3 AUGUST 1833, Page 2

an Prirreetrin0 in Parliament.

1. hum CHURCH REFORM. The Report on the Irish Church Temporalities Bill was brought up on Monday, in the House of Lords; and the question being put that it should be received, The Earl of WINCHILSEA rose to express his decided hostility to the bill, which was one of the most unconstitutional measures ever pro- posed. He would admit that there were some clauses in it not un- worthy of support; but he firmly believed those clauses had been in- serted to mask and conceal a plan, intended not only to weaken, but utterly to destroy the Protestant religion in that part of the empire to which the bill referred. He felt that the measure was fraught with innumerable and irremediable evils ; and would therefore move that the Report be received that day six months.

Earl GREY made a few brief observations in defence of the bill and of the motives of Government in bringing it forward, and the House divided : for the original motion, 68; against it, 30; majority, 38.

The Clerk then proceeded to read the amendments made in the Com- mittee. Upon the clause which relates to the appointment of the Com- missioners being'read,

The Duke of WELLINGTON suggested, that if the Chancellor and Chief Justice of Ireland should be Catholics, a clause should be intro- duced to enable two other public officers to be agreed upon to act in their stead.

Lord BROUGHAM said, it would answer the purpose if, in that case, the other Commissioners should be empowered to act without them.

The Marquis of WESTMEATH could not understand what Lord Brougham meant by supporting such a bill. He was the keeper of the , King's conscience ; he hoped he had very little of it in his keeping, and he trusted in God that he would not have that little long. (A laugh.) Lord BROUGHAM said, that Lord Westmeath was perfectly correct in one of the observations in his extraordinary speech—namely, that he did not understand what he meant. (A laugh.)

He did not in the least understand him : never was any man so much at fault in attempting to understand another as the noble Marquis was, if he thought he would support any bill which would endanger the Protestant Church.

The clause, as amended, according to Lord Brougham's suggestion, was agreed to.

Clause 34th was amended, so as to give the Junior Fellows of Trinity College, Dublin, the patronage of ten livings, not to exceed 8001. per annum each.

A conversation passed respecting some other verbal and unimportant amendments, which was very indistinctly heard. The report was finally received, and the bill ordered to be read a third time the next day.

The Order of the Day having been read on Tuesday, for the third reading of the bill, The Marquis of HE ADFORT said, he had heard no good reason why the measure should not be adopted, and would give it his hearty support.

The Earl of ELDON opposed the bill. He would rather sacrifice his existence than consent to a measure which proceeded upon a principle that would entirely destroy the Protestant established episcopal form of ecclesiastical government in this country.

The Earl of LONGFORD admitted that the bill contained some good ; but it also contained so much evil, that he felt himself bound to vote against it.

The Duke of WELLINGTON objected to many of its provisions ; but it was impossible for him, with' the opinions which he entertained of the necessity for some measure of this description, to concur in a vote against its third reading. The more he considered the situation of the Church of Ireland, the more he was convinced of the necessity of agree- ing to the present measure, in the absence of a better. Lord ELLENBOROUEH differed from the Duke of Wellington with great reluctance, but would give his decided opposition to the bill. The Duke of GLOUCESTER, the Duke of Buczmenast, Lord WIN- FOB" and Lord BEXLEY, would also vote against it.

The Earl of HADDINGTON said, he could not bring himself to vote for or against the bill; so, contrary to his hitherto invariable practice, he would not vote at all. .

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE briefly defended the bill. - The House divided; *ken there appeared for the fhitd weeding-- :Proxies Contents present '70 65 —125 Not contentopresent 50 31 Proxies

YON,.

Majority for the third reading The bill was then read a third time, and passed.

It was taken to the Commons on Wednesday, and their concurrence to the amendments desired.

On Friday, the amendments were taken into consideration in the House of Commons. Having been read a first time, Lord ALTHORP moved that they be read a second time. He proceeded to explain the nature of the amendments, not one of which met his approbation; but as they did not affect the principle of the bill, he would not dissent from them. There was one clause, relating to the patronage of the livings to be given to the Fellows of Trinity College, in which some alteration would be necessary. Mr. O'CONNELL thought the bill was not much the worse for the Lords' amendments. The alterations which it effected in the eccle- siastical system were not such as the people desired ; and he protested against such scanty justice, in the hope that More would be given next session.

• Mr. HUME said, that England was more disappointed with the bill than Ireland : a more complete abortion of Church Reform had never been witnessed. It was a farce, a mockery, a plaything between two parties, one of whom wished to do something but dared not.

Lord ERRINGTON thought that there were some good provisions in the bill—that it was not absolutely useless and bad.

Mr. HARVEY said, should the bill as it stood become law, be thought the people of England had but little prospect of that ecclesiastical re- form they so much desired. If they exerted themselves they might get a measure similar to the present, hut there was little beyond that to be hoped for.

The amendments made by the Lords, and an additional verbal one by Lord Althorp, were read a second time, and agreed to.

The bill was then carried up to the House of Lords, and laid on the table.

2. TITHE COMMUTATION BILL. Lord ALTHORP moved, on Friday, that this bill be reported that day six months.

3. SLAVERY BILL. At the morning sitting on Monday, the House of Commons went into Committee on this bill.

The ninth clause passed with a verbal amendment.

On the tenth clause being read, Mr. P. M. STEWART suggested that an alteration might be made in that clause, to allow slaves to be transferred from one island to another during their apprenticeship, providing it was with their own consent, and not under the restriction of either that House or the legislative as- semblies.

Dr. LUSHINGTON and Mr. BUXTON opposed the arnendmek; and it was withdrawn.

Mr. BUXTON then moved as an amendment, "that no apprentice should be removed from one colony to another after the passing of this act, without the consent of the said apprentice, given and recorded in writing before and by the said two Justices of the Peace." This amendment was carried, and the clause agreed to.

On the 12th clause being -read, Mr. STANLEY said, it was intended to amend it by adding, that the slave should not be employed more than forty-five hours each week, and that the time for cultivating their pro- vision-ground should not be deducted from his weekly but annual time.

Lord Howlex proposed that some small sum of wages in money, even if it were only 6d. for the seven hours and a half, per week, should be given to the apprentices, by way of stimulating them to exertion.

- Mr. STANLEY opposed this suggestion very decidedly. 'Mr. BUXTON supported it.

• Mr. JAMES spoke against the proposal.

If the negro was not paid money wages, he was paidfor his work in food, clothing, provision garden-ground, and other conveniencies. On one of his estates in the island of Jamaica, he had slaves who had made from 20/. to 2001. by the produce of their provision-ground, besides being provided for in other ways. Who ever heard of an English labourer saving 2001. out of money- wages? It was seen by the papers, that such was the distress of English la- bourers that they were actually starving in the streets.

Mr. BUXTON replied, that the fact of these savings was an argument in favour of his position.

Mr. P. M. STEWART, MT. O'CONNELL, MT. STANLEY, Lord HowicE, Sir R. VYVYAN, and Lord SANDON spoke; and the Chair- man reported progress.

At the morning sitting on Tuesday, the consideration of this bill was resumed in Committee.

The 25th clause, which regulates the amount of compensation, was put ; and Sir EARDLEY WILMOT moved that fifteen be substituted for steady millions.

Mr. O'CONNELL asked Mr. Bernal, if he, as Chairman, had the same power as the Speaker to clear the- Gallery of strangers ? Mr. BERNAL replied that he had.

-Mr. O'CONNELL said, that he would not, however, look that way just then, as his object had been attained. The reporters had promised to return to-their-duty, and report fairly ; though he did not believe that promise would be kept. He then proceeded to argue at length against the grant of twenty millions to the planters.

Mr. STANLEY defended the clause.

Mr. BUXTON also supported it; because, if not given, it would be laid out in military preparations against men who were merely asserting their natural rights. Mr. Fa-unopposed the grantnin tote.

Theplanterswould.get the money, but would never execute the: bill and the bill (said he, striking vehemently on the table) is a dead robbery. (Loud .Laughter.) The People of England did not make the Negroes Slaves, and why

call-upon themtopay the matey? The House would not dare to make such a bill for Canada, nor -dare to-take away the legislative rights of that colony.'llis other ground on which he was determined to oppose this grant was, that-the House had no right to mortgage the future industry and labour of the,coontry. There was no pledge given that the sugar trade would be thrown open; mad and after all this compensation-money was granted, the West Indians mightietill charge the people of this country at as extravagant a rate as they pleas.W.

