Star. — London, England, 1826-04-14 00:00:00

;.-_ , from any indifference to the question, still less had it arisen from any want of sympathy with or respect for those Gentlemen of great learning and talent who had distinguished themselves inEdinburgh by the it able sup port of this cause; his hesitation had rather been pro duced by an apprehension that his feeble aid might be thought by those Gentlemen more likely to be injurious thin beneficial to their cause, that they might upon the principle of now tali easilio be rather disposed to re nounce his assistance. The Hon. Gent. had furnished the people of Scotland with the most cogent reason and Motive why they should be anxious for the success of the present motion, by the seal with which he had de fended the interests of the thirty-three Corporators of Edinbiurgh whom he represented. His Hon. and Gal lant Friend bad said that every thine was imperfect in Scotland, although he of course perfectly understood, his meaning, he would rather say that as a system nothing could be more perfect. As a system of est{•. blishing exclusion from the enjoyment of political' rights, as a system of maintaining the monopoll of power, as a system of shielding every possible abuse, a more perfect system could not be devised by the in. genuity of man. He was the less zealous in his hosti lity to that system, because it was now brought before the House, separate and apart from the great mea sure of Parliamentary Reform, and there was nothing he so much wished as one general struggle for that constitutional good. Yet the argument of his Hon. and Learned Friend, as applied to this system, was entirely irresistible ; it was a pure and perfect chrysolite, taus tetra etre rotundas it was per fectly without flaw. It was, -however, impossible to convince, so tender and nervous were the' advo cates of corruption, it was impossible to convince them that any change, however minute or remote, could be effected without endangering the general system to which they clung. They would listen to no compromise. --He earnestly called upon the Right Hon. the Secre tars, for Foreign Affiirs,who had always expressed himself favourable to the principles of philosophy, which be truly said were the only wise regulator of human conduct—he called upon bias. in behaM of the rights of the enlightened City of Edinburgh. The Hee. Baronet then proceeded to urge upon Ministers the swanky of vain in favour of the motion, if they would act in itenferndty with their repeated professions of liberal said enlightened ; and suggested the probability. if such moderate and partial *ere constantly resisted, that the determination of the people to obtain a more comprehensive and effectual reform would become impatient and irresistible. Mr. K. DOUG L S said. be considered there was nothing special in this case—no corruption had been made out, and if the House &seeded to this motion, it must be on account of the general ques tion of Reform, and not for this special case. Alt. C. PELHAM opposed is. Lord A. HAMILTON supported the motion. He appealed to the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, whe ther it was possible for him to maintain ally semblance of liberattipinions, if he resisted a motion like the pre. sent. The only argument he had heard against . motion was, that it violated the articles of Union. Had not, he would ask the sets of Boroughs been altered is • 'Many instances and by various modes since the Union? Why this had beew done- is More than half of the whole -number of Boroughs in Scotland. Had not also the Union with Ireland, made since that period, a' .great change in the constitution of that House. He . deprecated the principle that, so long as a body of SS self-elected Corporator: could perpetuate itself, there should be no free representation of Edinburgh. The Right Hon. Gentleman professed to be the friend of education ; and when education was more generally diffused, was this the beautiful system they intended to peseta to the enlightened people? If such was their Intention, it would be more prudent, as well as more consistent in than to desire that the people should retrograde, than that the; should advaice in intelligence. The Noble Lord sat down after thanking the House for the attention which they had paid to the, observations which he had felt it Ma duty to make on an occasime which. more than any other in his mind, called on the Haase forks serious onsideratiom The LORD ADVOCATE of SCOTLAND comas menced by :icing that , he should not treat this as a ScotylrQuestion, but as a Question affecting British in terist, and therefore altogether a British Question. The Committee, he would observe, who sat upon this Bill, I had supported the proposition on which it was founded, and which he felt himself now conscientiously bound' to support. The Noble Lord had moved last year for a return, which he expected would prove there had been malversatiqn in the public business of Scotland.