The Sun. — London, England, 1846-02-17 00:00:00

PA I 'LW AY COMMITTEES. (YESTERDAY.) Sub• Committee No 1. THE LEICESTER AND nzpropio. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr. John Stapleton was called to prove that his property was not correctly shown on the plans and secttens. Mr. COATES admitted the allegation. :Several other allegations were sustained, after which Mr. BURKE proceeded with the petition of the Leicester and Swanington Railway Company. The first allegation was that there was no fixed point of junction shown on the plan where the proposed line was to oin the Leicester, and Swannington Railway. Several witneg,es were called on both sides and the Com mittee decided that no fixed point had been shown. Standing orders in this instance not complied with. THE LONDON AND SOUTH ESSEX. Mr. C. PARKES appeared for the promoters, and called the witnesses to prove the deposit of the plans, sections, books of reference, &c. Mr. Burke appeared on a petition against the Bill, but, in consequence of the absence of a material witness, the case was adjourned till twelve o'clock to-morrow. TZE RUGBY AND STAMFORD. Mr. Venables appeared for the promoters. The deposit of the plans, and sections, and books of re ference having been proved, the further proceedings were postponed till to-morrow. The Committee adjourned at half-past three o'clock. Sub-Committee No. 4. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) YORE AND CARLISLE. It is proposed by this Bill to connect the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway w►th the Great North of England line, by a line from Northallerton to Clifton, near Penrith ; also to connect the Newcastle and Darlington Railway with Lan caster and Carlisle, by a line from Auckland to 'Orton. The length of the proposed lines will be about ninety-five miles, and the estimated cost is 1,950,0001. The engineers are Messrs. Rundell and Harris, and the Parliamentary agents are Messrs. Burke, Pritt, and Co. The standing orders were complied with. - LANCASHIRE AND NORTH YORKSHIRE. The case of this Bill having been called on, the clerk to the Committee stated that a petition had been presented against the Bill. The CIIAIRBIAN was of opinion that such being the case, the Bill must go before another Gommittee. After some consultation, however, it was decided to call the party to the petition against the Bill, that is the East Lancashire Railway Company. _ _ _ - - - It appeared that the petition had not been properly entered on the votes of the House, as it did not describe the proposed Bill by its proper title. No one appeared on behalf of the petitioners, and the Committee decided to proceed with the Bill. There was a second petition from a Mr. Marley, in refer ence to which we understood the Chairman to say that he would not report on the consideration of the oppoSed parts of the Bill in the absence of the petitioner. The other particulars of the Bill were proceeded with. The object of the Bill is to unite the manufacturin g dis tricts of Lancashire, Yorkshire, and Northumberland. The projected termini are Elslark and Scorton. The length of the line, 47 miles 5 furlongs and 4 chains, with the Clitheroe Branch of 13 miles. The cost of construction is estimated at 1,450,0031. The engineers are Messrs. Hawksbaw and Gee, and the Parliamentary agents, Messrs. Dorrington and Co. • In the course of the proceeding Mr. Dyson appeared on behalf of Marley's petition. The CHAIRMAN believed that the objections in the petition applied only to the plans and sections. Mr. DYSON said that such was the case. The CHAIRMAN then decided that the Committee could not go into objections of that nature. The remaining portions of the case were then gone into, and the usual proofs were received ; but the case Iwas ulti mately adjourned till Thursday,to hear the opposition on the petition of the East Lancashire Company. HULL AND SELBY RAILWAY PURCHASE. The object of this Bill is to give power to sell the above named railway to the York and North Midland Company, to whom it had been leased some time ago. The standing orders were complied with. The Committee then adjourned. Sub-Committee, No. 6. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) BALLOCHNEY. This was the petition of the Edinburgh and Glasgow Rail way Company, who are the proprietors of the Ballochney Railway, for leave to bring in a Bill to make a railway about three miles in length, for mineral traffic, from a point on the Ballochney Railway, to the mineral fields near the Kirk of Shotts. The line was laid out by Mr. A. J. Adie, who esti mated its cost at 33,0001. One of the witnesses being absent, the Committee, at the request of the parties, deferred their decision. DIONILLAND /IND HIMXINTILLOCH (CHAPEL-HALL BRANCH). This was the petition of the Monkland and Kirkintilloch Railway Company, for leave to bring in a Bill to make a mi neral branch from their Palace Cray branch to the Chapel- Hall Iron Works. The cost of the line was estimated at 25,8001. The usual formal process having been adduced, the stand ing orders were declared to have been complied with. CALEDONIAN AND DUMBARTON JUNCTION. This was the petition of the Caledonian and Dunbarton shire Junction Railway Company, for leave to bring in a Bill to make a line from Glasgow to Dumbarton and Loch Lo mond, with branches to Helensburgh, Milingavie, and other places. The length of the line and the branches together is thirty-two miles, and the cost was estimated by Mr. Neil Robson at 590,0001. The Committee decided that the standing orders had been complied with, VITLSONTOWN, MORNINGSIDE, AND COLTNESS. This was the petition of the ,Wilsontovrn, Morningside, and Cultness Railway Company, for leave to bring in a Bill to make a branch of five miles and three quarters in length, from a point on the main line to Bathgate, the estimated cost of which is 61,000/. _ _ ... • The parties proved that they had complied with the stand. ing orders. CALEDONIAN JUNCTION. This was another petition of the Wilsontown, Morning.. side, and Coltness Railway Company, for leave to bring in a Bill to make a branch to connect tbeir line with the Edinburgh branch of the Caledonian Railway, the esti mated cot of which was 123,3741. The Committee postponed the case, to admit of the attend ance, of an important witness. The Committee adjourned at four o'clock. LAW Li TELLIGENCE. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Feb. 16. (Before Mr. Justice WicarrmAN.) BREACH OF PR - 03ILSE.-MARY ELIZABETH SMITH V. WASHING TON LORD FRRRERS. The'cross-examination of Mrs. Smith, by,.the ArronsE-r -. GENERAL (continued from our Afternoon Edi Lion of yesterday) —Amongst the articles mentioned as presents, there was a pink silk bonnet, sent on the 29th of June, 1844. That was after the time I was made aware that the other articles had not been paid for. All the bills bad been paid at that time. My daughter did not say where the bon net came from. I understood that it was sent by Lord Ferrers, from London. My daughter did not tell me about it until the bill came in on the following Christmas. I went to Ashby and paid for it. Probably 1 did make some inquiry about it, as 1 did not imagine it could be owing for. It was when the bonnet came that my daughter told me it was a present from Lord Ferrers. To the COURT—She told me before the bonnet came that • she expected a bonnet from Lord Ferrers from London. To the Arronstev-GEsusuat—Mydaughter knew she had done wrong. She dia. not explain to me _particularly about it. I showed her the bill, and said, " How is this?" and site made no reply. She did not say she had ordered the bonnet when I showed her the bill. She did deny having ordered it, or that it must be a mistake. She was conscious she had d , ne wrong, and said very little about it. Did she deny having ordered it?—She did. When the bill came I learned that the bonnet came from Ashby. When the bill came I went wth Mr. Hammel, the attorney, to Ashby. My daughter and I went to Miss Wyman's. This was about January, 1845; I said to Miss Wyman, "You have sent me a bill f,r a bonnet that I knew nothing of." Miss Wyman said Miss Smith had ordered it for herself; my daughter instaatiy denied she had ordered it; she said it must be a mistake, or "You must be mis taken in the person. " Miss Wyman probably said, " Miss Smith, if you would say that, you would say anything." I do not remember my daughter saying, if she stood there for hours she would deny it. Ido not remember _iss Wyman saying, " Oh, Miss Smith, I wonder you are dot afraid of being struck dead." She may have said it. I believe I did not say in the presence of Miss Wyman, that " it my daughter would own to the bonnet I would forgive her." I said, "my dear, if you ordered the bonnet, say so." She looked at me, but never said a word, and we walked out of the shop. About this time I said my daughter had re ceived a bonnet from a noble individual, and that there was a note in the box. Miss Smith opened the box. I saw the note, but Ido not know where it is now. It was a note pur- Porting to be from Mr. Devereux Shirley. That note was handed to M r . H amme l, the a tt orn ey. The ATTORNEY GENERAL asked for this letter, as it was . • produced on Saturday, b u t it cou ld no t be f ou nd f or a consider able time, and a good deal of confusion followed. Having been at length produced, it was handed to the witness, but she said it was not the one that came in the box. Did your daughtershe explain how that note came in the box ?—She did ;said that Earl Ferrers told her be would send her a bonnet from veniant Oslo so, but NVial;ondon; but he had found it incon d her to purchase one at Ashby, , and she did so, as she one e d told her papa and mamma that she was to have refused to do so unlre°ssin London • but that she trould write a note st a ti ng that it IMr. Devereux Shirley believed then that it had come lad come from Lond on . I London. Mr. Shirley gave Miss Smith the note to enels r s se h nl e in the box ; this is what ot the note at Ashby my daughter told me, and that irom Mr. Shirley; but in fact the noi)vedas not put into the de!euibvte inthyedaughter until it came into the hous . e. l ie =4 after I - put the note 'lnto the box muftis , to papa, She told me all this at and her went to pay for the bonnet. the bonnet is paid for ; but. I believe S A Y if I went to Miss Wyman's shortly after this, an d I may have have said that I did not pass the door without saying how sorry was that this had occurred ; I won't swear that I did not ask Miss Wyman's to say nothing about this story until the trial was over; but I said some words to that effect. Pro bably I might have said that I wished the Misses Wyman to understand how it was. I might have said to ahem that Lord Ferrers was to have sent my daughter a bonnet from London, but that be had not done so, but had desired her to c.reer one at the shop, and that Mr. Shirley had told .ny daughter to order it. lam not sure of this, but I might have said it. I don't recollect saying to the Miss Wymans that my daughter 'wets at her grandfather's, and that her father would not have her in the home. I inn certain I did not say that. I believe the paper now handed me to be in my daughter's handwriting. The witness was handed a third paper, which she said was not very like her daughter's hand writing. She was handed a fourth, which she said was her daughter's writing. She gave thesame answer to a sth and 6th. She then con; it:tied :—There were two handkerchiefs sent in lettsira. I seta the beginning of one of these letters; it he gan, with "Dearest Washington." This letter was posted at a Bworth, as my d aug ht er t o ld me t h at i t was t h e E ar l' s particular wish that letters for hint should not be posted at Appleby. The envelope now handed me - contained the two handkerchiefs in question e-lion. There was a letter written by Mr. Smith after thater of Lord F errers o f t h e 24 t h . tit - .;tine. I put was letter at in the office at Ashby it; welt. When is fetter posted respecting th e b to T l ida:l 3 ;r e This was before Mr. Court, there was smith's letter. My daughter at Lind Feirerli THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVEN tNG, FEBRUAItY 17, 1846. IMPERIAL PARLIAM NT. HOUSE OF LORDS, Monday, Feb. 16. The Lord Chancellor,took his seat