Elchatcli anti Pratccbinll in 13adiamcnt.

1. CORPORATION REFORM.

In the House of Cemmons, on Monday, Mr. GOULBURN asked Lord John Russell what course he intended to take in regard to bringing forward his measure of Corporation Reform ; and whether he intended to lay before the House a report which he understood had been sent separately from the report of the other Commissioners ?

Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied, that as Mr. Cayley refused to post- pone his motion on the Currency, he would not bring forward his Corporation Reform until the Friday. With respect to the report alluded to by Mr. Goulburn, it was not a proper report, nor did it refer to matters into which the Commissioner was desired to inquire. It was full of personalities, and of little use.

Mr. BLaelint'ItNE stated, that no power was given in the commis- sion for one of its members to make a report. " Three or more " of them might make one, but not a single Commissioner.

The Commissioner in question had gone the circuit in the same manner as the other Commissioners, but had made no report to the Board, except in two cases, and these were of little importance ; but now he had, for no reason which Mr. Blackburne could conceive, thought proper to make a report to the Home Office, which he had no right whatsoever to do. lie had made this report because he supposed sonic wrong had been done him by the other Commissioners. Mr. Blackburne had done all in his power to screen the gen- tleman in question : he had passed over a great part of the negligence of which lie had been guilty, and had done every thing he could lest the Commission should suffer because a Commissioner had failed to do his duty ; but he had at last been obliged to send the gentleman word, that if he did not send in his report, he should consider it his duty to hold no more communication with lam as a Commissioner. This happened five or six months ago, and no report was sent in ; but now he chose to send a report, not to the Board, but to the Home Office, in which, 34 far as 'tlr. Blackburne understood, he endeavoured to criminate some of the members of the Board, and probably, among others, himself. That report had little or nothing to do with the subject into which it was his duty to inquire.

In reply to calls of inquiry from several parts of the House, Mr. BLACKBURNE stated, that the name of the remnant Commioaioncr woo el Hogg."

Mr. BAINES asked if Mr. Blackburne had stopped Mr. Hogg's supplies? Mr. BLACKBLIftSal said, he had not, for he had not the power; the supplies did not go through his hands.

Last night, Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved for "leave to bring in a bill to provide for the regulation of Municipal Corporations in England and Wales." He commenced his speech by lamenting that the task had not fallen into abler hands ; with a pointed allusion to Mr. Aber- cromby, who was originally destined to the undertaking. He then proceeded to remark upon the necessity of amending the existing mu- nicipal system. He quoted from the general Report of the Corpora- tion Commissioners ; and adduced the particular instances of Norwich, Bedford, Aldborough, Alford, and other corporate towns. He briefly described the malepractices which prevailed so extensively in corporate bodies—their perversion of charitable funds to the purposes of gluttony and debauchery, and the promotion of the political interests of their patrons. To remedy these vices, and to establish a system of municipal government which should give the people a control over the expenditure of local funds, was the principal object of the measure, whose provisions be would then explain to the House.

We intend to include 193 boroughs in the bill ; containing a population of about two millions. The number of inhabitants may be rather less at presentowing to the de- fectiveness of some of the boundaries, a point upon which I shall afterwards touch; but I may fairly state that two millions of persons will be affected by the hill, by esta- blishing, not an extinction, but a reform oh these corporations. We do not propose that they should be deprived of their charters; but in the first enacting clause we de- clare, that all powers in those charters inconsistent with the provisions of the bill are null and void, and shall totally cease and have no operation."

Sir &want PEEL asked, acres, the table, "Will this apply to the whole number ?"

Lord JOHN RUSSELL—" To the 193 boroughs ; but there are 99 which have been visited by the Commissioners which we do not intend to include in the bill. There are some other places that have not been visited, or which have given no account of themselves, which, 1 believe, arc not included in the 99. A few of these corporations exist solely, others are corporations only for particular purposes, with which it has not been thought necessary to interfere; they will remain as at present as lac as the provisions of this bill are concerned. With regard to the 183 boroughs, we propose that there should be one uniform government applicable to all—one uniform franchise for the purpose of election, and a like description of officers, with the exception of some of the larger places, in which there will be a Recorder or some other magistrate ; but gene. rally speaking, the form of government will be the same. I come now to the franchise It must have occurred to every one who wishes that there should be a uniform fran- chise in corporaiions, that the present Parliamentary franchise of ten-pound house- holders, or as they are familiarly called, ten pounders, might be taken as the consti- tuency incorporations : but upon considering what would be the best course, several reasons presented themselves, which seemed conclusive against adopting that franchise. In the first place, I think it would be exposing that franchise to danger. I look upon a.smost valuable. and it has worked as beneficially as the authors of the Reform Bill anticipated; it has produced a class of constituency which, from property and intelli- gence, is fit to be It' Crusted with the responsible duty of electing Members of Partin. meat ; and 1 think if we were to say that no ...Bier persous but these who kw sseas that franchise shall have a vote with reseeet to the corporation, we should be raising a feel- ing of enmity and jealousy against these persons, on the ground that they mouopolia,ed all rights and powers, to the exclusion of others that were as well entitled as them- selves. In the next place, I think we should consider these whom I may call the pee- mauent rate-payers, the inhabitants of the town, as perfectly fit mud qualified to choose persons to represent them in the Common Council and government. (Much eheer:oe.) It may often happen, and I think it does ofteu happen, that the lower class of rade- payers. however well known and long established in the town, do nut take such • just interest in the election of Members of Parliament as not to be open to the various modes of seduction, and to those corrupt arts which have been ordinarily resorted to to procure notes. I do not think that the same thin can be said when you place before them the propriety of choosing their own neighbours, perhaps their next-door neighbours, as pergolas fit to have a voice in the government of their own town. But there is :mother reasou, as it seems to we, more conclusive titan all ; which is, that these rate payers do contribute, mid directly contribute. to the expenses of the tom'''. By t his bill, they will be obliged to pay the borouglurate which may be required, and it is absolutely essential that they should not be exempt from it ; according to the established principle—to the known and reeng- fired principle of the Coustitution—it is right and proper that those who coutributo their money should have a voice in the election of those by m hum the money is ex- pended. But while we think that it is but proper to have Ow permanent ride-payers of the town as the persons to elect the Council which is to have the government of the town, yet at the same time it seems to tie necessary to take some precaution that thej are tiettlwr persons who are ,erasiou:dly suffering under that pressure of distress whith obliges them to receive parochial relief. nor persons unable, regularly and for a length of time, to pay their rates, We think they ought to be the permanently settled and fixed inhabitants of the town alone, and those who regularly contribute to its rates ; and we propose. as a test of this, that they should he persons who shall have been rated to the relief of the pom, and who shall have regularly paid their rates. There will be provisions introduced for taking eare that the having received relief, or the not having paid rates for a short time, shall not exclude persons who have previously acquired the right of voting. for a longer period than their inability to pay up their rates. We pro- pose, then, that the right of voting should be in the occupiers of houses, warehouses, and shops, using similar words to those adopted iu the Return' Bill. We propose like- wise that they should be householders. residing within seven miles of the place. The next question is as to whom these persons are to elect as the government of the town. We propose that there should be one body only. consisting of the Mayor and Common Council, in N% 110/11 this power shall be vested; the Cotnnion Council to consist of various

numbers, not in arithmetical proportion. but iu such a manner as is best suited to the population of each particular place, varying from fifteen in the smallest of sueh plume, the inhabitants of which are about 20110, to ninety in the largest towns. The largest of these towns, of which there are only about twenty in Danier, and each or which have more than 25,000 inhabitants, we propose should be divided into wards, and a certain number of Common Conawilmen (to be named according to a schedule to be annexed to the bill) to be chosen in each ward. But with regard to the rest of the towns, it is proposer] that the whole of the Common Council shall be elected together. Now, Sir. I will next state what is to be dune with respect to those who at present have rights in these corporations."

Lord John then stated, that he intended altogether to abolish the rights acquired by birth and apprenticeship, and all " exclusive rights of trading; " preserving, however, all pecuniary rights belonging to cor- porator; during their life-time. He went on to mention the term for which Town-Councillors would be elected, and the form of their elec. tion, their ditties and powers, with other particulars of a similar kind. With regard to the election of the Common Council,t‘e propose that the members of the Council should be elected for three years, lint that mie third of them should go out every year. For my own part, I mist confess that my belief is, that the inhabitants of the towns having once Merkel persons in whom they have confidence, whether they elected them for three years or one sear, would generally elect the same persons. They would, in either ease, naturally elect those persons for whom they had a regard, and to whom they ',clime,' the disposal and management of their property might be safely intrusted, and whom they would not very likely think of changing. But by providing that there should be an annual elect' of only one-thini of the Council, we shall secure at least two-thirds of the Council who will have had some experience of the manage- ment of the affairs of the town. With regard to the mode of election, that in itself is not very important ; but it is proposed to be done by each voter making out a list of all those whom 1w wishes to elect, and to sign his name at the bottom. Although it would be very easy to give a vote nisi rote for one or two persons, yid it is evident that it would he very inconvenient to vote for fifteen, or thirty, or tiwty persons, unless the franchise were taken in the form proposed. We propose that the Mayor should be annually elected by the Couucil, and that he should be. during the time of his Mayoralty, a Justice of the Peace for the borough, and likewise fur the county. We do not propose that there should be any qualtneatton etcher As Um "Mee of Mayor or of Common Conned. (Great cheering.) There is in our day but little to be gained by requiring qualifications, while it very often excites great ill-will in the towns. It is but a modern device. In none of the ancient towns, I believe, is there any trace of that kind of qualification which it has been the fashion to introduce iu more modern times. Then, Sir, with regard to the officers which the Council are to appoint, we propose that immediately on the Council being elected, which will be on some certain day in October, they should have the power to appoint a Town Clerk and Treasurer, as officers who will be required to carry on the management of the town. Certainly we do not mean to oblige them—it would be totally inconsistent with the spirit of this measure were we to attempt to do so—to preserve the present Town-Clerks in the offices which they now hold. (Prehmgeet cheering.) It would be utterly impossible to do so with any kind of consistency ; because I think it is quite obvious, that on a Dew body of men coming into power, and laying down rules of their own for their future government, it is necessary that they should have the power to appoint persons to assist in carrying out those rules, in whom they could have confidence, and that they should not be required to allow persons to remain in office who might thwart their purposes and hold them at defiance. At the same time, wherever any case should occur in which compensation could be fairly demanded. provision will be made by which that compensation can be fixed and ascertained. The most important part, no doubt, of this Municipal Corporation Bill, is that which relates to the management of the funds : the management of which certainly does not, at the present moment, show any great wis- dom or economy on the part of these corporations; for while the gross income of these funds amounts to 367,000/., the expenditure amounts to 31.7n0tti. ; besides which, there is a debt of 2.000,000/. owing by these eorportaions. ("Ilear, hear, hear 1 ") When we come to look into particular cases, we shall find that some of these bodies have been in- curring debts year by year up to within two sears ago ; while they were dividing among themselves the proceeds of these loans by which they were getting deeper into debt. (" Hear, hear, hear ") It is proposed, therefore. that the Council should have power to appoint a Committee in order to manage these financial and that these accounts should be regularly audited, and be brought before the public. and that they should no longer be secret accounts. (Cheers.) Giving this security of publicity, if no other security be given, we obtain this much as a guarantee that these funds will henceforth be under better management. There is another part of the duty of these corporations which has been no less scandalously mismanaged, of which I spoke in the earlier part of my address to the House—namely, the management of the Charity estates of which these corporations have at different times been made trustees. We propose that the Common Councils should become the trustees of these charity funds ; with power to appoint, if they think proper, a Committee in order to their management ; but at the same time requiring them imperatively to appoint a separate Secretary and Treasurer, and to provide an audit of those funds in a different manner from the audit generally of the accounts of the town. It is likewise provided, that the number of persons to be chosen to the management of these charity estates shall not be less than fifteen ; and that they shall be chosen, not from the Council, but from among the general body of the burgesses of the town ; for it may often happen that persons may not like to have any thing to do with the municipal government of the town, yet from their habits of business, and from their connexion with matters of this kind, may be regarded as very fit and proper persons to have the management of these charitable estates."

