The Sun. — London, England, 1846-03-24 00:00:00

he proposed a perfect equality of treatment of the Catholic and Protestant. What was done for one class should be done for another, and what was done for one religion should be done for another. Th ere were var i ous modes of arrieleg at that end. So me proposed that all eneow merit should be be taken away for the present purpose ; and that, as so n as the existing interests fall in, the property of the Protestant Church ehould be applied to secular education. Ile should greatly re gret to see such a measure adopted. He had never been tea le to understand the advantage of the voluntary system, but he thought it of very great importance that a large public funti should be made for the maintenance of ministers of religion, with permission for them to teassli the people in the form in Which they had access to the i ns t ruc ti on i n th e sacre d truth of Christianity. An arrangement of that kind should be come to, but he should be deeply grieved that all endowments should be taken away for the purposes of secular education. The Present system combined all the faults and d'sadvant ••ges of the voluntary system. 'I hey had a voluntary sys tem as regarded the people, with all the ievidieusness of w State Church. He, for one, should not be prepared to say that all the property of the Church should be applied to those bses of religion. He thought that the Catholic Church should be established in Ireland as the Protestant Church was in England, and the Presbyterian Church in Scoland. There *as in favour of that principle the opinion of a man whom he reverenced more than any man now living—he meant the late Dr. Arnold. He reverenced him more than any man now in existence, and he believed that thi s was hi s view as to w h at 'lhoald b e done in this case. He had no hesitation in saying that it was deeply to be regretted that such a principle was not how in existence. It was a great pity that the Protestant Church had been made the Established Church in Ire land —it was as fatal a mistake as was ever commit. te d• Another proposal, made by a N o bl e L or d whom be then saw opposite, was that a toll should he levied on landed property in Ireland for the payment of the Catholic C lergy. He thought that preposition a perfectly just and reason able one. Another Noble Earl, who was formerly one of her olajesty's household, asked if it was true that there were 150 parishes in Ireland in which the rent charge amounted to no l ess than 58,000/., and in which there was not a single Pro ' e l egant 4. The answer he received confirmed the accuracy of ' 1 supposition or informant. He (Earl Grey) believed that au th e other side it was not shown that the statement was sub ttantisally erroneous. He had no hesitation in saying that thi s Was a 4B state of things which could not endure. As the existing Interests fell in, a portion of the property of the Protestant Established Church ought to he diverted to the use alit payment Ministers of religion of such a kinclthat the Catholics would 4tillent to receive instruction from them. H e co uld p erce i ve th at an answer to this would be given—the objection would be That the Catholics would accept no assistance. It would be gated that the time hai gone past ; that a few years ago the C atholics wou'd have accepted their bounty, but that they tf quid no longer receive it. As to that belief, he knew that the assistance were given in a proper manner, and with due pre caution, w .old be accepted. They could no l onger o bt a i n be advantage they might have obtained. They could not attempt to establish, directly or i n di rect l y , t h e r i g h t o f inter ' Te re nce with or control ove r th e C at h u li cs . F ormer l y t h e Wholies would have granted such a power, hut now the op , kttunity was lost, and it would be the height of madness to mpt it. He believed that they would not accept of any &ranee as a direct payment to any individu a l c l erg y man , "'it they would take assistance if given to a fund to be applied et their own discretion. We owed this state of things to the bete ,pd error made by Sir Robert Peel in 1825. Ile still ii ,.""eved that the Catholics would take a grant, if it was given sum to be administered by some Catholic authority, to be lOplied by hint to the building of chapels a id houses, or in toCatholics ways as mi g ht seem necessary . H e h a d a l ways sa id t h at ICatholics were ready to t a k e as si s t ance if large arid gene ,o g r ants were made for them, excluding stipends. He had b w ever, gone further into details than he inten !ed, and it was toothe time for trifling discus-ion. All he would say was there should be an equality of favour sh own to both re nis•—(Hear, hear.) They ought not only to endow the te e tholics, but thy social,ught to go further, they ought to give zeta the same position as the Protestant Clergy. Tney Gust allow then their proper rank, and must reverence th ::,giholie hierarchy even more than the Catholic Bequests Bill, r ° eh was passed last year or the year before. A a body the ''gholic clergy were distinguished for their piety, and their e it t latest feeling for the welfare of their flocks, and therefore guy that be allowed some rank. Ile could go so far as to 0 , 1 1 that he wished to see Catholic prelates taking their place• ik the bench in that House._( Hear, herr.) He wished, con ed ,ring the state of Ireland, that this House could have tie t u l dee and assistance of those who knew the Catholic popu e.,l°°, and could explain to the House their feelings and their Cts• He wished that the House had the advice of those who %eased the means of conciliating the Catholic people, and e n did not think that any danger would result from their intro. e e -et i° l l' at least it must be a timid person who could sup-. ; 1 ' that anything dangerous would be the consequence. He ee, l ”ed that the House was not to easily led array that four ti e tiolie prelates could obtain any undue authority. He s tie t e'eed that the course of policy that they were now recom keilding to Ireland was opposed to their feelings. He we , - ei o - Peeed to find that his motion met with little support in that He was prepared to see the address he was about te e, e. r_e thrown out by a great and overwhelming majority, lon I;7', years would not elapse before its essential features would co me the law of the country. As long . as he had been in life, he had ample reasons for saying that he had seen phi" "3' case resting on a solid foundation of truth and justice B ere in the end to get on ; justice and reason were sure to ep al l- He remembered nothing more discou rag i ng i n i ts htearance than the Bill for Catholic Emancipation, in the At 4 1 1827 , but that m e a sure h a d b ecome t h e l aw o f th e l an d . !li ege ° Mine time f'e e t r ad e seeme d altogether impossible, and th e Who advocated th e op i n i on w hi c h he wished to apply to etaetnincrcial regulations of the country—s principle which We e ' e et Philosopher s h a d a d vocate d— were regar d e d as persons re it it was not worth while to answer; and when they e et - we the slightest allusion to any alteration in corn, they could h ill bluster more votes than from a dozen to twenty. eteen years had since elapsed ; he had lived to see it t e questien, y ear b y year a d vanc i ng, till now it was at (Fulinal tine ; and if i t was st ill d oomed to be refused— lifrierashear)—it was only for a short period, for they were in ,wiof the , goal. I n t h e same way i t was w i th every measure ng regard t o any alteration in the policy we pursue towards Lad withregard to her church, but it might now h e seen the time was not very far distant when that church would ; _reognised. Th at t i me was advancing rapidly; he could see klt i t e he tone of the debat es l as t y ear; an d i n t h e speech of the se„,,dt; Duke oppo si t e , i n h:s arguments in favour of the May Vd° grant, he could see the evidence of the progress of li,tl Measure. In the mi n d s o f t h ose w h o advocated justice to Vtaad in this m a tt er no c h ange of opinions had occurred, A de. e heard of freque n t an d su b s t ant i a l c h anges on the other Of He saw men, who had come to Parliament with opinions .414 different nature, were inclined t o a d op t t hi s now; b ut k e 511 , he knew its progress in private conversation. They We*, and could not fad to hear in private conversa t ion, fo the state of the Irish Church was unanimously admitted e t4.4 °, such as ought never to exist in a civilised country. It 41 1 . e ePly to be regretted that a difference was ever made, and Astnient of that difference was earnest!y to be desired. I Ns t sk i rue that be heard such language followed up by the itZsiation that reform, however desirable, was rendered ins bleettle by the prejudices of England and Scotland ; l . were so strong that they would not be able to Measure of that description. That was a question very l e pu rit ratit to con s id er , b ut l anguage of this sort ought not to el . 4 ° Fted, no r s h ou ld suc h pr i nc i ples b e acted upon. A man N I 6 honesty of thinking would sate that it was right that Q u estion should b e p ropose d , as i t was only by being pro gee:dand di scusse d t h at t h ey could hope for success. If lan tt tr e df that sor t were to b e use d , i t would be unjust to address tpd's countrymen. They had, it was true, strong prejudices, 3 th " was very well aware very deep-rooted prejudices; but oth a same time he knew that the language of reason and Iteolte Was never addressed t o th em i n vain, and if they went to 4 in this matter it weu ld b e t h e f au l t o f t h ose who hail odds them right. If those who took y art in public affairs, 1 51, 0 T Whose advice and euidarice the nation was accustomed t) and who, standing in this high and responsible situa lNe',"m want of discernment of what was required, or from N' o f courage to s tate their opini ons f rom f ear o f i ncurr i ng a \efc'eal opposition by stemming the current o f p u bli c op i n i on hits se eh no w , from such opinions, condescend to give up the the e uri and privileges of Englishmea, it might be long before lkeitere disturbed, but it might be too late for the safety of• Sts te r °Pire to do justice to Ireland, when they thought they lel t ete neeessity. He would fain hope for better things ; that 1 _,F49` 14 debate they would take a lesson from the years qise, And 1816 that they would not be again guilty of this I tep t nlousness, and of that want o f f ores i ght of earning 1 4 . e l es which the result has show n m i g h t j ustly b e i mputed t he e i t ;! l for their conduct in 1829, and they would not, for th e i mes place themselves in that most painful situation in h e .1 they were comp e ll e d to sac rific e f or a grea t emergency of 11`14ivierest interests of the country, or incur the just reproach to ngSa I deceived their followers, and of having been the p er - Nist C arry the measure which formerly they had ever been etet,le resisting. He hoped he should not again see any such I tk e 01 things; he trusted that now it was time to consider the eaw ei nf Ireland that they would acknowledge the ne:•assity of tere i n g remedie s more e ff ec t ua l to qu e ll th e e ' fils w hi c h were Zeros e 4ll , l eted upon them. The address 'which he would lay alt e . them did not call upon them express any opinion ;he % W ould not be right, as h e d id not stan d i n t h e pos i t i on of to 'nt authority to give him any right to ask them me ohs to so M'Alle/ItOUS a decision. At the same lfelt himself bound fully and fairly to express to them 4 ,nd renaltered opinions —opinions which he had en. 11te le . w from the first moment he had entered that House. 4.4 , - „,134 his address did not for an expression of opinion v4t.ttifY particular queseon, if ! there were other remedies, e alculated to meet the evils laid before the House, let mos t te propo se d an d di scusse d ; h e was confident he would be ill e t , I Pil to hear them, and no effort of his should be want • 5 4 give th e mas t p a ti en t, f u ll, an d f a i r cons id erat i on. They N 'i i p - tailed upon to express, by an a dd ress t o h er M a j esty, le e e e enviction that Ireland could not be left in the state in lite,:_tt ems. Something must be done, and if tile remedies he l,ter e d wer e wrong, ot h ers m i g h t b e adopted better calcu gtt 1 secure the interest of th e em pi re . H e t rus t e d n ips great crisis was at an end—he believed that k‘e . t he lcas one way, and, in his opinion, only it hoed appeasing and allaying th e di scontent o f the I r i s h tee!ind of gradually restoring or d er an d tranqu i ll i ty to I Zl et 7tgani se d portion of the empire. There was one way, k i kil o / °we way, and that was not to grant repeal, and not e ttl itle e l r .the advice of the Right Rev. Prelate. The plan was e t et ; t l t Was to legislate for the Irish as an Irish Paella eitee ° act fairl and consistently, and they could do no Ite If they did not, they would see nothing but the • r kbi e . ' Ottle„ Continuance of misery and destitution. Whenever the p e g s l ,e., l failure of a crop occurred, it would cause famine k‘ t eee t 4 'enee, only to be awarded by the interference of Par t/14N They wou ld see outrages b ut i mper f ec tl y p reven t e d and troublesome methods, until at last would come e:eliiiiightful catastrophe, fatal alike to the dominion of the 16 1 uq d g ad the safety of the empire. This was what they had to V l esel e fi e (Lord Grey) asked their Lordships to pledge Ot te r to do what in them lay to avert this fearful result, leavePte g to th e a dd ress t o h er M a j est y, w hi c h he would now te h t liese l to read to them. (The Noble Earl concluded by e t te e ig e t he address to her Majesty, which is contained in an es.'