on the Woolsack shortly after Five o'clock. THE CORN-LAWS. Lord CLARENDON presented a petition from the Borough of Musselburgb, in Scotland, praying for a repeal of the corn-laws, Lord RADNOR presented a great number of peti tions from different parts of the country to tfie same effect. MILITIA. Lord MONTEAGLE presented a petition nume rously signed from Leeds, praying the Parliament would not at this period sanction the calling out of the militia. was visiting at the Deans. of Bangor and it was at a hotel at Bangor we were to meet him. We stopped at Stafford, and as he did not meet us there, as m' daughter said it was likely he would, we returned back, loon I said not follow him. After we returned, my ghter w I would rot a letter from Sias Court to Lord Ferrers, which I read. I posted that letter at Tamworth. The letters my daughter got from the Earl she told me had been put into her hand by a man named Atkins and another named James. I have spoken in the course of examination of a Miss Neville. I do not recollect having shown her any of the letters pro duced in Court. I might have visited Mr. Neville in January, 1845, but Ido not recollect the precise date. The letters of Lord Ferrers were then talked about. I believe that Mies Neville then remarked that the writing was very like Miss Smith's, but I do not remember having said that the family had often been surprised at the similarity between the writing of my daughter and the letters of Lord Ferrers. I do not remember having said that the reason of the similarity arose 'from Miss Smith when young, having had some writing of Lord Ferrers in her possession which she had tried to imitate. Before sh went to school I believe Lord Ferrers sent her a great number of scraps, and pieces of poetry, but they were de stroyed afterwards. I saw the pieces of writing myself. I do not recollect having ever said that Lord Ferrers had had my daughter's handwriting, and tried to imitate it. I might have said when at Miss Neville's that the similarity arose between the two handwritings from Miss Smith having when young letters of Lord Ferrers' in her possession, and that she tried to imitate the writing, but I do not recollect it. I will not swear I never said so, but I have no recollection ofit. I was much excited at the time, as Mr. Green, the attorney, said we were all to be put in Warwick gaol. We were ac cused of being forgers, and I was too excited to think of a trivial conversation. I say again, Ido not recollect the coir. versation. I am a truthful woman, and wish to speak nothing but what lam sure of. The familiy noticed in some cases a little similarity, but were not surprised at it. I might have remarked it to Mr. Smith, but do not recollect it. We noticed some slight similarity in the letters, but not in the style of writing ; still we were satisfied the letters were of his Lordship's writing. I would much rather believe that Lord Ferrers had imitated my daughter's writing, than that my daughter had imitated that of Lord Ferrers. We certainly were sur prised at the similarity between the hand-writings, but the only explanation we could give was that I have already given. To Mr. Justice Wosurrstax—The correspondence did not begin till 1844. I believe my daughter never wrote to Lord Ferrers while he was abroad. I cannot explain why it is that the letters of Lord Ferrers were similar to those of my daughter, seeing that my daughter had not written to him at that time. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that perhaps this would be the proper time to make an application, which was to allow their witnessesto inspect the letters prior to their being put into the box, so that they might the better give their evidence on the subject. The witnesses on the side of the plaintiff had bad every opportunity of examining the writing before being called ; and it was but right the witnesses on the other side should have the same opportunity. Mr. MONTAGU CHAMBERS objected to the application, as unusual. He could not acquiesce. He was willing that the witnesses, when put into the box, should have the letters placed in their hands, and be allowed to say yes or no, as to their belief regarding the hand writing. At the suggestion of his Lordship, it was arranged that Counsel on each side should consult as to the course to be taken in this respect. His Lordship, however, thought the best course would be that the letters should be submitted beforehand to such witnesses as were to be called. That whatever parties were permitted to inspect the letters, should be put into the box and examined. Re-examined—Mr. Neville is an attorney at Tamworth. There were only some slight resemblances in the character; of the writing, but the style and composition bOre no re semblance whatever. The first time I believe that my daughter wrote to Lord Ferrers was when she sent him a note after he had got his hand hurt. Regarding the scraps and notes sent to my daughter when she was young, I am not aware that my daughter answered them, though she might have done so. The letter to which I have referred was posted at Derby, and was shortly after his Lordship returned from abroad. When the charge of forgery was made, we then de termined to commence the action, to vindicate our characters, as we were sure the letters were written by Lord Ferrers. The Learned Counsel then read another extract, to the effect that the defendant wrote to the plaintiff to prepare her trousseau; and that he did not like the plaintiff's cousin. The re-examination was then resumed—When Earl Ferrers returned from abroad he did not resume his position as pupil, but he renewed his attentions, after an absence of two years. I believed him sincere in his attachment. This witness was not allowed to go down until four o'clock. John Lees was the next witness—He said I am a farmer, and have been a long time a neighbour of Mr. Smith. I have been in the habit of posting letters for him. I posted one in the latter end of February, 1844, which Mrs. Smith gave me ; that letter was addressed to Earl Ferrars, Chartley Castle. Upon another occasion I posted a letter at Tamworth I saw a white handkerchief put into that letter, this was in March, 1844. There is a road near Mr. Smith's house which is sunk below the level of the ground ; you might go along this road without being observed. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—That is if nobody was there to see them ? Just so.—(Laughter.) Mr. Holdgate—l live near Liverpool. I was on a visit to Mr. Smith in June, 1844. He showed me a letter he had written to Lord Ferrers, and his Lordship's answer. Mr. Smith's letter was to the effect that he gave his consent to Lord Ferrer's marrying his daughter. Eleanor Holdgate—l am wife of the last witness. I was with him at Mr. Smith's, on a visit, in June, 1844. I saw Miss Smith write a letter, but I did not read it. She put it in an envelope and gave it me to post at Coventry, but I had not time, and I posted it at Leamington. I went with Mrs. and Miss Smith to Ashby. Mrs. Smith posted a letter on that occasion, but I did not see it. Ann Smith, sister of the plaintiff, a very pretty-looking young lady, apparently about sixteen years of age, was the next witness. She said I often saw Lord Tam worth at church in the spring of 1843 ; on one occa sion I was going along a walk, opposite my father's drawing room window, and I saw Lord Ferrers leaning against the chimney-piece. There was nobody in the room then. I saw my sister go into the room, and then I left. Upon another occasion, on the 9th of December, I went into the drawing room, and Lord Ferrers was there playing on the piano. I went out again and met my sister, she had some cake and wine. She did not give me any, but brought them to Lord Ferrers.—(Laughter.) I was told I should be whipped if I went there again.—(Laughter.) I knew Joseph Atkins. I saw him near the house when they had gone to Harrowgate. Cross-examined—l was thirteen years old last November. I did not lose sight of him. I always kept my eyes upon him while at church.—(Laughter). He went away, and was absent some time. It was my mama who said I was not to go into the drawing-room. She did not say why, but I guessed.—(Laughter.) She did not tell me Lord Ferrers was there, but I found out. I left my little sister in one of the gardens, and in passing the window I peeped in at the corner.— (Laughter.) When I saw my sister come into the room I ran away. Re-examined—When at church Lord Ferrers used to look at my sister.—(Laughter.) Susan Hopley, servant in Mr. Smith's family—ln Septem ber, 1843, Miss Smith asked me to put a letter in the post for her, which I did at Rngely. Cross-examined—Mrs. Smith asked me, about 12 months after, if I could get some of Lord Ferrets's hand-writing? She came to me, and wanted either me or my husband to get the writing. I didn't do so, but my husband tried, and couldn't get it, and then I wrote to Mrs. Smith. Re-examined.—l don't think I heard of the action when this application was made. John Page, labourer, and :Chelsea pensioner— I know Lord Ferrers and Miss Smith by sight. I was in a field at the back of Mr. Smitn's house in July or August, 1843, and I saw Lord Ferrers and Miss Smith in the field. They were walking side by side, and might be two or three yards apart.—(Laughter.) I was not near enough to see that they were talking. Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL—It is about two years ago since I did anything as a bailiff's follower. Re examined—l saw them a second time in the field. They were then four or five yards apart.—(Laughter.) The COURT—The distance between them appears to have increased.—(Laughter.) Here Mr. CHAMBERS applied to the Court to adjourn, SI3 Mrs. Perry, who was ill, could not attend until to-morrow. Mrs. Holdgate was recalled with a view to ask her to whom the letters were directed, which she had posted for Mrs. Smith, but the question was not pressed. The Court then adjourned at half-past five. WESTMINSTER ELECTION. MEETING OF TUE FRIENDS AND SUPPORT. ERS OF CAP rAIN ItOUS. Last evening a meeting was held in the British Coffee-house, Cockspur-street,. Piccadilly, of the friends and supporters of Captain Rous, for the purpose of making the necessary preparations for the contest which commences this day ; but very soon after the ap pointed hour for opening the business of the evening had arrived, it was announced that the meeting would be held in 'Willis's Room, and thither the assembled crowd rushed, and in a very few minutes the room was crowded to excess. At about eight o'clock the platform became filled with the supporters and friends of Captain Rens, who arrived about the same time, and was loudly cheered on making his appearance. Upon the motion of Mr. C. J. WOOD, M.P., seconded by Lord E. BRUCE, Lerd Femecis EGERTON, M.P., was called to the chair, amidst loud and general cheering. He commenced his address to the meeting by assuring his auditors that he had no wish to occupy their time •by making a lengthened speech. Neither did he wish it to be understood that he stood there with any view of exercising any influence he might possess as a Member of Parliament. He merely presented himself now in the capacity of an elector of the borough of Westminster, to call upon his brother electors to return to Parliament his friend Captain Roue, whom he could recommend to them as a representative worthy of their choice, though he had not the ability or the desire either to bribe or to bully.—(Cheers.) His Hon. Friend belonged to a profession of which he was an ornament ; a profession in which he had proved him self as 'mend to his country as any man belonging to any of the learned professions; and the fact of his now having been called into the sec . vice of the Crown in a new capacity, was an additional recommenda tion in his favour before an EngliSh constituency.—(Cheers) He (Lord F. Egerton) would state his opinions frankly and fairly upon those measures of the Government of which Captain Rous was a sup porter ; cad here let hint say that he was not in any way connected with the Government, and did not hold any office whatever under the Crown, and therefore it was a matter of perfect indifference to him whether the Government measures should suc ceed or not, except in so far as he regarded them as beneficial to the best interests of the country ; but this he would say for his Hon. Friend Captain Rous, that he was perfectly confident that no ap pointment could be made whichwas more desirable, and would prove more useful, than that of his Hon. Friend to that department of the Admiralty to which he had been appointed.