atbatti net 13rnctitinint in Parliament.

1. REFORM OF THE IRISH CORPORATIONS.

Several petitions were presented to the House of Commons, on Monday, for and against the Ministerial bill for amending the collar)• rate system of Ireland. Among the latter, was one from Belfast, signed by eight thousand persons, which Mr. EMERSON TENNENT presented amidst loud cheers from the Opposition. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD said that this petition did not truly represent the opinions of the inhabitants of Belfast, and that he should shortly receive a petition in favour of the bill, very numerously signed.

Mr. O'Lociii.EN ( Attorney-General for Ireland) then rose to move

the second reading of the Irish Municipal Corporation Bill. He commenced his speech by referring to the report of the Commissioners for proof of the necessity of adopting a new system for the regulation of Irish Corporations. At present there were sixty Corporations in Ire- land " in full vigour," and eleven almost extinct, besides many others which have become defunct since the Union. In the towns in which

these seventy-one Corporations exist, there were 900,000 • bitants;

but of these only 13,000 are corporators ; 8000 of whom in four boroughs, leaving only 5000 for the remaining sixty seven. In most of the boroughs, the corporators are men of small property, adherents of particular families, supporting political opinions at variance with those of the majority of the inhabitants, and the objects of jealousy, suspicion, and dislike. In the large town of Belfast, for instance, the Corporation consists of twenty-one self-elected individuals. Although the laws which excluded the Roman Catholics from Corporations were. repealed in 1793, yet such has been and is the exclusive policy of these bodies, that only about 200 Roman Catholics out of the whole popula- tion have been admitted into them since that period. The corporators had abused their power to the very worst of purposes. In Dublin, the corporate property had been shamefully managed. Out of the receipts of the Water-rate alone, in eighteen years, the Corporation mis- applied the sum of 74,0001., in defiance of Acts of Parliament and the decisions of Courts of Law ; that was only one instance of the mode in which the Dublin Corporation abused their trust. The Cor- poration of Derry borrowed 16,500/. under an Act of Parliament to build a bridge, in 1790: they had collected tolls between that period and 1813 amounting to 34,2001. ; but not one sixpence of the debt had been discharged. Iii 1813, the bridge was carried away; and 15,000L, to be repaid by instalments in twenty years, was lent to the Corpora- tion out of the Consolidated Fund. From 1813 to 1831, they col- lected 74,0001. in tolls, but never repaid one shilling of the loan ; and there is now a balance of 57,0001. unaccounted for. They received from tonnage-dues and other sources of revenue, between the years 1790 and 1813, sums amounting altogether to 270,339/. ; and of this amount the sum of 203,563/. is unaccounted for. As specimens of the manner in which the Derry Corporation disposed of their funds, Mr. O'Loghlen mentioned, that they had a solicitor with a regular salary, though one of his bills amounted to 4000/. ; that they had a cook with a salary of 1001. a year ; that the deputation, which congratulated the late King on his visit to Ireland, were paid 5461. for the expenses of their journey of only 110 miles ; that they had given a piece of plate to Sir George Mill, their Recorder, which cost 11601. ; and that they had a salaried apothecary—a necessary consequence of a sala- ried cook ! The same abuses prevailed in Drogheda. The Corpora- tion divided among themselves a rental of 10,000/. or 12,0001. a year, and let property worth 14,737/. per annum for 3-265/. Between the years 1800 and 1831, they received from tolls alone the sum of 33.4061.; of which only about 80001. was accounted for. The Carrickfergus Corporation had leased 183 acres of public land to Lord Blaney for ninety nine years, at a rent of 301.—calling it, in the lease, 18 acres or thereabouts. This was done because the two parties in the Corpora- tion being nicely balanced, both feared that Lord Blaney's influ- ence might be exercised against them at an election. In Naas, the Corporation had made over to Lord Mayo for a rent of 211. 15s. 6d. a property worth 8201. a year, without any fine being paid. It had been said that Lord Mayo was only a trustee; but when did a trustee bargain to pay a rent? Besides, in fact, the conveyance of the pro- perty was an absolute conveyance. In Cashel, there had been a series of disgraceful transactions with the family of Pennefathers ; by which the loss to the borough and the gain to the patrons was not far short of 20,000/. ; and this was the work of the Corporation of a town, which was unable to procure a supply of water, though an expenditure of 2000L only was required for that purpose, and in which 550 families went to bed without so much as a blanket to cover them.

After having made these statements respecting the misapplication of corporate property in Ireland, Mr. O'Loghlen called attention to the power exercised by the corporators in nominating Grand Juries, Sheriffs, and other officers of justice. By reference to the practice ni, Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Galway, and other cities, he showed, that not only were Catholics excluded from all' participation in offices of distinction and emolument, but that all Protestants who did not belong: to the dominant party suffered the same injustice ; and that the privi- lege of taxing the community, of appointing Sheriffs and Sub-Sheriffs,. and paying their salaries, was vested in a few, ill-informed, and fre- quently insolvent and disreputable, tools of an ascendant faction or powerful family. As an instance of the perversion of justice arising, from this factious selection of Juries, Mr. O'Loghlen mentioned the following case— It appears that the Corporation of Limerick claim the sole right of fishing, in the river Shannon. This, however, was disputed by the fishermen, who determined to assert what they considered to be their right. Some Policemen in the service of the Corporation of Limerick fired on these fishermen while pursuing their calling, and wounded one of them in the breast by a shot. The fishermen landed and took the arms away from the Policemen, and then went before a County Magistrate and stated that they had been fired on by thePolica- men of the Corporation. The Magistrate, who gives an account of the trans- action proceeds to say—" I saw the wounded man, and the other men, and they asked my advice. I advised them to give up their arms to the General of the district, and swear informations before a City Magistrate fur the assault. Informations were sworn before a Corporate Magistrate; but glen delay and difficulty occurred before a warrant could be obtained. Cross-informations were sworn against the fishermen fur taking to arms, which had I eels delivered tip to the General, pursuant to the Magistrates' advice. The bile against the Policemen, who were servants of the Corporation, were ignored by a Corpo• rate Grand Jury, though supported by the evidence of the wounded persons, and bills . fur a capital offence found against the fishermen. 1 he fishermen were very poor. A subscription was entered into to procure tin m the aid of counsel. They were defended by Mr. Sergeant Jackson, and acquitted with- out hesitation under the direction of the Court." " I quote this statement (said Mr. O'Loghlen) from the report of the Commissioners appointed to in- quire into the Fees, &c. taken in Courts of Jusl ire in Ireland : and I think that it sufficiently shows the evil of placing the appointment of Grand Jurors in the bands of persons with irresponsible power.' Having thus stated, as it appeared to him sufficient ercunds for at- tempting to reform the Municipal system in Ireland, Mr. O'Loghlen proceeded to give an account of the leading provisions of the bill. It was proposed that in Dublin, Cork, Belfast, Limerick, Kilkenny, Gal- way, and Waterford, a new Municipal constituency should be created, to consist of the residents in houses worth 10/. a year and upwards ; and that in the remaining towns the residence in a house valued at 5/. a year should give the right of voting. It had been proposed to establish one uniform sum of 101. as the rent which should confer the franchise, but lie found that this would restrict the constituency too much. In Londonderry, out of 3074 householders, there were only L.00 rented at 101. and upwards ; in Portarliugton, out of 500, only 130; in Lisburne, out of 600, only 91. He found also, that by the Act 9th George I V., chapter 82, the occupants of 51. houses were entitled to elect Com- missioners for lighting and cleansing the towns and other municipal purposes; and this Act worked well. No person would be allowed to act as Councillor in the seven larger towns who was not worth 10001., or in the smaller ones who was not worth 5001. after all his debts were paid. There was to be no separate election of Aldermen, but the per- sons highest on the poll were to be Aldermen. One third of the Councillors would go out of office every year, and half of the Aldermen every third year. A commission of the peace would be granted to such towns as the Lord-Lieutenant thought proper to select ; in other places the only Magistrate would be the Mayor : about 140 Borough Magistrates would be set aside by the operation of this part of the bill. The Councils of Dublin, Cork, Kilkenny, Limerick, Waterford, Carrickfergus, Drogheda, Galway, and Londonderry, would have the power of electing Sheriffs, subject to the approbation of the Lord- Lieutenant; but the Councils would not be allowed to reelect any per. son disapproved of by the Viceroy. These were the general provisions of the bill : they were based on the principle of the English and Scotch Municipal Bills ; and it remained for the House to say whether that principle should not be extended to Ireland. He utterly denied that the consequence of the bill would be the transfer of power from one party to another. He recollected that this argument was used when the Irish Reform Bill was introduced ; and he could not do better than quote the triumphant reply which it received from the present Lord Stanley. Here Mr. OLoghlen read extracts from the speeches of Lord Stanley on the Irish Reform Bill, in which the folly and in- justice of legislating for Ireland on Ascendancy principles was empha- tically exposed : if that were to be the system of governing Ireland, the Catholic Relief Bill, Lord Stanley said, would be a dead letter. The danger of refusing to put Ireland on an equality with England and Scotland in respect to political rights, would be well worth the attens• tion of men of all parties ; for if English interests were to be treated in one way and Irish in another way, Lord Stanley was (in 1832) con-

