The Express. — London, England, 1851-07-30 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS.—TotsooT, JULY 29. The LOSS CMANCILWS tea his seat at 5 o'clock. PUBLIC BUSINESS. PETITIONS PRESENTED. CSYST•L PALLCIL—By Earl EITZHARDINGE, from Cheltenham' the Etll of HARROWBY, from a place not hoard ; Lord LYTTELTON, from Worcester ,• the Bishop of MANCHESTER, from Birmingham ; Lord MON TEAOLE, from Chester; in favour of the retention of the Crystal Palace. ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES BILL. —By the Earl of ENNIS KILLE.N, from Wesleyan congregations, Ireland; the Earl of MOUNTCASHELL, from several places ; in favour adds bill. Lord MONTEAGLE, from Clare, against the hIS. Tin , . Bess Aci.—By the Earl of HARROWBT, from Towninallsag, complaining of this act. COPTIIOLD ENCLOSIIIE AND TITHE COMMIS- MONS BILL. Oa the footles et the Ball of CASLISLI this bill wu read S third time and prod. EPISCOPAL AND CAFITULAR ESTATES MANAGEMENT (No. 2) BILL. On the make of the Earl of Canuus this hill was read • third time and passed. POOR RELIEF ACT CONTINUANCE BILL. On the motion of the Karl of CPA/LISLE this bill was read a sound time. SMITHFIELD MARKET REMOVAL BILL. On the motion of Earl GRANVILLE this bill was read a third time and LEASEHOLir T e tINURE OF LAND (IRELAND) ACT AMENDMENT BILL. This bill passed through committee, and was reported to the house. UNITED CHURCH OF ENGLAND AND IRELAND BILL.—CHURCHES AND CHAPELS (IRELAND) BILL.—ECCLESIASTICAL RESIDENCES (lltE _ LA - Ni)) DILL. Oa the motion of Lord hlo:srrent.r, thew bills seve rally pawed through committee, and were reported to the houx•. CIVIL BILLS. &e, (IRELAND), DILL. . , Oa the motion of the Marquis of CLA.NRICAKDZ, this bill was read a third time and passed. ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES ASSUMPTION BILL. The Marquis of LANSDUWMII having moved the third reading of this bill, The Earl of AUERDEEN said he could not but avail himself of the last opportunity which would be afforded lien, by the forma of the house, to pretest against the peas• ing of this bill. The discussion which had taken place on this subject had not removed the apprehensions which he had entertained as to its mischievous consequences and radical injustice. If he found Monti( almost alone in opposition to the sentiment, of the house, he hoped their lonlehips would believe that it was in consequence of the most deliberate coneideration of what he deemed to be right—(hear, bear)—and some thing told him that noble lids opposite were not strangers to the feelings which he entertained. What was the situa tion of the hill at the present moment? Nothing ovoid he more singular then the position of this measure—eareled as it hr. been by great majorities—every amendment having been successfully resixted —and yet no one person had expressed entire satishatien with the measure either is that or the other house of parliament. His noble friend on the crass-leaches (Inc(lntl Munteagle), who moved the omission of Ireland from the hill, hail, in his (the Earl of Aberdeen's) opinion, made out a strong—s triumphant case, to which, however, he could not secede; and he had voted against the motion in order to avoid mischiefs of greater magnitude than those which it was intended to remove. The noble lord's srgumeut in favour of excluding Ireland, powerful as it was, app. areal to him to be stronger &goind aU legislation on the subject. Ile said is conclusion that he shoals! avail himself of one of the moot valualde privileges which their lordehips possessed, namely, that of recording on the journals of their house his reasons for olojecting to this measure. It would be for these who came after them to deride whether those reasons and objection. were consistent with good policy and goal government, and whether the apprehension. expressed were we'll founded, or whether they were only rain and visionary. (icer, beer.) The Bishop of OXFORD said that if he had not the tamest belief in his own mind that his giving a silent vote upon this question might lead to a miseenstruction of his motives, he should not hare risen to address their lord ships. (Hear, hear.) Hut he was conscious that one hold ing the position which he oteupied, and 111110 hid lora fre quently Minded to in the course of the debate, would have been subject to the charge of lukewarmness, union ho stated that he gave his full and hearty and rational eon pent to the lull before their lordship+. It was on 16 , 1 lower ground Own this that he could consent to vote for this ques tion. It hail been argued, with singular ability, that this bill was only a civil and political measure ; and that it did sot affect the religious pert of the question. Now, he be lieved that it did meat directly concern the religious cha racter of this country ; and it was only on that ground that he should give kin vote fur it. lie did not mean to say that it was the province of parliament to estab lish relminus truth; he thought, however, that two separate Liam of duty heenme the legislature of this country and the bishops and clergy. He thought the church WAS hound, mhos this act of oppression was perpetrated, on two distinct grounds to rotest against it, as being first the introduction isif !else ant i fatal doctrine into this our land, and also as to the ground • and there was se each fatal, fundamental °kitties sgaisist this bill r to render it an unlawful mea. sans. Therefore, as it was far snore desirable to do some thing, though not the best thing, that could be defined, than to leave everything undone, he alkpqght he was actin, not irrationally, not from passion, of any lower moiiii4t from the dictates of his judgment,.which had . h t to bear upon this great questiosZareenting ut he was hound to add that - iota did Mstisfy him. First, because was. not sure diet it'. was altogether the best mod nxe li 'id peoeeed eh A • Ind, +.. secondly, if they were to liflhah way, he did not think the bill was what it ought to be. The position of the question was this:—There were three modes of deal ing with our Roman catholic fellow-subjects. For • I. time after the reformation we had endeavoured, by penal laws and direct legislation, to enforce truth and extirpate error. We trusted more or less to persecution. This, though a very bad and irreligious mode of dealing with the question. was a distinct sad appreciable mode : but the time came when that became impossible, and we next proceeded to ignore altogether the existence of the Bishop of Rome. Our supremacy was constructed on that idea, that we did not know of the fact of there being any Roman catholic+ in England, or those who got rescripts end bulls from Rome. Chia for a time was an intelligible mode of proceeding—not a good one, because it savoured of untruth. The time came when it could no longer be acted on; for, having given our Roman catholic brethren seats in the two houses of parliament, and proceeded, by different bills, to acknowledge their status, and the status of their priests and bishops, it was altogether impossible and preposterous longer to attempt to ignore the existence of that which was every day forced upon our attention. The third system, the only rational and enduring one, was to say, . M e will no longer persecute, because we think it ' wicked ; we can no longer ignore ; but we will do what we have a right to do, we will regulate this intercourse which we cannot any longer deny." By this he meant no con cordat ; there could be, in the true sense of the word, no concordat between England and Rome ; because that ne cesaarily involved giving some portion of the national power to enforce the dogmas and doctrines of the Bishop of Rome. Valuing so highly as he did the protestant re formed character of this nation of England, he never could consent to any concordat which should give the support of the law of England to any such dogmas. By regulation he meant this: Suppose it had been enacted, before this un happy brief or rescript had arrived, under the highest posaible penalty, that no bull, brief, or rescript should be admitted into this country without being previously laid be fore the government, to see whether it contained anythiag hostile to the institutions of the land; and that, if judged to contain any such provision, it should be remitted to the l'ope, and any attempt to introduce it should subject all concerned to the very highest penalties of the law, as the very highest possible breach of the nationality of this coun try what would have been the effect ? All the difficulties that hail arisen would have been avoided; this bull would have been rejected