—(Loud cheers.) He (Lord F. Egerton) would not detain the meeting by making a speech relative to his own opinions upon the great questions which now agi tated the country, because his sentiments upon these questions were already well known.—(Cheers.) He would, therefore, conclude by calling upon the gentlemen around him to propose the resolutions en trusted to them for that purpose. Mr. C. W. HALLETT then came forward and proposed the first re solution. In doing so he said, that in taking upon himself the task of proposing a resolution at a public meeting, he felt the embarrass met of his position; but how much more had his difficulty been enhancedvace on the pr esen t occa si on , when he remember e d th a t h e was Placed In the unenviable position of being compelled to follow their ',,. e h ar i r . .mal, a s v v i l n io had so ably and eloquently addressed them.—(Hear, Roos done stituents?—( ask, although g been selected to had changed his opinions propose this resolution, he would jipaiehumble individual, what had his Hon. Friend Capt. neldoral inlidowneasrersepuedcyt nearttat moment to forfeit the confidence of his con ,toauar, this was s at o C n a e pt o . f ßo tb u e s charges made against him • had been insinuated , but he would say, that when it this change in his against his Ilon. Friend that he had made present Ministry and to procure in order to find favour with the a base and unfounded calumny e, and unworthy would say that such was General De Lacy Evans was suppodrtuerrthy of the party by whom fact that Captain Rous delis.—(Cheers.) It was a well knownParliament upon this question, in a speech last session in which he stated his sentiments were ; but had not many etbesrttan very fairly wh a t Roes had reason to qualify their Opinions since gi en as well as C apta i n upon ques tion ? (Hear.) Though he (Mr. Hallett) was butu this individual, and therefore his opinions were not of much importance, humble still he would say that he h ad alwa y s hones t l y given ex.prssiontZ, them, and was as much opposed as any man to restrictive duties, while at the same time he was equally an enemy to radical and deStructive doctrines.—(Cheers and groans.) Ile was decidedly a supporter of free trade in all i ts branches, and it was as the advo cate of free trade he now addressed this meeting.--(Cheers.) There was only one other topic to which he would allude, and It a pp eared to b e which his Gallant Friend Captain Eons appeared to have one on on qituents and that was, that he had felled the good opinion of his eon.. Government.—(Great uproar and accepted office under the present clamour, amidst which the spe aker read the resolution entrusted to him to propose.) RAMIE CoeftßAsE, M.P., said, in rising to address the meeting, he did not mean to trespass very,much on their attention. But he her had stood on a begged to rectal to them the fact th at his fat former occasion for Westminster, and that his (Mr. Cochran's) name was not unknown to the city of Westminster.—(Cheers.) That name was a naval name, and as such it was independent of private consi derations or private friendship, and thereby they might understand what had interested him in Captain Rous.—(Cheers and noise.) He believed that a more able and a more honurable officer was not to be found than the Gallant Captain.—(Hear, hear.) Tie needed not to recal to them the circumstances under which he brought his ship across the Atlantic.—(Noise and cheers.) It had been very truly I remarked that a man gallant in one thing was gallant in everything; he did not believe the gallant Captain to be the man who could stoop to meanness in any one thing.—(Noise, and three cheers for Evans.) Mr. Cochran proceeded—The Gallant Officer told them that he had confidence in her ➢fajesty's Government.—(Confusion.) He (Mr. Cochran) would prophecy that days would come —days of darlc,ness and trouble—when many of those who spoke against Sir Robert Reel would regret that they had ever adopted that course.—(Sonie delay was here caused by the gesticulations of a ragged youth, exalted agairkst the opposite wall, and evidently haranguing in favour of General Evans.) As free traders, they asked always for fair play. He was sorry he did not see an instance of it there. He hoped they would but give him so much as they would claim in other instances themselves. But ashe had nothing more to say, he would sit down, atter seconding the resolution, trusting they would give the Gallant Gentleman their aid on the day of election. The CHAIRMAN then put the following resolution to the meeting, when it was carried by a large majority :—" That this meeting are of opinion that the conduct of Captain Eons in Parliament, and his at tention to the local interests of the city, entitle him to the confidence of the constituency at large." Mr. FREEMAN rose, amid much confusion, and said he did not imagine that in any one of the gentlemen there could be any indisposition to hear the remarks of a man like themselves. He saw many other gentlemen in the meeting who were advocates of free trade ; but, though advocating these princi ples, they refused to hear those who held the same sentiments. There could be no doubt whatever in the mind of a thoughtful man that at the present time he could not speak on any question so as to meet the views of a large assembls ; but he thought the least they could do was to give him a patient haring • and he, as an English man, demanded it. He did not mean to detain the meeting, but he would have his say, whether the meeting would hear, or whether they would disturb. A resolution had already been put to the meets ing, and a show of hands taken upon it, and it had been carried by a large majority. He thought, therefore, that it best became the mi nority to conduct themselves quietly. There was no doubt but that the movement which had taken place had disturbed the parties of this country, and these Were fast tending to annihilation. What were they then to do? Two parties had offered themselves candi dates for the city of Westminster —(Cries of " Roes "—" Evans".) He said it was no triumph which they sought; for the object which they (the friends of Captain Rous) had in view, was the country's good, and if no other object were attained by that great movement, notwithstanding that it would cause the dissolution of parties, and perhaps division between old friends, he was certain that that would be attained with incalculable advantage. Be did not calculate whether a man was of one party or of another, but whether the man was a faithful representative of the princip'es. The question ought not to be who was the man of the largest purse, or who was the man who could expend most words, but who was the man who would expend his best efforts in behalf of his country ; that was the question,—(Cries of " Rous," and confusion.) Mr. Freeman then moved the following resolution :—" That this meeeting pledges itself to use every exertion to secure the return of Captain Rens." Colonel Wools, M.P., rose to second the resolution. He said he cheerully came forward to discharge the task that had been imposed on him. It was not because he honoured the Gallant Captain's powers or his private worth, but because he was a supporter of the Minister of the Sovereign in the undertaking in which he had engaged,— ' (Cheers.) Into that undertaking the Right Hon. Baronet had not been driven by necessity ; his Sovereign had imposed it upon him It was a question which concerned the interests of the country ; it was one that ought to be attained by all parties uniting together for the common prosperity of the nation. It was a measure which considered all interests, and would benefit all; it gave scope for a fuller development of the powers of the nation ; it gave employment to an increasing population ; it unshackled their industry from the fetters which had bound it down. Yet those bonds had been the protection which some had talked of, and given to labour. They all knew what competition they had to contend with from the foreigner. That measure which Sir Robert had brought in, and his gallant friend in tended to support, gave them free scope for the use of their energies to the best advantage against that competition. It gave them, also, unrestricted trade in the food of the people, and he (Colonel Wood) heartily wished they might have plenty of it. Ile knew the agricul turists had nothing to say in their own behalf, except a repetition of their antiquated notions, for they could not see when a measure was really for their advantage. The gentlemen who had addressed them before him had told them under what circumstances the Gallant Captain had brought his slip across from the St. Lawrence without a rudder.—(Cheers.) He hoisted the union jack, spread the sail on the bdom, and set the ship's head for the British Channel.—(Cheers, and confusion.) Such was it at that moment with Sir Robert Peel. Left without a friend, he looked to the Gallant Captain, Captain Rous, and said—" I know you are the friend of my country, I will back you at the risk of anything.--(Great cheering.) (The Colonel, pointing to Captain Bons, continued) —lt is the same spirit; it is the very man.—(Great cheering.) Won't you take on with him ? Come to the aid of the Minister ; come to the aid of the gallant Captain, who, to support the Minister and his measures, says—" lam prepared to forfeit anything." He (Col. Wood) had seen that Minister listening that evening with patience to the pithless, uninteresting, dry, and musty arguments of the agriculturists, and hearing their taunts. He wished only that Ire heard their cheers. — (Cheers.) As that Minister was the Minister of the people—the Minister who wished to reconcile all interests in one common prosperity—agriculturists, manufacturers, merchants—he asked their aid to the Minister by giving their aid to his friend.—(Cheers.) He hoped they would give him their hearty support—(We will)—then the election would be won —(Checrs)—he knew it would, and that by the independent votes of the electors of Westminster. He seconded the resolution, and sat down. Captain Roos then came forward, and was received with deafening and prolonged applause, and it was with difficulty he was heard at all. He said he hoped the meeting would have the kindness to listen to him for a few moments, in order that he might explain the position in which he stood at present before his constituents. Much had been said against him, and therefore he was anxious to avail himself of this opportunity of explaining to the electors of Westminster the real position in which he stood in regard to them.—(Hear.) He had heard it insinuated that he had accepted office under the present Government from selfish motives. Now, it would be recollected, that last year, when there was a very strong opposition to some of the measures of Sir Robert Peel, he (Captain Rom) stood up in his place in Parliament, and voted in favour of the admission of Australian corn into this country upon the same terms as those upon which it was proposed to admit Canadian corn.—(Cheers.) The reason he did so was, that he recollected that the population of this country received an increase annually to the amount of 400,000, and . therefore it would be impossible for this country to provide food for so enormous a mass of human beings from its own resources, and consequently it would be necessary to look to other countries to supply the deficiency.—(Hear, hear.) This he had told to the Suffolk farmers, though they were not willing to listen to him ; but he convinced them that they could not quietly rest their heads on their pillows at night, so long as they continued to support a law which prevented this country receiving a sufficiency of food for its people.— (hear, hear, and cheers.) He also told the Suffolk farmers, long since, that it was his opinion then that the duty on foreign cons should be lowered, and therefore his constituents would recollect that his opinions upon this subject were not so new as they had been represented. How, then, could any man say that ha had changed his opinions, and voted with Sir Robert Peel upon this question merely because he wanted to get into office?