° ta e ) do t)e question being put, , 4 tO st 4 , L e of WELLINGTON rose. It was not his inten ;°dow the Noble Earl through his very aisle speech. eette°' it was foueded on fact, unfortunately, and that part 'l4 k geref °i'e th at he was unable to answer. But really he did not lt e r ee in that other part to which the Neble Earl referred. llt Ant th " Ji w e act of her Majesty's Government in respect to 4,, %el `nen of a Commission to inquire into the relations 14Pt ed ;118-adlords and tenants, and the measure which had been t itie t ho tee e,cinseque nce of the nomination of that Committee. Ott e fai r that the Noble Earl would admit that it was not t elq:lthe, ,!.! say that Isis Right Hon. Friend, when he nomi ee te et; '°lnusission, admitted either the juitice err propriety kereje, _TR tinder consideration at the thee which related to le t :el e ;uote tenure. But he would now confine himself to the 04,Pr eeee _ed for by the Noble Earl. Similar add' asses had to eO. or tie:ted frequently both in the last and at the commence t,ollZtsper`zaldesession. Parliament always expressed itself ready with her Majesty's Government in every measure 16,11 tend to the presperity of Ireland. It was impossible Ite d, c oncur s in the address moved by the Noble fcimtttee ee-ensidering the speech he made, more particularly toed o r e ' e tr of it, namely, his admission that his object was q ol,j_ e e eti `inee address a system of measures which must end '114,1 nction of the Church of England in Ireland, the s ho had e.es i f sa- es i ,. spoken throughout as if this were an open 4th,, it ' Parliament had done nothing on the subject t "e a • r k , h e question on which measures could be adopted , N en , I'l:tallest difficulty, or without any breach of former ` 1 or compacts. If ever there was a point which was made the object of a special compact, it was the existence of the Church of Enssland in Ireland. That was a distinctive ohjeet which too Parliaments had agreed in carrying out as perpetual. This was one of the articles which they were dis tinctly pledged to maintain. The Noble Earl said that. he did not desire them to repeal the union, but that which he de sired, he stated, was that they should adopt the adalrese which was to lead to the putting down the Church of England in Ireland, which was to deprive the Church of England in • Ireland of its present possessions, and which must end in the repeal of any treaty of union, which the Noble Earl stated it was not his desire should be conceded. The Irish Parliament was, as a body, capable of legislating on that subject. It was because they had formally agreed to the union that Parliament ventured on the consideration of the question, tinder the auspices of the Government of Gent ge and then it was agreed and stipulated that the sth article, by which the Church of England in Ireland was to be unifed for ever to the Chinch in this country, was to be for the future maintained. They could not place the Irish nation and the Irish Parliament in the same situation in which they both stood at the time that compact was made, and lie said, therefore, that they could not depart from that compact without a breach of the engagement then entered into. He maintained that they had no power upset the subject, and therefore, he recom mended their Lordships not to agree to the address proposed to them by the N',ble Earl. Undoubtedly, measures could be adopted calculated to benefit Ireland, anti that and , the other House of Parliament ought in every case to adopt measures, and to legislate for the good of Ireland, whenever the in terests of that country came under their consideration. He would say to their Lordships that in his opinion Parliament had done its duty on that subject. He believed that the Noble Lord did nit deny that: He believed that there never was a country which had so advanced in improvements of all descrip tions as Ireland since the period of the union.—( Hear, hear.) He would not go into details on this subject, because perhaps Noble Lords would speak in the course of the evening more capable than he was of doing so, but it was quite remarkable in every way, in trade, in commerce, in shipping, in revenue, in the customs, in the excise, and indeed in every thing, the in crease had been enormous, but the Noble Lord said in the earlier part of his speech that foreigners, who went to Ireland, expatiated on the miseries which they witnessed there. It was true there was misery and great poverty there, as there was its Aber countries, but yet in Ireland there was a vast capital, there were great riches; Ireland was at that moment setting an example to the world, an example which could be imitated in few countries of Europe, she was laying out mil lions at this moment in the construction of railways, at the pri vate expense of individuals. There were, it was true, railways in the course of construction in the other countries of Europe, but how were they constructed? At the expense of Govern ment; not one of them was constructed at the expanse of pri vate individuals. It was in this country that they were con structed at the expense of private individuals—only in this country and in Irelansl—in every other country in the world they were constructed at the expense of the public treasury. Now, he did nut much care whetherthis capital was the pro perty of Irishmen, or whether it had been borrowed in this country. If it were sent there, it was sent oq...the credit of Irishmen ; if it were the property of,lrishmen, Wad he hoped it was) why it showed the vast improvement in that country, to which at least the Noble Lord ought to have given Parliament and those who governed that country some credit for. If it were the property of England and lent to Ireland, it showed there ras some credit in Ireland, and that men hail little more canfidence in the restoration, and continued existence of peace than the Noble Lord had, He was sure the Govern ment would do everything in its power to bring forward mea sures which would be calculated to give satisfaction to that country, vd to insure public tranquillity. Now, he thought :hat there was evidence to show that the Noble Earl was a little mistaken as to the very greet dislike which Iri s h men en- by compact to maintain the United Church of England and Ireland, and considering the great advantages they derived from the existence of the Church of England, advantages which were enjoyed alike by Catholics as well as Protestants, he called upon their Lorddtips (by rejecting. the motion) not to give rise to the supposition that they were inclined to enter tain any such meesures as those proposed by the Noble Earl. Earl FORTESICUE concur red cordially in the views of his Noble Friend, and he should certainly support the motion bef,re. their Lordships. He gave a reluctant consent to Ihe third reading of the Protection to Life Bill, but not from any confidence in the law or its administrators, but because, after the statement of the Noble Earl opposite, of the amount of crime committed in Ireland, he thought sonic strong measure was necessary for its suppression. He considered that, under the existing circumstances of Ireland, it was their citify, not merely to grant pecuniary assistance for the relief of the present distress, and pass severe laws for the detection and punishment of crimes, but measures ought, without future de lay, to be adopted, for the purpose - of effecting a real and per manent improvement in the condition of that part of her Majesty's dominions. These were the only terms in the id dress which pledged the House in any way, and he thought it was too bad to reject it, because the Noble Earl who proposed it, had expressed his opinion that a great reform was necessary in the establishment of the church of reland. In that sentiment he most cordially cuacurred, and he agreed also with the Noble Earl that they would never have perfect contentment amongst the people of Ireland until the Catholic Church was placed upon the same footing as the Protestant.—( Cheers.) He had always considered a general distribution of land among all classes in the country as one of its safeguards, and one of its bulwarks, and without pretending for a moment to defend the Anti-Corn-law League, he must say that great obligation was due to them for directing parties how to invest the products of their industry in small freeholds. Of this general distribution of land great want was felt in Ireland. He had been told, when he wished to introduce a measure to extend the fran chise to 40s. freeholders, that there was no such class. He Government had made appointments equally political. If they had a facksln, and a Lefroy, and a Smith, they had also an O'Loughlin, a Perrin, a Ball, a Brady, a Wolfe, and a Compton —every ono of them politicians. It resulted from the nec ssity of the rate. All the political bar of Ireland was tinged with politic , , and such would be the case till a third party aro , e and introduced a different state of things. As long as there ware two great parties at the bar, 9 out of 10 of the barristers would be ioliticians. Ile thought it his duty to make these observations. ale word as to the s vial state of Ireland, which was divided into seven millions of Catholics, and one millian of Plotestan's. He con!endetbthat the Catholics had no right to complain of the alienation of the religious pro. perty in Ireland, as the property was granted for Christian ' uees, and Pa , liarnent had a perfect right to appropriate it to those purposes, and to the State religion. The maser grievance of Ireland was, that these seven millions received no emolu ment for their own religion. That was a great difficulty, he admitted—co difficult as to amount to an impossibility. The people, he considered, should not be subjected to the burden of paying for their own religious instruction. It might be said that the clergy would not take an endowment. His life on it they would take it.—(Laughter.) Ihey might not take it the first quarter, but they would the next. He denied that Catholics were challenged on juries for their reli gion. They were challenged for other objections, which would have equally applied had they been Protestants. If a question should arise as to the eligibility of a juror, it would be one not at all connected with religion. But taking a full review of the whole statement of the Noble Lord, he (Lord Brougham) di 1 not believe that this was a question which could be de..lt with by legislative enactment, but by the determination of the Government not to palter to or bargain with agitators, be they priests or laymen. He quite agreed with his Noble Friend that the processes of law in Ireland should be made more facile and less expensive ; but then it should not be forgotten that the law in England was ten times more expensive. He felt great pain is being obliged to make many observations that h e h a d ma d e; but he did think this House should not lend itself to the malpractices of certain par ties ; and if they did, he did think they would be lending them selves to those agitators in Ireland to whom he believed was would ask, why was there not? There were numbers of per sons in that country who expended as much in purchasing tenant-right as would enable them to obtain small freeholdi. He did not, therefore, think that it arose from the want of money to enable them to become freeholders. He thought that the Government ought to introduce some measure to faci litate the purchase of these small freeholds, and at the same time to keep some of that money in the pockets of those which, under the existing law, now weat to the attorneys. Lord BROUGHAM—There is a Bill of that nature Wore the House. Earl FORTESCUE would wish to see the measure ex attributable much of the agrarian outrages that had been committed. He had read speeches made at public meetings by priests and others, who spoke of property having its duties as well as its rights, and he believed that the landlords of Ire land had observed that maxirn.