The Sun. — London, England, 1837-05-09 00:00:00

of the Bill, we are left only to conjecture—( Hear, Lear Is anything we hear i n conversat i on, an d a ll t h at r epeated i n t h e public prints, as being the deliberate o pinions of certain Noble Lords, only involves the subject in greater doubt and difficulty and uncertainty.—(Cheers.) Under these circumstances I think it is my bounden duty to proceed with the Bills without suspending their pro gress, and in the manner in which I originally proposed to deal with them ; at the same time we should not be doing Our duty to this House and to the constituency if we did not warn the House of Lords that it is not possible that there can be a satisfa.ctory adjustment of this question if We did not endeavour while carrying on the public service in such a manner that it did not suffer inconvenience or de triment, to take care that none of the essential powers and privileges of this House should be departed from, which house of Commons has given confidence to the Adminis tration, and which confidence we should be misusing if we InerelY persisted in carrying Bills which were afterwards to tially defe a t e d e l sewhere.—( Cheers.) I believe the Right :Jon. G ent l eman (the Member for the University of Dub ") stated, with respect to the tithe question, that it was n ot essenti a l t h at the Tithe Bill should be passed during the present Session. I will not give an opi nion on this subject, but I believe such was the infe rence to he drawn from the speech 'of the Right Honour able gentleman.—(Hear, bear.) I must state further, that In what I have hitherto explained to the House I have not s eemed to answer the Hon. and Learned Member for I(ilk nnY, or laid down any definite or clear of ac tier' ; but the Hon. and Learned Member must course recollect that in the very doubts that 1 have expressed as to the si tuation in which we stand, and as to the intentions of our ??Ponents, and I must also add the other House of Par thliament, w ou ld l ead us to the conclusion that it is better at we s h ou l d wait and see whether we have mistaken i_ne intentions of our own -opponents, instead of adopting that decided course which it would afterwards be shown !ere not justified in pursuing. We s h a ll en d eavour t o come In a s ett l ement of these matters, and to come to that settle silent in such a manner as will produce benefit to Ireland, and also to carry these measures in such a way that those who representJhat country, and those who sympathise with the feelin g of Ireland, will be satisfied that some pro gress has been made during the present session. But at Present I feel, after the vote of the other night, which cannot be interpreted in a way which will lead us to any thing as to the course of proceeding of the other trtiouse,. .that it is essential at the present moment that all in ,ie majority of the House of Commons should remain lir • 1111) united together on the present occasion --(Cheers) - -and I think I may say that if the supporters of the pre- Sent Admini s t rat i on continue their present confidence in it, chat with such support, and with such a majority, the Mi nistry will n o t d esert them.—(Loud cheers.) I feel, also, that other consideration s affecting this subject, of very haevt. and par amount i mportance, but into which I will not e nter—con s id erat i ons affecting the maintenance of the autho r i tyy of the two Houses of Parliament—l rem a i n , as ever h ave b een, an adherent of the established form of Government, which has recognised an h ere dit ar y H ouse of p. lAment as part of the Constitution of the coun ;osed re, -- (Rear, hear.) From that opinion I am n o t dis ton to depart , and I feel convinced—such is m y e -(,e nce in the excellence of the British C:onsti n--such is my confidence in the temper which has tarried us hitherto through whatever dangers and difficul- Letie s we have h a d to contend with—that there will at last an agreem ent w i th respect to these Bills, as there has en before when differences have arisen. Under these cir elllnst •I, i , ances, think that the Constitution ought not to be lY parted w i t h , and that no misunderstanding as to the Post ponement the delay, or th e retarding the se measures , reght to be considered an o b s t ac l e t o th e ma i n t enance o f wtat Constitution, and to its being continued on a basis o f ounY and coneord.—(Cheers.) With these opinions, and "l e expressing any d ou bt s as t o com i ng t o an y settle -9t on the Corporation or Tithe questions, I must con ealune, at the same time, with stating, that I am convinced at there is nothing in the Constitution of this House, or th e her House of Parliament,which could finally prevent su c h a set tle snent ; and therefore it would be better that, instead of the d etermination he being left to the chances of collisio n , or t o tu e winds of fortune, that we should maint a i n th a t consti te tut ion whi c h has hitherto worked with su c h admirable a f t . and w hi c h i s st ill capa bl e o f pro d uc i ng most admirable ' fl 'its both to England and Ireland.—(Cheers.) Ur. HUME was satisfied - that th e conc l us i on of the Noblefacts . Lord's speech was directly at var i ance w i t h the 2 e ts %thi e f ' be had stated in the cou rse o f it. H e h a d no do u b t. however, but that Ministers would do their duty, a n Ir d stand b y t h e H ouse n ow th e y saw t h e c l ear course be- t ,`,e them. (Cheers.) That House, at the early part o f the sessi on , passed a Bill which had for its object the es t e - Mish tnent • o ' f liberal local bodies over Ireland. The cause of Ireland seemed, however, to be unworthy of the at (tention' of the other House, at least till the 9th of June.— Hear, hear, hear.) He wished the Noble Lord to state Z ,Ileth er h e i nten d e d to carry the Church-rates Bill and Lie other measures before the House, as fast as possible, :tand send them Op to the House of Lords, or whether he ended to postpone th em un til th e 9 t h o f June `t It ap peared t o hi m to b e trifling with the feelings of the country no t to state distinctly what course the Government in . - te nded to take to prevent the stoppage of the public busi -I(;3,_s• two Houses must be placed on a footing ""rmony to carry on the legislation for the country. He , 1 1,ew that the Noble Lord was afraid of the subject of the -el °lll l of the Lords, The Noble Lord said that he was e ns , e , °us to adhere to the Constitution, which had hitherto 1 -.4 ked so well ; had that been the case for the two last t e n t s '`( Hea r , h ear )—d ur i ng w hi c h per i o d a ll t h e measures b,2 n P•by that H ouse h ave b een mut il ate d or b ro k en i n g ee ? He wi s h e d to h ave a d i st i nct answer from the Noble h e °r d n as to th e course he intended to pursue, as to whether sati ' sti eaot to press the measures before the House. He was oth er if the ob s t ac l es were f oun d to rema i n w i th the le 'r douse' the country wou ld no l onger su ff er i t , b ut as s i st 4 away the impediments i n i ts way , an d wou ld h e ., t he Gov ernment i n app l y i ng a remed y.—(Hear, th;u.) They h a d arr i te d at a per i od when there was a 14ee stoppage of le g i s l a ti on , an d i t was necessary t h at ProYsees t (ii n n uld have som e un d ers t an di ng as to t h e i r f uture Lord gs. hi n „ , r J OHN RUSSELL h a d th oug ht h e h a d ma d e int,:A" un derstood, but he begged a t once t o state t h at h e the d, with as li tt l e delay as possible, to proceed with s nleasures before the House. so ae I L' PEEL—I a m ex t reme ly sorry t h at a di scuss i on Haveale up with pa r ty f ee li ng an d party interest should wi s h t ren pla ce on t h e quest i on o f a poor-law. I greatly rata 'e Hon. Gentleman, however legitimate his question lue, had taken some other occasion for putting it, for olisfee that, thStusion if we once permit party feeling to mingle in the of a poor-law for Ireland, it will greatly prejudice or _ °iscussion, and materially tend to discourage the hope 10014, satisfactory completion of a measure which, as it is, is ler (H(H e ed upon with very considerable doubt and anxiety.