end sent back; and a settled relation have been introduced, which would have saved us all these perplexities. That was the only line of proceeding on which their lord ships could firmly take their stand. They must come to this conclusion to admit the deplorable, the lamentable fact that there were those in the nation who believed it ne cessar7 for their soul's safety to have communication with the bishop of Rome, and to insist upon regulating that communication so that none of the rights of this nation should be infringed. Some of their lordships thought this hill went too far; others that it did not go far enough. He thought it was open both to the one objection and the' other. (Hear, hoar.) !lad he had the opportunity of voting in committee lie should have supported the amend ment of the noble duke opposite. These money penalties tomald never be enforced; and the amendment would have as it a self-executing measure, and sufficiently stringent, Mad would have prevented these conflicts which he feared Must ensue on its passing. Ile thought that another amend meat, proposed elsewhere, was essential to making this a truly honest measure—that which declared the Queen to ho the only fountain of honour in these realms, and made it penal for any minister, without the royal sign -manual, to concede rank, title or precedence to any Roman catholic prelate in virtue of his office. It was the most complete contradiction to call the parcelling out of England into sees a grievous aggres sion, and yet to say that if Roman catholic bishops were appointed in our colonk , s, so far from its being felt an insult or an aggression they should be allowed to take precedence immediately after the bishops of our own church. On one point he desired earnestly to address their lordships. Ile did not affect to fear for the result of the division. Ile knew their lordships would pass the bill ; but he would most respect fully and earnestly press upon them that when they had dam this they should not consider the matter settled, or imagine that the protestant feeling which had been called forth hail been abundantly satisfied by such an act being =lon the statute-book. What could be thought of a ure which passed a law not to be enforced ? There were doubtless government difficulties attending this mea sure, but they must he prepared to enforce it when it was isetl. Some regarded it simply as a Notest. A penal bill was not a protest—it was something more i and a penal bill carried, not to be enforced, would be an insult to the spiritual character of our church, and an encouragement to that aggression which it affected to repel. lie knew the subtlety and strength of the to with which we bed to contend ; he knew that for 1,100 years and more, *rough forty generations of men, she had been unwearily, enichhally, and most ably e irrying on this contest; he know that she was full of traditions of victory, and coup ler d success ; that she had had all the subtlest nod Hems) of the ablest men that had lived in her comma- Zmials. d they bad consulted for her how to carry on this Ho knew that great part of the training of her priests was a controversial and warlike training, to enable them to make converts, and to weaken the church of Eng land. Ile knew that that church had little of human strength or ability to compare with this great amount of di versiticsl esperience,and of traditional learning. The church of !tome haul known before how to tura defeats into tri umphs, and gather new arguments for success Irons those very reverses. Knowing all this be trembled to think of the legislature or this country weakening the ground of their national protest by passing a measure which they , hul nut mean to enforce. ICe kuew that the foe was at that mo ment sleepless ; he knew that the church of Rome fully un derstood the strength given to the opposition by the fact of the established church having not only truth of doctrine, but also apostolic orders. She knew that this had made the church of England so strong through many generations against herself. (Hear.) Knowing how, at this moment, all her energies were applied to supplant that church ; knowing that to effect this object the dearest charities of domestic life had been mast mercilessly &mei ticed,—knowing that for this she had sent out anew exhor tations to a holy crusade of prayer, that she had anew in stituted orutorians to harangue, and unlicensed jesuits to intrigue,—knowing all this, he said that if they passed a measure which was to leave them weaker in the conflict, because it promised much and performed little, they would have dour evil service to the reformed faith of this land. On this ground he ventured to say that, without being wholly able to approve of the measure, lie acted rationally and wisely in supporting the third reading. LORI sruAitT DE DECEIS regretted that be felt himself compelled to vote against the bill. lie did so because it would be fatal to the peace and welfare of Ireland, involving the prohibition of legal forms in the faith of' the Roman catholics of that country. The efforts of the Roman catholic priests might be met by the increased spiritual action of the English church, but it could not be met by leifislation. I'he Duke of ARGYLL denied that the value of the bill consisted in the extent to which it was to be enforced. They had now established that great principle of the law, and the Human catholies would not be able to found an argument upon their silence. lie contended that the church of England, being a national inditution, might summon the legislature to her aid when attacked by • foreign power. The right rev. prelate and other persons had spoken of the church of England as the great bulwark of the Christian faith. Such it had been, and such he prayed God it might yet be; but it was, nevertheless, now the only protestant church which, as far as he (the noble duke) was aware, was giving forth, day by day, perverts to the Roman catho lic faith. (Cheers.) Earl FORTESCUE, in intimating his assent to the measure, trusted that parliament would not ehriuk from passing a more stringent enactment, if required. The Earl of OLENGALL, who supported the bill, be lieved that the laity in Ireland were in favour of the col leges which had lately been established there; and, if any Rumen catholic bishops on the Continent had adopted a similar line of proceeding, respecting any colle g es eke,., which they had adopted at the synod of Thurles, they w 1 soon have found themselves in a fortress, or have been con veed to the frontier. Earl NELSON contended that the cause of religion had never prospered when supported by penal laws, and argued that the bill was full of inconsistencies. It professed to meet a special case, but went beyond it, whilst the real danger was left untouched. The Marquis of SLIGO protested against the bill. Lord REI)ESDALE apprehended that they were legis lating without having instituted the inquiries or obtained the information most desirable on the subject. Be regretted the absence of Lord Derby, whose proposition for an in quiry into the whole matter as to the best means of meeting this aggression seemed to be the safest and moat prudent course of proceeding ; but consented, n thcleas, to adopt I the bill. _ _ _ being a schismatic intrusion of a rival chord; kite, ground already legitimately occupied by the church of the country. (Hear, hear.) On loth these grounds he felt hound to pro test, as a solemn synod had lately protested, against this act of aggression ; and be must alarm that every part of that protest was justifiable. It had been stated that it was altogether to he considered as the repulsion of an out rage on the crown of England —on the heart of the national life of England. (Hear. bear.) It was only as a Christian people that we could denounce this act re f the Bishop of Rome. If the act of the Bishop of Rum.