Debates anb Vrottebings in parliament.

CHARITABLE BEQUESTS AND .DONATIONS IN IRELAND.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, Sir JAMES GRAHAM moved the second reading of the Charitable Bequests and Donations (Ireland) Bill, the objects of which he explained.

The administration of charitable bequests is regulated mainly by an act

Cedin the reign of George the Third, which has been in operation forty- years. It appeared to him that there were in that act three prin- cipal and important defects : first, the constitution of the Board; next, the power of changing the uses pointed out by the testator, upon a view of ex- pediency ; and thirdly, the absence of the power to endow land in perpetuity for certain given persons and their successors. The act incorporated a Board; consisting of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland for the time being, the twelve Judges, the Judge of the Prerogative Court, the Provost of Trinity College Dublin, the incumbents of the several parishes in Dublin for the time being, said several other official personages. At the time this act was passed, all the members of the Board, without exception, must necessarily have been Pro- testants; but since the passing of the Relief Act it was possible that some of the twelve Judges might be Roman Catholics. With that single exception, however, the exclusively Protestant character of the Board was still main- tained. The Commissioners were entitled to proceed for the recovery of every charitable donation or bequest which might be withheld, misapplied, or con- cealed, and to apply the same to charitable or pious uses in accordance with the intentions of the donors; and the act then proceeded, "Or in case it be in- expedient, unlawful, or impracticable to apply the same strictly according to the directions and intentions of the donor or donors, then to apply the same to such charitable and pious purposes as they shall judge the nearest and most conformable to the directions and intentions of the donor or donors." By the insertion in this act of the word "inexpedient," a view apart from the original intention of the donor or testator might be taken as to the application of such trust property. Three-fourths of the bequests for charitable and religious uses in. Ireland were charitable bequests. The 9th of George 11., which imposed a limit upon a power of bequeathing or charging real property in England for charitable uses, enacted that any deeds for that purpose must be executed twelve months before the death of the donor, and enrolled six months before. That statute did not apply to Ireland ; and at the present moment any person there might bequeath or charge land to any amount without any reference whatever to the period antecedent to his death, and without limitation as to quantity or value. There was, however, in Ireland one difficulty in regard to these bequests, and which was common also to England. A devise to a cor- poration in Ireland, such, for example, as these Commissioners, for the benefit of Roman Catholic Bishops and priests and their successors, would be con- trary to the Statute of Mortmain, and on that ground might be set aside ; thus a provision for a Catholic priest for the time being would be invalid, on the ground of being in perpetuity. This bill would remedy all the defects which he had pointed out. First, with regard to the Board, it was proposed that the Master of the Rolls, the Chief Baron of the Exchequer, and the Judge of the Prerogative Court should be members ex officio : two out of those three functionaries might be Roman Catholics. The bill then provided that the Crown should appoint ten Commissioners; and it was specially required that of these Commissioners five should be Protestants and five Roman Catho- lics. By section 6th it was provided, that all matters concerning the doctrine, discipline, or constitution of the Church of Rome—if a question arose as to the status or condition of any person who had a right, or claimed to have a right, under any of the deeds of bequest brought under the consideration of the Commissioners, it was specially provided that such question should be re- ferred, if the claimant were a Roman Catholic, to the Roman Catholic Com- missioners only ; and it was provided that they should grant a certificate of their decision, which certificate should be received as evidence. The second objection he bad noticed as applying to the existing law was removed by clause 10th, which limited the power of the Commissioners to apply donations and bequests according to the intention—and the intention strictly—of the donor or donors. The third, and as he thought the most important objection against the present law, arose from the difficulty which existed under the Statute of

Mortmain in making bequests chargeable upon land for a given class of persons

and their successors: and this difficulty was removed by clause 13th. He could anticipate but one objection to the measure from the Irish Roman Catholics—

possibly they might object to the decision of any ecclesiastical matters relating

to their Church by persons who were not in holy orders of the Church of Rome: but be would remind them, that, under the existing law, such matters might be brought before the supreme judicial tribunal of the country, the Judge of that Court, the Lord Chancellor, being a Protestant. According to the present bill, however, such matters would be left to the decision of a Board composed equally of Protestants and Roman Catholics. Be and his colleagues

bad framed and proposed this measure ins spirit of peace. It had been framed

with due consideration to.tke.circumatarices of Ireland. The Roman Catholic Church in that conntrywoold not accept an endowment from the State; but it was desirable that individsmIs who were actuated by a spirit of piety should be enabled to contribute to the comfort and independence of that body of pastors who were the religious teachers of a large proportion of the population of Ireland.

Mr. MORE OTERRALL made many objections to the bill.

The Bishops of the Catholic Church in Ireland had not been consulted indeed, pains seemed to have been taken to exclude the word " Bishop,"—a most offensive proceeding to the Roman Catholics. They were not inclined to trust any legislation which interfered with religion ; for they felt that, even if they could now endow their church, the endowments might hereafter be diverted to the support of another religion. The Irish Catholics felt that this bill

might operate to their future prejudice. By one of its clauses the Commis- sioners were removeable at the pleasure of the Crown : if, therefore, at any period it should suit the objects of a future Government to apply bequests arising under this hill to purposes other than those contemplated by the donors, they could at once remove the Commissioners and replace them by others. Another objection to the bill was, that one of the persons who was constituted

a Chairman of this Board was the Judge of the Prerogative Court in Ireland, appointed by the Archbishop of Armagh, to whom the Bishops of the Catholic

Church owed no allegiance. Some years ago, Lord Wellesley had expressed

the opinion that previously to the introduction of a measure of this kind it was necessary to ascertain what were the wishes and views of the Roman Catholic

body. Mr. O'Ferrall objected to restrictions imposed by the present bill.

He could assure the Government, that if it was really their desire to conciliate the Catholics of Ireland, they would be met in a spirit of fairness; but if they sought to override that religious community—if they endeavoured to force upon the Catholic Church measures which it could not conscientiously accept, they would be met with stern and steadfast opposition.

Lord ELIOT defended the bill ; pointing out that it was altogether of a permissive nature.

Mr BFT T:SW echoed Mr. O'Ferrall's objections.