The provisions for the administration of justice formed an important part of the new measure-

., We propose that there should be a division of these 183 towns into two schedules. The greater part of them are to be put into one schedule, to be called Schedule A. (Laughter.) Yes, but it is a schedule not to take away, but to give a privilege. (Cheers.) This schedule contains 129 towns out of the 183; and it is proposed that these are to have a commission of the peace. The remaining fifty-four towns may have a commission of the peace, but they are only to have it on application to and upon[ grant from the Crown. But with respect to these 129 towns, the Council are to have the power of recommending to his Majesty certain persons whom they may consider proper to1 ave a cotundssion of the pee: in he turough ; but they are not to have the power of fleeting Magistrates, except hi such a s-toe as that of reserving to the Crown the power of exercising the right of g:a:cite; a commission (in the same manner as it now exercises) in order to perfect the ccivi.,i,sion by the Council. There are, I believe, now more than cue thousand Alagist rates ako Mg in these boroughs. I do not expect that it will be I ii'Pei• ry that any thing like that tetaiber should be hereafter appointed ; as I doubt rot that the Council will take proper 1-,1,! 1.0i to recommend to the Crown any perilous bait those n hum they think the Crown can w itlk safety appoint to be ftlagistrates of these boroughs. These Ma.tistrates, however. are not to it in Quarter-sessions; but Owe are a tons lerahle number of Ow boroughs or skk lartm a size that it might be proper for them still to hold courts of Quarter.ses-tom:, a, they now do ; and in many of which there toe Recorders appointed w ho are perfectly fit Mr their situations, and whom it may be expedient to eff whine. We p:.op,se, therefore, that upon application to the Crown by these borough: to have the rouer of hoieing courts of Quatterdtessions. and

alma slating that they are tilling to famish the necessary salaries for the lie-

coolcr,,I hese Meunier,: sli:111. be But three Recorders mast, in every in. !,,, 1,1 risters of the years' stamlikw. With re speet to the other towns which reek'. tVe 1.11111iS or llti.trt.-r•sl.s,ioni, but which have no Recorders, or no Res coolee «hu !title beck. barristers a tire years' standing. and with respect to the tiotni- oabt,if of all Recorders iu future, we pillilt)■■• that the nomination shall be vested in

the C row It. Therefoie, it' ally tockii d- 1. that it requires a mutt of Quarter.sessimb it is f,fr the Council to show that such a emnt may be conveniently held within the town, and that limy are prepared to paw ide for the salary of the Recorder, and then it

„iii 11■4,1111. a dot ou the pit lath, such Judge or Recorder. It seen', nig, that power should b • in the Cron n. limiting the appointment 1., leo rish.rs of live years' standing, than that it should be exercised by any thin:, mbling a popular election, each as now takes place. These Recordels n ill be jr,1„,;„1,.,1;mudLeh, iffle., an I not removeable at the pleasure of the Crown ; thercfrqe I think We may rely upon their exercising their functions as honestly and M- r.:, pm,.lently of the Government as if they were appointed in the same way that they

An' :Lie SOI11e provisions neek,sary to be introduced in consequence of these

Qoa!tta with re,pect to the Co,:iity•rates ; but the clauses are of great corns ant I shall not enter into Gran minutely. It is purposed that a certain pornaft ot the count ,•rate should not be levied on the county, but on -the hos rwe41,s, and in such proportion:, as may be agreed lx.tween the boroughs and the seamy : led if that :tgreenient ca uuut he made, then the matter shall be referred to ”itti • thittl part5, ; and I kimw of no better imrsons to whom to refer it than to the Ce womb-boilers of the Treasury. We propfse, that in all of these great boroughs the

Commission shall have jui istliction in capital offences. I have little more to say at pte,eht with reference to the details of he measure. I may as well observe, that in cases w here tow tr. wish to base it Stiik..uktiary Magistrate—and it is well known by .sever.fl Members of this !louse. that in many towns their services have been fuuud eX.

terlAy On their expression of that desire, they shall be at liberty to make rennin rules and regulations fur thu zippointment of that Stipendiary Magistrate, and be shaft hr allowed by the Crown on their behalf."

It was intended that the business of watching the town, and pro- viding police, or " quieting the;town," and licensing public-houses, should also be under the control of the 'Town-Council. Lord John concluded his speech with lamenting the loss of Lord Spencer's assistance, and leaving his measure to the judgment of the House, "as a great, effec- tual, and wholesome measure of reform."

Sir Roma PEEI. felt bound to admit that the time had arrived when it was of the utmost importance to establish a good system of municipal government. lie declined stating his opinion at that time on the more iinportantprovisions of the bill. Ile regretted that Lord John Russell

had not adhered to his principle, and avoided details , especially as his selection of examples to illustrate the necessity of reform was by no

means fair. Sir Robert read some passages from the Reports of the Commissioners relative to the political subserviency of Ikrby to the Cavendish family, and the shameful squandering of their funds by the Corporation of Portsmouth in feasting Liberal Members of Parlia- ment and their supporters. But he would not look at the question in st narrow party light. Ile was sure he had much greater direct per- sonal, greater pecuniary interest, in seeing corporate funds properly ap- plied, than used for feasting and patty purposes. Ile had no hesitation in saying, that Parliament had a right to require, by laws now to be passed, that the revenues of corporations, except when applied to spe- cial purposes, should be applied to public purposes connected with good

municipal goveniment. This principle be was bound to admit ; but he was also bound to say that it was a new one ; for hitherto, he maintained, by law corporations could apply their funds to their own exclusive

benefit. Ile required information on some important points,—the limits, for instance, of the new municipalities ; the provision for the debts of corporations already contracted ; and the administration of Church patronage. It would not be allowed that a corporation, the majority of which was composed of Dissenters, should appoint Church clergymen. Ile wished charitable funds to be placed under the control of trustees, not of persons selected by the Town-Councils. Ile would give no opinion its to the qualification—the confusion that might arise from having three different suffrages (the Parliamentary, the Vestry, and the proposed Municipal) in the same town ; but it was an import- ant point. Neither would he pronounce judgment on the frequency of elections ; though frequent elections, it should be remembered, tended to disturb social concord. He was decidedly in favour of a good system of. stipendiary police; but doubted the propriety of allowing Town- Commas to license public-houses. The measure was of such vast importance—not inferior, lie thought, to the Reform Act itself, nay, in some respects superior—that be trusted full time would be given for the careful discussion of all its provisions.

Several questions were then put to Lord JOHN RUSSELL; whose answers ware not heard distinctly, owing to the noise in the House, and the low tone in which be spoke. Mr. BROTHERTON, Mr. EwAar, and Mr. 13AINEs, expressed their strong approbation of the bill.

Mr. O'Coxsaa.t. wished to see the word " Ireland" attached to the title of the bill : with that addition, he did not think "it would be pos- sible to produce a measure better entitled than the present to universal approbation." As to the Church patronage, lie was sure that the Ca- tholics would allow- the Bishop to have the disposal of whatever belonged to the Corporation. i. THE BALLOT.

Numerous petitions in favour of Vote by Ballot were presented to the House of Commons on Tuesday, by Lord EBRINGT0N, Mr. Hew, Colonel EVANS, Mr. DIvETT, and other Members : the greatcr number were from Devonshire.

Mr. GuoTE then rose to address the House ; which at that time, and during the whole of his speech, consisted of about :300 Members, who appeared to listen with unusual attention to the arguments of the speaker. Mr. Grote stated, that he bad postponed his motion, in order to see whether any effective substitute for the Ballot would be suggested by the Committee on Intimidation which had been ap. pointed on the motion of Sir George Grey. But nothing- had oc- curred in that Committee, or out of it, which gave him the smallest reason to expect that any such substitute would be found. With re- spect to the objection which had been urged against entertaining the question of time Ballot—that the Reform Bill was a final measure—be would remind the House, that Lord John Russell, in bringing forward that Bill, had expressly reserved the Ballot and the duration of Par- liaments as subjects for future discussion. His proposal was indepen- dent of the Reform Act, but he maintained that it was in pet feet har- mony with its spirit and purposes. Mr. Grote Went on to argue, that when the elective franchise was conferred, the recipient was hot in- tended to be the passive tool or mouthpiece of another, but an inde- pendent agent. In elections, it was the free, unbiassed opinion of the voters, that was professed to be sought. The voter might be mistaken or led astray, but that did not affect the question : it was his real opinion that we wished to know. Mr. Grote described the various modes by which an elector was prevented from acting independently, and referred to the protestations of the defeated candidates of all par- ties that intimidation had been used to gain the victory. Two mem- bers of the Cabinet—Lord Palmerston, in the course of his canvass last winter in Hampshire, and more recently Lord John Russell in Devonshire—had ascribed their defeat to the intimidation of the elec- tors; and the resolution of the Committee of Messrs. IV( st and Hamilton, at the last Dublin election, to publish the names of the supporters of the Liberal candidates, and thereby mark them out for the hostility of the upper classes, proved in what light gentlemen who meddled with elections regarded the freedom of voters. It had been said that the Reform Act should have fair trial, and that we should wait to see whether it would not gradually put an end to intimidation. There were gentlemen who prophesied that it would; but had their prophecies been fulfilled, or were they in any course or probability of fulfilment ? The facts, up to the present time, and still more the pro- babilities of the future, were decidedly against them.

