The Express. — London, England, 1849-07-28 00:00:00

RAILWAYS. Tins DAT, Two o'Clocw. Bares ere rather flat this morning, the account in most of them being "bullish." Great Western and York and North M dlands are exceptions from this; upon them then is a " backwarglation." Prins have not varied mush, 'rapt for Caledonians, which are sessibly lower, and were last dose at 24g. York and North Midlands wen last bought at 33; Midlaads at 66 f• The market for French @hares is wry quiet. The directors of the York, Newcastle, end Barwick Railway having pot a stop to the labours of the eon 'titles of investigation, another general meeting w:11 have to be held. Y. ohday up to I ceolook. Yen= ItAnwar,. ilk le 20. I. 71 ft V 1 n Arobejtot..los.,ki Doris - Dna Dat.Zl j b or gill somoloo rain owl Slow ria m r duly paid. or ti Da. withost•ffairanter 0111016. UM, sad 111rus... ' "It' ii F ..... , 8.." Mr' • Pestiessierag.... sedl WAIN/ .. Ds. .. Mils Vi i as:. Da• ( 1115.)14.13.1'nf. MOON. / a. S p. Da. lit. S p. Q., No. 1 Do. as. Pa 2 DLL k IL. 1 per Ct... &Wm Mdse. 3 Ma 1.11.234 dm . ..Ds. sirs C. O. l .. • e u 7 . =. p: , Da. Sew Dw Iw. e awn, :As. II pee 08. Pat e LieweeNel rliee adwiee*elemiew. Do. amnia Italsis 6 tik & Northern ... Newport . Faste Da. r End esakosilt Oran Northers D. $ sham A,Deferrod Do. $ shores 11, 6p. Ct- Do. 3 per Cent. PreL.. (31. douth. sod West. (De.) t North of Englona... Do new, SW . . D. Now, Nee D. New, AIS Breit Western Do. Mtn 1.10.. New, I De.l thorn tasertar sad Do. Thirds Lanosehhe sad ierithire Do. So. Wads Do. Now (guo. • p. •• Ct.).. D. Livert i t t lt Pray De. West Usiam Do. Pluton aa Wyre Do. Lando end Leeds rd Think Do. N.. Prat d p. - Cent London and blarewall Lca„ Brighton. h N. D. truarsatoodta2. .. bite Crept 00 i D. Pref. S per Cost.... De.Otnert. p.CL.,11132 Do. Nen SS pui. p.Ct. Larks and Oretawrel D. Pee Year Leaden It Pienth.W D. de. New Ewer... D. PVtlis . DLL le .o,li. . iati . B.(6 Leaks k routb-Wootera D. Now, £3O De. Ne i n e .l3o Do. Pretreat* 7 p. Ilanett„ Ma., and MM.. . neach„ abed., and U.... Do. IJ share& N. I .. Do. rearm No. 2 ... Do. share& No. S. Do„ New CM Pre. ... Do, Groat (trhashy D. do. .. D. seseihriLiaelka... Do. Oelatally Dock .. Dw.Liwiela Milos .. Do. cam Da, SOO dime De,. Oro. awl Derby .. ▪ =dß. 0 p. Cent. D& New • 12/ • D. (Moron. 5 per ••• Ct Do. Ousts& 26 per Ct.. De. Sank mark Were., dr Wolter. NereL,Culld., and Reigate Royston and Ilitehla • Costral At Biros., CiesaA Do., B B. Do, Sew Oseesaiewl... _ wed - 1114471 i: NV.) 777 D. 14 Ont. 1111. No. I DION. 4 1114. 4 :r ind ... IT. dbeffield. liadaddiany Odd% W Vl. s DL r a tt ne pt elarkad ad War %IWO p. Ct. via." Ds. de. de. Ds do. ds. TorkNewardsit lsrlst D.Litt.( TartliNewsa.) De. 03X Poralme or rrodMww Tart mad North Masa& limns Itau.wava aillie4leDis Doe hall= mg Mate sai me; =and Mose (ilsesii) Dia Ihnia Oen& ladles ea . De. Dadriiiatria . Iflrthas rif Ire - Oviems art llordnaz MY mod Odom Pale awl Iltailberg Sem sad Ham %Ebo sod nom Toon awl Nubia LIVIRPOOL. Ask 27. EVOCE-Eienhnon.— TIP haling is the inarkst to.day war very dull PPM. Esrey say buds, yr does, and the trans ardor est did Oaks par wan at a knee *pro Balm i—Edinimelth and Northam, Itialay, ad Orsinoak, lt2—Orest Northern (I re l egirri P l74 24 d. Lim sad Tart Eztenska) , latzladiandlirs ) s i r artnlirs i drE allarrah 121—Ditto *ell L. mai lli d—Dido ( imp, W.1.U.), Sek id. & Load= rad Nor th Modem 0122 alt—Ditto Paw i sisres) e.23 = Manchester Iltalliald. and Linda bre. se w ), II (4 sharp). , b IL—Tart, Neersalls, and Berwick (eztansiona N. and M. Noa. I 2), ill 4. —Ditto 0. N. E. (6 per cent. till '3O), 4 Ms.— Tort sad North Midland (prof. 0 pc cent. till 10), an el. MANCHESTER, July 27. Sirocx-lacwAxot.—The market Was flat, but there was no dumps i• prices, except Ise North eradierds, wlikti were swain • shade lover. Alma the elides treassetioes et the day were to Le ambits sad Yorkshire stooks. LEEDS, Jul, 27. STOCt kayo bees more trumNilemil tins morning than isr many days putA la several indoors As see. have keen at kaprOvoi prior% ismotally may dried a little Arum The kdowlag ors qvatations:—Ert Las sublvs Qaartinv, Si. Se. ht.; Amberods, Nottinsiont, mod Basta % H. S.. 3d. dm.. Owed Northern Preference, Ids. 4k; Newt Lad Las. eaddre, 17i , Think Esteasions. 4e. sm.• ; MM. Midland,. 121,12 i Mo.; York sod Salk Mld ark .; ild 7l ll Que. 10°L BRISTOL, duly 27. Seocz-licriwros.—Ti• 'auket remained without im provement, bailees beim very probably ehrelred by the near approach al the llelf-YearlY Ile= and the natural thersition W await the admire et the di YORK; .holy 27. STOCK-RIONANOII.—Bairo : Great Northam? 91 ez tn . t & ent Dew ; York, Zroweaotte, and hi re Wt.; York and North letattk rw t . "4 ; Ditto Pm.), HAMBURG, July 22. BO7Sll,7llALL3.—Himaburi Bert a 40. 401 80 ; Ditto. Prio rity shares, 101 701 70; Mtn, Priority ea issolia. Om walk s U 1 Moro, 95 ,e ; moteklisamerg 102 ; peas .. 0. ; so rt. Eutaw -- .1 - 4: 1 dil. per 11414 - t 3 14 101 Il+ ex is 4 pa. Pb. pos. al 14 f 3 db. II 7 db. s l i dlL4l Mb I 3 ps. Is yl 14 loam Is $1 dm Se 1 1 3 ' I Ii , i t live. a l SI CM. lid ii 4 3 • pm. IS 16 db. Is 16 db. 144 194 ez in 174 14 db. pI I di i pm. 29 es in 43 . 4 24 . dl. 11 lij N 61 X 11 1 .1 1 4% It slaslainlaa la la 010alail m ou la li 14 13a 114 dull 330 3118 SS 0 SI 0 pm. If SO p pm. a $2 . 64_ iO4 3ii 11 411. f 3 3 dim ii i pa 31 14 "Sr 1 pea. s 111 al& 10 • die. 14 11 db. 3 db. 01 dlr. 31 gr. 39 1 10 • 7 164, 103 103 19 . ID_ Pm $7 311 Pi 10 4 1:4 tie ni 132 134 a las. N 33 i 36 4 IS 14 dis 11 10 di,. II 44 die. 54 31 1 SS ii 10 die.s 1 1!• i iex In ll} Ilf 111 31 ex la IS Il ats.st 7 Maxi 13 14 dia. 13 14 did. 4 j'i 'TN- 13 1241E430 42 44 1811 es. thy. 36 89 II 10 dl r. la 196 ex la 12 lie 6 26 31 16 Pei 1 tha. Pm Iti ,:3 11 am 1 17 la Ell 5.4 si db.: t 1 ad d (Wks 1 3 pea. I die. pm I Ws. p r 7_ 1 d 4. 13 3 1 1r 3 dlaa 10 14 9 12 i* -Zll a.. 21 21* 4 li 4 I 414 1 i eszia I si PM* 20 21 44 dies II 83... dim 4 Kai.. 144 Ili 12 et la 44 as. ipso. Por Ws Pm. N n :I • 4 4 11{ db. 414. 41 26 NI az la 14 22 4 21 s St Ma •• 101 1 6 71 db. Nis Hi In gi i 111 I Pla 711 24 II 41 1 I sat lei 171 I IS 17i 161 ISI 111 Int Si i 1178 131 1 33i 1 Iti 443 e 111 12 21 1 1 1 It it2l 7s 41 IMPERIAL P. HOUSE OF LONDB.-FIODST, JULY 47. The Bari of 131LATTailIIIIT (Deputy Speaker) took his Net at 6 o'clock. PUBLIC BUBINEBB. Oa the presentation of five petitions by the Earl of FORTUCCI, Is favour of the bill foe the relief of clergymen seceding from the established church, Lord STANLEY raid that, without intending to offer any otwervation upon the merits of the bill, he hoped that it was sot tstesded to pass the bill during the present session. No notice had been gives of the second reading of the bill, sed it wee owe whkh required consideration and discussion. Lord CAMPBELL said the bill was cot a govenuaent means" sad thermos* he could not give any sassier to the question of the noble lord opposite. The Jedgmtate (Irelesd) Bill wee read • third time sad The report ea the Poor Law Union Charges Act (Ire land) Amendment Bill was received. On the motion of Lord Catmints, the Petty Bag Offices Amendment Bill was read *third time and pared. Lord LYTTELTON gave notice that on Tweday next he should put a question to the noble marquis the President of the Connell relative to the management clauses required by this Committee of the Council of Education. In answer to a question from the Earl of ELLEN nonocon reepactiag _the disposition of th e jewels and pries money taken at Lahore, The Marquis of LANDSDOWNE said that no details bad been received from India 611 the subject, but it would be satialnetoty to their lordships to hear that sa months' batta had been Sinn to the often and men who had been Gaped in the war in the Purplish. --- • • • • - • - - Toe Rad of ELLEN BOROUGH said that the statement of the noble marquis, with reference to the allowance of sit months' beats to the officers end men engaged in the Pun ' jaub, mast, no doubt, be most satisfactory to every one of chi it lordships It was the more satisfactory, because many of the soldiers would now