- was an aggnossion in any other sense it was as much an art of aggression fur the apostles to set up the Christian church at Jerusalem, at Antioch, and Romeo, because it was opposed to the religion which °thind in that part of the world at that time. It was then just as much an aggression to op. pose the nationality which then exiated—this country was a Christian country, and we had a Christian nationality—. and the assumption was that we were not a Christian coun try, but that we had lapsed into a state of unbelief. Ho mid, not merely SS a bishop of the church, but as a member of this great Christian commonwealth, that an aggreraiem bad been made which affected every one of them. On this ground the whole opposition to the measure of the Pope MSS fully j ustifiable; because it was the claiming on the part of this country of its own alienable national rights, an a member of the great Christian commonwealth. Again, being a nation, and having an established church of a cer tain character, we were hound to reject this interference. What wan done at the Reformation? This people of Eng land thee asserted for itself that it belonged to the church of Christ—that it held certain doctrines, truths, and farms of discipline—that to maintain thou- was part ails national being—and that it njected certain others. Such was still the profession of this nation; it was impressed as a stamp on every part of our legislation and customs. Why was the Queen of this country rarrounded not only by the Liables of the state but by the clergy ? Why, wheu the royal diadem wan placed on those fair brows on which it now sat, was it placed there, not by the oldest uobleman of the land, but by the highest minister of the church ? Because we Mill ma nation acknowledged the truth of the reformed 41:ret faith, and had incorporated it with all our ns. According to his own showing the Pope had not only sent in bishops to his own fold, but he had abolished the existing episcopal sees in this country. (Here, hear.) This was a direct interference of a mixed spiritual and temporal kind, with our institutions, and as such ought to be misted. Much mist might be thrown over this question, but he would rat it in the plainest possible way. Supposing there had been a pro-catholic revolution in this country, and Roman catholicism had been established in the land ; suppose this to have happened before this reecript of the Pope was famed, what course must he then hare pursued? Ile • mast have recognised our sees, hare proceeded against the iadividual occupants, have deprived them for heresy, and pat ether prelates in their place. But if there were to he a pro-Roman catholic revolution in this country tomorrow, the Bishop of Rome would say —•• Your sees are swept away altogether ; I don't need to deprive the occupants of their seats." (Hear, hear.) Thus, he had interfered with that spiritual constitution which we, rightly of wrongly, had established for the instruction an d worship of OW people. On three grounds he supported the bill, bee mme there had been, in this iuvasion of our rights, an attempt to remove as from among Christian people, and to abolish the several bishopree of the church of England. Os these religious grounds their lordships sees board to iatoriass with regard .to this aggression. On the gaisatisa of this particular way in which this letterer enlea Was to be mask le would say that, without any espc del Iftilmp ter this wasore, he was prepared to give an ad whew went is what ministers had proposed. In all Bigliihatiwa s elms dillicidtiss Interposed, a wise man must ha pseud la dr choice of his course by that which semel most sapilient ; he must wisely adopt a certain line of essellst. though Itsowieg it was not the best that could hew Wm aimeeaL bat feeling it to be the best under the cit.- , ounistsseee. The treble earl had said they were taking from the lionten asdralles what was essential to the perform- • scant lilllllllf disir faith. If that could b.: established, he hot gee wadi alasea the bill. But the arguments hod altsptheet hied to tarty that conviction to his Meek Be ort* les th the simple fact. that for many them weds lad been fully and fiblin sailaski by biabilni nomiaal sces in distant awnmaries 1 ire tie Aims epandie were bishop. It was said the NOM why that bib", were not snot miner was Abe to aft& lewd= dieting mow the Roma embo li. body—molars spied seeder, and so en. Ile be lieved the Wass was a wry different one. He Wawa the Pep himself bad all along resided the desire for laving diameas la Plagind. apt wishing, until this massed, to awe to taialles mid absekte Weeds with the people of la pot times. the Peps had stated it *mad be e ll e=he to is awe and gweenneent in We wintry ware he to amen blimp. that be was net permed to take the step. Bet imissady am* had arises a great demise I. mks monaisasenatiathe perversions which had smilibased li awl made monsailit the fans of our cinch ; those was a libelant mayM4 reaming In the dwelt tide* be led to doubt abet lb sompletsams nod ediseey, if t%: aa mr • estaidislesel behee thole eyes a hog awl territorial ; gad flat Ile mama had bees adapted with the view ef hastaglag thew yeevandeas be truly be- Mewed. It had am bees dew her tip paresisase of the desk of the Mew of P.maa bet to iheiNteta spa these who were not of Wit dee& Thenehrev sauggaa swat thet we wee withholding from the Sem= esthetics teamdig W their religious earelese, absolutely fell Lord GAGE said that the increase of convents and monasteries was the real papal aggression, and he should be glad to see the government abandon this bill, which would lead to nothing, but offend many and please nobody, and boldly meet the actual danger to which he had ad verted. Earl GREY begged to make an observation or two upon an allusion in the speech of the right reverend prelate (the swap of Oxford). The right reverend prelate had pointed oat the defects by which the bill was characterised, had stated the coarse which he would havevrecommended, and amongst ether things had said that on rank or title ought to be given to any Roman catholic prelates without some distinct and famed instrument on the subject. The right rev. prelate had askered especially to instructions which hall been traneenitted about four years ago to the governors of the esicmisa, to the effect that they should give titles of honour to the Romeo catholic prelates and the precedence conse quent thereon. Here he would observe that in the majority orate colonies the Roman catholic church stood upon a fasting of equality with the protestant church. In Australia, when this question had first been raised, the church of Rain was the sharer of an endowment on precisely the as principles as ,our own church there. In some other eclogue the case was still stronger for the Roman catholic &web, because these colonies had been originally Roman catholic. Under thew circumstances it had been represented to the government by the Roman catholic prelims that they ought not to be denied the social distinctions accorded to our own prelates, and the request had seemed so reasonable THE EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JULY 30, 1851 that government could not deny it, and consequent) I in structions had been that the Roman catholic prelates *odd have the same social distinctions in the colonies which were given to the prelates of the protestant church. The right rev. veleta (the !Bebop of Oxford) had said this ought to lee been degC4de m .- ae someinetmenedt. Must, howcreerreamnd the gist rev. prelate that there 514 be* no form ali instruMent weed in cogeiviag the title bilitowed on the Englith colonial bishope— r thatthey had beell r eanferred la the caM of the catholic bishops and **at of the HBO* bishops in precisely the same man nee, (Hear, hear.) . He had no hesitation in saying . that in some eases it was a misfortune rather than otherwise to the prelates both of the English and the Roman catholic 1 churches in the colonies to posies titles,and had he (Emi(; rey) the power to go back he should establish equality not by , giving titles to both, but by . taking them altogether away. It was en anomaly that parties should possess titles while their income was scarcely sufficient to maintain them de cently ; and this was the ease with respect to many of the colonial bishops of both churches. lie believed, however, that whatever social privileges or rank in the colonies were given to the prelates of the one church could nut Ix withheld from the other. He was strongly of opinion that the policy of this country towards Roman catholic Ireland had not been what it ought to have been, but at the same time le thought that the law should be maintained against any d_- nomination, and that the authority of the crown and par liament of this country should be strictly and firmly sup ported. (Hear, hear.) The bill was then read a third time. On the question that the bill do pass, Lord MONTEAGLE rose for the purpose of prorating an additional clause. Ho stated that the opinion of emisent counsel had been taken on the bill, which opinion was to the effect, that, on section one, which was declaratory, an indictmeat might lie for a misdemeanour; that under see tion one a prosecution might be commenced without the as sent of the Attorney-General ; and that a jury mightlind against a Roman catholic prelate