The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY took that opportunity to thank Government for introducing a bill which appeared to him to be framed with the very best intentions, and with a real desire to conciliate and to promote the interests of the Roman Catholic population of Ireland. It was true that the priests of his persuasion did claim for themselves the exclusive privilege of deciding in matters relative to ecclesiastical discipline

and interpretation ; but it did not appear to him that the questions likely to be

referred to this Board were such as would at all intrench upon that claim. He thought, however, that her Majesty's Government would do well to take into consideration one objection which had been made, and see whether they could not recognize the Bishops and Archbishops of the Romish Church. The ma- chinery of the Church of Rome did exist in Ireland, whether for good or for evil, and it was by that machinery this bill must be worked ; and be thought it would tend greatly to promote good feeling, and conciliate the good-will of the Roman Catholic population of Ireland, if the dignity of their revered Prelates were acknowledged and recognized in the bill.

Sir ROBERT PEEL, deprecating a controversial debate, heartily com- plimented Lord Arundel on the tone of his speech ; and vindicated the bill on the former showing of the Catholics themselves. The Roman Catholic Association of Ireland complained of the existing law upon the subject ; to which Mr. Scully devoted a chapter of his book. That

gentleman said, that the laws connected with the bequests and donations

of Roman Catholics, either in respect to the priesthood, churches, places of worship, or schools, amounted often to an absolute prohibition. The object of the bill was to place beyond all doubt the legality of the en- dowments of the Roman Catholic Church. It was their wish that there should not exist hereafter any question upon that point—that Roman

Catholics might in the face of day make any endowment, bequest, or donation, without entertaining any fear of being hunted down by a Protestant board. Now what was the enactment with respect to matters of religion ? Why, this—" That all matters relating to the doctrine, discipline, or constitution of

the Church of Rome, shall be referred by the Board to a committee consisting of those Commissioners who profess the Roman Catholic religion." (Loud crier of "Hear, hear!") Now, he would ask, when the Government were thus

giving effect to the motives by which their conduct was really directed, and giving effect to them to the best of their power—be asked, was it not dis-

heartening that they should be met in the spirit they were met, and that the attention of honourable Members should be diverted from the subject properly before the House by references to bygone debates and to the question of a

nomination of a Lord of the Bedchamber? The noble Lord who spoke last said it was objectionable to the Roman Catholics to have lay Commissioners to interfere with spiritual matters: but it was perfectly open to the Crown under this bill to appoint on the Commission a Roman Catholic Prelate and

a Roman Catholic Priest ; and why should it be supposed that the Crown would not secure the appointment of Roman Catholic Prelates, as in the

case of Maynooth, if they found it to be desired by the Roman Catholic

body and congenial to the wishes of the hierarchy ? He assured the noble Lord that his supposition was not consistent with the real state of the

case ; and he trusted that, having stipulated that one-half of the Commis-

sion should consist of Roman Catholics, the House would feel that her Majesty's Government were desirous of meeting what they understood to be

the feelings of the Roman Catholics on the points in question. Reference had

been made to a measure contemplated by the Marquis Wellesley : Sir Robert contrasted that with the present bill. It was entitled "An Act to assist in Providing Places of Worship for Persons of the Roman Catholic Persuasion, and Houses and Glebes for the Roman Catholic Priests"; and it recited the defects of the existing law, whereby the intentions of donors were frequently frustrated. There was a point to which he wished to call attention. In the

title of this measure, the Roman Catholic clergyman was called " the parish minister :" her Majesty's Government, noticing that, had introduced the ex- pression in the bill brought into the House of Lords; but they were told that there were most serious objections to the use of the term " minister "—that " minister " was a Presbyterian term, and did not designate a Roman Catholic clergyman. Well, her Majesty's Government yielded to that representation,

and substituted the word " priest " for the word " minister " throughout their bill; though the latter was the word used in the measure of Lord Wellesley, which had been seen by Dr. Murray. Surely that was a proof that no insult to Ireland was intended by the use of the word in the bill as originally pro- posed. The House might depend upon it, her Majesty's Government would go on in their course of doing justice to all parties but certainly it was hard, that when they attempted to cure an admitted defect in the law in a way which they had reason to think would be considered satisfactory by the Roman Catholics, the means they took should be held out as a new insult; that the reward for their pains should be to be told they were doing wrong, and that all they had attempted to do was an insult to the people of Ireland. He pursued his contrast in detail ; showing that the permissive provisions of the contem- plated bill were not greater than those of the present measure, while the -se- strictions were as great. As to the supposition that Commissioners would be charged to bring about an altered disposal of land after it should be be- queathed, did any man seriously think that the Crown would be base enough to put in five Roman Catholic Commissioners pledged to take part in such a scheme, if it were practicable ? If honourable gentlemen really conceived such opinions of the Government, the sooner the Government abandoned all hopes of conferring benefit on Ireland, the better; it would be far better to leave the law as it was, than that they should be subjected to such imputations, and the Rouse be influenced by them. Lord Arundel was quite right in saying that the bill did not relate exclusively to spiritualities : but his first answer to the charge that it subjected spirituals to a lay tribunal was, that there was nothing in the bill to cause the Crown to constitute this exclusively as a lay tribunal; his next answer was, that the bill of 1834, which was said to have been submitted to the Roman Catholic Prelates—which was maid to have had their assent, did devolve on a tribunal exclusively lay the con- sideration of these matters. It was possible that at that period of the session, strenuous opposition to the bill might prevail ; but be trusted that during the recess popular discontent would not be excited in Ireland by charging the Government with unwillingness to listen to real complaints, or with a want of desire to do that which might be considered justice. " I hope, at any rate, that in the next session, we shall not be taunted with the imputation that we per- mitted the business of England and Scotland to absorb our attention, and neglected Ireland, as an additional argument for the Repeal of the Union. I trust that honourable gentlemen opposite, who talk of the difficulty of not being influenced by the clamour for Repeal, will have the goodness to state fairly to their constituents, that the measure was one which permitted the voluntary endowment of Roman Catholic churches—the voluntary subscription of money for the building of Roman Catholic places of worship—which rendered it im- possible under any pretext to interfere with such bequests—which constituted a commission of equal numbers of Protestants and Roman Catholics. Let them add, that the principle was that of equality; and that if it had been permitted to pass, it would have been held by the uninfluenced and reasonable part of the people of Ireland as a measure of great advantage, and indicative of the just spirit in which Ministers are determined to proceed." (Much cheering.)