receive the bairn, who could not by any possibility have shared in the Lahore prize money. BANKRUPTCY (IRELAND) BILL. Lord BROUGHAM, in moving the third reading of this bill, drew the attention of their lordships, in accordance with a notice of motion which he had given, to the amend ments made by the Hones of Commons upon the Bankrupt Law Consolidation Bill. The committee was composed of barristers and mercantile men and persons representing the great trading towns in Yorkshire. The dm thing which the committee did was to objet to the form of the bill. He (L sd Br ingbain) thought that the form of the bill was the best for the suitor, for the prac. Blotter, and far the judge. The committe • of the House of Ccnunona had opposed the princi ples of free ovation upon the bankrupt law by the amend ments which they had made to this bill. The bill when sent down from their lordships' house contained originally 378 articles. The committee had object. d to the word article, and inserted the word section instead ; they had also shown such an oppesitlon to illOOTIli7ll as to retain the old numerals, using X. fur twenty. (Laugh ter.) He meant to say for ten. He had numbered the chapters of the bill, from 1 corsecutively, but the com mittee had altered the numbering in a most ins nvenient manner. The House of Commons had struck out the clause in the bill which referred to the secret and frau dulent transfer cf a bankrupt's property. That was a clause to which mercantile men attached gra at importance, and he did not think it would have been omitted if the legal autho rities had been able to attend the committee. The don claws had been struck out of the bill by the committee of the Howe of Commons; and they were sinuses, also, to which persons engaged in trade and commerce attached great importance. Ile would not jeopardse the bill by opposing, at the present time, tho amendmenta of the House of Commons. The pulite of Mai.cbeatcr were opposed to the alterations made an this bill by the com mittee of the House of Commons, whilst the mer cantile people of London were of a different opinion. He regretted that none of the bankrupt commissioners had been examined before the committee of the House of Commons. He regretted that such men as Mr. Commissioner Holroyd, Mr. Commissioner Goulburn, Mr. Commissioner Fonblanque, or some other of the learned anramissioners had not been required to give their evidence before the committee. The committee, although they bad altered the clauses of the Bankrupt Law Consolidation Bill, had se unity adopted the clauses of that hill iu the Bank ruptcy (Ireland) Bill. When we were called to legislate upon an important subject like this the same principle ought to govern the bills applying to England and Ireland. The House of Commons could rot accept clauses for one bill and reject them for another bill when both the bills were on the same subject—they could not be black and white at the same time. The committee of the H mos of Commons had gone through the 378 clauses of the Bankrupt Law Consolidation 13 , 11 in a very short time, giving about 35 minutes to the consideration of each clause. If this was the way the 1,200 or 1,400 articles in his (Lord Brougham's) Criminal Digest Bill were to be treated by a committee of the House of Commove upon receiving the report of the crininial law commissioners, it would be better that the commission should be done away with, and the ex pense of it saved to the public. He now begged to move that their lordships should agree to the amend ments of the House n 1 Commons to the Bankrupt Law Consolidated Bill, wi'h the exception of the 0111i1.111011 of the clause which was their lordships' third clause, and the eighth clause in the Home of Comm ins, and that an schedule 1" A " annexed to the bill they should insert the word " not." The noble and learne d lord also moved the third reading of the Bankruptcy (Ireland) Bill. Lord CAMPBELL said that the greatest anxiety had been shown by the communes of the House of Commons to further tbc bill in every way. Tee bill had not been ne glected by the members et the legal profession, for, be sides the Attorney-General, the hon. and learned member for Midburst (Mr. Walpole), whose great Went& would, one day, obtain fur him the highest han..urs in his protes-ion,, hail:devoted himself to the bill. He thought his noble and learned friend had done well to move that the amendments of the House of Commons be agreed to, subject to further discussion on the bill. Lord WHARNCLIFFB said that he thought it was right that the amendments should be received, and altera tions could be made &est session. The amendments of the House of Commons to the Bank rupt Law Consolidation Nil, with the two alterations pro posed by Lord Brougham, were then understood to be agreed to. _ _ . • - Lord REDESDALE, in presenting a petition from the Clerk of the Enrolments to the Court of Bankruptcy in Ireland, raid that the person from whom he presented the petition was paid by fees ; the House of Lords, by the Bankruptey (Ireland) Bill, had abolished the office, whilst the Hues of Commons had not abolished the office, but had dons away with the necersity of enrol ments. The petitioner, under these circumstances, prayed that some compensation might be granted him. Lord BROUGHAM said it was no doubt a very bard ease, but their lordships could do nothing in the matter. The remedy, if any, must be sought elsewhere. The bill was then read a third time and passed. DEFECTS IN LEASES ACT SUSPENSION BILL. Lord BROUGHAM, in moving the second relining of this bill, stated that itr object was to p much inconve nience and loss to parties, which would be occasioned were the measure to which it referred carried into immediate effect. Lord CAMPBELL felt that te suspend that act would be to suspend a most useful measure, but he would content himself with this espreasiou of opinion, and not formally propose the rejection of the bill. The bill was read a second time. ACCOMMODATION OF THE HOUSE. Lord BEAUMONT brought up the report of the ram. mitres on V e accunmodatiou of the house, which among other things set forth, we did not colleci upon whosi authority, that the reprten were quite satisfied with their new gallery, and that the conmaittee accordingly recant meadad that a permanent gallery in the same position should be erected. The Railways Abandonment Bill was withdrawn. PILOTAOB BILL. Oa the here going into °maitre on this bill, The Bari of BLLIINBOROUGH wished to know whether there had been any communications between the Trinity Board and the government as to the execution by the board of the pogroms given to them by this bill. He de sired to know whether the Trinity Board intended to place themselves voluntarily under the restrictions imposed on them by the sctof Cleo. IV. As the bill stool the beard might give a license to any person, belonging to any ship, trading to any port ; whereas ender the existing law the board could only grant licenses to persons who had acted as pilots, r required by act of pediment. In a mercantile point of view, the question was a most important re. The noble lord then referred to a letter written to Cork by Capt. Bewley, requiring a first-claw pilot pro ceed to Cowes, for the purpose of piloting the royal yacht in which her Majesty is to be conveyed to Ireland, and en gaging from seven to ten on the arrival of the royal vessel on the Irish comet. If this bill passed, and matters and mates acted as pilots, it would be difficult to obtain the servioes of a pilot under similar circumstances. It was impossible for a man who proceeded on a long voysge to acquire the amount of knowledge requisite to enable him to pilot a vessel effi ciently in the channel, and rivers. The practised pilot was guided not by chart and compass, but solely by his eye ; and without long and continued knowledge of the land, no man could be qualified to perform the duties. No meta could possibly attain such knowledge. Lord BYRON thought this bill ought to have been galled the " Steam Pilotage Bill." Had its ptovisioas boon in ae gordenes with that tali, it would have boon moot beneficial and quit* unobjectionable. ___. . . . _ - . Earl TALBOT nos earred in the opinion that the opera. Rion of the bill ought to ban been confined to steam-boats. Earl GRANVILLE wished to state, in reply to the ques tion of the noble earl (Ellenborough), that the result of the communications held with the Trinity Board, was a condi tion on the part of the government that the powers conferred would be exercised with great caution and prudence. Under the new law, the owner would be responsible for the conduct of the penon who acted for him u pilot, instead of being exonerated, u he was at present. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said that while he heartily approved of the loyal desire exhibited to provide for the safety of her Majesty, it appeared to him to be not unimportant to provide for this safe ty _ of her Majesty's ships. (Hear, hear.) After all her Majesty could only sail in one vessel, and the wish for nine pilots he could scarcely undentaad. (Hest, hew.) The bill then paw& through ormatitteLl _ I THE EXPRESS, SATURDAY EVENING, JULY 28. 1849. NUISANCES REMOVAL AND PREVENTION OF DISEASES BILL. Oa the steam of the Liz! of CARLIALS this bill woo teed • seemed time. - WALTIIAX FOREST AND NEW FOREST BILL. Milli' prod atTOOfth committee. TITLES OF ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS. Lord BEDESDALE, in moving for the productioa of a despatch addremed by the Colonial-office to the various colonial governors, with regard to the titles of Roman catho lic bishops, observed that it would be desirable to have those prelates recognised and acknowledged by the titles which they bore by courtesy in their own esuatry. He wished to know from the noble earl in what position he conceived this question to stand ? He also wished to know in what position a cardinal would stand, If one cams to this country ? • " - -- - . Earl GREY said there was no objection to the production of the correspondence. With regard to this question, he con ceived that no bishop, whether protestant or catholic, had any r4ht to any rank. except as lords of parliament ; and the Id* bishops bad their titles only because a special clause of the eel of union had continued to them —where not peers of parliament—tbe same titles as those who were peers of parliament. He believed that no bishop had any rank what ever as such. He considered it a great error that the titles and style adopted In this country by courtesy were extended to the colonies. But as they were allowed to take this style and title in the colonies, it was felt to be just that in all the colonies where the Roman catholic religion prevailed, the bishops of that church should get the style and title which at tacked to them. Accordingly, in the instructions be sent to the 'over:len of the colonies where the Roman catholic religion prevailed, he desired that out of courtesy the title which ordinarily attached to the prelates of the Roman catholic church should be given to them. He believed that ' that was a right decision. But that being the case he in 'trusted the governor of New South Wales not to allow the Roman catholic bishop to take precedence of the protestant bishop—that he should not allow any per son to assume the title of bishop of Melbourne, ex cept the protestant bishop, who had the Queen's com mission, and that any letter addressed to the Bishop of Melbourne should be sent to the residence of the protestant bishop. He also instructed him not to recognise the preten sion put forward by the Roman catholic of assuming the title of catholic only, as it they were the only catholic church. He had given to the Roman catholic prelates every thing which he thought they could fairly ask, but having pot that, he must say he thought they demanded a great deal more th►n they were entitled to. (Hear.) Lard REDESDALE sail that the noble earl had not told him in what position a cardinal would stand if one came to this country. Earl GREY said he had not studied the question, it was no part of Ire duty. (Laughter.) The Earl of CARLISLE said he believed all claws would address a cardinal, if one came to this country, by the title of evainenoe. (Laughter.) THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (IRELAND) BILL, This till passed through commute*. CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRIATION) BILL. This bill passed its iscond reading. The house than adjourned at a quarter past 8 tilll2 o'clock to-morrow (this day). HOUSE OF COMMONS.—FRIDAY, JULY 27. The SPELFAZ took the chair at 12 o'clock. PUBLIC BUSINESS. _ _ PETICIONS PRESENTED. SLATS TRADM.—My Lord PALMERSTON, from inhebi tents of Jamaica, of all ',Akita' opinions, asking this country to cmcur in any measure which government may adopt for obtaining a faithful execution by Spain and Brazil of the treaty for the suppression of the slava trade. Tney eomplaintd of the inensurn of 1833 and 1846, and prayed for a renewal of the negotiation which began with the Spanish government for restoring free•-lom to the negrots in Cuba, who by law were entitled to their freedom. THE MEDICAL PROFESSION. In answer to Mr. M. GIBSON, Sir G. GREY said he had been r:guested by his hon. frierd the Lard Advocate, who WU chairman of the select committee which had sat upon this subject, to mate that early next session it was his inuntion to bring in a bill for the registration and better regulation of the medical profes sion of the United Kingdom. TREATMENT OF FEMALE EMIGRANTS. Mr:geolYroae --. tO put a que honi gen. tleman the Under-Secretary for the Colonies relative to the conduct of the surgeon on board the emigrant-ship the Inchinnan. His conduct had been represented u being most indecent and reprehensible towards the female passen gers and it had been made the subject of proceedings be !ore the court in New South Wales. Al upon a former ccesaion, when the treatment of female emigrants was brought under the notice of the house, the hon. gentleman had only referred to the case of the Sobraon, be begged to ask whether it war likely that the government would Usti. tuts any inquiry into the conduct of the surgeon in this in stance on board the Inchiuun. Mr. HAWES said he was aware that the conduct of the officer refesrel to in that Teasel had been brought under the take of the authorities of New Ssuth Wales ; but he was not able at present to stato the particular , . To-m,.rrow, however, he 'holed be ready to give the fullest information upon the subj(ct. TIIE FALKLAND ISLANDS. Mr. H. BAILLIE inquired whether it was true that the government of Buenos Agree had laid claim to the Falkland Islands, and, if so, what had been done upon the matter. Viscount PALMERSTON said there was • claim made some time ago ' which had been resisted by the Brit sh government. Gnat Britian had always denied the claim of Spain to the Falkland Islands, and the government was certainly not inclined to yield to Buenos Ayres what it had n fused to Spain. Toe result was, that some ten or twelve years ago the Falkland Islands were taken poaressian of and occupied by the British, and ever since that period there had been a settlement there. He thought, under these chews stances, the hen. gentl, man would see that there would be no great use in reviving the correspondence which had ceased with the acquiescence of both parties, the fact being that for the last 10 or 12 years we had occupied the Falkland Islands u • possession of the British crown. TAE pOMBARDMENT OF ROME. Mr. ANSTBY inquired whether the noble lord at the head of foreign affairs would have any objection to lay on the table of the house the copy of a despatch said to have been addressed to him by the British consul at Rome, relative to the bombardment of that city by the French troops. Lord PALMERSTON said he did not carry in his me mory the exact terms of the despatch refirred to. He would look at it, however; and he did not apprehend that there would be any objection to producing, at any rate, extracts from that dispatch. TRIAL BY JURY IN IRELAND. Mr. SADlllll.wlsiteil following circum stance under the attention of the house. An action for trespass had a short time ago been commenced by a person named Callaghan