institutions; and secondly, that with represeitative institutions New Zealand would soon become one of the greatest and most flourishing colonies of the empire." Sir William Molesworth proceeded to move an address to the Queen, - - - - "praying that her Majesty will be graciously pleased to appoint a Com- mission to Inquire into the administration of her Majesty's Colonial Poesessiona,

with the view of removing the causes of Colonial complaint, diminishing the cost of Colonial government, and giving free scope to individual enterprise in the busi- ness of colonizing." Be began his speech with a brief notice of the origin and growth of the British Colonial system.

e By far the greater portion of our modern Colonial empire is of recent acquisi- tion; all of it, with the emption of the Plantations in the West Indies, and two or three old colonies in North America, has been acquired within the last ninety years, meet of it within the last fifty years: for instance, the Canadas in 1759; Trinidad and other West Indian islands, Ceylon, and New South Wales, in the interval between 173 and 1797; the rest of Australasia, New Zealand, the whole of South Africa, British Guiana, the Mauritius, Malta, the Ionian Islands, Heli- goland, Hongkong, and Labuan, are not (as the noble Lord the Prime Minister once called them) precious inheritances from our noble ancestors, but have been added to the British dominions since the beginning of this century. These colo- nies have been acquired for various reasons. Some we conquered because we grudged the possession of them to rival powers, and fancied that the might of a nation was in proportion to the extent of its territory; others we held as outposts, on the plea of protecting our own trade and injuring the trade of other countries; and others we occupied as places of punishment for our criminals. Thus, our Colonial empire consisted chiefly of conquered provinces, garrison towns, and gaols. Their government was intrusted to a central authority in England. The invariable tendency of such an authority is to grasp as much power as possible, and to resist every measure which seems likely either directly or indirectly to diminish that power. In conformity with these tendencies, the Colonial policy of Great Britain was framed; and the Colonial Office laid claim to omnipotence and infallibility in all matters concerning the Colonies. That claim was long recog- nized in this country, and scarcely disputed in the Colonies. But of late years it las been contested, not so much within as without the walls of this House; and every colony him repeatedly and energetically protested against it; and now the conviction is daily gaining ground throughout the empire, that our Colonial sys- tem is not well suited either to the state of Great Britain or of the Colonies."

He traced the causes of this awakened and altered opinion —

"First, within the last quarter of a century Great Britain has begun again to colonize, and on a much greater scale than ever before. Daring that period, at least 2,000,000 of persons have migrated from this country; half of them have gone directly to our independent Colonies of the United States; the other half to our dependent Colonies, whence a large portion of them have reemigrated to the United States. This great emigration, though chiefly directed to our independent Colonies, has made the subjects of colonization and colonial government matters of deep and increasing interest to a large portion of the community, especially to the humbler and middling classes: for there is scarcely one amongst them who has not some acquaintance, friend, or 'elation, in one of the Colonies or about to emi- grate; and also many of the aristocracy and gentry have friends or kinsmen re- siding in the Colonies as Governors or in other situations of trust and profit. In consequence of this great emigration, the relations between Great Britain and her dependencies have been greatly changed; and there ought to have been a cor- responding change in her Colonial policy, which was framed without reference to any emigration except that of convicts. Secondly, public attention has been very much directed of late years to Colonial questions by the writings of distinguished men, who have carefully investigated the economy of new societies, examined into the principles of colonial government, and attentively studied the subjects of coloni- zation and emigration, with the view of relieving the economical difficulties of the United Kingdom and of planting the uninhabited portions of the globe with com- munities worthy of the English name. Of these writers Mr. Wakefield is the most eminent: by his writings he produced a profound impression on the minds of some of the ablest men of our dity--as,•for instance, John Mill, Grote, and others; and there are few persons in thie country, who have paid. Much attention to Colonial questions, who will not readily acknowledge, even when they do not adopt all Mr. Wakefield's conclusions, that they are deeply indebted to that gentleman for a considerable portion of their most valuable knowledge of matters relating to the Colonies. Thirdly, public opinion has been much directed of late years to Colonial questions in consequence of the dis- cussions which have taken place with regard to free trade and the Navigation laws,

and which have led to so great a change in our commercial policy Again, the attention of Parliament and of the country has of late years been con- stantly occupied with Colonial questions, in consequence of a series of remarkable events in the Colonies, which have annually occasioned heavy demands to be made on the public purse. In the course of the last fifteen years, the Colonies have directly cost Great Britain at least_60,000,000/ in the shape of military, naval, civil, and extraordinary expenditure, exclusive of the 20,000,0001. paid for the abolition of slavery. The total direct cost of the Colonies has been at least S0,000,0001. in the last fifteen years."

The results of the policy maintained at such enormous cost, Sir Wil- liam illustrated, in Canada, by the two rebellions and the civil strife, with a third rebellion impending; in the West Indies, by the slavery-compensa- tion, ruin of the planters, stoppage of supplies, insurrections, &c.; in South Africa, by the repeated Clare wars; in Ceylon, by bad finance, riots and disgracefully savage punishments; in Australia, by convictism; in New Zea- land, by bad government, and aboriginal warfare; in Western America, by the Vancouver's Island affair. The eighty millions spent on the Colonies would have taken out 4,000,000 of emigrants to Australia, or the whole Celtic population of Ireland to North America: yet all our Colonies do not contain more than 1,000,000 persons of British or Irish descent; while there are now at present as many British subjects in the United States of America. The export trade to all our subjt Colonies does not exceed 9,500,0001. a year, while in the independent Colonies of the United States it is 1,600,000/ more. Judging of the tree by its fruits, these results show that there must be grave errors and defects in the Colonial policy of the British empire.

"That policy has few defenders out of this House; no defenders in it except official ones: for whenever the honourable gentleman the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies rises, and with matchless conrage and undaunted determi- nation maintains that nothing can be more perfect than our Colonial policy, that nothing can be more judicious than the conduct of the Colonial Secretary, and that nothing can be more praiseworthy than all the appointments made by his noble friend, a solemn silence reigns around him, scarcely, if ever, interrupted by a faint cheer."

Many of the most important of these disastrous events have occurred since the present Secretary of State took office-

" For instance, the alleged renewal of the war of races in Canada; the stop- jag of the supplies in British Guiana and Jamaica; the mismanagement of the LIWre war, with peculation, extravagant expenditure, and no accountability; the rebellion of the Boers, with the foolish extension of our empire in South Africa; the hasty transportation of convicts to the Cape of Good Hope; the strange igno- rance of the financial condition of Ceylon, with its lamentable and disgraceful consequences: the abandonment and the renewal of transportation to Van Die. man's Land; the blunders about the constitution of New Zealand, and the transfer of Vancouver's Island to the Hudson's Bay Compury. (General cheering.) The honour of all these events belongs to the administration of the present Secretary Of State for the Colonies?

Public opinion condemns the Colonial policy of Great Britain, and ptits no faith in its recognized organs in either House of Parliament: a state of opinion notorious, dangerous, and much to be regretted.

This motion was the natural sequel to other motions which showed the necessity for inquiry,—Mr. Baillie's, on British Guiana and Ceylon Mr Adderley's, on convict emigration to the Cape of Good Hope; Lord Lin- coln's, on Vancouver's Island; Mr. Scott's, on our Colonial system; Mr. Roebuck's, on amendment of the Colonial system; with other motions, of which notice has been given, by Mr. Hume and Mr. Milner Gibson.