— Now, in his opiniin, it was always wrong in principle to begin, in cases of mooted national rights, with the weaker vessel, more particularly when he reflected on the means by which the national Union between the two countries had been effected. The consequence of the legal measure which had taken place lately was, that Edinburgh had been improving in resources and population for the last few years beyond all former pre cedent. It was contended that the consequence of the present system was that those tenting 5/. a year in Edinburgh were that out from the representation. If this was good for any thing, it was a good substantive gi ouid for impeaching the representation altogether in England, IreLtnd, and - Scotland. The better waywould then have been for the Noble Lord to have levelled his attack generally against the skate of the representa-' lion of the United Kingdom. If such were the tendency of the Noble Lord's motion, he should have no objec tion to meet him on the subject, p rovided he brought it in upon, the broader principle applicable to a variety of other representations, but certainly he would not now sanction a motion which overlooked Avowal principles. and merely for the sake of introducing a specu. lathe system of reran* in a particular city, applied itself to the remedy oft specific alleged abuse, which ought on principle to form merely an item In the elms of alleged abases. For these reasons he should oppose the mentions. Mr. Becretar7 CANNlNG—Although it is neither my desire, nor within my competence, to speak to the latter parts of the historical statements made by the Noble Lord (Lord A. Hamilton), I feel myself bound, as a mane spectator of the contest, and it is in this cha racter alone that I have viewed the whole discussion upon this subject, to assure the Noble Lord that the al teration which has taken place in the preceding Bill, to which allusion has been made, and which, as be says, has left the question as nearly as possible where it was, without either improvement or contradiction,. has not been effected in the manner, or by the means which he supposed. The gravamen of the Noble Lord's attack upon my Hoe. Friends is not the division of the Bill, but the mode, the object of that division, and the col lusion which was practised upon the =Cask& As to the' fact of collusion, my two Hon. Friends.oor and isibiad me, have most distincuy disclaimed asCrep; bated the imputation • and when a charge Of this. lure" advanced, item of no triblirlat which an appeal can be made, except to the Aet. most beneficial and the least objectionable. .The asser tions of the Noble Lori, though they were in opposi tion to this statentent, - were not contradictory, as both may be perfectly true; but by the way of taking the sting out of his objection, he refers to those motives by the intience of which the division of the measure was effected. This being the state of the discussion, I do net know of any other tribunal, when a charge of per sonal or'parliamentary unfairness is alleged, to which reference can be made, tban the honour of the parti 's in question. To this tribunal the appeal has been made, and the charge has been most strenuously denied. I have been required, both by the Hon. Baronet (the, Member for Westminster) and the Noble Lord, to an swer certain questions .which have been proposed to, me, connected with the general question of Reform, and to declare upon what ground I can, in. any consis tency with some former declarations of mine on another occasion, oppose that degree of improvement which is, supposed to be contained in the present propos al of the Honourable Member for Cane . These calls have been , undoubtedly made with great politeness, and in terms of more than ordinary, and, I fear, undesc ved com pliment; but, I confess, I am very much at a loss to understand the grounds upon which it is said I shoal& give my concurrence-to the present measure; or how suck a character can be attached to my expressions, as to give reason for supposing that I am pledged either to this or any other more comprehensive measure of Reforms. It is perfectly true, that on the occasion alluded to by the Hon. Baronet, I did make use of those expressions which he has taken as the foundation of his argument is and that I did state, in the language used by all men, when they have occasion to address a deliberative body, upon any great question connected with policy or the public weal, that I would not resist change, merely be. Cause it was change ; neither would I resist innovation, as innovation, provided it were accompanied by that degree of improvement and advantage which would sanction a departure from established order, and war. rant the propriety of adopting it. I have often been accused of being incorrigibly and pertinaciously averse to a reform of any kind which I did not consider abso lutely necessary and expedient ; but I would even take a higher and more formal ground, and 'say, that I de sire to be accused of resting my opposition to reform, not upon any times—not upon any circumstances—not upon its application to any particular places—not upon any events of a nature transitory and evanescent—but upon a decided, matured, and I may 'say, unalterable convic tion, that there are no grievances in the representation to be redressed ; but tharif there are any grievances, that they could not be remedied without leaving us exposed to the chance of greater misfortunes and greater cala mities than could possibly arise from any of those evils to which we may be subjected by an