Star. — London, England, 1828-02-26 00:00:00

sidered himself bound to take the course he had taken that night, in justice to himself, and with a view to prove the occur icy' of what he had stated on a former occason, and in which he trusted their Lordships would concur with him. What he had said was, that. the Right Hon. Gentleman had declared in the face of the public at Jaiverpool, that he .knew of no personal enemies to ,Mr. Canniog—the declaration had even tip• peared in a public Journal, and was held to have been . made by the Right Hon. Gentleman, in his character of Privy Councillor to his Sovereign, in the choice of his Council ; that declaration the Right Hon. Gentle-, man had made at Liverpool and in• Parliament; and • his (the Marquis of Clantiearde's) ths Noble Lord opposite was, to sshom that declaration had been made? When first he made a statement on this sub. jest to their Lord hips, he was followed by a flat con-, tradiction and considerable censure. He had,. however,' .soon after, the s atisfaction of witnessing an admission on the part of the Right Hon. Gentleman, however par. tial and qualified, of the accuracy of his statement, and that admission was probably made because the Right • Hon. Gent. knew he stood in the presence of persons who were acquainted pith the facts, and could correct any error in his account of them. Was he not. sight, then, in standing up before their Lordships to repeat and support the accuracy of his original assertion? Lord SEAFORD—My Lords, I am indeced to rise on the present occasion by my regard for the memory of.a late Right Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Canning) • Atitith whom I was connected by .ties of the most intimtae friendship—whose friendship shall ever be the pride of • my life—nor is that. feeling likely to be abated by the • fact of his having died. in the fulness of his fame— soon enough for himself, too soon for his country. jr is impossible for me ,to allude to this subject, my Lords, without feelings of considerable pain; and this feeling, I regret to say, has been made b till more dis-, tressing by the course pursued by the Noble Relative of my late Right Honourable. Friend—and the very circumstance of the Noble Marquis's connection with, my Right Honourable Friend and his family, renders it still more painful to me, that I should feel it my duty to contradict any thing he may have stated, and makes me most reluctant to enter at all into a conflict with the Noble Marquis. But as the Noble Marquis has thought fit to repeat his statements of a former night, on which occasion I forbore making any comments on them, I regret that I-cannot now practice the same abstipence, nor avoid troubling your Lordships with a . few observations, in justice to my Noble Friend opposite (the Earl of Dudley), and other colleagues of my late Right Honourable Friend, at present members of the existing Administration. And here let me declare to your Lordships, that having had, in consequence of my personal intimacy with my late -Right Hon. Friend, mail opportunities of witnessing the habits of friend ship that existed between. my Noble Friend, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and my late, Right Honourable Friend, and the respect felt by my Noble Friend for the transcendant talents, and other lighter but more fascinating qualities of that Right Honourable Gent!eman—and having also known the circumstances under which my Noble Friend, took the office of Secre tary for Foreign Affairs under my Right Was. Friend, and the confidence shewn by my Right Hon. Friend in the Noble Earl's principles, and proved, too, by the fact of his incrusting to him such an important situati• - m in the Govetnment—l cannot bring myself to think that my Noble Friend has lately accepted the same office under the Noble Duke at tire head of the Government . with any other than the purest motives. And having had the same opportunities 4.1 observing the connection between that same Right Hon. Gentleman and my Rii..ht Hon. Ft irnd at the.head of the Colonial Depart ment—his steady attachment of twenty years to my late Right Hon. Friend, and the political concord and priva e friendship by which they were united—it is (m . fo,sible for me to entertain any doubt of the feelings by which my Right Hon. Friend was actuated in his recent accession to office. My Lords, when I see these, my Noble and Right Hon. Fr tends, made the objects of meated attacks, neither Parliamentary nor fair, I feel that I would not act honourably if I shrunk from the duty of declaring my opinion on the conduct of my Noble and Right Hon. Fi lends, and of sharing the obloquy to which they have been exposed. In the dis charge of this duty I shall not milieu to every attack made on my Right Hon. Friends, but shall confine my self to one in particular, which :elates to my Right Hon, Friend the Secretary for the Colonies, and which has