Mr. WASON opposed the grant, as most extravagant. Mr. HARVEY and Mr. ROBINSON wished to know how the money was to be raised, and who would have to pay the interest of it ?

Lord ALTHORP said, the money would be raised by an additional tax on Colonial produce ; and in answer to a question from Mr. O'Cozo- NELL, he said that the scale of taxation would be raised so as to secure a preference to the produce of our own Colonies. Mr. HERRIES and Mr. AGLIONBY disapproved strongly of the clause. The Chairman reported progress.

The discussion on the 25th clause was resumed in the House of Commons at the evening sitting on Wednesday.

Sir ROBERT PEEL urged the injustice of rescinding or mutilating this compensatory clause, while the emancipating clauses were still to be enforced. Mr. O'CONNELL opposed and Mr. STANLEY defended the clause.

Mr. CORBETT would have no objection to the grant, if Lord Altbiarp would complete his legal tender project. If Lord Althorp wonld set his paper-mill at work, there would be no difficulty in coining as much money as we wanted.

A division took place on Sir E. Wilmot's motion to reduce the grant from twenty to fifteen millions ; which was rejected by 152 to 27. There was then another division on the original question, and the clause was agreed to by a majority of 132 to 51.

Mr. BUXTON then moved, as an amendment to the 40th clause, that half the compensation-money should be retained until the period of the apprenticeships should have expired, or until some guarantee had been obtained of the intention of the Colonial Legislatures really to carry the provisions of the measure into full execution.

Mr. STANLEY opposed this amendment.

If it was right (and the House had determined that it was) th,.t the sum of 20,000,900/. should be paid as a compensation to the West India proprietors,, it would not be right to defer the payment of one half of that sum to a period when the value of it, when so paid, would only be equivalent to 6,000,0004 paid down at present.

Would Mr. Buxton allow the money to be raised now and invested in securities, the interest to be paid along with it to the planters after the expiration of the apprenticeships ?

MT. BUXTON would not object to that.

Mr. STANLEY resumed— Now, in point of pecuniary consideration, the country would be a loser tby such an arrangement, for the money so invested would be liable to a higher rate of interest than money at present bears in the market. Besides, he would-ask- whether it would be a desirable thing, or a thing consistent with the safety. of the Colonies, to hold out to the proprietors such an inducement—ouch an unna- tural stimulus to put an early termination to the period of appienticeslaip—ra

period which, as even fixed by the bill, was rather short. -

Mr. P. M. STEWART opposed, and Dr. LUSHINGTON, Lord Hownnt, and Mr. O'CONNELL supported the amendment.

Mr. JAMES could not argue the question like a special pleader

Mr. O'CONNELL—" Does the honourable member allude to me ? "

Mr. JAMES alluded to no individual, certainly not to one so renowned for his oratory as Mr. O'Connell. Mr. O'Connell had mistaken: him.

In spite of slavery, the slaves were yet in a good and comfortable condition ; and he believed that if the labouring population in Ireland were but one-half-so well off, the learned member, like Othello would find " his occupation gone." His influence would at once be extinguished—his power vanish- .' And, like the baseless fabric of a vision. Leave not ' The Rent' behind." (Loud Laughter.)

Mr. R. GORDON earnestly hoped the House would not depart from its engagements, and that the amendment would be rejected. Lord SANDON remarked upon the want of conciliation evinced by Mr. O'Connell, who charged the planters with that fault.

Mr. O'CONNELL said, that Lord Sandon attacked him because such a course was popular in the House.

He had never set himself up as the protector of bribery and corruption. Let the noble Lord keep himself quiet. (" Order !") Gentlemen called " Order !" but why did they not call "Order" when he was attacked ? Lord Sandon might have been actuated by the most godly and praiseworthy motives in his de- fence of the Liverpool freemen, but if the investigation had not taken place upon that subject, one of the grossest scenes of corruption ever heard of would have remained unknown and unpunished. Let the noble Lord take his consolation out of that. Lord SANDON was prepared to contend, that the investigation alluded to had established the purity of those whom be stood forward to de- fend. (Laughter.)

The Committee then divided : for the amendment, 93; against it, 194; Ministerial majority, 101.

Another division took place, upon an amendment proposed by Mr. O'CONNELL, to alter the words "services of" to "rights to" the Negro, in the preamble. His object was to annul the recognition of the right to Negro property. This amendment was negatived by 103 to 22.

The bill having gone through the Committee, the House resumed. The report was ordered to be taken into consideration on Friday.

On that day, Mr. STANLEY moved that its further consideration should be postponed to Monday; which was agreed to. He then moved that the House should go into Committee on the money clauses of the bill.

The House being in Committee, Lord ALTHORP moved a resolution, the effect of which was, that the Government should have authority to raise a sum of money in the form. of redeemable or perpetual annuities for terms of years, and that this sum should be added to the Funded debt.

Mr. HERRIES objected to the course of proeeedirg adopted by Lord Althorp, as it would not leave Parliament the means of making the conditions on which the money should be raised. He proposed the following resolution, as-an amendment to Lord Althorp's. "That whereas Parliament has granted a sum of twenty millions, for the purpose of raising that sum, the Lords of the Treasury shall have the power, from time to time, to enter into contracts for such parts of that sum as they may require, under such conditions and terms as Parliament may think fit to agree to."

After a few remarks from Sir R. VYVYAN against, and from Mr. HUME in favour of the amendment, Lord ALTHORP said, that he admitted the proceeding to be irregular, but it was justified on the ground of necessity. He called upon the House to give credit to Ministers for making the best bargain they could.

• The clause was then agreed to.

' 4. Mom CHARTER. Lord ALTHORP stated, on Thursday, in an- swer to a question on the subject, that the Bank Charter Bill would be passed this session, and would be brought forward as soon as the Slavery Bill was disposed of.

On Friday, be moved the second reading of the bill.

Mr. POULETT SCROPE moved, as an amendment, that it be read a se- cond time that day six months. The subject of the renewal of the

Bank Charter was not fully understood ; certainly it had not been fully discussed. lie had full reliance on Lord Althorp's integrity, but not much on his financial talents. It was said, that if the measure were not passed this session, our monetary system would be left in a state of suspense.

This objection would have some weight if the Bank Charter were to expire in the present year, but that was not the case; for if notice were not served on the Bank before the lit of August 1833, it must continue for a year from the let of August 1834, for it would require the notice of a year from that time.

Lord ALTHORP was understood to say, that Mr. Scrope was under a mistake. A notice of twelve months from 1833 would be sufficient.

Mr. SCROPE said, that even in that case there was not any pressing necessity for urging the matter in the present session. There could be no danger in delaying it over till the next ; but there was every danger from precipitancy in taking a step which must bind the country for so long a period. He concluded by calling upon Lord Althorp to post- pone the bill till next session, with a view to the appointment of a Select Committee, which should place the banking and monetary system of the country upon a firm footing.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY seconded this amendment.

Alderman THoztesorr trusted that the House would reject the amendment.

Mr. M. ATTWOOD predicted, that the most serious embarrassments and losses would ensue from this proposal to extend the monopoly of the Bank, and for making its notes a legal tender.

Mr. POULETT THOMSON defended the arrangement made with the Bank by Ministers.

Sir ROBERT PEEL concurred in all that part of it which related to the privileges of the Bank, but objected to the legal tender clause. He objected not only to the principle, but the mode in which it was pro- posed to be carried into effect, and more especially to the time at which it was brought forward. So great a change in the monetary sys- tem of the country ought not to be discussed at midnight on the 2d of August. Lord ALTHORP briefly defended his bargain with the Bank ; and stated his intention to move a clause in the Committee, by which each Branch Bank would be responsible only for those notes which might have been issued by it.

Sir Robert Peel argued as if it would be to the interest of bankers to pay in paper rather than gold. Surely he must see that they must give a full value for the paper as well as for gold. Well, this might appear very foolish in Sir Robert Peel's eyes, but it did not in his own. The great principle of the measure was to establish one bank of issue, so as to regulate the whole value of the currency of the country, which he believed to be at once just, desirable, and necessary. Mr. HERRIES was decidedly opposed to the legal tender project. He had heard no arguments in favour, but many against the change proposed.

