The Sun. — London, England, 1837-12-05 00:00:00

eept 'e f no tumult— (Cheers) —without a sigh, ex the misci cants whom we had robbed :rfti.eeir.irlrigotten prey.—( Cheers.) I sacrificed to them one h,..t_a largest professional emoluments ever received ; they vs " . , e, generously, nobly, more than repaid me.—( Deafening th; i u : ° _ ll .37-continued cheering.) I stand before you, called in , e l e msple gratitude by the glorious name of " Liberator." newed cheers.) And prouder am I of their voluntary ZP .. ensation th an th e titl e d nobleman of hie treasure.—(Loud totoZs-) I stand before you a lover of my native land, but ready join you in every struggle for freedom ; and I ask you to use Z e l_til discrimination in politics, which has led you on through hi:a glorious march of discoveries and improvement in att lees and arts. The Tories are execrable. The Whigs ‘ tit but (as we understood the Honourable and Learned Ge ntleman), t not so bad.--( Cheers.) Or shall Igo back to bi a . °llll. rymen and say, that I appealed by the hour to English nt , ticie in vain—that you shouted against the Whigs, and prineOned Ireland—that in the selfish struggle for your own ig_ntli You forgot ours. Oh, no 1—( Ti emendous cheering. ) Pend -children—(Loud you, as for the beings I love best—l have some Z a ti ndechildren—(Lourl leughter)_not to take such a i ge T : e-- eif you do, you will at least respect me—we will send this answer, " we are seven millions —( Loud and long thenntintied cheering)—and, having all the bed against us, and I I ,: good, neutral or assisting - , us, only by their cheers and '` z as, instead of practical efforts,— I will address them thus: Hereditary bondsmen, know ye not, Who w ou ld be free, themselves must strike the blow." -- (Tremendous cheeting.) Sir ps V-.• ...,RARAZON, M. P., was induced to say a few to f„" r ust from being one of the Members wh o voted for Mr. Wak e's amendment the other night.—( Hear , he ar.) Ile had lihis earliest days been the streeuo us advocate of Vote by I„ nt, Triennial Perliaments, and Extension of the Suffrage. '(Cheers.) In Ireland they had not the benefits of Reform, :lett the people of this country had ; for even in the county h u,'Fh be represented, although it contained many thousand in habitants ets, yet only two representatives were sent to Parliament m r that county. He regretted th et a larger portion of the Members House of Commons did not vote in favour of Mr. ee 'Lley's amendment, and he believed that many were already rtY at their not having done so.—( Cheers.) He trusted, d'wever, that when the lion. Member for London (Mr. h ro te) brought forward his motion in the House of Commons, ; would receive that support whit h would slice the people of done and Ireland they were not to desedr of having justice t he to them. The lion. Baronet concluded by seconding resolution amidst loud cheers. Mr • •-,WART then presented himself to the Meeting. and was lOu i -1-cheered. He was sure there was not a soul in that eeti ng w hich did not burn w ith warmth and affection ro t the unhappy people of Ireland.—( Hear.) He (Mr. pl a Wart ) had supported her in the hour of adversity in his ce i n the Howe of Commons, and his Hon. and Learned grad knew well that all around him wet e sincere and sym- P o t , lili zing friends of Ire land.—(" Hear, hear," from Mr. friend Connell.) He knew him to b e a sincere and sympathizing of the English people; but he confessed that when he 1 ,, 4 e his brilliant and eloquent speech in favour of the Ballot, r ionnial Parliaments, and Universal Suffrage, there arose t e :°ss his mind the spectre of the sp eech delivered by a Noble "irci in the House of Commons, which directly denounced all those measures. If they were not to g ather grapes from th orns, or figs from thistles, lie must confess that his z eal in t he cause of Ministers was damped and dismayed in the ,°P sort h e had given and might give them as an elector, 4 he felt that they must previously re p ent of the son tt!inente so unequivocally expressed. — ( Hear, bear, hear.) : 14 thought it right to say so much, summoned as he had been n attend a meeting of his fellow-electors of Westminster, tack 0 re he came to the resolution which had been entrusted to hi m- That resolution was founded on another declaration of the Noble Lord (J• Russell) in the House of Commons, to effect that the . Reform Bill was made to maintain the p re ponderance of the landed interest.—(oh, oh.) He would srthose present, who had so ably s u pp orted Ministers in that nleasure, if that was a prop er return for the popular t anusiasm and support they had given in former times ? Vioud cries of " Hear, hear.") U p on him the Reform ' nisters rested for support. Was it not upon the city and to wn i constituencies, who were by fa r the most enlightened in th at es great country ? He must say t hat it would become any Ministry to remember with gratitude now in their season of p o wer the assistance rendered them by th ose men in the day of !neir adversity. He denied that there was any comparison Point o f i nte lli gen ce and power between the towns and bo roughs and agricultural districts. It w as from assemblies tt ! el t as the present, that light and truth emanated and were diffused i all over the country, illumining th e p ath of liberty. He would like to ask Lord John Russell, whether the lande I l ike to had not preponderance enough alr ead y ? He would to ask him, whether they had not alreadylthe whole of the 'louse of Lords,which was completely and exclusively in favour of the landed interests ? Did they not possess the Church ? and to turn in another direction, had they not the controul of t he Universities, and the entire education of the country. "--( Hear, hear, hear.) in all these the landed interest was in the ascendency, and now the time was come when the commercial and manuf acturin g interests which he nad the honour of representing—now the time was come to do them justice, and it was not fair to sink their preponderance in that of the House of Lords. The House of Commons was !ot the House of the Aristocracy, for when it was that, it was little better than the concealed representative of the House of He therefore felt injured, if not insulted, by the re tetion of Lord J. Russell, that the Reform Bill was intended give a prep on d er ance rather to one party than to another. aeheers.) He hoped the people would vindicate themselves public l onger submit to the dicta of the Noble Lord in the Publicly °' Commons. He (Mr. E.) had never hesitated pre se :° express his opinion, and it was that the basis of re feoderati in that country was but a remnant of the on sYstem and he was firmly convinced that until that reese" untn e. was removed the people of England would never be tP e rmanently free.—( Cheers.) Although in such an assem- Y, and at so late an hour, he ought not to be in the habit of quoting the say e- ings of a member of the House of Lords, yet 1e could not help re comendin to them a simp le and well known phrase, " Let us steal by our order." — ( Cheers. ) ~ - . l . ne man wh o did not d o t h at , th e ma n of the democracy also did not stand by his order, should forfeit his p rivile g es and immunities altogether. Should it be said that the aristocracy stood up for their empty order, their decorations, and titles, while they who had everything at stake refused to do so? The people of England I ,!iust be prepared to act every one for himself.—( Cheers.) Let them resolve to be united, and not allow themselves to be cajoled by any aristocratic party in the State. They were called on to act in behalf of the people of England, irrespec tive alike of Whig or Tory ; for upon themselves depended the day of their salvation. It appeared to him that the present was a period in the history of the nation which would settle in wnat way society was to be finally adjusted. He saw in the P,tnepective the aristocratic party marchin g off on one side, and the Democratic party on the other. Let the people take their Choice—let them follow on the one side, like slavish voters, in . "ic guarded train of the tyrants; or, on the other hand, assert their rights like men determined to be free.—( Loud cheering. ) Mr. R. D. BROWNE then came forward to second the re- R °liition. He did so with considerable difficulty, as it was the trst time in the course of his life that he had ever addressed a Popular assembly of Englishmen ; for he did not consider the House of Commons, under its present constitution, was deserving of the appellation of a popular assembly.--(Hear.) ' They were not to measure his sentiments by the feeble expree . 2:! . e ms he might use, but they would conside r those who sent him eere—the free and independent p eo p le of Ma y o—and they would not have sent him there unless he represented the opi '2'°ns of the people. They would also cons i d er ha had been nt ther e , attached to no Government , but for the p ur p ose of w orking out that democratic principl e, which he considered n i s t _ inseparable from the Constitution of En g land.—(Cheers.) Was not attached to any Mi nistr y . He was attached to Lie the people.