been referred to en a former occasion before your Lord ! ships, and this I do fur the purpo,e of vindicating my Right Honourable Friend from an attack on him, aris • ing from a declaration alleged to have been made by him of his feelings immediately after the.death of my late Right Hon. Friend. The declaration my Right Hon. Friend avowed in his place. An attempt was then made . to fix that declaration on my Right Hon. Friend; in - other terms, to other persons, anti on other authority. What tffe precise difference is between the two versions „I do not accurately remember; nor do I believe it to be :important in any point; but in the fact that it has been converted. into matter of blame against my Right Hon. . Friend. But, as my name has been used; I feel myself ,called on to declare, ,that.. I. natter used the words, nor .doer, uttered any thing which .could• fix on my Right Hn., Friend any precise form of expression, or bind him to any particular course of conduct. I did aot.profess to repeat the pirticular words used by my Rignt Hon. )Fiend, nothing in fact more than the general substance of them—and for.this reason, that .I had no accurate recollection of them at the time, nor do I now under- take to say that I remember the ♦ery terms of my Right Hon. F.itail's declaration. ,But if I used the words im puted,to me, I had the satisfaction of learning after wards, that I made au erroneous representation of my Right Hon. Friend's language, and of. knowing that they were not in fant the words which he.used—nor do , I take any,shame to myself fur this difference between my Right Hon. Friend's declaration and my represen- tation of it ; to; Lord Grenville sheaved to me. a few. ,days.after I had mentioned .the affair, a letter from my Right Hon. Friend, in which he confidentially related to Lord Grenville. the declaration he had made to me on the occasion alluded to. And here I must declare, my Lords, that those who fancy that I am disposed to soften down the sentiments that dictated that letter,do not know me. If ibis were no* made the subject of eva- . cial discussion. Ldo.think it. would. be disingenuous in tut not to own 4with every,respect for tbe.Noble Duke opposite), that transactions arose, connected with the; ,death of my late Right Honourable Friend, which ex „cited in my mind leelings and impre*sions that would !we made it difficult for me (were I in.the. situation of ;may Right/Jim). Friend.the Colonial Secretary) to unite .* with those former colleagues of my late Right Hoe. , Friend, who separated from him on his.actessionto tho bead of the Government. But I was a.ptivata.m . iridual. My Right Honourable Friend ands kis.political, *Wads in the Cabinet were not, and .I: am-of opinion: . that those, my Noble and my Right Hon. Friends, being public. men,. were bound to consider their public duties 4, perainonat to private feelings, when an offer. to retain ton. D I u approve e p e their places was made to them by N oble i was empowered. t o form *dmi . Noble Friend thiattiiteheierlpcioannsi3dteor:siorncteo.ifv.r,tdhetbry s p m oh i lic duties. and my Right a cl it i ot t i bz re% h b e l o e . 4 f,1 1 .th ;re' E c ° o re lo ig n n iale ° .. 5 -7tn ;i ' eti n ry 4 , be such ay - btt n f°r part of •the Noble Dukes Admi- -oirfilM . t called• on to, abandon the principles on which . t he y acted under Mr. Carling's Isat°i!!".4g shall be Government. Then I say that I think it was their pub !leftist,' not to•withhold their services from the Noble Duke—and .that their private duty also, as friends to the memory of Mr. Canning, ought to dictate the same course to them—after the Noble Duke's offer to them of retaining thero s in their important and iefluential offices, connected with the foreig n policy, with the Co. lonies, and the Government of Mood, without, requir ing of them a compromise of their principles.. This offer of the Noble Duke I conceive to be such a decided tribute of honour to the memory of my late Right Hon. Ft iend, that I say they acted mesteTrectly in not object hig to join the Noble Duke's Administration. In fact, I see nothing in the conduct of the N.,ble Duke or of my Noble Piiend (Earl Dudley) or my Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Huskisson), as set forth in their several explanations, but obit is strictly hoiwurable. As to the alleged differences of opinion between the Noble Duke and my late Right Hon. Friend, did not the Noble Duke act with him many years in the same Adminis tration—in the time of Lord Liverpool—aye, and of the Duke of Portland, when my late Right Hon. Friend filled the office of Foreign Secretary ?