The inquiry he proposed would arrange itself under three heads-1. Co- lonial government; 2. Colonial expenditure; 3. Emigration or colonization.

1. An inquiry should be made into our system of Colonial government, with a view to remove the main causes of Colonial complaint. Sir Wil- liam quoted Mr. Charles Buller's remarks on the faults of the system,—its arbitrary character; its government from a distance, on second-hand and onesided information; its secrecy and irresponsibility; its subordination to parties and cliques; its constant procrastination and vacillation, its heart- breaking injustice, and continual disorder. Although after Lord Grey's attacks on the Colonial system much was expected from his coming into office, Mr. Buller's description applies as closely as ever it did. Under the existing system, even in those Colonies which enjoy representative consti- tutions—in all except Canada—the representative institutions are shams rather than realities; the Colonial Office generally attempting to carry on the government by means of a minority in the Assembly acting with a majority in the Council nominated by the Colonial Office.

" The consequence is, a perpetual struggle between the majority of the rem- sentative Assembly and the party of the Colonial Office—a struggle carried on with an intensity of party hatred and rancour happily unknown to us: each party rejects or disallows the measures of the other party ; thus legislation stands still, and enmity increases. After a time, the supplies are stopped, and a dead lock ensues; then the Imperial Parliament is called on to take the part of the Colonial Office, and a constitution is sometimes suspended. Next, to preserve order or to put down rebellion, the military force is augmented; and, finally, a demand is made upon the purse of the British people, who have invariably to pay the piper at every Colonial brawl. Within the last fifteen years events of this kind have taken place in most of our largest colonies—in both the Canadas, in Nova Scotia, Jamaica, and British Guiana; aud they seem likely to be repeated in Jamaica and British Guiana."

" Ignorance, negligence, and vacillation, are three inseparable accidents of our system of Colonial government. Ignorance is the necessary consequence of the distance which intereenes between the rulers and the ruled ; negligence is the in- variable result of the want of efficient responsibility, and the responsibility of the Colonial Office to Parliament is merely nominal in consequence of the ignorance of Parliament with regard to Colonial affairs; and whenever there is either ig- norance or negligence, there vacillation must also exist." He censured the system, not individuals. "My object is to prove that our Co- lonial policy works ill, and produces discontent and complaint in the Colonies— not because it is specially maladministered, but because it is an essentially faulty system, which cannot be well administered. My motion is not intended to be a vote of censure on the Secretary of State for the Colonies: for, in my judgment, the Colonies have not been worse governed by the present Secretary ot State for the Colonies than by any one of his predecessors who have bad equal oppor- tunities of so doing. I know that a different opinion on this sullieet prevails both in this country and in the Colonies; that in consequence of former speeches made by the present Colonial Minister, very exaggerated expectations were formed of what he would do when in office—that those exaggerated expectations have been disappointed—that that disappointment has been embittered by the injudicious praises of friends and subordinates; and that hence his name is most unpopular: hut, in my opinion, it would be a great mistake to suppose that either his re- moval from office, or any mere change in the staff of the Colonial Office, would be of any real benefit to the Colonies. The fault is in the system." The Colonial Office governs forty-three communities, with various races, tongues, religions insti- tutions, laws, and customs. The Office comprises the Secretary of State, two Under Secretaries, one Assistant Under Secretary, a chief Clerk, and twenty-three inferior clerks ; in all, twenty-eight persons. The two first are removeable; the three superior functionaries—collectively called by Mr. Buller "Mr. Mothercoun- try "—are the real governors of the Colonies. They are screened from responsi- bility by the political functionaries, who rarely retain office) more than two years at a time. No division of labour is practicable. There is not one official to each colony, and the Secretary is responsible for all.

" If he could divide his time equally between the colonies, as there are forty- three of them, he could give about a week a year to the affairs of each separate colony; but to no single colony could he at one time spare a week of continuous attention, for every colony more or less requires his attention simultaneously. s one time he can only give a few hours to one dependency, then a few hours to an- other, and so on, turn and turn about, traversing and retravereing, in his imagina- tion, the terraqueous globe—flying from the Arctic to the Antarctic Pole—hurry- ing from the snows of North America to the burning regions of the Tropics— rushing across from the fertile islands of the West Indies to the arid deserts of South Africa and Australia—like nothing on earth or in romance save the Wan- dering Jew. For instance, one day the Colonial Secretary is in Ceylon, a finan- cial and a religious reformer, promoting the interests of the coffee-planter and casting discredit on the tooth and religion of Buddha ; the next day he is in the West Indies, teaching the economical manufacture of sugar; or in Van Diemen's Land, striving to reform the fiends whom he has transported to that pandemo- nium. Now he is in Canada, discussing the Indemnity Bill and the war of races; anon he is at the Cape of Good Hope, dancing a war-dance with Sir Harry Smith —(Loud laughter)—and his Caffre subjects ; or in New Zealand, an unsuccess- ful Lycurgus, coping with Huni Heki ; or at Natal, treating with Panda, King of the Zoolebs; or in Labuan, digging coal and warring with pirates; or in the midst of Smith Africa, defeating Pretorius and his rebel Boors; or in Vancouver's Island, done by the Hudson's Bay Company—(Lnughter)—or in Port Phillip, alias Vic- toria, the chosen representative of the people; or in the Mauritius, building forti- fications against a hostile population; or in the fair isles of the Ionian Sea, enjoy- ing, I hope, for the sake of my dear friend Mr. Ward, a life of luxurious ease and perfect tranquillity. (Cheers and laughter.) Thus the most incongruous events succeed each other, and are jumbled together in the brain of the unfortunate Se- cretary of State for the Colonies, as in the wild dream of a fevered imagination; and ere the unhappy man has had time to settle one grave Colonial question, an- other of equal importance presses on his wearied and worn-ont attention."

This system ought to be revised. A Commission should draw a broad dis- tinction between those Colonies which have or ought to have representative insti- tutions, and those of the Crown Colonies which are unfit for free institutions. It would also consider what is the beat form of local government for those Crown Colonies which are unfit for free institutions.

2. Colonial expenditure. Sir William went over an array of figures to show how much money has been devoted to public works, how mach must be spent to complete those works, and how much is locked up in works which cannot be finished for a considerable time. In Mauritius, where de- fences may be necessary against an alien domestic enemy as well as an ex- ternal enemy, it is proposed to expend 5,000/ a year on coast-works, which will not be completed for forty years. In the Cape- of Good Hope, our

Ordnance expenditure is only beginning; for we have advanced the boundary of Caffraria and taken military possession of it: yet no one knows how this money has been expended. Sir William ridiculed the old • "prestige of might" argument in favour of retaining colonies by armed streogth, which reminded him of the fable of the ass that went abroad in a lion's skin; a dangerous fallacy in time of peace, a costly mistake in trusting to military force rather than good government for the mainte- nance of the empire. He would call the "prestige of might" argument the sham lion fallacy.

"If the Commission which I propose should be appointed, it should inquire to what extent it is necessary or politic for us to keep troops or build fortifications in our Colonies; whether we ought to do so in any colonies except in our strictly military stations; what colonies should be considered to be military stations; and what is the best mode of checking and controlling our huge Ordnance expendi- ture in the Colonies, which at the present moment is without check or control. This inquiry appears to me a very important one; for I feel persuaded that with- out -

out a very considerable reduction n the military and naval expenditure on ac- count of the Colonies, no considerable reduction can be made in the cost of the Colonies, or, in fact, in the general expenditure of the British empire."