against Major Cameron, for certain acts done by him in July, 1848, in the town of Carrick-on-Suit. That action was defended by Mr. Kemmis, the crown soli citor. A special jury was moved for and o►taind, and the list, consisting of 49 gentlemen, contained the names of 8 Roman catholic gentlemen of high character and position. Mr. Remits went up and down the list until he had en. pawed the whole 8 Roman catholic,, and, having yet 4 mon to expunge, be was reported to have said that it was a matter of indifference to him what other four were strack out. He begged to inquire whether the course thus takes by Mr. Kemmis had bees with the sanction of the Attorney. General in Ireland Sir W. SOMERVILLE said, as he had heard nothing before of the circumstances of the ease, he could not at ones say what course it might be his duty to pursue with regard to it. Mr. EIADLBIIt asked whether the government would ob. jact to furnish to the house a list of the jury in the ease, die. pushing which were Roman catholim end which were pro testant'. (Cries of " Oh, oh.") Would the government also give any information as to why these eight gentle , men had been struck off the list ? Lord J. RUSSELL—I should object to give any such In formation. (Hear.) WORKHOUSE LOANS (IRELAND) BILL. This bill was read a third Ulna and pared. DRAINAGE OF LAND BILL. This hill wet also read a third time and passed, having fint had a dense appended to it on t►e motion of Mr. C. LEWIS, providing for the application of money paid into the bank where the works were not executed, or there was a surplus not applicable to the works. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. In 1111111Wer to a question from Mr.NIWDIO ATI, lord J. RUSSELL expressed a hops that they should be enabled to get through the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill in the eourse of the day. He did' not think it necessary that the house should meet on Monday, but he pro( wed that they should meet to-morrow (this day) at two o'clock. Agreed to. ADMIRALTY JIIRISDICII9N IN THE COLONIES This bill was read a third time and passed. SLAVE TRADE (PERSIAN GULF) BILL. On the motion that this bill be road a third time, Mr. ANSTEY expressed a hope that the noble lord at the head of the foreign department would reconsider this sub ject. He had always entertained a serious and deeply. grounded repugnance to all treaties of this description be tween this country and others, whether civilised or barbarians, and he felt convinced that the adoption of the pranat bill could not possibly be attended with any go o d, bat that in all probability it would be productive of a great deal of mischief. The country derived no benefit from these agreements. For the reasons which peculiarly applied to the bill, and for the reasons to which he had peeviously adverted at the commencement of his observations, he objected to this bill, and proposed that it be read a third time that day three months. Sir E. COLEBROOKB secoadod the motion. Alter the long experienos of the bud 30 years of the failure of these attempts, they were again about to enter upon the same idle and foolish attempt. He exprismed strongly his regret to And the government ergaged in such an attempt, end, sen sitising that the system had been condemned by the casting vela ad the chairmen, and that the whole question mast come ander the consideration of the House of Commas early next essisa, ha deprecated now entering upon this new and idle attempt. CM. 1110XPSON beli.ved he oonld throw some light on NM et Os points which seemed to be considered doubtful by the hon. member opposite (Mr. Ansley). In the Ant place these transaction in the Persian Gulf were no novelty whatever, for they dated from the Bth Jen., 1820, when • treaty was concluded whir all these very chiefs by t• pre sent general Sir W. H. Grant. It was his (Col. lomp son's) fortune to be Use negotiator of that treaty • therefore he could speak to the spirit in which it was car ried oe, and tithe feeling with which it had been received by the Arab chiefs, whose names he knew as mentioned in the bill, for be knew every man of them. The tuts which occurred were thee. : He was ordered to collect the representatives of these chiefs or the chiefs themselves in a tent, and he had a large cireleof Arab diplomatists. He began with great reserva tion and cau'ion to state to them tint there was a point which the English government bad very much at heart, that it was a subject of popular feeling in this country, and they knew that on the successful termination of the war we bad not pressed hard on them, and ho hoped they would not con sider there was any intention to do so azpresent ; but there was • point which he pressed with all dEflast7, would they make the slave trade piracy ? A smile ran through the as sembly, and they cried, capital, capital. There was • chief who had been an ally in the war, and this chief was no stranger, and they thought it the highest joke that we at the conclusion of the war should propose a i arti cle of a treaty which was to put down a treaty of somebody else of whom they were exceedingly jealors. That powerful opponent was his Highness the 1 tnaum of Muscat. Of that treaty he had • printed copy in hie pocket at this moment, and that treaty had this pecu liar fact, that it was the eeriest public document in which the slave trade had been written down piracy. He bad that on the authority of Mr. Roes, the American minister, whe said that the American treaty, which contained *epees 'dons to • similar affect, wee dated in May, sad was first known in England, from circumstances, although ours was so much earlier. He had not the slightest doubt that the agreements of that treaty had been public law ever since in the Persian Galf. He would answer for it that there was not to be any increase Of squadrons, because the thing had been going on quietly ever since the Bth January, 1820. _ Lord PALMERSTON was not going to discuss with the toe. gentleman who made the motion, or with the hon. gentleman who seconded it, the abstract results of slavery, which he thought were so evident. He should not discuss his opinion of the mild character of slavery in eastern coun tries ; but this might be borne in mind, that • great part of those perasns who were the subject of the slave trade on the eastern coasts of Africa were Christians ; they were people of Abyssinia, and might claim greater sympathy on the part of the &lash public than negroes. The bill gave the vessels that were on the spot for the protection of trade powers to carry into effect the agreement entered into wish the Denim of Muscat. He mid that this act was este. Wishing no new principle. It was simply carrying into effect an agreement made spontaneoualy with the Arab chiefs ; it would feud us into no conflict with those chiefs or any other p ewer in the Persian Gulf, and he thought that no argument had been used by the hon. and learned gentleman to induce the house not to pass the bill. Mr. M. GIBSONWTs6a — ti - Oilhe noble lord whether a better understanding was likely to be arrived at with the Em perer of Brazil on the subject of our attempts to suppress the slave trade. The hon. gentleman who seconded the motion was as much opposed to the slave trade, and thought it as abominable • traffic as the noble lord. All that he questioned was the policy of attempting to put down the slave trade without reference to the opinion of the countries which were carrying nn the slave trade. We could not expect other countries to arrive at our opinions at any moment we might point out. Opinion was of slow growth. The anti slave trade party in Brazil bad net keen at work so long in that country as they had been in this to abolish the slave trade. They were longer in this country agi tating against the slave trade than they had been en Brazil. Why should we expect the Brazilians to be faster than we were ? Give these different nations every time for the formation of an opinion, and carry on a conciliatory and rational course of policy. He should support the !nun= of the hon. gentleman. After a few words from Capt. Pecnet.t. and Mr. J. °Ton si