— ear hear) As the Noble Lord has made distinct re• t eu e , be e to me, I find it necessary, not adopting a different 164:Per from that in which the Noble Lord spoke, to say d ini ng on this subject. I understand' from the Noble i ' c 'rd that it is his intention to proceed with those mea sets, which were indicated in his Majesty's speech from the geiThen as affe c ti ng t h e i nternal peace and tranquillity of and, with the consideration, namely, of the Poor -law " 1 , and the question of Irish tithes. I rejoice to hear • t'4t such Is the N o bl e L or d' s determination, and I regard „_ 4B a m uc h more pru d ent decision than the one I under 17'nd hi m t o i n di cate on Friday last of a contrary descrip v!'n.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The Noble Lord complains of 1 " course taken by the House of Lords on the subject of the 4 sr'sh Municipal Corporation Bill. lam bound to say that . • s . thi nk that the course of the House of Lords is perfectly ,h"sistent with justice and good sense.—(Loud Opposition tv„T;'•) I can say this with perfect truth, because the thf s "le Lord will do me the justice to remember that when t i 'natter was first brought under the consideration of this ; 11 112 : 1 : I expressed an anxious wish that before we came to iondeeisio n on the Corporation question we might first un utter the other two matters.—( Hear.) I said this with wh a t ract vi ew o f t h e question, :lad without a n y re f erence lev er to the course the House of Lords might think leirlZto adopt.—(Hear hear.) I th oug h t i t o f t h e utmost th e that before we pronounced our final opinion on alo e I r i sh, quest i on we s h ou l d b e in full posses eoerse the intentions of Government, and the probable (pur sue the Hou se o f C ommons would be called upon to He ar "'referen ce t o I r i s h t i thes and Irish Poor-laws.— I'er s o I think the Hon. and Learned Member for Tip linsl I must admit it is perfectly consistent in the Peers to fur connection between questions of this kind, self said'e v ery speech w hi c h he has just delivered he him tied iri that he. thou ht the questi o n; of Irish Poor-laws tested tithe S o intimately connected together that lie pro euseqatinst the consideration of the Poor-laws until the spe et i w ''s Pitt in full possession of the Ministerial measure Ig o" 4 Irish Tithes.--(Hear, hear.) For, said the Irel.4!' .Learned Gentleman, " Tithe in many parts of tvif4h-es t'.Barrear for three ears, and at Christmas next l' t f any Cul Years in arrear ; before you impose a new rate ° "w w i l i n u in Ireland for the relief of the poor, let me t o ti, is the final settlement you propose to make as the tiHon. in that country." Now, if it be the view of Le s arld Learned Gentleman that two out of these unti.4(4 I atte st . lie e p I °lls are so intimately connected together, that , ine s th 1 14 "" u opinion on an Irish Poor-rate pronouncing ano f e s ascertained the feelings of Government and ea se use • as te a the to 'e ex • Irish Tithe, how can he deny to other f is f ercis e of that judgment which he not only s u kt ti le , h mself, but pronounces ; or how could in re gllve that the . ri ght of thinking that the three questions t her e intimate connection with each other which he a a e s r efor e, T i ts to exist between two of the three `e If, h _q wanted any vindication of the reasonableness ° use 1" tile course which ha s been pursued by the "L'°4le, fiod it 4414issi" Cif ' - -ai Honourable and Learned Msrnber.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The Honourable Member for Middlesex seems to think that there is something in the course taken by the House of Lords which is disrespectful to the House of Commons.—(Hear, hear.) I beg to say I myself have that feeling for the honour of a House of which I have been so long a Member, and by which I have been received with only too much of favour. I have that deep in terest in its honour and character that nothing would in• duce me to acquiesce in any course which I thought dis• respectful to this House—( Hear, hear, hear)—but I hug the Hon. Member to call to mind that it was distinctly in timated to the House of Lords in the speech from the throne that in the course of the present session their atten ton would be drawn to " three measures intimately con nected with the tranquillity and welfsre of Ireland," and that on the invitation of the Ministry their Lordships pre sented an address to the King, in which they expressed a hope that they might be able to make some arrange ments conducive to the welfare and peace of Ireland, and pledging themselves to an early consideration of the three measures which were specified by Ministers in the speech from the throne. If, therefore, the Lords concur with the Commons in the principle that there is an intimate union between these questions without any reference to the pro ceedings of the House of Commons, have not their Lord ships had authoritative and indisputable declarations made to them that these three measures would be presented for their, consideration, and if they think them so intimately connected, can any thing be more natural or reasonable than that they should desire to postpone the consideration of one Bill until they know on what principle the others are founded?—(Hear.) I before stated to the Noble Lord, and with perfect truth, that if the order of these measures had been reversed—if he had perfected the Poor-law Bill and settled the tithe question, I should then, on the discussion on the Corporation Bill, have frankly stated the connected view which I took of all the measures ; but as things have been arranged, the Municipal Bill came in this House to its third reading before any thing was known as to either of the other measures. The Noble Lord seemed to ap prehend the possibility that in the course now taken some advantage is intended to be laid hold of of this kind, that one Bill will be passed into a law and the other inde finitely postponed ; for instance, that a Tithe Bill rendered satisfactory to the House of Lords will be passed, and that then the Municipal Bill will be thrown . overboard.— (Hear.) Now, this result would be altogether a matter of impossibility unless this House were a consenting party ; for whatever the scheme of adjustment adopted by the House of Lords as satisfactory to them, this House is of course in no way called upon to accept it ; and, therefore, the danger which the Noble Lord apprehends as possible is altogether out of the question. I will not enter further into the consideration of these questions, being most unwilling that anything of party as p er ity s h ou ld connect it self with the discussion of a poor-law. I will merely re peat, that as reference was made to me by the Noble Lord, as to the course of the House of Lords, I felt hound to express my entire acquiescence in that course—(Cheers) —my conviction that it was perfectly consistent with justice and equity to ask to see all these measures be fore it considered the details of one of them—( Hear, hear)—my conviction, further, that had any other course been followed by the House of Lords, if they had at once proceeded to consider the details of the Corporntion Bill, such a course would not have facilitated an amicable settle ment of the questions, but would, on the contrary, more probably have led to their indefinite postponement—( Hear) —and lastly, my conviction that in the course so adopted there could have been no intention to offer disrespect to the House of Commons.—(Cheers.) I believe that no such disrespect was intended ; the proceedings of the House of Lords had no necessary reference to any inconsistent proceedings of the House of Commons ; their Lordships themselves declared, in their answer to the speech from the throne, that they would give full consideration to each of the three measures that speech pointed out, in reference to Ireland ; and feeling as they did the intimate connection between the three subjects, it was impossible for them fully to consider the one without being in possession of the principles on which the other two were founded. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could not help thinking there were some fallacies, and those of no ordinary importance, in the statement of the Right Hon. Baronet.—(Hear, hear.) Whenever the Right Hon. Gen tleman or the other Hon. Gentlemen who differed with Ministers on the essential principles on which the Govern ment of the country, and more especially the government of Ireland, was to be carried on, whenever the Right Hon. and Hon. Gentlemen appeared disposed to apply to autho rities of the kind just invoked by the Right Hon. Baronet ie support of their arguments, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was always disposed to suspect that there lurked some fallacy which they sought to impose upon the House in borrowed arguments. Thus it appeared to him that the Right Hon. Baronet, in attempting to prop up his arguments by illustrations drawn from the statement of the Hon. and Learned Member referred to, manifestly showed that he had no very strong case of his own to rely upon. What did the borrowed argument of the Right 11 on. Ba ronet prove 7 What was it to the purpose ? Nothing. That a member of their own House, conceiving a connec tion to subsist between several measures before the House, should ask . to see them in a combined form before he formed his judgment on one or all of them, was perfectly consistent with the rules and forms of Parliament, and was no violation of the Constitution, receiving no influence whereby the House should seek by its proceedings to follow the proceed ings in another._( Hear.) But the moment such an argu ment was raised elsewhere, it became a very different mat ter._( Hear.) It raised a principle for which those who raised it must hold themselves deeply responsible. It raised a principle which might be raised, and he hoped justly, in the present instance, only by inference ; but whenever it was raised actually and positively by design, and with a view to effect a given purpose, it could never be so raised without great danger to the Constitution.—( Hear.) The argument of the Right lion. Baronet as to the propriety of a Member of that House demanding to see all these three measures before he decided upon one of them, was correct enough, as asserting the constitutional rights of a member of one branch of the Legislature in the Chamber to which he belonged, but it was totally inapplicable if raised in a question between the two branches of the Legislature.—(Hear, hear.) lie would even assort the right to free and independent action of both Houses of Parliament, but, at the same time, he would resist any attempt on the part of either to overawe or con trol the other, tte an attempt most dangerous to the Con stitution. He did not for a moment mean to draw from the course stated to have been taken by the other House, any infereneo that its intention was to overawe and control the House of Commoose all he had a right to know of the matter was the statement on the Journals of that House, that the measure in question lid been postponed ; and he was willing to imagine that this postponement of the Bill by the other House was not for the purpose of depriving the country of the benefits which Government anticipated from the passing of the measure.—(Hear, hear.) if it were probable that any Bill had been delayed in the other Hous e , for the purpose of holding out to the House of Commons either a threat or an inducement to take a parti cular line in reference to other Bills p-nding befOre it, the individuals who took such a course in the other House were indeed incurring an awful responsibility--.-(Hear, hear) — but as he saw nothing of this declared on the Journals of the House of Lords, ho could not in justice impute to any Members of that body any such det:ie,n, If such were • the design of any Members of the Upper House, they might rest assured that it would be entirely defeated by the spirit and resolution of the Representatives of the people. —(Loud cheers.) The two branches of the Legislature were co-ordinate, but they were not co-equal, and this would manifestly appear were anything in the shape of' a conflict to occur.—(Loud cheering.) It was the House of Commons which was in possession of measures without which the public service could not for a week be carried on. —(Hear.) With the postponement of the measure to the 9th of June, the House of Commons had nothing to do. It was for th e H ouse of Commons zealously to persevere in is duty ; carry on the business to which it pledged i'e self in the commencement of the Session ; to discharge its functions faithfully ; and, having done this, the House of Commons would stand firm in the affections and confidence of the people of England.—( Hear.) Whether tie House of Lords was ia the wrong or no, it was for the House of Commons to keep itself hi the right.— (Hear.) Whatever party in the country put itself in the wrong in the eyt s of the people, that party would be sure to be the sufferer.— (Cheers.) Supposing fora moment the case to be that the House of Lords had, in the views of some partios, put itself in an inconvenient position in reference to the House of Commons, it was the duty of the House of Co.nmons to persevere in the eight, by calmness and moderation, and by undeviating adherence to the principle of serving the peblic i nterests, by being swayed by no party views or party animositie s one point beyond the track in which they would have walked if this occurrence had never intervened. The Right Hon. Baronet had implied that the Ministry had changed their minds on the subject since Friday. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) could as sure the Right Hon. Baronet he was wistaken in this re spect. The Ministry were taking precisely the which they had maked out for themselve in th e e " first rse inst„co, They made no interruption in their arrange tnents for conducting the public business. They left to the other House its full right to judge of all the molt sure; tpnt up to The sotlheeatnldtffisoins:ppleososbibj e le ct ex o t f en i t in th l e sere was to 'Garry Into effect the largest measure of national nprol em ant—to promote ta happiness and prosperity of the pooplo,eaille4r2) conelus;cio he might observe, that th ere was one observa. tins of the Right (lentleman in which he fully con curred, in -app r o ac hing the most 1144,74;5 pull most difficult duty ever i ; pp ose d on men , th a t on which a greater ma c ,, of fp isery or 4appippg never depended, it Was enentio that all should divest themselves of party feeling ; an,l he trusted that the discussion on this subject would on a ll sides of the House be for the fut r carried on in the same spirit in which it had commenced, and which had suffered nn interruption, until the interlude which had just taken place.—(Hear.) Mr. W. S. O'BRIEN said the cpies'ion of the Honour able and Learned Member for Tipperary remained its much unanswered as before. If there was to be a compromise with the Hens:, of Lords upon this question, let it be frankly stated. Mr. A. TREVOR was really very sorry to see so bad an understanding on this occasion between Ministers and Gentlemen with whom, in general, they were so friendly, ,nd witho u t whose assistance they could not keep in office for a week. For his part he did not understand time clamour raised against time House of Lords, for their very reason able request to know the na'u .e of one measure bt , fore they decided upon another, these measures hiving so intimate a connection. Mr. 11. GRATTAN protested against the House of Lords being permitted thus to hang up Ireland by the neck till the 9th of June.