Sir William contrasted the salaries to British Colonial Governors with the salaries of State Governors in the United States, which they exceed by nearly nine times.

It would be a question to be considered by the Commission, whether all or some of the Colonies which pay for their Governors should not be permitted to elect their own Governors, and to determine the amount of their salaries; or, on the other hand, if it be deemed expedient that all the Governors should be appointed by the Imperial Government, whether they ought not to be paid out of Imperial funds? In those Colonies which have, or ought to have, free constitution the representa- tives of the people are the best guardians of the public purse. But in those Crown Colonies which are unfit for free constitutions, it would be for the Com- mission to ascertain what checks exist, or ought to exist, against lavish expendi- ture.

3. The Commission should inquire into colonization and emigration. It should determine whether or not convict emigration is to continue— whether the benefit to Great Britain from convict emigration so far ex- ceeds the injury to the Colonies, that on the whole the empire is a gainer thereby.

"With reference to free emigration, I do not recommend that the Commission should inquire into the expediency or the practicability of the great schemes of emigration or colonization which have been lately proposed with a view of re- lieving the economical difficulties of the United Kingdom. I recommend that the inquiry should be confined to ascertaining the nature of the obstacles which stand in the way of individual enterprise in colonizing, and which impede emigration to the Colonies. During the last twenty-five years, three-fourths of the emigrants —last year 188,000 out of 248,000—went direct to the United States; and more, no doubt, reemigrate,d from Canada. I ask, why do emigrants prefer the United States to the Bntish Colonies? I ask this question not from any feelings ofjea- lousy of the United States. For I look upon those states as the greatest, the most glorious and most useful children of England; for their inhabitants I enter- tain the strongest regard and affection. I rejoice that we are assistiag them in peopling their far West. I rejoice at everything which promotes their interests and redounds to their honour. I believe these feelings are entertained and re- turned by the instructed and reflecting men of both countries: I believe that trade emigration, and similarity of institutions, are daily strengthening the ties betw4n Great Britain and her independent Colonies; and thence I augur the happiest consequences to our race. But, in thosiaine manner as I might ask why emigrants prehr one British colony to another, so I do ask what turns the tide of emigration from our dependent to our independent Colonies? and I answer, Colo- nial Office government, convict emigration, and other causes, which a Commission would be able to ascertain and point oat to the House."

The Commission should attempt to ascertain what powers ought to be reserved for the Imperial Government, and what intrusted to the local Legislatures. The effective classification of such subjects would have spared the House many a useless debate upon Colonial questions.

"I am convinced that upon the practical settlement of these questions the maintenance of our Colonial empire mainly depends. I believe that the stability of that empire is in imminent danger from their non-settlement; first, in cense- muence of the Colonial discontent engendered thereby; secondly, in consequence of the opinion, which I am sorry to say is thence gaming ground in this couotry, that these Colonial questions are insoluble, and therefore that good Colonial go- vernment is impossible—therefore, that colonies are nuisances and burdens—and therefore, the fewer they are in number, and the sooner they are got rid or, the better." .

Sir William explained that he proposed a Commission, because the subject would be too extensive for a Parliamentary Committee. He suggested that the Commission might consist of five persons; say, one from each section of the House of Commons, representing the Ministers, Sir Robert Peers friends, the Protectionist party, the section to which Sir William himself belongs; and to them he would add one of our most dis- tinguished economical and political thinkers, such for instance as Mr. John Stuart Mill.

Mr. HUME seconded the motion, and spoke earnestly in its support.

Mr. Hawus declared the motion to be impracticable aud illusory. Sir William Molesworth had shadowed out none of the causes of Colonial com- plaint, or ho would have seen how impracticable are the remedies. In the West Indies, fbr instance, the complaint is, that their misfortunes began with Mr. Canning's resolution in 1823, which led to Emancipation, and that led to their subsequent misfortunes and ruin: was it meant to open, the whole subject of slavery, and the slave-trade? If so, he protested against it. In New South Wales, the complaint is the minimum price of a pound per acre for the waste lands. He ridiculed the five gentlemen sit- ting—not, of course, in hateful Downing Street, but in Whitehall, or some newly-furnished apartment elsewhere, and discussing a form of government for every complaining colony— There was to be a°Free-trader here, and a Protectionist there, somebody to represent this, somebody to represent that; and when this happy family were con- gregated, each one was to propound his opinions; and when they had joined them all together, iu due time they were to produce their report. Ile might safely pre- Met that such a report would prove to be one of those admirably-written compo- sitions which mean nothing; or the result would be that the evidence alone would be printed, and no report at all would be made. The motion is singularly ill-timed, when many important questions have been settled by his noble friend, in a large aod comprehensive manner. Lord Grey hadsdoe here towards laying down large principles than any

of, bet..predeces Liberal changes in our Colonial policy have been .saggEsted by the Committee of Council. A constitution for New South . Wales ikas been drawn up by Sir James Stephen; whom also Mr. Hawes

bespraiteds, The colonists or New Zealand have had a constitution: given

to then* but it was suspended, because the colonists themselves have oh- As to reductions Of Colonial expenditure, reductions have

been made in Ceylon, the Cape of Good Hope, and elsewhere. As to the West Indies, Mr. Hawes read statistical accounts to show that they are rapidly advancing in prospeeity, and free trade would be their salvation. New South Wales has enormously increased in population and production. Thirty-one colonies are protected at a cost of no more than 1,000,000/..-- not a large sum for their vast extent. Sir William Molesworth's speech went to abandon the Colonies altogether; and Mr. Hawes opposed his mo- tion because the proposed Commission would paralyze a great department of the Government.

Mr. GLanarosiL looked at the question not so much with reference to the precise terms of the motion, as to its general scope and effect.

The ohjeet, as he understood it, was not to fasten charges on those who admi- nister the Colonies, here or elsewhere, but to come to some rule and principle as to the future administration of our Colonial empire. Admitting that upon many points Lord Grey is equal to any, and on some points superior to many of his pre- deeessors,—admitting his ability, industry, and good intentions, and the activity, watchfuluess, and general fitness of the agents whom he selects to carry out his views and policy,—Mr: Gladstone still could not hesitate to express the opinion that the Secretary of the Colonies has been led in some cases into serious errors, which have greatly aggravated the previous difficulties. The House should take some means to prevent the recurrence of such errors, and should not rest satis- fied, as is commonly the case, with leaving everything in the hands of the Go- vernment. • They :should confider the immense mass of business which the Colo iiiai Seemtary. nand look to in eietail et a east distance from the spot, and neces: easily dependent on partied,11. before a despatch is answered a change of Illisietryanertake.plam; in nine cases out of ten, it is impossible for the Minister. to draw the attention of Parliament to Colonial questions; and in the tenth the attention of Parliament is obtained on account of the party-spirit ex- cited by eertain.Colonial questions. There is an objection to a Commission, that it would diminiskthe responsibility of the Minister: but if the business is too great and the responsibility is too large—if the responsibility, in fact, becomes no responsibility at alh-fthat objection loses a great deal of its force. It is a sig- nificant feel, that. the Governmanthave themselves already made an arrangement to which the vary wane objection might be made; for it applies to the Co louial Cecomittes, of the Privy Council. The objection would apply even were that body composed entirely of members of the Adminiatration; but when that is not the ease, does not the objection now taken to the appointment of five gentlemen, whose images the Under Secretary for the Colonies sees in the dim perspectives apply to the Committee of Council, which has been the object of his praises Sir James Stephen is a member of that Council, and not a political offi- cer; and in the same category would be the five gentlemen of the Commission.