" I am persuaded that undue influence over voters was never more widely spread, or more formidable, than at the. last general election ; and it is but too evident that the efforts of the imperative classes of society to subjugate the will of the humbler voters are nowise likely to be suspended or relaxed fur the future. It is my full belief that the ties of dependence, in every form and variety, will be strained tighter and tighter. 1 doubt not that dictation and resolutions of exclusive dealing among the masses will be brought to bear in the opposite direction, in such places as admit of it, and those despotic influences which carry the voter to the poll without a heart and without a conscience w ill be felt everywhere more violently than ever. Such are the signs of events as I read them. I should, indeed, despair of the tranquil and efficacious operation of the elective principle for the future, if I did not see in the Ballot the means of rescue and preservation. But are the means of rescue to be found any else ? What other methods, besides the Ballot, have ever been suggested to eradicate such very serious evils? " lie referred to the bill introduced by Mr. Poulter for preventieg bribery arid intimidation, and argued that it would be totally inopera. tive, except against very violent and indiscreet persons- " In so far as that bill will be operative at all, there will be (I doubt not without his intending it)' some degree of partiality in its operation, which forms to a contain extent an objection against it. Whenever the poorer clasves meddle at all with the freedom of other men's votes, each of them individually is of little weight or importance, and it is only as a combined mass that they can interfere with effect. Now, the steps requisite to bring about concei t and cooperation in a numerous body are liable to be more or less public • awl the interference thus becomes cognizable by law. But the interference of saute kind, and for the same purpose, exercised by rich men individually, needs no public notification, no joint declaration or resolution, to render it effective ; and it therefore escapes legal cognizance altogether. The species of dictation w

is the most wide-spread and most injurious—subtle and untraceable in its course, but fearfully ruinous in its effects—is precisely that which the honour- able gentleman's bill leaves untouched and unmolested. ' The objections to the Ballot were next touched upon by Mr. Grote. He, in the first place, replied to the assertion of its being un-English, by referring to the common practice of it in the Clubs, and other asso- ciations of gentlemen. It was said, however, that the Ballot would give a man an opportunity of breaking his promise without risk-

" I ask in reply, why should we suppose this to be likely? Why should not a man who has promised his vote perform the promise just as much when he votes secretly as when he votes openly ? Secrecy puts no fresh difficulty in his way ; it gives him no new motive to break his promise; it simply enables him to do so with impunity if he pleases; anal the question still remains, why should he please to break his promise ? There can be only one reason, because the promise is not conformable to his own natural inclinations, and has been ex- torted from him by a force upon his free-will. This is the only case in which promise-breaking can possibly arise : the free and voluntary promise will be observed as surely in the darkness as in the light ; but the voter who has been bullied into a reluctant promise may, perhaps, take advantage of secrecy to elude the performance of it." Such breaches of promise as the Ballot would render possiLle, were not unlawful- " A voter has no right to enter into any engagement to vote against his own free choice and conscience, because by so doing he expressly contravenes the trust which his country reposes in him., The sole intent and pompose of invest- ing him with the elective franchise Chat he may deliver his free and indif- ferent suffrage at the poll. A promise to deliver a suffrage which is neither free nor indifferent is, in point of fact, a promise to commit wrong—a promise to be guilty of deliberate breach of trust. A promise extorted by fear of evil is just as insincere and just as unlawful as a promise suborned by the present of a bribe. Let me again impress upon you, Sir, that these wrongful promises con- stitute the whole of what is involved in the present argument—they ale the only promises which are in any danger of being broken when votes are take b

n y

ballot. But is it any great mischief that wrongful promises of this kind should be broken? Is it not rather a greater mischief that they should be observed? Suppose a man has entered into a solemn promise to commit any other wrong— suppose he has engaged to bear false witness in a court of justice—to give a par-

tial verdict in a jury. box—to become an accomplice in any breach of trust, pri- vate or public—will any one tell me that a man who hes entered into such a criminal engagement, would be right in performing the act of criminality to which lie has bound himself? Assuredly not. He has already done great wrong by the mere promise to commit a crime : he would do still greater wrong if he veut en to perform such a promise, and to commit the clinic in reality. I could say much on the conduct of those who extort these pro- mises, but at present my object is to let you see distinctly the utmost extent of duplicity and promise-breaking which the Ballot can by possibility let iu upon you. Take it at the worst, those promises only will be broken which ought never to have been asked and never to have been made. This is the true way of steting the argument, and I ask whether it does not prove in favour of the Ballot, not against it ? I contend that under secret suffrage there will be far less duplicity than there is at present, because men will cease to press for unrighteous and compulsoiy promises, when they lose their power of compelling ram mence. ruder the existing system of terrorism, the great object which men strive for is to tie down the voter by a solemn promise, whether his con- scheme goes along with it or not ; and duplicity of one kind ur other thus be- comes unavoidable. If the voter keeps his promise, he lies to his conscience and his country by giving all insincere vote; if he breaks his promise, lie lies to the individual who extorted it front him. Such is the dilemma which this guilty encroachment on the freedom of the electoral conscience inevitably creates. 01)111 voting is the indispensable condition to its exercise: secret voting would extieguish It at once."

It had been said that the Ballot would not prevent bribery. because a candidate might engage to distribute a sum of money among the voters in case of his return. But though this species of bribery wonlil not be rendered impracticable by the Ballot, it would he rendered much more costly, more uncertain lit its effects, and more easily detected. Mr. Grote then proceeded to refute the argument against the Ballot derived from the assertion that the elective franchise was a trust, and that votes should be given under a feeling of responsibility to the public. This beLdenied : the franchise was a right, not a trust. The elector was not accountable to any human being for its exercise. Another objection to secret voting was that it would destroy the legitimate influence of pro- perty. But what was the legitimate influence of property? " Legitimate infleence supposes willing fidlowers and an honourable obedi- ence; it excludes all abject submission springing from constraint and far. Now, Sir, I hold that this legitimate influence will be preserved just as much under the Ballot as under open suffrage—without counteraction or abatement. Exer- cised as it is over none but willing subjects, it will be just as complete and as effective in secret as in public. The men who obey such guidance feel no lord- ship in it, nor any disposition to elude or renounce it. They follow a leader

whom they esteem and honour, whose serial position they look up to, and se character and behaviour they regal(' with affection and reverence. lf, Sir, VDU IleSile to retain this legitimate influence of property pure, unalloyed, and in lull vigour and vitality, while, at the same time, you effectually disarm that brute

free of wealth which now presses down the poor voter's free-will and consei- ence—if you seriously desire to insure these great and valuable ends—you will adopt the vote by Ii dlot."

The Ballot would give that which the Constitution declares we ought to have—the honest genuine opinion of the electoral body : it was the " viedox taciee libertati,.."

" You call the House of Commons a represent:I:tie° assembly, and you qualify certain persons as electors; but what are they, after all, when you have so quali- fied them ? They are distinguished from their countrymen by a peculiar badge of servitude and legalized dependence. It is not they who elect Members—it is the Aristocracy who elect by and through their voices. Your register of voters

becomes nothiug more than a register of men liable to electoral impressment—

liable to be called oa to do compulsory voting-duty, whenever it pleases their commanders to issue warrants for their attendance. And is this after all the real heart and kernel of the Constitution—is this the arcanum imperil, which gentlemen take so much delight in holding forth to publie view, when they tell us rl at the purpose of the Ballot is unconstitutional and denincratical? I ven- ture to say, that the fiercest and most seditious of all the decried newspapers has never put forth a more deadly libel against the Constitution than this, the alle- gation of its exta erne panegyrists—the allegation that it repudiates free and in- dependent voting, as a danecrous nuyelty, foreign to its genius and spirit. Sir, I affirm, and I defy contradiction, that free and independent voting is the most constitutional of all constitutional things, and that all the means necessary for such an end must he censtitutional also."

But, it would be said, we hare all this : we have free and independent voting-

" Is this indeed so? Then, I ask, what can you possibly have to fear from the Ballot ? Reasoning n:1 this assumption, the Ballot will no more vary the course of our political affairs than it will vary the orbits of the planets. But such an as- sumption is rot for a moment to be tolerated—it is not true—it is not even an ap- proximation to the truth. There is the amplest proof that your suffrage is the very reverse of free; and therefore the measure which emancipates it will work a salutary and important change. But it is a change, the extent of which every man can see and measure—a change which can only land on in the true and natural haven of a representative assembly, the undisturbed manifestation of real electoral feelings. Let me remind you, Sir, that the dignity, the useful- ness, the moral ascendancy, of this House, depend upon its possessing the entire and unqualified confidence of the people; and that of this there is no other constitutional test except the free and unbiassed choice of the electors. Let me remind you that the first and greatest interests of the State—the tic of affec- tionate reverence which binds a nation to its elective legislature—the induce- ments for the rich to respect the conscience, to cultivate the attachment, and to improve the understandings of the poor—all these inestimable objects are at stake in the integrity and independence of the suffrage. You insure them, be- yond sitseieion or contest, by granting the Ballot : you never can insure them without it. I therefore beg to move " tluit it is the opinion of this House, that the votes at elections for Membus of Parliament should be taken by way of secret ballot." ( General eliceriog.) Sir Murex Mouswonent rose to second the motion. There were some gentlemen who supposed that intimidation could he prevented by penal enactments; but they must be very slightly acquainted with the commonest modes of intimidation-

_ Landlords seldom directly informed their tenants that punishment would fol- low disobedience. They merely solicited the votes of their tenants, and left the evils consequent upon a refusal to he inferred ; and this was in most cases quite enfficient. In the late Devon election, a body of tenantry, almost 'all of .ng-hom had at a former contested. election voted for Lord John Russell, without the slightest change in their political sentiments, then voted against him. lie in. quire(' the reason ; and was iofurmed that, at the first election, the landlord had abstained front all interference, but that on this occasion he had written a letter, which was tiken to each of the tenantry by an opponent of the noble lord,

wherein he stated, that though he did not wish to co newt his telsantry to vote contrary to their inclinations, yet if any of them had not made up their he should feel much obliged by their voting for his candidate, 31r. Parker. Some of the tenants abstained from going to the poll at all; the reinainder voted against the noble lord. Could any penal enactments preveilt this, the commonest and most effective species of intimidation? It was in this way that whole bands of tenantry in Devonshire seemed miraculously to have changed their opinions with their I ted- lords, who had apostatized from the Liberal side.