The Bank of England would be exposed at a time of real panic to a greater danger than ever. He believed that the quantity of gold in circulation would be diminished by the change, and that the Bank would pot more of its paper into circulation than at present. The Bank-would advance its paper at a cheaper rate also than it advanced gold. Its issues would be advanced on different se- curities, too, from those it now accepted. It would advance its paper, he believed,

on mortgage deeds.

He thought that sixty-five miles was too large a circumference over which to extend the monopoly of the Bank, and in the Committee he should move to reduce it.

Mr. Scam declined dividing the House on his amendment, as many members who would have supported it had gone away. The bill was then read a second time ; to be committed on Monday.

5. EAST INDIA CHARTER BILL. In the House of Lords, on Friday, this bill was read a second time, on the motion of the Marquis of LANSDOWNE : with the understanding that the debate should take place on Monday, on the motion for going into Committee.

6. EQUALIZATION OF SUGAR-DUTIES. Mr. EWART, on Thursday, moved a resolution, "That it is just and expedient to admit the sugar and coffee of our East In- dian possessions (the produce of free labour) on equal terms with the sugar and coffee of the West Indies and Mauritius."

He entered into a number of details in order to prove the advantages that the revenue and commerce of the country would derive from acting upon the principle of his resolution.

Lord ALTHORP said, the motion was one of that kind which it was desirable that the House should not entertain. In consequence of the operation of the Slavery Abolition Bill, there might be a great falling off in the production of sugar, and it would not be wise to legis- late on this question until the effect of measure was seen. Mr. Ewart might perhaps say that his motion went merely to declare the expediency of equalizing the duties on sugar and coffee ; but he need not tell him, that if the House carried his motion, it ought to be followed by some practical effect, and that must be an alteration in the existing law. He trusted that the House would not bind itself at the present moment to any alteration of the law. He did not mean to give any opinion or pledge himself in any way on this question; and not wishing to meet the motion with a negative, the only mode left him of dealing with it was by moving the previous question. My. Lvettx, Mr. PEASE, and Mr. DAVENPORT, supported the reso- lution. - Mr. P. THOMSON quite agreed with the object proposed by Mr. Ewart's resolution ; for he thought that it would be inexpedient eventually to prevent the East India merchants from sending over pro- duce on the same terms as West India merchants ; and he only opposed its adoption because he considered that present circumstances were not propitious to its being followed up.

Mr. EWART then withdrew his motion.

7. SUGAR REFINERY BILL. This bill went through the Committee of the House of Commons on Friday.

8. BLOCKADE OF THE PORTUGUESE PORTS. In the House of Lords, on Tuesday, the Marquis of LONDONDERRY moved for " copies of all communications from commanders of his Majesty's ships of war rela- tive to the blockade of the Portuguese ports, addressed to the Secre- tary for Foreign Affairs before the 25th instant." He spoke et some length, and in a very desultory manner, in support of this motion; and contended, that at the time the notice of the blockade was issued, none in fact existed ; and that even now Don Pedro had not the power to render it efficient. He strongly reprobated the conduct of Lord Pal- merston in the transaction, and asserted that he was guided entirely by Talleyrand in his foreign policy. The Marquis also adverted to the conduct of the Duke of Sussex in presiding at a public meeting in honour of Captain Napier, who had disobeyed the orders of the King and broke through the laws. Such • conduct • in one of the Royal Family he considered highly unbecoming.

Earl GREY defended the conduct of Government at length ; and re- fused, at the present time, to grant the papers called for.

The Duke of CLEVELAND expressed his approbation of the foreign policy of Ministers.

The Duke of SUSSEX defended himself from the attack of Lord Londonderry. He merely attended the meeting to express his opinion of the bravery and high character of Captain Napier.

The motion was finally withdrawn.

9. NATIONAL EDUCATION. Mr. ROEBUCK, OR Tuesday, rose to move the following resolution ; which he supported in a speech of great length.

"That this House will early in the ensuing session consider the means of establishing a system of national education."

He said, he was well aware of the unpopularity of the subject ; that there was nothing in it to raise the wonder and admiration of the ignorant many—no party nor individual purposes to be obtained by promoting its design—nothing, in short, to be gained by it, but the pure, unalloyed benefit of the community at large. For so unpopular a cause he could only hope to obtain a brief, a very brief hearing. To obtain the consent of the House to his resolution, he would make a very few observations upon three points,—first, the benefits that would accrue from the general education of the People; secondly, the reasons why Government should itself supply the means of this education; and thirdly, he would give an outline of a plan by which every inhabitant of the British,erapire might receive the instruction requisite for the well- being of society. He then proceeded to expose the falsehood of the no- tion that education consisted merely in learning reading, writing, and accounts.

Putting a hammer and saw into a man's hand does not make him a carpenter —putting a flute into his hands does not make him a musician; in both cases you give him certain instruments, which, if he have the knowledge requisite, he may use to plod purposes, but if he do not possess it, they will prove either useless or mischievous. So may it happen with the instruments of knowledge. Unless the mind be trained to their exercise—unless the will and the power to turn them to good purposes be conferred, not only will they be useless, idle powers, but they may be made eminently mischievous. Education meant the framing of the mind of the individual so as to enable him to become a useful and virtuous member of society in the various relations of life. It meant making him a good child, a good parent, a-good neighbour, a good citizen, in short, a good man. Be al- luded to the bad effects of the ignorance of the People upon the politi- cal Government of the country. The People were in the habit of ex- pecting the Government to remedy evils which it was utterly out of its power to remedy. • Now, one of the first, one of the most important results from a proper educa- tion of the People, would be a thorough understanding on their part of the cir- cumstances on which their happiness depended, and of the powers by which those circumstances were controlled. They would learn what a Government could, and what a Government could not do to relieve their distresses—they would learn what depended on themselves, what on others—what evils resulted. from evil authority, what from popular ignorance and popular vice.Of all the knowledge that could be conferred on a people, this is the most essential ; let them, once understand thoroughly their social condition, and we should have no more unmeaning discontents—no wild and futile schemes of reform; we should not have a stack-burning peasantry—a sturdy pauper population—a monopoly- seeking manufacturing class ; we should not have a middle class directing. all their efforts to the repeal of a single tax, or to the wild plan of universal, rob- bery; neither would there be immoral landlords wishing to maintain a danger- ous corn monopoly, nor foolish consumers, who would suffer it to remain. We should have right efforts directed to right ends, and a people industrious, ho- nest, tolerant, and happy.

It bad been often stated, that by giving the working classes educa- tion, you rendered them dissatisfied with their condition, and unfit for the laborious duties of life : but this could only be the case when thee circumstance of having been educated conferred a distinction ; and there could be no distinction when education was general. He dwelt upon the terrible consequences which must ensue from leaving the mass of the people uneducated, when it was quite evident that before long the hitherto inert and submissive multitude, the subject many, would become paramount in the State.

The necessity of making the education of the People the business of the Government, was recognized by the most enlightened nations on the earth. In Prussia, Saxony, Saxe Weimar, France, and the United States, the Government had taken upon itself the task of in:, structing the people. There were objections, however, to this.itAere ference of the Government. It would be dangerous, it was said, ta put such an instrument into its hands, lest thereby the public rnin4shonl4 be debauched, and slavish ideas and habit* aloe be propagskadA his

answer to this objection was twofold,—first, according to his plan, the Besides these, he would have a Minister of Public Instruction) a persons who would have to determine in the last resort on the subject high officer of state, with a seat in the Cabinet.

matter of instruction, should be the People themselves ; and secondly, The business of his office would be a general supervision of all the national he did not admire the policy of those, although that policy had been schools in the kingdom. He would have to determine, on the application of invariably followed by the friends of the popular cause in England, the School Committees, what extra schools should be built. He would appor- who thought it their duty on all occasions to tie the hands of Govern- tion the sum of money to be given to each district, for masters, for books, and ment, which, as they supposed, could only be good when totally with- repairs, and a hundred other things. out power. Again, it was said, that individual exertions would be Mr.. Roebuck then alluded to the great deficiency of good elementary relaxed if the system he advocated was adopted. He saw no ream:in to books, and the difficulty of supplying it. He concluded by calling upon apprehend any such result : on the contrary, he bad great hope, that in the House to consider the subject with calmness and candour, in the consequence of an improved plan, a much more constant and affec- full certainty that their constituents and the whole country would fairly tionate communication between the poor and the rich would result from appreciate their motives, and be grateful for the benefits conferred upon it. There would be no gratuitous instruction : the children of the them. poor man would receive it only from the State. Mr. GROPE seconded the motion, in a brief speech.