vinced that agitation would become more formidable than ever. Mr. O'Loghlen contended that this line of argument was equally applicable to the Municipal as to the Reform Bill. He referred to the election of Protestant Members by Catholic constituencies as proof of the ab. Bence of religious bigotry among the Catholics in political affairs. He concluded by referring to the substitute which he had heard would be proposed for his bill by the Tories-

" It might be argued from the cheers with which the petition from Belfast was received, and from the manner in which the observations of the honour-

able Member who presented it were received, that some gentlemen were nut

satisfied with reforming the Municipal Corporations in Ireland, but that they would be satisfied with nothing less than their total destruction. I confess that I should be afraid to make such a proposition ; being, as I am, a Reformer, and wishing to improve and not to destroy ; and until I find some Destructive rising up and proposing the abolition of Corporations in Ireland, I will not be- lieve that it can seriously be done. (Loud and continued cheering.) I know, if such a proposition was made to the House, that it would never be sanctioned. But I would ask, is it possible that such a recommendation can come from a pretended friend of Corporation Reform? Such arson must know, that by adopting such a step, the Legislature would be sanctioning laws such as I have already described. Will any man in this House say that he is prepared to sanction the loans that were made with reference to the property of the bo-

roughs of Cashel and Naas? Is any one prepared to give his support to a pro-

position which would sanction the proceeding by which property undoubtedly belonging to the poor of Cashel should be alienated from them for ever? The

object of the bill is to invest the management of such property in the hands of

Commissioners elected by the persons interested in it. I respectfully claim the vote of the honourable Member in favour of such an object, and against any

proposition for destroying the Corporations of Ireland. I claim his vote who

is not a Destructive: I claim the votes of those who say that there is nothing in the state of society in Ireland which should prevent that country from having

extended to it the same measure of justice and right principle which England and Scotland have been deemed entitled to enjoy. I ask the votes of all those who have stood up for the vested rights, and even the inchoate rights, of free- men ; and who have stated that the continuance of the connexion between the two countries depends on the freemen. I ask, will they advocate a proposition to destroy the Corporations, unless they conceive there can be freemen of a

body which does not exist? In fine, I ask the support of all the advocates of

equal rights and equal privileges; and who think that nothing can suggest the idea of a Repeal of the Union but the refusal of England to extend those rights

and liberties to Ireland. I have troubled the House at some length ; but I trust I shall be excused, on account of the importance of the subject. Thank- mg the House for the attention which has been paid to my statement, I shall conclude by moving, that this bill be now read a second time." Bit ROBERT PEEL delivered a long speech, to prove that, although the Irish Corporations were too corrupt to be preserved, there was as occasion to substitute for them a new Municipal s) stem ; but that a Board of Commissioners nominated by the Crown, might take change of all the property of the Corporations ; that the existing rights to tolls and property—regard being had to the claims of those who had ad- vanced money upon them—should be abolished, and that the govern- ment of the Municipalities should be carried on under the several local acts which had been obtained from time to time. In support of this plan, he contended in the first place, that the Irish Corporations were too bad to be improved— For himself, he had never thought it possible to amend the corporate systeaa of Ireland as it exists at present : nor should he advise a partial modification for the purpose of propping up a system which was radically had. They might enlarge the number of freemen, or make new regulations in respect to the ad- mission of freemen, and cure some of the evils which were inherent in the pre- sent system ; still they could not, in his opinion, overcome by such means the grave objections which applied in principle to the continuance of that system even modified by these slight alterations. A system which presented so limited a number as but 13,000 corporators out of a borough population of 900,000 was in itself a most mischievous one; yet to this was superadded the grievance that these corporators were almost entirely of one form of religious faith. (" Hear, hear, hear !") Another agravation of these original objections was that political feelings were mixed up with the administration of justice, and even though that administration of justice happened to be perfectly pure, still there was created a feeling which was almost as bad as though it were justice impurely administered.

But though he would say nothing in favour of the old Corporations, he had strong objections to the bill which was now proposed to be read a second time. He was opposed to the indefinite creation of corpo- rations, authorized by that clause of the bill which empowered the Lord-Lieutenant, on the application of any number, however small, of the inhabitants, to grant a corporation to any town. There might be l26 towns in Ireland with Corporations ; for the rule in the bill was, that corporate towns with 2000 inhabitants should retain their Corpo- rations; and therefore the Lord-Lieutenant might, on being applied to, consider it proper to adopt the same rule, and grant corporations to all towns in Ireland with such an amount of population ; he had ascer- tained that the number of such towns was 126. Now, in all these places, there might be a separate system of by-laws, and Commissions of the Peace, with Town-Clerks and Sheriffs elected by the Councils; the Sheriffs would have the summoning of Juries ; and thus the ad- ministration of justice would in a great measure be thrown into the hands of partisans, dependent on the populace for their places. Under such a state of things, party-spirit would prevail in every corner of the land. Great complaints were made of the evil influence of the old Corporations on the administration of justice, arising from the power of their Sheriffs to summon Juries ; but he would ask whether, under the new system, the Sheriff would not be intimately connected with the dominant party in the Council? There was nothing in the prin- ciple of popular control to ward off this evil. The veto of the Lord- Lteutenant on the appointment of Sheriffs was a clumsy and ineffi- cient expedient. The Irish Government had refused to take the Sheriffs nominated by the Judges—were the Councils likely to make a better selection ? Why fetter the Lord-Lieutenant in his choice of Sheriffs ? Then as to the Police, Sir Robert Peel contended, that it WII8 grossly inconsistent in Ministers to take the power of appointing Policemen from the local Magistracy, as they proposed to do by their Constabulary Bill, and yet to confer that power on the Councils. He was anxious to cure every abuse ; but he would not give the new Cor- porations a vested interest in abuses—such as a right to existing tolls. His plan might be briefly stated, for it was very simple— He did not propose to vindicate the maintenance of the present corporate bodies. He did not hesitate to say, that he for one would not consent-to the substitution of other corporate bodies. In the present state of Ireland, he did not see the necessity for the existence of corporate bodies. He thought their interference with the administration of justice was deeply prejudicial. He thought that corporation property should be applied to local purposes; but he was not prepared to appoint a Town-Council to nominate subordinate and paid officers to manage that property. With respect to municipal purposes not connected with the Police—not connected with the administration of justice.