It had been falsely asserted that it was the cry of " No Popery," whirli had influenced the electors of Devon. Seine of them hail, 110 doubt, feigned it, as the only means of concealing their real slavery ; but though lie could not fore his own personal knowledge speak highly either of the intelligence or education of the electors of that county in general, yet he could not allow that they were so beastly stupid, so brutally ignorant--( Cheers and interruptioa)—ye,, so beastly stupid, so brutally ignorant—as to have credited the falsehoods which were so industriously circulated on this subject, or to have believed the asser- tiees of the clergyman, who told his parishioners, when assemble:1m vestry, that 3Ir. O'Connell had appointed a Catholic priest to each parish in the county. (t, Mar, hear !") Lord John Russell was most correct where in his parting address to his supporters in Devon, lie attributed his defeat to ruti- midation and undue influence. That election was lost through the exertions of the nobles and of the landed gentry, mid through the undue influmee ie thee clergy, who, as tithe proprietors, were in a certain degree the !audit r ls ot ere/. parish in the county. The responsibility of the elector to the non-elector was math- eleete of— Ile would meal to Lord John Ilussell's recollection his enthusiastic reception iu the South of Devon—the scene in the Castle-yard in Exeter—the esootebleill thousands who there greeted hint with loudest acclamations, and th:.ce-fourths of whom held tip their heeds in his favour. Where, he would ask that noble lord, was his much vaunted responsibility of the elector to the non eh etor, when a few clays afterwards, in that same city, an enormous majority accordish their votes against him ? The noble lurch had experienced the elb.els of liar responsibility of the elector to the wealthy and powerful; he had ;wand it ir- resistible.

Ministers should ponder theee facts well, and be aware of their posi- tion in the country— They ought nosy to be aware of the fact, to them undoubtedly a most mere:- fying fict, that amongst the gentry of England their party wits decidedly in the minority ; they ought now to be aware, that the vast majority of the Aristo- cracy, of the landed gentry, and all the Clergy to a man, were their determined and irreconcilable foes, who would spare no efforts, who would use every species of intimidation and undue influence, to compass their destruction. They coat' not with the same weapons successfully contend against their too povenful an- tagonists. If they could not protect their friends—eirel they were eel weak to do so without the aid of the Ballot—if they left their suppoi tern 1•Xr),!!11. to the tender mercies of the Tory party, they would by degrees be vie,eel, like the noble bird, from the representation of all the counties of England.De they remember their fatal losses in the countie.,,Iiiiing the le-it general election ? Del they remember that their friends were ejected and rep local by their aiitagoaste, iii Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Canihridgeshire, Denbighshire, I, South, Devonshire South, Essex South, Gloucestershire West, LI inipsliire

South, Lancashire South, Leiecitershire South, Lincolnshire, .:k Eese, Northamptonshire South, Shropsliite North, tThirolk fist, sir West, 'tarry

East, Surry West, Warwickshire South ? that within the few last %-esoiss they had been again dismissed from Devonshire, Inverness-shire, and eltieeere.bire (Vert, loud chteriag.) Mr. GISPORNE rose to move " the previous question." Ile agreed with Mr. Grote on the principle of the measure ; but he did nut think that secret voting was attainable ; and lie considered it int.:et:Jew. on the supporters of the motion to prose: that they were in pus-essi el: of machinery by which secrecy could be obtained. He would support a motion for a Committee to inquire into the practicability of some mode of taking votes secretly; but would oppose the bald proposition befere: the house.

BOWRING informed the House that lie had seen the experiment of secret voting successful in many countries, and he had no doubt of its working well in England.

Mr. BARLOw 110V opposed the motion. In America, lie said, the Ballot did not prevent bribery, as the United States Bank had ex- pended twenty-eight millions of dollars in the course of some recent elections to procure votes.

Mr. STRUTT supported the motion. In the course of his speech Ere replied to an objection which he did not expect to have heard from hie friend Ale. Gisbortie-

That gentleman said that much difficulty would be found in the coastru(tion of the machinery by which the Ballot would be carried into effect. Now, this might he true, or it might not. It did happen, however, that such a description of machinery' was already in existence; therefore the difficulty would, probably, not be so great as Mr. Gisborne had supposed. But what lie complained of was, that Mr. Gisborne should mix the two questions up together ; when the

only question now before them for discussion was, whether secret voting could he advantageously adopted in this country. The other question was quite dis- tinct, and he would say, merely mechanical, if lie might be allowed so to exerees himself. It them only determine in favour of the Ballot, and he lied no deelit they would lied the machinery.

Mr. WV.LIANIS supported and Mr. C. RUSSELL opposed the 'no- tion. The latter gentlemen quoted the opinions of Cicero against the Ballot !

Mr. Want) declared himself a convert to the Ballot ; which though called un-English, would, he felt convinced, be found to be the only mode of preserving the virtues of the English character.

Lord 110WICK did not think it necessary to dwell on the assertions that the Ballot was un-Eeglish ; still less would lie speak of the legi- timate influence of property, as it was called. He did not wish under that name to maintain a degrading and oppressive tyranny on the clot:- tors of the country. He was of opinion, however, that the Ballot would not put an end to intimidation.

Who could prevent the question being put, or what could prevent the lord from Interpreting his tenant's refusal to answer into an adinissieli that Lc. had voted against his favourite candidate? Besides, while the Billet prefesteif to protect the voter, it would deprive the elector of that legitimate ildhicure of character and respectability which was the mu,t important of all, and which Jar openly taking part in an election invariably secured. Public opinion was now declaring itself so loudly against intimidation, candidates were beginning to See; that it in reality endangered their interests to be suspected of being concerned in it, while at the same time the facilities of exposing it were so numerous, that he thought it might with safety be left to the spirit of union and genera/ re- sistance in order to put it down, without having recourse to the plan of Mr. ()rote. The system of espionage to which Mr. Ward had alluded as connected

with the present system, would, in his opinion, be the certain inevitable eons.- prence of the introduction of the Ballot. Its very first effect would infallibly be an organized system of spies to ascertain whether persons voted according to their promises, which would create heartburuings and jealousies among the lower classes, that must put an end to all social peace and comfort.

He admitted the melancholy fuct of the numerous defeats sustained by his friends at the lust general election, but attributed them gene- rally to delusion, not to intimidation. He should have preferred meeting the question with a direct negative, but he felt that it was not an unreasonable wish on the part of many gentlemen who were ac- quainted with the existence of the evils attending the pre-raft mode of taking the votes at elections, to be allowed to express no opinion upon the Ballot until the Cotnmittee which was now sitting on the mode of

conducting elections had come to a decision upon the subject. On this ground be was partly reconciled to the matmer of meeting the motion which had been selected by Mr. Gisborne ; which he should otherwise consider most objectionable, as it exposed the House to the inconve- nience of having two divisions taken upon the question. Mr. CHARLEs BULLER protested against the doctrine that the Re- form Act %vas a final measure. ‘Vere they now to rest contented with the Reform Act, and to view it as the completion and perfection of legislative wisdom ?

What ! were they so to consider it, after two general elections had proved that without the Ballot refor m was worse than nothing, or, if good for any thing, could only operate in times of great excitement, when it might hi too late to

remedy encroachments upon public liberty and property, which previous in- tervals of apathy :night have facilitated, and when the other advantages de- riva'ole from an extended suffrage were at least problematical ? It was the steady, uniform, and equable action of the popular will that they desired, and not those occasional bursts that might sometimes frustrate the very purposes which they were intended to promote. Something had been said of the delusion practised

in reference to the Malt-tax. What was the real state of the case? It was not that Liberal Members were rejected in counties on the occasion of those elec-

tions to which the late change in the Administration gave rise, on account of

those Menthe's having voted in favour of the Addt-tax, contrary to the expec- tations of their constituents—that tram not the cause of their rejection, but the

direct and strenuous exertion of influence possessed by Tory landlords and par- eons. If the vote on the `Malt tax went to dispel delusion, how could honourable gentlemen account for the results of the three late elections? The results of those elections were entirely attributable to the fact that the great majority of the gentry and the higher classes were opposed to the present Government.

Lord Grey's measure of Reform gave increased power to independent voters throughout the country ; but there was another great Reformer, the Marquis of Chandos, who about that period stood forward in the Legislature.

He too was resolved to try his hand at reform, and thereupon he was received with the warmest applause by all who had been theretofore considered the most

implacable furs of all or any reform. Ile declared himself determined to vin- dicate the rights of the 50/. leaseholders, and came forward for that purpose in the noble way in which Tory gentlemen arc in the habit of acting !

An analysis of the votes given at the last Devonshire election would show that it was the operation of this clause, not the fear of the Pope, but the dread of the landlord and the parson, that ga% e the 'Polies their majority of W7.

lie was aware that that cif cumstanee would be referred to as a proof that a reaction had talon place in the public mind, and as evidence that a material

approach to Twvism had been made throughout the country since the last ge-

neral election; hit he entleated ruientiam to facts. Ill comities, the persons prioeipally independent of the higher elasse, and the liaisons were the free- holders. Now, the moldier, of the ficeholders polled fur Loth candidates were within tin" of each uther_tliose for Lord John bos.eif bring 1:494 while the numbers for Mr. Parker were INN. The forini r paled 127;3 leiseloilders, while the Ian, c had as niaay as is 10; tons the !loose would ,I•1• that he gained his majolitv solely IN leaseholders. Ile then would refer to Tavistuck. ( boo/ cheers.) lie was glad to hear those ehtVls, they proved that the rental ks he

had made were not O iihoot some might think that Tin istork

Would display tact, adver,ii to Lilo rol pt iociples, while it was exactly the case Which best suited the purpo,.es of his as goincot. ile ttas aiming to establish this truth, that the effeet of the Reform lullas to extend and consolidate the influence of popcity ; awl the statements which lie held in his hand proved incoarrovettillly that it was only whore the Mem:ince of property came in to the aid of laud John Ilitssell that he could obtain the support of the lease- holder.. The state of things ill the Tavistork dist tiet plowed this and nothing less, thaL the leiewholders there ■■ ere as dependant as they were elsewhere; fur there the mime hail rood xcaiiu.11iai Hoa-eholds while Mr. Patket only Mi. But there were four town pari.las is that alivision of the county which formed a striking contrast to the condition of the districts; for there the numbers for the noble lord wet, '277, While those for the honourable gentleman were only 12S in district, where laud Rolle, Sir TI as Achim!, and the Dean and Chapter po,se.sad great influence—he hoped he mi.la he al- lowed to call the last 'motioned !lady great Tory landliard•—Lord John Russell could command only Ill leaseholder-, yet his opponent had the suffrages of 249.