endurance of our present grievance (hear! front the Opposition Benches); The Noble Lord has ssid that he hopes I do notlintend to rest my opposition to a reform in Scottish Bo g hs, on the articles ofUnion between this kingdom and &Attend —to a certain degree I will admit to the Noble Lord chat I do not. Itt, on other grounds, I could - bring myself to think that . a great and sweeping plan of Re form, which would go •to the Reform not only of the Scottish Burghs, but of the whole system of representa tion in the empire, mold be made practicable and Irene. ficial ; and if these Articles of Union stood in the wee of that general improvement, I would go with dor Noble Lord in his view of the case, and say that ncthing in that Act, with respect to a particular portion of the empire, could be conclusive against the power and opinions of the Legislature, when considering the ad vantages trhich would result to the whole community. But I think that no such good would result from any such sweeping or general Reform ; that the present motion would not do good ; and I cannot but be of opinion with the Learned Lord who spoke before me, that we are bound to oppose any experimental plan of Reform when about to be applied to that party who is the weakest in the compact, and that She has a right to say, if there are any hazards attendant upon these measures, which we contend there are, try the measures first upon yourselves, before you subject us to its con sequences, and do not' select the weaker vessel to make upon it a trial of your experiments. Since the comment,- ment of this debate, I have bad the Articles of Union put into my hand; -and- in them I find that the article upon the subject - runs thus: " And be it provided; that from and after this date no one shall be capable to elect or be elected a Member of the Parliament for the United Kingdoms of England and Scotland, except such as may have been capable to elect or be elected' for the Parliament of Scotland." Now I say that as long as England preserves that state of representation which she possessed at the period of this Union, so long has Scotland a right to plead that she should not be cons; pelted to adopt any plans of reform which England may not think it expedient to try upon herself ; but if,' I repeat.• the whole Empire was to be affected by any such alterations, thea Uwould contend that Scotland could not plead this act-.of Union in bar of the claims of that Empire, for the purposes of universal be nefit. I adroit, that, speaking of Scotland only, and the Parliament of Scotland, there may not be that po pular election which would in other eases be desirable ; but we are not arguing the question with regard to Scotland alone, and I am prepared to contend that, 'taking Scotland, with its representation. to-be, as it virtually is, a part and parcel of an empire, in which ft many classes of things and sentiments find, - and Mg have, an organ of their opinions; that it is fully l aid truly in possession of a representation of its opinions Is the Parliament of the kingdom. I do not mean to law, that if I was allotting the portion of representation, L would not give to Scotland a larger share of that popular infusion, which .1 consider desirable • but I do Isay, that the h:fusioa of other parts of t he empire, where the representation is of a character more popular, produces such a ;immixture ip the General Parliament of the Empire, as I think sufficient to ensure all, even the highest, objectifor which such.a body may be de• sirable is this rich and populous , country ; and that although it may, not possess all the advantages which may .be thought attainable in theory, yet that it do not wish to, touch that which .I find to be of 'soffiCient practical otility, for the sake of the theory, which nsay. aftei.all; prove delusive. Ate WW I that I di not sail, upon Honourable Meru betv,towagroo widtsau upon this view of the aities lon—l only' state candidly and fairly what are say inlet* that I • mar -not • be- *subjected to doubt misrepresentation (kettri hear t frew the Oppolitsoa that althongial.sisstthe.pblie kin maw* the aftdom of Scotland.; yet try tho otherpor clogs of thsticirtg dem thOnfosaion and coramixtote of the fertile swanked it them, and Job serve of pracCc .1 utility for which it is de . Let us for a moment consider the case, as to Scotland, in the view of public benefit. Have we any reason to believe that counto y to have been exposed to any difficulties, to have suf fered any distresses, because the Representatives of that kingdom have nut been chosen with the same regard to the popular voice as in the elections of this more wealthy and more populous nation? If we look to Scotland, caw say that in these times, when the whole empire has been flourishing, she has not advauced in power and importance? So far from that, I would say the very reverse is nearer the truth. She has even outstripped us in the race of prosperity, made advances to wealth and greatness, in a ratio much beyond those who enjoyed in its fullest ex tent the benefits of free and uncontrouled election. The Honourable Member, in the commencement of the detail, urged arguments founded on the disfranchise ment of the system of representation adopted in Scot land; he contended that ,the Scotch Members-are sub ject to misgivings on this topic; that they are aware. that they are so considered in this House; that they possess here awkward fedings. I see no such symp toms--(loud cheers and laughter).