Mr. SHELL carried on the objections to the bill ; pointing out, among other things, that substituting the Judge of the Prerogative Court for the Lord Chancellor did no good, since the one is as necessarily as Pro- testant as the other.

He did not object to the Judge of the Prerogative Court as an individual : be knew him well ; he knew him for a man of the highest talents and the highest integrity ; he was the assessor by whom in 1828, against his interest and that of his party, Mr. O'Connell was returned to Parliament. Sir ROBERT PEEL.—" This was the man I appointed." (" Hear!" and a laug)

Lord STANLEY defended the bill at some length ; observing that if Ministers had not consulted the Roman Catholic, they had also not consulted the Protestant Bishops.

Mr. WYSE reiterated the objections, especially that the Roman Catholic people had not been consulted.

Mr. HUME thought that the tribunal proposed by Government was perfectly fair.

Be gave the Government the greatest credit for bringing this measure in a pirit of peace and conciliation ; and he must observe, that the opposition which bad been raised to it did not appear to him to have been raised in such a manner as would lead a Government to accede to those applications for reform and redress which were really desirable. In giving this measure his cordial support, he would express a hope that he might regard it as a prelude to other changes which would be equally advantageous to the people of Ireland; and also that some means would be taken of looking into the charities of England. No less a sum than 250,0001. had been spent in investigating the affairs of English charities, and yet at this moment there was no competent tribunal to which the administration of a charity could be re- ferred. He had often asked for "equal justice to Ireland," he now asked for equal justice to England.

Colonel RAWDON also applauded the bill; and it was censured by Mr. DILLON BROWNE.

On a division, the second reading was carried, by 71 to 8. After a few more words from Mr. MORGAN JOHN O'CONNELL, claiming the ex- press recognition of the Roman Catholic Bishops, the bill passed through Committee.

On Thursday, Sir JAMES Gummi moved the order of the day for going into Committee on the bill ; and explained a few alterations which he proposed.

Considering the vast amount of Roman Catholic bequests in Ireland, it bad been felt expedient to appoint, for the Roman Catholic section of the Board, a Secretary of the same persuasion. As the large powers given to the Commis- sion might be supposed to imply judicial functions, he should add a proviso that nothing contained in the bill should he construed to limit or affect the jurisdiction of any court of law or equity with reference to the bequests in question. By a defect in clause 13th, it failed to secure endowments to the successors of dignitaries and priests in office at the time of the bequest : that defect would be remedied by a verbal alteration. Some objection had been made to the omission of the titles " Bishop " and " Archbishop": he had de- murred, and he still demurred, to the Archbishops and Bishops of the Church of Rome claiming titles as affixed to certain localities and districts in Ireland ; but, hoping to conciliate the feelings of those who were deeply interested in this measure,—and having no other desire than, as far as was consistent with the maintenance of their principles, to tender that which might be acceptable to their Roman Catholic fellow-subjects,—the Government were anxious to make such tender in the form and in the terms which might be most satisfactory. He therefore proposed, in clause 13th, to substitute for the words " any person in the said church of any higher rank or order," &c., the words "any Arch- bishop or Bishop, or other person in holy orders of the Church of Rome," &c. Mr. GRANVILLE VERNON, Lord JOHN RUSSELL, Mr. MORE O'FER- Raiz, the O'CONNOR DON, Mr. PHILIP HOWARD, Mr. SHELL, and Mr. WYSE expressed their gratification at the proposed amendments ; though some still adhered to a minor objection or two—such as the not giving to the Roman Catholic Bishops the customary titles of their sees. And Mr. HOWLED desired an assurance that Roman Catholic Prelates would be appointed on the Commission.

Sir ROBERT PEEL wished to leave the Crown unfettered in the indi- vidual appointments.

It might, he conceived, very reasonably be anticipated, that if, in the operation of the Commission, it were found that the nomination of a Roman Catholic Church dignitary would tend to increase its efficiency or utility, the Crown would regard this necessity with favourable eyes, and not render it necessary for the Par- liament to exhibit such distrust as to bind it down by itself to make such nomina- tion. He hoped, therefore, the House would consent to accept the alterations the Government had proposed in the measure without exacting concessions that ought hardly to be demanded. All be could say at present on the subject was, that the same spirit of conciliation and desire to consult the feelings and welfare of those concerned which bad already been manifested by the Govern- ment would influence the nomination of the Commissioners; and he trusted this assurance would be deemed satisfactory.

Mr. Si:Lew accepted the measure in the spirit in which it was offered ; should make no remarks hostile to that spirit, or calculated to dis- compose the feeling of harmony which had been exhibited on the other side of the House. But he had one objection to the measure—that it should recognize religious distinctions at all, by the compulsory nomi- nation of a certain number of Roman Catholics and a certain number of Protestants.

Mr. DILLox BROWNE objected to the bill altogether ; because his own diocesan had told him that it did interfere with the doctrine and disci- pline of the Roman Catholic Church ; which he was bound to believe.

The House went into Committee. Some slight attempts were made to alter the bill, but decisively defeated ; and the clauses down to the 19th were agreed to.

The Chairman then reported progress.

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC PENAL Acre.