Mr. Buller then instanced two parishes, one of whieb was inha- bited principally by freeholders, the other by the tenants of a Tory lord ; both parishes used to go together, and in favour of the Liberals ; but at the last election the tenants went with their landlord and the free- holders voted for Lord John Russell. The Earl of Devon's tenants also voted according to their landlord's wishes, although he didnot reside among them ; nor had he done much to secure their respect or affection. The mass of the people were with the advocates of the Ballot ; and even in the House of ( 'immune; they had some converts. They might well be proud of the support of Mr. Ward, and Mr. Buller hoped that the day was not distant when Lord I lowick would also join them. In reference to the remark of Lord Howick on the system of espionage which the landlords might adopt if the Ballot were in use, he ob- serve, that those who supported the Reform Act might subsequently take such line of conduct as upon consideration might to them seem best ; but he then added, in reference to the Ballot, that be hoped Parliament would long pause before it vested in any set of persons irresponsible power. His opinions had not been changed by what had been urged in Mr. Buller's able and argumentative speech. It was admitted by Mr. Buller, that we must trust to the forbearance of the landlords, not to spy into the votes given by their tenantry.

Why, what was it we trusted to at present ? Nothing but the forbearance of landlords ; and what could be more unwise than to reject an old and tried method, and adopt a new and untried one, if, after all, the security was no other than the one we hail at present, that landlords would not be oppressive and tyrannical—that they would not seek to find out the manner an which their tenants had voted, or exercise a tyrannical influence over them? He was not one to deny that there did at present exist an undue tyrannical influence exer- cised over voters; he was not one of those who thought it was proper, in order to prevent the iufluence of the democracy, that the rights of property should ex- tend to restrain a man from giving his vote agreeably to his own opinion, but that he ought to vote according to opinions dictated by others. Eut he con- considered, and he adhered to this opinion with confidence, that the influence which was sometimes thus tyrannically exercised would not, in the course of time, and with the progress of opinion, continue to be so exercised. He trusted now to the remedy which Mr. Buller professed himself ready to trust to,— namely, a feeling of slum on the part of those who exercised that influence, which would restrain them from endeavouring to find out in what way their dependents bad voted or endcavousing to influence their votes. He was confi- dent that as public opinion gained strength, so long as the People of England retained the power of changing their Representatives, a practice so odious would in the end be finally forborne.

Lord STANLEY pressed on Ministers the necessity of settling this ques- tion now, by a direct negative. There was no use in delay. Both Lord Ho wick and Lord John Russell had declared themselves opposed to the Ballot; and Lord Althorp, when Chancellor of the Exchequer, though individually in favour of the Ballot, had directly negatived Mr. Grote's motion in the last Parliament. Ile contended for the just and legitimate influence of property ; and read a letter from an English resident in America, who deplored the evils arising from the Ballot, and universal suffrage in that country, and urged the English Conservatives to keep their ground and resist innovations. Lord Stanley abio declared, that in America, voting by ballot was not secret voting, as he had himself seen in a hundred instances.

Sir FRANCIS BURDETT thought that the friends of the Ballot over. rated its advantages, and its opponents exaggerated the evils that would arise from it. But it was demanded by large bodies of elec- tors ; and if they were under a delusion, the best way of dispelling it would be by letting them have a trial of the Ballot.

Mr. O'CONNELL spoke in favour of Mr. Grote's motion ; but his speech is so imperfectly reported, that it would be doing him injustice to quote any part of it as we find it in the daily papers.

Mr. LECIIMERE ClIARLToN spoke amidst so much interruption as to be perfectly inaudible in the Gallery.

Mr. ROEBUcK complained that Mr. Charlton had used improper lan- guage to Mr. litune.

Mr. CHARLTON said, lie heard Mr. Hume make an observation respecting him, or contradicting him, and he had therefore desired Mr. Hume to hold his tongue.

Sir ROBERT Peet., after stating several of the common objections to the Ballot, called upon Lord John Russell, as Miui.tciial Leader, to give the motion a direct negatire, as he deprecated the idea of this ques- tion being considered an unsettled one.

Lord JOHN II essrm, was quite ready to give the motion a direct negative, since Lord Stanley and Sir Robert Peel thought that the question ought to be met in that way; and he therefore would ask Mr. Gisborne to withdraw Ids amendment.

Mr. GiSuoitNE said, that he agreed in the principle of the Ballot, but he did not feel satisfied that Mr. Grote had made out such a case with respect to its operation as to justify his voting for the motion. If, how- ever, he was bound to give a positive vote, be should vote for the Ballot. At the Caine time, in deference to what appeared to be the wish of the House, he would withdraw his amendment.

Mr. Gerais briefly replied ; and the ]louse divided : for the motion, 144 ; against it, 317 ; majority, 173. rf his debate did not terminate until two o'clock in the morning of Wednesday; and several of the later speeches are 'lunch curtailed, or rather mutilated, in the reports.'

3. Aeruceartatas Disrasss : DEPRECIATION or THE CURRENCY.

These subjects Were discussed ut length on Monday evening, on the motion of Mr. C ASSES ; who entered into several statements to prove the distress of the landed interest, owing to the fall of prices. It was his firm conviction, that at least one half of the land now cultivated should be thrown out of cultivation, to render agriculture profitable. He had stated before the Committee of II332 that rents had then been reduced 25 per cent. ; and he then observed, that unless wheat rose in price to above 60s. the quarter, it would be necessary to reduce rents another 2.5 per cent. The ;nice of wheat was then 54s. a quarter, and at present it hail fallen to 38s. As they descended in the price of wheat, the ratio must increase in the reduction of rent. The present price of 38s. was ruinous to the farmer, and not one half the arable Land in the country could be continued iu cultivation if wheat remained any thing like stationary at that price.

Mr. Cayli‘y contended, that the real cause of this state of things was the alteration in the currency effected in 1819; and he would propose as a remedy for the evil, that there should be a conjoined standard of gold and silver, or a standard of silver alone, which latter be should prefer. He concluded by moving the appointment of

"A select committee (based on the Parliamentary declaration of agricultural dis- tress) to int-prin• it-there be not efroetual men& within the reach of Parliament to afford sups nntial relief to the agriculture of the United Kingdom, and especially to recom- mend to the attention of such Committee the subject of a silver or conjoined standanl, of silver and gold."

Mr. 1VODEHOUsE seconded the motion ; which was also supported by Mr. BENETT, Mr. RICHARDs, and Mr. O'CONNELL.

Mr. RicitARDS said that the cry against tampering with the currency was very absurd—

Was not the currency " tampered with " every day ? What were the opera+

Lions of the Bulk—now contracting, now enlarging its issues—but a tampering with the currency, by a number of irresponsible individuals, who had shown that they were not always guided by absolute wisdom? The confusion which bad within these few days occurred on the Stock Exchange, what was it to be more attributed to than the operations of the Bank ? He should be surprised if this House, composed as it was of individuals more or less directly interested in the high rent of land, refused to grant an inquiry into the causes of the depressed state of the agricultural interest Hite might once more prophesy with- out exciting a laugh, he would say that, if his Majesty's Alinisters resisted this inquiry, they would not long sit on the benches they now occupied. (Laughter and cheers.) Did they believe that it was their over great talents that turned out the Tories? Did they believe that it was to their wisdom the !louse deferred ? Did they imagine that the country' looked to them, or pi eferred them, individu- ally, to the Member for Tamworth? Let theni be undeceived, if they so fancied; for the country only desired to try first one set of men, and then another, be- cause it was distressed. That was the reason of the cry for a change, first in one institution, and then in another. That was the occasion of the talk first about tithes, then about poor-rates, church-rates, road-rates, and municipal re- form. This last they might fancy a fine subject for sustaining their fleeting popularity ; but unless they inquired into the distress of the country, and brought forward measures of substantial relief, they would not lung keep their places; and he hoped to God they might not.

I Mr. Richards spoke as usual amidst mingled cheers and laughter throughout.] Mr. O'CONNELL described the distress which had followed the bill of 1819, in Ireland, which was a debtor country; and he warned the Ministers, that their refusal to accede to the appointment of the Com- mittee moved for by Mr. Cayley, would be made use of as a powerful electioneering weapon against them.

The motion was opposed by Mr. POULETT THOMSON, Mr. CLAY, Sir ROBERT and Mr. SPRING RICE; but there was nothing very new in their arguments on this liacknied subject.

Mr. TriomsoN said, in reference to the substitution of a silver for a gold standard— lie did not hesitate to admit, that if in the year 1819 a silver currency had been adopted, it would have been preferable to a gold one; honourable gen- tlemen mistook hint most completely if they supposed that, by expressing the opinion which be had just pronounced, lie meant to insinuate that the gold standard had any thing to do with producing the occurrences which had followed its adoption. The question as to the relative advantages of a gold or a silver currency, was one, as Mr. Baring bad very properly remarked, of philosophical nicety. It was a question not necessarily involving the depreciation or appreci- ation of the currency : its merits were confined simply either to the difference which might exist between a greater or less production of the mines, for judging of which there were very imperfect data, or with the greater or less facility with which demands upon the stocks of the Bank might be met. The relative merits of this question resolved, in fact, upon very trifling points of difference, and had nothing to do with the great and important subject which Mr. Cayley had sub- mitted to the House, and the decision of which, according to his view of it, was to prove the grand panacea for relieving the distresses of the agricultural interest. Ile thought he was warranted in concluding, that it was impossible to wish for a change from one standard to the other simply on the ground that one descrip- tion of coin was a better measure of value than the other. Mr. Cayley must, then, have a different-object in view from merely changing the description of coin which was to he recognized as the standard of value. Ile must, as might be inferred front that part of his speech in which lie said that things could not go on with wheat at its present price, intend to effect a depreciation by the change which he proposed to introduce.