he would in those cases leave the Act 9th George IV. in operation, which per- mitted Commissioners to be appointed subject to popular control, and owing

their election also to popular nomination. He would, iu the counties of cities and of towns, instead of Sheriffs being appointed by the Town- Councils, have them appointed by the Crown, as Sheriffs were now in counties. He would abolish all those small Manor and Seneschal Courts, and he would extend the operations of the Assistant Barristers' Courts, which gave now entire satisfaction. The bill gave the Councils elected by 5/. householders the power of

superseding Harbour Commissioners, and Chambers of Commerce, and other associations formed by the best-qualified persons to super- intend certain important interests: was this to be endured ? How

would the Manchester merchants and manufacturers like such a superintendence and control ? This, however, was to be done ; for he

found this principle of interference directly laid down by the Com-

missioner:, in their Report : it was a power much more extensive than any which had been given to the English Town. Councils. As to the political feeling of the Irish Councils, could any man doubt they would become schools of agitation ? What had Mr. O'Connell said of the English Councils on the first day of the session ? The honourable and learned Member for Dublin, speaking in reference to the Municipal Councils in England, used those expressions which he was very

sorry to have to quote. He believed the honourable and learned Member said

upon this subject —" The sore is festering in your vitals. You regret the triumph the Reformers have gained in the Municipal Councils. You know that there

is not one of these Councils that will not be converted into a normal school for

teaching the science of political agitation." ( Cheers.) These were the ex- pressions of the honourable and learned gentleman, with respect to the Town- Councils. He prophesied of them, that they would lie " tne normal schools for teaching the science of agitation." (" Hear, hear I" from Mr. O'Connell —"I said "peaceable agitation.") If that, then, were the case with the Town-Councils in England, was it likely that the Town-Councils in Ireland would! be free from political agitation. " England (he said) had received an

instalment of what was due to her, and right well has she used it. You have

good reason for opposing Municipal Reform in Ireland. You regret the triumph the Reformers have gaire I iii the Municipal Councils. You know that there is not one of these Councils that will not be converted into a normal school of po- litical agitation." If that were true as respected England, was it false with respect to Ireland ? lf, then, it were true with respect to Ireland, had they nal a eight to protest against the administration of justice and the superinten- dent's. el the civil power being committed to such hands ?

Sir Robert concluded by imploring the House not to consent to a osessure for exterminating one party and giving ascendancy to the other— We ask of you to consider the present state of Ireland—its present state of *gaiety, and particularly that state of society in reference to the administration Otte laws. We ask you to remember, that you now recommend a principle width Jos object to in another state of affairs : we ask of you to recollect your am doctrines with respect to the administration of the civil power, and the ricsiphs arm yourselves have laid down to insure unanimity ; and if you have sesson to believe, from the present state of party feelings, that annual elections are Fatly to engender bad passions—if you have reason to believe it will—if you Rase reason to believe that these societies will be converted into schools of stkotiou, I ask you will you pass this bill ? We ask of you, as you value reli- gjaas peace—we ail; you, as you value equal laws—we ask you, as you value tic security and integrity of this great empire—not to lend the sanction of your aathesity, of your moral and legislative authority, to the constitution in Ireland et ro ual schools, in which the science of agitation shell be taught. (Loud deers. l But, above all, we demand of you, respectfully, but firmly, that you srsli aot make the graduates in those schools, and the professors in the science of agitation, the chosen instruments to wield the civil force and dispense public instice." (Loud cheers from the Opposition.) _NIL SPRING RICE said, that a train of sophistry ran through the whole of Sir Robert Peel's speech. Ile would give an instance of the eii.sisrgenuous manner in which he had treated the subject before the /loose. Sir Robert bad asserted that greater power was given to the /ash than to the English Councils, and had asked this question very aignificuntly-

“ Why will you allow the Town.Councils in Ireland to interfere with your issaitatione of trade and science ? Why will you allow them to have a weatved over the Chambers of Commerce in their respective boroughs, when you Boers given no such power to your Town-Councils in England ?" Would the name believe that no such power as that which the right honourable baronet

had described was given to the Town-Councils by this bill ? (Long• continued sierra fiom the Ministerial benches.) There was not a siugle word in the bill which would enable Town-Councils to interfere in the way which the right honourable baronet had stated. The right honourable baronet had very skilfully taken a recommendation of the Commissioners, which was not adopted in this WV, and had, for the sake of a little temporary effect, used it in argument, as if it had been a clause in the bill.

But Sir Robert Peel had been guilty of a still more important mis- :epresentation : he had especially relied upon the bad results which the power to appoint Sheriffs and Grand Juries would occasion—

De had mixed tip with this the question of judicature, and had then applied

it to the 120 towns and boroughs in Ireland ; when it was quite evident from the bill itself, that it only affected eight cities and towns, which were all the cities and towns in Ireland that were entitled to exercise these powers. ( Cheers firm the Ministerial benches.) There were only eight cities and towns osrpoaate in Ireland in which corporate Sheriffs existed, and in which they would continue to exist after the passing of this bill. The argument, therefore, which Sir Robert had constructed upon the appointment of Sheriffs, was only applicable to eight cases, if indeed it were applicable at all ; and certainly could not under any circumstances, be applied, as he had applied it, to 120 cases in ( Cheers continued.) Ile would recall the attention of the House to another portion of Sir Robert's speech. The right honourable baronet, whilst "minding them that they bad in Ireland what he should ever consider the un- seemly spectacle of Recorders annually appointed and Magistrates annually elected to administer justice, had carefully and cautiously abstained from referring to that portion of this bill which made the Recorders in all corporate towns the nominees of the Crown, and which gave the Magis- sates a permanence in their office, and subjected them to the control elder Crown, instead of leaving them open to the influence of the freemen by whom they were now annually elected. ( Cheers from the Ministerial benches.)

Much had been made of one expression of Mr. O'Connell, that the

Corporations would become " normal schools for peaceful agitation ;" but that expression was applied to English Corporations and was as applicable to English as to Irish Corporations ; therefore if the system a/peaceful agitation was so very objectionable, why did not Sir Robert Ma notice on the paper for the repeal of the English Municipal Bill ? he could tell Sir Robert, that if be succeeded in procuring the selection of the bill before the House, he would be by far the greatest agitator of the day. Mr. Rice would not at this stage enter upon a friscussion of details which might perhaps be reserved for the Commit- tee; and he would at once go to the real objection to the bill,—which was, that the People of Ireland were to be trusted with the manage- ment of their local concerns, notwithstanding the present disproportion of nanabers between the Catholics and Protestants.

That was the real objection to this bill. (Cheers frosts the Opposition Wenches.) Every thing else was mere mystification. ( Cheers from the Minis- Stria benches.) They had been that night told that the majority of the People of Ireland were Catholic, and that in consequence it could not be trusted. If there was any danger to the State from that circumstance,—which he emphati- cally and indignantly denied,—it was not to be averted, the evil of it was not to be cured by refusing to the people of Ireland a well-digested bill for Muni- sip" al Reform. You must trust to higher and better motives ; you must avert it by mitigating the rancour of religious rage, by procuring a calm and impar- tial administration of justice. ( Cheers from the Opposition benches.) The ren. tremen who had just cheered hint so ironically were those very persons who had resisted all the various propositions which he had brought forward for the purpose of securing the due administration of justice in the city of Limerick. Ella to the present day, they had resisted all attempts to reform the Corpora- tion*. Now they came forward to destroy them altogether—to make, as it wore, '6a murder of the innocents." ( Cheers and laughter.) They stigma-. tiled the system proposed in this bill as interfering with the due administration of justice : and that led him to the consideration of the nature of the former system. Sir Robert Peel bad this night abandoned that system altogether ; there was not one shred of it for which be had offered a single word of excuse. Mayors, Aldermen, Common-Councilmen, Burgesses, even the favourite Free- anen—( Great cheering)—with the Recorders and Town-Clerks, were at one fell swoop, all given up to the Genius of Destruction.