In the House of Lords, on Tuesday, the LORD CHANCELLOR moved that the report on the Roman Catholic Penal Acts Repeal Bill be re- ceived ; entering into some further explanation respecting the measure. When his noble friend (Lord Beaumont) introduced the bill, he urged him to abstain from pressing it, as Government were about to revise the whole of the penal laws; but Lord Beaumont objecting, he had carefully looked over the bill, and had struck out every doubtful point. It bad been stated that the bill was introduced so late in the session that their Lordships ought not to en- tertain it. That objection was, he must say, under the circumstances of the case, a very extraordinary objection. The bill bad been placed on the table ten weeks ago; their Lordships' attention had been directed to it ; every noble Lord and every right reverend Prelate had had an opportunity of considering its provisions ; and now, because they bad allowed two months to pass over, m order to give time for consideration and inquiry, they were told that the bill was brought forward so late in the session that they ought not to entertain it. Lord Lyndhurst enumerated the acts which the bill repealed. The first, a statute of Elizabeth's reign, directed a particular form of prayer to be used ; punishing a first offence in breach of the act with three months' imprisonment, a second with six months, and a third with imprisonment for life : if they were to allow such a measure as that to stand, in common consistency they mud repeal the Roman Catholic Relief Bill. The next act punished the denial of the Sovereign's supremacy in ecclesiastical and religious matters—first with forfeiture of goods and chattels, or, if they did not amount in value to a certain sum, with imprisonment for a year; for a second offence, with the penalties of a priemunire ; for a third, with the penalties of high treason. The third act compelled attendance at pariah-churches, and imposed certain oaths. Another made reconcilement to the See of Rome high treason ; and imposed a fine of 200 marks on every priest performing mass, and of 100 marks on every person hearing the ceremony. By another, a Jesuit remaining in this country a certain number of days was made liable to be prosecuted for high treason; and persons residing abroad to be educated at a public seminary, who should not return within six months after proclamation to that effect, were also ren- dered liable to the penalties of high treason. Another required all persons, and especially those who did not attend the parish-church, to come forward and conform, or to abjure the realm, under pain of being pronounced guilty of felony. Another imposed severe penalties on any Roman Catholic who should be found more than three miles distant from his abode—a law which would be considered moat barbarous in this travelling age at least. A statute of James I. prohibited Roman Catholics from sending their children to be educated abroad, under severe penalties. Two others punished " recusancy,"— which in this instance meant not going to church,—with severe privations and penalties; and imposed the penalties of prtemunire on Roman Catholics generally. A statute of Charles I. deprived persons sending their sons abroad for education of the right to sue in any court. Another declared any one newly converted to the Roman Catholic religion, and his children if educated in that religion, incapable of holding any place of trust or profit. A statute of William and Mary enacted that no Catholic should come within ten miles of the metropolis, forbade any Roman Catholic to have in his house any arms or weapons of defence, and if he possessed a horse worth more than 51. rendered it liable to be forfeited and seized. The Bishop of London objected that the bill would repeal the act of the 31st George III.: now that act constituted an extraordinary jumble of legislation • they had an act of Elizabeth which re- quired a party to take a certain oath, and if he refused he was guilty of high treason; but by the subsequent act they provided that if he took another oath, and a much milder one, he was free ; yet if a man professing the Roman Catho- lic religion did not take either of the oaths, he would be guilty of high treason, and liable to all the penalties which attached to that crime. in conclusion, the Lord Chancellor hoped Lord Beaumont would postpone his measure till next session, with a view to the introduction of a more general measure by Government ; but if he preferred to proceed with it, Lord Lyndhurst should feel bound to vote for it.

The Bishop of LONDON wished to guard himself against the suspicion that he was opposed to the repeal of the acts in question ; but he pro- tested against the Government's taking up the subject at the eleventh hour, without consulting the heads of the Church ; and against the very short time allowed during the present session for giving that attention to the subject which it deserved. Lord BROUGHAM recommended Lord Beaumont to defer to the Lord Chancellor's wish. The Earl of Wice.now and Lord CAMPBELL urged him to persevere. The question having been put, the Bishop of LONDON said " Not content" to the motion ; but declined to move any amendment ; de- claring that he did not mean to interfere with the bill in any way. The report was then received.

ALIEN-LAW REFORM.

In moving, on Monday, that the Commons agree to the Lords' amend- ments on the Aliens Bill, Mr. Burr made some parting observations on the character of the measure, which has hitherto escaped the notice of the newspapers.

From the period of the Revolution, the laws of this country relating to aliens had been harsh and oppressive in an extreme degree. At all times of our history, all our more distinguished public' men, statesmen, lawyers, and historians, had united in condemning them. Yet so obstinate had been the general defence of them, that not only had every attempt hitherto to mitigate their rigour utterly tailed, but the persons who alone succeeded in legislating on the subject of alienage were those who aimed at aggravating the vicious and prohibitory character of the existing statutes. Be would venture to call the present bill a complete reformation of our Alien-laws: the spirit and policy of them were entirely changed by this bill. Foreigners visiting this country as aliens would now find their position greatly improved, their civil rights widely extended, and clearly and carefully defined. Persons of foreign birth coming among us to reside, and being desirous of placing themselves within the legianee of the British Crown, would be enabled tad° so at little cost and with no delay ; and they might now secure from the Secretary of State a far more liberal charter of naturalization than they could formerly acquire from Parliament itself. They might in fact be placed in a position to enjoy all the rights of natural-born subjects, except those of sitting in Parliament and at the Council-board. But even these high privileges were not wholly denied to them : foreigners who either from their high station or their intimate relations with British society might regard the complete rights of British citizenship an object of legitimate ambition, would not longer be debarred from appealing to Parliament on the subject. He could not permit himself to doubt that many such applications would be successful. These regulations, then, together with the extension to persons already naturalized of all the rights and capacities which the Secretary of State was impowered by this bill to confer on aliens, and the naturalization de facto of all women married to British subjects, constituted the scope and provisions of the bill. When it was considered that the only civil right which even Parliament could confer till now on foreigners, was the right to hold and transmit landed property, he thought the bill would be pronounced an important improvement of our law. He believed that it would be productive of much real practical advantage, and that it would conduce to the reputation of the country. Ile bad to express his acknowledgments to Sir Robert Peel for much kindness and encouragement. In other times, attempts to settle this question on a sound and liberal basis had more than once convulsed the whole nation, and proved fatal to the existence of Governments. To have been per- mitted to bring such a question to a final and peaceful conclusion, was very gratifying to his feelings.

The Lords' amendments were then agreed to.

TAHITI.

On Wednesday, Sir CHARLES NAPIER put the following question to Sir Robert Peel- " Whether it is true that the British Consul at Tahiti has been arrested, under the name of the man Pritchard, by the French authorities ; also whether an order has been given that the lights of the English residents there are to be put out at eight o'clock at night ; whether the French have erected strong fortifications there ; and whether the Queen has been obliged to leave Papiti to take refuge on board a British ship ? I wish also to ask the right honourable Baronet, whether, when these transactions were in progress, we had any naval force at the island, and what was its extent ?"

Sir ROBERT PEEL, in reply, limited himself to a statement of facts.

" We have received accounts from Tahiti ; and presuming on the accuracy

of these accounts, which I have no reason whatever to call in question, I do not hesitate to say that a gross outrage, accompanied with gross indignity, has been committed upon that functionary. (Loud cheers.) Her Majesty's Government received information of that on Monday last ; and the first oppor- tunity was taken of making those communications to the French Government which her Majesty's Government considered the circumstances of the case to call for. That outrage was committed by a person in temporary authority at Papiti. We know that, in fact, it was not committed in consequence of any authority given for that purpose by the French Government ; and I must presume, therefore—assuming that the statements we have received are correct —I must presume that the French Government will at once make that repa- ration which this country has a right to require. I trust I shall not be pressed for any further answer."