if they were of opinion that any act was done virtually in pursuance of a brief or rescript, whether it had been ostensibly so done or not. Moreover, parties of the lionian catholic faith acting under any brief or rescript from the see of Rome might be indicted for conspiracy. (Hear.) Now he asked them that where there existed a doubt they should put in words to do away with that doubt. If they allowed the bill to go forward in its present shape they must be held deeply restsonsible fur the consequences which might ensue. This act would operate differently in different localities, and it would tell with undue severity on the possessors of the ancient sees in lreland—s:es which had not been created by the Pope's bull. Such a state of the law could not be defended. What he would ask was simply this, that a clause should be added allowing the Roman catholic pre lates to continue the titles recognised by the Bequests Act, and that if they took the designations used in that Act they should thereby rid themselves of the penalties of the bill. 10 this he did not think there could be any reasonable objection found. Ile did not ask them to apply any new principle, but only to take the same course in Ireland and Eng land that they had adopted in the colonies, and by adopt ing this clause they would give the means to catholic.; of extricating themselves from penalties. The noble lord con cluded by moving the addition of the clause. On the question being put, The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said he should not have address their lordships on the present stage of the bill had it not been for the amendment, or rather the addition, which bad been proposed by his noble friend. It appeared to him that his noble friend was apprehensive of the same ' effects being produced by the bill which had been antici pated by the noble earl opposite who had begun this discus , non, and hail been described by him RS dangers of a very formidable character. 'the noble earl had said that pro ceedings might be instituted which would have the effect of debarring Roman eatholics front the exercise of their re ligion, and deprive them of that protection of the law to which it was admitted they were justly entitled, and which effect he had already stated the bill not only was not intended to produce, but that actually the bill would not produce that effect. The course which the government had proposed appeared to hint plain and intelligilde, and one capable of execution, and he thought the plan proposed by his right rev. friend, if he would allow him so to call him, was open to the objection of not being so practicable as the measure proposed by the government. There was one point upon which he need not dwell, fur he had already stated that there was a portion of the bill which he would rather not see in it, be alluded to that which gave power to the common informer to lay informations. Ile common informer could not be actuated by the motives that would influence a government in instituting a prosecution. A common informer might be used in petty offences ' such as uttering base coin, but in such cases as this he could not be trusted, and for that reason the government bad interposed and given the most effectual check to the action of the common informer, by enacting that the prosecution should depend upon the discretion of the principal law officers of the Crown, so that no prosecution could be carried on with out the consent of the Crown, through the learned Attorney General. And he held, he might say with confi dence, that prosecutions could be only instituted in such cases as were objectionable under the law as it before stood, and that the jurisdiction to be exercised would be the same. It was satisfactory to him to be able to say that the acts of the Bishop of Rome might have been unobjectionable in themselves if he had taken a different course in carrying them out. If he thought it a lawful course fur him to se cure the benefits of episcopal administration to the Roman catholic subjects of this country, ho might have chosen a safer course in effecting that object, and have informed her Majesty's government that he intended so to confine his object. If he had stated that that was the sole object to which his briefs were confined, in his (the Marquis of Laiudowne's) opinion no objection would have been made, and, if the Pope would even now so limit his object, it might make a great difference in the public feeling ou the question, for there was not one of those spiritual functions which might not be exercised. He thought the doe tnne of his noble friend's amendment failed. Some authority must be exercised for the due administration of ' purely spiritual functions, whether by the Pope or any one ' else, and when his noble friend called upon the govern ment to purge the evil from the bill he could only repeat that, whether earth:el out in England or Ireland, the law unaltered remained in full force, and no person would be prevented front doing that which it had been the object of the legislature to permit, or would be deprived of that protection which it hail been the object of the law to give to him. But the object of the hill was to curb that exercise of temporal power which, under the name of the church of Rome, had been so often brought into prac tice under the colour of spiritual jurisdiction. Upon these grounds he must oppose the addition of the amendment proposed by his noble friend. (Hear, hear.) After some observations front Lord st. Germans, the Bishop of Oxford, and Lord Cranworth, Lord MONTEAGLE briefly replied, and said he was so much satisfied with the sentiments which had been ex pressed by her majesty's government on the subject of his amendment, that he would not further press his motion upon their lordships. The bill was then read a third time and passed. CHART (ABLE TRUSTS permanently roofed over and a chimney placed on the top. Laugister.) When he (Lord Seymour) came into office, he not only found matters in that state, but he also discovered that the had actually laid out a small garden round the stead. He should 'slivery bad accounts were rife in reference talks, stand ; and these unfavourable accounts were reported to him. He (Lord Seymour) had also been informed that, if he sanctioned the encroachment for any length of time, there might be some difficulty in dispossessing the woman. (Hear, hear.) In that state of things he applied to the Duke of Wellington, as ranger of the park, before taking any step, and the noble duke undertook to inquire into the whole matter. Shortly after his grace wrote to him (Lord Seymour) entirely concurring in his views. Ile (Lord , Seymour) then referred thu entire correspondence to the solicitors of the department. He also informed Ann Hicks that, in the event of her withdrawing from the occupation, she should be considered ; but she actually did not stir until proceedings were commenced against her. Although she had no legal possession, yet he (Lord Seymour) paid her Ss. a week for twelve months, a portion ef which money she employed in getting placards printed and posted through the park, de. tailing the hardship of her case. (A laugh) He might say, iu conclusion, that no erection whatever was permitted in the parks. His Royal Highness Prince Albert had built a model cottage, but on being informed that it was contrary to usage, he promised to remove it in November. (Hear, hear.) Lord D. STUART inquired how many years the hut of Ann Hicks stood in the park ? Lord SEYMOUR replied that, previous to 1843, she had no hut. The matter then dropped. THE NEW HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. B. OSBORNE hoped the hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Greene) would give some assurance, before the session closed, that the house in which they were then assembled would have no more heraldic devices entblasoned on its windows. Such devices he had never seen. (Laughter.) Mr. GREENE was understood to say that they were then completed. (Laughter.) Lord D. STUART wished to know if it were the inten tion of ministers to continue their sittings in that house ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought it desirable that they should sit there, as by that means the house would in every way be tested. Mr. WAKLEY should observe that the atmosphere of the house throughout last night was most dangerous to human life. No provision whatever had been made for the ventilation of the Louse, and therefore he thought it better they should return to the old chamber. MEDICAL CHARITIES (IRELAND) BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. METROPOLITAN SEWERS COMMISSION. ...On the order of the day for going into committee on this bill, Mr. WAKLEY begged to move as an amendment that it be committed that (lay three months. In his opinion the various matters or sewers, intramural interments, and water supply belonged to one department, land should be regulated by . a single and comprehensive bill. Whilst the commissioners were engaged in takh.g the money out of t* rockets of the 'Metropolitan pViblie for the abatement of sewers nuisances, that public were declaring -- , oners themselves were a greater nuisance. that the (Laughter.) Mr. W. WILLIAMS seconded the amendment. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explained that the present bill intended merely to bridge over the present year, and was therefore of an entirely temporary nature. TIR measure would merely continue the present commission• r in office through the present year until a more general measure should be introduced. Mr. O.OSBORNE begged to suggest that the commission should wont on under the old bill until neat session; and then la them commence in earnest. (Hear.) After a few words from Lord 1). Smear, Lord EBBINOTON said previous to the present commissioners being appointed to office the coinmis stoners were appointed by the Lord Chancellor, under a statute of Henry VIII. That commission was not pro vided with a system of maps and plans; and whatever maps and plans were in their possession were much better calculated to mislead them than to assist or expe dite them. Now, fur such bad and inefficient management, the charge to the ratepayers in 1817 was a rate of 7s. on a rental of 1001.. whilst under the present commission it was only four saillin7s on the same amount of rental ; and even a large portion of the money raised by that 4s. rate went in procuring information that they should have inherited from their predecessors in office. They had been parochially maligned ; but it could nut be denied—indeed, it had been admitted by a most hostile writer in the West nanster leech:le—that they had done good and efficient ser vice to the public. The new, that was, the present, com mission was appointed in 1819, since which period it had been flippantly asserted by way of disparagement that they had done nothing. Certainly, if he (Lord Ebrington) were asked if they had effected all that was necessary for the sa nitary improvement of London, and if they had fulfilled all the duties which the law imposed upon them, he would answer they had not. (Hear, hear.) But when the complicated nature of the system under which they had worked was recollected, as also that they had an act with no less than 116 clauses ; with all that cumbrous machinery considered. the wonder should not be at how little, but rather at how much, they had accomplished. At present the subterranean survey might be considered all but complete, there having been 760 miles of underground drainage sur veyed, and 4,448 acres of surface. 'I here were also two courts held in each month instead of one, as formerly, whilst upwards of 11,000 applications and 4,000 complaints bad been attended to and disposed of. Since the commence ' meat of the :iresent year the commissioners had completed 54,000 feet of pipe sewer and 15,000 feet of brick sewer. Their engineering alone cost them 19,0001. iu the year; and there were at present works to the amount of 150,0001. planned and ready fur execution: so that when he asserted their works were executed at half the cost of their prede cessors, he thought he might claim some credit that the Commissioners of Sewers were not so entirely neglectful as would seem of the duties entrusted to them for execution. After some explanations regarding the Victorhostreet sewer, Lord Ebrington said that, so far from courting secrecy, he over and over again challenged hen. gentlemen to move fur a committee, that the whole thing might be sifted. But hon. gentlemen, in refusing to take that course, best knew why ; and for his own part, lie should regret it had not been taken, as then the SeWerSCOMIIIiSSiOII would be afforded the opportunity of making everything clear and evident. At the tiine of the old Surrey commission, there was a debt of some 61,0001. pending. At the present time there was a difference, they having reduced the liabilities of the tom mission by about 20,0001., notwithstanding the imputations. In conclusion, he should say that the present bill of the go vernment did not embody many suggestions—most useful and important suggestions—of tho sewers commissioners. (Hear, hear.) Sir B. lIALL thought the statement of the noble lord most unsatisfactory. He was prepared to show that of all the public board,: which had ever undertaken public duties, the commission of sewers was the must unsatisfactory and inefficient that had ever existed in the metropolitan dis tricts. No minutes of their proceedings were kept from the 11th of October to the 13th of the following May, the only record of them being a note upon a little piece of dirty paper, without signatures and without date. Yet this com mission had the power of levying a rate of 6d. in the pound on upwards of 8,000,000/. of property. The fact was, notwithstanding the effort of the noble lord to exhibit this commission iu favourable contrast to the old one, the pre sent board had levied a rate of 50 per cent. greater than the former one. In reference to the Victoria sewer that work had cost 62 per cent. above the:contractiprice, and 45 per above the estimate. In the last report on the Victoria sewer there was a charge of 4001. for thither for shoreing up Westminster Abbey, and a farther charge for concrete. Surely the engineer ought to have known better than to gone so near the Abbey, and that concrete would have been required in carrying on a sewer through such a soil. By the returns relating to the old commission it appeared that their liabilities amounted to 58,0001., whereas the liabilities of the present commission in the course of fourteen months amounted to 135,0001. He complained of this bill not being brought in at an earlier period of the cession, when it could have been properly discussed. He entirely concurred in the proposition that this commission should not last longer than another year, and ho thought that a clause should be in serted in the bill to prevent the commissioners levying any rate beyond the last rate of Gd. lie was convinced that unless they had some system of representative control the public would never be satisfied. The sooner that the pre sent commission was annihilated the better. The house then ;enirjocoMMitiee — oir this bill. Earl POWIS moved the omission of the 19th clamp. After a conversation, the galleries were cleared for a division, but none took place, and the clause was agreed to. On a subsequent clause, The Duke of CLEVELAND moved that the three royal hospitals of London, Christ's Hospital, St. Bartholomew 's, and St. Thomas's, should be exempted from the operation of the bill. He was confident, from the constitution of the mouaging body of these hospitals, that any abuse was im- The Earl of WARWICK seconded the amendment. The LORD CHANCELLOR said the details of the ma nagement would not be interfered with by the bill, and un less they were prepared to omit every charity they could not make an exception in favour of those referred to by the noble duke. . After a few words from the Earl of CHICRILSTIR, and 10 Marquis of SALISBURY, The amendment was negatived without a division. The remaining clauses were then agreed to and the house The Leasehold Tenure of Laud (Ireland) Act Amend lent Bill passed through committee. Their lordships adjourned at a quarter past cloven o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS. 7 TrEsDAT, 70LT 29. The Sroxickapok the chair at 12 o'clock: Tun CRYSTAL YALAt•i• PoR 'FPRES-EN-IEIiRB RTTENTION OP.-- By Mr. B. OSBORNE, from S Kensington ; Mr. ARCHIBALD HASTIE, from Paisley; Mr. R.PALMER, from Maidenhead; Sir .1. WALMSLEY and Messrs. PUSEY, HEYWOOD, OEACH, and EWART, from places not stated. Also by Colonel SIBTIIORP, from Chelsea and Kensington, to the same s ffect. In presenting this petition, the gallant colonel said that be by no means eoneurred in its prayer, and that, should any proposition for retaining the building be brought forward by the mi nister, he should oppose it. BOARD OP BRISIBS.