—and was not the Noble Duke more immediately conneced with, and a consenting party te, his measures of foreign policy, under the Government of Lord Liverpool? As, however, the measures of my Right Hon. Friend's foreign policy have been already discussed, I shall not on this occasion go over them again, nor reply to those several corn mentatois on them—whether to those who, approving his principles of foreign policy, objected to the time and mode of their application, or those who disapproved both his principles and their practical operation—or to those persons oho approved both one and the other— or finally to that class of politicians, who declare they could never know what were his principles of foreign policy—(A laugh)—to these several rorSONS I shall not now make an answer, but briefly shew the condition in which Mr. Canning left the country at the time of his death. He left her in the possession and exercise Of that influence which, from her power, she had a right to assume—he left her at the head of the Councils of Europe—he left her when the eyes of all the nations of the New World and the Old were turned upon her, some with feelipgs of confidence, some with gratitude, some with hope, and all with re spect. (Cheering.) For the proof of this, I need only to re fer your Lordships to the sentiment ofliespect entertained for my late Right Hon. Friend by the liberal and en lightened of all countries, and the sensation of dismay and consternation universally felt at his death ; an event which, in foreign States as well as in England, was la mented as a national calamity. And that this my late Right Hon. Friend's glorious course of foreign policy will be followed up by his successor, we have a hope, .and, indeed, a warrant, in my Noble Friend's retention of the direction of the foreign policy of the Empire.— Then, as to the ltight Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Home Office, his sentiments, and the manner in which he has expressed them, reflect the greatest credit on his candour ;that Right Hon. Gentleman has declared, that there was not one measuie of my late Hon. Friend in which, he did not concur, with the exception of the Catholic Question; that he never met a public man with ,whoni Ire acted as colleague in office with greater pleasure; nor one under whom, as leader in the Com mons, he was more willing to act, or as Premier in the Administration, but for the Catholic Question; and the objection which he felt even on that point, arose from the peculiar sort of auxiliary relation in which he should stand as Home Secretary to a Prime Minister favourable to Catholic Emancipation. As to any mew sutes intended by the late GovernMlnt, or any dissen- Aims% or discussions that may have taken place in that 'Cabinet, I shall make no observations on them, as they are subjects with which no person not a Member of that Cabinet ought to interfere—no more, I say, than this, that I ern, sure they involved -no personal motive, no fundamental principle, of a nature which could render it incompatible for my Noble and Right Hon Friends to act in concert with the Noble Duke and his. friends in the I/resent Administration. Their . Lord ships will remember the fact of Mr. Canning'' offer-of office to the Noble Duke and the iriends who retired with hiaocoupled with his (my late Right Hon. Friend's) assurance that the Government should continue to be conducted nn the principle of Lord Liverpool's. Now, after this, I can see no reason why the Noble Duke opposite may not consistently make a similar offer to the friends of Mr. Canning, nor why they should not as consistently accept it. As to any objections arising from private feelings, I consider that my Right Hon. Friends ought to hold them subordinate to their public duty, and I have no doubt that in the main they will act on general measures with perfect concord with the Noble Duke and, his friends. As to the explanations lately given on matters that arose since the formation ; of the present government, while some persons are of ' opinion that somewhat more express pledges or stipule tions, or, as the phrase goes, guarantees, ought to have' been demanded by and given to my Noble and Right' Hon. Friends, the Secretaries for the Foreign Affairs and for the Colonies, on their accession to office under the, Noble Duke. I must confess that I differ from that opi nion and whet) 1 heard that my Right Hon. Friend the Colonial Secretary had said that he received lc, guarantee from the Noble Duke, I thought he could not have used the words attributed to him in the papers, and I shortly after knew that he did not use them ; for, having asked him on his return from Liverpool, whether he had usedthem, I was informed by him that he had not. but that be bast seen no report of his speech but that in the Liverpool Courier. He then referred to ano ther journal.ashen he.declared that he did not use the words in theiseuse ascribed w him in it. For myself, do not think that the Noble Duke would first offer them situations in his Government, and afterwards ask them to abandon their principles ; and if such an attempt should be made to induce my Right Hon. Friends to, compromisealleic principles, they would have the roo medy in their own hands, namely, the power of retiriag foam office, and I have no doubt would instantly exer cise it.. In.fine, I aro, sure the Noble Duke will conduct his Administration on the principles of my late Right Hon. Fr iend ; and in that event I shall be ready to lend' im my hunablelattordial.suppert. The Duke of.. WELLINGTON—My Lords, I 'lei ' ', not to address , your Loerlaisips with it view to continue these discussicuair; astoopinion, are unneceo;' nary, entirely oarsecessery- T 4Chevrin g s)....a n d which, in ; . °piety atad.good . L think ought to have bee alooso—(Cheennos).