the means of popular education in its present state; and that was the hitherto buck's observations, admitted the great importance of the subject ; but imperfect success of all private efforts to educate the People. If the matter objected to several parts of the plan, especially to those which related were one of minor import, we might perhaps be justified in leaving it still to to compulsory education and the interference of Government. He chance ; but, as it involved the entire happiness of the community—as without a much more complete system of education this happiness could never properly hoped that, as it was too late in the session to legislate upon the sub- be provided for, all tampering with the difficulty—all hesitation or carelessness ject, Mr. Roebuck would withdraw his motion. as to pursuing the course open before u§, was in the highest degree criminal as Mr. O'CONNELL hoped also that the resolution would not be passed well as absurd. We all of us appeared to feel the necessity of supervising our to a division. Mr. Roebuck had referred to the French system of Criminal Code—our Code of Prison Discipline—our Poor-laws ; lout all these education— were only off-shoots of or adjuncts to a system of education. But he could only have done so as he did not know what the principle of the He would now proceed to detail the manner, to give a rough sketch Government of France was, as those did who had had actual experience of it. of the plan, by which this general education might be effected. He He could tell hint, that the object of the Liberal party in France was to un- would oblige, by law, every child in Great Britain and Ireland to be a christianize that country. (" Oh, oh ! ") It was of little importance to them regular attendant at school. The State had a right to demand that this whether a man was a Deist or an Atheist. They were the party who endea- should be seen to by the parent, and, in the case of his neglect, to in- voured to enforce the education plan of the Normal School. That plan of the terfere itself for that purpose. He denied that this interference would Normal School was to prevent that sort of education which the People wished rob the people of rational freedom. -In many other ways the State in- terfered between the parent and child for the protection of the latter, Sir ROBERT INGLIS made some observations relative to the mode in and no one deemed it a tyrannical interference. If the People really which the two Universities had acquired their property, and the inte- believed the House of Commons to be solicitous about theie welfare, rest which the clergy generally took in the subject of education.

all objections which would at first be raised to a system of compulsory Mr. HUME advocated the adoption of Mr. Roebuck's resolution. education would soon disappear. The children of any sect differing Sir ROBERT PEEL opposed it. He doubted the policy of the House from that of the school which they attended, should not be compelled entering into any abstract resolution. He objected to the interference to join in the religious teaching or exercises in use there. Peculiar of Government with the instruction of the People ; and thought it masters of their own sect should be charged with their religious instruc- wa.s by no means proved, though it was assumed, that their education tion. After dwelling some time on the necessity of impartinga higher was imperfect.

species of education to the poor than merely reading and writing, Mr. Mr. ROEBUCK, in reference to Mr. O'Connell's remarks upon the Roebuck went on to remark upon the necessity of political instruction French system of education, replied, to the well being of the poorer classes. It was essential, for example, That of all the observations that had been made, those which had surprised that the mass of labourers should know what circumstances govern the him most were those that had fallen from Mr. O'Connell; and of all the un- rates of wages. founded attacks, that upon the French Government and on M. Cousin was the If this had been understood, did any one believe that we should have had corn- most unwarranted. (" Hear, hear, hear I") To confound persons and bination-laws on the one hand, or combinations on the other ? Could any one things in this manner together, and to say that a whole body of men wanted to believe that an enraged, because badly paid population, would then have burned put down religion, was highly unbecoming, and unworthy of the candid manner ricks in order to raise wages ? or that we should see unhappy and futile attempts in which all persons should be treated. He referred to the book of M. Cousin, at strikes? Knowing on what the rate of wages really depended, the enlightened in which it was distinctly said, that nothing could be effectually done for the labourer would have pursued the only mode by which that rate can be increased. educ Ilion of the poorer classes without the aid of the Clergy of the country. i

He would have done t peaceably, but certainly. Did that look like a wish to put down religion?

a threefold nature. instead of assertions, which he so often hazarded and was forced to First, schools; second, masters; third, money, whether acquired by taxes or retract. otherwise. The schools, as the plan would be confined to the education of the The motion was withdrawn. poor, are of three separate classes:—first, Infitnt Schools; second, Schools of 10. JEwisit DISABILITIES BILL. In the House of Lords, on Thurs- Industry ; and third, Normal Schools, or schools for the instruction of masters ; day, Lord BEXLEY moved the second reading of this bill; and spoke at separately for boys and girls. As the purpose is to educate everybody, there ought to be in every parish in the kingdom at least one infant school, and one some length in favour of it. He concluded with reminding their Lord- school of industry, and this without any exception. As the law would he im.• ships, that the bill had been passed by large majorities in the House of perative in demanding the presence of the children, justice would demand that Commons ; and as that House now represented a greater mass of the the schools should be placedwithin their teach. In all cases where the size of community than formerly, its decisions ought to have a proportionably the parish demanded a greater number of schools more than one would be greater weight with them. erected. Many expedients have been mentioned, by which the richer classes The Archbishop of CANTERBURY agreed with much that Lord might be brought into intimate and affectionate union with the poorer. In Bexley had said, but did not arrive at the same conclusion. He thought every part of England, London, perhaps, only excepted, this might effectually that Parliament was the place of all others where Jews of talent and in- be done by /ending the children of both classes to the same school,— for example, formation would be of the least service. His great objection to the to an Infant School. By his supposition, this school would be regulated accord- ing to the highest state of knowledge existing at the time, respecting the rearing admission of the Jews to seats in the Legislature, was one of principle : and education of infants; and if the children of the tradesmen and gentlemen he thought the religion of the country should be Christian. He should were sent (not by compulsion, but voluntarily) to the school at which the poor feel himself wanting in what was due to the Author of our holy religion cotter's child was taught, much real benefit would be conferred on the last, and if he did not vote against the t:1/., Excepting the privilege of sitting no slight good reaped by the former. in Parliament, he was willing to accede to the Jews every other privi- The Schools of Industry would impart the knowledge of some trade, lege and advantage. He concluded by moving that the bill be read a as well as what might be termed scholarship ; also of natural history, second time that day six months. music, and singing (as was done in Germany), the nature of the phy- The Archbishop of DuntrN felt bound to support the bill. Those sical system, so as to enable people generally to preserve their health, who opposed the removal of restrictions on any class of his Majesty's and of some portion of political economy, subjects, were bound to show the use of those restrictions ; and if good The Normal Schools would be instituted for the instruction of reason could not be shown for their maintenance, they should at once

teachers. be removed. He defended the admission of Jews to seats in the Legis-

Such young men as determined on the vocation of a teacher, would, upon lature, on the ground that no real danger could arise to the established having made at the School of Industry certain advances in scholarship, be re- religion from it. Papists and Dissenters were allowed to legislate for ceived by the Normal School upon examination; and on having gone through the Church, of which they were not members. He considered that the the various stages of those schools, which would occupy their time till they Jews, in consequence of their being, by their peculiar tenets, still reached the age of twenty, they would receive a certificate constituting them further removed from the Church, were therefore less dangerous to it. teachers of National Schools. The course of instruction at these Normal Schools, Their Lordships knew, that during the domination of the Presbyterian party he would not touch on, as it would necessarily require great consideration, and in this country, all the Protestant Clergy were turned out of their benefices; would not be determined on without the most grave and deliberate inquiry, and he confessed, that if the question were simply one of, whether it would be With regard to the funds for the support of these schools, if private better for a man to live under a Government, daring little from him in reli- contributions and the existing funds dedicated to the purposes of in- gious professions, or differing much, he would be, III due regard for life, and struction should prove insufficient,. a iiix should be laid on for that property, and personal liberty, bound to choose that Government whose religious purpose. opinions were most at variance with his own. For example, it would be better The machinery would be simple,—first, there would be the people acting as for a Protestant to live under the Mahomedan Governments of Turkey and electors. He should wish that the head of every family should possess a voice; Persia, than under the Christian Governments of Spain or Portugal. The but if this should be considered too democratic, why then every person who existence of a Christian legislature was to the sectarian no security for life or contributed towards the funds by which the school's would be maintained, property. The persecutions which Christian sects have exercised against each should be endowed with this privilege. The iihole country should then be other were greater than any which had been exercised against Christians by the divided into school districts, in each of which there should at least be one school. unbelievers. He confessed that it would be improper for Jews to legislate for In the government of the school or schools of each school district, the people the affairs of the Church, and he thought it was an anomaly which ought having the privilege of voting, should elect every y-ear five persons, who would speedily to be eut an end to ; and suggested that a Commission might be up-. be called, say the School Committee,- and it should be their business to select pointed, to which all purely ecclesiastical matters should be referred. But this and dismiss the master, to supervise the school, and, in the last resort, to deter- did not apply to civil matters; and he did not think they were justified in ex- mine on the instruction that should be then afforded. Being fairly chosen by eluding Jews from legislating in such matters, when they were compelled to the People, it may justly be supposed, that they would represent their opinions • obey the laws, and pay taxes. and being selected from a large number of persons, they would, probably, inthel He concluded by saying that it was a scandal to oru faith to suppose certainly, be among the most instructed persons of the community. that it was so fragile that it could not be touched ; and by reminding

answer to this objection was twofold,—first, according to his plan, the Besides these, he would have a Minister of Public Instruction) a