It was true that Sir Robert Peel bad brought forward something like anew system in the place of that which he destroyed- " Yes, he who last year would not give to the Crown the power of dividing

The corporate towns in England into wards, was now ready to appoint a Royal ebminission which was to consolidate and appropriate--( Cheers from the Ministerial benches)—yes, appropriate was the word—( Cheering continued) —an the tolls in Ireland, which were hereafter to be vested in certain Commis- :owes appointed by the Crown. Now, if we had proposed any such thing,- iT, sot content with destruction, we had proposed the erection of a regal tyranny to as zoorn,—they would have raised against us the cry of having caused the

wanton destruction of corporate rights, and would have accused us of wishing to establish a new domination in the country." Mr. Rice contended, that it was quite absurd to confound the Con- stabulary force—the armed Police of Ireland, which was commanded by the Lord-Lieutenant, and paid out of the Consolidated Fund—with the watchmen, whom the new Councils would pay and provide. In Limerick, and in other places, there was at present a Municipal Police and a portion of the Constabulary force ; and there was no clashing between them. The conduct of Sir Robert Peel with respect to this bill was most unusual, and contrary to precedent. The premises of his speech ought to have led him but to one conclusion-

" Ought he not to have moved as an amendment, that leave be given to bring in a bill to abolish all existing Corporations in Ireland, and to create a Corn- mission, to be appointed by the Crown, in which should he vested all corporate property now in existence in Ireland, no matter whether the parties enjoy it by charter or by inheritance, perverting every prescription, forgetting the rights even of their darling freemen, and adopting the new principle as to tolls, which their friends elsewhere compelled us to throw out of the English Municipal Re- form Bill? ( Great cheering and laughter.) We wanted to go further than we did with regard to tolls in our English Bill : but no, they would not hear of such a proceeding. But now, their beuevulence to Ireland is so great, so sur- passing all former precedent, that they me ready to suppress all those corporate tolls to-morrow." ( Cheers and laughter front the Ministerial benches.) These were to hint new doctrines ; and, considering the quarter from which they came, singularly wild into the bargain. ( Laughter.) He therefore hoped that the gentlemen who propounded them would allow him to administer to them those salutary lectures upon caution and moderation which they had so often, so kindly, and so disinterestedly read to honourable gentlemen on his side of the House. (Ministerial cheers continued.) lie hoped that the right honourable baronet and his friends would employ these new doctrii,es with great cam and caution. For his own part, he was not inclined to quarrel with the principles contained in them : he Was ready to admit their correctness. He was well acquainted with the views of the lords and gentlemen opposite to him; and he hoped, that for the sake of the institutions of their country, they would moderate their " destructive " rage, and try their principles by the test of ex- perience. ( Cheers and laughter.) Lord STANLEY avowed his determination to support the plan deve- loped by Sir Robert Peel, at the proper time—

He did not hesitate to avow, that religious grounds did influence him in his opinion on this question; and he said so because, unfortunately, in Ireland all great political questions were so mixed up with religious differences that it was impossible to separate them. Therefore, without washing to deprive a single Ca- tholic of a single right or privilege—still less wishing to secure to Pa otestants the continuance of a single abuse by which they might profit—ae said you must look at the state of society which prevailed in Ireland—that state in which the lower class of the population, infinitely superior in numerical strength, differed in religion from the minority ; and taking this view of the case, lie could not separate the questions of politics and religion, or avoid seeing that in all local matters and discussions, political questions connected with religious differences would and must be brought lo bear. With this view, he asked Mr. Soling Rice whether he could pretend to say that the same remedy that had been found necessary and efficient in England was as necessary and likely to be equally efficient in Ireland ?

He quoted a passage from Mr. Rice's speech on the Repeal of the Union, in which the argument against granting a domestic Legislature to Ireland, founded on the religious and political animosities of the People, was strongly stated ; and he asked whether this argument did not apply with at least equal force against granting them the Municipal institutions, proposed by the bill ? For his part, he was prepared to do equal justice to Catholic and Protestant ; but he repeated, that he would not allow one body to obtain an ascendancy over the other, which would be the result of adopting the English Municipal system in a country where the state of society was essentially different from what it was in England.

Mr. SHEIL wished to know why Lord Stanley had refrained from discussing the principle of the bill ?— What more apt opportunity could he presented ; and from what motive did he reserve the display of his faculties for another night? Surely the principle of the bill should be discussed on the second reading, and the de.ails in the Committee. Did the noble lord intend to invert the natural order of discieoion, and debate the details before the priciple, and the principle after the derails ? His right honourable leader, the Member for Tamworth— Cheers and laughter) —had not taken that course ; for be had not only gone into the principle of the hill, but struck directly at its foundation.

Lord STANLEY—" It may save the learned gentleman trouble, if I now apprise him that it is intended to debate, and to divide, on a subsequent occa- sion, on going into the Committee." Mr. SHEIL said, he thanked the noble lord for his kindness it. intimating, the result of his consultation with his new colleagues on the other side of the House. ( Cheers.) He should not, then, as there was to be no division, go at length into the bill ; bet to some of the observations made by the noble lord he thought it even then not inappropriate to apply himself. The question had been boldly put on religious grounds by Lord Stanley— The right honourable Member for Tamworth had not said so much : with his habitual caution and characteristic skill, he had only dealt in insinuations ; while the noble lord, who had not made any proficiency in prudence, even with the aid of so valuable an instructor as the right honourable Member for Tam- worth, with a great deal of frankness, and he hoped with not a little honesty, at once let the truth escape from him, and declared that he would deny en Ireland the same municipal institutions as bad been conferred upon England from sectarian, or if be pleased so to call them, from religious considerations. H it if did this accord with the passage in the speech of the noble (but somewhat incongruous) lord, made in 1832, and which the Attorney-General had referred to? In that speech, so replete with lofty sentiments, and so much in contrast with the noble lord's existing position, the noble lord had declared that all distinctions between Catholic and Protestant ought, by the Emanci- pation Act, to be buried in everlasting oblivion ; yet he now resuscitates and evokes them, when to his purpose they may be made subservient. The noble lord had in 1832 declared that Ireland and this country should be placed on a perfect level, and that all lines of national as well as of religious demarcation should he effaced for ever ; yet now he would deny to Ireland the extension of the advantages conferred upon England, because there are in Ireland seven millions who believe in the religion of the country, and seven hundred thou- sand who profess the religion of the law. But although the noble lord with- held from them whom he still persevered in calling his noble friends the benefit of his support, be could not take away from the advantage of his authority. He had abandoned his party, but he could not subvert his former principles from the solid basis on which they rested. He had gone, indeed, to the enemy's camp, but he had left his arms behind. (Loud cheers.) The noble lord could not do the same detriment to his argument as his character, nor deal with his logic as it had unhappily pleased him to deal with his reputation. (Loud cheers.) Mr. Shed ridiculed the new zeal for reform and sensitiveness at cor- poration abuses, which were now professed by the Tories. He ex- claimed claimed against the gross injustice of those who in every way strove to kindle religious animosity ; and then referred to their own work as proof of the danger of governing Ireland on the same principles as England and Scotlund- 44 With what face do the Conservatives talk of religious animosities? By whom are they most sedulously fostered and maintained? Look at the public journals in their interest, and at the emissaries of thimlogical rancour whom they send as incendiaries, to propagate the worst feelings, and inculcate detes- tation thiough the country. ( Cheers.) Are not our clergy designated as surpliced uffians? are -not their followers represented as banded assas- sins? and are not the Representatives of the Irish People held up as guilty men, basely foresworn upon the Word of the living Guff. (Loud cheers.) Anil when such lauguage as this is apitiital to us, to our country, and to our religion, can it Ire wondered at that Owl e is a feeling of inevitable esentment m duced in the nation's heart.' And what estimate ought to be formed of these who first raise this religious excitement, this miserable No-Popery howl, and then avail themselves of it, for the purposes of party ; and, in order to deprive us of the benefit of British institutions, appeal to the passions which they have themselves excited -1 Sir, we ate entitled MBritish institutions; and hate them vve will and must. What is the plan of the Conservatives ?—to transfer the nomination of sheriffs, of Magistrates, of Police, the management of property, the administra tan of laud justice, to the Crown. This in England they did not dare to pro- pose ; this io Ireland, please God and the People, they shall never carry. No; we must have Municipal as we have secured Parliamentary Reform. By the same policy bath countries must he governed ; and if Corporations in England have Iven submitted to popular control, in the true sense of the word '' popu- lar," Corporations must in Ireland be submitted. Do you think that we will, or that we ought, to /tinniest in any measure short of complete equality with England ? Don't you know, that if you treat us as a province and a colony, and not as part and parcel of yourselves—if you refuse us what we call justice, and what your hearts must tell you that as justice we rightly designate—a perilous question will be revived, and its discussion will inevitably be resuscitated? But if you carry the great international compact into real, substantial, practical effect ; if you abolish all distinc- tions, natural and religious ; if you give us the sante laws, the same rights, the same privileges, the same institutions; if you place us on a noble level, and establish a glorious parity between us; if you rill our hearts with the glorious consciousness of British citizenship, and make us feel that we are even as you are,—then you will not only have refuted the argument for repeal, but you will have annihilated its pretence ; you will nut only have removed the motive, but eradicated the desire. And that you may act this %vise part, is the prayer of one who holds at heart the interest and peace of his country, and the glory of that great empire of which it forms so essential, and of which I trust that, ere long, it will prove a prosperous part." (Loud cheers.)