Sir CHARLES NAPIER again asked whether there was a proper naval force at Tahiti at the time ; and, whether the French had erected for- tifications ?—but Sir ROBERT PEEL declined to give any further answer.

Some additional explanation was given in the House of Lords, on Thursday ; when the Marquis of CLANRICARDE asked whether any reparation had been demanded for the outrages ?

The Earl of ABERDEEN replied-

" It is undoubtedly true that a gross outrage has been committed against

the person of a British subject; indeed, so flagrant an outrage, that, if I had not received an authentic account of the transaction, it would have appeared to me almost incredible. ("Hear, hear !") But I wish to state, that this proceeding has taken place, not only without the possible knowledge, or in- struction, or participation of the French Government, but under a state of things which has been disavowed by them. (" Hear, hear ! ") It will be re- collected that, in the month of September last, the French authorities in the island of Tahiti dethroned the Queen, and took absolute possession of, and exercised the full rights of sovereignty over, that island. As soon as a repre- sentation on the subject was made by this country, the proceeding was promptly disavowed by the French Government, just about the time that the present transaction took place, in the month of March last. But during the interve- ning months, it is clear that a state of things existed that would account for certain acts which it would be impossible to anticipate under another and a different state of things. Now, the gentleman to whom the noble Marquis has referred—at the time when the French took. actual possession of the island, and proceeded to exercise all the rights of sovereignty—that gentleman imme- diately hauled down his flag, and gave an official intimation or notice to the authorities that he was no longer her Britannic Majesty's Consul there ; that the Queen having been dethroned, he had no longer any official character. So that, in point of fact, however unjust the proceedings might be which placed him under the necessity of abandoning his situation, he was not, at the time when the recent transactions occurred, occupying any, and was not recognized as occupying any, official situation. Now, although the power which has been exercised, and the arbitrary and unprecedented proceedings that have taken place, could not be justified against any British subject, having an official cha- racter or not, still the circumstances under which the transaction took place must make some difference in the manner in which it is to be received. I said before, that this proceeding had taken place without the slightest knowledge or encouragement of the French Government ; and I have no doubt that they will regard it with as much concern as we do. (" Hear, hear !") I am afraid, however, that the late transaction will prove a godsend to the enemies of peace between the two countries, and 1 have no doubt that it will be turned to a good account in furthering their views : but I trust, and have every reason to be- lieve, that, by the e,xercise of a spirit of justice and moderation, it will lead to no serious consequences. (" Hear, hear! ") I have every reason to believe that the French Government will disapprove of such a transaction; and I must say, that not a moment was lost in making such representations to that Go- vernment as appeared to me to be suitable to the circumstances of the case." (Cheers.) The Earl of MINTO said that nothing could be more satisfactory than Lord Aberdeen's assurance : but he endeavoured to extract some further information as to the means which had been taken by Government to provide against the occurrence, especially as to the naval arrangements. The Earl of HADDINGTON explained how the Vindictive, whose time of foreign service had expired, bad successively been replaced by the Dublin, a large fifty-gun ship, and the Talbot or Carysfort. He thought that there was present, in March, a frigate of a minor cast—some ship larger than the Basilisk ketch. Lord KINNAIRD censured the Government for having permitted the French to assume the " protectorate " at all—at least there should have been a joint protectorate by France and England. And had not Queen Pomare been restored ? If so, Mr. Pritchard must have resumed his official character. The Earl of ABERDEEN believed that Queen Po- mare would be restored about the present time, but not sooner. Lord Kinnaird should know that the protectorate of those islands had twice or thrice been offered to England, but invariably refused. In answer to Lord MINTO, Lord ABERDEEN added, that Admiral Dupetit Thouars had been recalled in March last, in consequence of his assumption of the sovereignty of the island ; and had been succeeded by Admiral Hamelin.

CAPTAIN WARNER'S INVENTIONS.