There was one other and more potent argument, however, against leaving Lord ALTHORP, who had listened most most carefully to Mr. Roe- the means of popular education in its present state; and that was the hitherto buck's observations, admitted the great importance of the subject ; but imperfect success of all private efforts to educate the People. If the matter objected to several parts of the plan, especially to those which related were one of minor import, we might perhaps be justified in leaving it still to to compulsory education and the interference of Government. He chance ; but, as it involved the entire happiness of the community—as without a much more complete system of education this happiness could never properly hoped that, as it was too late in the session to legislate upon the sub- be provided for, all tampering with the difficulty—all hesitation or carelessness ject, Mr. Roebuck would withdraw his motion. as to pursuing the course open before u§, was in the highest degree criminal as Mr. O'CONNELL hoped also that the resolution would not be passed well as absurd. We all of us appeared to feel the necessity of supervising our to a division. Mr. Roebuck had referred to the French system of Criminal Code—our Code of Prison Discipline—our Poor-laws ; lout all these education— were only off-shoots of or adjuncts to a system of education. But he could only have done so as he did not know what the principle of the He would now proceed to detail the manner, to give a rough sketch Government of France was, as those did who had had actual experience of it. of the plan, by which this general education might be effected. He He could tell hint, that the object of the Liberal party in France was to un- would oblige, by law, every child in Great Britain and Ireland to be a christianize that country. (" Oh, oh ! ") It was of little importance to them regular attendant at school. The State had a right to demand that this whether a man was a Deist or an Atheist. They were the party who endea- should be seen to by the parent, and, in the case of his neglect, to in- voured to enforce the education plan of the Normal School. That plan of the terfere itself for that purpose. He denied that this interference would Normal School was to prevent that sort of education which the People wished rob the people of rational freedom. -In many other ways the State in-

to have.

terfered between the parent and child for the protection of the latter, Sir ROBERT INGLIS made some observations relative to the mode in and no one deemed it a tyrannical interference. If the People really which the two Universities had acquired their property, and the inte- believed the House of Commons to be solicitous about theie welfare, rest which the clergy generally took in the subject of education.

education would soon disappear. The children of any sect differing Sir ROBERT PEEL opposed it. He doubted the policy of the House from that of the school which they attended, should not be compelled entering into any abstract resolution. He objected to the interference to join in the religious teaching or exercises in use there. Peculiar of Government with the instruction of the People ; and thought it masters of their own sect should be charged with their religious instruc- wa.s by no means proved, though it was assumed, that their education tion. After dwelling some time on the necessity of impartinga higher was imperfect.

The machinery by which instruction would be imparted would be of It would be better if Mr. O'Connell would bring forward documents,

a threefold nature. instead of assertions, which he so often hazarded and was forced to poor, are of three separate classes:—first, Infitnt Schools; second, Schools of 10. JEwisit DISABILITIES BILL. In the House of Lords, on Thurs- Industry ; and third, Normal Schools, or schools for the instruction of masters ; day, Lord BEXLEY moved the second reading of this bill; and spoke at separately for boys and girls. As the purpose is to educate everybody, there ought to be in every parish in the kingdom at least one infant school, and one some length in favour of it. He concluded with reminding their Lord- school of industry, and this without any exception. As the law would he im.• ships, that the bill had been passed by large majorities in the House of perative in demanding the presence of the children, justice would demand that Commons ; and as that House now represented a greater mass of the the schools should be placedwithin their teach. In all cases where the size of community than formerly, its decisions ought to have a proportionably the parish demanded a greater number of schools more than one would be greater weight with them. the House that this bill'in fact only permitted Christians, irthey wer e so minded, to return Jews to Parliament.

, The Earl of WINCHILSEA opposed, and the Marquis of WEST- MINSTER, who regretted that scarcely.one of his Mtwara Ministers was present at the discussion, supported the.bilL The Bishop of LONDON opposed the measure, simply and solely from the duty he owed to the constitution of the country.

• That constitution, God be thanked, was a Christian constitation. Perhaps he might be asked why so? Because Christianity was part and parcel of the law of the land.

He did not apprehend being outvoted in Parliament, hut he dreaded lest the people of England should be impressed with the notion that the Legislature was indifferent to the true religion.

He allowed the Moral worth of the Jews. He had under hie care a large parish in which many of them resided ; and he found them a most moral, libe- ral, and loyal class of persons : therefore, it was not without the deepest feeling of pain that he felt bound to oppose them on the present orcesion.

The Bishop of CHICHESTER briefly defended the bill. The Jews were the elder brothers of Christians, and he did not see so much dif- ference between them.

Lord CLIFFORD begged to ask the Lord Chancellor a question. Were the Jews born in and to the privileges of the Constitution?

If so, they were entitled to all the franchises of that constitution, except some clear and especial case was made out against them. Such, he believed, was the opinion of several great men—Mr. Fox among others—awl such was the ground on which he wished to argue the question.

Lord BROUGHAM felt no hesitation in answering Lord Clifford's question : it was not only his own opinion, but likewise that of the soundest lawyers of the country, that his Majesty's subjects, professing the Jewish religion, were born to all the rights, immunities, and privi- leges, of his Majesty's other subjects, excepting so far as positive enact- ments of law deprived them of those rights, immunities, and privileges.

Some difficulties had been raised as to whether the Jews ought to be consi- dered as natural-born subjects of his Majesty. There were many authori- tie- for holding the Jews, nut only as aliens, but in a state of perpetual hostility to Christianity. Those opinions, however, in practice and in effect, were now exploded.

The law in the Statute-book was clear and precise.

Every statutory enactment which affected the Jews was expressly framed with the purpose and avowed intention not of excluding them, but other parties. Like many enactments in the penal code, they originally struck at one class of I eiigionists only, and the letter of those enactments ultimately burdened other cleises. Soon after the Rebellion, his Majesty's subjects, the Jews, having been struck at unintentionally, and required to take a certain oath, and include them- selves in the registry,—a form of procedure expressly intended to affect the Jae cobins,—some attempts were made to relieve them. It was about this time the Oath of Abjuration was required, and the words "on the true faith of a Chris- tian" were inserted in the oath. An act was passed in the reign of George the First, to relieve the Jews from the necessity of repeating these words in the oath.

Lord Brougham then defended the bill ; and pointed out the absur- dity of supposing that rietrictirs, such as were sought to be removed, could prevent the admi,:doit of irreligious and unscrupulous men into Parliament. Loi ds She fte:li ry, and _Bolingbroke, and Mr. Wilkes, all were members of the I n. ; and, though notorious unbelievers, took the oath "out the tree fele li of a Christian."

The Duke of Gi.OuCE:,TER opposed, and the Duke of SUSSEX, in a brief speech, gave his hearty support to the bill.

The Duke of WELLINGToN saw no grounds whatever for passing the bill.

The case of the Jews stood on a verv different footing to that er the Catholics and other Dissenters to whom relief had been afforded. Lord Breugliam had referred to certain acts of Parliament, by which indulgences were granted to Jews in the very words of the present bill. But these indulgences were granted to Jews in the Colonies—in Canada, Jamaica, and Barbadoes—and what was the reason for this ? Was there no State necessity for it? Certainly there was. European inhabitants were required in the Colonies, and English inhabitants especially; and it was in order to encourage their settlement in Cauada, that by the 7th of George III. (he believed), these relaxations were made in favour of the Jews—relaxations which were also adopted in the other instances alluded to. But no such necessity existed in the present instance, nor did any reason, equally forcible, now occur.