Colonel CoNoreee warmly defended the conduct of Lord Mayo with respect to the Corporation of Naas; and approved of the proposition of Sir Robert l'eel.

Lord Jotter RUSSELL said, that after the speeches of Mr. O'Leghlen and Mr. Rice, there was'no cceiteion for him to give the reasons why lie supported the bill ; arid, he continued, "I shall only just observe, that if the amendment of the right lionourahIe baronet he carried, it will be incumbent on us to engage the services of Sir Charles Whether-ell, in order to be heard at the bar of the House re.tainst so gross an invasion of rights and property as that which the right honourabIe baronet contemplates. (Much laughter.) So far does the astounding propo- sition of the right honourable gentleman exceed any thing ever proposed by us an the way of Reform. (Laughter.) I shall now state the course proposed to be taken by my right honourable friend (Mr. O'Loghlen). We propose that the bill should be read a second time to-night, and go into Committee on Mon- day next. Now, I wish to know whether the right honourable gentleman will embody his proposition in an instruction to the Committee, or whether be will move an amendment in the Committee ?"

Sir ROBERT PEEL replied, that he should move his plan as an in. struction to the Committee; and if it were rejected, he should not give Ministers much trouble as to the details.

Mr. BROTHFATON got upon his legs, and there was at once a rush of Members to the door.

The bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Monday next.

On Wednesday, Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET, OR behalf of Lord FRANCIS EGEItTON, gave notice of a motion for Monday, "to empower the Committee on the Bill for the regulation of the Municipal Cor- porations in Ireland to make provisions for the abolition of such Cor- porations, and for such arrangements as may be necessary, on their abolition, for securing the efficient and impartial administration of justice, and the peace and good government of cities and towns in Ireland."

2. PRISONERS' COUNSEL BILL.

On the motion of Mr. EWART, the House of Commons went into a Committee on this bill on Wednesday. On the first clause being read, Mr. WAKLEY proposed that attornies as well as barristers should be allowed to act as counsel for prisoners. Some conversation arose on this point. Several Members, including Mr. HUME and Mr. O'CONNELL, approved of the alteration ; but

,commended Mr. Watley not to endanger the bill in the House of • 'eers by arraying the whole of the bar against it. Sir F. Poeeoce advised that Mr. Wakley's amendment should be altered so as to allow " attornies, in courts where attornies practice, instead of counsel," to plead for prisoners. This suggestion was adopted ; and the clause, as amended, was passed.

Clause second allows the prisoner the right of final reply. Sir JOHN CAMPBELL strongly opposed it : he said, it would allow nine out of ten criminals to escape. Sir F. POLLOCK assured the House that they might as well throw the bill into the fire at once, if they expunged that clause : without it the bill would be a curse and a snare to the prisoner. Mr. O'CONNELL spoke to the same effect. Sir JOHN CAMPBELL would not oppose the general sense of the House, and with. drew his opposition to the clause.

Colonel PERCEVAL oalled the attention of the House to a charge formerly made by Mr. O'Connell, upon his (Colonel Perceval's) friend, Mr. Charles Phillips ; who complained that the Member for Dublin had said that he was biassed by a regard to his private interest, in the evidence he had given before the Committee on this bit Colonel Perceval culled upon Mr. O'Connell to do, as Sir P. Pollack had done—to retract the injurious expression.

Mr. O'ComerEet. most readily and cheerfully responded to the eats-- Mr. Charles Phillips had been longer his biend than he had beta the /Like/ of Colonel Perceval. Ile was, and ever bad been, proud to call Mr. C. Nal- lips his friend. On the last occasion when the bill was before the H, ii e, its made some observation upon the evidence given before the Select Committee asi the other House of Parliament, but he had at the same time stated t 'oily spoke Irons public repent es to that evidence, and not from the evitletwo itedt, a copy of which be had endeavoured, but at that time hail failed, to raatax-e- I le, however, had never mentioned the name of air. C. •• /cur!" from the Mimisteria Leeches) --hut (Woad Pei ceval, in "ruin

the tenderness of his friendship for that learned gentlentam did interfr I e Or- o-mime his name, and did make the latest of au exec a.ut oppor, Omit; Ise

thought, of creating a quarrel between two old friends. If Inc, Itiovever, Lae said any thing that could be thought disparaging to the character of Mr. C. Phillips, he did not now hesitate to retract it. Ile hall no intention of indite any attack upon the character of au individual whom he should ever eatsaeis of

an honour to know.