--nqro. _my. Lords, do I rise S iu ingler-to mike. a...perdessitia of thaptinciples on whip Lin end to conduct the Government, AS those .priod plea will be mote dearly seen in the stets of the Governs. meat, aad.will 12ZOIC.W. be such as, I trust,. shall de serve your Lordship's approbation ; but I rise to &fen,' I myself against the imputation that. I ever entertained a feeling of personal hostility against , the Goveroment of yireilibinning. On a former occasion I stated to your totdstiips the reason why I could ;not reinain fin . sui . Atinsiaistration conducted under theSuperiUtendetsce of thit c ltight Honourable Gentle Man. ' Now, mr.Lsirdi; .iiihirin thnsc.re.wns or. in .the wt hien AOMMlattiell• dons that passed between me and that Right Honotit: able Gentleman, and which unfortunately were pub lished at the time, either in those reasons or those come munications, I dstyany person to shew me the sign on my part of a ,feeling.. o( ,personal] hostility against Mr. Canning. It is,ttne chat at the,, nme.tinsethat I thought .it necessary. to withdroviT myself .4om the, Cabinet. on account of the assumption tf the chief place in the Government.by that Right. Hon, Gentleman, I, also r tired from the military office that I held under the_G • vernmeut; but, as I said at the time, I did not retie , from either office through a personal feeling Of Oppos lion to Mr. pinning, and if. ever I met,,him aPerwardi, it should tie:with the feelings and habits of friend,hip-;. (Cheering). Nor, my Lords, did I entertain even any political hoitilitY against Mr. Canning. True,.in re'a tion to a measute'brought before your Lordships in the time of that Right Hon. Gentleman's Administration, I proposed that a certain clause should be introduced into the Bill—a proposal which induce.] the gover nment t" abandon the Bill altogether ; but I eali upon you- Lordships to hear witness for me, whether I did lot then ask the Government to take my cause into their own hands, or adei.t some measure similar to it ? TI en, my Lords, I repeat, that I had uo personal hostility, nor political hostility, against the Government of Mr. Canning ; and I, therefore, claim a i ight not to be consi dered among the number alluJed to by the NobleLotd opposite, of the, enemies of Mr. Canning—(Cheering). In conclusion I have only to express a hope that, for the sake of the public business, and of the character of public men, we may have no more discussions on this unfortunate subject. . Lord MELROSi!: briefly exrpressed his concurrence in the Sentiments of his Noble Friend (Lord Seaford), and could not let this opportunity pass without &elating himself satisfied with the conduct at Mr. Canning's friends. Their Lordships then adjourned at a quarter to seven. HOUSE OF COM DONS. Sir George CLERK took the oaths and his seat. ST. PAUL ' S, COVENT GARDEN. Sir F. BURDETT presented a Petition from several Inhabitants of St. Paul's, Covent Garden, praying, that as the Standing Orders of the Honourable House were not agreed to, that the Petitioners should be heard against the Bill for a Select Vestry. Lord W. RUSSELL said a few words which were wholly inau dible aft.ir which the Petition was referred to a Committee. Ma% HUME considered that the Petition should be referred to the Standing Order Committee. The SPEAKER observed, that the usual course was to appoint a Select Committee, of whom five were Members of the Standing Order Committee, to investigate into the merits of the Petition. NAVIGATION. _ _ Lord A LTHORP presented a Petition from the County of Northampton, in favour of the Ayr and Calder Navigation Bill. Laid on the table. ISIPIRIAL OAS COMPANY. Mr. F. CLINTON brought up the Report of the Committee on the Bill for establishing the Imperial Gas Company—they agreed to several Amendments. On the motion that these Amendments be agreed to, Mr. HUME begged the attention of the House to this subject. This Company had already two Acts passed for their re gulation, and by the 77th Clause of the first Act, the proprietors agreed to deposit one-eighth of their entire net' profits in Govern ment Securities, in order to cover any just demands made against them. Now he asked, was this engagement kept with the public ? Ile answered, certainly nut. He would not, therefore, grant the Company further privileges, until