Gladstone knew how objectionable Commissions were, and admitted that it is our general rule to transact business without their aid; but we have in some easel recognized it as a et:end:principle, that when the business of a particular depart,- ment is too large to be:coped with by that department, we should call in the aid of a Commissame—as in the cases of the Church and the Poor-law. He men- tioned as an argument for a Commission, and in correction of a boast by Mr. Hawes, that the course which the Select Committee on Guiana has recommended is materially different from that taken by Lord Grey—with respect, for instance, to the reduction of the salary of the Governor.

Mr. Gladstone conceded to Mr. Hawes that there are many questions connected with the Colonies, particularly those involving Imperial policy, which should be sedulously excluded from this Commission—the policy of free trade, for instance, ought not to be considered by any five gentlemen of such a Commission as this. But he proceeded to his duty as a supporter of the motion, of showing that there are cases where thelabotua of each a Commission might be of great service. hi the -first place, it *mkt be- tank useful that a body of well-selected gentlemen should consider what-are ihe-general rules that should be followed in the esta- blishment of new -colenies. Lord Stanley proposed to establish a new colony North of New South Notes; and 14,0001. or 15,0001. of public expense Was in- curred: but Lord Grey thought it inexpedient to go on, and the settlement was abandoned. Several successive Secretaries thought it not necessary to sanction a settlement of the Auckland Islands: Lord Grey thought differently, and, gave his sanction. This changeful uncertainty of practice was a practical evil. He -did not- know that such a question could be referred to Parliament; but he thought it possible that a Commission might lay down general principles appli- cable to such cases, which would assist the Colonial Minister when right, and keep him within bounds when wrong. Another case, which came under the consideration of the House last year, And he was sorry must have another long discussion this year—the ease of 'Van- couver's Island—was of itself enough to show the absolute necessity that some measure should be taken for the purpose of checking the arbitrary will of Colonial Semetaeles respecting unoccupied territories. "I think it is too much to say that the fate of large portions of the surface of the earth, which according to the view of several Members of this House should be considered of great value with respect to their prospective axial capabilities, should depend upon the will of ally man who may. condemn them' to perpetual sterility, or within one degree of it. There is also theetase of Jamaica, which should undergo the review of able sad impartial men appointed for the purpose. (Mr. HCC40438—" Of the Committee of Council.") The honourable gentleman says, 'of the Committee of Council'— therefore he agrees with me as to the necessity for such an inquiry. I am glad to find the question between us is not the broad question of principle, but merely the question of detail as to whether the best mode of settling the question is by a Committee of Council or by a Commission. Then there 38 the New Zealand question, with respect to which it would be most valuable to have such a body df rules prepared as the ability of the gentlemen competing the Commission would enable them to lay down." He alluded with some pain to the relative position of Parliament and Government in reference to the granting of representative insti- tutions to New Zealand—to the passing of the Constitution Bill in 1846, with such precipitancy that the first step taken by Parliament in the next sesaioo svas to retrace Ai' own steps, suspend for five years the constitution it had granted, and delegate to- one man the whole authority of Parliament. ." In -considering this question, we should not consider the concession of free institutions as some very great gift from us to them; but we should consider that when we are giving them free institutions wears doing the greatest grace and favour to ourselves, not only on account of considerations of public economy in this country, which is closely connected with the improvement of our Colonial system, but because it is our in- terest to give them strong and healthy powers of self-development; and where we wish to have it, we can only bring it out by enabling the people to learn by prac- tice the management of their own affairs. With respect to the case of New Zea- land, we should never have permitted those zigzag proceedings—this rapid ad- vance, followed by as rapid a retreat—this stultification of ourselves; and the Secretary of State, instead of 'being at liberty to concoct a system of Colonial philosophy for himself, should have been able to refer for information to a body of men chosen by the Executive Govemmeut,—information which 1 tun 'sure they would be able to furnish to him. I dopot know whether my feelings may be shared by gentlemen on the 'Apposite side Of the House, but nest to my desire to see the powers of the colonists enlarged where it may not be impolitic, 18 my anxiety to see them restrained from managing affairs not their own. i want to 13.aVa a sound definition of those questions that are imperial questioas, and careful prc,- viSions laid down for the purpose of reserving those questions fur our disCretior. (" Ileart "from the Trearg-bench.) 05, you think I refer to Canada? Wel, I do refer to what has occurred in Canada, and I regret there was not such a tinction laid down there in reference to Imperial and Colonial questions. My doc- trine is that such questions should be inquired into and clearly defined. I don't say that human foresight would be able to cover every imaginable case that may arise, but with respect to Colonial and Imperial questions I would define the exact line. That is donein!America by the line that ie drawn between the Federal and the General Government." Much good might be done by the Commission in clearing up the point whether or not our system of military defence in the Colonies is not needlessly expensive. In the case of the Cape and Caffre war, every farthing of the money was actually spent, or the obligation to spend it contracted, before Parliament heard a word on the subject. The case of the Cape suggests another point—the relation between our colonists and the aborigines with respect to their boundaries. Though he did not think the root of the evil lay in the Colonial Office, there have been instances of eacillation and capricious change, most discreditable. Some years ago, it was re- solved to effect the repression of the Caffres with a strong hand; in 1835 philan- thropy was at high-water mark, and the Colonial Office was obligedto abandon the stringent system and yield up a great portion of territory: for some years philan- thropy has been at low-water mark, and has not interfered inconveniently; and philanthropy being at a discount, very short work was made with the Caffres—we undid our cession of territory, made enormous additions, and pursued a course of territorial aggrandizement exceeding all example. Sowith the treaty of Waitangi. e In the year 1840, the treaty of Waitangi was entered into without a dissentient voice: it recognized the rights of the aborigines, and even went something beyond what sound reason might suggest: but that treaty of Waitangi has since been disparaged in public despatches. I do not ask the House to decide whether the treaty of Waitangi was right, or whether the principles laid down by Lord Grey, in 1846, were right ; but I say both were not right; they are in diametrical oppo- sition to each other: and it is not for the honour of the country, when dealing particularly with aboriginal tribes, that our policy should be marked with such vacillation, for it leads to imputations of bad faith. But if we had the assistance of such rules as a well-chosen Commission would lay down, we could never get into such difficulties, because a uniform course would be pursued by the Govern- ment from the first to the last moment of the transaction. I am now speaking of the relations of the aborigines with respect to land ; but there is ano- ther question to which I most reqbest the attention of the House, and that is, the management of the land after it has been acquired by the Crown, and rularly constituted colonies have been established. In the year 1842, the Laud Sales Act was passed; and that act has been the cause of discontent in New South Wales. It passed through the House of Com- mons without attracting the attention that such a measure deserved. That was no fault of the House of Commons, for it was occupied at the time by other mat- ters which were more imperative; but it was a great misfortune that such a ques- tion should be dealt with in such an off-hand manner, because we are at present entirely at sea with respect to that act. I do not believe that the honourable gen- tleman the Under Secretary of the Colonies approves of that act, and from his speeches I think he would wish that act. at the bottom of the sea. We are at a loss to know who should have the control of that • wild land. We are in uncertainty about it; and the consequence is, inequality in our dealings and the appearance of injustice. New South Wales, though not so populous as Canada, contains *bout 200,000 of our fellow subjects, men of the same race and blood as ourselves; and they are under the asolute and unmiti- gated control of this act of Parliament, though they believe almost without a dissentient voice that the impolicy of that act is actually ruinous to them. We might come down here and say they are, all wrong and we are right; but do we hold that doctrine? Are there fite men amongst those who hear me who have a fixed convictien that thee-rim of- wild- land in New Smith Wales ought not to . be less than Went" ,aMIllegs an acre? The act is entirely a dead letter so far as we are concerned;,' but although it is a dead letter to us, it is as a yoke of iron to them, restraining their freedom of action in matters in which they feel deeply interested." Then there was the question of transportation ; a problem which perhaps nobody will be able com- pletely to solve, yet one on which the labours of the Commission might save us in future from much of that vacillation of successive Secretaries which has so greatly aggravated the difficulties of the subject. In fine, Mr. Gladstone allowed the impossibility of dealing simultaneously with all these subjects, bet the Commission might devote its labours to those which press most heavily on the colonists: thus we might at once promote their good and render material aid in the duties of their government. If we direct our minds steadily to the promotion of the good of the Colonies, we need not fear for the connexion. On the contrary, he believed, that would be the way to maintain the connexion, and to maintain that which he esteemed more important than a mere political connexion—namely; the love of the colonists for this country, and their desire to imitate the laws and institutions of the great country from which they spring.