Colonel l'EncEvere to show that he lied been no meddler is tbe

matter, offered to read the letter of fr. Phillips to him. After sense opposition, he was allowed to do this. The letter wee couched in very to terms, and concluded with these words- '• No man knows better than !Mr. I il'onn.•11 that ., !did inten.st has tweer le maes3 vide. He ought to remember. tlmt, u, 1!.• of the eiss :die patty to w '.tier yea which was then omnipotent in 4,1 Ind. awl amorntst whom yon hinrw trry it feral patrons were, 1 sacrificed. for %tint I considered Li • L.,ilseeitted sets (Sis '141E eniu!oment or promotion. I ITIel it for acting cutiseientionsly ; but ...weir. surely the tact ought to hate siticltesl ior nom such ata ooxconioi and funs sank a quarter. How I bare Winifred his enmity I kuow ;t:1 it Ire by my Im‘itig al ways been his friend ? You will scarcely' believe III it, alter two.atitt-t wittily years of the csrd. confidential intercourse, his la, t act was that of cordial tecognit ion Ott the say t;vekisofd. of the House. into which he tins entering to :tsperstt me. Mr. O'Connell is limal of his zolverling to his home. A happy on, I know it s. sail long mas it coot' r so; het he ought led to hater forgot ltqa helpless li,:1c daetiet another home, whom he was depriving of their bread. hy depth Ma their pareos of has character:' Air. O'CONNELL said that he had retracted his observatioes before

the letter was read, and now could only retract them again. The discussion of the bill was then re-timed. IN Ir. Cue iu.r.s moved an amendment,

"'That after the closing of the evidence for the person or persons ner,...,c17„ then, and not till then, the counsel for the prosecution and the counsel fe: de accused shall be permitted to pit !less the Court." Several Alen:here pressed Air. Buller to withdraw his amenamens; which he was ss Ming to do, provided the House divided on the orieinall. clause. The galleries were eh are.I for a division ; but a edeeetesion arose as to whether the Horse in Committee should divide oat Mr. Ward's or on the old plan. The Chairman was ordered to report leo:o- gress ; and the Set:el.:1St having vilten the chair, gave it as his deeided opinion, that the wove: in Nis. Ward's resolutions—" the door: being simultaneously-opened by the Speaker's orders "—did nut authorize a. departure from the old mode, when the Speaker was nut .in the Aside. Mr. Wean wished to amend the resolutions at once, so as to seeszlet them extend to divisions hi f'ommittees. But it terns objected, lee' the SPEAK ER, that doe. notice had not been given of such a motion; ore finally, the Speaker having left the chair, and the House being again in Committee, the clause was passed, by 13-1 to 50 ; the division !Join taken on the old plan.

The third clause, which allowed persons accused before Justices of tie Peace to be defended by counsel, was rejected, by 110 to 93.

The fourth clause was agreed to. The fifth, which allows prieUliCIL to inspect the depositions against them, was opposed by Mr. Wynn; but carried, by 155 to 51; and the House resumed.

3. NAVY ESTIMATES.

Last night, the House being in a Committee of Supply, Mr. Cneuers WOOD brought forward the Navy Estimates. It appeared from his statement, that the excess of the proposed expenditure this year over the last was '254,000/. ; which was rendered necessary by the addition of 5000 men to the Navy. Mr. Wood entered into a number of &- tails of a very dry description, and gave several reasons for the pro- posed increase of the naval force; the chief of which seemed to be, that the fleets of France and Russia had recently been considerably strengthened.

A long and desultory conversation ensued.

Mr. flume said, the Estimates were the best arranged he had ever seen ; but he was sorry that some sinecures had riot been abolishedL He did not see the necessity for the proposed ;:crease.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM and Sir Rontate PEEL cordially Improved of it.

Lord JOHN RussEee was anxious that the House should mkt:seined. that we were on friendly terms with all Foreign Powers, but that die state of our Foreign relations did not always depend on the will ar policy or inclination of the Ministers of this country.

Sir E. ComuNGroN was convinced, from what he observed at St. Petersburg, that an increase of our naval foree was necessary. Se- veral other Members expressed the same opinion ; and Lord DUES.E•T STUART observed, that as the real object was to oppose the designs of Russia, he wished it had been avowed.

It was then agreed, that 33,700 men, including 9000 Marines and 2000 boys, should be employed in the naval service of the year.

Several votes of money were agreed to without discussion. But in the course of the evening, allusion was made by Sir E. CODRIN(.46M to the retiring pension promised to Lord Auckland, to induce hint tie become First Lord of the Admiralty : he did not see any necessity far such is promise.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that he had not taken any retiring pea ions but Lord Auckland had stipulated for one.

Mr. HUME said, if such was the fact, it was disgraceful to Lad Auckland and the Government. LORD TEYNHAM: BREACII OF PRIVILEGE. In the House of Peers, on Tuesday, Lord TEYNHAM presented a petition signed by 300 inha- bitants of Brighton, complaining of the conduct of the Brighton Magistrates in committing a tvoinan to prison, the bill against whom was subsequently ignored by the Grand Jury. The Duke of Riot- worm and Lord STRANGFORD defended the conduct of the Magistrates; and Lord Chancellor COTTENHAM said, that, upon the face of the depositions, they could nut do otherwise than commit the woman. LordSramstwouu confessed himself tillable to guess what had induced Lord Teynbam to throw the whole weight (1' his metal character into the scale against the Brighton Magistrates. After a few words from Lord Teynham, the petition was read, and laid on the table.

On Thursday, Lord TEYNHAM called the attention of the house to the report of Lord Strangford's speech in the Mowing Post. lie did not know whether that noble lord was in the House or not.

Lord SHAFTEsBURY—" 11%4 till lie comes,"

Lord TEYNIIANI—" No, I shall not : it is immaterial to me whether be is here or not." He went on to say, that Lord Strangford, . . . . forgetful of thousands upon thousands of kindnesses done by him to Iris family, had made upon him, as it appeared in the report to which he alluded, a most unwarrantable, gross, and unfounded attack ; and he would be failing in the duty. he owed to their Lordships individually, as well as to the respect he entertained for their privileges, if he did not formally bring it under their notice. His complaint was a breach of the privileges of the House com- mitted by the Morning Post newspaper. That paper, notorious alone for the falsehood of every statement it put forth, had published a version of the noble viscount's speech upon the discussion of the other evening, not only totally dif. ferent from what he believed the noble viscount had said, but in every word varying from the reports which appeared in the other morning papers. Ile knew well—

Here Lord Teynham was called to order, by Lord SHAFTESBURY; but he took no notice of the interruption. However, shortly after, at the suggestions of Lord Londonderry, he agreed to wait till Lord Strangford entered the House.

Lord Strangford soon made his appearance; and Lord TEYNHAM asked whether he had not sent the report of his speech to the Morning Post himself? Did he mean to apply the observations, to which his rime was attached, to him?

Lord Strangfoad did not rise or speak.

Lord TEYNHAM—" I demand an answer to my question."

Lord KENYON spoke to order: the course taken by Lord Teynham was quite irregular.

Lord TEYNHAM thought that great latitude should be allowed in eases of this personal nature ; he either did not hear, or he entirely misunderstood Lord Strangford's remarks on Tuesday. He thought be ought to have an answer to his question.

Lord Strangford kept his seat, and did not speak.

The Marquis of WESTMINSTER rose to present a petition.

Lord TEYNHAM, starting up, asked if he was not to have an answer to his question?

Lord ELLENBOROUGH said it was the rule of the House that no explanation should be demanded by one Member from another except for words spoken in debate, and then the explanation should be re- ceived on the moment.

Lord TEYNHAM said those remarks were too diplomatic for his comprehension.

The Marquis of SALISBURY rose -to order, but Lord Teynham would act desist.

fact : Lord Auckland had rot acted imprudently • for his two pensions,

arnounting to 16001., would though perhaps not virtually, ter- Minate with the demise of the Crown ; but he secured in return a pen- sion of 20001. a year for life.

Mr. RICE said, this was an ungenerous insinuation.

After some remarks from Lord HOWICK, explanatory of the arrange- ment with Lord Auckland, Sir HENRY HARDINGE repeated Sir James Graham's insinuation. Lord JOHN RussELL repelled it. Mr. Ream withdrew his harsh expression, now that he saw the affair in its true light. Here the conversation was closed.

4. RAILROADS.

The following Railroad Bills were read a second time, and ordered to be committed, on Monday,—the London and Brighton ( Steplienson's line); the Bristol and Exeter; the Birmingham and Derby; the Bir- mingham and Gloucester; the Cheltenham and Great Western ; the Midland Counties ; the Sheffield and Rotherham ; and the Arbroath /sod Forfar. The London and Gravesend Railway Bill was thrown out, by a majority of 177 to 63.