Air. CLAY remarked, that

If Mr. Cayley proposed merely to return to the old English silver standard,

and to coin the po 1 of standard silver into sixty shillings, the change would not exceed a half per cent., or about foariance i,t flue son:reign. lie was quite ready to admit, that he should preftw a standard of silver to a standard of gold ; and that he thought an error had been committed in I sl6 in not establish- ing a silver standard. It', therefore, Mr. Cayley confined his proposition to such a measure, witlimit committing any breach of national faith by depal tin; flour the ancient English silver standard, lie would agree with hint : but it was evident that he intended ninth more than that.

Sir Romer wished that the gentlemen who supported motions

of this description would state their object distinctly— If the depreciation of the standard were the real object which Mr. Cayley had in view, depend upon it, the best and simplest mode of obtaining it, instead of establishing a conjoint standard of silver and gold, would he to say at once, honestly and fairly, ,‘ Sovereigns shall pass for five-and.twenty shillings." This would be saving the trouble and expense of a new coinage; and it would, more- over, be doing in an honest and straightforward manner that which was sought to be accomplished by a side-wind. Whenever the Iluusc determined upon a depreciation of the standard,—or in other words, whenever it determined that the public creditor should be despoiled, and that the debtor should not pay the debt he owed, —depend upon it, the simplest plan would be to declare at once, openly, candidly, and honestly, that the sovereign should remain a sovereign, but that it should pass for live.and-twenty shillings. To adopt titis , the preseut price of silver, when it was issued as a token, as the standard of value of silver, would be clearly and manifestly to depreciate the standard.

After an ineffectual attempt by .Mr. Cau.ox to get the debate ad- , journed, Mr. Cayley's motion was rejected, by 316 to 1-26; majority, 90.

4. Tint WOLVERHAMPTON AFFRAY.

Mr. THORNELY, on Monday, called the attention of the govern- ment and the !louse of Commons, to the conduct of the Magistrates and Military at Wolverhampton, on Wednesday the :27th of May. 1-le read extracts from several letters, containing nearly the same ac- count of the circumstances as was published in the Spectator last week ; and went on to say- " I cauuot imagine upon what ground the military were introduced into 'Wolverhampton' and I think their conduct requires the earliest and the strictest investigation. Ido not know by what right they fired upon this occasion ; and should be glad to hear from some member of the Government, or from the Law Officers of the Crown, whether soldiers are authorized by law to fire upon the people? I believe that they are not ; but I should like to have that point decided. I do not know whether any inquiry has been yet instituted ; but as an humble individual, I beg to say that nothing will, or ought, to satisfy the country, but the fullest and most impartial examination into the whole transaction. Govern- ment ought to send down some confidential agent to Wolverhampton to investi. gate the matter ; and I beg to ask whether such is the intention of the noble -Secretary."

Lord JOHN RUSSELL, extremely regretted the painful and distressing occurrence at. Wolverhampton. He had received a statement similar to that read by Mr. Thornely, from Mr. Roefe, a Dissenting minister at Wolverhampton; and had immediately called upon the Magistrates

for a full account of what had taken place ; and he Mao communicated with Lord Hill in order that the conduct of the military might be in- quired into. He objected to send down any one to make inquiry, as Mr. Thornely suggested- " The adoption of such a course would be liable to very great objection, in- asmuch as the agent could only take the voluntary depositions of any person who might come before him ; he would not be authorized to make any legal inquiry into the transactions ; and thus the Government, after the inquiry had proceeded to a certain extent, might have no authority or power to carry it fur- ther. All I can say is, that every account of the melancholy transaction which has been forwarded to my office shall be laid before the House. For my own part, I am only anxious that the fullest inquiry should take place into the transaction. If any further inquiry should be necessary, after the statements of the different paaies have been received, I can only express any wish that it should be one of a strictly impartial description." Lord John dwelt upon the difficulty of getting at the truth by ex pule statements- " I will mention, in corroboration of this assertion, that in the account trans- mitted to me by Mr. Roefe, it was stated that the soldiers had furiously charged the people in the market-place, and that in turning a corner one of the horses fell, and was killed. The account from the other side was, that the horse had been struck by a stone, and that he died in consequence of the blow. It now appears by the deposition of the veterinary surgeon who examined the animal, that lie died of a wound inflicted by some sharp iustrument, which had pene- trated to the heart."

Mr. Vila.mtis had received statements similar to those of Mr. Thornely, and was not at all satisfied by the counter-statements.

He contended, that the particular circumstances which led to the proclama- tion of the riot required explanation. There were also facts connected with the conduct of the military, that did require some inquiry to be made; for instance, he did nut hear it contradicted that the soldiers dist' ibuted themselves in parties of two and three over the town, and acted upon their own discretion, and that they had not only dispersed the people, but had actually fired at them when its the act of flight. Ile would wish to learn hom any military Member of this House if this was in accordance with military discipline or military practice upon such occasions. If it was irregular, be begged to assure the I louse, that such things were alleged against the soldiers; and if it was denied, lie thought that it afforded a substantial ground for granting the inquiry suggested by his col- league Mr. Thornely ; and he should strongly urge upon his Majesty's Govern- ment, that they should forthwith commission some person or persons in whom they could place confidence, and on whom the public could depend, to proceed to the town of Wolverhampton and collect the truth. There were three parties implicated in this matter—the Magistracy, the Military, and the People; and it ryas clear that a fair and full investigation would nut be expected from the violent partisans of either. It became the Government, therefore, to select some fit and proper persons for this business. Mr. Foasma defended the conduct of the Magistrates and the Military ; and read a copy of the statement transmitted by two of the Magistrates, the Reverend Mr. Claire, and Mr. llill, to the Horne Secretary. In that statement the conduct of the mob was described as being outrageous.

" We beg to state, (said these gentlemen) that during the whole of the last day of the poll, the conduct of the multitudes of people assembled in the streets was very violent ; many respectable individuals were rolled in the mud, and assailed with mud and stones, and some seriously injured ; and we received re- peated applications to send for a military force ; as, of about forty or fifty special constables who had been sworn in, and were all that could be procured at the time, some did not act, and the rest were completely overpowered."

Before the Riot Act was read, Mr. Clare in vain endeavoured to persuade the populace to disperse ; and he himself was struck by stone when reading the Riot Act from the window of the Swan Inn-a. The soldiers were then called out, and the mob commenced a furious attack upon them. A street near the Mai I:et-place was batrieadoed with two carts and an iron chain ; many of the soldiers were struck with stones ; and one horse was stahhts1 in the side, and fell down dead, while standing still, which is ne- cessary to be stated, because it has liven asserted that the horse fell while chug.. ing ; the undersigned Mr. CL ire saw him fall It was not until after the death of the horse that the soldiers were directed to fire ; and the mob still per- sisted in their attacks, at times retreating to the churchyard close to the Market- place, to which the soldiers could not fur some time get access, and advancing again. Mr. Hill, who was sent for, and arrived at about eleven, states, that many discharges of lire-arms were heard by himself and others in different parts of the town, when all the soldiers were assembled in the Market-place ; but whether ball was tired by the mob, he does not know ; neither is he aware of any of the soldiers having been fired at that night.

The Magistrates also declared, that Mr. Rock's statement was very much at variance with the truth ; that the soldiers behaved admirably, with the exception of one who was drunk and placed under confine- ment in the early part of the evening ; and that it had been ascertained that a bullet, which had been fired at a house in Queen Street, was too large to have been fired from a soldier's carbine.

Sir JOHN WitorrEsary insisted on the necessity of an immediate and an impartial inquiry. Ile must tell Lord John Russell, that the course he intended to pursue was highly unsatistlictory. It was of the utmost importance that Government should institute an inquiry into this affair.

All lie asked for was investigation. If it were true that an officer hail allowed his men, under feelings of strong excitement and irritation, to separate into

small pat ties, and go armed and provided with ammunition into different streets, where they were not uuder his immediate superintendence, he grossly miscon- ducted himself, and was guilty of a dereliction of duty. Sir John spoke in the presence of several general officers, and he ventured to say that not one of them

would contradict the opinion he had just expressed. He recollected one case perfectly well, in which he, as a Magistrate, had considered it necessary to call

in the aid of a troop of light dragoons, who were quartered near. Ile saw that it was highly desirable not to leave a particular place unguarded, and he begged the officer to allow a mere patrol to accompany him to examine the state of the

spot. His reply was, as he thought, a most proper one. "Sir," said the officer,

"my orders are, not to to allow my men to separate. So long as they are under my personal superintendence, I can be responsible for them ; but the moment they separate, the control I possess over their actions is gone." Ile thought this

the conduct of a prudent and discreet officer; and he mentioned the circum- stance now in support of his view of the case. All he wanted was investigation,

and immediate investigation. He should not be satisfied with the investigation of a military officer alone. If what he had heard were true, the investigation of a military officer was considered by uo means satisfactory. He advocated immediate and searching inquiry because he was decidedly of opinion, that in the present case there were good grounds fur demanding it.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL then said— •• A y only objection to the inquiry proposed was, that a person sent down by Govetuo rot to orwatd a i no,ury on tin spo could have no proper authority to compel persons to c ante before hint other than those who were willing to ap- pear and give their evidence voluntarily. Still if, as my honourable friend says, an inquiry of that nature would be inure likely to afford satisfaction to the public than any other, I can have no hesitation in acceding to his suggestion ; and am therefore ready to adopt that course."

Mr. O'CONNELL—" Whoever is sent down, can be armed with a commission of the peace for the county."

Sir fleNav IlaainNee said, it appeared, that in the opinion of every one present, the conduct of the military bad been admirable ; and be would ask Lord John Russell, whether in any official reports that had been received their conduct had been differently represented ?

Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied, that the conduct of the military had been described by the Magistrates and the High Constable as marked by the utmost forbearance.

Mr. SUM/LEI:1E1.D read some letters he had received from persons who were eye-witnesses of what had occurred, and who were perfectly

trustworthy,—very much to the same effect as appeared in our last week's paper. He referred to a remark of Mr. Forster, who had spoken of the population of Wolverhampton as a "peculiar one," and maintained that the electors were a most estimable body of men, peace- .able and intelligent.

Mr. Foasrea said, that lie had made no remark about the electors. Mr. SCHOLLF/ELD continued— He was quite aware that gentlemen entertaining the honourable Member's political opinions endeavoured to mate a distinction between the electors autl people. In his judgment, the nomelectors were as good as the electors. lie was

sure the non-electors of Birmingham were as excellent a set of men as any in that House. The case of Bristol had been referred to, iu which the military had done too little. Let them remember the case at Manchester, where the yeomanry hail dune too much—even where there was no resistance on the part of the populace. At all events, be felt quite certain that it would be a most

dangerous course to allow the military to be lightly called out at contested elec- tions, by men whose opinions were not on the popular side. Let the House and the people remember, that very few men of Liberal opinions were in the com-

mission of the peace in this country. If clergymen would voluntarily conic

forward to read the Riot Act, they must expect to find strong feelings excited even against their cloth. I'M), need they voluntarily enter into situations which few men would be forced into without shuddei ing ? Why need they conic for- ward to display their Christian charity, by ordering the soldiers to tire upon an unarmed multitude.