Mr. LADOUCHERE took Mr. Hawes's line, though more modestly. He was not ashamed of our Colonial system, and could not agree to the pro- posed vote of censure on that system. He could not imagine what practi- cal benefit would result from delegating the high functions of Government to a Commission. If the Commission was intended to represent Parliament, he did not see on what constitutional principle the House of Lords conld be omitted. He alto- gether objected to delegate to a Commission those duties the responsibility of which ought to rest on the Government. He was not quite sure as to the inten- tions of the right honourable gentleman opposite—whether he intended that the Commission should be a standing Commission, to whom matters ought to be re- ferred from time to time, or to be appointed upon particular occasions for a spe- cial purpose. Perhaps it might be desirable to refer the question of transports- tation, and that of the management of wild lands, to a Commission: but that would be quite different from setting up a standing Commission to receive all the grievances which might be sent from the Colonies, ad whose functions it would be impossible to define. He did not see how such &Commission could act without assuming the executive functions. The question of the constitution to begiven to different colonies was one to be considered with advantage by such a body as the Committee of the Council of Trade; but that was a distinct matter from having the same or similar questions disposed of by a body of Commis- sioners independent of the Executive Government. Mr. GLADSTONE explained, that he did not contemplate a standing Com- mission, but merely one of inquiry.

Mr. Scorr supported the motion, with an especial reference to New South Wales.

Nothing was clearer than that, from the apathy of Parliament, the Colonial Office is alone responsible for all measures relating to Colonial administration. The bill for establishing a constitution in New South Wales was passed through all stages in both Houses of Parliament without one single observation from any Individual but Lord Monteagle, which occupied exactly four lines in "Hansard "-

ways excepting the introductory remarks of the Minister who brought forward the !measure.

Mr. ADDERLEY also supported the motion, in a short speech, which em- braced a good many points.

The arguments employed against the Commission for which Sir William Moles-

worth asked would apply to all Commissions what Commissions Commsions were Moles- ea in only on extraordinary emergencies, to deal with large princip'es and large questions; and if that was the objection in this instance, it would pre- clade them from appointing any Commission for settling large questions. The report of the Committee of Council which Mr. Hawes boasted of as an authority for the Government Australian Bill, was, it seems, the production of one man— Sir James Stephen. Though it was ably written, there were flaws in it; and the bill that had been founded upon it was utterly unsatisfactory. The Colonies re- monstrated against the present system; and that was echoed by this country. Great Britain was nationally interested in providing a wider field for her emigra- tion. Every one said that this subject must be inquired into. Committees had been refused. Then how was Parliament to deal with it?

Lord Jon:: RUSSELL restated and amplified Mr. Hawes's objections; added illustrations from history, maxims from political philosophy, opi- nions from himself; and he quoted statistics of population and imports, to show the growth and prosperity of Canada and New South Wales— Here was an increase in the population and wealth of two colonies only to which a parallel could scarcely be found in the history of colonization. lie as- serted, then, that there was some presumption in favour of that system which the House was now called upon to condemn. Upon the general principle, he should be little disposed to recommend to the adoption of the House the appointment of any Commission whatsoever which was to lay down rules for the limitation of the Imperial authority on the one hand or of Colonial liberty on the other. The best way to preserve those limits was to use forbearance on either side; to consider each question that arose upon its own proper merits; so that on the side of the Colony there should be no desire to put forward unreasonable demands, and on the part of the Imperial Government no wish to restrain any freedom the exercise of which was beneficial to the Colonies. If rigid and fixed rules were to be laid down, the very interpretation of those rules must lead to disputes; bitter feelings would be excited ; and, so far from putting an end to difficulties, that very provision for so doing would increase them. . . The man who perhaps had written with the most force, with almoet mathematical precision, and with the greatest beauty of language on questions of politics- Rousseau—declared at the end of his life, that politics after all was but the science of circumstances and modifications; and that the particular questions to which rules were to be applied, and the particular countries in which laws were to be in- troduced, were to he considered by the statesman, and not solely according to any abstract theory. There being so many difficulties in Colonial government, and so many ques- tions upon it haring arisen of late years, Lord John could not wander that the present motion should have found favour in that House. It would have been a different matter if a Commission had been proposed to inquire into some parti- cular question—as, for example, that of the waste lands. Questions of that na- ture were fit for such an inquiry: but with regard to the general Colonial go- vernment, it was better to leave it to he dealt with by the responsible Ministers of the Crown, subject afterwards to the control and supervision of Parliament. That was the free constitution of this country. lie was told it WAS inconvenient to have changes of policy. That was true. There was no change more inconve- nient than a change in our Foreign policy. A change in the opinion of thee House, which made it necessary for the Minister for Foreign Affairs to resign, brought another Minister into that department, though there was no part of our policy in which it was more important to have a steady political bearing. The Emperor of Russia had a great advantage in this respect, because, from the year 1815 to 1849, he had had but one Foreign Minister, who had held continually the same language, followed the same policy, and treated all foreign powers ac- cording to that invariable and unchangeable policy. He had thus a great ad- vantage over us in this. The case was similar with regard to our Colonial po- licy; and so it was with many other departments of the-Government of this country. _But if we Meant to have a free and not a despotic government, we must be content to pay this price for the advantage. Sir WILLIAM MoLeswonrir, in reply, said that he did not contemplate any standing Commission. Neither did he insist upon the very terms of his motion: they might be modified, and the range of the inquiry could be clearly defined by the instructions to the Commission, which would rest with the Executive Government.

The House divided—for the motion, 89; against it, 163.

PREVENTION OF SEDUCTON.