—Scotland, such as she is, mis-represented or non-represented, as the Hon. Member maintains, has still continued to make good her hold—(continued cheers and laughter) the Soohrons have made no impression among her maidens. I can find no instance of her relinquishing her own gallants for any of England's sons ; her shires and burghs con tinue intact,.from the embraces of the men from the South, except once, and -once only, as I remember, when Mr. Fox, discarded and banished from Westmins ter, took refuge in the arms of Kirkwall. Scotland, rich in her resources of representation, and feeling the advantages of her fertility, has found means to spare to England many to represent the boroughs of this part of the kingdom --(Cheers and laughter).— ,The very motion of this night-proceeds from a Gentle man who comes from that country; who settled and nestled himself in an English Borough: and who having so settled and so nestled himself, undertakes with filial piety to reform the abuses in the representation of his •mother country.—(Cheers and much laughter.) For my ,part, were I an Advocate for the measure of Parlia mentary Reform, which I am not, I would move an amendment to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman, and instead of a motion for " leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the law relative to choosing a Represen tative for Edinburgh," I would propose that Edin burgh" be omitted, and that Caine" be substituted for it.—(Loud cries from the Opposition of" Move, move," and _iron Mr. ABERCROMBIE in particular.)—lt is not necessary, Sir, for me to move as the Honourable and Learned Gentleman requires. lam arguing solely on, the grounds of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman, and of the supporters of Reform. The ob jection to the elective rights of the Corporation of Edin burgh was, that there were but SS electors. Why the number of electors in the Borough which the Hon. Gentleman represents is still smaller nor smaller, per haps, in comparison to the whole population of the place —thear, from the Opposition), but still there was a great disproportion between the body of the electors and the body of inhabitants of the Borough. of Caine. Ido not complain of this smallness, but I would say to those who complain of smallness as an objection to the exercise of elective rights, 4, Look at home before you go abroad."—(Hear.) If this objection is to be an avail able one, why select Edinburgh, when the Hon. nem . ber, by looking at home, would find a fitting subject for the experiment he proposes. If the paucity of numbers is to be taken as a test of insufficiency, why stop here ? If such a motion were entertained, the House would be called upon night after night, to alter the law relative to this Borough, and that Borough, and they would be required thus to proceed, is a series of partial legislative measures, without end. I have now argued this question on the grounds as it was connected with the place to which the motion has reference, and I shall briefly proceed to nonce it as it is connected with the more general question of Par liamentary Reform; and first, I would say, that this is the single instance in which the paucity of the numbers of the electors has made a ground of disfranchisement ; on every other occasion, it has been deemed necessary to allege and prove an abuse in the representation; and I contend, that without the proof of such abuse, there is no conclusive ground established for an altera tion in it. The present question is one quite different in principle from the more comprehensive one, of which a Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) has given notice, and which will come on for discussion in a few nights—here the principle relates solely to the smallness of numbers, and is quite distinct from the measure of a more comprehensive reform, which should be adopted in spite of all existing rights, for some great national good—(Hear). , That every partial interest should yield to so great an object, I admit—but though I admit the ,principle, I deny the advantage of its application to the measure of Reform. As to the present measure of partial Reform, although I will not say that cases may set occur to deprive a City or' Borough of its franchises, or to alter them, yet I do object to such a deprivation or alteration, without proof being given of abuses in the use of them. I do, besides, object to this motion, because it is the first time that suck a change would be made ; because the electing portion of the inhabitants of a place was dis proportionate to the bulk of its population ; and because, by entertaining it now, a series of discussions leading to endless contentions and individual squabbles would be let into that great question of Parliamentary Reform (for great I admit it to be) of which the Noble Lord (Lord .1. Russell) has given notice foi an early day. Sir, I prefer to discuss that great question ou its own merits. The topics relating to it should be kept for the motion of the Noble Lord, and I hope they will be kept for discussion long after his time. To the entertainment of this partial measure, I prefer that the more compre bansive one be submitted to this House for the purposes of declamation and of annual display. I shall be as well satisfied if the display be a triennial one. But as this is a Incest/re which does not purpose even (if castled) .to accomplish a national good ; as it cannot operate even as.so eons& in any useful vray, but as one of individual injustice (individual not only as to the persons to whom it is proposed to '/IPKY•fievi also as AO the instance itself); and as I look upon it, in Wary point Of view.