ch, Mr. E. DENISON said that a committee had been sit ting for two years receiving evidence concerning the slave trade, and that committee had made a report to the effect that all attempts to suppress that trade by means of a naval force must be Ineffectual. (Hear, hear.) On account of - he indisposition of the chairman and the late period of the session the report had not been brought specially under the notice of the house. He (Mr Denison) had been one of the majority on that committee, and he had come to a conclu sion in perfect accordance with the report. (Hear, hear.) Having come to that conclusion, he should, if driven to a division, vote against the present bill. (Hear, hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL said that, as his bon. friend who had just spoken had alluded to the general question of the means taken for the suppression of the slave trade, he would trouble this house with a few words on the subject. He did not consider that the passing of the present bill would at all commit the house as to what mea th.y might think it necessary ultimately to adopt, nor would the mesons urged by the committee, against the mea sures ter the supprevion of the African slave trade, apply to it. He certainly agreed with his hon. friend behind him that the evidence taken before the committee, and its report, mutt form the subject of serious consideration fur parliament and the government during the ensuing session. But he must also soy when his hon. friend referred to the report of the committee, that there were two things which would greatly add to the difficulties with which government woulil have to deal. The one was that the report, instead of being unanimous, or even the opinion of the great majority of the committee, was agreed to by a majority I.li only one, and that one was an hon. mem b2r who had taken a strong previous interest in the matter, and whose pre-formed opinions could not be shaken by soy evidence whatever. Therefore they had only the opinion of a balanced committee to guide them. Another e".ifficulty would be that while the committee had come to the conclu sion that the present means taken for the suppression of the elate trade were inefficient, they had suggested no eubstitu• Lion of any means of another description. (Hear, hear.) And this, although the object for which they were nomi nated was, " To consider the best means that Great Britain could adopt (or the final extinction of the slave trade." The present means used might be inefficient, but before they were given up parliament should see that an efficient substi tute was provided. As to the ape cific bill before the house his noble friend had fully explained its objects. Mr. HUME reminded the house that in the formation of committees government generally tnok care to nominate a considerable number of their friends, if the question to be investigated was one in which they were interested. There fore, when divisions were nearly equal, it showed that a strong principle was involved. Mr. BERNAL said that the present bill legislated for the Persian Oulf, and had no reference whatever to the general question of the African slave trade. Mr. ANSTEY explained; and the gallery was cleared for a division, but none took place. On our return we found that the hon. and learned member hrd withdrawn his amend ment. The bill wee then read a third time. On the question that the bill do pass, _ . Mr. ANSTEY proposed several verbal amendments, which were severally negatived without discussion. The hon. and learned member then proposed to insert after " admiralty," in line 8, page 6, " Provided always, that, in applying so much of the said act or acts es relate to the indicia or evidences of slave trading, regard shall be had by all such courts respectively to the general habits and cue. toms of the said tribes, and of their respective countries, with reference to the build and equipment of ships." Lord PALMERSTON opposed the amendment as un necessary. The questions indicated would always be taken into consideration by the judges. After • short discussion, this amendment was also ne gatived. Th bill then passed. POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL. The order of the day for the consideration of the Lords' amendments to this bill having been read, Lord J. RUSSELL said—Sir, before asking the house to take into consideration the proposals which I have to snake with regard to this important measure, and of which I have given notice in the paper, I am desirous that they should have the benefit of your opinion in respect to these amend ments which have been introduced by the Howe of Lords, which affect the privileges of this house, and I will reserve what I have to say as to those amendments, more especially the omission of the first and second clauses, until after that opinion shall have been given. The SPEAKER (who was not very distinctly heard) knew not bow he Gould better answer the srpeal which had been made to him by the noble lord than by stating whet bad been the practice of the house in reference to amend ments made by the House of Lords in former bills of this description. The undoubted rule was that it was competent for the Lords to amend bills having for their object the relief of the poor. prortled such amendments did not affect the amount of rates proposed to be raised, the mode of levying, the mode of collecting, and the parties who were to levy and to manage them. Tole was undoubtedly the rule, both with regard to public and local and in respect to pri vate bills it had invariably been adhered to. But there were some instances where in respect to public bills this rule had not been strictly insisted upon, as in the case of the English Poor Law Bill of 1834, the Irish PllO7 Law Bill of 1838 the Irish Muni c ipal bill, and lastly in the we of the Irish Poor Law Bill of 1847. (Hear, hear.) There could be no doubt that the alterations which the Lords had made in the present bill did affect the privileges of the House of Commons. The two first clauses of the bill as sent up from the Commons flied a maximum rate to be made in certain unions, and in addition to that maximum fixed a certain additional rate to be levied on the country at large. It would be for the house to say whether it would follow the precedent of the years te which he had alluded, and waive its privilege on the present occasion, or whether they would maintain their ancient and undoubted privilege'. If they adopted the latter alternative, they must moles that the amendments be read that day six months. (Hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL—Having now the benefit of your opinion as to what are the privileges of this house, and whet course the house has adopted on former amnions of a similar nature, I will pr iced to state my view on the ques tion immediately before us, and of the mode in which I think the home should enter upon the considerati en of these amendments. (Hear.) I cannot, air, for a moment differ from your statement, that the °minion of the douses 1 and 2—to say nothing of the other amendments which Dave been introduced by the House of Lords—does interfere with the privileges of this house in the way you have so accu. rately laid down. (Hear.) At the same time, air, you have stated, that both as to the English poor law, the Irish ' municipal law, and the Irish poor law, the house his on former occasions so far waivrd its privileges as to consent to the consideration of amendments which interbred with them. With regard to the first Irish poor law of 1838, one of the amendments made by the Lords into that bill intro ducod electoral division of taxation. The effect of that change has bean that instead of having an equal rata over the whole union, the rate levied in different parts of that same union varies considerably, so much so that it happens that while in ono part of a union the poor rate is 10s. in the pound, it is only 6d. or 10d. in the pound in another ; thereby charging particular places and particular persons very lightly, and imposing a greater rate of taxation on others than this house intended they should be subject to; (hear) and with respect to the last measure you, air, have referred to, the poor law bill of 1847, the house will remem ber that the bill, as it passed the house of commons, imposed a rate of le. 33. in the pound for the half-year, or 2.. 