they had fully performed their promise. There were other Gas Companies who had no charter, although each of the members of which were individually liable for all demands against them ; whereas in the Imperial Gas Company, no one was liable for more than the sum he subscribed. The object of the Chartered Company was in the long run to injute. if not ruin Companies which were not chartered. So unjust did he think the demand of this Company, that he would move that the Amend-- menus should be-further-considered this day six months: • Mr. ROBINSON was disposed to - concur with the Honourable Member for Aberdeen. Tht•se companies were estab lished for the public convenience; but he further thought that their prayer 'should not be complied illtii-had violated their con tract. They agreed to place oneaeigtigs of their profits in the public funds, but they did not pertorm their contract= And he ,nought no further privileges should be granted to' tfiem. He had another objection to this company, which was, that many of its directors were members of the flagrant Arigna Mining Company. Mr. F. CLINTON said, the great question here was, did not the Committee put such guards in ti-e Bill as would secure the public and the proprietors from any further misapplication of the Cotnpany's funds? A clause was introduced calling upon the Company to lay an account of their stock, and the -general nature of their business, every Session of Parliament before the House.— The contingent fund was formerly under tie management of the directors, henceforth it would be altogether in the hands of the prorit tors. The Company asked no new privileges or powers, but to enable them to raise a sum sufficient to carry on their work with effect. Fur himself, be knew nothing of the Company until this Session of Parliament. lie agreed with the Hon. Members as to the mi,applicatii,n of the money—(heat . , hear!) But his object was to introduce clauses to prevent their recurrence for the future. Ile hoped the matter would be regarded entirely on its own inetits. Mr. CALCRAFI' would not entrust larger powers to a body who, on the two former occasions, abused the powers conferred upon them. They had twice before violated the law, and he would not tempt them to violate it a third time. Under all the circumstances of the case, he should give his support to the Amendment of his Honourable Friend (Mr. Hume). Mr. Alderman WAITH MAN objected to the prin ciple of this measure, as well as to the originators and concocters of the first measure brought before this House. They would not have wanted more money it they had not gambled in many of the late bubbles and public cheats. The Directors of this Company had fraudulently abused their trust, and therefore he hoped the present application would be rejected. Al r.MABERLY said, it this Company were to receive new powers, it would be conferring on them a monopoly injurious to the public service. lie hoped the House would mark its de testation of such conduct by voting for the Amendment.—Stran , gets were then ordered to withdraw, when a division took place : For the Amendment . . . . 81 Against it Majority . . -7.5 On our return to the Gallery, we found that Mr. 13. Ccantit obtained leave to bring in a Bill for inclosing Lands in the neigh bourhood of Calla), county of Kiikenny. Sir JAM ES GRA H ASI presented several Petitions in favour of the Ferry-bridge Canal.—Ordered to be printed. LIYERPoOL DOCKS. General GASCOYNE moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Act for making the Liverpool Docks. The Hon. and Gallant Member admitted that the applicants had omitted to comply with'the Sending Orders of the House relative to private Bills, but contended that th e present object was virtually of a pub lac character, and that in such a case the Standing Orders might be dispensed with. Part of the purpose of the Ihll was to enable the Corporation to take certain lands by Valuation for the extension of the Liverpool Docks ; and the rest was to authorize their raising a sum of money to prosecute various works already commenced, and to be hereafter undertaken,: Sit J. YORKE opposed the . reriiission of the Standing Orden. lie tholight that the town of Liverpool was too far ag. grandized already at the expense of other' plasm The extent of their docks warat present five miles. Mr. HUSKISSON could not agree that the trade of Liverpool ought . either to be restrained or regretted. The fact was, that the Corporation were acting in this work for the public advan tage—they had not a shilling's worth of private interest. He I thought that the Dill might be allowed to pass, and the Standing Orders be remitted, as far as regarded the raising of money, al a vast extent of sea works were actually in progress, which would ' 1 fall into dilapidation if any delay of funds prevented( them from i 'being' prosecuted. • • ' iMr:tALCßAFT'agreed . to suspend the Sta..ding diedera'as far as regarded the power to raise money. • Lord ALTHORP thought it would be a dangerous precedent to dispense with the orders of the House. Leave was eventually gives to bring in the Bill. TUT Ara COVORATiOII ACT.r. Petitions, praying for the repeal et there tlct.t, we vrtsetf from the Protestant Dissen!eta of Wellingisorotso, Winington, Chepstow, 11r.