—( Cheers.) lie thought the people had tbo Prier of asserting their liberties; and ho thought, if the arm of the people was not exerted to defend themselves, they never could expect justice done them. The Constitution of Was had been built upon democratic principles. This ptaLeividenced b history. In . every contest, they read of the 3 e. e having asserted the right of government themselves, 1 1 ° ` 1 in every contest they found the aristocracy had been more • t u miiliated. They would make the aristocracy again subniit t ° Humiliation.—(Loud cheers.) The struggle was between I.w, aristocracy and the people. It was between the House of rdp,s, and those attached to that order, and the people England. Was he to be told that any politician c en - A u ld be tolerated by the people , wh o said that Reform should ? Reform must progress according to the wishes of the e s e P l e ; and if the wishes of the people were subject to pi r. ge with times, all reforms must keep pace with time. th y_ onsidered the declaration made by Lot d John Russell in ril e House of Commons, had given a very different cern elion altogether to Whig policy.—( Loud chem iog. ) dv C considered that Lord John Russell, in making the fatal elaration he had done, had totally forgot the principles tl s i°e years ago on so high a pinnacle o f estimation among puntrymen.—( Hear.) lie thought that the people w ou l d be th e forgetf u l of themselves, and of their own interests, if t rusted allo we d t h a t declaration to pass without com ment. He . 0 , 6 5 .. , 1 ed that th e people would show , by the course which the y adopt, that they were determined to defend their own Hear, and that they would not he ch eated out of them. th "ear, hear.) The present Government had assumed the i 'eine of the Administration with ever y prospect of hnei honour to themselves and fulfi llin g the ex p ectations of e "lintry Why we re the Government p laced in the pe el -I 's situation they at present were ? Why, because the re en,se ntativee of the people in the Commons Howe of perlia tit (011 had allowed them to pursue a temporising po.icy— ls,eers- ) Let the leaders of the p eo p le compel the present tl,. e erinocnt to discharge their duty t o themselves, and to 3 ant for whom they held their trust — l et them force them to P, the extension of the Suffrage a nd the Vote by Ballot. n e j e9 l s ' i , own part he cared not for the Vote by Ballot, ses.(Cil it was accompanied with an extension of the . Suffrage. et4 t ,' eering.) He would venture to predict that if a general th ere l°n did not take place within three )ears in England, le ek would be such a demonstration of feeling in Th e r . ,d as there was in England some years sioce.—( Cheers.) leg f "cm. Gentleman concluded by apologizing to the meet sen.°e the length at which he had trespassed upon their atten tiem These, he said, were the honest e x p ressions of his poll ikaliti°P;nions—opinions which should ev er be the guide of his aI conduct, and which he hoped would y et be more gene ly o c aused amongst all classes. Itserd Resolution was then put from the Chair, and carried Te acclam a tions of the meeting. 11 t , sso _ ti i Ltmeiseorl,us,tisohnouw be to the effect, that a Petitio n, embod y in g the , 4 presented to both Houses of Parliament, eo Frold to. li etios t °nel EVANS, in propoaing the Reso lution, said, that h° co:Ild not entirely concur in all the sentiments that it then expressnd by the different speakers, he quite agreed great vinciples which were embodied in the resolutions ; and would support them in the House of Corn n ons at any opportunity.—(C.leers.) Thanks were vnt-d to the Gallant Chairman, who having acknowledged the com pliment, the meeting separated. THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, DECEMBP,II 5. 1537 Hon. Friend. But if the proposition of his lion. Frier. l verc rejected, he should certainly bring forward his own. lion. Gentlemen did not seem to be aware of the esteem in which their fellow-citizens of the Jewish persuasion were held i e society. In the Corporation with which he was connsc ted, a Jew was proposed as his successor, said the motion was seconded by Mr. Gurney, himself a Quaker. Sir R. H. INGLIS opposed the motion of Mr. Grote. The object of the proposition was to fill that House and the other institutions of the country with persons who were not only opposed to the Established Church, bu! the prineiples of Christianity. He asked the Hon. and Learned Member for London did he forget that ho was summoned to that House on his oath to give advice to the Crown on grate and important matters affecting the safety of the United Kingdom and of the Established Church ?—( Hear.) It the House were to sanction such a measure it would offend the feelings of the country, andbesides it could not pass in tire other House of Parliament. The Jews, it appeared from what he Lad heard that night, would find their way into Municipal and Corporate offices, without the relaxat ion which the Hon. Member for London was desirous to effect. He ( Sir R. ci l. - Inglis) would not then deta in the House by going spe cally into his objections to the proposition, but should reserva what else he had to say until the measure appeared in a more advanced stage. Mr. C. FERGUSON had been quite prepared for the speech of the Hon. Member for the University of Oxford, aces's° he had always been the enemy to anything which hal a tendency to put an end to intolerance.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Upon a great quo stion of principle they had no right to take into consideration what would be the conduct of another (louse. It was a great principle, because it involved directly the question of admitting or, ex cluding from civil office a most loyal portion of her Majesty's subjects—(Cries of " Hear, hear")—it laid down the prin ciple that it would be dangerous to admit the Jews to civil appointments on account of their political opinions. The Jews were a loyal people, and it was remarkable that there was no instance upon record in this country of any Jew ever having been convicted of a political offence. By the enlightenment of the citizens of London they had an example of two gentlemen in office who belonged to the proscribed sect, and it was singular that in those instances where the rule had beenbroken, the conduct of the gentlemen had been so good that praises were showered upon them from both sides of the House. He (Mr. F.) remembered when the lion. Baronet was as decidedly opposed to the admission of Dissenters —also of the Catholics—EU of whom were as good Christians as themselves ; and now he had no argument to use against the admission of the Jews, but that they were not Christians. He ( Mr. F.) saw no ob jection to their admission to any corporate office, and be trusted the amendment would be agreed to. Mr. K ENIB LE said that as he had understood this Bill, it was one simply to relieve Quakers under the Municipal Corporation Act hem taking an Oath, substituting in lieu of it a Declaration, as by several other Acts of Parliament they were relieved in certain cases. That being so, the amend ment moved by the Hon. Member fir the City of London had nothing whatever to do with the subject. He was seeking too much under colour of a Quaker's Bill when he asked for liberty for the Jews to sit in both Houses of Par liament ; therefore he should oppose the amendment. Mr. GEORGE F. YOUNG was surprised at the mis takes into which the Honourable Member for Oxford had fallen, self-evident as those mistakes were.—( Hear, hear.) That Honourable Member had said this Bill was intended not only to afford relief to the Jews, but also to persons of no religion at all. It must be apparent that persons of no religion at all could have no religious principles or views to violate. Another mistake was, that of confounding the pre sent (as had the Hon. Member who had last sat down) with a Jew Bill ; whereas upon no fair construction could it be so consi dered. Even if it were, would any man tell him ( Mr. Y.) that it was consistent with common sense that a Jew should be elected by his fellow-citizens to fill the office of Sheriff in the city of London, and that he should be compelled to fill that office or to pay a penalty of 6001. That when he came to take upon himself the office he should be called upen to sub scribe to the tenets of Christianity, which refusing, be went on in the office to discharge his duties under penalties which were expressly onerous, and from which lie was only re lieved by an annual Act of Indemnity ? Such a system was perfectly absurd. Under such circumstances, ho hoped the House would negative the proposition of the lion. Mem her for Leeds, and either leave the law as it now stood, or at once consent to extend it in that way which every fair and honourable mind ought to wish to see it extended to. Captain PEC HE LL said, that, in answer to the state ment of the Hon. Baronet, the Member for the University of Oxford, that the motion was contrary to the feelings of the people of this country, he begged to observe that the people of this country were by no means hostile to the prin ciple involved in that motion. The House had heard the high character given to gentlemen of the Jewish per suasion, who, it was clear, enjoyed in an