In the House of Commons, on Wednesday, Viscount INGESTRE drew attention to the inventions and claims of CaptainWarner. He began by relating his first introduction to Captain Warner; to whom his notice was attracted, in 1839 or 1840, by a paragraph in the newspapers; and then he went back to that gentleman's successive communications with Government, and the Government inquiries into his pretensions; describing him as having encountered, in ridicule and suspicion, the common fate of all great inventors. His projects had obtained the approval of William the Fourth ; and Sir Richard Keats, Sir Thomas Hardy, and Lieutenant Webster, had all reported favourably on the powers of his destructive apparatus. Captain Warner performed a successful experiment, similar to the one at Brighton, but on a small scale, at Wanatead, in 1840, in the presence of the Earl of Hard- wicke and Admiral Bowles, and a great concourse of people : at the re- quest of Sir Francis Burdett, in 1841, he repeated the experiment, in the presence of Sir Henry Hardinge, Sir George Cockburn, and Sir George Mur- ray : but the negotiations to perform experiments before Government Com- missioners had failed, through the hostile and indiscreet conduct of the Com- missioners, and the impracticable conditions which they imposed. Lord In- gestre bore testimony to the immense powers of the engines of the inventor: with his invisible shell he could defy the proudest fleet that ever was at sea, and block it up in any harbour or road-way. He concluded by moving for copies of all the correspondence between Captain Warner and the Government. Sir ROBERT PEEL seconded the motion ; for he was at length deter- mined that the public should be enabled to judge why Captain Warner had refused to submit to the ordeal proposed by Government. Sir Robert had an opportunity of witnessing an experiment with the " invi- sible shell" on a small scale at Wanstead ; and he had no hesitation in saying that it was a most formidable power. He had no doubt that the vessel was destroyed at Brighton the other day in the same manner. Nevertheless, the invisible shell always appeared to him to be of much less importance than the " long range"; which Captain Warner had thus described—" I can project 100 shells of most destructive power, and repeat the experiment with rapidity. In Gibraltar, under the operation of my invention, in two hours there would not be a man alive. I can use it effectually at sea at a range hitherto attained by no battery. By means of my long range I could have demolished Algiers: instead of damaging the place only, as Lord Exmouth did with his fleet, I could have demolished it with a single ship ; and after having destroyed Algiers, with comparatively little refitting, I could have in like manner de- molished Toulon." Sir Robert determined that the matter should be investi- gated, to see how far the thing could be done, and how far this country might be able to retain the secret, either for the purpose of suppressing it altogether or of using it. Sir Robert read letters in which the members of the first Com- mission desired to see experiments of the " long range " performed first, and offered divers facilities for the purpose,—among others, cannon and men from the Ordnance ; but requiring an estimate of the expense. " If he had not laid down that rule as to the expense, there would have been no limit to the demands on the Ordnance. Why, that very day he had had applications from four parties, all professing to have instruments at least as destructive as Captain Warner's, and only begging that they might be allowed to try their experiments, and that the Government should pay the expense." Captain Warner replied that he did not want any men for either experiment; but objected to the order proposed, and insisted on try ing the invisible shell first : he said that he was quite ready to give an estimate of the probable expense, but that he submitted to the consider- ation of the Commissioners whether the expense might not be avoided, as he had the testimony of the First Lord of the Treasury, the Master-General of the Ordnance, the senior Naval Lord of the Admiralty, Lord Ingestre, and others. Now, for himself, Sir Robert could only say he never saw any experi- ment by the " long range." What was the use of referring to First Lords of the Treasury ? He had certainly had several interviews with Captain Warner, but he felt he was wholly incapable of forming a judgment ; that could only be done by those who were accustomed to witness explosive power. The Com- missioners answered, very properly, that they were appointed to form an opi- nion for themselves. Captain Warner also said that he could not proceed unless he were promised 200,0001. for the "invisible shell," and 200,0001. for the " long range." The Commissioners saying that that would close the com- mission, Captain Warner consented to take any remuneration which the First Lord of the Treasury might promise him beforehand. However, he allowed himself to be examined ; and his answers would satisfy the House that the caution on the part of Government had not been misplaced. Captain Warner was first asked how long he had baen in satisfying himself of the utility of his long range and invisible shell ? He answered, twelve years for the long range, twenty-seven years for the invisible shell. Being asked what experiments he had tried, he answered, that he had sunk two French privateers at the end of the war, one off Folkatone, the other in St. Valerie Bay; that he was in the Nautilus, a cutter hired for the King's service ; that it was hired by his father, whose name was William Warner. " Such extraordinary circumstances," the Commissioners observed, " were, of course, reported to the Admiralty ?"— " No; we were not in the employ of the Admiralty." " Who were you hired by ? "—" Lord Castlereagh, who employed us in landing spies." " Were the circumstances you have mentioned reported to the Secretary of State ?"—" I do not know." " Were they entered in the log-book of the Nautilus? ''—" No; we did not keep a log-book." " Was there no claim made of prize-money ?"— " No." " Were any of the crews of the privateers saved? "—" Not a soul was saved." " The crew of the Nautilus was of course aware of these facts 1 " " There was no one on board the Nautilus but myself and another." The Commissioners had sent to the Admiralty to discover whether any communication had ever been made respecting the destruction of two French privateers off Folkstone and in St. Valerie Bay ; but no trace of anything of the kind was to be found. The Commissioners then sent to the Foreign Office ; but it did not appear that there was the slightest record of such a transaction. The crews of these two vessels were therefore sent to destruction without any reward having been claimed for the destruction of the ships to which they belonged, or any record made of the transaction. He hoped the House would observe, that the account Captain Warner gave before the Commissioners of the " long range " was, that he had tried it before Sir Richard Keats at a place he named ; and that with a two-pounder he could project his shells at a distance of three miles. Now this was most important. Captain Warner with a two-pounder could project this invention three miles with accuracy. From this it would appear that the invention was simply projected with a cannon. When asked how he had tested the power of the " long range," he answered, by trying it on certain islands off Vigo Bay and in Hainault Forest. When asked what objects he had tried it on at six miles range, and whether he had demolished any fort at that distance, he answered, he had knocked to pieces the rock in the islands off Vigo By to a great extent, and that he bad displaced many tons of rock there at that range. Now, the Government wanted a repetition of that, the destruction of the trees in Hainault Forest and the breaking the rocks in the Wands off Vigo Bay ; and the Commissioners accordingly said to Captain Warner, " Without disclosing your secret, let us have the lung range exhibited at a distance of two or three miles, before we go to the in- visible shell." It was important to have this fully investigated ; because there were many parties who had secrets of explosive power, but the question always was, could they be used under difficulties ? could they be used with safety to the parties handling them ? The experiments before the Commission came to an untimely end; and Sir Byam Martin, on enclosing his commission, begged that be might never again be put upon the same employ- ment, and positively declined to have anything more to do with Captain War- ner's inventions. Sir Robert then alluded to the appointment of the second Commission ; of whom Captain Warner required 2,7001. as the cost of testing the " long range," and 2,4701. for the "invisible shell." The Commissioners offered 500/.; and Captain Warner said that his friends would try to make up the difference : but the deficiency was not made good ; and thus terminated the relations between Captain Warner and the present Government. In this case, Government had departed from their ordinary rule: the rule was, that any one proposing a new plan or projectile should have all the experiments tried at his own expense. It was obvious that a neglect of this rule must impose upon the Government endless labour, and upon the country indefinite expenditure. As guardians, then, of the public purse, her Majesty's Government were bound to forbear from entering into any engagement to pay considerable sums of money for the communication of such a secret as this. They were not prepared to pay 200,000/. or 300,0001. upon such grounds as Captain Warner had laid before them. In reply to some of the inquiries, Captain Warner said that it would only be necessary to trust one man in each fleet with the secret. But to this it was objected on the part of the Government, that the persons so in- trusted with this secret must each be paid 400,0001., in order to guarantee the preservation of the secret : nor was it even certain that that sum would pre- serve their integrity. To this Captain Warner could give no satisfactory answer. Sir Robert thought he had shown that Captain Warner had not been treated with the least disrespect ; that the fullest opportunity had been given to him for displaying the powers of his invisible shell and of his long range ; and the fault was his if he had failed to perform that which he had undertaken. (Cheers.) Mr. WILLIAm CONSTER vindicated the late Ministry's treatment of Captain Warner ; and remarked, as a feature of that gentleman's con- duct, that he always went to the Treasury in the first instance : he always preferred going to those who had the command of money, rather than to men skilled in science.