—( Hear, hear.) But he could not agree with his Noble friend that the Irish landlords should not exercise that right as they thought proper. Earl FITZWILLIAM did think that the House was much tended to Ireland. He wished to see Ireland placed upon the same footing as England. The Noble Duke (the Duke of Wellington) had said, in the course of his speech delivered that night, that all the concessions made to Ireland only produced fresh agitation. He (Earl Fortescue) would beg; to remind . _ _ . indebted to Lis Noble Friend for having brought forward this motion, inasmuch as it would have the effect of bringing the state of Ireland before this House and this country, because Ireland was a country not understood by Englishmen, and also because she was a sort of mirror in which Englishmen did not like to look, for it did not reflect anything creditable to the Government of England. His Noble Friend had spoken of their Lordships that all concessions made to Ireland had been the fruit of previous agitation, and it was not to be wondered if, after the lesson which had been set them, they would fail of pursuing the same ►ine of conduct while any chance of success remained to them. He contended that '.f they had more con fidence in the administration of the cJuntry—if they were put upon an equal footing both in Church and State, they would then effectually put down agitation among those who, however excitable, were certainly not the less entitled to the considera tion of their Lordships. Having tried such measures to their the difficulty of dealing with the monster grievance of Ireland, the Irish Church ; and the Noble Duke opposite had said it would be impossible to do so ; but that the latter phrase would be a sort of disinheritance of this House of its power of legis lating for Ireland, or of removing the grievance by legislative enactment. He had heard a great deal said about the pay ment of the Catholic clergy ; but if he were a Roman Catholic he would never consent to such a regulation. If the 'House did not deal with this questio n justly an d i m p ar ti a lly, * depend upon it they would have to deal with questions of still greater difficulty in reference to the rights of property in that country. This was a matter in which he was deeply interested as a proprietor of land in Ireland. There was a time when certain villains in Ireland made propositions to the Lord Chancellor of the day, though these fellows held their estates by a very insecure tenure ; yet such a state of things was brought that these men became firm legal holders of those estates. He knew that what was said here went abroad by means which he did not approve of ; but he spoke to their Lordships, and he told them not to inquire too nicely into the the tenure by which property was held in Ireland, for the result would not be as satisfactory as they might expect. The Noble Earl then alluded to the state of Scotland, and the circumstances under viiich the • fullest extent, and having found them not to answer, then and then only ought the Government to adopt coercive measures. Lord lIROUG lIA. NI would not have addressed their Lord ships, had it net been that the Noble Earl, who moved the address, had in the course of his speech made refer ence to one or two matters in which he felt, himself if not juiticially, at least profesionally bound to make one or two observations, alike injustice to himself, to the Government, and to the country at large. First of all, he would say that, with reference to that part of the Noble Earl's speech, whether with reference to the afflicting statements of the amount of dis tress, or of the evil of the Administrations which have con ducted the affairs of Leland, or whether, with regard to the misery which prevailed among a large portion of the people, or of the crimes and frightful outrages upon life as well as pro perty, whether resultin g from misery or other cau ses , w hi c h had, as it were, scared the soul of society, and which had forced their Lordships reluctantly to have recourse to mea sures of a severe, coercive nature, which broached upon the natural rights of our fellow-countrymen—all these statements were but too true. They could be matters of no controversy. No person would dispute thsm. They were reiterated over and over again in the course of the discussion on the late coercive measures. But these thinks, the existence of which we all deplore, had (as his Noble Friend who had last spoken had reminded their Lordships) their root far deeper than in any misgovernment of the present or any other day. Its root lay deeper than in any political agitation of the present day, although he thought they were not in some sort uncon nected with that agitation, as he should presently show, they had had their roots deeper plunged and wider spread in the social condition of the Irish people. With reference to their engagements in landed property, and their great predilec tion for agricultural pursuits in their own style, he did not think they could interfer e. They could not interfere with the rights of property, the most sacred of all rights—those sacred rights upon which society itself depended—the great corner stone of the whole social edifice in every country, as they must ever necessarily be. They constitute the line of demarcation which separates the savage from the civilised state of society. In the one property is safe—in the other unsafe. This consti tutes the difference between a governed country and a country where anarchy prevailed. Here property is safe—there, there are no sacred rights of property. This constitutes the differ ence between the two states of society. It was a wide differ ence—it was a contra t—it was a diametrical contrast between the civilised and savage state of society. Therefore it is that property, having all those rights, must be deemed sacred. For that reason it was that they must in all they did, in all they said, and in all they meditated to do—make all spring from this as from a first principle ; and:no man who desired the name of a reasonable being, or even a person claiming for himself the least grain of common sense, or the smallest amoust of reflec tion, can entertain a doubt upon the subject. Nor could any person suffer a thought to cross his mind—to pass over the mere surface of his imagination—could entertain for a moment an hesitating thought—a shade or the shadow of a shade upon the most sacred and fundamental of all principles—the sacred rights of property. If, then, there were speculators—practical speculators—who suffered to pass across their imaginations the abstract ideas that those sacred rights of property may be in terfered with with impunity, and who propounded this inter ference with property as one of their remedies for existing evils, who carried out the absurd principle for the purpose of deluding their dupes in the country, who were for the most part ignorant persons when compared with themselves—but more thought less, more reckless than they who suffered it to be said, and to go out to the world upon their authority—and propounded Bills in Parliament of which he had heard that night for the first time. He could not have believed it possible in this 19th century, in a British House of Commons, that there could have been propounded, what hod been called by the gentle phrase— euphonious and eugolistic " fixity."—(Laughter and cheers.) Meaning thereby, by an Act of Parliament, that any person, being the occupant or tenant of a piece of land, or other pro perty, was to have a personal property nut of his landlord's estate, in the shape of the house or tenement, or lands, which he must have occupied for a limited number of years, and which he was to b ec om e en titl e d t o by p a yment of fixed rent. That was an interference with, a desecration of the sacred rights of property, which their Lordships must strenuously re sist, honestly, fairly, openly, downrightly. It was a gross monstrosity to give the tenant property upon such conditions. 'l'o place the tenant in the landlord 's place, in consequence of his having formerly paid the rent. He could only understand how it was that such a proposal was not instantly put down by the strong arm of talent in the other House, except that it was thought, either that the matter was of so little im portance, or else so extravagant in itself as not co deserve the attention of the House. At all events it was brought forward in the middle of August, when long discussions are deprecated, and Government being anxious for a prorogation, mentioned at the same time that they intended to send over a Commission. He knew, more over, that a Commission was intended long before that tires, and the Commission, wnen formed, was not formed to inquire as to the best mode of improving the sacred and inalienable rights of property. It was not appointed to inquire into fixity of tenure, nor the robbery of landlords for the sake of tenants. It was lamentable that there should lie such a state of things in the United Kingdom as had grown up in the sister country. Matters omeht to be far otherwise in the management of pro perty. The Noble Lord who had just spoken had given us an illustration. He (Lord Brougham) w uld give his Noble Friend another illustration, with which he was familiar, to show him the difference between the two countries. What would he think of an estate, the rent of which was 15,000 or 20,0)01. a-year, upon which there were not SO or 100 tenants, but 1,300 or 1,40) tenants in chief paying rent, and perhaps half as many more again —probably 3,000 paid the rent of under-tenants; none of whom paid so much as 401. a-year. Numbers of them paid 71. and 101., and some 10s., 125., and 15s. rent. It was a great mistake to say, that if the land was underlet the law of Ireland was the same as that of England; and to say if the poor sub-tenant had paid his rent to the middle-man, and the middle man should fail, that the landlord could not destrain upon the sub-tenant. It was a gross mistake—he could do so, and it was only an act of kindness or good feeling that he did not do so. And again in another case, to which the Noble Earl who moved the address adverted, which he ( Lord Brougham) hoped rarely happened, that upon a lease being out, and the owner wishing to have his farm better cultivated, and in order to bring about that result, found it necessary to reduce the number of his tenants, in order that he might apply that skill and capital which a number of small tenants were not able to command, and were not able therefore to improve the condition of the land. He considered it a great hardship that the landlord could not exer cise the powers granted him by law of dismissing all the small men, and consolidatiog the farms as had been done in Scotland some years ago. To consolidate these farms it must be necessary that a number of these small men should emigrate. It was a considerable hardship that a man should not have some Power to act, as he thought for the good management of his estate. He would be loath to believe that the example quoted by his Noble Friend had been much followed. It appeared from his statement that a vast number of persons were evicted the moment the lease fell in. It was undottbledly right for the landlord to do that if he thought it was for the benefit of his estate, and it was nothing more than an act of kindness, and neither more nor less, on the part of the landlord toward his tenantry if it was not done more frequently, and they Must be made by the strong arm of the law to understand that such was his right ; and if he should choose to stand upon his right, they had no right to oppose, or resist, or thwart him, for that is the law of the land; and property would be valueless, and no longer worth having or cultivating if such laws were repealed. The landlord had an indissoluble right to do as he wished with his own estate. He con sidered that by passing the late coercion measures for putting down outrages, that they had begun at the right end. He rejoiced to see it. They had armed Government with a compulsory power, and the first lesson to be taught to the Irish people was, that they must obey the law • that they must sub mit themselves to the law, and that their' agitators and evil counsellors, be they laymen or ptiestS, Shall in vain attempt to urge upon them to resist the law, or persist in the commission of outrages ; and they should know, and must knows that if they do so resist and persist, they must suffer the penalty of the condign punishment of criminals. So carefully did the Noble Earl abstain, from telling them what he Wished to prdpdse to remedy the grievances of Ireland, that it was only when he alluded to the Irish church, at the end of his speech, that he ( Lord Brougham) could know what tangible femede he had in view. The mode of collecting the tithe was, it appeared, the master grievance. B ut s i nce 1832, when his Noble Friend op posite, with himself, made the change in the tithe, there was no such thing to be found in Ireland as a tithe proctor. To use the war d s o f Lord Plonliett, he Was ai . rare to be found other o no H ne o uf that s j e n o s t f s eu l e : ; a j a r e I cn i as an ostrich. I n t h e year 1823 he resented a petition in the td am wh e he n i t ch , hadheeeeraesgi complaining of the mal-adminis roentttehden wereto m b a n k t o observa tionsten true. Some of the judges who then executed the la* were sailed "Union judges," dheily r sb o aagtseorewhvoielcri,e'h' afterwards. i t e t htheirer then regard, made, d ee: as it so happened that they owed their origin to the union, and statement aistrong gh a ce political days gas l w o e ok e e da actuated e t and he could say that no such grievance now remained. It pqtionuiensmenn,t,hbonwtever, whatiw,eash andotbewenhastinaeej.udgfieawd might be said that politi ca l men now sat on the bench, The wag the beforeermine i his abeenp stained with faction? Were they political judges? It was said that such appointments were not liked by the peo ple of Ireland. He could say that one-half of the population might disapprove of the appointment, but a half rend more ap proved of them.