—(hear, hear.) He could not be said to have come round to the views of Sir Robert Peel, though the old Tory papers had abused him for having dons so, and he certainly had fallen in for a large share of abuse in the Post, and the Herald, and the Standard.—(Cheers and clamour.) Now, with regard to his acceptance of office, he had but this explanation to offer. Four years ago, when the prasent Government brought in certain measures, be attacked them as unsuited to the wants of the Country. Was that the way to procure office?—(Loud cheers, and cries of "No, no.") He had invariably voted against the measures of Sir Robert Peel when he thought those measures were not calculated to be of service to the country, and one of those to which lie and his friend Col. Wood had given their most determined opposition, was a Bill which proposed to abolish vestries as they then existed.—(Cheers.) He had also given his most strenuous opposition to the con tinuance of the window-tax—(Cheers)—and surely there was nothing base in his having done that..—(Loud cheers.) In reference to the Church, also, he had taken a prominent part.— (Cheers.) There were no such things in the army or navy as sinecure situa tions, and he could not see why they should exist in the Church, and therofore he was opposed to them.—(Cheers.) No man had a greater respect for Sir Robert Peel as a statesman than he had.—(Cheers.) Ile admired him for the useful measures he had brought forward for the country, and on that account he would stand by him.— (Loud cheering,) That statesman had lost many of his Tory sup porters in consequence of his having brought forward these measures, and therefore it was that he (Capt. Rous) would support him, and not because of the miserable office he had accepted.—(Cheers.) Surely it could not be supposed that it was for the sake of this office he lead accepted it ; this must be quite apparent when it was recollected that in a few months there would be a general election.(Elear, hear.) He was therefore, then, warranted in saying that he Bad made this sacrifice for the public good.—(Cheers and confusion.) If in the year 1812 he had seen it necessary to give his support to the agricul turists, he had, within the last three years, seen so many chances take place in the prosperity of the country and the condition of the people, that he also, like many others, Oad changed his opinion. —(Cheers.) When he saw those changes passing before his eyes he was compelled to admit the utility of the measures intro duced to meet them, and therefore he could not be so lost to all feeling for the good of his country as not to support those measures. (Cheers.) Now, then, the question came to this : —Where was the man to be found who could carry out these measures ? Lord John Russell had attempted it and failed ; there was, then, ne other man in England who could do so but Sir le. reel.—(Cheers.) If, then, the electors of Westminster had received to support Sir Robert Peel, how could they better do so than by supporting him (Captain Roue) ?—(Loud cheering )-Ile had now been fbur years connected with the electors or Westminster, and he would like to know what measures .s Bring that time. he had lent his aid to which had ever ; erdved detrimental to the country ?—(Cheers.) Well, then, wnether victorious or beaten in this contest (and victorious he eeeav he should be) he had the pleasure of be ing able to say that while he had the honour to represent the city of Westminster, he had endeavoured to the fullest extent of his humble ability to be as useful to them as it was possible for a representative to be.—(Cheers.) The fate of the forthcoming battle depended upon themselves.— (Cheers.) In 1841 he . was supported by a proud aristocracy; but he now looked forward to the support of tic independent men of Westminster.—(Cheering.) He had found amongst the lower classes men of fine and noble hearts, and upon that he now relied, and if they returned him, they would find him always at his post, and discharging his duty to them to the best of his ability.—Great cheering.) Mr. CARTERWOOD hoped that the supporter's of General Evans would learn, from the manner in which the speakers there that eve ning had conducted themselves towards the opposing candidate, to go nod do likewise. He added a few observations in favour of the gallant Captain amid great confusion and uproar, and moved a vote of thanks to Lord Francis Egerton for his kindness in consenting to occupy the chair. With three cheers for Captain Rous, the meeting separated. COURT CIRCULAR. The Queen and Prince Albert took their accustomed early walk yesterday in Claremont Park His Royal Highness Prince Albert afterwards rode out on horseback attended by the Equerry in Waiting. The Hon. and Rev. C. Leslie Courtenay took his departure yester• day from Claremont. Their Royal Highnesses the Prince of Wales, Prince Alfred, the Princess Royal, and the Princess Alice, were taken out on ponies and for walking exercise yestetday in the pleasure grounds of Claremont. Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent visited her Royal High ness the Duchess of Gloucesteryesterday at Gloucester House. We are sorry to learn that the American Minister is still confined to his house by severe indisposition. Prince Castelcicala, the Neapolitan Minister, had an Interview with the Chancellor of the Exchequer yesterday, at his official resi dence in Downing-street. A deputation from.tbe Anti-Slavery Society - , consisting of Mr. Jos. J. Gurney, Mr. Samuel Gurney, jun., Mr. George W. Alexan der, Mr. Jos. Cooper, Mr. J. H. Hinton, Mr. J. Gurney Barclay, and, 1110! John Scoble, had an interview with Mr. Secretary Gladstone . yesterday, at the Colonial-office. - The Mexican Minister transacted business yesterday at the Fo rein-oflice. Mr. Fielden, M.P., had an Interview yesterday with the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Dispatches from the Governor of the Mauritius were received yes terday at the Colonial-office. Dispatches were alsa received yester day from the Lord ligh Commissioner of the lonian Islands and from the Governor of Malta. The Hon. Edward Stewart, Deputy Chairman of the Customs, and Mr. Higham, Secretary and Comptroller-General to the Com missioners for the Reduction of the Nation 11 Debt, had interviews with the Chancellor of the Exchequer yesterday. Dispatches were sent off yesterday evening from the Colonial office for the Governors of the West India colonies. ROYAL ASIATIC SOCIETY.—At the meeting held on Saturday last, a paper was read by Professor Boyle, on the culture of cotton in India. Experimental farms have been introduced and kept in cultivation for some years, but lately the Indian Government have engaged experienced practical hands from America, for the purpose of superintending it. The climate of the staturis in the Bombay presidency ap peared the most successful, being the nearest to that of th e Mississippi, In 1842 there were six hundred acres planted, in 1843 those were increased to three thousand, in 1844 there were six thousand, 'whilst it was calculated that last year fifteen thousand acres must have been in cultivation, and the estimated produce above a million pounds. The seed, instead of deteriorating, appeared to improve and resume its Mexi can character, and it was considered that this and the Mah ratta country might be looked upon for a future inexhaustible source of supply. It had been estimated that the cost of clear ing and conveying the cotton to the port of shipment would be under ld. per pound. ROYAL MILITARY ACADEMY.—A Board of officers of the Royal Engineers and Royal Artillery assembled on Sa turday, at the Royal Military Academy, at Wool w i c h, M a j or - General Sir I. F. Burgoyne, K.C.8., Inspector-General of Fortifications, president, and the following gentlemen cadets Royal Arthur Arsenal:--I.sn,ih ;6FrederickiWilliam virt C . having passed their examination in.a satisfactory manner, were P. Hutchinson ; 3. Edward M. Grain; transferred to the first, or practical class, studying at the * Ba ß rr e y lB 7.. James e C s h j a . r o le rm s e F ; . 4. Philip F. Miller • 5. 8. George H. Colomb ; 9. Au W. Hay; 11. Thomas H. 'larding;usus M. Lochner; 10. George son ; 13. Mervyn Stuart ; 14. James 12. Philip D. Marges chibald M. Calvert; 16. Philip Ra F ven D h . ii Street; 15. Ar chibald gentleman cadets entered the practical The ci above named afternoon. It is expected that they . Ivi lts! an Sa minetl, and, if found proficient, be appointed t be exa e commissions is April neat. IMPORTS FROM IRELAND. The NOBLE LORD, before sitting down, begged leave to give notice of his intention to move for certain returns, to which he expected the House would have no objec tion. They were as to the amountof the imports of grain into this country from Ireland. PROTECTION TO AGRICULTURE. The Duke of RICHMOND presented upwards . of 200 petitions from various parts of the country against the repeal of the present protection to agriculture, and praying that the. House of Commons be dissolved before any attempt was made todecide the question. The peti tions were from the counties of Wilts, Kent, Berks, and from a large meeting in-favour of agricultural protection lately held in Chelmsford, in E sex ; also petitions from Stockbridge, in Hampshire ; places in Wicklow, Berk shire, and Yorkshire ; also a petition from distillers in the south-east district of Scotland, from farmers and others in the counties of Somerset and Lincoln, all pray ing that their Lordships would not alter the present ex isting corn-laws, and also praying that the measures pro • posed in another place (House of Commons), which were calculated to cause so much damage to the agricultural and other great interests of the country, should not receive the sanction of their Lordships, in the event of the Bill being passed by the House of Commons. The Earl of STRADBROKE presented a number of petitions from different places (the names of which we could not catch) to the same effect. PECULIAR BURDENS ON LAND. Lord BEAUMONT rose to submit to their Lordships the motion of which he had given notice, to inquire into the peculiar burdens on land, the impediments which existed to the improvement on agriculture, as well as to inquire into the present system of Ex, ise duties. Although he understood that it was not the intention of the Government to oppose that motion, their Lordships might probably expect that he would enter into the reasons why he submitted so important a motion to their consideration, and why also those, with whom he had hitherto in general acted, refused to comply with a similar motion when moved by other persons. He had -ever upheld that peculiar burdens on land, and protection to agriculture, were matters very closely connected. They must regard both subjects from the same point of view. Either they must remove the peculiar burdens on land, if they attempted to re move the protection which agriculture enjoyed, or they must, in common justice, continue protection, if they permitted those burdens to remain. He found that he was fortified in this opinion by men whose authority was of considerable weight. He found that Mr. M'Cul tech, Mr. M'Gregor, and if he mistook not, his Noble Friend on his left (Lord Brougham), were all of opinion that there were peculiar burdens on land. The object of his motion was to inquire what those peculiar burdens were. If it were submitted to his choice whether the burdens of land and protection to agriculture should be removed, or both allowed to con tinue, he would have no hesitation in selecting the con tinuance of the burdens and the centinuande of protection rather than the removal of both, and he was influenced in coming to such a determination by national con siderations, by economical considerations, and by motives of a sense of justice to the colonies. He believed that the continuation of protection would be the most economical bargain that the country at large could strike with the agriculturists, if they granted a sum of money for general purposes, in which it was their desire- that all classes should equally participate. He