—( A laugh.) If the Lords were quietly allowed to shelve this essential measure till the 9th of June, they would in the same way postpone the Poor law Bill till the 9th of July, and the Tithe Bill till the 9th of August. Mr. SHEIL said he did not conceive that he had asked any question of the Government ; he had suggested a diffi culty with respect to two measures, but he had not inquired which course they meant to pursue either with respect to the Municipal Corporation (Ireland) Bill, or the Irish Tithe Bill. He, however, had heard with great satisfaction the declaration that, they would not desert their post while sus tained by the House of Commons.—( Much cheering, and a cry from the Opposition side of " Spoke!") He believed he had no right to go beyond explination, and he begged pardon for having said he was delighted to hear Ministers declare that as long as they were supported by the House of Commons they would not resign.—(Renewed cheering.) The House went into Committee, trod the first clause having been moved, Mr. O'CO N NELL rose to submit an amendment, but the noise occasioned by Members leaving the House was so great that very few of his observations reached the gal ery. He said it was his opinion that there ought to be a Commission apppointed exclusively for Ireland. The relief afforded in that country now would cease directly the new system was brought into operation, and the provision, there fore, that would be necessary would demand the confiscation of.property to a much greater extent than had been calcu lated. There ought to be a separate set of Poor-law Com missioners for Ireland who were acquainted with all the details of the existing system. What information could the English Commissioners be supposed to possess ? What (lid Mr. Nicholls know of the condition and wants of the Irish ? He had been a sailing captain of an East Indiaman. Was that an education peculiarly fitting him for a Poor law Commissioner? They could not have an opportunity of practice in both countries ; the circumstances were not the same.—(Opposition cheers.) It was quite true that the circumstances as regarded pauperism were not the same. We pauperised the people, and they produced crime in Ireland, and in England crime was the result of our Poor laws.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman concluded by moving as an amendment that three Poor !aw Commissioners be appointed tp carry this Act into exe cution iu Ireland. Mr. S. O'BRIEN concurred entirely with the amend. ment. Mr. HUME was sorry to see his Hon. Friends take the course they were taking with respect to the Commission. The question was whether they would accept the services of men who had had two or three years' experience in the working of the Poor-law system. Were their services to be accepted to per!'orm what was acknowledged to be a dif ficult duty, or would they reject them and support those who had all this to gain ? He did not think that his Hon. and Learned Friend had dealt with this matter with his usual consideration. He objected to Mr. Nicholls because he was brought up at sea. Was that a way to judge of a man's abilities? " Why I," said Mr. Hume,' was brought up at sea."—(Great laughter.) Experience assured him that the English system of Poor-laws had b een we ll worked by the Commissioners. The evils complained of had re sulted from the abuse of that system, and not from the prin ciple which Mr. Nicholls recommended. He w ou ld as k was it possible to put an end to the mendicancy in Ireland while alms were distributed indiscriminately, and while no means were taken to distinguish between the idle and in dustrious poor ? It was but justice to the Commission to state, that in the Committee which sat up stairs not the least evidence was taken reflecting prejudicially either on the law or on the way in which the Commissioners had car ried it into execution. Mr. O'CONNELL, in explanation, s aid he did not im pugn the conduct of the Commissioners with respect to any thing that they had done in England. He believed that they had done wisely and well ; but what he con. tended was, that the principles on which Poor-laws ought to be administered In Ireland differ, d tote code from the prin ciple on which they might be administered in England. In this country they had to correct abuses in an existing sys tem ; in Ireland they were introducing a system entirely new. He maintained that that they were bound to take care in introducing such new system that it was based on a thorough acqu.iintance with all mutters of detail. Mr. RICHARDS said that mendicancy could not be put down by the law unless they made some provision for the really destitute. In his opinion it would be found that the number of the destitute was far short of the number estimated by the Hon. and Learned Member. He thought there should be a board sitting in Dublin, and if the lion. and Learned Member fur Kilkenny went to a division he would vote with him. Lord J. RUSSELL thought the discussion had been carried further than the principle embodied in the clause called for, and ;is the system of Poor-laws in England differed sn matedally from that proposed for Ireland, it e ou ld h ave been better to have postponed a great deal of what had been said till they came to the clause relative to workhouses. In allusion to what had been said by the Hon. Member for Middlesex relative to the Commissioners, he would state that it was necessary to have fOr Commissioners men of great experience, and that it would cause very great inconvenience to appoint three gentlemen totally unacquainted with Poor laws, as they would be totally inadequate for the object in v:ew. He thought it would be necessary for !Mc years to have a beard sitting in Dublin, composed of gentlemen possessed of local knowledge, but at the same time it was absolutely necessary to have a general board to carry out the system on general grounds not applicable only to Ireland, but such as might be adopted in other countries to which a Poor-law might be necessary lle did not see anything so peculiar in the state f Ireland to prevent the application of those general pri. cites to th..t country. With regard to the imputations made against Mr. Nicholls, he wished the House to understand that that gen tleman had been sent over to Ireland at the express rquest of the Government, and that he was not responsible for having set aside the Report of the Commissioners. In fact, he (Lord J. Russell) was more responsible for that alit Mr. Nicholls. Mr. O'CONNELL differed entirely from the Hon. Member for Kriareshorough in his statements about men dicity in Dublin. So far from 9,000/. a year only being ex pended in that capital, the sum exceeded 100,000/., and even with that, the scenes of destitution and misery were gill very distressit,g. After a few words from Mr. SHELL and Mr. WvsE, rela tive to the necessity of having a local board in Dublin, Lord JO lIN RUSSELL said it was the intention of the Government that there should be a Board sitting in Dublin, subsidiary to the Board of Commissioners in England. Sir ROBERT PEEL thought it was of great impor tance that there should be a local board subordinate to the general board. The people of Ireland were in the habit of consulting the authorities in that country, and it would be desirable that there should be commissioners in Dublin to whom they could apply fur information arid advice. The amendment was th , n withdrawn, and the clause. agreel to ; the 2d clause was aLo agreed to without dis cussion. On the 3d clause being put, Lord STANLEY said he did not rise to oppose the clause, but simply to call the attention of the Committee to one part of the clause which would require alteration. The English PoJr Law Act delegated powers to the Com. missioners, subject to certain existing laws. Now, in Eng land the powers of the Commissioners were limited by the established laws, but that was not the ease in Ireland. If the clause were allowed to remain as it stood, tbc powers of the Commissioners in Ireland would he uurestrieted or vague. _ _ _ After a few words from Mr. SHAW and Lord JOHN RUSSELL, Mr. O'CONNELL proposed that tho clause b© post poa:7.d. Lord JOHN RUSSELL stated that he would not ob ject to the postponement of the clause ; but he wished the committee to proceeded to-morrow. Toe CHAIRMAN reported progress, and asked leave to sit again to-morrow. Tiie House then resumed. THE REGISTRATION AND MARRIAGES ACTS ANILNDMENT BILL. The second mading of this Bill having been moved by Lord JOHN RUSSELL, Colon 1 SIBTHORP pro:ested against proceeding with such a Bill at tho present late how , of night, Lord JOHN RUSSELL eons:Nat:a to postpone the Bill till Wednesday. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of and the House adjourned 4t one ttlehlek. THE SUN, LONDOIN, TUESDAY. MAY 9, 1837 HOUSE OF LORDS, M-41' 8. Viscount DUNCA NNON said that the Noble Lord had asked for returns of the panel book and the• sheriff's jury book of the county Carlow, and he would now lay them on the table. The Noble Viscount then said, in answer to another question which had been asked him relative to the limit to which the Dublin Police Act was intended to extend, that the present system of Dublin police extended eight miles from the Castle of Dublin, and it was im possible therefore to extend this Bill, and the system under it to that distance, but it gave the power to extend it, if it became necessary hereafter. It was also • thought right by this Bill, that instead of four police stations there should be only three, and instead of three magistrates there should be only two at each, and that the entire time of these magistrates should be required, which was not now the case. The Bill also gave to the Lord Lieutenant power to superannuate some of the magistrates now connected with the stations, which would be done without any additional expense to the public, from the saving which would be effected by the reduction of the number of magistrates and stations. Earl WICKLOW said, the first point to which the Noble Viscount had alluded was the opposition which he ( Earl Wicklow) had given to the 2 , 1 clause of the Bill on its - second reading. That clause gave the Lord Lieutenant the poser to extend the operation of the Bill to any portion of the county of Dub lin he thought proper. Now he thought that clause was very unfair in its operation, because the county of Dublin was already provided with a sufficient poli ce . He had stated ou a former occasion that unless the Noble Lori gave SO:112 satisfactory reasons for retain ing it he should move its omission in Committee. As that had not been done, be (Earl Wicklow) should certainly move the omission of the second clause. An other objection he bad made to the Bill was, not that it increased the number of magistrates, hut that it en abled the Lord Lieute nan t to remove the magistrates at present in existence (of a hom he had heard no complaint) on a superannuated allowance, and appoint others in their placaa with a higher salary. In his opinion some reason should be shown for removing the present magistrates. Lord E L LEN BOROUG Noble Friend had very properly complained of the operation of the present Bill. By the Metropolitan Police Bill no rate exceeding eight-pence in the pound could be levied, whereas the pow ers of the presebt Bill were much more extensive, Ile thought that the same valuation should apply to all the local taxes, and that the paving and lighting and the wide street taxes should be collected on precisely the same valua tion as the watch and police tax. It would be unfair were it otherwise, and was calculated to create irritation and discontent. Lord FITZGERALD sail that he would be very sorry to throw any obstacles in the way of the mea sure ; but, in regard to the provisions of the Bill, he did not think the Lord Lieutenant should have the power, without reference to the existing Magistrates, to appoint others with higher rates of salary. But the Noble Lord had said that a satin; would be effected, and there would be a larger amount of duty to perform, as the number of magistrates would be fewer. In respect to vesting the power of appointing magistrates in the exe cutive, he could not view the appoin'Anent of stipeodiary magistrates which had been made with such approbation as would lead him to give them that power in the present instance. The Noble Lord had sail that some of the present magistrates would not give up other avoca tions which interfered with the performance of their duty ; but no facts to that effect had been stated, and he titought that there were persons still amongst the metropo litan magistrates of Ireland who were as capable of per forming their duty as any who might be appointed. Unless, therefore, some satisfactory explanation was given, he thought it would be better to postpone the Bill for the present. After a few observations from Lord DUNCANNON and the Earl of WicKtow, the Bill was postponed to that day fortnight. THE POLL. BOOK AND SHERIFF'S PANEL BOOK (CARLOW). The Earl of RODEN moved that this book be printed. Lord BROUGHAM said he would put it to the Noble Lord whether or no it would be worth while to incur the expense of printing the book ? Earl RODEN said the expense would be very trifling, as the book in which the names were inserted was not filled above two or three pages. Motion agreed to. THE UNIVERSITIES. The Earl of RADNOIt said that several days ngo he gave notice of his intention to move fur a Select Commit , tee relative to the Statutes of the several Halls and Col leges of Oxford and Cambridge. He (lid so in consequence of what had passed on a former occasion, when he had the honour of moving the second reading of a Bill for the ap pointment of a Commission to make a similar inquiry. Upon that occasion the argument principally used was with respect to the necessity of the inquiry ; and it was sug gested by a Right Rev. Prelate, who took a part in the debate, that some previous inquiry ought to take place before a legislative measure was adopted. He (the Earl o f Radnor) still thought that a Commission would have been the most advisable course to adopt, and that opiniqn grad been confirmed by his having more rtlitintoly examit e I t h e petition s which were proswitea from the different Col !pos. an that occasion. Entertaining, therefore, the same opinion, he now proposed another mode, which he thought the next best, for carrying on such i94iry, in the course . of the f orr imp4tea to hi m , t ht i th w o tuti tm h a (th e ttarl of Radnor) then made, ho had some ulterior object, and since then the same imputation had been repeated. He (the Earl of as nor) stated, o n t h e former occas:ep, ibrit ny had no UltC rior object beyqt?d tiu l t ‘k•bich niotion pt•OfeSsed, and, qIP o , eSeri( tope, b e certainly 114(1 no objecti on to state The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at Five o'clock. Lord COLCHESTER presented a petition in favour of Church-rates from a place in Sussex. Lord BURLINGTON presented petitions from places in Gloucester against Church -rates. Lord SEMI AYE presented a similar petition from the mayor and corporation of Tewkesbury. Lord ELLENBOROUGII presented a petition in fa vour of Church-rates from councillors of the same place. Lord HATHERTON presented a petition against Church-rates from a place in Staffordshire. Lord MINT() presented petitions aeeinst Church-rates from Bideford and other places. The Duke of I3UCCLEUGH presented a petition in favour of Church-rates from places in Northamptonshire ; also from the Synod of Caithness and Sutherland. Mr. R. CLIVE, and other Members of the House of Com ulnas, brought up two private Bills. Lord MONTAGUE presented a petition in favour of Church-rates from a place in Leicester. kNOBLE LORD presented a similar petition from Reigate in Surrey. The Marquis of WESTMEATH gave notice that on Thursday he would present a petition from the Rev. E. Mulholland, complaining of the way in which the co:lege of Mawnooth was conducted. The Bishop of L L AND AFF presented severalpetitions in favour of Church -rates frcm places in Glamorganshire. The Duke of WELLINGTON presented similar peti tions from places in Northampton. Lord B R 0 UG HA M preaented petitions against Church rates from Clerkenwell, Isle of Elv, and places in Suffolk, Essex, - Lincoln, and Market Harhorough ; and from the county of Midlothian, in f a v our o f t h e B urg h s o f B aron i es ' Bill. r The Noble Lord then said that he had now to call the attentions of their Lordships to petitions of a different natttie they were from the Commons of the province of Lower Canada in Parliament assembled, and were signed by their Speaker, one of them in the French lan guage (which was that spoken in the House), and the other in English ; they set forth the opinion of the House and of the people, that a Reform such as they had often sought for should take place in the Constitution of the Pro vince, and of the abuses which existed in it, and the grievances experienced in consequence.