Lords SEaertairE and HOWDEN spoke a few words in opposition to, and the Earl of Gosford in favour of the measure.

Lord BEXLEY briefly replied, and the House divided; when there appeared--

Content present. 29 Proxies 35

—54 Not content present 44 Proxies 60

—104- Majority against the second reading

So the bill is lost.

11. RETRENCHMENT. Mr. CHARLES BULLER, on Tuesday, after in- effectual attempts OR the part Of Mr. STANLEY and Lord ALTHORP to induce him not to bring forward his motion, moved the following reso- lution.

"That it is the opinion of this House that, in order to satisfy the just expec- tations of the People, it is necessary that such extensive reductions be made in the public expenditure as shall effectually diminish the burdens of the country; and that it is the duty of his Majesty's Ministers to make such arrangements- previous to the next session of Parliament, respecting the effective and non- eftictive services of the Military, Naval, Civil, and Colonial establishments, as may be necessary for the attainment of this object."

He supported it in a long speech, full of details and figures, which, from his low tone of voice and rapid delivery, was very imperfectly heard.

At the close of Mr. Buller's speech &member moved that the House be counted; but as thirty-nine members beside the Speaker were pre- sent; the debate proceeded.

Mt. BUCKINGHAM urged the-adoption of the resolution,

Lord- Avraoap-opposed it, as reading to no practical.good. He then, moved the following amendment, as he, did not like.to.meet the ratan- tion.with a direct negative. • -" That while this /Muse ach satisfaction, With satfaction, that by the reduc- tion of the public expenditure 'and by the financial arrangements carried into effect, there has been a redaction of taxation in the' last and the present session to an amount exceedint 3,000,000i annually, they feel it their duty to affirm the determination to which they have alreadycomey to adhere to the just prin- ciples of wise economy, and to apply those principles to all departments of the State, paying a due regard to the national engagements and to the interest. of the public service."

Mr. FRYER bore testimony to the honourable and honest characters of his Majesty's Ministers • But let them beware how they did any thing which might again bring Mt* power the man who would levy taxes with quant. sueff. of cold steel and leadea bullets; and yet he doubted whether, if the Duke came in to-morrow, the first act of his administration would not be to propose a repeal of the House and Window Taxes.

Mr. H. L. BULWER, Mr. HOME, and Colonel EvaNs, joined in re- questing Mr. Buller not to oppose the amendment; which was then carried, without a division.

12. ASSESSED TAXES REDUCTION BILL. The House went into Committee on this bill on Friday.

Mr SPRING RICE said, that as the subject would be discussed at a future time, he should not enter into the details of this bill, which it was necessary to pass preparatory to the other measure. He should move a clause to give relief to licensed victuallers, the whole of whom would be relieved to the extent of half their house-duty; and another clause to place the horses employed by market-gardeners on the same footing as horses employed in husbandry.

In answer to questions from several members, Mr. RICE said, that the bill would repeal the tax on bakers' servants and certain persons employed in counting-houses. No relief was granted in the ease of houses used as schools ; it being found impossible to frame an enact- ment that would effect the object-in view, since the having a single pupil for a single day might be made a ground of exemption.

13. SUPPLY; MILITIA. In a Committee of Supply, on Friday, 243,500/. were voted for the Militia, on the motion of Mr. ELLICE.

14. ,MR. O'CONNELL AND THE REPORTERS. In the House of Com- mons, on Monday, Mr. O'CONNELL moved that the Order of the Day be read, "that John Joseph Lawson and James William Lawson be called to the bar of the House."

Mr. METHUEN moved, that the said order be discharged. In making this motion, he denied that he was actuated by personal feelings of hos- tility to Mr. O'Connell. He was opposed to the present proceeding because it would place the House in a situation of great difficulty. It would compel the House to adopt a course which had always if possible been avoided, and which he trusted would continue to be avoided. The dispute between Mr. O'Connell and the reporters did not originate in Parliament, but in some expressions which the former had made use of out of doors. He protested against the House being drawn in as a party in a private dispute of one of its members. Mr. O'Connell corn- plained of the partial system of reporting, but none had profited more than he had by this partiality. The Tralee Mercury reported his speeches exclusively; and three Dublin newspapers had, throughout the session, reported theni without giving the triumphant replies of Mr. Stanley. He would say one word with respect to the reporters. He did not mean to justify them for the course they had pursued, but human nature was frail ; and he put it to any gentleman whether the charge made by Mi. O'Connell iigainst the reporters, of being guilty of " del:berate falsehood,'' was not one calculated to rouse all the feelings of a man, as well as of a gentle- moan? He had made inquiry into the characters of those gentlemen who usually acted as reporters, and he had every reason to believe that they were gentlemen of education ; ninny of them were studying for the bar; and there were in- stances, and proud instances, of some of them having risen to the highest honours of the state.

Mr. ROBINSON seconded the motion The dispute between Mr. O'Connell and the reporters originated in circumstances which by no means involved a breach of the privileges of the House. Upon a for- mer occasion, a similar course to the one now recommended by Mr. O'Connell was pursued. He found that in 1771, the last time a question directly bearing on the point at issue, was brought forward, the House of Commons was induced, at the in- stance of Colonel Onslow, to summon to the bar the printers and publishers of two newspapers of the time, for publishing reports of the debates, and the con- sequence of that step was, that the House got involved in a discussion which lasted from the 8th of February until the 30th of April. If the House took the trouble to refer to the reports of that period, they would find that this assertion of their privilege gave rise to a succession of angry debates, caused Feat inter- ruption to the progress of public business, created much public excitement and commotion, and led to the ultimate imprisonment of two nembers of the House in the Tower. ( Great laughter.) At length the House contrived to escape from the difficulties in which it had involved itself, but in a manner which did not tend to raise its character or add to its dignity.

He bore his testimony to the accuracy and fidelity with which the re. ports were made.

Mr. O'CONNELL said, he beard the amendment proposed with con- siderable surprise. When he first complained that the reports of the present session were exceedingly defective and, to his knowledge, de- signedly false, then Mr. Methuen's kindness induced him to applaud him. He had understood him to say that he bad indeed been misre- ported— Mr. METHUEN—" I said no such thing."

Mr. O'CONNELL thought he had. He had, however, said that he war conneeted,with a Tralee paper. Mr. METnuEN—" I declare I did not. ' I said—but I am in the re. collection of the House, and will not repeat it."

Mr. O'CONNELL.—" I heard the Honourable Member say so, if the House did not."

Mr.. METnumr—" What I said was, that Mr. O'Connell's speeches were printed-in that paper, but none of those of his opponents."

Mr. O'CONNELL said that the three Dublin papers alluded to, ha& only one reporter in London, and that reporter was opposed to him. He was sorry to see that there was a shrinking oa the part of the meat.. ben of that House.

The cause of their quarrel was out of the- Honse, but the reporters had at- tacked him by declaring (aswas,stateri in the Times) that they would not ref, port what he said in that House. By the privileges of the House, no publica- tion could take place except by the permission of the Speaker, nor could any evidence of Committees of the House be published without his permission. He should be very glad that the debates of that House should go fully abroad, but then they should also be under the correction of the Speaker. (Laughter.) It was not right that reports of what was said in that House should be misstated; they ought to be correct, if reported at all. If papers went on publishing the business of Parliament, and that incorrectly or falsely, the only remedy was to prevent the reporting of any.

The monopoly of the press was become a domineering aristocracy, and it was said that nothing could put it down; but he had put his band to the business and he would try.

The reporters boasted that they had suceeded in putting down some of the greatest men the country had produced—that they had overcome a member of the present Administration—nay, that they had overcome the Lord Chancellor himself; and they added to the list the names of Tierney and Windham, the last of whom had conciliated them by a dinner. But they should not put him down, and that they would find.

Colonel EVANS said, that Mr. O'Connell greatly overrated the power of the newspapers. Gentlemen of character inferior to that of Mr. O'Connell were not at their mercy.