-cen, bursley, Werrington, Boom, Bamford, Abe. rystwyth, Shepton Mallet, five congregations in Bristol. Chipping Norton. Brompton, Devizes, Springfield, Rye, Battle. Hytbe, s t , Leonard's (Shoredich); Scotch Presbyterian congregation Welk. street ; Bakewell, Chichetter, Trowbridge, Salisbury, Warminster, Bath, North Curry, F.mlbourne, Liskeard, hlidelleburgh ' • Lewis. bun-street Chapel, Westminster; Mayfair, Rochdale. Chick's. ter, High and Low Harrowgate, Cranbrook, Chatham, Cited. Ashwater, Ashburton, Hull, Reading, Shrewsbury, Lted : N2 'near Hertford, Chester, Blackburn ,the City of Gloucester, Wee aster, Truro and St. Austel, &Miran; Anglesey; the hide. pendent Congtegation at Lincoln; Barrbeneum.Repton..Dertty. shire; Alceiter; Birmingham; from five parishes in Caiwaroso. shire; Boston; 'Lincolnshire; the Association of Protestant Din. *enters in London : the Protettant Dissenters of Catiterbiry; S. Asaph; the Congregation of Hunter-street Chapel, Liverpool; tha • Clergy and Laymen of Rotherham; Huddersfield, Great Drilleig, Leeds, Halifak, and Bradford ; Marston, Arnoldswick. and a part* hear Bradford; Gosport, Newport, and Mortimer West, in the Isle of Wight; Farnham, Winchester, and Ringwood; Bury Se Edmund's; Aylesbury; the Vicar, Onirchwardens, and Parishioneti of Wingrive, Bucks ; Devizes; Within, Denbigh, Liangonee; LLn ye, Glensyrrial, Ross, and iltidport ; sad Several Mime plates: —)lost of them were ordered tube printed. Mr. s Nrmi pre.ented a Pethion, signed Ity 2,000 Rama Catholics bt Liverpool, also praying fol a repea l li the Test awl Cotporation Acts. It gave him, he said, Mimi pleasure to present skis Petition, as it showed that those who had endeavoured to raise doubts between the Roman ,Catholics and disseinert were not si successful as they wished.—The Petition was ordered to be printed: Mr: RASTHOP I E said, that of the Petitioni which be presented for the repeal of the Test Acts (from CltiPpitig gor on •and Bronap ton), the former was signed by the Clergyman (of the Church of England) of the parish, and hy several CathoTies, Quakers ' and some members of the Church of England ; and the second was also signed by the Clergyman of the parish, and several respecteble members of the Church of England. Mr. CU RTEIS, in presenting several Petitions from Susses, expressed his determination to support the motion of the Noble Lord for the repeal of the Test Act. Mr. PENDARVES, in presenting the Petition from Liskeird, said it was from the friends of religious liberty—that it was mow respectably signed, and at the head of the signatures was that of the clergyman of the parish. Mr. FERGUSSON, in presenting the Petition from the Mien. ters and Elders of the Scotch and Presbyterian Chapel of Wag,. street, objected to the principle of making that most sacred a,sl solemn act of taking the Sacrament of the Lone's Supper a test d political qualification. It must be extremely painful to the retina l of the Clergy of the Established Chards to have to administer in that way. Mr. STANLEY presented two Petitions from Nenagh, et* against the Sub-letting Act, and the other praying for Cathulic Emancipation. Similar Petitions were presented from Wexford and &mime. thy, by Mr. CAREW. Mr. LITTLETON presented a Petition from the Mobsters of Burton upon Trent for a Repeal of the Malt Tan.—Laid on the tahle.—The Honourable Member then moved for several Return connected with the Malt Trade—the number of Maltsters—the fines inflicted—and the mode of their application.—Ordered. Mr. M. A. TAYLOR presented a Petition from the Miyor and Coporation of Durham, praying that no receipt for any sum under twenty pounds should be liable to a Stamp Duty.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. BRIGHT moved for a Return of Receipt Stamps issued for the last five years, the number of Informations filedond Imes levied during the same period, distinguishing Loudon and the dif. ferent Country Towns.—Ordered. Mr. C ALCR AFT expressed his hope that the Hon. Member bad spoken to some one in the Government to know whether the Returns could be granted, and that be had ascertained that some benefit would be derived from these voluminous Returns. Mr. BRIGHT said that the subject was important, and that tin full Returns would be necessary; but that he had no objection to submit them to the Hon. Member, or any one who wished to see them, before they were ordered.—Motion withdrawn. Mr. W. ShIITH presented a Petition from Norwich, in foveae of Free Trade.