—(Hear.) The petitioners asked the repeal of the Tenure Act, and a more effectual control over the revenues of the country by the Canadian Legislature. He (Lord Brougham) would give no opinion .of his own upon any of the statements of the petition generally, but with respect to that part Which referred to the Land Company, he must confess that he differed with the petitioners. The Duke of CUMBERLAND presented a petition from Mr. Lewis Nockalls Cottingharn, stating that Mr. Barry, whose plan had been approved of by the Commissioners for the erection of the new Houses of Parliament, had copied it from the plan of the petitioner, and praying that an in quiry might be instituted into the truth of the allegations in the petition. Lord DUNCANNON said that the Commissioners had come to the determination to adopt Mr. Barry's plan after the greatest attention. The larl of WICKLOW presented a petition against the Constabulary Act. The Bishop of HEREFORD presented a petition in favour of Church-rates from a place in Hereford. Earl FITZW ILLIAM presented a petition against Church-ratei from a place in Yorkshire. The-Archbishop of CANTERBURY presented a pe tition in favour of the better observance of the Sabbath, and in favour of Church-rates from places in Kent. The Bishop of LONDON presented a petition to the same effect from the President of Sion College, and from places in Middlesex and Essex ; also a petition from the watermen of the Severn, in favour of the better obser vance of the Sabbath-day ; and to the same effect from a parish in the City of London, from the coach proprietors Richmond, and from the inhabitants of Holywood in he county of Down. DUBLIN POLICE. that this motion professed the same. It was insinuated that his object was to open the Universities to the Dissenterer. He conceived that the adoption of such a measure would he an advantage to the Universities themselves, and nothing more than act of justice to the Dissenters ; but it was not the object which he had in view.. The object which he at present had was, to inquire into the statutes of the Col leges, as they existed at present, and by which they were governed —to inquire into the oaths by which the mu tubers were bound, to observe their statutes, and to inquire into any provisions by , which the visit ors or th e govern i ng b ody might alter or amend those statutes. Now, it was admitted that the governing bodies of the Colleges were sworn to observe the statutes, and yet those statutes, all of them of a very ancient date, and totally inapplicable to the present time, were to be continued. It did appear to him that this alone was sufficient to sanction some legislative measure. Some of the Colleges eleimed not only to be bound to ob serve their statutes, but also to be hound to repel any at tempt at alteration and amendment. Sonic of the Col leges, however, stated that they were willing to have their statutes amended. He had carefully refrained from ap plying the word perjury to 'those gentlemen who took their oaths and who did not observe them ; but he knew that there were many persons who felt themselves to be perjured. He knew himself an instance of a mem ber of Trinity College, Cambridge, who felt so strongly on the subject that he threw up his scholarship._ He held in his hand a printed letter from a Professor of the University of Oxford, in which that gentleman said that the charge which he (the Earl of )Radnor) brought against the Univer sities was nothing less than a charge of perjury. He (the Earl of Radnor) only charged them with disobeying statutes which they were sworn to maintain, and if the Members of the Universities called that perjury, it was not from him that the charge or imputation came. [Here the Noble Earl referred to the opinion of Archdeacon Paley, in his " Moral Philosophy," on the subject of oaths taken to ob serve College statutes, which he thought could not cover the preserit case.] Now what was the object for which these Colleges were established ? Much had been said in opposition to a statement which he had made on the former occasion than they were established for the benefit of poor scholars ; but, notwithstanding that opposition, he still ad hered to his opinion. The words in the charters were pauperes et indi s , entes ; and what else could those words mean but poor scholars ? In the statutes of Merton College he found that the scholars were required to be pauperes ; in those of Oriel the term indigentes was used ; the same was the case at St. Peter's Colleg e, Cambridge ; an d a t Sidney Sussex C o ll ege t h e meeebers were to be valde pauperes. Much indignation had been excited by the declaration which he had made on a former occasion ; but in no place had it excited so much anger as in St. John's, Cambridge, where the members did not appear to like the designation of pauperes. However, he was borne out in the view which he took of the nature and - object of these foundations even by the opinions of Judges, expressed in law suits. The Noble Lord then referred. to the frag ment of a sermon preached by one Thomas Neevan, Rev. and Learned Man, who had been a Fellow of St. John's College in 1553, in which that Rev. Gentleman complained of the sorry and declining state of the Univer sities, and attributed it to the growing influx of wealthy persons, who were taking the places of poorer students. The Learned Gentleman also proceeded to describe the behaviour and conduct of those poor scholars, who still re mained ; " they were," he said, " content with a penny piece of beef among four for their dinner—(Laughter)-- after which they proceeded to their studies ; their supper was not much better than their dinner ; they then again applied to study ; and being without fires they were fain to walk about and run up and down for half an hour, in order to warm their feet before going to bed."--( Loud laughter.) There was another matter which was open to much ob jection—he meant the election to fellowships ; for it was unquestionable that that was a matter of canvas sing ; that many fellowships had been gained in con sequence of the canvassing of great Lords, aye, and great Ladies too ; and that persons had obtained fel lowships who were more likely to get invitations for Al mack's--(A laugh)—then from any qualifications they possessed, fellowships in a learned University. In the sta tutes of St. John's and Trinity Colleges there were express provisions limiting the number of the independent men, who were called pensionarii, to sixty. Ile th . ought then he had made out his case—that he was not incorrect iu stating that the object of these Colleges was to afford means of learning to such poor persons as should be in clined to study. Another point was, that the founders re quired generally constant residence, and that was evidenced from the provision that was made for lectures ; and he knew that, at Trinity and St. John's at least, theie was no inter ruption of the business of the Colleges even at the long vac aims. Upoa the subject of his present motion he had been met by the objection that Parliament had no right to inquire into these foundations, for that they were private, and received nothing from the State ; but these Colleges were all of them corporations, they all had, or, from their antiquity, were supposed to have had, charters ; and he could not understand' what a private corporation meant. lle admitted