He should not himself have had the power of addressing the House at all had it depended upon that newspaper,. for it had advocated his defeat upon two distinct and separate occasions. Indeed, the Times and the Morning Chronicle had advocated the cause of every candidate who had been defeated since the last general election. Did not that circumstance prove that those papers had no in- fluence save when their power was exercised with justice? (" Hear, hear! ") They had recently been advocating the claims of an honourable member of that House to a judicial office in the City of London. Everyone who knew the cha- racter of that honourable gentleman knew that he had every qualification to de- serve success he had failed, however, in consequence of their recommendation in carrying his election, and been triumphed over by a gentleman of much in- ferior ability. Sir ROBERT Itrcms observed, that the complaint was not that the printers of the Times had, but that they had not violated the privileges of the House. They had publicly d&flared, that, as far as Mr. O'Con- nell was concerned, they would not violate the orders of the House. It was said that wewere living under the irresponsible despotism of the reporters— He hoped that those who knew him did not suppose that he was a man likely to submit to such despotism. He hoped that the House would recollect, that some time ago he had attacked, not those reluctantes dracones the reporters, but the editors of the papers themselves. He had attacked those who commented on the proceedings of the House, and who had called a certain portion of them the deliberate lacqueys of the Peers. He felt for one that he did not deserve such language, and therefore he had deemed it his duty to bring the editor of the Times to the bar of that House.

He had seen a letter in the Times from the gentleman who was at- tacked by name in the House on Friday last.

• The gentleman in question he had never seen, but he had made reference to his friendship with Sir James Mackintosh ; and when he said that any man who was honoured with the friendship of Sir James Mackintosh might now be con. sidered as the equal of the honourable and learned gentleman, he meant no of- fence to him. He repeated that he had never seen that individual ; but if it were as he said, that he was the friend of Sir James Mackintosh, lie was equal to any gentleman in that house ; and therefore some allowance ought to be made for the irritated feelings of such a man.

He alluded to the great power possessed by the House.

He could not but feel that the privileaes of that House, which authorized them

to attack private persons, and then to act as judges in their own cause, which membors of the Inns of Court—si,ne of them practisaig luny:4(ns, and alt authorized them to punish summarily all libels upon themselves, and to vent, movina in the ranli of gentlemen ; and they naturally felt :ore at the de.igna- without fear or shame, libels upon others, were privileges which ought to be exercised with great caution. While we retained the power of punishing men thus summarily for libels on our proceedings, we should be cautious how we proceeded in defending language which attacks the character and livelihood of . those who are as entirely gentlemen as ourselves. ("Hear, hear, hear! ") Mr. O'CONNELL (according to the Times) repeated the assertions to which Mr. E. Nugent gave so direct a contradiction on Monday ; and further attributed to that gentleman the writing of a report which was written by another reporter.

Mr. HARVEY said, that

He had never had any personal communication with the reporters ; he had never, on any occasion, corrected his own speeches; and he had had occasion to think that a slight measure, and only a slight measure of justice' had been dealt out to him. He did not, however, complain. He recollected that he had once had occasion to communicate with a reporter, in consequence of a note which one of them had written to him for certain documents connected with his speech on the-Woods and Forests. He had gone into the Gallery, and in a small ante-room he found several of them together. He was induced to ask them how it hap- pened that- speecheawhich he read in the morning had so little coincidence, in point of extent, with the speeches he heard over night ; and one of them an- swered him—and he believed that there was great good sense in the observation —"Do you wish the newspapers to write themselves down? If we stated to the public one half of the nonsense "—Mr. Harvey believed nonsense was the word—" which is spoken in that House, we should soon write ourselves out of existenee." (A laugh.) And his experience had subsequently led him to con- cur in-the correctness of that reply.

He thought Mr. Buckingham's suggestion, of allowing each mem- ber only a quarter of an hour to speak, was a very good one. The • Speaker should have an hour-glass and a bell, and say when the time tame—" Sir, your sand is out, your knell has rung, you must sit down ;" the reporters would then have to say (as at the termination of the morning sittings, when they merely said, "The Speaker left the chair," without mentioning the state in which he left the business), "here the honourable member's sand ran out," and so leave him. He was per- suaded that Mr. O'Connell thought he had just ground of complaint against the reporters : he says, "Let me have a Committee, grant me a hearing, and I will prove that I have been misrepresented."

If so, why let him have his Committee, and the matter will drop there. If the charge is made. out,. Mr. NUgent will not stand quite as well as I could 'wish; and we maysend our compliments to Mrs. Brodie and say that her gen. man—(Loud laughter)—has not conducted himself as he ought. ( Continued laughter.) His connexion with the House—that is, his- connexion with the paper—would cease. Sir M. W. Hamm-said, he had voted for Mr. O'Connell's motion en a limner eventing ; butnove that he fbund that the quarrel arose, not fiom any thing said in Parliament, but at a tavern dinner, he could not think tiatthere was any breach of privilege in what the reporters mai

Mr.. C. O'DWYER supported Mr. O'Connell's motion.

It was not the question whether reporters should be allowed to report in that House, but whether they should have a power to exercise as they please in sup- pressing the speeches of honourable members. In his mind the suppressio uers was equal to the suggestio falsi. It was as bad that an individual should ds- pend on their caprice as to whether they would insert his speeches or not, as it would be if they put into his mouth words which he had never uttered.

Mr. HUME was not sorry to see the House in a situation of some difficulty. He had some years ago pointed out the folly of their pre- sent regulations ;. but he had been regularly answered that they were part of the wisdom of our ancestors, and could not be dispensed with..

No one could deny that the reports-were honestly given. He did not at that moment intend to enter into the personal question now raised ; he did not in- tend to consider it either as the question of Mr. O'Connell or of Mr. E. Nugent. He thought that the question should be decided on broad public grounds, and upon them alone. If the House should decide that the Standing Order ought to be maintained, then the House must deprive the country of the publication of the debates in—(Mr. 0' Connell—" In the Times.") "No," said Mr. Hume, "not in the Times only, but in every other paper." The question now Wasp whether any man or any set of men should be permitted to laugh at that Houss, or whether the House would support its own orders, and not allow the debates to go forth unless they were freely and impartially given, in consequence of the arguments of all parties being inserted in the reports. • * Let an au- thorized reporter be appointed. If that were not done, he could not see how Mr. O'Connell could give up his motion for acting on the present Stand- ine° Order. Mr. BANNERMAN was authorized by the reporters to deny most posi- tively the charges of wilful misrepresentation brought against them by Mr. O'Connell. He was glad to see Mr. O'Connell was beginning to break the neck of newspaper monopoly, by entering into competi- tion with them himself, and beginning to be a newspaper proprietor; and if he would withdraw the present motion, he would subscribe to the paper.

Mr. O'CONNELL denied that he had or should have any thing to do with being the proprietor of a newspaper.

Mr. BANNERMAN said, he had received a resolution to that effect, signed by him.

Mr. O'Comar.r. said, that be only signed it as the chairman of a meeting.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that during the last twenty years the reports had been given with great accuracy and fidelity.

During fifteen of those twenty years he had held office' and during the whole of that time he had never received any communication flora any person con- nected with the press respecting slit manner in which his speeches had been re- ported. He had never during that time received any solicitation for any favour or patronage from any reporter ; and he believed he might say, that no applica- tion had been made to any of his colleagues while he was in office for any such, patronage or favour in consequence of any favour shown to them fot. having given their speeches fully. It had been said by Mr. O'Connell, that the reports in the Morning Newspapers were designedly false— Mr. O'CoNNtu.i.—" I meant in one paper only—the Times."

Sir Roemer Peer —" Then why commence by a motion for bring- ing up the proprietor of the Morning Chronicle ?" (" hear, liter! " lie understood that with the four papers against which be complained, some forty or fifty gentlemen were connected—some holding commissioir:in the Army am! in the Navv—s,veral having got academical edneation—everal of theta

tiou of their repoits as deliberate falsehoods.

He concluded by warning the llouee against being led into a very disagreeable predicament by adopting Mr. O'Connell's motion.

Lord ALTHORP disapproved of the motion, and hoped that Mr. O'Connell would withdraw it.

Mr. O'CONNELL said lie would persevere ; and called upon the Speaker to say if any precedent existed for refusing such a motion as his. He had looked into the Journals and found none.

The SPEAKER—" If the honourable and learned member says that he has looked into the Journals, I should be sorry off-hand to oppose my distant recollection to his recent inquiry ; but I must say, that my recollection is that many hours of the time of this House have been taken up, not in a debate whether a certain matter was a breach of privilege, but whether the question was upon the whole such a one that the House ought or ought not to interfere with regard to it. The mere right to interfere was never called in question."