6d. in the pound for the year, on the electoral division, leaving any remaining charge beyond that to be levied equally on the who.e union. The house of Lords omitted that clause and introduced certain o her provisions of a totally different character. Well, sir, both in regard to the original Irish poor law and the amended law—this house consented to discuss the amendments so made by the House of Lords, and consented also after consideration to the admission of the clauses the Lords had introduced, and to the omission of the clause the Commons had previously inserted. (Hear, hear.) In both these cases the privileges of the House of Commons were as clearly and positively affected pos.ve.l y affected by the alterations which had been made by the Lords as they were on the present occasion. On the mere ground of precedent, therefore, I do not think that we should feel onnelves bound to assert the privileges of the house by refusing to entertain these amendments. That, however, will be • question for the house to consider—whe ther it is advisable on this occasion, and with regard to these amendments, that we should insist upon our privileges or not. (Hear, hear.) I own, sir, it appears to me that as long as the Lords confine themselves to the principle of introducing amendments in a poor law with a view to better legislation on the subject of the relief of the poor, and do not seek to introduce new rates, or to make such alteration as would impose new burthens on the ratepayers I do not think it is expedient that we should insist upon the assertion of our privileges. The subject of legislation for the relief of the poor is one of great importance, upon which, as I think, both houses of parlia ment are entitled to give an opinion. (Hear, hear.) And I think further that legislation is likely to proceed more hat. moniously as between the two houses if we do not assert OUT privileges on occasions like the present then if we do. For if we were to insist on our privilege upon every such macs eion, I do not see well how any progress could be made In amending the poor law either in regard to this country or Ireland, as scarcely any amendment of importance could be introduced which would net in some way or other affect the rates or the mode of levying them. For these reasons, then, I shall pvipose to the house to consider the bill as amended by the Lords, without any mention of our privileges to the other house or any assertion of those privileges so far as the present amendments are concerned. (Hear, hear.) I believe these amendments have been introduced by the Lords with a view to amend the law relating to the relief of the poor, and that is • subjecton which, in my view, they ma fairly be entitled to give an opinion, and to propose such amendments as they may consider will conduce to the im provement of the law for providing and administering relief to the poor of Ireland. Therefore, sir, 1 shall now propose that this house do agree to the L ords' amendment for oink ing clauses 1 and 2. The question basing been put, Sir J. GRAHAM could assure the house that in • question affecting the ancient end undoubted privi lege of that representative onembly, he differed with great regret and with great diffidence from the noble lord who had just spoken, but entertaining as he did great doubts on the matter, considering that the noble lord and himself had long been members of that home., and influenced by a desire that their ancient privileges should b 3 maintained he felt that he should not discharge his duty if he failed, before the house came to a final decision, to express his impressions with se gard to these amendments. It appeared to him, that for the sake of discussing them satisfactorily, it would he ad visable to consider the coca itutional principles involved in the amendments altogether apart from the merits of the alterations which had been made in the bill. (Hear, hear.) To show, however, that he was not prejudiced in that respect, ' he might state that he was one of those who had voted against the maximum clause, and therefore that in substance he agreed with the most impriant of the amendments which the Lords had introduced. (Hear, hear.) But to re turn to the more constitutional question now fairly raised, he thought it right to state shortly to the house the impres sions which weighed on his mind. To begin with that which was the most important—they had had the dee larotion from the chair, that were it not for precedents of compara tively recent date these alterations did interfere with the ancient and undoubted privileges of the House of Commons. Without going back to antiquated cases, or the authority of Rennet, with regard to the unwritten law of parliament, they had had it now clearly stated by the Speaker that the privilege claimed by the Hons.... of Commons was this—that the lords should not in any bill of taxation, whether general or local, interfere to alter such bill, either in reference to the amount to be levied, the mode of collecting, or with respect to the persons who should collect, the persons who should pay, or the persons who should receive. (Hear.) He did not believe (he spoke of course subject to the corrections of the chair) that he was in any way overstating the privilege of the house, as up to the time mentioned by the Speaker it had always been insisted upon. (Hear, hear.) He now came to the period of recent relaxations—of these just ad mitted and the relaxations to which the noble lord re barred, were both dory recent date, and connected with the question, as to the levying of poor rates. The first case, which was one of very great importance, woe that of the Irish Poor Law of 11138, and than incidentally certainly there was a considerable interference on ' the pert of the House of Lords with the privillits of the Commons, in regard to the distribution of the burden of the rate. The area of taxation, as the bill was sent up by the Commons, was that the rate should be levied on unions ; but the Lords thought proper to narrow that area, and sub stituted, for unions, electoral divisions, and by that altera tion increased pro tanto the burden ea the smaller districts. (Hear, hear.) But if he mistook not, a speziel entry was made in the journals at the time, or, at all events, the then Speaker (Lord Dunfermline) left • strong record of his opinion that that was a precedent not to be brought forward thereafter, as showina that the privilege in question had been abandoned. In the other case, a more direct interfe rence on the part of the Lords had been made; but never theless, giving the utmost effect to these precedents, he con tended that the interference went infinitely further than any one past-precedent, or than the aggregate of former prece dents taken together. (Hear, hear.) If, then, it was ad mitted that this interference was as extensive as it was, end as he ebouid point it out to be, he must toy that in his view the better and more consistent course would be to aban don the privilege directly . and for ever. (Cheers.) For if this precedent were admitted, he did not think that the House of Commons could ever withstand interference on the part of the House of Lords in respect to its privi.ers. Now, what had been done in this case ? In the two first c'auses of the bill the Commons had sent up a maximum rate of ss. on the union, and an accumulative rate beyond of 2s. to be charged generally ever the whole country, so that in no ease as the bill was sent up could a person be compelled to pay more than 7e. in the pouted in the year. The Lords had struck out this limitation, and had left for limited taxation an unlimited tax without reference to amount. The Commons said the rate/tigers should in no case pay more than 7s. in the pound, but as the Lords had sent down the bill there was no limit whatever to the charge. So much for the quantum of the interf,rence. But was that all ? The House of Commons bad, in