believed it was for the advantage of the country at large that they should make an agreement with owners of real property to pay this large sum of money for these purposes, in considera tion that they should be allowed a duty on the importa tion on foreign corn. The motive on which he preferred this choice of the two was because he believed it would tend to make this country independent of foreign na tions, and at the same time encourage industry at home. He further believed that the adoption of that system had one great advantage, inasmuch as it would enable them to give certain other advantages to our colonies, and enable them to admit their corn at a lower duty than that imposed on the corn imported from other countries. But there seemed to be no longer a chance of having such a proposition as this submitted to them, and he spoke rather in anticipation of the possibility of protection being entirely done away with, because, had he not an ticipated such a possibility, he never should have thought of submitting such a motion to their Lordships. He might here as well state that the object he had in view was not to delay the consideration of the question of protection, because from what he had already stated he thought their Lordships would see that he considered the investigation of the peculiar burdens with the inten tion of equalising them as the consepience of the repeal of all duties there, as a measure by itself. Having thus, he trusted, explained the motive and reasons why he selected that moment for submitting his motion, and by implication shown the motives which induced those with whom he was associated for refusing to grant it on a formes' occasion, he would proceed with as much brevity as he could to consider the peculiar questions which he thought the Committee must take into their considera tion. In speaking of those taxes which were raised from real property, he wished to draw a wide distinction be tween the two classes, into which he intended to ar range them. In the Poor-law Commissioners' re ports he found twenty-four distinct rates enume rated, but the only classification of them was this—that ten were raised on the basis of the poor-law; 8 raised in practice, though not in law; and 6 raised on other bases. The operation of the law was, that they were raised from property and practice. The distinction which he wished to draw was this—that he wished to distinguish those which were only for local purposes—which only interested those people for whom they were raised, and thOse in the immediate vicinity. Now he wished to make this distinction between those taxes and those rates which were imposed for general purposes, and those taxes and those rates which were im posed for peculiar purposes — the one being borne for the 3 - , and the other only for The taxes which designate for local I b ihe e e n , e aw fi do t rua o in f dt t a h g e e w o h f o a le p c a o r m tie m ul u a n r it district. purposes were the 2rainage rates4the sewers' rate, and the rate for the rural police, and he should no more think of imposing the ex penditure for the purposes of these rates upon the com munity at large than he should think of imposing the especial rates for towns upon the rural population ; as, for instance, he should no more think of imposing the rate necessary for the improvement of the marsh lands in the East and West Ridings of Yorkshire, on the inhabitants of towns, from the peculiar burdens of the agricultural residents, than he should think it ne cessary- or just to impose the burdens which had to be borne by the residents in cities f or p ecu li ar purposes, from which the rural pop u l a ti on de rive advantage. The rates which The were es particularly imposed he should the paving rate, the nanecdesthsaors3e, foroth other particular m ode o : e dri n evse e i t .-n e nao i t n e habitants of towns we re mposed bt lig i r h d t e i n a g s l r r a h t i e e , h t h a e , er water a t ra a t l e l , life of the inhabitants of towns ; these were what he called the peculiar burdens of towns, and he should no more think of impos ing them upon the inhabitants who were charged with the cultivation and improvement of the marsh lands of the . East and West Ridings of Yorkshire than he should think of imposing upon them the expense of affording a better supply of water to the inhabitants of Exeter. It was usual for these rates to be imposed by the inha bitants of towns, through the agency of public meetings, called by the inhabitants themselves, and ratified by a special act of those inhabitants. Now the burdens imposed upon land for peculiar pur poses aro the rate for drainage, the dike rate, and the rate for the support of the rural police. These rates were for particular . acts, in which the rural population were specially interested. But there - were other rates which were imposed for general. purposes, such as those for the maintenance of the poor, public security, and the support of the ad ministration of justice • and without protective duties he would no more think of imposing them upon land alone than he would think of imposing them upon the f undholders or upon any other particular body in the State. The maintenance of the poor-rate was an object of pecu liar interest to all classes, whether manufacturing or agricultural. He trusted that he had said enough to convince their Lordships that the maintenance of the poor was a national and general object. If the militia were called out, it was not for the purpose of defending the mere acres—it was not for the purpose of defending the capitalist—it was to defend the country generally, and, therefore, all classes were equally interested in paying the militia rate, which was made for the pro tection of every person, and not of peculiar individuals. Thus, the rates for the maintenance of the poor, the de ft nce of the country, and the a dministration of justice, were common to all, and equally paid by all, cud were distinguished from other rates levied for less general purposes. He wished to see how far the relation between real property and every other kind of property extended, and he wished to see the relative position of landed pro perty and property that consisted of houses. The poor rate was originally founded on the same basis on which most other fates were founded. -It was not real property alone that was liable to be rated for by an Act of Elizabeth. Every man was rateable according to his means and ability, whether his income was derived from land, from trade, or from funded property. That had since degenerated, and now, by the law of the land, only real property was liable to this tax. He would wish to know the effect of this law on the capitalist, who embarked his money in trade, as distinguished from the effect it bad on the agricultural community. IF a person invested his money in building a mill, he would be rated according to the rateable value of the lie would have t o hi re the mill, and the mill would he merely rated according to its rateable value , and - not at its rack rent, as in some eases land was. It would only be rated at two-thirds, or one-half, as in the county of Westmoreland. There land was rack-rented, and houses were rated two-thirds, while , mills were only rated one-half. That was the way this great capitalist contributed to the poor- rate, yet he made vast sums of money, for he collected from the entire neighbourhood far and near—from the agricul tural districts—able, healthy labourers, capable of con tinued exertion ; and unless the manufacturer received some check in his trade, his profit would go on, in creasing. Tileq what did he do ? He dismissed those persons by hundreds and thousands, and they were thrown upon the agricultural districts, which were obliged to support them. The capitalists derived the profits of their manhood, and the agriculturists sup ported their age. Now let them contrast this with the operation of th law upon the farmer. The farmer had no choice whatever, he was bound to employ those men or to increase the rates, and many farmers he knew in his own district employed a great many more labourers than the purely economical working of the farm required. That was the difference between himself and the capitalist, but let a glut come on the trade of the towns of Leeds or Manchester and the labourers would be obliged to re turn to the rural parishes, where the farmer was obliged to contribute to their support, and where he could not derive much b3nefit from their labour, because their pur suits had been confined to manufactures, and these were, therefore, fitted to cultivate the soil. This was the diffe rence he drew between the effect the taxes had on the capitalist and the farmer. He would now proceed to show how it operated between land and houses, or, rather, he would allude to some of the deductions which had been made from figures, which appeared in regard to difference of lands and houses, as placed in the report of the Poor-law.Commis stoners ; but he might, in a parenthesis, state that, in is view of the case, - the difference was not between land and houses, but between the proprietors of real property and the rest of the community. It seemed that in the year 1826 the land paid at the rate of 69 per cent., while houses paid in the proportion of 26 per cent., whereas in the year 1841 the land paid in proportion 52 per cent., while houses 1a d in the ratio of 37 per cent. In this statement it would appear that the bur dens on land had gradually been reduced, while those imposed on houses hid increased. But to this he would answer, that those whose eyes•were open would see that there had been between the two periods referred to, a gradual increase of towns and villages, thus in creasing the number of houses and decreasing the quan tity of land. Every day the number of houses was in creasing, while the quantity of land was decreasing, the latter being taken up by railroads and new towns. They saw day by day that which was formerly field ground used for the erection of houses, or used up for ether purposes—taken up for railroads er objects of a similar kind. This showed how it was that houses in. creased and land diminished, and explained the ap parent discrepancy between the two /et trns. He might illustrate the point by one or two strong instances. At Newcastle there was an extensive parish which formerly was land, but now it was occupied by a new town. He would also refer to Hrighton, which formerly was a fishing village, whereas now the houses had so much increased, that it had become a great town. There was another point to which he would refer, while speaking on this subject. It had been said that houses were perishable property, and that therefore they ought not to be rated so high as landed property. He was willing that this should be so, and he would take care on a future occasion, if the free-traders used it as an argument, to meet them with their own weapons. If perishable property was to be fa vourably considered, what was more perishable than the farmer's capital—that which depended upon the season, which might perish from a decay in the seed or a blight in the blossom, which a thunder-storm or any other destructive operation of nature might annihilate. He would say to them, do not use this argument, or he would tike good care that it should be made to tell on behalf of the great question of protec tion.—(Hear, hear.) The issue would show how it would befriend the cause of agricultural industry. He would further say, let them look at the oppression of the poor-laws—he referred to that part of the system re latiag to settlement. To the old law of settlement, he had an utter objection, as it operated most in juriously to, the agriculturists without doing any real good *to the manufacturer.