Mr. SPOONER moved the second reading of the Protection of Women Bill, on Wednesday, with assurances of the great care it had received in the other House from one of the chief legal authorities of the coun- try; but he admitted that it was still susceptible of improvements, and he offered ready submission to good alterations. Mr. ANSTEY .objected, that the bill was ouesided and illusory; it did nothing to protect men against solicitation; and he moved that it be read a second time that day- three months. • Mr. Hume inquired what new evidence had been laid betbre the House of Lords?

Had inquiries been instituted, for example, in the Universities, for the purpose of getting information on this subject? No persons were better able to give evi- dence than those who had been connected with the Universities. It would have been satisfactory, for example, if the Proctors of the two Universities had been examined; and no one was more likely to be able to give information than the right reverend Prelate who brought the bill before the House of Lords.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL took exception to the bill as unnecessary: the law is already able to accomplish what the bill aims at: in fact, the bill would weaken the present law, and lessen the protection already given to women. He was in favour of protection, but this bill was very imper- fect. Appealed to by Mr. SPOONER, on the ground that. he had rendered valuable assistance in a former sesaion, Sir GEORGE GREY maw refused to give assistance to a bill confessedly inadequate, on the ground of having once supported a bill really adapted to meet the evil; wheeh bill the other House rejected. Mr. ANSTEY'S motion was negatived, by 130 to G.

Sir George Grey and Sir John Jervis not voting, Mr. MILNER GIBSON complained that they, who had been so eloquent upon the deformities of the bill, left the small minority so completely in the lurch; for tomorrow the names of the minority would go forth as if they were supporters of all those immoralities of which they had been hearing! Mr. HONE was sur- prised at Mr. Gibson, and exhorted him to more moral courage and lese dread of minorities. He moved the adjournment of the debate: in the the midst of the conversation that ensued the clock struck six; and the Speaker adjourned the House.

An attempt was made on Thursday to proceed with the bill; but Colo- nel SALAVEY and others objected to doing so at a very late hour; and the debate was again adjourned, just before adjournment of the House itself.

PRISON DISCIPLD7E.

The debate on Mr. Charles Pearson's motion for a Committee on his plans of prison discipline, adjourned from the 15th of May, was renewed on Wednesday- Sir HENRY HALFonu moved, as an amendment, for a Committee on the system of prison discipline applied to prisoners at pre- sent in confinement in England. Lord MAFION, Mr. ROBERT PALMER, and Mr. DENISON, engaged in a general defence of the Separate system; advancing the customary arguments and classes of facts. Mr. HUME in- sisted on the necessity of attacking crime by compulsory education. Sir GEORGE GREY gave some facts to show that the Separate system is cheaper than the old ways, instead of dearer, as Mr. Person maintains. The Members generally advised Sir Henry Raiford not to press his amendment 4. so late a period in the session; and Mr. Home in a friendly spirit, urged the sause suggestion on Mr. Pearson. After some conversation of ma encouraging tenour to both Mr. Pearson and Sir Henry Belford, the amendment and the motion were both withdrawn; with announcements that they would be renewed at the beginning of next session.

TRANSPORTATION FOR TREASON IN IRELAND.

The third reading ef the Transportation for Treason Bill was op- posed by Mr. NAP= and others as an ex-post-facto law; by Mr. Swa- mis Caaweetsu aa unconstitutional; and by Colonel Rawoor and others on grounds of mercy, transportation being held a severer punish- Meta than the State prisoners would undergo if this bill were not passed. Mr. lisxtroetee calculated that the transportation of those prisoners would have cost not less than 1,000,0004 of public money—for troops, &c., before and after the prosecutions,. The motion that the bill be read a, third time that day three months, was negatived by 159 to 27. The bill was read a third time. A motion by. Mr. INSTElf to substitute "imprisonment during the queen's pleasure, or banishment," in place of "transportation," was 'Weaved by 146 to 21. The bill thee passed.

lama Eeculeseaes ESTATES.

Ole the third reading of the Encumbered Estates (Ireland) Bill, Lord gatateessee mate some cursory allusion to the alterations introduced by Abe Select Committee, for the purpose of showing that the bill would con- for-as-good a title as before; and that the decision of the Commissioners would be binding, and therefore protected from the proceedings of any Other court, high or low. He was much gratified to learn that there was 4 prospect of colonization under the auspices of the Corporation of Lon- domin imitation of the example which had been set by the same body in the reign of James the First.

The Earl of GLENOALL observed, that very considerable delusion existed the,subject; and that parties taking waste lands in the far West, in eloyoe's Country" and the like, would find that their speculations would and in downright failure.

The bill was read, a third time, and passed.

Irma, BOOR-RELIEF.

Im Committee on the Poor-Relief (Ireland) Bill, on Monday, Mr. STAF- WAD unwed an amendment on the maximum clause; and, to compensate " the eurpassing folly" et' Mr. J.:oho O'Connell's exclusion of reporters, lee raised a new discus:eat, comprising most of the argument, already familiar on tbs general principle of such a bill. The bill found the same opposers as at former stages; Mr. Cormiewaere LEWIS taking on him the burden of answering objections, and finding the same supporters among the Irish Members that have before declared themselves in favour of a maximum rating. Mr. HORSHAN threw some vigour into the later stage of the dis- mission by strength of language and bold eptmciation of principles— We knew, he said, what Wee the average duration of life in Ireland, but it really remained for the bill now before the House to show what was the average vaJueç life in that country.. It was just seven shillings—it was not worth seven-and-sixpence; seven shillings was the sum the Poor-law Guardians were authorized to give; at three half-crowns the poor man was knocked down to the undertaker. And this wise discovery was made, this beneficent precision was enacted, for what? To tempt English speculators in Irish land to spend their money ! Well now, just let the House see the difficulty they get into, patting out of eight the principles of a poor-law. The real object of a poor-law was not that of providing relief for-destitution, but to afford security to property. The evils attending a poor-law were so great, the mischiefs attending It were so ob- vious and inevitable, that motives of humanity alone would hardly juetify.the enactment of such a law; but public policy compelled them to doh. It was very well to say that Irish property must support Irish poverty, but much must de- m. d on the relation of property to poverty. Whatever might have been the re- lation between them. in 1837, it had since that time altered for the worse. With property decreasing and pauperism increasing, to say that Ireland was to depend:upon fleeting but its poor. law, was simply to consign property to confis- 0•Mon, and pev?eily ko,deatil, Meek it as you might, the system now attempted to be enforced to Ireland in this midst of a redundaecy of pauper population was eothing,else than, Socialism; audit would soon effect the ruin of all holden, of property, whether proprietors or occupiers. The poor-law, being established in Ireland, could not now be distarbed. All that could be done was to make the beat of it. There was but one way of doing that, namely., by reestablishing it on round principles. It was necessary to apply in Ireland as in England the strin- gent workhouse test. . . . Parliament had much to answer for on account of the carelessness with which it had, legislated for Ireland, and that responsibility had been immensely aggravated by what bad been done duriege the present session. English Members, from a feeling of exhaustion and weariness with respect to Irish miestions, had thrown the whole responsibility of fashiouing them epee the Qovernment ; and the Government had availed itself of the favourable state of parties to propose and carry imperfect and faulty measures—measures which were keown to be imperfect and faulty by the men who connived at their passing; and thus on. the part of the Homo all sense of conscience and responsibility ap- pears to have been lost,

Mr. Stafford's:amendment was negatived, by 178 to 51; and progress vote xeported-on the bill.