Sir HOWARD DOUGLAS contradicted a statement in the Times, that the Commissioners resigned because they could not agree among them- selves—they were perfectly unanimous ; and he corroborated Sir Ro- bert Peel's statement, citing extracts from Captain Warner's examina- tion.

Captain Warner was asked whether he could lodge his shells so as to close a roadstead in such a way as that a fleet could neither get in nor get out ? He said he could. Then this case was put to him : suppose there were twenty sail in Torbay, and they were three miles from Bury and Newatead, Captain Warner was asked how soon he could destroy them ? He answered, in an hour and a half. It was then said, that he must do so by laying lines of his invisible shells : now, his shells might be invisible, but he himself was not so—he could not render himself invisible—he could not approach that fleet in secrecy ; they would take the usual precautions—they would have outside cruisers: how could be escape those ? The only answer he bad to make to that objection was, that be should use cutters, schooners, and boats. On this it was objected, that there might be a strong tideway and a distance of three miles. He then said that be should use steamers. But the noise was urged as a serious consideration. That be sought to obviate by saying that he should use screw-steamers. It was asked, did he think that he could, under such circumstances, face a British fleet ? did he suppose that he could face them with schooners and cutters ? did he think he could buoy up the passage of the port with his shells without the knowledge of the enemy ? He admitted the 'difficulty was great, but he maintained that he possessed the means of overcoming it. When the House looked at all the conditions which he insisted on as necessary to the comple- tion of his objects, one could hardly refrain from exclaiming, that his schemes were a renewal of the old plan by which sparrows are to be caught—that of lay- ing salt on their tails. As to chasing vessels, there certainly had been an ex- periment tried ; but after all, it had been very fairly described as a trial upon a punt, in a fish-pond—a punt towed by an old horse. And what was the other experiment ? it was one certainly tried upon a larger vessel, towed by a steam- tug ; and there was a larger dose of the composition: but that was all ; the shells went along the tow-line—they could not miss—they went on each side of the bow of the vessel, and it was impossible that she should escape from them.

Sir CHARLES NAPIER confessed that, with Sir Hussey Vivian, he doubted Lord Ingestre's sanity in agitating the subject. He commented on weak points in Mr. Warner's case, especially the known existence of powerful but dangerous explosive substances, such as chloride of nitrogen. He read an account of an experiment off Weimer Castle in 1805, very like the account of the recent one at Brighton ; only that the ship was known to have been destroyed by two large copper vessels filled with 200 pounds of gunpowder, and joined with a rope which crossed the ship's cutwater.

"How did this former discovery work in practice ? I had just served my time and passed as a Lieutenant ; and, having nothing better to do, 1 went as a volunteer on an expedition against the French flotilla under Sir Sidney Smith. We were sent in the most curious collection of boats that were ever known—the Gemini, the Cancer, and every other animal; and we were sent to blow up the French flotilla at Boulogne. We were under the orders of as gallant an officer as ever sailed, Captain Seckem. It was on a November night; we went in five or six boats ; our feet were chapped. There were pegs in the coppers to be thrown ; if they dropped out, there was the dread of ex- plosion : our teeth chattered with cold, our hearts quailed with fear lest the pegs should get out. Captain Seckem was determined that we should run close under the enemy ; and in getting so close' he ran us ashore—so there was a finish for that night. We went the second night : we saw our own vessels off the harbour, and were going to blow them up by mistake for the enemy ; but they cried out lustily, and so we left them alone. We beano cutlasses; we were wholly unarmed ; we were to blow up the enemy, or tie taken. or get away. After we had changed the boats, the boatswain got frightened, for he saw the peg out. I ordered them to chuck the copper overboard, and overboard it went. There was not one of the enemy touched so far. Captain Seckem dropped down again. When we came alongside the vessel, he forgot to cast off; the copper was hoisted, and out came the peg: the copper was then thrown overboard; and it kept up a great noise for some time, to our horror and asto- nishment. That was the whole history of the thing, after twenty or thirty thousand pounds had been expended, and we were almost blown up ourselves."

Mr. Warner always shied off his,six-miles range, and returned to his invisible

shell. " I think that Government has given him a fair chance. I will give him another : 1 will tell him to go to Southsea Castle, and I will turn a ship out by the Havant Light ; and if he can blow a ship up there from the Castle, I shall be satisfied."

Mr. AGLIONBY contended that the inventions merited further experi- ment.

Mr. BROTHERTON objected to encouraging such inventions. on moral grounds ; and contributed his anecdote to disparage the present one. Captain Warner might have sold his invention to Don Pedro for 500,0001.; but he would then, as now, have the money down first. During the Portu- guese war, there was a battery which gave much trouble, and it was proposed to Captain Warner to destroy it. Captain Warner said he could do it. Op- portunities were given to him, and things provided for him; and they went on from day to day and from week to week ; but nothing was effected—there was always something wanted. A gentleman acquainted with the whole of the facts had written to him stating his conviction that Captain Warner could not effect what he declared he could.

Mr. WAKLEY understood Sir Robert Peel to say that he was prepared to make an offer which should be satisfactory to Mr. Warner. [Sir ROBERT PEEL—" Hear, hear !"] He thought that he should have fur- ther opportunity ; though Government had done all that could be ex- pected.

Sir GEORGE COCKBURN could state exactly how the experiment at Brighton had taken place.

He had an officer iu a boat close to the two vessels, and the officer distinctly saw the one blown up. A rope with two buoys attached was thrown across her cutwater, the vessel then going at the rate of about three knots an hour; these two buoys, by the impetus of the vessel, were forced under water; and the tension of the rope attached to them either struck a hammer, or excited by other means the igniting power, and then the vessel blew up. The officer who had reported to him, said he considered that the explosion was the effect of two barrels of gunpowder. The nitrate of silver, and several other explosive mate- rials, would produce the same effect. He trusted that any further experiments would be made at a long range. If Captain Warner could scud a missile of that description five or six miles, he would be entitled to any reward that the Government could give. He, however, looked on the invisible shells as of no importance whatever. Lord INGESTRE having briefly replied, the motion for copies of cor- respondence was agreed to.

MISCELLANEOUS.

TnE B.AILWAYS BILL, briefly recommended to the House of Lords, on Thursday, by the Earl of DALHOUSIE, passed through Committee, and was reported without amendments.