—By Sir B. HALL, from Mary lebone, complaining of the inefficiency of the Boma of Sewers. Mr. HENLEY considered the defence made by the noble lord opposite (Lord Ebrington) a very unsatisfactory one. waascossmtomti commissioner rapt proposed obleeby the ball, t i nnmad to who should be salaried, and be in constant attendanc e t o appointment UBS E L o i ice, t he 'lj• wind up the affairs of the commission. That, in his opinion, was the chief merit of the bill. They were all agreed that it was necessary, in order to bring the affairs of the commis sion to an issue, to renew it for a year, and he therefore could not see what objection there could be to pass the bill. After a short conversation, Mr. WAKLEY replied, and the gallery was cleared for a division, but none took place, and the house went i n t o com mittee on the bill, Mr. BERNAL in the chair. Clauses 1 to 4 were, after a division on each of the first two, and one on 4 for reporting progress, agreed to. On clause 5, Mr. HENLEY moved to insert, " Provided also that no rate or rates amounting to more than threepence in the pound shall be made by the said commissioners.' The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opposed the motion, on the ground that if it were carried the commissioners would be unable to clear off their arrears of debt. After a short conversation, Lord J. RUSSELL agreed to the motion. The words were then inserted. The clause was then agreed to. The remaining clauses of the bill were then agreed to, and the house adjourned at half-past four to half-past six. The sitting was resumed at half-past six. THE CHURCH PAROCHIAL SYSTEM. The Marquis of BLANDFORD gave notice for early:next session of a motion for an inquiry into the necessity and means of extending the parochial system of tho church of England. Some other notices of motion were given, but the low tone in which this part of tho business is transacted, the bus of conversation prevailing in the house the while, and the height of the reporters' gallery from the floor in the new house, rendered itimpossible to gather their purport. VISITORS TO HAMPTON_ COURT AND KEW CASE OF ANN HICKS, Mr. B. OSBORNE wished to know from the noble lord the Chief Commissioner of Woods and Forests, whether „ Ann Hicks held • home in Hyde-park by the lift of George the Second, or by what tenure she occupied the I house from which she had been evicted ? Lord SEYMOUR mid, in reply to the first question, whether Ann Hicks held a house by the gift of George 11., that she did not, or by the giR of any other royal indivi dual; and the first time that he (Lord Seymour) heard any thing of that was a few weeks ago. He would i n f orm the house of the matter. (" Hear, hear," from Colonel Sib. there.) In 1843 Ann Hicks had a stall in the park, where she sold apples and ginger beer. Previous to that time she had a conduit in one of the parks. In 1843 she applied to the Commissioners of Woods and Forests to be permitted to have a stand for the security of her bottles and apples, and was permitted to erect one of wood, something similar to the cow stands in St. James's Park. She sub sequently wrote again, requesting permission to erect a brick stand instead of a timber one, on the ground of affording greater security. Up to that ' time there had been nothing said about a royal gift.' , Permission was ranted her to erect a brick stand, some thing about the use of those in St. James's Park, and of the height of five feet. Next year again she wrote to the Commissioners of Woods and }meets, thanking them, and stating that, though she did not intend to reside in the stand, nevertheless she would feel obliged by being per mitted to construct a tire-place, (or the purpose of supply ing herself with boiling water to make a cup of tea. (Laughter.) That was refused by the commissioners, but notwithstanding, some time after the stand or stall was On the motion of Sir O, Pecnau, a return was ordered of the number of visitors admitted to see the apartments and pictures at Hampton Court, and the gardens at Kew, during the year 1850; distinguishing the number in each month (in continuation of parliamentary paper, No. 494, of session 1850.) THE DEFALCATION OF SIR T. TURTON. In reply to a question from Viscount JOCELYN, Mr. ELIOT said he had received no accounts from India on the subjecatifthe settlement of the claims of those who had snared from the defalcation of Sir T. Turton, since the 22nd of February. It was found that a local act would be necessary to authorise the settlement of those claims, and such an act had been introduced, but whether it had passed the council or not ho could not say. A re quirement for Rinker information had been sent out, and should the result be that the act had passed, the claims ho apprehended would be speedily in course of adjustment. THE HOP DUTY. Mr. FREIVEN rose to move. pursuant to notice, that the Excise duty on hops was impolitic and unjust, and ought to be repealed at an early period. After referring to the various motions brought forward from time to time to repeal, reduce, or postpone payment of this duty, and call ing attention to the fact that his object was not to interfere with the financial arrangements of the present year, but to obtain a pledge from the house for the future, he observed that the total repeal of the tax would involve a sacrifice of not more than 300,000/. it year oft the average, which, con sidering the severity with which the tax pressed on the hop growers in general, and his constituents in particular, by whom about one-third of the whole was paid, its injuri ous effects in limiting the cultivation of the plant, and thus preventing the growers from providing against bad seasons, was no unreasonable demand. Mr. FULLER seconded the motion. Mr. HODGES, who was all but inaudible in the gallery, moved as an amendment, that on any reduction of excise duty on hops taking place, it is expedient to reduce the excise duty on British hops, and the customs duty on fore'gn hops, by one penny per pound weight each, toge ther with the 5 per cent. additional duty thereon granted by the act 3 Vie., c. 17. Sir G. PECHELL seconded the amendment. After a few words from Mr. BANUOW and Mr. Curcrets, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said this was the fourth time during the present session that the hop duty had been brought under the consideration of the house. Ile need not, therefore, repeat now what lie had so frequently observed before on the subject. It was mani fest that the duty could not be repealed at a time like the present, when the financial arrangements of the year had been made; and, as to the future, no promise could be made. Ile hoped the house would concur with him in re jecting the motion. Sir J. TYRELL said her Majesty's ministers had gone upon the principle of treating the burdens on land in a very c 'taker manner, relying upon the imbecility and crip pled state of the protectionist party. Mr. COBDEN would vote for the repeal of the hop duty, and the house might rely upon it that if the excite duty on hops were abolished the protecting duty on the foreign article would not, with a free trade parliament, long remain on the statute book. Whether tt e hon. mover divided the house or not, he (Mr. Cobden) went with him heartily in desiring to witness its abolition. (Ilene ) After a few words from Mr. BASS, Mr. lloilvs withdrew his amendment, Mr. Freweit briefly replied, and the house divided— For the motion Against it THE CRYSTAL PALACE. Mr. HEYWOOD rose to move ' pursuant to notice, that an address be presented to her Majesty, praying that her Majesty will be graciously pleased to direct, in such man ner as to her Majesty may seem fit, that the Crystal Palace be preserved until the Ist of May next, with a view to de termine if that novel structure, or any portion of it, can be adapted to purposes of public utility and recreation. The hon. member observed that this was a question with the hearings of which the house was well acquainted. llis ob ject in introducing this motion was to afford an opportunity of securicg a great public advantage which would not soon recur. There had been great complaint made by parties resident in the neighbourhood of thee inconve niences which they had suffered in consequence of the increase in the traffic of Kensington-road, in connexion with the Exhibition. These complaints were, no doubt, well founded ; but he apprehended that all such complaints would cease, should the glass palace be converted into a conservatory or a museum. The proposal which he now made to the house was, to emotion the building remaining as it is for a certain time, in order that inquiry might be made as to the scientific purposes to which, the Exhibition over, it might he converted. Objections had been urged to the suggestion that the building should be retained on the ground that it