Mr. FORSTER said, the peculiarity of the Wolverhampton popula- tion was, that it consisted principally of colliers and persons engaged in iron-works.

Mr. Hum urged Ministers to sift this matter thoroughly.

It was all unfortunate eir,mmstance, but nevertheless it was true, that whether in Ireland, as in the case of Itatheormic, or in this ca,e, there never was an instance in which mischief was done by violence to the people without a clergyman being coacerned in it. lle hoped that his Alaiesty's Ministers wouhl take tare that no more clergymen should be appointed to the Magistracy. If it Was the ivi,11 of his Majesty's I :merriment to support the character of the Church, they ought to remove all clergymeu from the commission of the peace. He knew no circa:est:ince which would tend more to raise the character of the Church in the eyes of the People than such a removal. In every instance in which the clergy Intel-feted as Civil Magistrates, even if their interference was itself perfectly right, it had a bad (sleet.

After some remarks from Mr. CHARLTON against, and Major BEAU- CLERK iu f.ivour of the proposed Government inquiry, the discussion Mopped.

S. SA 1:BATII RILL

Mr. Fortran moved on Weduesday that the Report of the Com- mittee on this bill should lie taken into further consideration.

Mr. WARD moved that it be considered that day six months.

Mr. Curers:is seconded the amendment ; which was supported by Sir S. WHALLLY, Mr. R01:11CUK, Mu. Wattineterox, and others; and car- ried, on u by M to 43. to the bill is lost.

3. Mr. ANDREW JOHNSTON AND HIS CONSTITUENTS.

On Monday, Mr. ANDREW JOHNSTON complained to the House of Commons of an unprovoked attack upon his character. which had ap- peared ire several newspapers ; and as he was informed that Mr. EIphin- stone was intrusted with a petition on the subject, he wished to know when it was his intention to present it ?

Mr. ELPIIINSTONE said, he had such a petition ; hut, at his sugges- tion, the petitioner had consented to a proposition to be trade to Mr. Johnston, which was, that certain documents, to be pointed out, should be referred to the same distinguished individuals whom Mr. Johnston had st hetes' as his arbitrators in the ease. lie admitted that the pe- tition was rather unprecedented in its nature. The first of the ducts- melds referred to was a statement in the Fife herald; the second was an affidavit— Here Mr. HUMS said, that Mr. Elphinstone was out of order, unless he meant to conclude by presenting the petition. He was talking about documents and an agreement to which the House could be no party.

Mr. EselliNsroxF. was ready to present the petition as a matter of form. It was from Robert Anstruther, Esq.

The SPLAKER said, perhaps the House would not choose to take the petition out of its turn.

Mr. JOHNSTON hoped lie should have the usual courtesy extended to him, as this was a most extraordinary attack on his private character.

Mr. ELPIHNSTONE had informed Mr. Johnston, somedays ago, that be should bring the case before the House. He would read, but not comment on tl:e petition. [Mr. Elphinstone began to read, but was interrupted by cries of " Read the prayer."1 The prayer was, " That the House would take into its consideration a matter so dceplyUfeeting the honour of a Member."

Mr. Croul.m. aN said, the I-louse could not receive this petition : it could not re t,-: acre between a Member and his constituents.

Mr. WY :. ;.; of the same opinion : the House could give no opi- nion either way.

Mr. Hums: reminded Mr. Wynn, that be (Mr. Wynn) had supported. while hie,-sit ( Mr. Hume) had been one of sixteen who opposed the

expels of Mr. Walsh from the House a number of years ago, on

the ground of moral turpitude ; Mr. Walsh having been guilty of no legal crime.

Mr. WYNN said, that Mr. Hume spoke in total ignorance and for- getfulness of the facts. Mr. Walsh had been convicted of embezzling Exchequer Bills, and was expelled on that account.

Mr. HOME replied, that Mr. Wynn was wrong; for the sentence on Mr. Walsh was reversed, and it was on the ground of moral turpitude alone that be was expelled. (" Hear, hear!")

Lord JOHN RUSSELL agreed with Mr. Wynn, that the House could not interfere in the ease of Mr. Johnston and his constituents.

Mr. ROEBUCK hoped the House would interfere. The case of Sir Richard Steele, who was expelled, was a ease in point. Mr. Johnston was under a stigma, is under a stigma, and would remain under it, unless it was removed by an inquiry in the House.

Mr. JOHNSTON requested that, if not now, he might soon have an opportunity of bringing the subject before the House; whose indul- gence he craved.

After a few remarks from Mr. PRYME, Mr. Snaw, and 'Ma. OIL- LON, Mr. JOHNSTON advanced to the table, pulled out his papers, and was commencing a speech, when Sir ROBERT PEEL spoke to order. lie said it would not lie fair for Mr. Johnston to make an ex party statement, in the absence of his con- stituents or of any statement on their behalf. Ile could address his vindication or explanation to them, not to the House.

Mr. BUXTON said, that to take an unfair advantage of his consti- tuents was the last thing Mr. Johnston desired.

Ile was naturally most anxious to have the matter fully and fairly discussed, under the conviction, in which others who had looked into the facts partici- pated, that the result would entirely clear him from all imputation. It seemed rather hard, therefore, to deny him the opportunity of explanation ; but if the effect were to give him an advantage over his constituents, Mr. Buxton would recommend him to refrain at the present moment. Ile trusted, however, that it would go forth to the world that no statement bad been made which could in the slightest degree impugn the honour of the Member for St. Andrew's.

Lord Howler:, Mr. ELPHINSTONE, Sir ROBERT PEI:1,811d Mr. ROE. BUCK, spoke a few words ; and then Mr. Jolts:wrote said lie would not attempt to make any explanation ; and Mr. ELFIIINSTONE withdrew the petition. G. Ma. Hum. AND MR. CHARLTON.

On Wednesday, Mr. HUME complained to the House of the conduct of Mr. Lechmere Charlton, with whom (as has been noticed in the report of the discussion on the Ballot) lie had an altercation.

" it may he recollected, that last night, or father this morning, towards the dose of the debate, the honourable Member for Ludlow ruse from the bench be - hind that upon which I was sitting, and persevered in addressing the House, although it showed itself unwilling to listen to him. In the mast of his ad- dress, the honourable Member alluded to what had fallen from the noble Member for Lancashire, and said that it had been proved by the speech of the noble lord, that the system of voting by ballot had entit ely failed in the United States. The broom-aide Member for Bath was sitting next one at the time; and although I had not intended to speak upon the question, my seutinants being so well known, I felt, while the noble lord was addressing the !louse, a strong desire to rise and expose the fallacy of the argument on the application of dm Ballot to this cumin y. When, therefore, the honourable Member for Ludlow asserted that the noble lord Lad established the point, I used this expression to my honourable friend the Member for Bath, ' No such thing has been proved,' in a tone of voice that I thought was little above a whisper. However, the honourable Member behind me stopped and said, ' Hold your tongue, Sir ! ' in a dictatorial tone. Iansweresl, • 1 am not speaking to you ; ' and the honour- able Member for Ludlow continued= If you do not hold your tongue, I will make you, Sir ; you are an impertinent fellow, and we do not want your Re- publicanism here.' I; retorted, when thus assailed—' You ate the impertinent fellow ;" and at the same moment I was very near rising to make use of my ti,t, hat :respect for the House kept me down. I considered the manner of the honourable gentleman so unprecedented, that I returned his own words, You are an impertinent fellow,' and nothing more then passed."

In consequencs: of this, Mr. Charlton sent Mr. flume the following letter, by Mr. Cecil Forester.

•• House of Commons, Tuesday Night.

•• Sir--I heard you make use of the words • ;nitwit Meld fellow' when I teas speaking I la.lie‘e that you meant to apply those words to me; hut for Oar of any mistake I .twirl 1 may know inintediabdy whether you did or not. " I ant, Sir. ;.our humble servant, •• Joseph Hume, eat" " E. L. CHARLTON." Mr. Forester asked Mr. Hume to apologize ; but the latter refused, saying, " No such tiling; what I said was an answer to a gross attack by Mr. Charlton, and it is his business to apologize: " and that was the only answer Mr. Hume would give. Mr. Forester then requested Mr. Hume to 11111118 a friend ; which the latter refused to do. Mr. Charlton then sent another letter, through Mr. Forester, to Mr. Hume, which ran as follows.

" Fendall's !Intel, Palace Yard, Three o'clock, Wednesday Mt.roine. " Sir-1 am just informed by Mr. Forester. that ton have rentsed to give him any answer to my letter; that you have refiessl likewise to enter into auy explanation, or name ;lot- feieagat w hit ti hunt he might confer. " I inter these circumstances. I regret that I am reduced to the necessity of publicly eleelai lug, w bat I conceive the world will justify me in doing. namely, that you have rendered yourself, by your unmanly and cowardly behaviour. w holly unworthy of the

title of a gentleman. '• I am, Sir. ale.