extraordinary de gree the favour and respect of their fellow citizens. He must say that one of the gentlemen referred to came down into a part of the country with which he was more particularly nequainted, to canvas for votes for the representation in Par liament, although in that part country considerable prejudice prevailed ; yet that gentleman did win very much on the feelings of the people ; and he would appeal to the lion. Member for Shoreham whether that gentleman would not have been elected if a mistake had not got abroad that if elected he could not have taken his seat in that House. He must say that ho hoped the example of the Hon. Baronet would not be followed generally by the Hon. Gentlemen be hind him, and that at length they would see the necessity of conceding what had been long called fur by the vast majo rity of her Majesty's subjects. ( Loud cries of divide ) Sir C. BU 1111 F, LL—Having been appealed to by the lion. and Gallant Member on the other side as to the character of Mr. Salomon, he certainly could speak favourably of his ge neral conduct as a merchant, and of his, honourable character as a gentleman ; but beyond that he could not say any thing, and he had no hesitation in saying that he differed tote cwlo from the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman on the subject of the late election. lie would take upon himself to say that not a single Clergyman of the Church of England had sup ported Mr. Salomon ; and though he certainly had many vote; in his favour, yet the way in which those votes I were obtained he ( Sir C. B.) should not state to the House. The conduct of some parties who supported that gentleman at the late election was also by no means creditable. This was all he had to say in answer to the appeal of the Hon. arid Gallant Member. As to the question itself, he conceived the present motion was introduced in a m anner contrary h to Parliamentary usage , a nd he should for this, among oter reasons, give Iris vote against that motion. Mr. O'CONNELL said that the Hon. Baronet having pro. flounced a vivid eulogy upon the constituency of Shoreham, afterwards stated something rather inconsistent with the cha racter be gave them—(hear, and a laugh)—he (Mr. O'C.) would not have risen on that occasion if he hail not reasons for not giving a silent vote. If he rightly understood the Hon. Member for East Surrey, that Hon. Member was fa vourable to the principle of the Bill.—( A laugh.) Mr. KEaIBLE-1 never said any thing of the kind— ( Hear, and a laugh.) Mr. O'CONNELL had really thought that he must have misunderstood the lion. Member. But if so, what right had the lion. Member to argue from the principle of the measure ag ainst the proposition of his li o n . Friend tne Member for the city of London ?—( Hear, hear.) For his part, he Mr. O'C.) wished to see all those kinds of petty legislation for the con sciences of men done away with.—(Cheers.) Nothing could be more paltry than religious tests for admission to civil offices. Those tests wore always mere oaths of office, without any reli gious feeling.—( Hear, hear.) There were in that House men of various religious professions. But surely in those days no one claimed a right as a Legislator to enquire into the reli gious opinions of another.—( Hear, hear.) And out of the House they should not look to a man's religious opinions, but to his conduct ; and if his conduct in society entitled him to civil rights, the more he was repugnant to taking oaths which acre a violation of his conscience, the more he was deserving of esteem—the more the Legislatuie should encourage such a man. —( Cheers.) He (Mr., O'C. ) entreated the Hon. Mem ber fur Leeds to accede to the proposition of the Hon. Mem ber for London. Why should not the Hon. Member work out his own principle, and allow the Bill at least to pass that House ? He (Mr. O'C.) would support the proposition, as lie would always support having for its object a motion to set conscience free. Mr. HUME said time Right Hon. Baronet had supported the East India Bill, in which was a clause distieetly opening any office to all Jews , Turks, or Mahornedans. There re we offices of great trust ; and, therefore, he hoped, for the sake of consistency, the lion. Baronet would now vote for the amend ment of the Hon. Member for London. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, with respect to the amend ment before the House , his vote would depend upon what opinion the lion. Me mber for Leeds bad formed respecting the effect it would have upon his Bill. If the principle of it could be established in any wa y he would at once support it. but the question was , the effect it would have upon the .11a -111 before the House. It mi g ht be contended that the Legis. tore intended to prevent the admission of the Jews by add.ng, to the d e claration the words, " upon the faith of a Christian,' which g ave it the nature of an oath, and did not intend .t to prevent the admission of pe rsons who only objected to taking an oath. If the H onou rable Member for Leeds though his h !r would be s a fe to allow the ame ndment to be added to Bill, he (Lord J. Ruesell) would be most happy to declare the principl e ; but on the other hand, if he thought it would injure his Bill, then he must vot e ag ainst the amenernen t. That would l ea v e the case as regarded th e Jews o p en, and in the mew time their cause would be much strengthened. Mr. B A INES felt that he was bound bo th in dut y and 130- hey to adhere to the line he hail adopted. In introducing this Bill lie had stated distinctly th it it was a measure for the relief of the Quakers and Moravians. So far from being op posed to relief to the Jens, be was also extremely favourable to that, arid if he considered that his present proceeding would be at all likely to prejudice the introduction and pass ing of a Bill for their relief, he should consider that as a very grave subject of consideration for himself ; but he could not look upon is Bill as at all calculated f of the J e ws. Let histo dam anea ure for time relie Hon. nif Fr y iend y s m alio were desirous of affording relief to the Jews bring forward a Bill for that purpose, and introduce the subject boldly to the e notice of the 'louse. Assenting to the proposition now mad would subjeot him to an aeousatien of introducing that by a s ide wind which he had never any intention of d;ing• measu re could in no way whatever injure any application hereafter to be made on behalf of the Jews ; and as to say in g th a t this was a bit-and-bit relief, his reply to that was that every measure of this description had been a bit-and-bit re lief measure; and he should not only be thankful for it, but he considered it to be the best course he could adopt. The Hoise l•ben diviOq• wtmen there appm,44 4 -- For the Motion 172 I For t he . Amendment 156 [Majority 16 The Bill was then coinnutted, On the .notion of Mr. BAINES a verbal amendment was introduced into the second clause of the Bill, for the purpose of applying it to Separatists. The remaining clauses having lee i agreed to, the Bill passed through Committee. CUSTODY OF INSANE PERSONS. On the motion of Mr. BARNEBY this Bill passed through Committee. ELECTION PETITIONS. The consideration of several Election Petitions, amongst which were those from Flint, Oxford county, Bedford, Edin burgh, Beverley, Gloucester, Norwich, &c., was fixed by the Speaker for the 12th of December. COPYIIOLD-LANDS BILL. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL postponed the considers.- tiori of this Bill until after the recess. WILLS BILL. Sir E. SUGDEN begged to move for leave to bring in a Bill to suspend for three months, from the end of December, 1837, an Act passed in the last Session for amending the law relating to Wills. He could bear an humble yet a willing tes timony to the talent and industry of the Real Property Commissioners, on whose report this measure was mainly grounded, as well as to the merit of Mr. Tyrrell, by whom the Bill was prepared. It might nut perhaps be considered proper to recount the names of all his Learned Friends in that House and the House of Lords by whom the mea sure was brought forward and supported ; but he could not do justice to his own feelings if he were to omit to notice the part taken by h;s Noble and Learned Friend the Mas:cr of the Rolls in reference to this 13111, and to state his conviction that, setting aside his legal c -mpetence to the task, no man could enter upon it with a more conscientious desire to fulfil the duties of the position which he filled.