The Order of the Day was then read. Mr. O'CONNELL moved that Messrs. Lawson be called in.

Mr. :METHUEN moved, as an amendment, that the order be discharged: Mr. E. J. STANLEY seconded the amendment.

Mr. TYNTE also supported it. He was present in Paris during the days of the Barricades, when be saw the people of France rise up in vindication of their rights, and when that assertiort had the effect of removing a king from his throne and of placing thereon a new dynasty; and he well remembered that one great cause of the revolution was the seeing some of the Paris papers of that day come forth as mere blanks, in. consequence of a censorship to which the people of France were not prepared to submit.

Mr. Fmr would not vote at all on the motion ; he was anxious to get the absurd order relative to the breach of privilege off their Journals.

Sir FRANCIS BURDETT said that the matter was beyond their juris- diction, and whatever they could do in it would be nugatory. Mr. AGLIONBY said, the reporters were not justified in deliberately suppressing the speech of any member. The question was not merely one of inaccuracy. If the reporters were unjustly attacked, let the resent it in an open and fair manner, and not by a suppression of speeches, and breach of contract to Which the were impliedly bound. A division then took place: for Mr. O'Connell's motion, 48; against it, 153; majority, 105. The order for calling Messrs. Lawson to the bar was then discharged. When the Gallery was reopened, the House was about to proceed ea the consideration in Committee of the Slavery Bill; but

Mr. O'CONNELL said—" Mr. Speaker, I think I see strangers ía. the Gallery."

The Gallery was then cleared, and the House debated with close • doors for the rest of the night.

Mr. ROBINSON then gave notice of a motion for Tuesday, for sus- Tending the Standing Order which excludes strafiers. [Tins notice was afterwards withdraw*, as Mr. O'Connell desisted from closing the Gallery.]

15: FACTORY BILL. On the motion Lord ALTHORP, the House, on

• Thursday, went into a Committee, pro forma, on' this bill. Certain amendments were agreed to, and the report is to be taken into consi- deration next Friday.

. 16. Lusa GRAND JURY BILL. At the morning sitting of the House of Commons on Friday, twenty-nine clauses Of this bill were agreed to in Committee, with a few unimportant amendments.

17. BANKRUPTCY Counr.• On Thursday, in a Committee of the • House, a resolution proposed by Sir Jonst CAMPBELL was agreed to, the object of which is to indemnify the Judges of the Bankruptcy Court for expenses to be incurred by them in going circuit for the purpose of _deciding cases under the Insolvent Debtors Act.

18. BURGLARY BILL. The report on this ,bill was received in the House of Lords on Friday, and the third reading will take place on 'Monday next.

19. MIDDLESEX MAGISTRATES. Colonel EVANS, on Wednesday, _asked the Solicitor-General, whether it was the intention of Govern-

• ment to institute some serious inquiry into the conduct of the Middle- ..sex Magistrates ?

Sir JOHN CAMPBELL said, that certainly the Magistrates had fallen -into some irregularities, and committed some blunders; but he did not ,know that they had done any thing for which they deserved to be pu- nished, or which made it necessary to inquire into their conduct.

Mr. ROTCH, their Chairman, amidst much interruption, defended the conduct of the Magistrates. They had only acted in conformity with the custom which had descended from their ancestors. He ad- mitted that he had received a notification, through the Crier of the , Court, that the Judges considered a new session should, be holden ; -but the Crier was so old and bewildered, that he scarcely knew what he was about. Mr. Botch proceeded at length to maintain the propriety of the Magistrates' conduct on the occasion referred to ; but was in- audible in the Gallery, owing to the noise which prevailed in the House. When he had Concluded, " Sir JOHN CAMPBELL said, It was now indisputable, from the gross misconduct which had been proved by the last speaker on the part of the Middlesex Magistrates, that some very .strong measures were necessary to be taken on the subject. (" Hear, hear !") 20. CORPORATION REFORM. Mr. JAMES KENNEDY moved, on Thursday, for leave to bring in a bill to regulate the election of Magis- :Inites in corporate towns and cities.

Mr. VERNON SMITH objected to the proposed bill, on two grounds, —both becauseit would apply to those boroughs only which seet mein- -bets to Parliament, and because it did not apply to Ireland. He thought also that any measure such as the /Imposed bill could not consistently be in progress until the present COonnissimr to inquire into the state of ...existing corporations should have finished their labours ; for he did not :see how an inquiry for the purposes of a specific legislation and the le- . gislative enactment itself could go on together.

- Lord A urnonr said, that he hoped the inquiries of the Corporatioo Commissioners would be completed before the next session of Parlia- ,snent. He should be sorry to be a member of any Government which would not attempt Corporation Reform. He also stated, in reference .to some remarks Of Sir John Campbell upon the municipal constitution of Dudley, that a bill was in a preparation, though it would not be passed this session, to ebnfer charters of incorporation upon all large towns.

• Mr. KENNEDY withdrew his motion.

Mr. O'CONNELL then obtained leave to bring in a bill for the reform of the Corporation of Dublin ; which, however, is not to be pressed ..this session,

21. CONDUCT OF THE EARL OF WARWICK. Mr. PETER gave notice, 071 Wednesday, that if the answer expected from the Earl of Warwick proved unsatisfactory, he should before the close of the ses- sion move an address to the King, praying that his Lordship be dis- missed from the Lord-Lieutenancy of the County of Warwick.

22. WARWICK ELECTION. On the motion of Sir R. FERGUSON, last night, a bill to prevent bribery and corruption in the borough of :Warwick was read a first time.

23. CARRICKFERGUS. In the House of Commons. on Monday, the order for the second reading of the Carrickfergus Disfranchisement _Bill was read and discharged, and a resolution come to that the Speaker should not issue a warrant for tile holding of any election for that bo- -.rough until fourteen days after the meeting of the next session.

24. DRAMATIC PERFORMANCES BILL. Time Marquis Of CLANIII- .. CARDE moved the second reading of this bill in the House of Lords, last night. He defended and explained its provisions at some length.

• The Earl of GLENGALL moved that it be read a second dine that day six months. The Bishop of LONDON strenuously opposed the bill. He objected ,to encourage the fondness for theatrical amusements among the people. As at present conducted, the theatres were an enormous evil. Since the • small theatres had multiplied, offences had increased. lie referred particularly . to the Garrick Theatre, in Goodman's Fields, and described the case of a poor woman, whose only daughter, the stay of her old age, had been tempted by the - vicinity to go toil frequently : she had staid out frequently—at length staid out all night—and the woman lost her daughter, and the daughter lost her character. Lord WvNeonn thought the bill should go into Committee, where -its objectionable clauses might be removed. .

Lord SEAGRAVE opposed, it on the ground of its interference with private interests.

' The Marquis of CLANIVICARDE having replied, the House divided : for the bill, 15; against it, 19.. The bill is consequently lost.

;.. • _

25. THELLUSSON PROPERTY. Sir JAMES SCARLETT 1110Vpdi in the

House of Commons, on Wednesday, that the Thellusson Estate Bill be read a second time.

Mr. D. W. HARVEY said— The law might be said to cling to this property as an opossum clings to a luxuriant tree, and after battening upon it till scarcely a leaf was left, had fallen on the grass in a state of bloated repletioo, there 'lie till its huge mass of food ' was digested, and then look for another Thellussontree to make a similar repast of. (Cheers and laughter.) There was nothing that would be of So great ad- vantage as the revision of that which was a curseto the country, the Court of Chancery,—miscalled a court of equity,'-' for there any thing but equity was to be found.

A conversation ensued, in which Sir R. PEEL, Dr. LUSHINGTON, Mr. M. A. TAYLOR, Mr. Tocote, and Mr. W. BROUGHAM took part ; and the bill was then read a second time.

26. Sir JOHN KEY; GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS, Sir HENRY HARDINGE, on Friday, gave notice of his intention to present a petition from certain stationers and paper-manufacturers in the city of London, alleging that Sir John Key, a member of that House, was concerned in a Government contract for paper. He had written a letter to Sir John, enclosing a copy of the petition, and mentioning that it was his intention to present it to the House on Monday. In presenting it, he meant to move for the appointment of a Committee to inquire into the circumstances of the petition.

Spotted a problem with this article?

Page 2

Page 3

Page 4

Page 5

Page 6

Page 7

Page 8

an Prirreetrin0 in Parliament.