the bill as sent up to the other house, enacted a fresh property charge (and here also let him remark that he had dissented from the proposition of the House of Commons), and those who agreed to this fresh property charge did so with the view of alleviating the burden on the present ratepayers. The House sit Lords had, however, struck out that clause like wise, and left the unlimited charge on the present ratepayers, rejecting the proposition altogether that fresh property should be brought into account—there, again, indirectly add ing to the burden of the ratepayers. But there was another clause which had been introduced by the Lords, in which actually the enactment of a new penalty was involved. The Lords had inserted • clause which enacted that a tenant being in arrest more than one year to the poor rate, should be subject to ejectment. This was a clause of a most penal cbaracter—(hear, heir)—notwithstanding all contracts en tered into, notwithstanding any agreements for leases that might exist, the Loris had enacted a clause inflicting the penalty of ejectment as the punishment for the nonpayment of the rata (Hear, hear.) He was aware that the noble lord had given notice that, with regard to this amendment, he proposed to reject it—(hear, hear)—but they were not to let the merits of the amendments interfere with the principle at issue. He thought he was fairly stating the extent of the interference of the Lords with their privileges, and in arguing the case on principle it was necessary that the whole extent of that iaterterence should be brought under their notice. He had stated the extent of the interference, but was for the house to consider how were they—if they waived their privilege as to the poor rate—how were they to take their stand as to other local rates—what would they say as to the highway rate—what would they say as to the county rate—and there was another topic, what would they say as to the church rate ? (Hear, hear . ) Might not the Lords, if they gave way in this ease, frame an enactment as to church rates, and send it down to the Commons ? (Hear, hear.) As the matter now stood, in times of excitement and on quee. tions calculated to excite angry feeling in the country if such a mason wore brought down, the Commons would take a preliminary objection, and say we will not enter into the merits of it, but reject your measure on the ground of its being an infringement of our privileges, thus avoiding all angry discussion and all chance of collision. (Hear, hear.) But if they waived their privilege as to the poor rate, he for one—reserving his judgment, however, to be corrected, if wrong, by superior information and better lights did not see how they would be able hereafter to make a stand founded on reason and precedent in regard to any of those local and other rates he had mentioned. (Hear, bear.) Was this subject new to the house ? Had not the question been referred—in what way they could maintain their prirreges as to local taxation—to a committee in the last session of par liament—upon which committee he had the honour of 'try ing with several members of the government. That com mittee investigated the subject with great care, and delibe rated upon it with a desire to arrive at • satisfactory conclu sion. Some of the arguments he had now addressed to the house were submitted to the committee. lie believed he mi:tht say fora!! the members that they went into that coal mines predisposed to come to some arrangement, and with the view of consulting the public convenience and facilitating the progress of public business to make • large relaxation of their privilege', and to enable the lords to issue measures of this kind without waiting io every ease for their corning up from the Commons. But after the moat careful consideration they could give to the subject, and after consulting the highest authorities and the opinions of the most experienced members of parliament, the opinion of the committee was unanimous that any .05th relaxation would be highly dangerous. (Hear, hear.) A li m i te d re taxation was afterwards recommended to the house, and formed a standiog order at the commencement of the 'eosin. On that occasion his hon. friend the member for Oxford Uni versity (Sir R. Inglis) moved an amendment to that limited standing order, based on the recommendation of the committee, which be would now read to the house. Si R. lulls moved that, " in order to facilitate the passing of bills through parliament, this house will not insist upon its psi. 'lieges in respect of any bill, clauses, or intendment. which may be brought from the House of Lords, whereby tolls, rates, or duties are authorised, imposed, or rep. lats." provided the same shall be assessed and levied by leesl authorities and for local purposes, end shall not be applied to the public service." His hon. friend recorded i that opinion, but it being evidently opposed to the sense of the house, he did not go to a division upon it. and it now stood on the journals as a record that this house delihsrately adhered to the a pinions of the committee, and was opposed to the recommendati , n of his right hen. friend. (Hoar, hear.) Now, he must ask the house whether they thought this was the {Weil.e moment when, with • view to ex peiiency, and to prevent the possibility of needless eellision between the two branches of the legislature—whether this was the exact moment when it was expedient that they should convent to any enlargement of the pow. rs of the other house, and to tiny abandonment of the powers of the House of Commons i (Hear, hear) Looking at the ques tions which were now rending, end which were likely to be discussed, be was warned by dangers he fon saw would re sult, and wee disposed to take his stand on the safe and sure ground of the ancient and undoubted privileges of the house. (Hear.) lie saw no reason whatever for abandoning or departing from that ground. (Hear.) Then was there anything in respect to the amendments which had been made by the Lords in this bill of so much importance as that if the considerations he bed submit'ed were not well founded and of great weight, as he believed them to be, was there anything sa attracive in the alterations made in this bill to induce them in a case of difficulty to depart from the exercise cf their undoubted and ancient privilege ? (War.) He must allude here to tome other of those amendments. The Commons bad sent up in the bill certain clauses which they believed were of primary importance—giving a remedy in case of accumulated arrears against the corpus of the estate—giving facilities for recovering the rate, and, failing payment, to sell the estate in small por tions in order to pay off the arrears. All those clauses had been struck out by the Lords, and was the noble lord and were the government so sure et their ma jority in the other house that if on this occasion the commons should waive their privilege with all the disadvantages of that waiver they wou:d be able to give effect to their views ? Were they sure that after all the lords might not insist on their amendments, and so place the commons, by eneveeeling in insisting upon them, in what he should cons:der the most disadvantageous position of having waived their privilege, and then losing the bill in their desire to obtain whirb they had departed tram the safe and swe mound of standing on their nadonbted rights. (Hear.) H. had real y r,o feeling personally in the matter. In many of the alterations made by the lords t e agreed ; but as he had stated in a ease of this kind he differed from the noble lord (J. Russell) with hesitation and doubt, for he was qnite sure the object of both the noble lord and himself was the same—to uphold in a manner which should be safe and reesonab'e, and with a view to their I uture mcur:ty, the rights and privileges of that house. (Hear, hear.) He differed with the noble lord, he said, with doubt and hesitation; still, on a matter of such great importance, and considering the present juncture of affairs, when they were cslled on to discuss and decide, he should have failed in hie duty if, before the house decided, he bad not