—( Hear, hear.) lie felt bound to observe that this subject had been several times brought before that House and referred to Committees upstairs. It had also been submitted to the other House, and twice considered by it in Committees. It was the law that ❑o person could pass real property without having witnesses to his will and other cere monies. Ever since the reign of George I. attempts had been made to impose the necessity of having two witnesses to wills conveying stock and funded property. That provision was continued successively in many acts, down to a late period. What was the consequence? Why, the previous habit of the people caused the Act never to be attended to, and the Courts of Equity were compelled to evade it, because it was opposed to the feelings of the community, Stock was thus vested in the executor, who took a trust to which he was not legally entitled. It was impossible to turn the current of public opinion. The only effect of attempting to drive it from the channel in which it was accustomed to go was to bring what would perhaps be under other circumstances considered a wholesome measure, into odium. There was another rule which should bind those who proposed legal changes : it was this—that we should not give an arbitrary meaning to words which did not admit of a fixed signification. There were two or three rules to which he should advert, es worth consideration in a question of this nature. One was, that no alteration should be made with respect to existing- con tacts and wills He should n)t at present point out how that evil had result from the Act to which he directed their atten tion. And the next and last rule which he should take the liberty of submitting for their adoption was, that they should r.ot attempt too much in any one Bill. He had invarieb!y ob served that where the grasp of a measure was too great for any penmanship, there were not embraced within the compass of a Bill such distinct language and provisions as to meet all the difficulties which it was intended to remove. If they attempted too much in one clause, other subjects were left unexplained and unprovidsd for, on which the meaning of the law should be clear and certain. When he considered the talents, the learning, and the efficiency of the Hon. Gentleman who had breught forward and sustained the late Bill, he felt no little hesitation in saying that it had miscarried in certain parts; but if it had been found so ineffectual, the failure was owing, he ventured to say, to a departure from some one of the rules which he had laid down. That measure did not leave well alone, but attempted to make it better. It did run counter to the habits of the people. It attempted to fix construction on words which bore different senses at different times. It was intended by it to found a system, and to lay down an univer sal plan, in order to meet a particular mischief. He would not enter upon a detailed view of the opinions of others, but merely state his own general impression of the necessity of reconsidering some points, and certainly altering others. The first great alteration which was made in the law upon this subject was in relation to infants. For a long time infants had been allowed to make wills of personal estate. This right, so far as it related to real property, was confined to those persons who had reached the age of twenty-one. It was observed, by his Noble and Learned Friend who intro duced the question in the other House of Parliament, that it was not allowed to a person having illegitimate children to provide for them, and that it was hard that such a disqualifi cation should be continued.—( Hear.) The law being al tered, how did it now stand? An infant might have very large property, and might be desirous of bestowing it on those to whose kindness and goodness he was deeply in delsted ; but this right was now denied to him. He might marry and have children to succeed to his property, but he could not bequeath it. When a person reached the age of seventeen, the right was taken from him, which he had hith erto enjoyed, and given to whom ? To the Crown. He could not think that ajudicious alteration. Before, it was not neces sary to have any witnesses to wills conveying mere personal estates; but und.e . this Act every wail, if only for a matter o ten pounds, would require two witnesses. He admitted it was necessary to make some alterations in the law as it stood, but the alterations made by the Act, would increase the exist ieg difficulties, while it would give rise to endless vexations and ennoyanee. It was a notorious fact th it very few persons not actually engaged in the profession of the law understood all the arcane of will-making. He was then addressing not the least intelligent part of the community. Now he should he glad to know how many Members of either House of Parliaineet, not lawyers, were aware that by an Act pasted in the reign of George 111., legacies of moneys vested in the public; funds were invalid unless the will granting them was witnessed by two persons of credit? This was a most important point, and yet few even of the most enlightened class were aware of it. And why were they not Because most men wont with Vie stream, and practice once stamped was not easily departed front. He now came to another important point. Under the old law, if a man made his will regularly, and hid the required witnesses, he might after wards add to it as many codicils as he pleased, with out having each codicil again attested. Now this was altered by the Act; for i:a future not even a verbal alteration WAS to be made, or )11y/thing explanatory added, unless the attorney was at the rime's elbow, with his two 'clerks as witnesses. Now, such clauses ho affirm 2d could never be retained. He would next call the attention of the House to the character of the witnesses to a will, as altered by the Act of last Session. By the law as it stood before the passing of that Act, it was sta el that those witnesses should be credible witnesses. Insane persons, felons, or parties in terested in the will were not considered credible witnesses. When the Act of last Session was first brought in, the quali fication of witnesses that they should be credible was compre hended in it ; but in its progress through Parliament, either in the Committee or by some mistake or other, that qualifica tion was omitted. The signatures of persons as witnesses to a will were therefore rendered valid by that Act, although the law would not permit such persons to be examined in a Court. By the Act of last Session, also, the execution of wills would be rendered in many cases much more diffi cult than it was at present, and in some cases it would be rendered impracticable. A greater violation of all legis lative principle was never committed than that which was com prehended in the Act or last session, by which all the testamen Lary powers, which existed under the law as it had hitherto stood, were rendered void, and those powers were to be made conformable to the provisions of that Act, and that Act alone. The Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman then went into a variety of details involving matters of pure legal technicality, matters into which, he said, he could not expect the House to enter, and which would oely be understood by the Hon. and Learned Gentlemen (the Attorney and Solicitor General), to whom he more particularly addressed himself. He maintained that many of the most essential clauses of the Bill were in volved in an ambiguity that could not fail of producing much in c onvenience, and in many instances, perhaps, much injustice. Ho must further remark, that the Bill did not extend to the Colonies. It applied only to Great Britain and Ireland, so that a person residing in this country aced having property in the Colonies, would be under the necessity of making two se- Iterate and distinct is ills, or otherwise his heirs would find that the will which operated one way in England, would have a totally different operation in the Colonies. As it appeared to him that the imperfections of the present Bill might be re moved if a short time were allowed for its reconsideration, he begged leave, in conclusion, to move " for leave to bring in a Bill to suspend for three months from the end of December, 1837, an Act passed last Session for amending the law relat ing to wills."—( H e ar, ) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the course pro posed to be taken by the Right Honourable and Learned Gentleman was wholly unprecedented, and, as he thought, wholly unjustifiable. He did not cemp!ain of the want of courtesy that the Right Honourable and Learned Gentleman gave him no notice, nor even conveyed to him any communi cation whatever that could afford him the most distant concep tion its the world of the course which the Right Honourable aside, he th oug ht he might and Learned G ent l em an intend e d to pursue ; but, setting that should no w b e ca lled upon t o appo i nt a C om mittee to sit upon the d eta il s o f a Bill aft er t h at Bill h a d become the law complain a little that the Hou se the laud.