was not of a material calculated to endure. lie believed, however, that the iron work was exceedingly good, and that though the timber was Canadian it would last for several years. There would, of course, be consi derable expense incurred in keeping such an edifice in a proper state of repair ; but, at all events, he thought it was well worthy of consideration whether the Crystal Palace might not be advantageously retained as a winter garden for the recreation of the metropolitan public. Those gentlemen who were fond of riding and took exercise in Hyde-park found the row often wet and sloppy ; and be thought a covered ride would be to such persons a great luxury. The conservatory in the Botanical Gardens, Regent's-park, was exactly the model, on a smaller scale, of what he wished to see in Hyde-park. There were many other purposes which they might accom plish by the retention of the Crystal Palace. I he British Museum was too crowded. It lead but just space enough for the books and the antiquities ; and he thought the third department, the collection of objects in natural history, might be properly and usefully transferred and exhibited under glass in Hyde-park. (Hear, hear.) So far, every thing connected with the Great Exhibition had been most satisfactory. (Hear, hear.) The conuuissiouers had done themselves the highest honour, and too much could not be raid in praise of the illustrious prince with whom the idea of the Exhibition had its origin. The duties of the prince and his coadjutors were now coming to a close; and their present intention was to close the Crystal Palace on the lot September. They were further hound by their contract to remove the building altogether by the Ist of June. 15.12. What he (Mr. Heywood) asked the louse was that the commissioners should be granted a delay up to the lit May, with a view to steps being taken whereby the legisla ture could authorise the commissioners to retain possession of the building altogether. Ile was authorised to state on the part of Messrs. Fox and Henderson the contractors, that they would hold themselves in readiness to treat with the commissioners as regarded the Ist May upon the Mille terms as bad been agreed to as regarded the Ist September. (Hear, hear.) Ile thought that Mr. Paxton and Messrs. Fox and Henderson had distinguished themselves greatly in the design and execution of the Crystal Palace— (hear, hear)—and he should be glud if a considerable sum were awarded them, as an acknowledgment of their services, as soon as the commmissioners came to close their accounts. ben, had, nevertheless, as far as he kne w , not her n th e occasion of a single police case. (Cheers.) A circumstance which had been most satisfactory to Englishmen and foreigners was this :—that these vast crowds had not neces sitated any display of military power. (Cheers.) Il e w „, 14 say a few words upon the subject practically Isefor , th e house. The proposal was not that the house should pbage itself to the permanent maintenance of the budding erected for the purposes of the Exhibition, but that thu house should interfere to grant a sort of reprieve to th e commissioners. On this poiut, he, as a commissioner, and as a member of the government, begged to decline t . x _ pressing an opinion. As a commissioner and as a member of the government, he had pledged himself linei i i,„g y to certain conditions. lie hail pledged himself that t h e building should at a certain time be pulled down and re. moved ; and not for a hundred crystal palaces would he that that pledge should be broken. On this OCCaliioll he would simply state the position in which the commis. sinners stood. In the transaction with Messrs. F ox and Henderson, the commissioners had no alter native. They had engaged the building for a certain time, to he used only for the purposes of the Exhibition, and then handing it over to be pulled down ; and engaging to pur chase it in case it was retained beyond a certain time. At the present moment the commissioners had paid, or bad promised to pay, in round numbers, 120,0001. for the us • of the building_; and if they bought it they would further have to pay 70,0001. more ; making altogether, for loan and purchase, 190,000!. Unless they gave notice to Me.s rs . Fox and Henderson by , the Ist of September, they would ho bound to purchase the building outright. Unless, tl oTe . fore, his hon. friend (Mr. Heywood) was right in the state ment as to the views of Messrs. Fox nail Henderson —(Mr. Heywood : Yes, I have the authority of Mr. Paxton)—tho commissioners would he obliged to wive this notice, even if the building were to stand. There was a further contract with the Woodi and For,sts; and by thut contract they would also be compelled to pull the building down. Ile did not wish to offer any ar,m ments, one way or the other. He would express no per sonal opinion. The house knew exactly how the meter was, and it was entirely a question for hon. members and the public to decide. (Hear, hear.) In accordance with what he believed to be his duty ho would abstain (runt voting. Sir It. INGLIS, subscribing to the statements made by Mr. Labouchere of the-results of the Exhibition, still thought that the house W3l not at liberty to alter the ar rangements. It should be looked at simply its a question of contract, which could not be gut rid of, except by an act of parliament. Mr. EWAItT supported the motion. An opportunity was offered which hail never presented itself before, and which should not, he thought, be neglected. Mr. M'OltEGOlt likewise spoke in favour of the motion. Ile considered it would be rash to consent to the immediate demolition of the palace. Colonel THOMPSON suggested various reasons for pre serving the building. Mr. GOULBURN must be governed by a principle of good faith, and he put it to every one whether the building would ever have risen if there had not been a distinct assurance given that when the object of the Exhibition had been answered the site should be restored to its original condition ? If this was so, no consideration would warrant a departure from the arrangement. Independently of this objection, Mr. Ooulburn suggested various iiiitlenlties in the way of the conversion of the edifice to other purposes. Mr. WAK.LEY said the contract was by the public with the public ; and who, he asked, could contemplate without pain the destruction of such an institution, the temple , if peace as well as science, connected with the noblest as toms that could cuter the mind of man ? Forty-nine out of fifty of the inhabitants of London would vote fur the pre servation of the Crystal Palace. Mr. I3ANKES, though not for the destruction of the palace, was not fur its continuance in its present site, which would be a violation of public faith. Lord SEYMOUR said this was the reason why he must , vote against the motion. The first minister of the crown had distinctly told the house that the building was not intend, d to be permanent, and the commissioners had given a solemn ' assurance that it should be removed. Mr. C. VILLIEILS thought it would be an ungracious thing to refuse to keep up the building for a few mouths to try the exlwrituent of a winter garden. Mr. CLAY considered the difference of opinion a gold reason for delay. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER cautioned the house that it was necessary to consider what might Is' the expense of converting this building into a winter gar den. In the first place, the country must be prepared to take upon itself the payment of 70,0001., which might Ie called for. Moreover, it could not be maintained as a pr manent building without a considerable outlay. The most solemn pledges having been given that the building should be taken down, more than a mere majority of the house was required to set aside this stipulation. As a memo, rof the government, he should express no opinion upon the motion. _ _ After a few words from Mr. itEADLAX and Mr. Gi; in favour of the motion, The house divided— . 