—(Hear, hear.) What happened when there was a sudden check in the demand for manufactures? The labouring artisan re turned to the rural districts, and when the demand for manufactures returned there the manufacturers could with difficulty find men to work their mills, while the rural districts were overcharged with paupers. This had occurred lately in Manchester and in Nor wich. Their Lordships might rely upon it, that if they adopted free trade in corn, they must apply the same principle to the labour market, and the first step towards that must be the abolition of the present law of settlement. The law of settlement made the labourer a bondsman to his parish, and it prevented him going into the dearest market to dispose of his labour. To this part of the poor-law system he trusted they were ap proaching an end. He had alluded to this matter in consequence of its having been reported to be the intention of the Government to offer as a compensation to the agricultural interest an alteration of the law of settlement. That alteration, even if it should be carried out to the extent of Sir James Graham's Bill of last year, would not be satisfac tory. But he believed that the repeal of the corn-laws would be carried, and then the proposed alteration in the law of settlement would fall to the ground.—(Hear.) The present measure proposed by the Government was most objectionable. He considered that making a resi dence of a few years the means of obtaining a settle ment would lead to very enormous results. The mea sure would have a tendency to force women likely to give birth to children from one parish to another, in order to get relieved from the burdens of the chil dren born there, and as to an industrial residence of a certain number of years, as being the means of obtaining a settlement, he considered tha.•, measure to be impracticable ; it would be too heavy a burden on the towns. He believed that in time of a sudden check in trade, when hundreds , were thrown out of work, the towns were scarcely able to support them selves. He thought the measure would be no compensa tion 'Whatever, the only remedy was to get rid alto gether of the law of settlement. His -Lord ship then tattled to the highway rates. He maintained that the highways were as much for the be nefit of the town as for the country, through which the road passes. Indeed there were cases where two towns formed the termini, and were the only parties who derived any benefit from it. They are of little use to intervening country accommodation, and bridle roads are used by the farmer ; he has little or no business on the highway. He had had an account taken at the several tolls of the number of vehicle's which passed through, and the result had been that the majority belonged to the inhabi tants of the towns at the different extremities. He would allude incidentally to the question of tithes. He did not, howeve-r, consider the tithes were a burden on the land.—(Hear hear.) He did not wi s h to be misunder stood upon this matter. Previous to the commutation of tithes they were a burden upon the cultivators of the land. They objected to laying out their money upon land, as they did not wish that the benefits of their labours and enterprise should be applied to other persons. Since the passing of the Tithe Commutation Act, tithes did 'riot intefere with the cultivator of - the larid, •- as by the previsions of tho Act :, they , were constituted - a certain debt upon the property itself. That was merely looking at the question in the light of buying, selling, and barter. The produce of the soil was the same, and produced the same to the occupier as if the tax did not exist at all. It merely reduced the value of the fee simple. He looked upon the land-tax and the titho in the same point of view as charges upon the land. He considered they were merely charges upon the land, but did not interfere with the production of the agriculturist. He looked upon the tax as- he did upon indirect taxes. In France, where land was sold under the in direct taxation, the loss sustained was borne by the seller, but it did not fall upon the farmer. This kind of tax diminished the value of the land in both countries. He would pass over one or Iwo points which he intended to refer to, as he did not wish to trespass on their attention much longer, and he would come to the last point to which he wished to call their attention —he meant the malt-tax. It was said that that tax was no burden on land, but he believed that this was an erroneous statement. The tax he admitted was equally paid by all, but that por tion paid by persons who were consumers of beer, &c., fell in the end upon the agriculturist. In addition to this, how ever, he would point out the direct amount of duty which interfered with the agriculturist. It interfered with the agriculturist to the extent of the barley to which the tax amounted. If the tax, therefore, did not exist, the barley would be increased to that amount, and the agriculturist would be so much benefited. If any proof of this were wanting he would refer to the circum stance that, notwithstanding the increase of population of late years, the amount of duty did not keep pace with it. That was the burden, but that was not the only hard ship—that was the amount of the burden, but the hard ship went still further—and by not allowing him to use his barley as he likes for other, purposes, they placed him in the same position as they would a manufacturer, if they were to say to him, " You may manufacture cloth, but you - must not wear a coat made from it." They defied, they prevented him, from using the barley produced by his own soil. That I was a serious burden, in addition to the one he had named, and he could give a great many authorities— M'Culloch and others--but he considered it unneces- 1 nary, because when the duty on printed cottons was re pealed, there was a great increase in the trade in that article, and he held that a similar result would ensue if the duty were taken off malt. There was another article of Excise which he thought particularly heavy on the owners of real property, and which, if it were not re-- quire) for the purp , •su of creating a portion of the revenue, would be' a great advantage to the proprietors of land--he meant the article of hops; but if they came again to the general taxation' of the country, he wished to know what portion of it the agricultural body was exempt from? They were exempt from the Cus toms' duties as they contributed as much to them as any other body cf the community; they also consumed and paid duty upon innumerable articles which paid cus toms' duty. From what taxes then were they exempt ? They paid the Post-office and stamp duties ; the stamp duty for the transfer of property fell peculiarly heavy cn them, and was so enormous that he considered it one of the greatest hardships under which any p otion of the community laboured at the present moment.—(Cheers.) And he must say this, that if there was a subject which might obtain a moment's attention from his Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack it was this ; and if be would suffer him for a moment, he would say if there was a department against which the agriculturists had reason to complain to the Noble Lord, it was the enormous duty which they were thus compelled to pay—(Cheers) —and he had especial reason to complain, because in all the reforms which had taken place in which the portions of the community participated, care was taken to con tinue the burdens upon land.—(]Tear.) And again, when the law relating to the transfer of property was carried by the Noble Lord, it was found of such a nature as to be a difficult matter to get a conveyancer to adopt it, and in thousands of cases it was impossible to transfer property without being obliged to pay for six or seven sheets to an attorney. Then how long had they left the question of the registration of des ds unsettled? In every other country conveniences for the purchase of land were so great compared with those of this country, as to cast a blot on this country, and to induce every one to do all in his power to obtain some alteration in it. He would, before he concluded, refer to that which his /lon. Friend intended to add as an amendment, and he would wish to know what were the numerous exceptions proposed in that amendment. The legacy duty was cer tainly a case in point, and he would allow it to be fair that it should be exempted. Certain property belonging to the agriculturists was exempt from insurance. • The farmer's property, such as stacks ; &c., was from its nature exposed to danger, and that property was not to be se cured by insurance. He was sorry to say the danger was increased in consequence of the very violent language sometimes addressed to the labouring people. The per sons who addressed it to them did not mean to do the mischief they did—they were emissaries from others, who were not aware of the high tone they adopted. He, for one, when he used to read the strong• language made use of, used to remark:—" There will be some mote stack-burning in the district." He had no peculiar ob jection to strong language ; he thought that it sometimes added to the interest of the debate, and he was perfectly indifferent to the hard names which were heaped upon the agricultural body, of which he was a member. At the same time, lie felt that he had not terms strong enough to use in condemnation of the violent language which sometimes led to so much mischief in the country. The Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government had brought forward certain measures which he intended as a compensation for the withdrawal of protection fro in land. He would sty that these• measures were no compensation, and if they did give any, the difficulty of ascertaining the benefit it would confer would be enormous, as they would have to ascertain the precise loss which the withdrawal of pro tection would cause, and the precise gain which the diminution of taxation would aford to the English farmer. He would then turn to another question, and he theught that if it could not be shown that the impositions on the protection of corn in foreign countries were commensurate with the imposition on real property in this country, they would fail to show that British-grown corn - was in a condition to compete with foreign corn. He had seen some attempts to render this assertion a fact to the minds of the people, but he thought it would be extremely improbable that any such attempt should succeed. If they were to take the whole amount of the taxes imposed upon towns, or what were properly called civic rates, and would compare them with the communes or department districts in . France, they would find that taxes imposed in that country stood as five to four with those which were laid on the inhabitants of cities and towns here. This was no fair comparison with the impositions in France, but they would find that it was not quite so high as that in Eng land.—( Hear, hear.) That was not• the way to put the case—they ought to take the amount of costs imposed for realising the produce of one hundred acres of land in one country and the amount of costs imposed for obtaining a hundred acres in the other country, and if they could show the amount was the same they would make out a good case. But by this mode of calculation they would find that in • England the cost was nearly double that in France, that in the German States it was more than in that proportion, and that in Turkey and some parts of Russia it only bore the proportion cf two in a hundred. It was even notorious that Great Britain was taxed in a far greater degree' than in any other foreign state, at least in Europe. He had now come to his conclusion and he felt compelled to say a • few words with respect to him • self. He had always conceived that the system of protection was absolutely required by the peculiar burdens imposed upon land ; yet, if he found the continuance of that imposition was con trary to the tendency of public opinion—that it wan likely to raise one class in opposition to another, he should feel it his duty to refrain from further opposition to the measure, and instead of wrapping himself up in a sulky humour, and aggra vating the evil of domestic schism. he would endeavour to pacify the conflicting feelings, and he trusted his Noble Friends would use their powerful influence in prevent ing that hostile disposition and unnecessary difference which might arise between the manufacturer and farmer. The Noble Lord then continued—My Lords, I have never joined in the abuse of the Right Hon. Baronet at the head, of her Majesty's Government. I believe in the sincerity of his convictions—l believe that he thinks he is doing for the best in the measure he proposes. I respect his sin. cerity—l respect his courage. But this I will say, that if in the present Parliament he carries thiS measure, it will not be the triumph of opinion, but the triumph of par tisanship—l say, not the triumph of opinion, because he will have carried it against the opinion of the country, as declared at -the last election ; he will have carried it against the' opinion of the House of Commons, as declared in various divisions ; he will have carried it • against the opinion of the House of Lords, as also delared on numerous divisions ; but lastly, and above all, he will have carried it in defiance of the opinion of a majority of the Cabinet.