-co be fraught.wlds many evils and no advan tages, I am determined to give it the meet decided opposition. Mr. HOBHOUSE was surprised to find the Right Hon. Gentleman mad instituted a comparison between the case of Vie Beton& of Caine and the representation of Edinburgh. Was it to be endured that the City of . .. , -;r:: • note of the issclividOs t. _4a so, who, d.6l . tiits , ' - ,4* say, the StLadct is icaliii. : 114 4 iiithe reams of the i r% Of I occasion / most psi that upon ths p d, sj al - hr as r4so simillillimemillilliniPli hv *Mkt ea 1 7 13414 eimPlainiar . theta , - teedengsa AO d i p ino gsMII **ever toot ' sigt am glad to.fial sent mode of Election, been " Mt " from ever y e ar° is My HatuFriodedt...... ebi1..... Lord Athos** ibe mover of the kr:lng . eneugh of the, brotbuti eaceptiog a few close boroughs. S rF. BURDETT confessed that he had hesitated Bill, stens, as a team for kit being "hied, that many, principle to atone for Of his friends,approved of the measure in part, - Inid ,alll the purposes of i whether he should address the House upon this q u ell of h 1 hl, of others, which he deemed the sirable (hear, hear). two or not, but his hesitation had not certainly arisen irn in uni indifference to the nuestinn. still less had it most beneficial and the least objectionable. .The suer- the case, as applied i _ _ _ __ tdinburgb sbottld be represented tbroegb in eiettire franchise of 93 individuals? He was content to put it on the broad principle so as to meet at once the elo quent objections of the Right Hon. Secretary. Hi must deny the inference attempted 'to be drawn that the metropolis of .the north was properly and suitablr . represented. In truth it iris *ell known, froE'the variety of Petitions which froth time to time Pere pre sented to that House on the subject, that the.Scoteti people were far from Content with the state of tfieif representation. It was a subject of regret with him that the Right Hon. Secretary of State stiould, in conse quence of the opinions which he had utterei in an early period of his political career,- feel• himself bound td oppose, for the sake of consistency, every motion treat should be made either partially or generally for reform in the representation. He felt at least one consolativm, and that was, that the question of Reform Was daily gaining ground, and he must be of opinion, that every Member of that House who thought with himself, that this great country was not fairly represented in•the Legislature, must be decidedly of opinion, that Edinburgh could not be fairly represented, when it was well known to the public and hit Majet ty's Ministers that the elective franchise was confined in that me tropolis to thirty-three individuals Air. ABERCROMBIE replied. He had been taunted with having nestled and settled himself in an English borough ; had • he chosen, he should not have been driven to such resource—he nigh., 'had he been one of the Right Hon. Gentleman's unshrinking Scotch men, represented a place in Scotland—( Loud . cheers). The gallery was then cleared for a division. The numbers were —For the motion, 97—Against It, 122—Majority against it, 25. WESTMINSTER ABBEY. Mr. HUME moved that there be laid before the House a copy of the Charter of Queen Elisab-th, ton ferrieg the Abbey on the Dean and Chapter. The Hon. Gentleman, in support of his motion, stated the opi. nions genet ally entertained, that the Dean and Chapter bad appropriated to themselves the funds originally allocated to the support of Minor Canons, who wete thereby deprived of their proper emoluments, and lit consequence their remuneration defended on the door Collections. Certain sums of mo: ey having brea regu larly appropriated to the Minor Canons, all he wanted to know was the source from which those sums:were derived, whether vested in lands, houses, or otherwise secured. h was also stated that several sums had been left by individuals to the Minor Canons; and if so, there could be no necessity to exact con tributions from the public for a purpose already served. He hoped the House would ascertain how far that necessity did or did not exist. Oa the motion Wing put, . Mr. Secretat y PEEL felt obliged to oppose it. When it wis recollected that he had offered no opposition to the Hon. Member's former motion, he was sure the House would be convinced that he had no wish to with hold any information that might be necessary; and he could not but think that the Hon. Member made an ungracious return for the facility with which he had obtai..ed the documents he before requited. He now wished the House to call upon the Dean and