—( Hear, hear.) The principle; of the Bill and all its m a i n enac t m ents w ere recommen d e d fi rs t by the Eccle siastical Commission, and s econ dl y b y t h e R e al Property Com mission ( Sir Edward Su g d en " No.") He (the Attorney- General) repeated the remar k ; t h e p r i nc iple of the Bill and all its main enactme n t s were recommen ded be the first instance by the Ecclesiastical Commission. The Real Property Com mission followed. He (the Attorney-General) had the honour of presiding over the deliberations of that Commission, sion, and after a melt painful investigation, after taking all the means in their power to come to a just conclusion, the Real Ploperty Commissioners concurred in the opi nion pronounced by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and confirmed the recommendation of those principles upon which the Bill acts framed. They also approved of every one of the provisions which almost, clause by clause, consti tuted the Bill as it now stood. Before the Bill was presented to the House it was printed and circulated amongst all the conveyancers and chief legal practitioners both in London and the provinces. The Bill vas not introduced into Parliament until rather late in the Session of 1834. It was read a first and second time, and then referred to the consideration of a Select Committee. The Session of 1834 concluded lrfase the Bill could be brought to a third reeding. In 1830; the Bill was again ititroduced—again read a first and second time, again generally approved of, and again referred to a Select Com mittee, It would be remembered that at the commencement .., &:. - - 1 IA t.,. ' • • !:- . 7' . .5 . . , :•1--- , 'L- -- .; i t t7ji i ,‘ , -,4 , - j- '• ' t ; :!!` --) s, • ,:',l :-.21,2 A.-. \ i • •-•)' -'"‘ ' - 'w:T / of the Session of Isle, the Right lionoerable Baronet (Sir 1-I)use and the Treasury, that Lord Althorp, NehOseees Robert P e el) oppo s its was in office, and that Lord Lynd that time Chancellor of the Excheqer said flirt plAylivansm...m; hurst was Chancellor. Lord Lyndhurst at that time wrote possible to roast the claim, and that if tl.e em to him (the Attorney-General) statino that h.: entir&y ber would withdraw his motion for a Cs mmit:ee, the Tres. approved of the Bill, and that he should be ready to brine it sury would make a satisfactory arrangerreet. This referre.l into the Meese of Lords. With hardly a single exception to the sufferers for losses by the cottiscaticn of the book debts, the Bill then stood in exactly the same shar as that in and is the Judy of the same year the Government refcrrei which it was subsequently passed into a law. Ildvieg been their ievesttation to the Commissioners, and a notice was ie. introduced into the House of Commous, and real a fir t and sued by th e Firing parties who had suffered tosses to de, second time, it was, as he already state]. again r, ferred liver in the particulars of their claims within three . months, to a Select Committee. Upon that Committee sat Sre Fre- It was contended that the claims for merchite ifs • tetecti were deriak Bullock, Sir William Follett, Mr, Sergeaht Jackson, in prec sett the same situation as threw, for hook tietAi. Tll4 Dr. Lefioy, Mr. O'Connell, Mr. llogg, Mr. Pemberton, and Coma ilioncra reported the doubt upon title point for the tiftl. all the most eminent Members o f the &tallish and Irish bar. nion of the la w o f fl er s o f the Crown , and Tour dap Within The Committee so appointe d went through the Bill clause by the expiration of the first three months, another toitice Way c l aus e, and most carefully conside red ever y one of the issued, stiting that the Government would not ohly outertma points which the Right Honourable and Learned Gentleman claims for the book debts already etaierteJ, but lON grant.ct had alluded to, and partially discussed. The Right lion. further three months for the tielleery of other claims for 'nook tw!.•ntary and Learned Gentleman hil in fact started nething new ; debts or °thee property. By the ParliAn - I teturns of every point that he had raised had been thoroug;,ly discussed 13:3 it appeared that the Treasury iniendecifrilse on shore; the words in the Committee. In 183 d it was introduced into the "other claims" to extend the tern for mereb nd House of Lords b that very great judge Lod Lang. but at the end of the there was a 1 :.. - aragraph in whi c h it y dale. It was referred to a Select Committee of the was stated that oils extension was no t 'to be treated as an .ad- House of Lords, compared, amongst others, of the present inisg i '2:a of the right to compensatiols till the question had been Lord Chancellor, Lord Brougham, Lord Denman, Los'', mentioned in Parliament. By this proceeding, however, the suf.. Lyndhurst, Lord Wyndford, and Lord Abinger, Those Noble ferers by the confiscation of the book debts were allowed se Lords took the whole measure into their consideration, but additional three raanths, making together six months, but te m could not make up their minds upon several most import- sufferers by the hes of merchandise on shore had only the ant chu,es. They thought that some further time was three months greeted by the last notice. Yet by the admis_ required for consideration, and, consequently , the Bill did sion of the Government, and by the vote of a aura of money by not pass in 1836. In the beginning of 1837 it was again in- Parliamert.:the claimants for merchandise had participated in troduced by Lord Langdale, who in the recess had paid the the second vote of 78.0001. allowed to the sufferers; and all greatest attention to all its details, having consulted every lie would ask of the House was, that the owners el the confis -9112 within his reach who could give any information or ad- sated merchandise should be placed in the same situation as vice upon the subject. It was again referred to a Select were the losers by book debts. Why, having a'rnit!ed them Committee, which sat day after day, bestewing the utmost to send in their claims in the vote for ireaemnity, ware they not attention to every part of the Bill. Some few altsrstions to be allowed the same terms as the other claimants? Why were made ; but the effect of those alterations was to restore were they not to h ave all the edeewtasses of the six months): the Bill to exactly the same state as that in which it had especially when they considered the greater difficul;y of col. originally pased the . House of Commons. in 1837 the Lords leering the evidence to suhesantiate the claims f o r merchandise sent down, without the difference of' a single bee, the very than there was in prGving the loss of book debts ? The Bill that was sent up to them by the Commons in 183 a. Danish Government ordered all the bosh debts to be paid Under these circumstances, could the House agree to suspend into the public treasury, and a correct register was kept, thorn the operation of the Bill, in the belief that it was mischievous which all the necessary evidence was easily supplied; but the —that it wanted amendment? It might want amendment; direct cent:ary was the case wil'e respect to the other class of and whatever his Right Hon Friend might hereafter propose claims. The merchi , edise was scattered very widely in with th view would, of course, be most seriously considered. Altona, Holstein. and Norway, and it was confiscated not He would not follow his Right lion. Friend through the only in warehoeses, but also in transitu, and there was, there several provisions of the Bill. His Right lion. Friend had for.., very great difficulty in collecting the elements of claim. said that the law of wills, as regarded the form of attestation, Why did sh-y not at least extend the tame facilities to ought to be 1. ft unaltered. The law, as it at pr:sent stood, claims for merchandise as to the other subject of indemnity ? tit's most incongruous and barbarous law—a law that was never These w. re the arguments of the petitioners whose case ho maintained in any country ;it was quite a elisgrace to any then rep:eseiited to the House. But was there no precedent civilized society.—( Hear, hear, and Oleo's ) His Right for entertaining those claims, and, instead of shortening the Honourable Friend had alluded to forfeitures incurred, period in which they were to be male, cu.& it cot to have and to property devolving to the Crown. Ile (the At- been ex ended ? lie applauded the Government for the li torney-General) had had the honour to he it law-officer of mitation of titre in the first instance, because he knew full the Crown for five years, and he could say that whenever any well how easily papers r light be di , covered and bad claims property devolved to the Crown ender the circumstances trade if great time had been &lost ed ; but when they dis stated by his Right Hon. Friend, the Croon had always covered that great iejesiee had accrued from the course acted merely as a trustee for those who would have been the adopted, were they within a reasonable period to act over ri objects of the bounty of the testator. He a screed that this gorousl ? This was the history of the case ;he would not was the case. Suppose a man died intestate without next of enter ueon the question of the justice or injustice of the war, kin, but leaving illegitimate children, the Crown always gave but the works of all writers en the law of nations had held that the property to them. Though there might be some difficulty parties situated like these claimants were entitled to relief from in the operation of the present Bill, he could only say the this nation. This case was clearly within the doctrine ; the Bill proposed by his Right lion. Friend would ha. e been much seizure of the Danish ships entitled the Government of that more liable to difficulty. Another objection made by his country to retaliate, and confiscate the British ships and cargoes Right Honourable Friend was as to the mode in which afieat , and the merchandise of En g lishmen. The declaration powers were to be executed. Now he (the Attorney- of