—( Great cheering.) I say, my Lords, that I. shall submit to the triumph of opinion. Let . the Government look to that point ; let them appeal to the country ; let them ask what the opinions of the country are ; let them follow that up by securing a majority of the opinions in the House of Commons, and again in this House, and I myself will no longer offer a factious opposition to the measure.—(Cheers.) I believe that then your Lordships will no longer oppose it ;. and if that shall be the case, it will be in the fullest sense a triumph of opinion, but as it now stands it is merely an able manoeuvre of party politics.—( Great cheering. ) Lord BROUGHAM rose to second the motion, but was called to 'order by the Marquis of LANSDOWNE, who said that in that House it was not necessary that any motion should be seconded. On the question being put, Lord BROUGHAM said that he wished only to speak to their Lordships a very few words, in answer to his Noble Friend who had made mention of his name in connexion with the opinions he had exprossed in 1820. Far from differing from the motion of his Noble Friend, he (Lord Brougham) considered that the burdens he had enumerated fell exclusively upon the land, and he went even further, for he was very far intleed from taking hie views on the subject of the tithes or land-tax. Ile did not admit, with the Noble Lord, that the land-tax or the poor-rates were not peculiar burdens. He did not wish to enter upon the subject to-night, there being no opposition to the motion of the Noble Lord. He would not therefore follow that Noble Lord, or enter upon the discussion, as the consequence would be to anticipate that which would be brought under their Lordships' consideration in a short time. It was not his desire to bring about a foregone conclusion irtantici pation of the inquiry which must shortly take place. To enter upon the discussion now would be to forejudge the labours of the Committee. He would go into 'Committee, though he still entertained the opinions which he held in 1820 and 1822 re specting the burdens upon land. He differed with the Noble Lord in a considerable degree. He thought that the burdens on land were not only greater in some respects than he had represented them, but also there were burdens in some material particulars which bad not been referred to—still, though admitting - the greatness of these burdens, he did not agree in the conclusions drawn by the Noble Lord, namely, the proposition that the proper mode of compensation was by taxing corn by imposing a duty on the importation of foreign grain.—( Hear, hear.) He would not anticipate the corn-law debate by snatching a debate on the question before their Lordships. The question of the corn-laws would be brought before them properly, timely, and regularly, as soon as the Measure came from the other House. He must say.in the present inquiry he greatly lamented the leav ing out of view, in his opinion, the greatest of 411 the exclu sive burdens of land. What he referred to was the position of the landowners and farmers, which was different from all other kind of employers. They had not the power of going into the labour market, and selecting the cheapest labourers and workmen. The manufacturers had amongst them none of that patriarchial relationship which existed in the agricultural district. They could turn off their work men in a day, whether they had been in their service a year or ten years. They could tarn them off at any time if they (the manufacturers) were able to get better and cheaper workmen. It was not so with the farmers—half the labourers they employed were employed tr„on what be ( Lord Brougham) called the patriarchial relation, and they often em ployed a great number of workmen when they might procure a supply of labour at half the price. The obliga tions of the poor-law did not alone impose this, but it arose from a feeling of attachment, to those who had long been engaged in the service of the farmers in the cultivation of the soil. No one felt stronger than he did the force of this particular burden. When a Noble Lord died he very often left eighty thousand pounds or ninety thousand pounds of per sonal property, on all of which he paid probate and legacy duty. One word with respect to the stamp duties, to which his Noble Friend had referred. There never was a greater error than supposing that the late improvements which had taken place in the law were not beneficial to the landed interest. What did they think of the abolition of fines and recoveries? He, him self, knew one landowner who had saved between 5,00 e/. and .6,000/. by,the change, and• he had krown another friend who had delayed his recoveries until after the Act of 1832 passed, by which he gained a large amount. Then there was the change in the law respecting leases. Instead of ten sheets for a lease, only half a sheet was now'required, and instead of ten skins, only halt a skin was required. There was no additional stamp-duty non that ; on the contrary there was a large reduction, and this reduction it was which made many persons doubt whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer Would not oppose the chang e . He did not, however think it is duty to do so. He (Lord Brougham) certainly thought the landed interest had a right to complain of the stamp duties, perhaps more than the ot herexclu sive burdens. It was worse than the alcavala of Spain. The stamp duties pressed most heavily upon mortgagers, for the mortgagee might, at any time, say to the mortgager " unless you raise your interest you shall change your securities, which will cost 10,000/. or 12,0001." He (Lord Brougham) hoped that lie would not live long before he saw the tax on the alienation of property replaced by a tax upon succession. • Lord DACRE ( whose remarks in the opening part of his speech were inaudible in the gallery.) stated that he conceived protection to be giving a certain advantage to some particular application of capital, or giving some encouragement to trade, or to some particular enterprise, which might be considered of particular advantage to the country who granted this protection. To this protection it was that the agricultural interest lay claim. He considered, from the great improvements which had been made, the facilities of communication, and the increased appli cation of the capital of this country, and from the statistical re , turns which had been made to this House, that this kind of pro tection should be removed from the agriculture of this country. .(Hear, hair.) He considered also that protection was of service to maintain the -balance or equilibrium of the country, when from circumstances of taxation or some other cause, the level of the application of capital had been destroyed.' That level has been destroyed by the protection which has been afforded to personal property beyond all bounds of reason or defence, He would not enter into detail, but would take his stand on the broad basis of the injustice which had been done to the country by the imposition of a grinding property- tax, imposed upon the country in the shape of a poor-law. Justice should be done to the farmer by the removal or equalisation of such a press of taxes.—( Hear, hear.) He felt convinced that the agriculture of the country was equal to compete with the agri -Iture of the world. If they were granted equal tax s, a free application of labour—( Hear, hear)—and an equally free disposal of the products of that labour.—(hear, hear. ) The Noble Lord then went into some statistical details relative to the valuation of real property, and proceeded to say that a great portion of taxation fell upon one-fourth of the property of England, to the exclusion of other property, which was as well entitled to be charged. Such was the position of the real property of England. What he wanted, therefore, 'was equal taxation., and if that were carried out, and no undue proportion of taxation placed upon real property, the agricultu rists of this country would be able not only to contend with, but to overcome the foreign competition. .It was not from inadequacy, on the part of the owners of real property, to meet the demands which were made upon them under the existing laws, that they sought their reduction or abolition, but a deep sense of the injury which would be in flicted upon them, by withdrawing a portion of the taxes to which other portions of the community were subjected, whilst those peculiar to them, and to no other parties, were continued.— ( Hear, hear.) There was another subject to which lie wished to refer. Hundreds and and thousands of persons had established themselves into a combination, and although he did not like to express the words, he could not forbear saying that it was an unconstitutional combination, and as an old friend of the privileges of Parliament for half a century, he could not too strongly denounce the attempt which those persons were making to control Par liament—to control the freedom of election, and to obtain the nomination of counties, and this, too, after the comp,ete refer., which the laws relating to the election of Members of Parba a n d had undergone, and when they were aware that the ir ri g • their elective franchise were derived from that very ref ' .3 tau _re, e When he saw all this he hoped they would resist a n y In oble which were forced upon them by these persons.—(•l 'ble ia Lent, during the whole of his address, was hardly audi nos the gallery, but during this part only detached could be caught.) Then with respect to th •duty. There had been no consumption of malt ;e !' ;e pared with the increased population, which he consitud• was an argument in favour of a modification of thosel.tifo't Malt was a comniodoy which the agriculturist con lo w 1 4 ., apply to the purposes which were most available f out the fiat of the Exciseman, and without ea1t,.1 . ) as duty of 30 per cent. on what he had produced.