—Ordered to be printed. Sir C. OWEN presented a Petition from certain Mobsters of Sandwich against the Malt Tax Regulations.—Ordered to be printed. The LORD ADVOCATE moved for an Account of the number of Licenses granted, under the Act for Licensing:lliad Houses, within the City of Edinburgh since the passing of the Act. Mr. CAREW presented Petitions from Enniscorthy, Wexford, and other places, praying (or Catholic Emancipation, and the Rend of the Subletting Act, and the Vestry Act. Air. F. CLINTON presented a Petition from the Inhabitantsat East Retford, not being Electors, praying that the Bill for disfrao. ebbing that Borough may not pass into a law, and that the right al returning Members may be continued in the Borough, with suck modifications as the House may think fit. SUB-LETTING ACT. • Mr. HUME presented a Petition, which he.desCribed as being signed by all the most distinguished and wealthy Catholics of Ireland, praying for a repeal of the Sub-letting Act. The Petitioners stated, that the Act was depopulating large districts, and must drive a million of people to •agrancy if allowed to - continue in operation. The Hon. Member enforced the necessity of giving an immediate attention to the subject, so ass to prevent the serious evils which the continued operation of the Act threatened. Lot d MILTON expressed his ht i tie,..%S . riihateiee alterations might be made in the details of the Acx,•the principle would never be abandoned. The evil of utr• der-letting land, Which it went to remove, he consi dered to be one of the greatest with which Ireland had been afflicted. Mr. BROWNLOW contended that. the evils de " scribed by the Petition, such as the depopulation of particular districts, were not the consequences of the Act against which it complained. The Petitioners stated this was a law for the benefit of the few agais.t 'the many, but he maintained -that it had greatly im proved the condition of the occupiers or the land, and that it was a wise and salutary Act of Parliament. It would then naturally be asked, how it came about that so good a law had encountered so much discontent and clamour ? The answer was to be found - in the state of the country. In England there was a peaceable well ' governed population, whose interest it was to preserve order, and who knew that labour and capital must be regulated, and applied in just proportions in order to make their employment mutually beneficial. In Ireland there was a directly opposite interest. The people of that country felt that it was their numbers which made them formidable, their famine and misery which made them terrible. He believed he could see a connection between this feeling and the discontent in which the Petition originated, and he called upon the House to look upon the matter as one of the utmost importance. The Irish people knew that their miseries were their strength, and if the House did not interpose, he feared that it was their rags and wretchedness before which must fall the wealth, the rank, and the education of this country. He was confident that if Catholic Email. cipatioa were granted, they should hear nothing, more of the Sub-letting Act. That was the measure which, by quieting men's minds, would revive industry, and ,give that security to the use of capital which would create employment at home for that miserable portion of the population who had now to seek it elsewhere of starve. Mr. DAWSON concurred with the Hon. Member who had just sit down in declaring, that this law Nall most unjustly misrepresented by the Petition upon their table. The measure was adopted alter the most deli berate caution, and it was in operation during the last year without the House having heard a word upon the subject. Since that it had been discussed in another place, and the consequence of the discussions to Much he alluded was the Petition now before them. In fact, this was the Petition of the Catholic Association—(Heir, hear). He believed that it did not contain one signa ture of a person who was an occupier of land in Ireland. Those" who had signed it were chiefly the persrm against whom the law was directed.—He was not beie speaking of them as members of the Catholic Associa tion, but upon other g►ounds he would declare that tlgi were principally the greatest oppressors of Ireland- - I e midOltaren, v l o g-i und the tenantry of that avow I 'tty into the dust, and who dcr and outraxe,liaay this Act, as they predicted. printed...and copies sent to and i - contained this warni the Act was not repealed : -esl4tors, emesnplate hOrriSr and affright ?"' 