On Tuesday, on the motion of Mr. Pon ETT THOMSoN, resolutions embodying the recommendations of the Committee on Railroads, ap- pointed last week, were adopted, after some discussion. Mr. Thom- son thus stated the purport of the resolutions— The first was, that it be an instruction to the Committees on Railway Bills, to obtaiu specific infer illation upon the various points adverted to in the report of the Select Committee. The object of that resolution was to procure for the House the most correct and ample information with respect to all those parti- cular railways, so as to guide its judgment in determining upon them. The next resolution regarded the divisions in those Committees, and the attendance of the Members of them. The third resolution was for giving time fur the nomination of the lists in cases of competing railroads, with a view, as the Committee recommended, that an amicable arrangement might be made be- tween the parties to such rival bills toga to one Co lllll iittee. The fourth reso- lution was to the effect, that the House would refuse to give fur ther time, unless demanded melee special circumstances, for the preseetation of reports from Committees sitting upon conflicting lines of railway. The object of this reso- lution was to prevent the promoters of one bill, who were anxious to defeat by delay the progress of a rival, to defer till very late their own report. in order to create delay in the decision of the House upon the other. The filch and last resolution was, that whenever there shall be three or more Railroo Bills re-

ported to the House and ready for their consideration, the House take the discussion upon them on the following Tuesday, prior to any notions or the transaction of public business.

5. MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS.

Lord MELBOURNE remarked that Lord Teynham was irregular in referring to observations made during a former debate. He hoped be would see the propriety of withdrawing his question.

Lord TEYNHAM, after "the amiable speech" of Lord Melbourne, felt "entirely satisfied," and would not trouble the House any further. He was sorry he had taken up their Lordships' time about the matter.

Mr. ROEBUCK : BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. Last night, Mr. Roz- BUCK complained in the House of Commons of a foul attack upon him by the Shcffiehl Iris. He read the paragraph, which charged him with having been bribed by the East India Company—the his people fancied they saw " his eager band groping in the coffers of Leaden- ball Street "—to oppose Mr. Buckingham's claim. Mr. Roebuck said he had written in peremptory terms to the editor of the newspaper to demand an apology; and he now wished to give Mr. Buckingham an opportunity of disclaiming any share in the writing of the libel.

Mr. BUCKINGHAM said, he had been too long a public character, and had written too much, to write in such a style: he knew nothing of the article in question, till he saw it the day before in print.

STAFFORD DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL. Mr. DIVETT, on Thursday, moved the second reading of this bill. Captain CIIETWYND moved that it be read a second time that day six months. Mr. LAW moved that the House should adjourn. For the motion, 4; against it, 55. 'f he amendment was then rejected, by 53 to 6 and the bill was read a second time.

DISSENTING GRIEVANCES. Sir RONALD FERGUSON presented a petitions from Nottingham, on Thursday, praying that the timber and materials used in building Dissenting places of worship might be ex- empted from duty, as was the case with churches of the Establishment. Sir Ronald also presented a petition from the Mayor and Corporation of Nottingham for the abolition of the declaration enjoined on the Dis- senters by the Municipal Bill.

Sir Jolts/ HomiousE said, that attention should be directed to the subject of the first petition, the prayer of which lie thought it not im- possible might be granted. With respect to the second petition, he did not hesitate to say in his individual capacity, that he thought the declaration required from the Dissenters superfluous and inconvenient.

Mr. LENNalin presented a petition, signed by 4800 inhabitants of Essex, praying for the removal of the Stamp-duty on the conveyance of Dissenting trust-deeds, and for the abolition of Church-rates. He said that there was considerable difference of opinion among the Dis- senters respecting the clause in the new Marriage Bill which reordered it necessary for the Registrar to be present at the celebration of Dis- senters' Marriages : some thought the regulation a stigma, others that it was a wise precaution to prevent improper marriages.

Mr. WHIN said, that the general provisions of the Government measures were satisfactory to the Dissenters.

Subsequently, Lord Jolts RessELL mentioned, in reply to Sir Ro- timer PEEL, that soon after Easter, Ministers would bring forward a measure regarding Church.rates.

DORCHESTER LAROURLIts. Mr. WAELEY stated, on Thursday, in answer to Mr. ROEBUCK, that from the amicable tone of a conversation he had lard with Lord John Russell respecting the Dorchester labourers, he did not think it would be necessary for him to bring the subject again before Parliament. Lord JOHN RessELL said— Since the late discussion upon Orange Lodges, he had thought it his duty to recoinnwild to his Majesty, that such part of the sentence upon two of the Dorchester labourers as reiini:ed their continuarice in the Australians Colonies for the whole period of their transportation should he commuted. Ile bail for- merly nantimied, that four out of the six offenders would be allowed to return at the end of two years, and that period would expire in October next. With regard to the remaining two, he had recommended that they should be allowed to return at the end of Boo: years. At tine satire time, if other favourable cir- cumstances were brought to his knowledge, he knew of nothing to prevent him from recommending to his Majesty a further extension of the Royal mercy.

REGISTRATION. Mr. MILES, on Wednesday, presented a petition from a number of Somersetshire electors, complaining that they had been disfranchised by the decision of the Revising Barristers. Mr. Miles said— It was only one of a numerous class of petitions, especially from the Eastern division of the county ; and unless some cx post facto clause were introduced into the bill before the House, upwards of ItRX) electors would be deprived of their right of voting, until a new list had been prepared by the Churchwardens. The case was this. One Overseer prepared the list and took it to his colleague in office for his signature; that colleague being ill, asked the other Overseer to sign it for him, which he did. When before the Revising Barrister, he was asked whether the list had been signed by both Overseers; and his answer was according to the fact ; upon which information, the Revising Barrister thought it his duty to reject the list altogether, and thereby to disfranchise all the elec- tors contained in it.

Colonel GORE LANGTON supported the petition ; and it was laid on the table.

On the same

day, after some discussion, Mr. HOWARD ELPHIN- STONE'S bill, to render the registration of electors final, was read a second time.

POOLE MUNICIPAL ELECTION. The debate on the motion for ap- pointing a Committee to inquire into the circumstances of this ele tion, was resumed on Wednesday. The motion was opposed by Mr!' HOGG, Mr. SCARLETT, and Mr. WYNN ; but carried, by 188 to 70.

LIGHTHOUSES. On Wednesday, Mr. HUME agreed, but very un- willingly, to abandon his bill on Lighthouses, on the assurance of Mr. POULETT TlioNISON, that he should oppose the second reading of it, but would himself introduce a measure founded on the recommenda- tion of the Committee of last session.

DIVISIONS OF THE HOUSE. Mr. BARI.OW HOY moved, last night, that the practice of taking the divisions in two lobbies be discontinued. Hs complained of the loss of time it occasioned— The first division that took place under the new system occupied nearly .47 minutes, though there were not above 400 Members present. In another division he counted 63 come out of the new lobby, and taking down their names occupied 15 minutes. Two divisions had since taken place in Committee according to the old system; in the first the Ayes were 134, the Noes 50, and the divisioa DITRESS OF THE SCOTCH AGRICULTURISTS. Mr. STEW ART MAC- KENZIE presented a petition, on Wednesday, from the landlords and farmers of Ross and Cromarty, complaining of agricultural distress. Mr. MACKENZIE said, he did not expect much relief from the labours of the Committee on Agriculture ; neither did he approve of tamper- ing with the currency. He thought that from an adjustment of rents to the prices of produce the most substantial benefit must be expected; but in the mean while, Government could in some respects aid the agri- culturists— " I allude to the tax upon agricultural seeds, clover, tares, and linseed, which may be considered us part of the raw materials, if I may use the term, required for the farmer's manufacture. A duty of 20s. per hundred upon all clover- seeds imported, operates injuriously, by enhancing the price of both the home- grown as well as the imported seed ; and frequently induces the farmer to use that which is of inferior quality, from being imperfectly ripened at home, but is sold at a somewhat lower price than the imported article. It is true that a few of the counties of England produce clover-seed to a considerable extent ; but if the foreign importer can afford to the agriculturist a superior article at a lower price, the repeal of the dirties on these seeds would be directly beneficial to all concerned in agriculture. The average amount of duty for the last three years is about 56,0001. per annum on clover-seed, affecting directly those parts of the country where, in ordinary seasons, such seeds cannot be ripened. It may also be mentioned, that the duty precludes the import of many kinds of agri- cultural reeds. I trust the Chancellor of the Exchequer may be able to afford this relief to the agriculturist of Scotland and of the other parts of the United Kingdom; and I feel confident of the support of my right honourable friend the President of the Board of Trade, in urging the necessity to relieve this im-