1•'or the motion 75 Against it The unnounc,ment of the numbers was received wi loud cheers. (Hear.) The west end was at present sadly in want of a place of public resort. He did not know of any resort at all for gentlemen but Tattersall's Corner. (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) It would he a great loss if so beautiful a building us the Crystal Palace were unnecessarily pulled down. It constituted a new order of architecture, and he thought that when the wonders of this century came to be recorded, the railways, the penny pest, and the Crystal Palace would be regarded as the prominent great tacts. (Hear, hear.) There were associations connected with the Crystal l'alace, which it was not desirable to destroy. Col. SIBTHORP (who rose amid great laughter) offered his earnest opposition to this motion. (Ironical cheers.) lie had opposed the proposition of the Great Exhibition from the beginning ; and he would consistently oppose all that followed from that Exhibition. (Great laughter.) Ho had regarded the appropriation of land in Hyde-park, to the purposes of that Exhibition, as a gross attack on the rights of the people of this country ; and it was with the utmost gratification he had found such eminent persons as Lord Brougham, Lord Campbell, and Mr. Justice Cresswell, concurring in the opinions which he had expressed at the outset. What had been the result? The desecration of the Sabbath. (Laughter.) The demoralisa. tion of the people. (Laughter.) The disunion of parties. (Great laughter.) The people had been 'educed— (laughter) —aye, seduced to come up from their homes to London to see this transparent humbug—this harmonious confedera tion—this world's fair. (Much laughter.) The people had scraped together and borrowed money to come up. They had spent that money, and (the hon. and gallant colonel spoke here in the most solemn manner) they had gone back without a penny. (Roars of laughter.) What followed this? Poverty and distress and ruin. The whole country had experienced this. Ask the tradesmen of the metropolis—ask the tradesmen of the provincial towns — they all said their trade was lost—their customers were at the Exhibition. (Laughter.) This was a fact, deny it who can. (Laughter.) The Crystal Palace was a wonderful building externally—he admitted it. (Hear, hear.) Of its appearance internally he know nothing. He had denied himself the opportunity—it might be the gratification—of entering it, for his opinions were very strong in regard to the Exhibition, and he believed it would have been desert ing the duty which he owed to his country if he had in any way encouraged the delusion which he had denounced. (Great laughter.) He altogether objected to the proposition to perpetuate this nuisance. Morally, religiously, and soci ally it had been a great curse to the country, and he wanted to get rid of it. Mr. LABOUCHERE would not follow the gallant officer through his discursive speech. Ile did not agree with the hon. and gallant gentleman in his general estimate of the merits of the Great Exhibition. His own belief was that that Exhibition had not only ministered tolthe gratifica tion of hundreds of thousands of persons of all ranks and conditions ; but that its effects upon trade, and upon the arts and sciences contributing to the happiness of human life, would not be inconsiderable. (Cheers.) With the hon. and gallant gentleman he differed, indeed, so com pletely, that he would not attempt any arguments, being quite content to leave the verdict to the country. (Cheers.) The honourable and gallant gentleman had, how ever, made one or two observations which re quired reply. The gallant officer had spoken of the demoralisation of the people. (" Hear, hear, " from Colonel Sibthorp.) He (Mr. Labouchere) believed that nothing could be more moral, more humanising, or more civilising, than the spectacle which we had this year wit nessed in this city. (Cheers.) He had seen with admira tion the magnificent assemblage of the works of industry of this and other nations collected within that marvellous structure which the genius of Mr. Paxton had erected in Hyde-park. (Cheers.) Yet there was another spectacle which he had witnessed with still greater delight, and that had been the orderly manner of the hundreds and thousands of our fellow-countrymen of all ranks and claws., congre gated in London from the great hives of industry scattered over the land, and from the agricultural towns and villages —(cheep)--and so conducting themselves that there had not been a single breach of the peace caused by them—a fact which was at variance with those predictions of scenes of disorder, of which they had heard so much at the beginning of the year. (Cheers.) Not less gratifying bad been•the influx of foreigners, who, visiting our shores in enormous num- TRANSPORTATION. Mr. ANSTEY called attention ton petition of native-born colonists of Van Diemen's Land, preparatory to moving an address to her Majesty, praying that transportition to that colony might cease, when the houoo being counted, and forty members not being present, an adjournment took place at . quarter to 11 o'clock. Vitt "1-170regg• TO CORRESPONDENTS. IL iteced FAltion nt " The Elpreek" eontulinng •he dame eree;ee. " Gazette;' fa published certy Tuareley aul Friday might, to time for post. Adiet memento intended for "Thee Express," Loudon Evening piper, must be at the °Mee, 10, ftouvorte-etreet, by Two o'olock an tho day of publication. 111011 WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE Tata U•7—Noreieß, SA. Va. Aftelllo , ..l, sill. 27m. Tamottow—llormea, 3b. 491.12. Afternoon, 411. LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JULY 30. A VOICE from Val Itieher—a low and desponding sound, full of reproach and reproof that nobody blamed will heed, and dismal prognostics of evil, without one distinct or definite word as to bow it is to be averted. The sovereignty of the people as the foundation of all political power, has been the tete ,wire of M. Ginzor all his life. As the incarnation of its oppo site, he was willing to serve the restoration in 1811, and to follow the nominee of foreign despots when he tied to Ghent. To re-imprison demo cracy under the OttLE.ANs dynasty he was dually ready, when, to his surprise and dismay, it snapped the fetters which lie and others had pretended to loosen previous to 1830, but which they eagerly strove to re-fasten the moment they saw what was done. And reverting once more to his early faith in the legitimate stock of the Bourbon-. we are led to believe that the el-minister is prepared to write and talk against the maintenance of the re public in order to pave the way for the re-prostration of France before the imbecile Count de Cii.vithotin. Those who in this country parade the opinion, of M. Gutior as significant of something important or influential iu the public mind of France would do well to explain how it conies to pass that the great party of order—as the joint-stock company of conspirators against popular power love to call them selves—are unable to bring so accomplished an ad vocate into the Assembly. Of his powers natural and acquired there can be no question. Why, then, does he remain in seeming neglect or exclusion? Are the assailants of the Elysi , e so strong in practical know ledge or parliamentary wisdom as to be able to dispense with so tried a partisan? Or can it be that no con stituency from Alsace to Bretagne can be wheedled into forgetting the sordid and benumbing valet. me under which 1. ranee was enthralled for the last seven years of the Orleanist dynasty, and of which the mainspring was the recluse of Val Richer? M. GUIZOT does not content himself with imputing to the PRESIDENT unlawful ambi tion, or carping at the inefficiency of his ministers, or even with criticising the defects of the constitution of 1848. His enmity is avowed against the existence of the republic itself under any modification or form, and specifically upon the ground that self-government is ,wt the right of the people. Man as an individual is swayed by two influences — the homage which he pays to law, and the desire which he feels for liberty of action. Nations, argues M. GI:MOT, can only err when they renounce their allegiance to authority, which to be authority and to act as a check on their freedom must derive its sanction alisnde. Democracy recog nising no such sanction, and claiming to be the sole and the supreme source of power and law 10 consequently the object of his undisguised aversion and prophetic denunciation. Tho fallacy of M. 611- ZOT'S analogy is transparent. The desires of a tre man are either restrained by the exercise of his ciplined judgment, which is the primary form of self rule, or they are curbed by the presence of law to which, by his own voice, or that of his representa tive, he has given his assent, which is the secondary or political phase of the same thing ; and in exact proportion as this previous re,ent is undeviatingly asked and universally obtained and obeyed, the theory of self-rule is perfectly developed and democratic freedom is consoli dated and sanctified by the authority of law.. But what is the moral worth or weight . ot any other law ? Who in his private affluri