— 11 If foreign timber was imported into this country at a (rtetodtteeer-, duty, it would be an unfair competition with English g e the grower of which had been liable to increased tax,trreuigl, consequence of it. So it was with English wheat. r ihep ro. wheat would be brought in, duty free, to compete with . _ we , duce•of the English farmer, which had been rated for te ha j tax and every other tax to which property was liable. ti t ; 2 ,y not intended to trespass on the time of their Lordshir rart ber, length, nor did he intend to enter on the subject mg ' w eed but he certainly thought that before protection was re crbe all these points should be taken into consideration' ttlideo Noble Lord here made some remark referring (as w e tbv stood) to a speech of his that had been misrepresented,,teel spoke in so low a tone that it was quite inaudible in thegc7.lo He had there an extract of a speech delivered at a; the garden on the 18th of December. The extract sees fl e ijeol T;mes, and he (Lord Deere) had taken measures to al i . t heo whether or not it was correct. The Noble 1 ,0 7.,. fat read the extract which was, as near as we could b_eS d ple the Noble Lord was scarcely audible—" I hope that th! e l' a - v erf will bear in mind how great a terror has been created be ' h e wou ld name of 40s. freeholder, a power lately creatrd, Oslo eventually humble the proud aristocracy to the dust. mid i ? irg said this, he would he grieved to imagine that all . i t eoet ter of that country would allow Parliament to sepal:at:4ol int 0 1 passing some measure to restrict this with the Constitution. —( Hear, hear.) As reformer, he recollected the creation of the forl ie ), tbq freeholders of Ireland, and the repugnance with wi' d , p elle: had passed that measure ; necessity, however, ha- "... a t al. them. He did not, however, wish in any way to regf i b e te i right of voting, either in county or borough, providieieve were conducted on constitutional principles . He be " pee , e 1; all diffiulties would be removed, if some arrangement ro pem tered into to equalise taxation, and so secure the of the country. t , to t he &lien • Lord MONTEAGLE rose to move an amen b e be , motion of his Noble Friend. That amendm ent, tet e lieved, would not meet with any opposition either fr i ll i e r side' ble Friend or any of the Noble Lords on the oullidoe He begged here to say, he would be sorry to take Noble the doctrines which had been laid dawn by the ' ci t y f e t e (Lord Beaumont). He did not wish to anticipa !e dues e, of the inquiry, but he must pr o test against th e , r e laid down. His Noble Friend had addne House in a fair and candid manner, en" e abl e) ' made a series of admissions on the ie si; There was one material point it which ° tee!' o • tet tamed a similar doctrine to him (Lord Monteagle) ° ,je, rt i d o jest of the commutation of tithes. Tithes, he '" e 01 0 depend on the same principles as rent. if so thef t) pe o i . ground for its protection unless he (Lord Beatlf oa be se st ie ) mined that protection was due to it, not for the efoo legg the country at large, but to uphold rent. He (Lord !",, ores od would like any Noble Lord, or any writer of ereil r l oo l ,t , show the difference between 253. an acre derive d wa r d subject to tithes and 20s. paid on land with ss. as stee°lo; to the clergyman.. The effect would be preeiselY.e d title and he could not see how they could talk of prose ren t, g:„ unless it was to be considered as protection •to r at 111 s not for the benefit of the clergy, or the coital d efqo He denied that the commutation of tithes made e n .Y to ti ot. in the question ; the principle of protection in relauft a e i t i e was precisely the same as before, and he cautioned belt ships of the great danger there was to the rights oil 00 4 0 supporting any clamour against rent which had been e o ' t o connexion with this question of tithes. Itc e ielY so , Hugs payable to the landlcrd stood in P re j e rel la „e/ same position as five shillings paid to the c ed ,ol o ol and in arguing the question of protection, must be de W e e , alike. If there was any inequality in the t axatit o tl es t property beyond what was fair and impartial, let tn de civil that inequality,• but do • not give protection t° Society or interest at the expense of all the owe, t ee r e e regard to whit bad beer, mooted about the removal °,.• t ee g laws on to the State, he called their attention ' l ' lo lll e danger of such a case. It would deprive all party the terested from participati in the administration °beef./ rates, and take away from the poor themselves ell t. e 4d 151! they now had over the g od administration of tu j ° , - 01', 1 / ( Hear, hear.) A very rapid diminution had ta . e ll pi tithes. From the year 1 826 to 1841 the propor7 r eride rate chargeable on differs nt classes of property w land (the siderably altering, and altering-for the benefit a or e 0 1 , pared with other taxable property. Were they bear• l l o ,l extent to Which railways were chargeable ?—(I was perfectly true that by the original conceptio n deecr il e Elizabeth, A or the statutes immediately Eubsequer rt s oet• of property not now taxed to the poor were then taab"e 6d they had not been able to enforce that state of t „ 4' l o o the difficulties and inconveniences which stood in !"" them look to the state of the law in Scotland., o h g' s e called means and substance" was rated in Scotta" at est ° te, • was one of the most difficult and most complicated ra tie force. The reason was that it was in the nature of fr e0„01 0 . tax, without any of its exemptions.. His Nobl e spoken of the cost of the administration of .in s , - „ e f og::, be seemed to forget that one e half of the expense °lr teti th e was borne by the State.—(Hear, hear.) ,j of remembered that if they threw the vf°°erote; t he expense on he State they must have a publ : °,,Oo O fi ts ; He should be t s rry to state that this was any abl e " Og re , a! proposition; on the contrary, he thought it w oo 0 4 greatest recommendations, and involved one of dt j o the , , . alterations that was ever contemplated with belee"„ be, e ) th t , sent criminal law. With reference to the malt-ta:oavolP t with the admission of the Noble Lord (Lord Be p d toff the malt-tax is a tax paid by the consumer, "" of . o t , . amount of duty tended to limit the consumP ti l. def t e t ; Of all the articles upon which had been made,ain-eate+e duty, the article of malt is that which has part leg Wee the largest extent in the remission of duties. At th e e e eet",e t j war, and long after, at the time of the Gov" - , be e ' r e . Noble Duke in 1830, the cou n t r y was s ubject !,°, dii l l o 3 th e , In 1816 a war-tax was imposed. M a lt then Pa iu r t to a charge of 435. per quart e r, w hil e a t the pros e " tetroigef , tax is 20s. Bd. per quarter. The amount of &I t / of r o o t , more than has been removed from any similar article", re And he doubted much, even if the who le t bat 111 I duty now payable on malt were to - be repealed, iit jete f fro"' , ducers of that article would be in any better coreet.dee malt-tax is a charge made by anticipation fir a F re e f , three to six months. The maltster sells his io no t° , not only the price of the malt, but also the thatof , payable on that article. And the• conseq uence I.' adr ib i o,l!" ceives a portion of the State money equal to o ne ', be cleP e e whole value of the article ; and with that Deb ne les. • it"( into the market and buy barley at reduced Pr,l.f,tbeoftl,i'; • lieved that if the agricultural interests could ob ts ! i i iioo s r ie r , 7 diate abolition of this duty, and allow the five in ' oth e o'4 Y now obtained on that article to be imposed in an io otiee e d net, it would not be so beneficial as the present f or , was one point, however, to which the' Noble, i o r t , b , alluded. The maltster is subject to a tax, Inn", be s' s ',s l ',.4 part by the consumer, but he forgot to state the er ofee l lti; t tamed a close monopoly of the article. He ha•l P° ll o us e . c o ' breweries and distilleries of the country ; and I t , t ei tie , made by them of the pi °duce of the country. I the English barley-grower maintained his in °9 j ee , this means the tax was a positive good to _ le t ro lf,, c I On that subject any loss alleged to be sustained the r sured by the advantage which would be gained ' b y f°,0 4 ,. tions were removed. Inquiries have been ma de fe e, j f ,(!eli eminent men,_ by Professors Graham and Pia „,te, ▪ relative value of barley in a malted and unmade it ef ' s{!e. , cultural purposes, and they were of opinion that 1 0 0 1 , 0 ,0 , I -better in an unenalted state. In G rm any th ere et to ',ey e upon malt, and no prohibition d u ti es with rescliete es74.te i Professor Liebig had gi ven a sim il ar o pi n ion• t the, sb' i e other subject to which he would allude. he me an , 3 la bel tion on probate. and legacy duties. That ‘ ca a jitftete;el , might he considered as partaking a little of inee e tee be inequality was rather to the advantage of the l an d o ° d ee ° , - He condemned the principle, however, of allowing be t to be redressed by another. With respect to e l r ev t le , considered, that though it was much dwelt uP °° ; d3 e!,,ltg,:r , great as it had been represented. Everything o el o ll • is tr until it was redrewted.—( Hear.) The taxes ° p i e ce „ t r were he believed fairly distributed, as they we re s ; c• oo r il vents, horses, hounds, agricultural implernentseeod a_irg to which affected the agriculturists had conta;001: ole er e of exemptions, but the argument of was itoP%* o s l ;ee was thet it was so full of exceptions that it , c e, t o f ! t it hold so tattered a flag ; but, at any rate, the e V e di tet t t , / in favour of the agriculturists. However, th, e t ; g; ° 0 11 0 ° t 11! matters would come under the investigation I ' l rj, for . c el g el He was sorry id that in that debate a Noble I,°t-oodliseose entertained sincere respect (Lord Ducie) had o° o 9 I' o l • transactions of the League. He (Lord Monte aele) co o d er „t o r e to that body, neither had he any interest i re' arnoreetlii, more, he must say that he did not like be see : ° e se; way it had done. He must not, however, , 0 X t. ( sponsible for its actions because he chose '4O ( . „e• opinions ; neither did- he approve of the o uie ree n e ly, Duke on the cro3s benches (the Duke °I : 7 ,„ 0 s of e iesg ° talked of the past, present, and future transaeb—f the ,Ctle' But he wished to know what had the que3tioo ,° ?....t ) do with the subject before their Lordsl7 D ° ere to self,ear, hear.") His Noble Friend (L er e j e li fetrtot j in adverting to the representations w a ii n g r ii 1 0 „ele A 1 ( 0 0 0 4 said that persons ought to abstain from in t the * do te"l, speeches made by persons in another place; b i. n e b ole, ( o , had not adopted the advice he had given, as' N o cv I ' o o! ibd • speeches of the members of the Leagu e. e tbe e l e rs e i d Y Monteagle) wished to see the League eear;jl ()Wale cited of which, he believed, were just the men* ° r e sb ° eife de . country who were desirous that their labou r j et eds e (Cheers)—and, he believed, rejoiced that t bel o w, 0 ,,f now embarking in a cause which would e atin4 ,ooel? d oe te ot e ; ( Hear, hear.) With these expressions, h; to a V OYe amendment to the following effect :—" An" n iarY ! l e° to report on the legislative exemptions and pee! a ffe.c% l c pbt tf t rovided by law in respect to taxation as he te, tee e! o t property." I f o re nteutoo The 'Earl of ESSEX defended Sir It t - e 2' l e A which had been made against him, that . he )what ha" e " duce the duties on the importation of cattl.e, 0 vioev el lii e t ; the present duty on- corn. Lord STANLEY could not but admit th! t i t b b e ig i lg s i' it i° 7. tion requiring the deepest consideration jr , 01:5 1 but he was bound to enter leis counter proetre • stn e ;.0$ od 1, the protest of the Noble Lord'on the oth i _ t oro und efe to tithes. He did not understand on " 1 '; r Lord had abandoned the assertion that th t t i b th at es e;i t ie l i t. t ; imposition upon l_nd ; for in abandoning arg o 4 fo r fact threw overboard the chief grounds ! ,nlf e e e r encie jee s l,o l this reason he felt bound' to. assert that tn .i u ato ll t ed i ot , .. this P d os 4 • ei , s weet o e on land was as high, if not more 1)1, , that for rent itself. In aseertninineo on o h . . jot. only to look to the peculiarity of the,tetr _rf ote te n n e t 0 1 .. 1 '0! was held, for when a purchaser bouo ba de uch..eidelle4 0 . 7 0 ee tc d te t l foo l : e i .:ayba t ev r e t r i e tti e; dre k!, , bought it with the knowledge that it e a tehhaaorgteh,aatnwdhtiehheihmerwelomosie was d been so charged. He would, e th f r e e , e s , which ti l ed !o bjec t 0. 1 ceP e t be sew) ° . ,j, complain of the draughtdh from hie hie), he turally made upn fro hie exldferenee bet4uporl the ' of from his estate. On a full 'Pin att" 'e e° ti would appear that there was this char ge . we re eit el .e , rent, that whereas rent was simety .e de t , o wn the ceebige,, and must rise and fall with the Pi.'" abstract eranl oo k a ,et it profits of the land, tithe, on t! upon t he la,i' cuu re ; , 6 from land, and just so much of ancooritrary% etitto ry t dt stand, for it was not only a ehaVr /tide tothe l.l.tdint.e, i` e his sdl td ntimaw aitedtely connectedoo such accidents, f iver o duce before any of those r;i i se righ e t 'to ° I to ,0 e ithe r r ou bt e, ape and the proprietor had vitil itsbucirt7t l00%_k! whatever might be or tenant , - and whatever prices the P eid rP o' ever th e p nor pe t 0 , It might be the consumer who id of the °°- eot a ,be l "io l Hon. Friend opposite had se.dieill 1 , 00 ,e.e ition Lithos ~,e t 11 " o di malt tax, and that the ins Pnd a ssume the e ° f eel •t ° cost of the article. He a d° by sat e law rt o f e be peP r od built in a certain town, that ' t ee tenth P i f e r the OS' the resultsrodoce to,o t ho n should -seed ts, of cotton made in that net s not the tats — would the tithe so iniP sea posed on the owner should be that 4