that already, in some respects, the Colleges were improved ; but still, as learned bodies, the two Uni versities at the present time stood very low, except at one or two places, and they were at Cambridge. Cambridge certainly did produce a few eminent men, hut Oxford stood very low in respect of theolOgieal and scientific knowledge. The cause of complaint was, no person stayed after a certain age, and that those who were best fitted for the instruction of youth ' either left the Colleges or remained merely in consequence of pa: ty connections, Then, again, too many pupils were allotted to each of the public tutors, as it was a notorious fact that, independently of all the opportunities which the College afforded, any young man who wished to obtain academical honours was obliged to have recourse to a pri vate tutor, in order to stand any chance of sueceA? but there was another thing connected with this part of the subject which, he most say, was most unfair ; it was this, that the examiners, the persons who had to award these honourable distinctions, took themselves pupils. The ob ject of his present motion was to get a Committee to in quire into the filets of the case. Ist. As to the statutes under which the different Colleges were instituted, and what was their present practice. 2dly. To inquire whether they were bound by oaths ; and whether in the governing bodies there was any power of altering the statutes ; and to report to the House whether any legislative measure ought to be adopted. It had been admitted that inquiry was necessary, and the strongest possible grounds had been given him by those who were concerned in the in quiry.—( Hear.) The Master and the eight Senior Fel lows of Trinity College' had entered into a resolution to petition the King to enable them to draw up a code of stet tes more congenial to the state of existing circumstances. --(Opposition cheers.) At all events, then, they admitted that something must be done. He would now, in conclu sion, move, " That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the statues by which . the several Colleges and Halls of Oxford and Cambridge are instituted ; into the present practice of those Colleges ; int., the nature of the oaths which are therein administered ; and into the powers that are vested in the governing bodies, and to report to the House as to the expediency of adopting any general le gislative measure on the subject." The Duke of WELLINGTON said that the Noble Lord had adverted to something that had fallen from him on a former occasion, and he certainly at ,that time, net seeing, as he confessed he did not, any grounds for the mo tion which the Noble Lord made for the second reading of the Bill then proposed to the House, had adverted to the Noble Lord's conduct formerly when he moved for a Bill to facilitate the introduction of ,Dissenters into the Univer sities, and he had adverted to it for the purpose of point ing out the object of the measure then before them. He could assure him he had not intended to cast any imputa tion on the Noble Lord. The Noble Lord had himself very fairly stated to-night his opinion that there ought to be greater facilities fur the introduction of Dissenters into the Universities than at present existed ; and what he (the Duke of Wellington) had said was nothing more than that such was the object of the Noble Lord's (Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had also referred to an admission made by a Right Rev. Prelate towards the close of the debate on that occasion, to the effect that it was necessary that there should be certain inquiries into the state of the Universities, although those inquiries should not he made by Commissioners appointed under an Act of Parliament of that description. Now he thought that the Noble Lord had mistaken the intention of the Right Rev, Prelate. Ile (the Duke of Wellington) apprehended that Right Rev. Prelate had wished to exerees an opinion that there ought to be inquiry, but that he had not in tended such inquiry to he carried into effect by a Com mittee of that House. He the (Earl of R ulnas) had stated that in the Universities there were various obsolete sta tutes which had become useless and impracticable, in con sequence of the length of time that had passed since they had been enacted as statutes for the government of these oolleges ; but it hal been stated by the Noble Lord that the members of those colleges were sworn to the observ vance of the statutes—that the members did swear to the observance of them, and that they violated those oaths That, certainly was a very grievous charge against those persons ; and he did wish that the Noble Earl had examined the matter a little further before he had twine forward, with all has weight and authority, and made that charge against persons of high respectability —(Cheers.) NOW he was prepawd to say that, with . reseCt to ) same of them, th e acts, for the non-performance o f which they were accused, had I:emu Magid —as was the case, for instance, with all those which had reference to the Roman Quleelie religion ; others were entirely obsolete, 4; 4 ;1 others had become wholly ine, practical*, she times in which they lived ; But before the Noble Lo;d.proceeded to itttiglatet that those persons who did not carry ir i tµ eaecution such statutes must be ggiity of perjury he ought certainly to have inquired whe ther, in the first elace, there existed any pwci ikk tile go- nchic:st verniug holies of the Colleges -to di , pens tutes, and whether, secendl 3 , visitors to dispense with the ( cu il la e r ar, po l i i n e) ti .r Of the':en ;lie rte sel.o:a.s on th fOund.. of these Colleges. The Noble Eed eaid that o.e panpers were properly the scholars of the foundation. Now, how ever, they were a distinct and separate class. They %Acre not among the highest, but generally in the middle class of life. The Noble Duke then alluded to the constitution of the College of Ail Souls and other Colleges not particulariscl,and said he thought as they had been in some instances designed for the benefit of the relat ions ai:d descendants of the founders their statutes should be carried into execution. There were many Noble Lords Members of that House,-others in his Majesty's Government, and others in the highest situations in his Majesty's service who bad received the ad. vantages of those c , .tatilislirnents, and he mild not sec %AY they should he interfered with, nor why a difleteot disposition should be made of their property thin) the one thine origin ally intended. The Noble Lord had also brought forward the subject of non-residence of Fellows in Colleges. sow, in some cases the founders admitted, and in others the visitors had the power to prevent it, and he found in every instance the statutes had been preserved intestate. The Noble Lord said that a Right Rev. Prelate had slated that at Trinity College, Cambridge, and at Oxf,rd, it Ives the general opinion that an inquiry should be instituted into existing evils, those evils being considered to be obsclere statutes, not only useless but injurious, eiid that som e ma sure should he adopted for procuring their amelieration. After he had been elected Ctemeellor of Oxrerd he hod en tered into a correspon d ence .. v ith the gover.ii ng part i i s of that University, and they had taken into consideration, and were determined to adopt, any ittpulioration s that might be found necessary, and he had been informed, and was autho rised to say, that these ameliorations would be made. He be lieved, too, that the Colleges of the University of Cambridge had directed titer attention to the same subject. At Trioity College, Cambridge, they bad applied to his. Maj -sty on the subject, as visitor of the College, and they were desirous of making every necessary alteration ; and every College its the University of Oxford entertained a similar desire. He would briefly advert to those charges which the Noble Lord had offered to substantiate before a Committee of their Lordships' House, and on which he proposed to found any measure