Chapter or Westminster, to show the deeds by which the) , held the property that had been for so many years in their possession. The Hon. MemSer asked also for Returns of the Lands, Houses, &c. appropriated to the maintenance of the minor canons—for a copy of the Grant of 1697 to the Cherie, on condition that, receiving the benefits of the exhibition of the Monu ments, they should keep them clean—for an account of Allowances and Income received by the minor Canons, Ste. and in whose pos session are the lands, houses, &c. from which the same are derived. Mr. HUME said, he bad not made any such motions. Mr. Secretary PEEL said, he read from the Orders of the House. Mr. HUME said, that he had as yet only moved for the copy of the Charter of (been Elizabeth. Mr. Secretary PEEL said, that the Hon. Member had torn sit the paper which contained that motion . front another pipet, which consisted, as he supposed, of the others. Mr. HUME spoke to order. The SPEAKER said that the interruption was itself disorderly: Mr. Secretary PEEL said, that if the Hon. Gentleman objected to his reading from the printed notices, he would refer to the book in which they were entered, and there he found them in the same words in which he had stated them. The Hon. Gentleman bad given no notice of his intention to withdraw any of those motions. Mr. HUME said be had ab intention sidoing so. Mr. Secretary PEEL.—Why then he had the autho rity of the Hon. Gentleman himself (if that was any authority) for saying that these were the subjects of his motion. He (M. Peel) had no other observation to make upon it than those he had formerly offered,that the rights of the Dean and Chapter of Westminster differed in no respect from those of the Dean and Chapter of any other place. If the Hon. Gent. doubted the right of the Dean and Chapter to take money for admission to those mo numents, he could refuse to pay it, and on being pre vented from entering the church, he could try the ques tion in any way he thought proper ; but he ought not to call upon the House to Make itself a party to any such dispate. The notice went on to call for retorna of the lands and tenements in the possession of the Dean and Chapter, and the title under which they were held. It was impossible that the House could sanction such an ihfringe ment of private rights, and be -did not 'Wonder that the Hon. Member had shrunk from the readintuf Such a notice. Mr. HUME said, the notice in the book had been entered from an abstract which he bad handed to the clerk at the table, and in which some alterations had subsequently been made. He thought that no Member in that House ought to be told by another, in the-promoting and improper manner which the Right Honourable Gentlemashad adopted, that he was bound by the precise terms of that notice. — (Cries of " Order.") • The SPEAKER-said, that it was a i*ntt* of %% tusk bet not of strict right that notice of a motion should bells**. When given wrong, Its elketwas to mislead *embers; sidgitee arose a suestion as to what party was to bbnie. He meant no particular allusion when he Wi t thawnone gave mere noticosof-enotient than the Hes. Member. and therefore he hoped••llf , WOOid sake late to advertise the. House of any insiinsce of inaccerecy whit& snigitrocccr. . Sir J. WROTTRELEY concurisid 'adds shr4l m Ofddesas, and gave the Motion his cordial support. Mr. ASHNURST spoke to the high character of the Dean sr Westminster, who had, out of his private pew; endoetedlhree Scholarships at Oaford. He epposedthe wades. • Sir JOHN NEWPORT said, that the Public had Slight to know upon what grounds tbe Dean and Chapter exercised the right of exclusion. He complained of ibe manner is which the returns made by the Dean and Chapter were worded..k. .I.tr The House was then cleared for a division, wiles do Dubber, appeared as follows: For the Resolution, 56 I Against it.-711. Majority against the Resolution, 16. -.- - On our return to the Mr. HUMBwas aweiNghis sss lbeelletive," for a Copy of the Grant of 1697 to the Melr o se eeedideethrekea their receiving the besefits of the ethibiden of the ineenimmesie they 'load keep them clean." Mr. CARTER supported the modem. Mr. Secretary PEEL had no wish to resist any just demand. As the Dean and Chapter alleged the condition, and said that they had not kept them all clean, bat that a part was kept is order at the public charge, he thought there was some ground far the Hawse to make the proposed inquiry, declaring his intention to oppose the twe other motions of the Henotirable Gentleman, he yeti& yet draw a distinction and agree to this. Mr. Secretary CANNING thought it advisable that the lion. Member for Montrose should postpone his motion until it was as certained whether the House bad any jurisdiction over the coesiact and funds of the Dean and Chapter of Westothater. Mr. HUME could not see what the Right Hop. Gent. was at- The objection which be (Mr. ebonies) bad raised, wee is deMplzfe opposition to that of his Right Hon. Colleague (Mr. flearitarl Peel.) That Right Hon. Gentleman might, however, have it m his power to account for the slistinetidn. Mr. Secretary PEEL said, that his objection was simply Se as certain whether the House had or had not any jurisdiction is the matter at lesuc.