" Joseph Hume, Esq." •• E. 1..CRARLTott:' Mr. flume read a statement by Mr. Roebuck, confirmatory of his account of the transaction ; and then went on to say- " These are the facts as far as 1 recollect them ; and I submit to the House to consider in what situation a 'Member is placed who wishes to attend to his duty, but is exposed to such inter, uptions. Even if I had said any thing to outrage the !louse, is it to lie tolerated for a moment that another Member, because he is in a passion, or because he wishes to excite noun iety, is to call me out at the risk of having a bullet sent through me? Neither would it be any satisfaction to me to scud a bullet through him. ( ('hterstnd laughter.) In some cases there may possibly be no alternative: those who live in the world must in some degree cabal the rules of the world. There may be an absolute necessity for meeting an adversary; but because one man cannot command himself, is tint a reason why loci:lust make another fight Linn, I thought that I had good ground of complaint, in the first instance, against the honourable alember for Ludlow. I dare say be thought it would look very well to have the correspondence in the newspapers; but f do not think the House will sanction the course taken. I have therefore brought the matter before it ; because, while I have been in the Howe, I have, on more ocrasions than one, interfered to promote peace, whether an offence had been intentionally or unintentionally given. The step I have now taken is in accordance with the principle I have supported for the last twenty years ; and having stated the circumstances as accurately as I could, I throw myself upon the !louse. DM eay, that if there was one Member more quiet than ;mother in his place lest night, it was I ; and I never meant to excite the anger of anybody. I am quite aware that it is not regular for one Member to address another, ex- cepting through the Chair ; but still we know that it is a thing constantly done, awl without offence. I am the last man to give an intentional affront, and 1 do not believe that I am forward in receiving one. ( Cheers.) Mr. CHARLTON solemnly denied that Mr. Hume had correctly stated what passed. He never used the words " impertinent fellow." "'Those are terms I never in my life employed to a gentleman, or to any one who wos like a gentleman. Surely it was not unreasonable to expect something forbearance and freedom from interruption ; and surely I must have received sore very romukable interruption among the extraordinary ones with which I cert4inly assailed, to induce one to say what I did to the honourable Member fel. Middlesex. But, Sir, I mean that in the first instance I asked hint to liMd hi' tongue. Perhaps 1 might have said with greater propriety, Sir, please to be quiet, and pray do not interrupt me ;" I used, however, the stronger expres- sion of " Pray, Sir, hold your tongue ;" and when the honourable Member for Middlesex said he would not, I repeated, " Hold your tongue." This, Sir, was tho head mid trout of my oliimding. Before I leaven I speak it, I never made use of our turner words to give offence to the honourable Member for Middlesex than rho e three words " Hold your tongue." I was then provoked by the honour-. ah!t• Member's reply, that be would not. That is the state of my case, Sir ; which I can Ming forwat d the evidence of gentlemen to prove in some mea- sure, when the matter is made more public, and when some friends of mine come down to the I louse, whom I do not now see peseta, but who were sitting in my immediate neighbourhood at the time, and %rho I am quite sure will join 'Inc in saying that every word I am now uttering, to the best of their knowledge

ti ue."

Charlton argued, that Mr. Hume would have stated to Mr. that he had been provoked by the words "impertinent fellow," 1:1,1 those words been really applied to him. Mr. Ron: ece confirmed the account given by Mr. Hume, in the main particulars. Lord AlenoN, Mr. CUMMING 13nrce, Lord Semt. and others, agreed with Mr. Charlton. Mr. Davio Boom and Alr. Sen r said, that Alr. Roebuck had given them the same account ne tin nt tyLirh he now gave, immediately after they left the House in the merning. Mr. Seam: Rice wished the discussion to be discon- tinued, and the matter to drop. Mr. O'CONNELL could nut permit Oat ; Ina ;teemed that Mr. Charlton's denial was; equivalent to a re- tractation of the oflimsive expressions, and that Mr. Hume might there- fore apologize for the words " impertinent fellow." Sir Roemer neer coil:eared with Mr. O'Connell. Mr. Hume then said, lie %vas sorry for linviog used the offensive expression ; Mr. Cuero:Fox retracted his offensive note; and the affair was thus settled.

MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS.

TITHES: I!CCLESIASTICAL COURTS. Mr. CROMPTON, on Wednes- day, coiled the attention of the llouse of Commons to the ease of Thomas Harris, one of his Staffordshire tenants, who bad been engaged in a dispute with the Revereud Mr. Port of Ilam, respecting eight or nine cabbages which belonged to the parson for tithe. The ease was taken by Mr. Port it to tine Ecclesiastical Court, and the tenant sub. mitted ; but was saddled with the payment of 151. 2.s. (id. costs, and 7s. 6d., the stun claimed for the cabbages, which were really worth n'alepence. Captain PECHELL mentioned a similar case with regard to a relative of his own, who was sued for the tithe of turnips. Mr. itnetenos, Sir G. SeniceLasn, Dlr. O'Dwven, Mr. A. TREVOR, Mr. 1'%TiEN, and others, took part in a brief discussion which ensued; some reprobating, others defending the parson, but almost all complain. ing of the state of the law.

IRISH TITHE BILL. In reply to a question, on Monday, Lord Moiterro stead, that he shoeld be prepared to submit to the House a measure on the subject of Irish Tithes on Monday the 15th of June.

.PARLIAMENTS IN IRELAND. On Thursday, Mr. Brsn moved his annual address, praying the King occasionally to hold his Court and Parliament ill Ireland. Dr. BALDWIN seconded the motion ; but the discussion was interrupted by the counting out of the House.

POST-OFFICE RATES. Last night, Mr. LABOUCHERE, in a Commit- tee of the whole House, moved some resolutions reducing the rates of postage in certain cases. Ile intended to found a measure on these re- solutions to facilitate the transmission of newspapers and letters to France, and other foreign countries. Mr. Manx Primes alluded to the charging of postage-rates on newspapers in which there were pas- sages underscored. Mr. LACOUCHERE doubted whether any charge ought to be made for newspapers on account of the underscoring; though he could conceive a sytem of ingenious marking, serving the purposes of correspondence, might be used to a very unfair extent. The resolutions were then agreed to.

BOSOUGII OF STAFFORD. On Monday, Mr. H. L. BULWER ob- tained leave to bring in a bill to disfranchise the borough of Stafford.

Yoccitete. ELECTION. On Tuesday, the Committee reported that Mr. John O'Connell was duly elected.

CORK ELECTION. The Committee reported, yesterday, that Mr. Feargus O'Conner was not, and that Mr. Richard Longfield was duly elected for the county of Cork.

LIMITATION OF POLLS BILL. On the motion of Mr. HOWARD BLPHINSTONE, this bill, which limits the time of taking the polls at elections to one day, was read a second time on Wednesday.

LONDON AND BIRMINGHAM RAILWAY BILL. The report on this bill was brought up on Thursday. Sir ANnnrw AGNEW moved the insertion of a clause to prevent Sunday travelling; but withdrew it, amidst laughter and cries of " Oh, oh !" The report was then agreed to.

Mernorous PURE SOFT WATER COMPANY. The bill to establish this company was thrown out last might, On the ir,utiuu for its second raiding, by 134 to GO.

DRESS OF MEMBERS AT THE SPEAKER'S LEVEES. Mr. HUME last night complained of the practice of requiring Members to appeal at the levees of the Speaker in court dresses. Many persons were

prevented from paying their respects to the Speaker by disinclination to ivear a court dress.

The SPIAKEll said, he was hianel to follow the custom of his pre- decessors, but should cheerfully accede to trey alteration agreeable to the !louse.

Mr. WARBURTON was satisfied that many Members were prevented front waiting on the Speaker by their dislike to make merry-andrews of themselves in Court dresses.

Mr. F. BARING suggested, that the subject had better be discussed in a fuller House.

Lord SANDON said, he should be happy to wait on the Speaker to mark his approbation of his conduct in the chair; and this remark closed the conversation.

Pnoionrreo Ale IMAGES. On Monday, Lord LYN DHURST obtained leave of the Peers to bring in a bill, to erred, that if a mar-

riage within the prohibited degrees was net, in marriages hereafter to be celebrated, called in question within two years after the marriage had taken place, or for marriages already performed within six months from

the date of the bill, the legitimacy of the children should never after- wards be questioned. Lord BROUGHAM wished that the retrospective'

anise of the bill, which allowed six months after its passing for the comtnencement of suits, to he altered ; so that in cases where no pro- ceedings were now instituted, none should hereafter be instituted is respect of existing marriages. lie wished the retrospective clause to take effect from the introduction of the bill, from that instant. Lord Lveni tease. acceded to this suggestion; arid the bill was brought in and read a first time.

A nn TO THE QUEEN OF SPAIN. Lord lIer.noutteL stated on Tues- day, in reply to a question from Lord Loenoemerev, (which had also been put on the previous evening, but which Lord Melbourne could not thee answer,) that military stores to the value of 200,000/. had been furnished the Queen of Spain ; and one of the Queen's vessels had been repaired in a dockyard of his Majesty, at the cost of Lo4;3/. These sums were to be repaid by the Spinel' Government ; but the Duke of Wellington, on the loth of Alarch, had directed Mr. Villims to inform the Spanish Ministry that the repayment would not be de- mended at present.

The Duke of IVELLteaereX said, that had Lord Londonderry given notice to Lim—a course whirl, was the ordinary Parliamentary course in these matters, and which he recommended hire to pursue inn tOture- he should have attended in his place and given an answer to that part rat the question which related to the share he had had in that oeinsaction. It was true that it had been intimated to the Spanish Government that it was not the intention of this Government to press immediately for payment.

Lord LONDONDERRY said, that in future he would pursue the cotnee recommended by the Duke.- LAW or PATENTS. On the motion of Lord BROUGHAM, on We(- nesday, a bill to improve the law of patents was read a first time, and ordered to be printed.

MARQUIS WELLESLEY: IRISH GOVI7RNMENT. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY mentioned, on Tuesday, that with respect to the asser- tion he had made, on the authority of the Ibike of Cumberland, of the dissatisfaction expressed by Lord Welleeley at the podey of the present Irish Government, he was ready to maintain, that he had been perfectly correct. A correspondence had taken place on tine subject, which he would produce if Lord Melbourne wished it. For his own part, he was perfectly satisfied. Lord MELBOURNE—" I am also perfectly satisfied, and have ro wish to see tine documents."

Marquis IVELLESLEY—" Neither bare I." (Laughter.) Istieneoei MAneeer BILL. This bill was read a second time on Tuesday, by a majority of 30 to 1 ; the only opponents being Loud ALVANLEY and the Duke of RICHMOND.

ORANGE MEETINGS IN IRELAND. On Tuesday, Lord LONDON- DERRY presented the petition agreed to at the great " Protestant meeting" in the county of Down, in October last. Ile took the op- portunity of denouncing the conduct of Ministers, and accused them of truckling to O'Connell. Lord MeLeounsE replied in a very firm and spirited manner. He reproved Lord Londonderry for keeping back the petition for so many months, and presenting it only when he thought he could serve his party by so doing. lie questioned his right to use the petition for such a purpose ; and denied that the docu- ment could now he considered as expressing the sentiments of those who signed it six months ego. Lord Melboure also charged the Orange noblemen with gross impudence and dereliction of duty, in calling vast numbers of Protestants together, and creating agitation in Ireland. A rather sharp discussion ensued ; in which Lords HATHER- TON, RODEN, anti Ilanemeneox participated ; and Earl FITZWILLIA31 had an altercation with the Archbishop of CANTER RUB r, who at- tempted to lecture him for terming the Protestants a stet.

ADJOURNMENT. Both Houses adjourned last night, to Wednesday