war was on the 4th of November ; the seizure by the General) avowed that of all the clauses in the Bill, that English Government was in August ; and the confiscation by which was the most valuable was the clause regarding the Dente erk was on the 7th of September. The international execution of powers. He was quite aware that that law was clear. If an injury were done by one nation to ano clause would render of no importance many decisions titer, the nation injured might seize upon the property of the of the Courts respecting the execution of powers, and other, whether it belonged to the State or to the private he was sorry to say also that it would render of very little citizens of the country perpetuating the injury. Vatel laid value some excellent treatises that had been publLhed upon down this doctrine, and added that compensation ought to be that subject—(Laughter);—because the law had certainly by awarded by the State to these subjects on whom the reprisals the new Bill been very much altered, and he thought very fell. This he laid down es the general rule for injuries re beneficially altered. The donor of a power sometimes esived, whether there was or was not property seized by the annexed the most fantastic) conditions as to the mode ia which other nation ; and so if no money had been received from the the person who was to execute the power was to carry it into seizures to Danish property, and if no fund had arisen from effect. The donor might, for instance, say that it should be it, England was bound to indemnify her citizens for their executed in the presence of seven witnesses, all of whom losses. In the years 1807 and 1808 claims were put in by Should have yellow hair—( Laughter)—or should have only the su'd'erers ; and what was done with the Danish property one eye or one leg.—(Laughter.) It might then become a seized ? It was not treated as droits of the Admiralty. Mr. question in a court of law whether the hair of the witnesses Perc•eeti, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, stated in was yellow, or whether each of them was blind of one eye, that House that the produce of this property was paid and should it turn out that one of the witnesses had brown into the public treasury, and that this had been done hair, or had both eyes, it was quite clear that the power was because several merchants had sent in claims for cons not well executed. With a view to put an end to this, the pensation on account of the losses which they had Ml lay required only certain formalities, which were easy of oh- tamed by reason of the extraordinary circumstances under servance, and which would avoid infinite evils. He was him- which the war was commenced. Such were the claims self counsel in a cause now pending, in which Sir F. Burdett of the pa rties under the law of re p risals. The y was interested, where the witnessns to the execution of the had put in their claims at the earliest period ; the Chancellor power did see it signed, sealed, and delivered, but it was not so of the Exchequer of that day had stated that the produce was stated in the attestation, and the disposition of a very con- not treated es droits of the Admiralty in consequence of that siderable estate depended upon that defect. New, if the law claim ; and would that House allow the lapse of time which of last session had been in operation, the question never could had taken place to be pleaded against and defeat the parties have arisen. The question had been in litigation for four who were entitled to the indemnity ? But another ground years, and would in all probability go to the House of Lords might be taken under which to rest these claims. Under before it was decided. Let not the House suppose that be- the then exiting treaties between Denmark and England, cause his Right Hon. Friend was a great lawyer, that he was if war broke out between the contracting parties, six months' the only greet lawyer of which this country could boast. notice was to be given to the citizens of each country to Sr E. "SUDDEN had not been guilty, that he was aware, remove themselves and their property. Denmark seized of any want of courtesy towards his lion. and Learned Friend, the British book debts and merchandise in direct violation in not communicating to him his ( Sir Edward Sugden's) ob- of this stipulation in the treats.. Did this country call jectiona to this Bill, because a book had been published which upon Denmark to account for this breach ? He did not his lion. and Learned Friend must have well known was pub. know why this had not been done; but perhaps the eir- Ilehed with his (Sir E. Sugden's) approbation, which contained curnstanees under which the enemy had been laid pros all the objections he hal to-night stated to the Bill of last trate, and considering that England had taken the brightest session. The Right lion. Gentleman concluded by saying jewel from the crown of Denmark—that she had been that he should carefully watch the operation of the Bill, and despoiled of Norway, England was prevented through very time would decide whether he was right or not in his opinion shim ! from demanding redress ; or it might not be con respecting it. yeteent to seek reparation, because the *hole amount of The motion was then negatived without a division. British property confiscated did not amount to more than DANISH CLAIMANTS. 303,0001., whilst, including what was taken at Copen- Mr. WARBURTON said although it was a very late hour, hagen ,England did trot seize less than three millions from yet as many Honourable Members elm took an interest in the Denmark.-Hear, hear.) But if the Danish Government question he was about to introduce expected that lie should were not called to . a ccount, were the sufferers to be, therefore po desled of them property;without compensation ? Why bring is forward, he thought it his duty to do so. Mr. F. BARING was sorry to interrupt his lien. Friend, wee they not protected by the Government ? He had only but as the Chancellor of the Exchequer was obliged to be fib- repeated Odifsets and recapitulstA the arguments which had sent upon urgent private business that evening, and had not been adduced on former occasions—( Hear, hear)—but he had yet returned to the House, he begged to request, on the part done to that all the present Members of that House might of his Right lion. Friend, that the Hoe. Member would peat- fully understand the true stale of the case. He begged to pone his motion till to-morrow. call the retention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to one Mr. WARBURTON had examined the order book, and circumstance. Ail the evidence of the class of cases to which .found it so full of orders that it would be absolutely impossible I his motion referred was already collected by the parties, and for him to bring his motion on to-morrow. The question was time were only given them—two or three days was all ho not a complicated one, and could not suffer it the Secretary would ask—to put in their claims, he would be contented. of the Treasury were to argue it on the absence of the Chao- But it mi g ht be in q uired whether that was all —(the Right cellor of the Exchequer. The question had been repeatedly Hon. Gentleman need not be alarmed lest he should be going before Parliament, and 75,0001. had been conceded to a por- to demand a further sum)--all he required was that the claims tion of the Danish claimants, coming under the category of all those persons whose demands were already prepared with those he proposed to bring forward. It was impossible might be received, or that some measure might be taken to he could postpone it. ensure justice to them The justice of the case was admitted, .Mr. F. BARING said that the Chancellor of the Ex- and surely the neglect of the claimants in not sending in their chequer was obliged to attend a consultation with counsel in a demands ought not to operate so seriously against them. He case which was coming on for trial to-morrow, in which he would ask the Right lion. Gentleman to cons'eler the motion, and was personally interested. he waited to know any reason which could be given why ono Mr. WARBURTON said that many Members who haul class of claimants should be relieved while the demands of been instructed by their constituents to attend to this qucstien another class received no attention.—( Hear. ) were about to leave London, it was therefore impossible for The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was a hint to postpone it. No doubt it was true that the Chancellor mere individual member of that House, and whether its of the Exchequer's absence arose from the necessity of attend- Members chose t ) vote 150,0001. for the Danish claims, was ing to an important case in which lie was personally interested; a question solely for their consideration, and one in which he, but let the House look to the enormity of the sufferings of otherwise than as a Member of the Government, was not into those "whose interest he now undertook to advocate.—(llear.) re.' ed. It was a question relating to the property of British He did not feel that he was justified in putting off the ques- sul j eta s and it was for the House to consider whether such a tian.