—(Great laughter.) No doubt four or five Judges were appointed, who were said to he political judges ;but were they the only political judges A former ertained towards the Establi — shed Church (f England in Ire and. He thought it was a very remarkable circumstance, hut it was a faet th it their Lor.l:4;Ms would tied. nu s:•archin,r the records of Parliament, that after the Irish Parliament and the English Parliament had been endeavoui ing to discover the node of enabling the Irish Roman Catholics to testify their sllrgiance to their Sovereign, by stiiking out from the oaths the iath of supremacy, and all refire:ice to the peculiar Roman Catholic doctrines of transubstantiAtion, and everything else, those parts of this declaration or oath which had reference to the property of the ;hurch, or to the existence of the Church, were inverted in the oaths on the petition of the Roman Catholics 'themselves. !lose petitions commenced in 1805 ; th. , y went on from that Preai;terian religion had been established in that country, and asked why the people of Ireland should not have as good a right to have the Roman Catholic religion established as their reli gion as the people of Scotland had to establish Presbyterianism. The episcopacy of some of the aristocracy of Scotland was no reason for its being established there, nor was it any reason bnause the aristocracy of Ireland were Prptestant that their n 0... ... ime to 1826; and on the passine of the Roman Cetholic Relief Bill, the Roman Catholics themselves repeatedly denied that they had any wish to deprive the Church of England of her iroperty, or injure in any m-enner the privileges of pesessions -he held in Ireland. All they desired was the removal of civil lisabilities, and that they might stand in the same manner as sthers of her Majesty's subjects under the laws and government , f the country. lie said, therefore, that he thought it not very nrobeble that there should be a total change of sentiment on hat subject. It was very true that some might look after pro derty of all description, but if one thing was more certain than mother, it was this, that the insertion of those words ie the eath or declaration which was now the law of the land, had been made by the very persons who were claiming advantages under the law. These words were suggested and desired to he in serted by the Roman Catholics themselves. Now he had stated that the institution of the Church of England in Ireland, and is union with the Church in this country, was a matter of compact which could not be departed from. But he would go further, and say that there was no one pro position in the Constitution of the country, for the maintenance of which more solemn engagements had been entered into, than for the preservation of the Church of England. The Roman Catholics themselves declared in the year 1828, on the repeal of the Test Act, and I again in 1829, on the passing of the Roman Catholic Relief Bill—indeed, on every occasion on which a concession of pri vileges were made with regard to that point, the declaration universally was—that the persons claiming the privileges of Roman Catholic subjects under these Acts of Parliament, universally made declaration of reservation to the property of the Church of England in that country. So in Parliament the principle had been uaifermly acted upon to preserve the Church of England in Ireland. But he would go a little further. Ile believed that the Noble Lord was further mistaken in some of the causes of discontent in Ireland. He (the Duke of Wellington) saw, some years ago, a petition from some Peers in Ireland, complaining of the discontent prevailing in that country. Among the subjects of discontent, there was certainly the existence of the Church Establishment mentioned; but there were other causes of discontent also. They mentioned that the relative proportion of Members of Parliament from Ireland and from England, referring to the population of Ireland and England, was not what it ought to be. Did the Noble Lord mean to concede that ? They mentioned also that in the Cor poration Act, the qualification had been raised higher than it had been in the English Corporation Reform Act, when the property in Ireland was taken into consideration; they met:- -ioned also that the number of Irish Judges—of Roman Ca tholic Judges—were not sufficiently numerous on the Irish Bench. lie (the Duke of Wellington) had always understood chat the Judges were selected according to the best judgment of the country, from those most capable of performing the duties of those judicial offices. He had been told it had been so in Eng land, and he did not see why it should not be in Ireland also. He had never beers told that the Irish Judges were deficient in those qualities which fitted them for their office. But these were not things to be incorperated in an Act of Parliament, yet they were the grievances which were stated to exist by the Noble Lords who had signed the petition, which he (the Duke of Wellington) had seen in print, from Charlemont House. He thought he could show, from what had passed hereto fore, that the most ample concessions would not put an end to the cause of all the mischief. He meant agitation—a perpetual agitation for the repeal of the union; and whether it were the restriction of titres, or churcheralea or any other measure of the moment—no matter what the concession might be— he thought he could show simply, from what had passed heretofore, that it had been followed by additional agitation and a iditional discontent.--(Hear, hear.) A great measure of concession was made in the. year 1829, and what happened after it? The law passed in the month of April, 1821, and in the month of June in the SAME year an agitator commenced his work in the county of Clare, calling on the people, now that they had got religious liberty, to demand civil liberty and a repeal of the union. From Clare he went to Dublin, and in the month of December, 1829, he commenced there a system of agitation, which hr continued throughout the year 1830, up to January in the following year, at different times, under dif ferent circumstances, and in different parts of the country, until a Noble Friend, whom he did not see in his place, issued a publication, by which he put an end to this description of agitation. Now, their Lordships would observe thatthis fresh system of agitation upon the sub ject of tithes ; a repeal of the church rates, and a repeal of the union, commenced on the very morrow of the passi ng o f th e Catholic Relief Bill. Well, then, soon after this publication had been issued, an agitation was recommenced fur the sus pension of tithes and church rates, and then the Government were under the necessity of passing the Coercion Bill, which they were induced to do by a dispatch of Lord Wellesley, who stated that he had invariably found a connexion between the agitation for the repeal and extinction of tithes, and popular discontent, and agrarian outrage. Now, your Lordships will observe, from these facts, (and he hoped the Noble Earl would see it too), that the moment concessions of any sort were made, agitation was recommenced for some other object; perhaps for obtaining the property of parties who gave occasion for discontent, or for exciting the population to commit agrarian outrage. After the Coercion Bill of 1833, there was another passed in 1834, which lasted for a twelvemonth, and it was succeeded by a third, which was passed in 1835, for a period of five years, but which terminated in the year 1840. There was, he believed, some little cessation of agitation in the yeats 1835 and 1835, owing, as it was supposed, to some political arrangement which was made in London ; but that apparent tranquillity did not last long. The agitation was continued under different forms, in 1837, le3B, 1839, and 1840 ; and in the latter year the monster meetings commenced, and they were continued to the end of the year 1840, through 1841 and 1842, and part of 1843. In the month of November of that year they were put down by a proclamation issued by the Lord Lieutenant. During this time there was no want of measures of conces sion, for the tithe arrangement was brought to a complete conclusion—the Relief Bill was passed, and the Cor poration Bill was passed; and, in fact, every measure was adopted which could tend to the prosperity of Ireland; and Parliament acted upon all these occasions, as if it were an Irish Parliament, acting solely for the benefit of the Irish People. But still the agitation continued, and monster meet ings were assembled, which could only be got rid of by mili tary law. Now, he entreated them to observe minutely this history of concession. He did net mean to say that it was right to concede on all these points, but he did say, that they ought not to concede on this occasion, when they were bound by compact to avoid doing so—bound by compact to preserve and maintain the united Church of England and Ireland.— ( Hear.) He did not put this question of the preservation of the Church of England upon such high grounds as those which he could have wished t o h ave put it s , but he mi g ht rem i n d their Lordships that under this establishenent they enjoyed the advantage of seeing the people entertain as strong a sense of religion, and as great a respect fr.r religion, as existed in any country in the world. They 'had, besides, the advan tage of enjoying universal toleration; every system of reli gion was tolerated in this country; and, above all, they had the advantage of enjoying religious peace.—(Cheers.) These were three of the great Christian advantages which they de rived from the existence of the Established Church, and he entreated their Lordships not to run the risk of losing any of them by adopting any measure of that description.—( Hear, hear.) It was true, that, although they had religious peace, there were still great political diVerences of opinion upon the subject of the different religioine sects which existed in the country, but this was the cunses luence of their constitutional existence. For the people of this country —every individual of this country, had the privilege of considering and discussing the question of political power..-- (Hear, hear. ) Consequently their minister or others might: lead them, and each sect was therefore anxious to increaser its poleieal power; and the result was that great siva'ry existed amongst the sects. ( Hear, hear.) But would concessions of any kind put an end to this ?rivalry for political power? No, it would not; concede - what they might the rivalry would still remain; while, - if they conceded what the Catholic Church demanded, he irvas afraid they would no longer have religious peace, or facilities for settling such matters as the marriage question in that. House, as they had done some time ago. The slime questio n o ould not be settled elsewhere. I. could not be settled in Germany, France, or Spain, and he ,a; sure that if they sac ctioned a Catholic establishment there would be an end to that religious peace and toleration without which this country could not exist for a single hour.