The House proceeded, in Committee on the bill on Thursday. Several amendments were moved against Ministers, but negatived by large ma- jorities. The principal discussion arose on an amendment by Sir GEORGE (IEEE; the of whioh was to separate rates in payment of- former ad- vances arid loans from, the maximum fixed by the Rate-in-aid Bill. The proposal was loudly resisted by the Irish Members; who complained that it virtually set aside the maximum limit which Ministers had fixed by the previous bill this very seseion. In the course of the disputation, Sir ftseeut Gazer remarked, that they could not get on -very well if they were to discuss together the two propositions of a maximum rate and of re- pudiation. Sir JAMES Gnertam produced an account of thirty-two dis- tressed unions in Ireland, showing that to the 25th of March this year they owed 231,000k, and, by neat September they would owe 271,0001. more— in all 50%0004: if that were added to the rate,_ it would raise it from 5s. to 25s. in the pound. On the other-hand; if no provision were made for heuidating the old debts, no contraotor would advance meal or other pro- visimut ou the security of the rat-in-aid s He had opposed the maximum limitation, and now he bad no, objection to, Sir George Grey's amendment. *es Q. B. Rome observed, that, uo capitalist. would. have much inducement to buy Mad Me which the meet, due would. eeeeed two yeene rental. Sir Georg, Clrej'a, au'eadelleet week adopted. Late in the tatting, thee Chair- mea averted progmee,

FRANCE, Rowe, AND ENGLAND.

On Thursday, the Earl of ELLENEGROUGH originated a conversation in which he tried to draw forth further information touching the position of this country towards France in Roman affairs. He aeked, whether Lord Lansdowne was prepared to lay on the table the let- ter from her Majesty's Ambassador acknowledging the communication made to the French Government concerning theintervention in Rome?

The Marquis of LAN6DOW5 replied, that no communications bad passed be- yond those already laid on the table of the House. The instructions issued by M. Grouyn de Lhuys to the French agents at Vienna and Guts, respecting tee verbal. Lord.AmezpedbassaditionotrainCiEuvitaghiVnecenlua,mienclobleseqd tiainata communications oaAdtiomnsiralhacteabeaue, Lord, Eenmesoaoucu said, that in making those verbal communications the English Ambassador must have acted on inatmetions: would Lord Lanadowne lay those instructions before the Home? The Earl of ABERDEEN reminded Lord Landowne, that when he asked for the statement of the Amtrien Ministry, he was told that on conuuunication had bees made by the Austrian Government to this Government: it now appeared that the French Government had equelly made no communication, except indirectlye by communicating, clespatcbee addressed to its own representatives: Lord Aberdeen asked for the corresponding document issued by the Austrian Government. Lord Letrateowees replied, that the Austrian document had only. been read to our Foreign Secretary. Of the French document a copy had been left with the Foreign Secretary.

The Earl of ABERDEEN rejoined, that the French Ambassador also was only instructed to read his despatch. No doubt, the Austrian Government would equally consult to the publishing of its communication; and what he wanted to know was, whether the &Istria° Government was not a great. deal more satisfac- tory than " this stuff" [the French correspondence], Isord LANSDOWNE nut distinctly replying, Lord Assesses repeated his in- . quiry.

Lord Leemeowes thought the noble Earl must already have seen the cont- . munication. He had no objection to lay it on the table. The Austrian Govern- ment had now presented the communication in form; which had not been done when he last spoke on the subject. Lord Sle,tettale asked, whether it was correctly- stated, that after the unjusti- cable attack of the French Government on Rome, the gnglish Government had neither received nor asked an explanation of the grounds on which the French army was bombarding that city ?

The Marqois of LANSDOWN& replied, that no explanation had been received from the French Government, and that no call for explanation hail been pressed upon it. At the same time, he did not say that it was not a legitimate subject for inquiry on our part.

ABSENCE ON THE LORD CHANCELLOR.

On Thursday, Lord BROUGHAM referred to a return ordered by the Peers,, a fortnight previously, showing the amount of business in the Court of Chancery: the object was to prove, not that the arrears were great, but exactly the reverse, and that no inconvenience accrues from the Lord Chancellor's absence through indisposition: if he had the power, he would Mime an injapetion to, prevent Lord. Cottnnham, from appearing in his Court until he ahould be quite recovered. In 1815, Lord Eldon was absent for three months—Junee July, and August. Lord LANGDALE did not agree in the opinion that no inconvenience would result from the absence of the Lord Chancellor—

In the time of (linen Elizabeth, when the Lord Chancellor was generally either an Archbishop or a Bishop, nothing was so common as to appoint a V4ce-- Chancellor to act in the Lord Chancellor's place as holder of the great seal miles occasional absence or indisposition. He suggested, therefore, that the great sea/ shored now be placed in the hands of another for a time, or that it should be placed in commission.

Lord CASEPBELL concurred.. The return was ordered to be made forth- with.

THE BUDGET.

Erom, want of space and, time last Saturday morning, we were unable to do.fulljuetice to the Budget debate: we therefore recur-to the speeches, and present indicaeions of such features as seem still interesting; taking the opportunity to correct some inaccuracies.

Sir CHARLES. WoODIS figures show that the total estimated- income of the peel year, exclusive of corn duties, was 52,130,000k; the total actual receipt, without corn-duties, was 52,067,7311.: the deficit of receipt compared with estimate was therefore 62,0001.—a falling off of 450,0001. had occurred in the receiptialeem Stamps, which had not been quite replaced by the increase on other items, The total =twit expenditure had eec.eeded the total estimated expenditure by 120,0004; it had amounted to, 50;287,1101.: but, in this sum there in- cluded were, two items which he had, never proposed to ipcludee—astmely, 389,9204 for

Irish distress and emigration, and 328,7861. for Naval excesses of the previous year—together upwards of 723,0001. The tomereceipts, including the corn-duties, which amounted to 550,0004, were 53,107,7320; tied the total expenditure, in- cluding the sums for Ireland and Navy excesses, were 53,287,1101: the excess of expenditure over receipt has therefore been 269,3_871s But if the current expenee rather than the total expense be compared with the current receipt—withdrawing from the espenses the Irish monies and the Navy excesees, together 723,0001. odd —then, instead of a deecit of 269,3781., there is a surplus of 444,3291. Or lastly", if you discard the Irish monies only., and include only the Na,vy, excesses of the preceding year, even then there is a eurphis of 120,0001. on the year, instead, of the apparent deficit of 269,3781. The total receipts of the eusuieg year he estimated at 52,262,0,00il, and the total expenses at 52;157,6961.; giving a surplus of 104,3094: but here again the expenses are swelled by 642,6321. of" Navy, Army, Ordnancetand Commisseriat excesses" for 1847-8—which will not relive; and if they be steductede a serpla of 746,9361. results.