THE POOR-LAW ACT AMENDMENT BILL was read a second time by the Lords, on Thursday ; to be committed on Monday.

THE SAVINGS BANK BILL having been read a third time by the Commons, on Thursday, Mr. HUMS proposed a clause enacting, that after the 20th No- vember 1844, the deposits of one depositor shall not exceed 201. in any one year ; also a clause, that when investments amount to 1301. interest shall cease : his object was to confine the provisions of the Savings Bank Act to those small depositors for whose benefit it was originally intended. The clauses were negatived without a division, and the bill passed.

THE MARRIAGES (IRELAND) BILL was considered in Committee by the Commons, on Thursday. In answer to Colonel RAWDON, Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, that the bill would in every respect assimilate the Irish law relating to marriages with the English law. All the clauses were agreed to, with some verbal amendments.

EMBANKMENT OF THE THAMES. On Tuesday, the Earl of LINCOLN ob- tained leave to bring in "a bill to impower her Majesty's Commissioners of Woods to form a terrace and embankment, with convenient landing-places for the public, on the Middlesex shore of the river Thames, between Westminster and Blackfriars Bridges." He had no intention of pressing the measure fur- ther this session ; his only intention being that parties interested might have ample time for considering the details, and making up their minds upon them. Mr. Home and other Members threatened future opposition. Sir FREDERICK TRENCH recommended a railway along the embankment to defray the expense.

INTERMENT IN Towiis. In reply to Mr. MACKINNON, on Tuesday, Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that he had already given his attention to the subject of the interment of bodies in large towns : it was a difficult question to be enter- tained by the Legislature : after the best consideration he had given to the subject, he found it impossible to bring forward any measure satisfactory teciblirci own mind ; and until he could devise some measure that his judgment could approve of, it was not his intention to make any proposition upon the subject.

SCULPTURE-GALLERIES. On Tuesday, Mr. WYSE moved an address to the Queen, praying her to take into favourable consideration the petition from the institution of the Fine Arts in London and the artists of Dublin, which prayed for the establishment of galleries for the reception of casts of sculpture, architecture, and ancient Christian arts. Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE objected to such a motion, brought forward irregularly on petition, without notice, at so late a period of the session. He hoped it would he withdrawn. After a short conversation, Mr. WYSE complied.

PAUPERISM AND LUNACY IN SCOTLAND. On Wednesday, Mr. BOUVERIE asked whether it was the intention of the Government to introduce any mea- sure during the next session of Parliament, founded on the report of the Com- missioners of Poor-laws for Scotland ? Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, he must decline giving any answer at present to the question; for, he frankly confessed, be had not yet had time to read the very voluminous evidence contained in the Report. Sir James afterwards alluded to a statement made by ?dr. Hawes, during the late debate on Lord Ashley's motion, about the state of pauper lunatics in the Isle of Arran. He had immediately called the attention of the Lord Advocate to the subject ; and he had great satisfaction in stating to the House, that nine months ago active pleasures had been taken to redress some of these evils. The pauper lunatics were immediately removed from Arran to the Glasgow Asylum. Steps had been taken to bring to justice the offending parties; in fact, criminal proceedings were in progress against them. Further, the Lord Advocate, through the Sheriff of the county, had taken ample pre- cautions against the recurrence of such evils.

DISTRESS AMONG THE COOPERS. On Tuesday, Mr. HUME called atten- tion to the depressed state of the cooper-trade. lie dwelt on the fact that the cooper-trade to the West Indies had been almost totally ruined by the compe- tition of the United States, where the coopers obtained their materials duty- free, while the British coopers were obliged to pay a duty of 35 per cent on Baltic timber. The effect of this was also very injuriously felt in the equip- ment of shipping, especially the South Sea whalers, a branch of trade and na- vigation of the utmost importance to Great Britain. All that the British cooper desired to save his family from indigence, was, that he should he placed on the same footing with foreigners, and allowed to obtain the raw material on the same terms. Mr. Hume concluded by moving, "That this House will, early in the ensuing session, take the petitions of the coopers into consideration, with the view of relieving them from their present distress." Mr. GLADSTONE objected to giving notice of altering duties at so distant a period. The coopers

were mistaken in attributing their distress to the Tariff of 1842: the real mutes were, principally, the diminished production of the West Indies, the de- wessed state of the whale-trade, and a change in the brewing-trade, which has diminished the number of casks lying empty. After a short discussion, the mo- tion was negatived without a division.

DISMISSAL OP MR. JOHN FIRATHCOTE. On Wednesday, Mr. MILNER GERSON called attention to the case of Mr. John Heathcote, a Sub-Inspector of Factories under Mr. Horner. In March 1843, Mr. Ferrand received an anonymous letter, which he gave to Lord Stanley; Lord Stanley showed it to Mr. Horner ; and Mr. Homer recognized the handwriting of his Sub-Inspector. On being questioned, Mr. Heathcote denied that he had written the letter ; but the similarity of handwriting being corroborated by peculiarities in the form of the letter, according with the forms in which Sub-Inspectors make their returns, he was dismissed, for the breach of truth, though the reason was not formally stated. However, Mr. Gilbert, a nephew of Mr. Heathcote, avowed that the letter was his; and he produced another letter from a gentle- man who bore testimony that the anonymous letter was suggested to Mr. Gil- bert, even in its details, by himself. Mr. Heathcote went before the Mayor, and solemnly declared that he was not the writer. Mr. Gibson cited the case of Isaac Looker, who was tried before Mr. Justice Alderson, in 1831, and sentenced to transportation, for writing a threatening letter, that was after- wards avowed by his son ; who underwent the sentence instead. He moved that Mr. Heathcote's petition be taken into consideration. Sir JAMES GRAHAM insisted that the internal evidence of the letter proved it to have been written by Mr. Heathcote : the handwriting was pronounced by the In- spector of the Post-office to resemble that in other letters by Mr. Heathcote, and not the handwriting of another letter by Mr. Gilbert. Mr. BRIGHT ex- plained that by the fact, that the anonymous letter was written with a quill, and the other by Mr. Gilbert with a steel pen. Mr. Gilbert too was familiar with the forms used by his uncle. After some discussion, in which several Members urged the difficulty of judging positively from resemblances in hand- writing, the motion was negatived, by 23 to 16.