—( Hear. ) Under these circumstances, esesidering that they were bound Lions should be exclusively established there. It was said that tha property belonged to the Church of E igland. He wi,bed to know what was the contiguity of the term " Church of England ?" Was it an ancient term ? He admitted, in deed, that the property belonged to the Church of Christ, but he denied that it belonged by original right either to the Church of England or to the Roman Catholic Church. It indeed be longed by Act of Parliament to the Church of England, and here he came to the vrarst feature in the con nexion between the two countries. Has their legislation been so universally right towards Ireland that it should be right in that instance also? For his own part, he would not consent that any portion of the church property should be diverted from its legitimate purposes, but he did think.it a matter of indifference whether that property should be applied exclusively to the one sect or to the other; on the contrary he would look at the real foundation of justice, and he would say that they ought rather to apply it to the wants of the many, than to make it applicable only to the purposes of the few—of those wealthy classes of the community who main tained their chaplains in their own houses. That they might dally with this subject he had no doubt, but when his Noble and Learned Friend spoke of putting down agitation, perhaps he (Earl Fitr,villiam) might be allowed to ask, if anything had been done for Ireland that had not been extracted from England by agitation? If they had acted perfectly just towards Ireland and all her Members, then indeed there might be something in his Noble and Learned Friend's views on this subject—something in his expressions of putting down agitation. But his Noble and Learned Friend knew well that Ireland had never got anything except by ivitation, and there fore his Noble and Learned Friend's dictum to put down agi tation, was saying neither more nor less than, put down the means of getting anything for Ireland. What measure had they got now ? One to prevent men from being out in the dis turbed districts after sunset or before sunrise. On these grounds he would snpport the motion brought forward by his Noble Friend. lie thought that it • eminently deserved the attention of the country, for they were intimately connected with the well-being of Ireland. The aristocracy of that coun try were iu an anomalous position, as anomalous perhaps as any other thing in Ireland. The aristocracy in England had grown up frem the people; but the aristocracy in Ireland was super imposed upon the people, and if ever there was an oligarchy existing in any country, it existed in Ireland in her Irish House of Peers, and still more i n h er H ous e o f Common,. Lord BROUGH ANI explained. - The Marquis of CLAN RICARDE was the more induced to speak upon this matter, because the Noble Duke had said that the existence of the Established Church was ono of the grievances of Ireland. The Noble Duke, he was sure, spoke without any distinct recollection of the words in his petition; but ho would take upon himself to assure the Noble Duke that he was wrong in so stating, for he ( Lord Clanriclrde) had never signed a petition stating that the Church of England and Ireland was a grievance to the people of Ireland. Much might be done to remedy the evils complained of, by regulat ing the temporalities of that Church, and reforming the abuses that existed.—( Hear.) But to one principle he would never consent, namely, to take from the revenues of that Church, and appropriate them to the support of the Roman Catholic clergy. Noble Lords en the other side had, in his opinion, mixed up two matters which ought to have been kept widely distinct, namely, paying the Roman Catholie clergy from the funds of the Government, and preservin g inviolate the revenues of th e E ng li s h Church. H e co nsidered , however, that a surplus fund might be formed for the purposes of pro. viding a joint education of the people. If they looked at Ireland in its political aspect, they would find the Queen's Govern ment denuded of all authority, and the representa tive of Majesty occupying a position somewhat similar to that of a superintendent of police. IVhen he said, also, he knew that Government had no hold on the country, they had not attempted to restore the influence of the legitimate authority, he said that the Queen's Ministry were alone to blame for this state of things, Ile would ask, was not the country in a different state when they received it into their hands? He would prove from the charges of judges made in 1842, that the country was in a state of tranquillity. Every one of these charges confirmed that fact po;itively. There was also a Bill brought forward by a Noble Lord, and which he (the Marquis of Clanricarde) had been accused of opposing. The principle of the Bill was, that the tenant should have compensation for any improvement made on his farm, provided that he did not remain long enough on the farm to make a profit of it. It was a just law—jest in itself and consistent with every right of property and sound principle of law. He said that the people of Ireland were in some degree alienated from Par liament, and had no confidence in it, amd that a great deal more laid at the door of the Government; for the method of administering the law must materially affect the confidence of the people of Ireland in the Parliament. An objection would be entertained to placing a man of violent party feel ing to preside over a court of criminal law, but there would be no objection to placing such a man in a civil court. Sir E. Sugden was a most distinguished Member of the other House, and a most violent party man, and did any man in Ireland blame the appointment of Sir E. Sugden to a law court on the ground of his being a party man ? The politics of an individual did necessarily affect his appoint ment. He had the assurance of experienced persons, that the state of Ireland had never been fraught with so much danger to the interests of England, or to the empire, as it was at that moment. He had received those assurances from persons who were old enough to remember and speak of the time previous to the year 179 and he would believe what he heard, that at no time of those disastrous periods was there so much danger to be apprehended, Under these circumstance, and concur ring as he did with the views of his Noble Friend, he felt it his duty to give this motion his support. The Duke of WELLINGTON said he was v er y anx i ous not to omit a word which he saw in the paper, and wh ic h t en d e d to the The interestsiarqu of o t f h e E o s pITesMATH said h e f e lt it necessary o . refer to some observations of the Noble Earl who had spoken the last but two. The Noble Earl had said that the aristo cracy of this country had grown from the people, but that the aristocracy of Ireland were afflicted upon the people. He would ask, whether there was any great difference between their ancestors, who came over in the earlier ages sword in hand, and the manner in which the aristocracy had been afflicted in Ireland? The Noble Marquis opposite had stated country. . that the people of Ireland had no respect for the I m perial Le gislature of the country. He denied this to be true. An a on to alienate the a going g ial Parliament, but from was glad to say, h a d not ver succeeded, t as strongly attached a s e ffgietcattitiohoninss, country.o hfe the admitted, p Thanatodt from agitation, long beenthe hel gtu and People the w try The Duke of RICHMOND said , after the speech of th e Noble Earl with respect to the Irish Church, it was quite the Government an d the im possible for him to support the Noble Earl's resolution. He did not, however, wish it to be understood that he had in the slightest degree any confidence in the Government, be cause he had not; and what was more he never should have again. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said he opposed the motion, and attributed the distress of Ireland to absenteeism. If Noble Lords who had estates in Ireland, instead of residing at Brighton, or Paris, or other places on the continent, would ()cage/telly Visit their property, and see justice done to their tenants, they would tic troubled with very few complaints from the Irish people. The Earl ST. GERMANS said that at that late hour it was quite impossible for him to follow the Noble Earl, for the . Noble Earl had opened a wide field for discussion, and bad spoken of agrarian outrages, the administration of justice, the church, the landlord and tenant commission, and the important measure of fixity of tenure, every one of which subjects would require the greater part of an evening to consider. The Noble Lord who followed the Noble Earl had animadverted with some severity upon the conduct of the Government in the other House of Parliament for not resisting Mr. Sharman Crawford's Bill upon the subject of fixity of tenure. Now, be had looked over that Bill, and he could assure their Lordships that he found no mention whatever of the subject oiefixity of tenure. The Noble Earl had told the Home, that these agrarian outrages were connected en tirely with political grievances. Now, if that were so, the same cause would produce the same effect elsewhere, and they would have the same amount of agrarian outrages in the nor thern and midland counties, as they had in the . western.. He said, therefore, that the supposition of the Noble Earl was wholly unfounded. Government were of opinion that the relation of landlord and tenant in Ireland was not in a patio- Pl SUN, , LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING MARCEI 24, 184(3. ' factory state. Accordingly, _in the course of the last session, they introduced a Bill for improving these relations. There was, however, not sufficient time to get it through the House, and it was, therefore, vvithdrawri. Bait there was another Bill in the course of preparation, and he trusted it would shortly be laid before their Lordships It would respect the rights of pro perty, and at the same time improve the condition of the tenant. With respect to the measure of Catholic Emancipation, he differed from the Noble Duke, and the other parties who brought forward that measure. At the time of the union with Ireland, the Protestant religion was the religion of the country, and by the Act of Union they were bound to preserve it in violate. And as regarded the opinions of Mr. Grattan and 11r. Plunkett, they always maintained a reservation in their speeches. The evidence given by the Catholic prel•strs and other advocates of the Catholic emancipation, was also of a similar' nature. They did net wish to affect the tem poralities of the Protestant Church. They entertained no such desire. Their prelates did not wish to sit in their Lordships' House. They wished to keep their Church apart from the State. They wished to be a religious body only, and such he felt would be the general opinion of the people of this country. He considered there hail been great exaggeration with refe rence to the revenues of the Irish Church ; the whole amount of the revenue did not exceed 300/. per annum fur each incum bent. The Nob'e Lord then referred to the measures which had been adopted by the Government for the benefit of Ire land—to the grants for education—to the great increase in the number of schools and scholars—the former being 273, the latter 3,700. The Government also proposed the establishment of model schools in each county in Ireland. The grant to May nooth had been productive of great good ; and the new col leges, established to furnish a sound and liberal education to the middle classes, would also be productive of great benefit. After a few words from Earl GREY, and Earl St. GERMANS had spoken in reply, Their Lordships divided, when the numbers were— For the motion Against it Majority The Calico Prints Bill went through Committee. The Consolidated Fund Bill was read a second time, and also the South Sea Company Bill. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and their Lordships adjourned at Half-past Twelve. HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 23. AMALGAMATION OF RAILWAYS. Mr. ENTIVISLE concurred in the remarks that fell from the Hon. Member who supported the appointment of the Committee. He b?lieved that it would be found, upon investigation by the Committee, that the amalgamations pro posed tiy existing companies were, in 'rimy instances, and most instances of a defensive character. The amalgamations took place in order that the companies might the better defend themselves against rival schemes, which were only started to terrify the existing companies into a compromise. He be lieved that the Committee would be of great benefit to the country. He therefore heartily seconded the motion. Sir G. CLERK said this question was one of paramount im portance; but he confessed that he did not exactly gather from the speech of his lion. Friend what was the precise ob- jeet to which the Committee was to direct its iniestigation. If that Committee was to lay thwn several rules under which certain railways should amalgamate, and uncb , r what circum stances amalgamation should not be permitted, it appeared to him that they would have little else to do but to give Parlia mentary sanction to the principles which were laid down in the twenty-first report of the Beard of Trade last year. He thought that if that were the object of the Com mittee, it was an exceedingly desirable one.