'consequences would result the House would never he: subject from the real o'ci. Ahem it was a law of proti upon the House not to b presentation such as the Pt i*gtiided by the tease); )abich the Honourable Mr .611p3ained the real nature 'that its principle was good, Teets in detail, they could )sit (allow the Hon. Mernl lit Emancipation, only o fallen from the Hon. Mit that the evils of Ireland 'to that source alone. Mr. NORTH entirely from the. Hon. Member there was not a reflect* land who did no . capPrin There was some of its di Member suggested oaten( clause o,lglit to be repeal Wigs .the proper am-2udmi A43l"the most beneficial r tolreland.. .Ilr. F. LEWIS said; 41 could be conferred onlrt ter establiihMen t.t. and le; When Gentlemen visited It . than the tenantry of this country • existed epos the land there, sident - lindlords Fit [rely ratans that, the should tenantry, able to perform connected its different c 7 amongst the whole? Hi where there was not a rei place was suppled by r yeomanry, from whom • protection and support. Ireland was the object of that - whatever improves require in detail, the prix would not be departed fi Mr. R. COLBORNE the House, whether it w; tialdiscussion of an imi . presenting of a Petition to hint that the titne of spent in such discussions, in it to proceed with the ofenteiing into them. If of baying the merits of had . been said, discits,ed, would be to bring thesubk Mr. Sect etary PEEL _ _ _ had fallen from the Hon. and said that after . Ifon. Prie'nd (Mr. Lamb) that any desultory con question would have been His Right Hon. Friend h .wady to give the subject 'te thread to any informal be- made to him. He ( better course could be his Right Hon."Friend.' the appointment of a Col With respect to the Pea • only say tins—without motives of those who 'Which the Petition was the most dignified reveng4 be, seriously to reflect upoi tn'eptke such alttirationt 'deemed likelyl6 be benl. . sure particularly concekns—, Mr. H. GRATTAN ' Members to rise and say did not offer a proper 'Ol enter ing • into the Merits • a different opinion. He his consti.trents, and he' occasion of endeavouri, they complained of, and He maintained that thi ignorance, and had ha, sth and 6th sections v.( and it was impossible fol to reconcile the differes that a Committee won' the time at which it known the better. Th , terested would then. ha\ seasons for being discen The Petition was then broil, Mr. HUME presen Roman Catholic Inhabitants derry. Mr. DAWSON sai, contented with the Sub.ktt certain, that considerable t Association to create a feeling of money levied by that Body bad been spent in having I,' so bad been made a mattes (ceded from the Cithulic / Mr. HUME should Catholic Association had Irishman be should feel proud there express his opinions laugh, and hear)—ani he Association down, or to tht an intemperance in language —The Petition was then ord, Mr. H. GRATTAN Romata Catholic Inhabitant! —Ordered to be printed. Mr. V. FITZGERAL7 Parish in the county of Clare. Mr. V. FITZtiiERALL Catholic Inhabitants of. two favour of the Catholic. Claims. FAZAKEILLErY•pr •for a Repeal of the Duty en Lord MILTON present Yorkshire, praying for a Repeal Mr. WARBURTON prey Mahaters of Britiport.—The ' On the motion of the CV the Hollis resolved itself NAY' Sir GEORGE CLI tention then to go ino meant to move for sui the Government to'ct the Estimates were bl sideration of the Hot been piirsittdAiitlV E timates, arid he'di bking followed on the io would b' PAP wed • ted. The to every M ning as to :—" Can y no million He was co Lilt from th hear any, "ccurying t rotection. listen to Petitioner; asoning an .1 lember, wh e of the m- xid, and if d easily be mber into t r observing limber to I were cert r fc: Arma; ncurre ng and in ove of the details up mdments, !aled as sp. intents, he • LI measure that the g [reboil wa Institutions lreland,n milaris y be• r and the here. If, t land, was i d have a re 7m those t ; chose-, and He knew• resident Gv. , an intelti 3 the poore To raise )f the preset ernent or rinciple of s from. E put it to was desirabl taportant qu on— (Hear, )f the Hon is. and that be business If 'Ho& Gen of the Act, ,ed, their t - tbject prop: concurred Dn. Gentlens • what had b) the tither InversatiOn j en deemed. i had eaves .ct his most nation or sty (Mr. Peel) t i s devised th I,And Meld :Olicnittee a tition before ut stopping petitlobed trartsed;•6 . mge {he upon the At ns as shall tefiCial' to !kns—(Hear said, it wa ty that the p br a cativo is of any qu le had a dut e felt bound ring to set nd so to proc :he Sub-letti tad a sery i mere at vari for any lawy rence betwc uld be appo was to be Chose who ave an °pp() :ontented wi brought up and , nted a simi 'no of the Cu rid that ther rtting Act. I trouble had cling of uppoait kitty fur what 1,000 copier u .ter of boast : Association. i like to kno l not a right to proud of bet is as freely as he thought tha brow contemp iage, was p.akr ordered to lie tsl presented s ants of Kilken ' LD Presented Clare. LI) presented two Parishes • rpresented a P NEI Receipts. toted a Petit' , . Repeal of she SI presented a The Petitions :.:HANCRLL into a Comnai AVY ESTikIA LERK'said, nto the Navy Loch a vote of carry on th brought ie. ; ouse. That likard to lid not antici .he &sent •