that he might subsequently introduce. One of them was respecting the Latin language being taught in Hall ; and supposing it could be proved that this was not done in the way the statute directed, or even something mere important than that was proved, he would ask his Lordship whether, having those proofs on record in that House, it would be desirable to act upon such a proof, where it might involve the forfeiture of the property of the College ? The Noble Lord had been pleased to say that the Universities were my longer the seats of learning. He must have a little forgotten what he saw around him, and forgotten, too, all the events that bad been passing in Coe c,untry for tnany years when he hazarded such an assertion. The Noble Duke then expressed his determination of op posing the motion. .at:on h e e ih The Marquis of CAMDEN thought that many of the subjects, such as that of non-residence, was a mach Letter subject for a CollcTiate than for a Parliamentary inquiry. Ile was so much out of his element, not being in the habit of attending Parliament, that he would not enlarge upon the subject, but hoped that the Noble Lord, instead of looking into minute circumstances, would permit the Uni versities to reform themselves, and refrain from pressing his motion. The Bishop of LLANDAFF said that the Noble Earl, in having attributed to him the suggestion for a Committee of Inquiry, was totally and fundamentally in error. From the first he had strenuously opposed such a course. But he did suggest that such measure should be adopted, but one saving the interest and honour of the University, and of relief, rather than of censure. But what the Committee now proposed must, in limine, have the effect of convey:.ng that censure. He had the same objection to the Conr,mit tee that he entertained with respect to the Comadssion. The gravamen of the charge brought against the Universi ties was the abuse of their oat!►. Now, he believed they obeyed them in the full spirit of the founder's intention , but, as many of them had fallen into desoetude, and for other reasons had become obsolete, they were not punc tiliously observed. He admitted the fact that this was an embarrassing state of things ; but even the Noble Earl allowed that it was not perjury, and that the oath was taken without prevarication or mental reserve. He could not see the necessity of this Committee, more especially as the subject was about being taken up by the Learned bodies themselves, and it would be better to post pane any proceedings until the result of their J::l►berations were seen. The Bishop of LINCOLN. did not think the Noble Earl had made out a case calling for a Committee. The Bishop of GLOUCESTER, in reference to the oaths, observed that there e ere many who, like himself, had taken the oaths in early life, and, notwithstanding, felt their consciences unfettered and inviolate. He admitted the ob jections made to all unnecessary- owns, and would rejoice to see them done away with in these. colleges, if the attempt were made by the Societies the.oselves, and executed in a legal and constitutional manner. if the Noble Earl had made out a case to show that the Colleges had abused the trust reposed in them by the foundcrs—ifit had been shown that they corruptly tithumistered tire funds of the institu• lion, or did mat pay proper attention to the instruction of the yout4 entrusted to their charge—then, indeed, he would have grounds for calling for a Committee. But, so far from this being the case, they fulfilled the duties which they were appointed t o per f orm w i th singular zeal :aid energy. the Noble Earl would consent to withdraw his motion he would rejoice to see the matter taken up and carried into execu tion by the Collegcs . themselves.—( Hear.) The Archbishop of DUBLIN would admit that it would be highly desirable to see the alterations come front the Colleges themselves. Lord BROUGHAM said, if he had at any time :luring the course of the debate had a disposition to accede to the suggestions of the Noble Duke opposite, the speeches of the three Right Rev. Prelates who had just preceded him ( Lord Brougham) would have diminished it. The Right Rev. Prelate who spoke first had been betrayed into the expression of opinions respecting his doctrine of the nature of an oath, which he (Lord Brougham) was quite satisfied he would be the first to repudiate if he was aware of their tendency. With the ethical doctrines respecting " sub scription" advanced by the second Right Rev. Prelate he (Lard Brougham) felt bound to agree; but from the con stitutional doctrines of the third Right Rev. Prelate he shoOd certainly dissent. With respect to the question under consideration, be (Lord Broughatn) thought it. would be well if the Legislature had the power, and exer cised it, of regulating the statutes of these Colleges. If the founders of many of them were now alive, they would be most astonished at the explanation given in m an y instances of th e s i mp l e ru l es they had laid down at their foundation. The Bishop of GLOUCESTER, in explanation, said tliat in respect to residence, Masters of Coll( ges had the power of calling the Fellows into resilence when t'..cy pleased. Lord BROUGHAM—The question now was as to the cc n truction of the words of the Statute. What was it his Noble Fiend (Earl Radnor) wished ? What was the ob ject of his motion ? To have the Statutes of the Colleges altered, so as to accommodate them to the exiiting state of things, for the benefit of the Colleges themselves, as well as for that of the public at large. That was the tenour of his entire argument. How far did they require alteration ? At present, though a dead letter,' they were the law of the Colleges : and the gravamen of his Noble Friend's case was, that one party was swearing to observe them while the other was swearing to cause them to be observed, they being observed by neither in most instances. The evil was hot denied—the only difference of opinion which existed was as to the best mode of remedying it. His Noble Friend's object was to make the practice conform more to the law than it did, by making the law more conformable to the practice and to make the cooduct of men coincide better with their oaths, .by making those oaths more coincident with existing circumstances. • But what most damped his (Lord Brougham's) hopes of a Reform from within the Univers:ties themselves was, that in many cases the Colleges, under the demise of their founder, had no power to change the laws laid do.vn at their foundation. He was, therefore, oF opinion, that recourse should be had to Parliament. He was inclined to think that the most natural way to go to work would be to appoint a Com mittee of their Lordships ; but still as he could not but fi)resee that very great inconvenienc e ►night result from the adoption of that course, he, for one, should have no objection to the temporary adoption of the suggestions made by the other side of the House. The Archbishop of DU BLIN explained. Lord WVN FORD denied the prevalence of abuses to the extent stated by the Noble Lord opposite, and con cluded by expressly a hope that he would withdraw his motion. The Earl of WI/'•iCHILSEA would tell the Noble Earl openly, and above board, that he strongly suspected the object of his motion to be, under the guise of rep ea li ng certain obsolete statutes of thes..! Colleges, to break down the barriers which surrounded then), and to let in Dissen ters on the several foundations. Parliament, he (the Earl of Winehilsea) maintained, had no more tight to interfere with these Colleges than they had with any ot h er pr i vate or trust prop er ty whatever. fie should offer his most de cided opposition to the motion of the Noble Earl. ','ho Earl of RADNOR replied, and then agreed to nithdraw the motion, on the assurance which came...from the Noble Marquis at the other side of the House, that the CoHews. were ready to enter into the inquiry sought for. The motion was withdrawn accordingly. Several Bills were then advanced a stage. Adiourned at Eleven o'Clock.