occupied only three minutes ; in the second, there were 198 on one aide and 51 on the other, and the division occupied only four minutes. This was a strong proof, he thought, that the ofd method of taking-divisions was the best. Taking the average of the hours of sitting at eight a day, five days in the week, he found that the time that would be occupied in taking divisions by the new method would he adequate to a whole week during the session.

Mr. WARD said the new plan had not had a fair trial— On the first division mentioned by Mr. Hoy, there were 75 Ayes and 281 Noes: it happened that the Noes went into the new lobby, the ingress and egress to and from which was so very inconvenient as to retard the division considerably. He thought, under the circumstances, that division was by no means a test of the practicability of the new method.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL agreed that the new plan had not bad a fair trial, and added that it had worked better than he had anticipated.

Mr. llov wished to withdraw his motion, and bring it forward again in the course of two or three weeks.

Mr. WARD wished the House to give an opinion on the motion now. But, after some remarks from Mr. SPRING RICE and Sir RonERT PEEL, the motion was suffered to be withdrawn.

PAYMENT OF MEDICAL WITNESSES AT INQUESTS. On the motion of Mr. WAsrev, on Tuesday, a bill was brought in to enable Coroners to compel the attendance of medical witnesses at inquests, and to award them a proper compensation for their attendance and trouble.

Bisnocaic OF DURHAM. Mr. Statism RICE mentioned, on Mon- day, in answer to a question from Mr. Hume, that It was the intention of Ministers to introduce a bill for the regulation of the abode question of the see of Durham, in pursuance of the recommendation of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, whose report would very shortly be laid on the table. 'that bill would comprehend both a reference to the total emolu- ments of the Bishop of Durham, and the immediate separation from the see of all the civil functions with which it had been hitherto coupled.

In the House of Lords, last night, the Marquis of LONDONDERRY expressed his regret that the revenues of the see of Durham were about to be reduced : this, he feared, would prevent the Bishop from continuing the noble hospitalities, such as the entertainment of the Judges, which had hitherto been customary. Lord MELBOURNE said that a sufficient income would be provided to maintain the dignity of the see.

ORANGE LODGES. The Marquis Of LONDONDERRY, on Thursday, postponed his motion respecting Orange Lodges, and the attacks upon himself which had been made in the House of Commons, until Monday ; when it was understood that the Earl of Roden would be present.

PERSECUTIONS IN CARLOW. Last night, Mr. WALT.ACE presented three petitions to the House of Commons from persons in Carlow, who complained of having been persecuted and turned out of their farms by Colonel Bruen and a Mr. Alexander for refusing to vote for the Tory candidates at the last election. Mr. Wallace expressed his determina- tion to have these majters inquired into.

Colonel 13nu1:N and Mr. FRANCIS BRUEN defended their conduct ; and the former read long extracts from letters written by gentlemen in Carlow, to prove the humanity and forbearance of the landlords and the tyranny of the priests.

After a few words from Mr. I lope, Mr. Haney complained of hav- ing been misrepresented by Mr. O'Connell, whose imputations bad been trumpeted forth in the provincial newspapers—

Lard .Tons: R ussr.t.i. called Mr. Hardy to order : he was travelling out of the matter before the House.

Mr. 11Annv only wished to vindicate his character.

The SPEAKER said, Mr. Hardy might have an opportunity of doing so at a future day.

Mr. HARDY made several ineffectual attempts to get a hearing; and gave notice, at length, that on Mr. Wallace's motion on the subject of Carlow, he should speak in his own vindicatiorr.

The petitions were laid on the table.

hum POOR-LAWS. Mr. O'BRIEN obtained leave on Thursday, to bring in a bill to establish a system of Poor-laws in Ireland.

COUNTY BOARDS IN IRELAND. Sir R. MUSGRAVE obtained leave, on Thursday, to bring in a bill " for the administration of certain civil affairs of a local nature by County Boards in Ireland." The object of this measure is to do away with the Grand Jury system in Ireland, and to give the right of electing County Boards to rate-payers. Lord MORPETH doubted whether the House would adopt so sweeping an al- teration in the Grand Jury laws ; but he did not object to the plan of Sir R. Musgrave being presented to the House in the form of a bill. ported article, as he has himself done so much in relieving all raw materials from severe and excessive import duties."

Mr. ROBERT FERGUSON supported the prayer of this petition.

THE MAURITIUS: Mr. PETER I3ORTHWICK. On Tuesday, Mr. Borthwick rose to bring under the consideration of the House the state of the Negro population in the Mauritius, when, on the motion of Mr. JERVIS, the House was counted, and found to contain exactly forty Members. So Mr. PETER 13ORTHWICK went on to speak. In the course of a few minutes, Mr. Wasost moved that the House be counted again, and it was then found that only twenty Members were present. So Mr. Peter Borthwick was obliged to desist, and the House was adjourned at a quarter past eight.

Last night, Mr. BORTHW ICK rose to bring forward his motion again, as an amendment on that for going into a Committee of Supply; but lie said that if Ministers would insure him another opportunity of bringing it forward,—an opportunity which he should not afterwards be deprived of,—he would postpone it.

Sir GEORGE GREY said he could not insure Mr. Borthwick against accidents, such as the House being counted out— He was sure his noble friend would assist the honourable Member as far as the conduct of the public business permitted ; but as to protecting the honour- able gentleman against the solitude in which lee Pool himself on a recent occasion, it was quite beyond his power. (Laughter.) Mr. BORTHWICK withdrew his motion.

SALT MONOPOLY IN INDIA. On the motion of Mr. GEORGE WILBRAHAM, 011 Dull sday, a Select Committee was appointed to con- sider the state of the salt monopoly in India.

REPUBLIC OF CRACOW. In reply to questions from Sir STRAT- FORD CANNING, on Tuesday, relative to the occupation of Cracow by Russian, Prussian, and Austrian troops, Lord P A LMERSTON said that he had riot received official intelligence of the entry of the troops into Cracow— Government, had, however, received official reports of a dissension which had takers place between the residents of the Three Powers there and the Senate of that Republic, with regard to the expulsion of certain Polish subjects, required by those residents. At the same time, he thought it was not improbable that the Austrian troops had entered Cracow. At first sight this would seem an infraction and a violation of the treaty of Vienna; but he could only say that it was a matter to which his Majesty's Government would direct their attention. Ile trusted the House did not expect he should be prepared now to state what steps would be taken.

PRIVATE BILLS. Mr. Hume moved a resolution, on Thursday, to the effect That every Private Bill, hereafter committed by the House to a Commit- tee, shall he committed to a Select Committee of fifteen Members, drawn by ballot from the list or lists prepared, under the direction of Mr. Speaker, and to which the Bill would, by the standing orders and rules of the House, have been submitted."

Mr. Porx.ETT THOMSON opposed the project, as impracticable. The motion was rejected, by 78 to 15.