—(Cries of "Go on.") In order that no objection se had been made out as would entitle them to make a might be made in any subsequent period of the debate, he deerand upon the public funds. The lien. Member had drawn would read the terms of the motion with which he intended r ;viler largely upon the supposition that there were very few to conclude. He did so, because he understood from his lion. Members who were acquainted with the subject, and he hail Friend the Secretary of the Treasury that the Chancellor of taken care t i explain to them the nature of the Copenhagen the Exchequer intende I to object to the form of his motion. expedition, tow ther with the law of nations and the other His motion would be to move, " That an humble address be points affectiog it. But upon those poin:s there was no issue. presented to her Maj sty, praying her Majesty to be gra- The Honourable Member had deolt on the circumstances at ciously pleased to give directions to the Commissioners to t -nding the exped;tion, and had shown that there were whom it was referred to examine the claims of certain Bri- some which inflicted great wrongs on some indiviivals ; but, ti4l subjects for losses sustained on account of book debts as in all such c ises, the injury fell on the wrong-doers. He and other property confiscated by the Government of Den- had proved the deed to be atrocious, no doubt ; but what mark in the year 1807, that they shall examine the claims for that had to do with the real question, he (the Chancellor losses sustained on account of seizures by the said Government of the Exchequsr) should take the liberty of inquiring. in the said year, and for the subsequent confiscations of mer- Now, if there were any young Members in the House, he chants' stores, and which claims or evidence by which they are would put them in possession of two fats which the Hon. supported, may not have been delivered into the said Corn- Member had almost put out of sight. At two different missioners before the 12th of February, 1835, and that the said times there had been votes in the Howe of Commons for Commissioners shall report on such claims to the Lords' Corn. the benefit of the claimants ; the one for 113,0001., and the missioners of her \lajessy's Treasury." other 78,000/., making in all 191,000/. It was hue that The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had no these were not for the same persons; but they were in satis objection to the form in which the Honourable Member meant faction of the results o: wrongs committed. If any to bring forward the present motion, but he (the Chancellor claimants had been told before these votes were of the Exchequer) wsuld tell him the mode in which he in- passed that a vote for 200,0001. would be granted tt nded t ) meet it, namely, by calling for the production of al; by the Ilouse to meet their demands—detnands which he minutes of the Commissioners and of the established rules from the year 1807 to the year 1835, had been in abeyance— d' ld b tee • not one who would not have been too glad, too under which the money had been istribute- y them ; and when the louse was is possession of these minute?, and knew what had been don , , it would be able to say whether it acquiesced in it or not. If they discussed the question at that time, he had no objection to the form of the mo tion if it were meant to be restricted to the anlication of the money which had been already voted; but if it were in tended to include any application for a new grant, then he undoubtedly did object. Mr. WARBURTON—The motion did r.ot include any application for a fresh grant. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, under such circumstances, had not the least objeztion to offer on the mere matt r of form. Mr. WARBURTON felt compelled to bring the matter forward, either by a motion for papers, or for a Committee of Inquiry, or by a reference back to the Da:.ish Commissioners, becaus, in consequence of the directions of the Treasury, they had been prevci.ted fro m going into several of those claims ; and as the original Commission was still in existence, he thought it best to refer the subject back to the Commis sion?rs, who had already investigated a portion of those claims ; and had onl y been p recluded from entering into the whole in conseq uence of the limitation p ut u p on their pow.trs by the Treasury. In August 1807, England sent a secret expedition to Copenhagen. The town was bombarded ; we seized the Danish fleet and her navol st.,res. His Majesty's cruisers were ordered to scour the seas for Danish vessels ; many prizes were brought into our port , , and rwaritilantmen were seized, the whole value of the property thus taken amounting to 1,397,000/. As tl matter of course the Danish Government made reprisals, and on the 7th of September is. sued orders for Oka confiscation of all vessels and cargoes afloat; of all merchandise on shove, and of all book-debts from British to Danish subjects. The Honourable Member for Sheffield, in the year 1821, presented a petition to the House in which the claims of British the subjects whose property had been thus confiscated were plainly set forth, and the pla;n statement of the facts made such an impression on the acre Vk' E. - grateful, to have closed with the proposition; but now having obtained that, they turned round and made a new demand, after one of a precisely similar description had already been discussed. Every party who had a claim was actively em ployed in bringing it for wai d from 1807 to 1834, and in 1834, for the first time, they were entertained by the Government, fur Lord Stanley said that he was willing to look into them. In that state he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) found them, the inquiry still going on. Ile took the opinion of the law officers of the Crown on the claims which were made, as t o whether the Acrs on which they proceeded were done against the law - of nations, and he was told that the two first, the b ok-debts and the property on shore, bad been confiscated contrary to the law of nations, and that if the nation allotted its subjects to suffer a wrong, and did not p .ocure a remedy for it, it was in justice liable to satisfy, from its owa funds, the injured parties. It was on that ground that he lut the gra its to Parliament, and on that ground that they were: toted. Now, what would be the fair and legiti mate construction to be put on the argument of the Hon. Mover ? That six months we o give.) t o the claimants of hook debts,and thatthree months cru s ty having been given to those who required satisfatior, for goads seized on sho re, to vend in their claims, the time for the latter should be doubled. But this was not so, the motion was to extend the time to all clasps of claimants, not only those who had already been al lowed only three months, nor to those who had had six months, but to those who had had, from the year 1834 to 1837, to p, epare the evidence of their demands. He repeated that this was no party question, nor was it one in which he was not bound to act ; for otherwise be might easily have got rid . of the whole affair, of the motion of the Hon. Member, and of the great mass of correspondence which took place on dm subject, by se.) ing, " Let it be looked to by the Committee.". He was bound to act in his capacity, however ; and he would say tha: more than the amount already voted would ar, claimed if this motion were to be allowed by the Heme t E . ,4 of this fact the Hon. Member was aware. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS.—DEc. 4. Their Lordships sat at Four o'Clock. The Royal Assent was given to the Justice of Peace Con tinuat'ou Bill. The Commissioners were the Lord Char cellor, Viscount Duncannon, and Earl Shaftesbury. The House then adjourned during pleisure. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool sack at Five o'Clock. SLAVERY. Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition agreed to at a public meeting, held at Exeter Hall, on Thursday, the 23d of November last. The petition was unfortunately only signed by the Chairman, the Honourable and highly respectable IlL:mber for Warwickshire; and although he (ford B.) had no doubt that it expressed the sentiments of the whole who were assembled there, yet according to the forms of the House it could only be received as the petition of the Chairman himself. It complained of the inadequate manner in which the provisions of the Emancipation Colonial Slavery Act had been carried into execution, and of the manner in which the slaves were now tr4a.'ed in great towns, notwithstanding the enormous sum of money which had been most liberally though justly awarded for their emancipation ; and it prayed for the total ar,d unconditional abolition of the apprenticeship system on of before the Ist of August next. The petition had his most cordial support, and he considered it right to express his en tire concurrence in one part of it which adverted to the admirable conduct of our negro fellow-subjects in the Colonies, who, under all the pressure they had sustained had never allowed themselves to become in the slightest degree ruffled, nor to show by their conduct the least inclination to insubordination, which lie considered entitled them more and more to the favourable consideration of the Legislature.—Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—Dicc. 4. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'Clock. A number of election petitions were presented, amongst which were petitions against the returns for Portarlingten, Sligo, Carrickfergus, Maldon, Limerick, Wicklow, Leicester, Dudley, and Dovvnp D atri DANISH CLAIMS. Mr. W. JAMES presented a petition from Hull, praying for compensation for the property of the petitioners, which had been seized in 1810 in the ports of Denmark. ADMINISTRATION OF LAW IN SCOTLAND. Mr. WALLACE prese:.ted a petition from an individual named Henry Jones, complaining of the slow progress of justice in Scotland. POSTAGE. Captain PECHELL presented a petition, signed by 248 inhabitants of Brighton, praying for a reduction of postage duties. EXHIBITIONS OF PUBLIC CURIOSITIES. The ATTORNE Y-GENERAL presented a petition from inhabitants of Edinburgh, complaining of the disgraceful exactions which are enforced from persons visiting exhibitions of public curiosity, and instancing, as an illustration of the discredit able nature of the abuse, the insult offered to the Turkish Ambassador, when, on going to see the Scotch regalia, with an order from the Secretary of State, and in the company of the Lord Provost, he was refused admittance unless he paid a fee of one shilliug. THE BALLOT. Colonel S I BTH 0R P presented a petition from the city of Lincoln in favour of the Ballot. He did not concur in the prayer, but thought the statements of the petitioners were worthy of consideration. The Hon. Member was proceeding to discuss the general question (amidst no inconsiderable laughter), when he was called to order by the SPEAKER. ELECTION PETITIONS. Petitions were presented against the returns for Ipswich, Stirling County, the Eastern Division of the County of York, Teigumouth, and Great Yarmouth. PENSION LIST. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER gave no tice that on Thursday next he would move for the appoint ment of a Select Committee on the subject of Private Pen sions on the Consolidated Fund. REFORM OF THE REFORM BILL. Mr. HUME presented a petition from the Brentford Po litical Union, praying for the Ballot, an Extension of the Franchise, and an abridgment of the duration of Parliament. The HON. MEMBER also presented a petition, praying for the abolition of admission fees for visiting public monuments. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he had corresponded on the subject with the Dean of Westminster, and also with the Warden of the Tower. Nothing had yet been determined on ; but if the Hon. Member for Kilkenny wished, he, Lord J. Russell, would not object to produce the correspondence. After a few words from Mr. HUME the correspondence was ordered to be laid on the table. MUNICIPAL OFFICERS DECLARATION BILL. On the motion of Mr. BAINES, that the House resolve itself into a Committee upon the Municipal Officers' Decla ration Bill, Mr. GROTE said that he believed that was the proper time for him to introduce to the House his proposition that the Bill should be extended to all classes of her Majesty's subjects, as well as to the Moravians and Quakers, whose relief the Honourable Member for Leeds had more immediately in view. He ( Mr. Grote) believed that when the Roman Catholics were emancipated and other dissenters relieved from the Test and Corporations Act, the principle was established, that no British subject should be deprived of the exercise of any civil right by reason of a religious regulation.—( Hear.) Nosy certainly gentlemen could not possibly apprehend any thing like danger to the Established Church of England from the admission of Quakers and Moravians to the privi leges sought for them ; and certainly if it was fit and light that the powerful sect of the Roman Catholics should be ad mitted to these privileges, it was also fit and right that Quakers and Moravians should also be admitted. He proposed, however, to carry the Bill of the lion. Member for Leeds, by the instruction to the Committee which he should move, to the same point as that Bill reached which that Hon. Member brought into this House in 1836, and which, after passing this House, was carried up to the Lords, where lie believed it was mot rejected ; but there not being time at that period of the Session to allow of a full discussion of the principle, it consequently fell, though the objects embraced by that Bill were precisely the objects he now had in view. Sir A. Clifford, the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, here summoned the House to the House of Lords, to hear the Royal assent granted to several Bills. On the return of fie SPEAKER, after a short absence, Mr. GROTE resumed—No one could take objection to the admission of Jews to the rights and privileges enjoyed by the rest of their fellow-subjects consistently with the present state of the law. There was a very strong feeling prevalent in time constituency which he had the honour to represent in in favour of the concession of those privileges to the Jews, as, iedeed, had been shewn that evening in three Petitions, which had been presented on the subject. There was a very great feeling of the inconsistency in volved in the circumstance that the Jews should be disqualified front holding the office of mayor or alderman, but not be disqualified from serving as sheriff. He would have appealed to the Learned Recorder, the Member for the Uni versity of Cambridge, had he seen him in his place, as to whether those Jews who of late years have acted as sheriffs, did not discharge the duties of the shriev alty with as much honour, credit, and efficiency as any other Gentlemen. Ile was quite sure that he should have the voice of that Learned Gentleman in favour of his motion, for he who had seen so many instances of the fitness of Jews for the office of Sheriff could not argue against the admission of Jews to act as Aldermen and eligible to Mayoralty. He did not know on what ground the Hon. Member for Leeds ould oppose hie motion. He could not see on what ground the motion could be opposed, which would not equally apply to the Bill itself. He thought the time was now arrived when the last remnant of the penal laws relating to conscience should be done away with. The Hon. Member concluded by moving, " That it be an instruction to the Committee on this Bill to extend the relief afforded by the same to persons of all religious denominations." Mr. GORING seconded the motion, and contended that it was unworthy of this enlig,hteeed age and country to retain those laws which excluded Jews from civil rights. Mr. L A NGD AL E was as favourable to the abrogation of the laws affecting the Jews as the Hon. Member for the City of London; but he felt satisfied that if his (Mr. Grote's) proposition were agreed to, it would cause the re jection of the Bill in another place ; whereas if it were sent up there in the form in which the Hon. Member for ',eels proposed to send it to the Committee, it would be cer- lain to pass. Sir JAMES DUKE said that he felt bound to do just ice to the charac ters of the individuals, one of whom had preceded,e the ether followed him in the office of Shrievalty—( Hear) _hy bearing testimony to the worth fullgentle approhis low-citizens, the office of Sheriff; avid ho had eariied with him, into his retirement: the esteem and good wishes of all.— Loud cheering. ) he other was now . filling that of fice, and he ( Sir James Duke) was satisfied that he woulond himself as to o btain a similar degree of approbationd so c. He uct cou ld assure the House that those gentle men had acted in the most liberal manner as regarded contri butions to the various institutions of the City without any con sideration of religious diffurences.—(knew . many gentlemen in the ti of London of the same persuasion as those gentlemen who, he was confident, deserved the same high c h ara cter. He tiusted, therefore, that the House would consent t o remove the barriers which 9:Tarot° those gentle men from the rest of their fellow -subjects, and he begged to second the motion of the Hon Member. Sir G EO. STRICKL AND considered that the only mode of propping up the Church Establishment in this country c onsisted in removing those religio us distinctions whidi existed in the imposition of civil dilabilities. He hoped to see the day when all civil disabilities would be removed, and when b Hon. Gentlemen opposite would be bro u g ht to see that this is the best way for securing the objects O which they had in view. Hut lie begged to otl that it had ever been his maxim if he could ro t carry out fully any principle, then he thought he was bound to take a smaller measure of that principle in lieu of the whole, and to take all that he could get when he could not get all that he could wish. He must therefore oppose the measure of the Hon, Member for London. Mr. 1' AT I 151-)N btlpportcd the proposition of his Hon. Friend and Colleague. lle was stivprised to find opposition made to such a motion from that (the Liberal) side 'of the Ho4e.i:-- ( Hear.) He had a notice of a motion for this night—whiedi he would not bring on, if the House acceded to that of his