shortly and as clearly as he could, stated the reasons why he wes disposed, he would not say, to resist the noble lord's motion—but to beg him and the house earetully to consider the subject in all its bearings b.dere they come to a final decision. (Cheers.) Sir G. GREY thought there could be no doubt of the correctness of the general principle laid down by the right hon. baronet, but without entering into the merits of the various alterations wh'ish had been made in the bill, he rose merely to point out an important distinction which it ap peared to him had been lost sight of by the right hon. gentleman between the decisions of the committee on public business in respect to the waiver of the ptivilegee of the house in rioeret to local acts, and the course propmei by his noble friend. It was proposed to the committee that in the case of bills relating to local taxation, the house should waive its privilege and surrender them by a direct resolution. Ile th ought the decision of the com mittee and the decision to which the house after wards came when the subject was brought before it by the hon. baronet the member for Oxford University (Sir R. Ingli) was a sound and a wise decision, and that it would have hecn most unw.se and impolitic to have surrendered by • single resolution the right they now maintained to insist on their privileges in any case in which they thought the public interest ri iinired it to be asserted. (Hear, hear.) But the proposition of his noble friend did not bind the house to the future, except so far as that it added one more to a string of precedents in which on the . questien of p tor rate they had not thought it necessary to insist twee their ancient privi lege. Ile thought the right hon. baronet (Sir J. Graham) was mistaken when he said that the first abiwelonusent of the privilege woe in the case of the fresh poor law of 1831. He Lad understood the Speaker to say that the fitst abandon ms nt had been in the CIS* of the English poor law in 1834, whea the late Lord Canterbury fid.d the chair of that house—(hear. hear)—and in the Irish municipal bill he thought the right hoe gentleman said there had been a de parture from the strict right of insisting on the pelt litotes of the house, and again in the Poor Law Act of 1847. (liear, hear.) The question was whether the house would be justi fied now in rejecting these amendment, by strictly insisting upon its privilege is a case in which that suleect of rates (the distributio-o of rater, the collection of rates, and the arrange meat of the area of taxation) wee ro mixed up sr i'lt the question of a poor law either for England er Ireland that in a bill of this kind it was impossible to exclude them from consideration ? The subject was one which the house should undoub:edly look to with care and caution, but he thought at the same time that the near entry connexion of those parei of the bill with the general question of the am ndment of a poor law should indsce them on that ground alone not to refuse to entertain the amend ments. He would not enter into the merits of those amend ments, but it was necessary to say this, that with regard to the MAXIMUM rate, whatever might be said as to the other clauses, the amendment did not propose the imposition of any new tax. It did not propose an unlimited for a limited rate, but left the law in this respect as it now existed. Under these circumstances—upholding the right+ and privile vs of the house as to church rates, highway rates, and poor rates also, if necessary—not waiving those rights and privileges in any case in which it might be necesJary to maintain them, he trusted they would be allowed now to ewer into the consideration of these amendments. Mr. F. FRENCH was anxious that the motion of the noble lord should be adopted, and that they ghoul , ' not take the view of the subject suggested by the right hon. baronet. Mr. HENLEY observed that the objection of the right hon. baronet (Sir J. Graham) had not been answtred, but the right hon. baronet, tie home secretary, had now narrowed the question to a single issue, viz., should they or should they not surrender their privilege as to Vie poor rate ? He could conceive that every privilege which rested like this on unbroken usage, must be lost before long if they went on giving way, as now proposed. At any future time, when it might be thought necessary to upset the privilege ' they would have to eater into a controversy with the Lords as to whether it existed or not. To bim it appeared that the mare ripen and manly course would be to surrender the privihge by a direct resolution, as the hon. member for Oxford (Sir It. Inglis) had proposed, than to go on this way asserting it when it was in no danger, and giving way the moment it waa brought into question. I Mr. HUME said he viewed with great jealousy any sur render of the privileges of the house. He foresaw nothing but collision hereafter if the privileges were surrendered. It was at all times unpleasant to cause the upper and lower houss to come into collision, and there was no more certtia course of avoiding such a result than by adhering to the pri vileges. (Hear.) Mr. GRATTAN said the argument of the noble lord at the head of the government was, that the bill was such a panacea for all the ills of Ireland, that hon. members ought to adopt it and surrender their privileges. He (Mr. Grattan) was in favour of retaining the privileges, and he advised the government to abandon the present measure, and introduce another and a better one next session. Mr. J. O'CONN ELL thought it would be unwise to create an additional bad precedent by giving up the privileges of the house. He win of opinion that the right hon. baronet the member for Ripon had put the question on it+ right footing, and that, at such a time as the present, it would be impolitic to waive privileges. Mr. E. DENISON said that, although the committee had recommended that the house should adhere to its privi leges on questions of local taxation, they had not gone the length of stating that any particular inconvenience had coo curred from the waiving of privileges on certain subjects. He thought these were n o t d a y s w h en t h e h ouse ner d fear any great encroachment on its privileges upon the part of tho ilou , e of Lords. Sir J. GRAHAM suggested the tho house should take the same course with respect to this bill which it had pur sued the day before with reference to the Boroughs Relief Bill, when the Lords' amendments were ordered to be taken into consideration that day three months. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed that the bill just referred to by the right hon. baronet lie r eference to Bir mingham, and that upon its provisions There had been a perfect concurrence of opinion on the part of the two houses of parliament. Mr. V. SMITH thought the same course adopted by the house with respect vs a Birmingham bill ought a fortiori to be adolteel with reference to a measure which affected the whole of Ireland. He expressed his thanks to the right bon. baronet (Sir J. Graham) for having called the attention of the h:Ave to this question. (Hear.) The right bosh baronet's arguments were unanswered and unanswerable; for, although precedents had been alluded to, hoe. mem bers must be aware that a series of precedents were often quoted with greater force than a resolution or a rule. Mr. LABOUOMBRE said there was a maticed difference between the Birmingham bill and the pri sent measure. There was no dispute as to merits of the former, and there had been no difficulty in throwing it out upon a point of privilege and bringing in another bill. With reference to the present bill, it was impossible to suppose it could be altered, rediscussed here and in the other house, and passed in the present session of parliament. After a few words from Mr. Broowen and Mr. SADLEI 3 , Col. DUNNE said that he approved of the amendments made by the Lords; in fact, they were the only part of the measure worth retaining, but that he woul.l prefer the with ' drawal of the bill altogether rather than surreuder the pri vileges of the house. H at. AL SO • i 1 so SI SI L «. SI SI