With regard- to these estimates, Sir Charles deduced from comparative state- ments that the income of the current year, exclusivaof the Income-tax, will be 46,000,0001.; and he called attention to the feet that this sum is little below the average income of the years between 1848 and1848, although large remissions of taxes were made in that interval. Rednetiona continue in operation—though an outcry is raised as if that were not the oase: last year duties expired or were reduced amounting to 985,9681.; and this year the duties expiring or being re- duced will amount to 386,8651. He stated list session that Government had eco- nomized the estimates by, 828,6894, and this session that farther reductions will be made of 1,447e0001.: he was now able to state the whole reductions of this year—they would be 71,8,1684 in the Navel estimates, 433,9141. in the Army, 337,8781. n the Ordnance, stud 245004 in the Miecellaneous • altogether 1,511,4554 making the total of tee,t1wears 2,399,1554 He explained in detail the reduc- tions accomplished by the consolidation of the Boards of Excise, Taxes,. and * Mons porRon Sirdharles's statement he says that the "total produce, exclusive of corn, was S2,067,7311."—in contrast to his estimate of "total anticipated mew" 52.130,0001,"; but In ttes place be says," Octet& receipts, including the coru-dutich which amounted 1°550,0045e during theeam amounted to 53,0.7,7520 Thus he SOON to make the, half-million of corn-dutlee alter by nearly a whole million the total, IC" Pea Ramps. 'In 1833 there were 9,083 men employed: there are now 7,029; being a redaction in the number of men to the amount of 2,054. In 1833, the salaries o amounted to 962,2661.; in 1849, the salaries amount to 715,0921., being a -ea/Lotion, in round numbers, of 247,0001. Last year I brought in a bill to abo- lish the Excise surveys and other charges, thus reducing the number of men em- ployed. The number of etations that were discoutiuued at that time was 606; Ina there were 51 situations vacant, which were not filled up, in anticipation of the change: 90 of these officers have been superannuated, because it is impossible to reemploy very old men; and we have therefore allowed all above the age of sixty to be placed upon a retiring allowance. Five are since dead, and one has been discharged, while isa have been reappointed to situations in the publics service, laying about 300 to be still provided tor; and I hope, as nearly the whole patron- age of Government has been given up for this purpose, that the whole of them wet be reappointed into the public service." Mr. Hums allowed that objectionable taxes had been removed; but he reiterated the broad fact that during the last five years the expenditure has been greater than in any five years since 1824. Fro.n 1844. to 1848, instead of a decrease of taxation, the average income of the five years was 57,000,0001.; being 600,0001. above the average of 1824 to 1828, aud 5,000,0001. above the average of the twelve preceding years. The average expenditure for the same period was 56,536,0001.; sod he might add, that the expense of collection was in all cases from four to five millions. He also reminded the House of an important point that seemed to have been forgotten—the steady increase of permanent burdens on the revenue. By the annual paper for 1848—that for 1849 had not yet been delivered—showing all additious to the Public Debt by interest or loan, he found that in the last ten years there had been added upon account of the Debt an annual charge of 836,0001.; exclusive of the enormous amount of taxation paid in that time. He called for further economy, in order that the Excise might be altogether done away with: for instance, save 7,0001. of Governor's salary at Sierra Leone, and then you can strike off the 7,000/. tax on books. And let them abolish the Ordnance department by transferring its duties to the War Office--saviug 250,0001. a year; =a follow the example of Sir James Graham, who reduced the expenses of the Admiralty department by 1,200,0001. Mr. COWAN, Mr. EWART, and Mr. lilmzeza GIBSON, followed up Mr. Home's Weeks on the Excise; Mr- Gibson giving some facts which ahead have especial weight with Whigs. The duty on paper interfered with. the patterns used in Jac- quard looms. He had been informed that the amount of duties paid to the Govern- ment on the paper used for two patterns only amounted to 481. There was another view of the tax upon paper which might be mostappropriately urged upon the Go- vernment of the noble Lord. The Whigs always deserved credit for their repudi- ation of the taxes on knowledge. The Messrs. Chambers of Edinburgh had lately presented a petition to show that the tax upon paper had caused them to discontinue Use publication of a work for the use of the humbler classes, of which there had been a sale of 80,000 copies. This tax, then, was a most serious obstacle to the diffusion of knowledge. The advertisement-duty was a part of the some subject, and so was the penny stamp on newspapers. Let the Government take off the penny stamp on newspapers, the excise-duty on paper, and the duty on advertisements, and a coarse wuuld have been taken which was quite in accordance with the prin- ciples and old professions of the Whig party, and which would quite establish for them the confidence of the country. Mr. MILNER GIBSON assured the House, that in the North of England the labouring.classes were never in a better position—commanding more of the neces- saries and comforts of life; and Mr...Kaaats gave a. favourable account of the people in the borough of Leice.ster: trade had not been in a better state since the year 1833. Mr. HODGES and Mr. FEEwsze prayed for &remission of the hop.duties, al- ready postponed; their exaction will ruin half the planters iii -three or four coun- ties. Mr. Frewen, indeed, feared that if the duty be maintained there must be an outbreak in the country.

Mr. DRIIMSIOND thought Sir Charles Wood's statement unsatisfactory, as not going to the root of the question. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was quite right in not repealing small duties; those which ought to be first repealed were those which pressed exclusively upon the poor. It should be considered, that in this country and in this climate beer brewed at home was a necessary of life; and the rule just suggested would include also the case of bricks and soap. He was very sorry that the Government would not undertake to deal with this great question. He felt the deepest conviction, and pain commensurate with that conviction, that unless they did, the time was not far distant when the Ledru-Rollins and Proudhons of this country would. The simple point was, whe- ther these desperadoes were to be suffered to do that, and a great deal more. Mr. &arrows thought that when the farmers of England were deprived of protection, they could not be asked to maintain aristocratic institutions as they used to do; and therein consisted the democratic nature of Mr. Cobden'e proposi- tion to repeal the malt-tax. He felkit his duty to state, that if the interests of the farmers were neglected by that House, they might, perhaps, not join with the honourable Member fur the West Riding, but they might attempt to combine with others who disagreed with their representatives on the great questions of constitu- tional government, and, by lending themselves to the phanta.sies and follies of the hour, place the institutions of the country in the greatest jeopardy. COBDEN had never wasted, and would not waste, the time of the House in reopening the Free-trade controversy; or defending the settlement of the question: he would leave-it to time and abide the result. At the beginning of the session he had noticed many things on which reductions should be commenced, and he now found different gentlemen taking them all up—malt-tax, tea-duties, and timber-duties: the man is not a statesman who did not prepare to meet these de- mands. The budget could hardly satisfy the nation, the two ends being barely made to meet. It was not right to draw the line so close as to say it might be within 150,0001.; for there might. be a deticiencyioatead of a surplus. They were now expending more-money than was expended before the Reform Bill was passed. Re did not say that reform had not done some good, but it had not insured PS much economy and retrenchment as might be expected. Mr. SAMBA= remembered stating to Sir Charles Wood, last year, that he would get nearly 4000,0001. duty on corn, but he appeared rather incredulous: and now instead of receiving one abating-, which would bring in a mvenne of 230,0001, he naked him why tie would not receive a- duty of 4e. or 53. This he would say from experience, that not a penny of the million thus obtained- would come out of the pockets of the consnmers—not a penny more would be charged upon the consumers of the country. Mr. CORDON rose again. He would not have said a word if that speech had come from a county member, but he apprehended that the honourable member for Wakefield was not sent there to advocate a tax Upon trade. He rather thought he was not authorized to make any proposal, and he was astonished to hear such a prop sition coming from that quarter. Mr. EANDARS resented this attack on his independence: he was returned to that House as independently as Mr. Cobden himself, and he eared sot for that gentle- man's censure. Mr. etuairras took Mr. Cobden to task for his assumption to lead every man in the House; and Mr.' linatte defended his friend.