—(Hear. ) The question was, in what manner could these general rules be made applicable in individual cases ? He hoped that whatever tribunal these cases might be brought before, that they would look with extreme jealousy upon all those proposals of amalga mation. He had no doubt that many advantages could be ob tained by the public by a uniformity of management. These benefits might, however, be effective, by means of arrange ments in the different companies ; these arrangements would not possess that permanent nature which a Parliamentary sanction would give them ; they might Le altered and modified by the company. The Board of Trade last year had pointed out some objections, which it would have been quite as well for the interest of the public had they been acted upon. In con elusion, be considered that the Committee appointed by the Hon. Member for Inverness (Mr. Morrison) should be instructed to inquire how far these general rules might be made applicable to individual cases. Mr. BARING considered that the question as to the manner in which the House was to deal with future railway legislation was not a question to be discussed at that time. He thought that was a future consideration. He would recommend that a Committee of five should be formed, to whom they would give a power, in cases of unopposed Bills, to send for any witnesses they might choose. He was very much afraid that from the Committee for which the Hon. Member had moved they would get no report, except a very hurried one. His Hon. Friend had said very pertly that the report of the Board of Trade had not been sufficiently attended to by him, but that very report stated " That nothing could be more difficult than to lay down any general principle for cases of amalgamation ;" and if they were not to lay down a rule, they would ever have the same uncertainty. Their only course, therefore, was to refuse to appoint the Committee, and throw it unon the Government to bring forward some measure on their owe responsibility which would meet the difficulties of the case. Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that it would appear from what the Hon. Gentleman had said, that her Majesty's Govern ment had very much neglected the subject of railway legislation. Mr. BARING—Last year. Sir ROBERT PEEL—The Hon. Member should recol lect that the House must take a share of the blame with her Majesty's Government—( Hear, hear)—because they had in a great measure acted contrary to the advice of those who had been appointed to consider the question of railway amalgama tion. They had not received very favourably the report which the Board of Trade made last year. That report laid down the principle upon which (speaking gent rally) amalgamation should be permitted ; and it then proceeded to apply those principles to every case of amalgamation which was brought before Parliament during the last session. It was distinctly admitted in that report, that it was very difficult to lay down universally the principle on which an amalgamation should proceed.—( Hear, hear.) And it was admitted, that there might be cases in which amalgamation might be permitted with the greatest advantage to the public interests—( Hear, hear)—because, wherever there was a number of distinct and independent lines, forming a great channel of com munication between distant parts, and the proprietors of those lines desired to amalgamate, it would certainly be to the interest of the public that the desired amalgamation should be permitted. On the other hand, the Board of Trade declared it to be their conviction, that an amalgamation between power ful companies, whose lines of railway lay in the same district, would deprive the public of many advantages which railway communication was calculated to afford.—( Hear, hear.) Although the House did not receive that report of the Board of Trade last year, he still thought that the recommendations in that report were wise and comprehensive, particularly as far as amalgamation were concerned ; and he only asked the House to bear a share of the responsibility which had been thrown upon the Government. The House must recollect that they had jealously overruled the decisions of the Board of Trade. However, they were now convinced by experience that amalgamation in certain cases might be justifiable, and conducive to the public ,interest, and he believed, that with some modifications, it would be well to admit the proposal of his Hon. Friend.—(Hear, hear.) Now, with respect to an im portant class of railway Bills, namely, those which had their termini in the city of London, or within the metropolitan dis tricts, they proposed to reserve them for the consideration of a Special Commission, to be appointed by the Crown ; and of course the progress of those Bills would be suspended for the present. Now, might they not adopt this course with respect to amalgamation, substituting a Committee for the Commission, and refer the amalgamation Bills, which were at present before them, to the best Co i.mittee they could appoint, who should consider the question of amalgamation as bearing upon those Bills before them, and leave it for the general Committee to consider at its leisure the principles which ought in future to guide them, when dealing with amalgamation Bills? They would thus have a Committee on the general subject of railway legislation, a Commission to consider railways which had their termini within the metropolitan dis tricts, and a Committee upon the amalgamation Bills, which were now pressing, who might give their opinions to the House as to what other tribunals these amalgamations fhonld he referred in future, and as to the general principles applic able to railway amalgamations, so far as the present session was concerned.—( !fear. ) Mr. FOX AIAULE regretted that the House did not last year carry out the admirable report of the Board of Trade on this subject, but he hoped the Committee, if they appointed one, would be directed to take this report into their particular consideration.—( Hear.) In reference to the atnalgation Bills, if it wag proposed to refer them to a Committee, which should merely report an them with reference to the principle of amalgamation, it was so far well; but if the Committees should be empowered to go into the merits of the Bills, it would only be getting up a system of rivalry between the lines under consideration and rival lines. His own opinion was that, if the Committee proposed by his Hon. Friend should be appointed, there should be some general measures laid down, somewhat, he would suggest, similar to the rules adopted by the Bord of Trade, and which rules should be adhered to by the House. That was the only way, in his opinion, to do justice to the Bills; but whatever course would be adopted he ( Mr. Maule) was prepared to support the proposition of his Hon. Friend opposite. Lord EBRINGTON said it appeared to him that the act of amalgamation was a voluntary act. The subject of amalga mation was so important, and pressed so generally on the com munity, that the Committee moved for could not possibiy de cide on the question. The question, it appeared to him, de pended on this—whether they would adopt the priuciple of competition, or take security on behalf of the public against monopoly—thus sanctioning monopoly, but putting it under proper regulations ? He was certain the result of the Commit tee, keeping such object in view, would be most beneficial. Now, how were they to deal with railway legislation in gene ral? The Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir Robert Peel) la mented that more attention had not been paid to the very able reports of the Board of Trate within the last year. Now, he should remind that Right Hon. Gentleman that he (Lord Ebrington), as also many Hon. Gentlemen on both sides of the House, that expressed their approbation of the ability with which these very reports had been drawn up.—( Hear, hear). He considered they were to blame in not attending more to the suggestions of the Board of Trade. Not only the House but her Majesty's Government had overlooked the labo rious exertions and able investigations of that board. He thought that in this respect the Government had not paid sufficient deference to the decisions of their own friends. Sir R. PEEL said the Hon. Member was labouring under he a mistake respecting the duty of the Government. . The Government, n oright o as i interfere te Government, rfere with th i e n be sorry to adopt a principle to effect the the Board of Trade. It adopting the recommendations o f involved privateh i s (Sir B Ri that Bills; a P ;t e sode l' s they) h opinion, p a l dn would o b n y , rt of the reports of the Board of Trade. Beyond this support interfere,. Lord could not reasonably ~ m w was t o , n i l n y when ite ca capacity i r t e y a great s principle such, w w es a s feeed to that eem e t h f e er G w Govern ment, d e r n i h - Lord EBRINGTON said, in speaking of the Government, he only alluded to what the Right Hon. Baronet had stated in the discussion that took place early in the session. Mr. 11. HINDE confessed, for one, that he had looked to see the Government support the reports of the Board of Trade, as those reports had generally been made with great judgment and discretion. He thought greater attention should have been paid to the recommendations of the Board of Trade. If the present Committee was agreed to, and parties had to Ise submitted to its ordeal, and then had to pass through a Select Committee appointed to inquire into the merits of their Bills, the delay and expense would be very great. If some means could be devised by which the investigation of one Committee would be sufficient instead of two—a great ad vantage would be obtained. Powers ought to be given to the Committee to inquire into all the matters for which two Com mittees, according to the present mode of conducting the busi ness of the House, were now required. Sir GEORGE GREY agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) that the Governmnent ought not to interfere with private Bills. After the discussion which had taken place, he confessed he thought that the appointment of a Committee, before the Committee on the Bill, was unneces sary. If a preliminary Committee were to sit, it would only perform the functions of the Board of Trade of last year. He hoped that the inquiries of the Committee would be limited to some definite and particular object. 1 Mr. PAKINGTON, as a Member of the Classification Committee, would state that the Hon. Member for South Lancashire, had submitted this motion at the suggestion of the Committee of Selection, whose object in making the sugges tion was to thaw the attention of the House of Commons to the magnitude and importance of the subev.t. This question of arnalgamatkin was not only the most important, but one of the most dillicult questions connected with railway subjects. It was more so now; there were no less than 33 amalgama tion schemes before the house at the present moment. The Committee, therfore, thought it their duty to bring the mat ter under the consideration of the House. He considered that if the Committee had gone on quiAly allowing that state of thins to go on, they would soon have had all the communica tion of the country in the hands of two or three gigantic com panies, Fie begged to state, that so far as his own opinio . n was caneerned, he would be content to follow the course indi cate by the Hight Hon. Baronet at the head of the Govern ment. Mr. BARING considered that the House was get ting into a state of considerable confusion. There were a mass of railways before them, the merits of which should be disposed of without unnecessary del iy. The House had three propositions before it as to the manner of disposnig of these momentous qeestions. !'irst, there was the proposition of the lion. Member far North Lancashire (Air. Entwisle), for the appointment of a Select Committee to determine upon certain general principles which were to govern the various Commit tees in dealing with amalgamation Bills hereafter. Then came the proposition for the Committee of the Hon. Member fur Inverness ( Mr. Alorrison), of which the Right Hon. Baronet, the Vice-Presid en t o f th e Boatel of Trade, had justly said that they would hare quite sufficient to occupy their attention without attending to the question of amalgamation. And then they had a proposition of the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Gove:nrnent, which he (Mr. Baring) must say he considered the most business-like mode of dealing with the question—that a Special Committee be appointed, to whom, as a group, all the amalgamation Bills would be referred, and who, having examined these hills, should report to the House upon the subject. He (Mr. Baring) differed with the Right lion. Baronet only on one point—he would have wished that the Committee should have been empowered to examine into the merits of the various Bills, and not nave been confined, as was proposed, to the mere examination of the tendencies of those amalgamations. He thought that they ought to decide upon the comparative merits of the Bills brought before them. He thought that these amalgamation Bills should be all grouped together, and that it would give rise to le:s inconvence to the promoters of the several Bills. Let them go to that Com mittee, and let it determine on the nature of these Bills, fur why should they subject them to a remote trial. He did not consider that the suggestion of the Member for Bath could by any means be adopted, as it would be a source of endless confusion ; what he would recommend was, that they should extract all the amal gamat i on Bill s, anti put them into on group. They should then refer them to a Committee of five, to be em powered to ex; mine into tin it merits, and make their report to the House, which report should be decisive of the fate of these Bills, they world thus obtain the very report for which they were new seeking. He should like to hear what argu ments would be urged against giving to this Committee a power to decide upon the merits of this Bill. Mr. PACKE said that if this motion were agreed to, the public would suffer much loss. Mr. I'tIORRISON did not think that the tending of those Bills to a Committee, for the purpose of considering their merits, would be the proper plan. They had had enough of such legislation ; what they now wanted was the laying down of a principle which the Government should apply in all ea - es. For instance, before they were prepared to decide upon this great question of amalgamation, as had already been suggested by his Hon. Friend, it should be determined to what extent they would sanction the amalgamation of such great railway companies as now possessed what must be called great legal monopolies.—( Hear, hear.) If that had been done some years ago many evils of which they had now to complain in railway matters would not now exist. He thought that railway comranies coming now before the House, praying for powers to amalgamate should be treated as new companies, and therefore subjected to all those preliminary conditions to which the promoters of all new bills had to submit.—(Hear, hear.) But, independently of that, there were a great many things that had been quite neglected, which were very necessary in these matters ; and those things could have been done without at all affecting their tariffs. For instance, he might quote the present system of carrying goods On railways, which much needed amending. They ought to require that railway companies should charge every person alike ; and he would propose that if one party was charged more than another, he should have power to recover back the overcharge in one of the legal tribunals. These matters ought to be settled at once, and they could easily do it, for whenever a company came far new prices their line ought to be treated as a new one. There ought in his opinion to be one general rule applied to railways, and all company's required to charge one rate of fares. But he might be told, that a line which passes through a poor country could not charge so low fares as a company which ran through a populous country. His answer, however, to that was very simple. If the line would not pay at particular fares, the line ought never to have been made. Mr. LABOUCHERE thought that if the Vice-President of the Board of Trade were to apply his attention to the amal gamation of railways, the result of his opinions would furnish a much better guide than could be obtained from the appoint ment of the proposed Committee. Mr. DUNCOMBE was of opinion that the amalgamation of railway Bills was a matter attended with very considerable difficulty. He had, ma one occasion, been a member of a Committee which had to deal with the amalgamation of the Grand Junction line and the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway. In that inquiry the Committee complained very much of having no distinct reference to guide them in coming to a decision. He was of opinion that a preliminary Commit tee should Ise appointed, as the House at present certainly was not in a position to deal with the amalgamation Bills. The Hon. Member for Inverness seemed to be satisfied that some of the amalgamation Bills might be allowed to pass. Hon. Gentlemen used the term amalgamation in boo loose a man ner, and frequently in ignorance of what this term really meant. He (Mr. Duneombe) supposed that amalgama- • tion meant that the conducting of the affairs of two railways should be brought under the superintendence of one Board. But there existed two kinds of amalgamation, one of which consisted of union for the public advantage, and the other of union to promote private interests. Now it was to provide against the monopoly which the latter kind of amalgamation would result in, that the House should he specially careful. lie thought that a Committee should be appointed to make a preliminary inquiry into the nature and objects of any proposed amalgamation ; and such Committee would not at all interfere with the motion of his Hon. Friend, the Member for Inverness. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER entertained similar oyinions with thoee pronounced by the Hon. Gentle man who bad just sat down. He believed that it was neces sary that some definite rules should be laid down with respect to the amalgamation of railways, for it was perfectly true, as the Hon. Gentleman had observed, that nothing could be more indistinct than the ease of amalgamation which had been brought before the House. He must say, that looking at the subject in all its bearings, the best mode of proceeding appeared to him, to appoint a Committee in which the House could have confidence, arid of which Committee the Vice- President of the Board of Trade should be chairman, to in vestigate the merits of the various amalgamation Bills, and report their opinion accordingly. It struck him (the Chan cellor of the Exchequer), that this mode of proceeding would not interfere with the motion of the Hon. Member for Inver ness, and would, at the same time, tend very materially to facilitate the progress of public business. Mr. HUME would humbly submit to the House that no more amalgamations of railway companies should be allowed to take place until the report of the Committee of 1845 had been produc2d, and he would further propose that the consideration of every case of amalgamation should be postponed until the report of the Committee which had been appointed to inquire into the subject should be obtained. Mr. W. Li. COLLETT considered that whenever amalga matien had taken place, the public had been greatly benefited— the fares had invariably been lowered, and every pains had been taken to meet the public convenience. He had always enter tained the opinion that the House was favourable to the amal gamation of railways, and felt surprised that there should now exist any desire to thro ,v a difficulty in the way. Lord HA 11 R.Y VANE suggested that certain general prin ciples might be laid down, so that those who had to deal with the matter might be able to form some definite judgment as to the practicability and utility of any proposed amalgamation. Ho could not see that any bad result would be the consequence of postponing the consideration of the amalgamation Bills to another session. Until the matter had been thoroughly sifted, it would be difficult to say, whether, when deciding on any amalgamation 13111, the Committee were riot preventing the con struction of a line which would be more beneficial to the public. Mr. WILSON PATTEN then briefly replied, and proposed that the adoption of the report of the Railway Committee of 1645 should be added to the original motion. In reply to a question from Mr. SMYTHE, Mr. W. PATTEN said it was not his intention to exclude the consideration of the amalgamation of canals from the atten tion of the Committee, and he would insert the word "canals" in every case after railway. The resolution as amended, was then put from the Chair, and agreed to. Mr. HUME wished to ask two questions of the Noble Lord the President of the Board of Control. He wished to know if there was any truth in the reports which appeared in the Paris papers with respect to our affairs in India ? The second question which he wished to have answered was whether the Government had taken into their consideration the present system of communication with India by our over land mail ? He thought that the Government should do some thieg to save them from depending upon such reports, by establishing a better means of communication, more especially when it was shown by Mr. Waghorn that he had been enabled to anticipate the overland mail by forty-eight hours. Lord JOCELYN said that, as the Indian mail had not yet arrived, he could not give a positive answer as to the cor rectness of the reports in the Paris papers. With respect to the second question, he would say that the Government had it under their consideration, and would, no doubt, adopt some measure to meet the inefficiency of the present means c loom munication. Sir 11. PEEL wished to inform the House how this in formation had reached the Government of this country, as the subject was most important to many, perhaps his ex planation, would go far to allay any anxiety. The intelligence was telegraphed from Marseilles to Paris, and the French Government immediately communicated it to her Majesty's Government. This was all the authority at present for the re ports in question. Lord PALMERSTON wished to put a question to the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government, with respect to their relations with Buenos Ayres. He wished to know if they were at all acting in the war which was going on between the Republic of Buenos Ayres and Monte Video? The language of the Government in Parliament was the language of peace, but the acting of their ministers at these places were the acts of war. There had been advertisements for ships to remove the British subjects Lom Buenos Ayres to Monte Video, and this looked as if the Government of this country had taken part with tl.e latter republic. If they were at war with Buenos Ayres it was right that the Govern ment should communicate the fact, and if not it was proper that such should be stated. He thought it necessary for her Majesty's Ministers to say whether or not they had sanctioned the acts of their ministers at these places. Without reading the instructions of the Governme n t t o t h e i r consuls, it was difficult to make out whether or not those gentleman had acted for peace or war. He wished to know from the Rig ht Hon. Baronet if the country was a t war with Buenos Ayres? Sir R. PEEL thought, as the notice of the Noble Lord was not very formal, it would be better that he should simply answer the question, and he would recommend that no discussion should take place. It was with great reluctance that her Majesty's Government had interfered with the affairs of Buenos Ayres, and it was not till protesting became almost intolerable that this country interfered. The independence of the republic was established through the interference of this country, and it was acknowledged by the Brazils. The inte rests of England were greatly connected with the two repub -1 lies, and the mercantile interests were very much injured by the continuation of hostilities- The Government of this country represented to France that the war was most injurious to the mercantile interests, and in conformity with those re presentations, treaties were made and accepted in 1 841 by Monte Video, and rejected by Buenos Ayres. By these treaties England had no other object but the restoration of peace—no accession of territory was sought, for that was out lof the question. England and France at a later period sent a special mission, recommending a cessation of hostilities, and, if I possible, to restore peace. The proposals were again accepted by Monte Video, but were rejected by Buenos Ayres. It was i then agreed by the two Gpvernments that they would not in ' terfere by force unless actuthiy compelled. The instructions which had been given by Isis country to their Ministers there were now laid on the table, and he could assure the N & e Lords and the House that those instructions did not amount to a declaration ef war. The question put by the Noble Lord was, whether we were or were not at war with Buenos Ayr, s ? This country was not at war with that republic, although it was true that a blockade of Cuba and the River Plate, by the instructions of the Government, had taken place; but this did not amount to a declaration of war. '1 he expedition up the River Panama had not been contemplated by the Government, but no doubt the explanation of the minister there would be 11L11:1, Satisfactory as to such a proceeding. With regard to the removal of several of her Majesty's subjects from Buenos Ayres,. the Noble Lord, he apprehended, was un d er an erroneous im pression. The fact was this, some subjects of her Majesty, being alarmed for their personal safety, left Buenos Ayres and went to Monte Video, and applied to Mr. Owsley for assistance and protection. Their removal was quite voluntary; Mr. Owsley contributed as much as he could to their comfort and safety, but being persons of agricultural pursuits, and the country not affording scope for the exercise of their pursuits,, Mr. Owsley found it ne c essa r y t o remove them, with their own consent. He believed that he had then answered the questions of the Noble Lord as far as was necessary ; further than that he could not go, without provoking a discussion. Lord J. RUSSELL said he rose to express a hope that the Right lion Baronet would give, either at that moment, or as soon as pnaible, some further information on the subject. The Right Hon. Gentleman had admitted there had been ships taken and ordered for sale. Now, certainly, it required some Order of Council to justify the Admiral in such proceedings; and with respect to the operations of the troops, he wished to know how they could be accounted for. Sir R. INGLIS wished to make an observation, About two centuries ago—(Laughter)—a fleet sailed up the Medway, and laid waste everything. They had an instance, also, of a Rus sian fleet committing the most enormous ravages. Now, be tween these cases and the present he saw no difference what ever. to satisfy the friends of peace. How, for instance, could the Quakers be satisfied that England was not at war with Buenos Ayres, when all the incidents of war that occurred at Nasarino, and in other naval engagements were enacted? He «i-lied to know what the distinction between war and peace was, when under both forms there was loss of life and destruction of property? If such constituted peace, he again wished to ask what was the difference between it and war? Sir IL PEEL said that if the lion. Baronet referred to the records of the year 11328, the period of Navarino, he would find that there was a declaration of war, and that England ac— tual:y was at war.--( Hear, hear.) In the present instance, the blockade was directed by the command of her 'Majesty's Ministers, and whatever responsibility attached to such the Ministers and representatives of her :Majesty were ready to undertake. He thought her Majesty's subjects, sailors and soldiers, engaged in the blockade, were entitled to the greatest credit for their gallantry in the affair; and he should conclude, by stating, that he was not then prepared to lay before the House further information in respect to the matter, but as soon as he couli do so, consistently with the public interest, of course he would take an early opportunity of laying it before the House.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. MILNER GII3SON said, that in the last session of Parliament be had presented several petitions in reference to the subject then before the House, and he then begged to say that whatever the policy of Government might be, he hoped they would protect the free navigation of the River Plate. MINISTERIAL MEASURES. Mr. S. CRAWFORD presented a petition from Rochdale, signed by 8,000 persons, praying for an immediate reduction and abolition of taxation on articles of food, as contemplated by the Government. The petition was ordered to lie on the table. Sir R. PEEL said he had been requested to present two petitions. The first was from Liverpool, and the commercial interests of that city prayed that the Government would not delay its decision in abolishing protective duties. No petition was ever more respectably signed than was the present by gen tlemen of all parties. He had been informed, that in the course of a few hours 414 of the signatures of the most respect able gentlemen in that city had been attached. Every banking hou•e in the city subscribed to the document. It bore the sig natures of 214 merchants and shipowners, and 190 ship brokers. The petitioners stated that every branch of trade was paralysed by the uncertainty and indecision tha at present existed ; and they prayed that the Go vernment would, at as early a day as possible, pronounce its decision. The second petition was from Manchester, and bore the signatures of 1,122 gentle- men, attached in the short space of twenty-four hours. It had been signed by the eminent bankers, by fifty-five members of the town-council, and by the greater number of the large houses engaged in the East and West India trade, the Canada, Russian, and American trade; and he (Sir R. Peel) had been assured that the capital possessed by those on whose behalf the petition was signed, did not fall much short of thirty millions. —( Hear, hear.) The petitioners stated that they observed with much satisfaction the course adopted by her Majesty's Government, and prayed that, while they admitted the pro priety of giving due deliberation to matters of such grave im portance, the House would pronounce its decision on as early a day possible.—( Hear, hear.) The petitions were ordered to lie on the table. _ _ An HON. MEMbER (whose name we could not learn) pre sented 46 petitions from Buckingham, against the measures in troduced by her Majesty's Ministers. Mr. ET WALL presented some petitions in favour of the measures submitted by Ministers.—Ordered to lie on the table, .THE CORN-LAWS. On the order of the day, that this Bill be read a second time, being put. Mr. ELIOT YORKE said that, unaccustomed as he was to address the House, and, knowing his own deficiency, he hesitated to appear before them ; but he was urged on to the discharge of the duty by the petitions which he held in his hand, signed as they were by an immense number of agricultur ists, and therefore he could not then, as formerly, give a silent vote on the question, lest the truth of his own opinions should be doubted, and the sincerity of his professions sus pected.—(Hear, hear.) His intention on that occasion wilts to more that the Bill be read a second time that day six months.. --(Hear, hear.) In advancing to that subject he would say, if the Gentlemen on that (the Ministerial) side of the House felt as he did, he entreated of them not to be deterred by what had taken place, but by every form which the House recognised, and by the adoption of every course which it sanctioned, to unite and exert themselves for the defeat of the measure then before the llowe.—( Hear, hear.) He objected to the Bill Le; iFe it sought to repeal a principle which, had been recognised by the people of England as identified with their best interests.—( Hear, hear.) It was stated that no apprehension i s manifested i n th e agricul tural diarists on thii subject, but he could answer that the sen timents of the district which he represented were not in its favour. That district was an area of 1,600,000 acres. It was formerly a wilderness, now it was a great corn-growing district. But in order to briny , it to this state a large expenditure had taken place. Not less than five millions had been expended to bring these wastes into cultivation ; and all this had been done on the faith of protection.—( Hear, hear.) At the present moment they were subjected in that district to an annual tax of from Bs. to Its. per acre, or an aggregate tax of 80,0001. per annum. If prices fell, as he expected they would, the amount of distress that must result would be appalling. He did not expect a reduction in prices this year, while so much capital was expended on public works; but as soon as that capital was withdrawn their prices would fall, and general depression over. take all engaged in agricultural operations. The Hon. Gen tleman then read several extracts, from correspondence he had had with parties in the agricultural districts in support of this view of prices, showing that, next year, with the Government measure in operation, and an average crop, the price of wheat would be from 40s. to 455. per quarter, and that the wages of the labourers would have to be reduced at least 2s. per week. He had that day received a letter from a gentleman, stating that at the present moment an eminent corn merchant in Gloucester had imported, wheat from Odessa at 37a. per quarter. He had also received information that several parties engaged in agriculture intended to remove abroad, and de vote themselves to the raising of wheat, if the government measure was carried into effect. All this showed that it was impossible for the farmers go on under the new system, and meet payments. He had been furnished with several calcula tions on the subject. One was, that in a 'farm of 400 acres, on which there was a loss under protection of 3471., under free-trade the loss would be 856!. 9s. t2d.—( Hear, hear.) On another farm of bOO acres, it was calculated that the loss under the corn measure would not be less than 665!. 1 Bd., or a sum nearly equal to the whole rent.—( Hear.) Yet this was a farm that paid 1,200'. per annum for labourers' wages. The Hon. ki ember then referred to certain returns respecting the amount of disease to the agricultural districts in various years, showing that in those years when corn was cheapest disease and distress most abounded. He also referred to the tables of prices, furnished by Mr. Crooke, showing that the effect of an overabundance was to produce a state of suffering and distress in the agricultural districts, and among the labouring classes. The present law gave fair and moderate prices, and was all that could be required, unless the Government wanted low prices. If they did so, then he had shown that low prices meant distress and low wages to the labouring classes.—(Hear.) On this point he would refer to the authority of Lord Fitzwilliam, who said, that the repeal of the corn-laws meant ruin to the farmers and destitution to the labourers.— ( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. E. Yorke) would therefore oppose the Bill by every means in his power, so as to defeat the money corporation that was seeking the repeal of the corn-laws.—(llear, hear.) But he would go still further to prove the injurious operation of the relaxation of the protec tion principle. In the year 1844, the r a t es i n t h e agr i cultural districts were much higher than in the year 1842, though, in the former period, the system had been relaxed. He further objected to the measure before the House, on account of its injustice. He did not deprecate the law from any selfish or exclusive grounds, but because it would be an act of spoliation in a great and important interest, which they were bound to defend. And if the measure was carried by the Government, he hoped they would not escape without that denunciation and desecration which they deserved, and which their treachery had justly earned.—( Hear, hear.) He ob jected to this measure because, while it took away all protection from the agriculturists, it l e f t on l and and houses all the great public burdens of the country.—(Hear, hear.) Ile did not avow these principles for the purpose of making a speech. He felt deeply upo n thi s matter. They must look narrowly i nto this subject, and they should not have his assent to the proposed change unless they consented to remodel the taxation of the country. He did not hesitate to say, in the language which the Right lion. Baronet the Home Secretary in 1839 used, that the Government had been guilty of a gross fraud upon the public. He would say a word to the new proselytes below him. It was the same w ' ith apostacy in politics as in religion. The proselyte was only used to strike a blow, and the blow having been struck, the apostate was kicked over, be cause he was not then trusted by those who had used him. He (Mr. Yorke) begged to move that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. Sir .1. Y. BULLER agreed with the views expressed by his Hon. Friend, and, supporting those views, he could not consent to allow the Bill further to proceed. He had supported the last alteration in the eorn-laws, believing that no further alter ation would be proposed, at all events during the present Par liament. He had been greatly disappointed when he had heard of the determination of the Government. He had not yet re covered from that disappointment. Mr. M'GEACHY would support the measure of her 111a jesty's Government, because he believed it wise and politic. Having supported the reductions in the tari f f , and looking to the effect of those reductions, he thought there was every encouragement to proceed. —( Hear, hear.) Every man who looked candidly and fairly into the position, and the difficulties of the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government, during the last year, would not, in his opinion, use any harsh expressions towards him for the mea sures which he had brought forward ; they would in fact con fess that he had acted the part of a wise and experienced statesman. Every dispassionate man, who viewed the position of the poorer classes of this country , would refrain from charg ing the Right Hon. Baronet with inconsistency for having pro posed his present measures. There was one point to which he would allude for a moment, as he conceived that the preval enc e of the present system was injudicious, and i njuriou s to the in terests of the country. The Whig party themselves, until a very • recent period, were protectionists, and a great portion of the political difficulty of the present crisis was increased by the fact of the Noble Lord, the Member for London, having been unable to accept the reins of Government, which had been abandoned by the Right Hon. Baronet and his colleagues. It was evident that the cause of that non-acceptance of office was the weakness and dissensions of that political party. Such a course would surely lead to the most injurious consequences. What would be the practical results of such a course? Why, that the country would be governed by the Exeter-hall or Anti- Nlaynooth Committee, or by 17, Old Bond-street or the Central Protection Society, and all its most remote provincial , branches. But there was one other point on which he would , th° ' , oula N:1/ e ' c' t if