The Sun. — London, England, 1852-03-31 00:00:00

THE SUN, fund available for immediately carrying out a resolution 1 promptitude, in or ls cl „ er ei tp . a n t the t steamers might be ready for of that House upon the subject.—(Hear, hear.) The war purposes at a Lord PALNIERSTON said he hoped iron steamers would not be subjected to the system, as expense had been, he thought, underrated by the Hon. Member; but even that was not the main di ffi culty. It cou l d not be used for the purposes of war.—(Hear. ) they would be necessary to reserve to the Government the Captain DUNCOMBE said the Admiralty had already ar pos er of investigating all the details of the question, rived at that conclusion. for he apprehended that some difficulty might arise be - THE WINE DUTIES. tween naval officers and crows of mercantile steamers Mr. ANSTEY THE WINE DUTIES. moved for a Select Committee to inquire serving together in cases of eme rgency. teplaee Thu crews t in h t e o i t m he e c r a t us d e d s t li e f the decline of the revenue derived from might also probably be unwilling on wines. He did not mean to contend under martial law, and it was here that the chief diffi- that t he duties ha d s declined during the last two years, but e culty lay.—(Hear, hear.) He was perfectly certain that that th e revenue that less now under high duties than in the present Board of Admiralty would rejoice if every former years it had be en vessel now belonging to any company could be rendered esdthe un der l consumption duties. had l e been l reate prove under lower d u ti e s subservient to purposes of defence, and he was not pre - larger. In 1788-90 the wine trade was r and the revenue pared to say that by strict economy such a desirable re- comparatively free. The genius of Mr. Pitt had emancipated it from many regulations which the rejudices of former suit might not be arrived at without any considerable lays had imposed. The treaties of 17 86 with France had increase of expense.—(Hear, hear. ) The Admiralty been made the prelude for remission of the duties, which had would carry out the resolution proposed by the Hon, been . reduced from 9s. 2d. a gallon to 4s. 6d. on French Gentleman in the fairest spirit, and is the earnes t belief s w a i i n d es :, a4 . !ht e 3s.a gallon on Peninsular. And Mr. Pitt then that it might be brought to a succ ssful issue.— (Hier , n opportu n it y reduction on the duty fer will exporting increase fathefabrics ce n s u l t l n p - hear.) And he thought that the following words of li on and afford a n Mr. Laing before the Committee afforded some encou- the capital and navigation of he country areenge i g es ed i , a a w nd i f e o b r ragement for hopicg, that in cases of emergency disposing of cotton and woollen and hardware manufactures, no insuperable difficulties would arise on the part of as well as increasing our revenue." In 1784-86 the annual consumption of all wines imported had been 3,350,131) gal the merchant seamen towards rendering the mercantile lons . ; in 1788.90 (after the reduction of duty) it had risen to marine available for the defence of the country. Mr. the774e2,6t00 of 2,29 2, 530 showing an increase of consumption to Laing was asked whether he had any means of knowin g en 88,536 - 1 ,29L53 1 0 79 rfa1 h 10n5, and the revenue had in what were the views of the merchant seamen and engi- creased x 6,437,2ootconsumption was 7,850,000 neers on the subject, and whether they would make any gallons; in 1819, only gallons; ye t . the popula.. complaint against being subjected to the rules of the tion had doubled in the meantime In t h e reign of Charles Queen's service. Mr. Laing replied—" The only proof 11. the duties on wine had been on . ly 4d. or 6d. per gallon , that I can give is this. Last year, at a time when there and in 1669 the consumption was more than 9,000 0 0 Was disturbance, and no one knew what the result might lons (of imported wines)—more than it had ever been 'o since. gai- Under the Methuen treaty, in the time of Queen Anne, the be, I received orders to have so many ships in readiness duties had been increased to about 5 3 . a gallon. In ' the period of Mr. Pitt the duties had been reduced, and since as might be required. It never entered into my mind that time had * bee n varied fifteen times. About twenty to ask the crews or engineers any question on the sub years ao und er ject. I merely told them that ships were wanting, and Mr. Robinson, the duties had been reduced; and the cons umption had increased from 5,000,000 gallons to that we did not know where they were going to, and they never asked any questions about it, nor exhibited 8,000,000 gallons. In 1831 there had been a step towards the least reluctance." It was in no niggard spirit that improvement by means of the equalisation of duties. But the Board of Admiralty accepted the proposition of the in 1840 the duties had again been increase d, an d that . in- Hon. Member, but in the earnest hope that the defences crease liad continued to the present tim e, the on thus provided would be found su ffi cient, and that in these French wine being 55. 6d. a gallon. The effe ' ct t of e ferential duty in favour of Portuguese wines was, that h e e o r d et arrangements a good feeling might be promoted between the navy and the' mercantile marine, so that another that natural price of a pipe of Port would, but for ' the w O connexion might be formed between those sister branches Wine Company, be let, and even under the monopoly of P that rte company would be only 201., the duty raised it to 331. Th of the sea service of the country. The Admiralty ac- effect h of the raising of the duty in 1810 had been to decrease cepted the proposition of the Hon. Gentleman in the a t n e d c t o u n e s r u , mption from 7,486,000 gallons to 6,550,000 gallons ; A n an tr 6 e o a o t L y, to th l e ,7 a 9 v o e ,O r o . ol. spirit in which it had been brought forward, and he ann a;....41,..- 7 ......a alias the best results would be found In five ye v a e r n s u ll i l l o a : fol l owing i t ' ll ' : l‘ ir fe n tlu l e . annual amount the duty had been 848,5091. In the five Captain arise from it —(Hear, hear.) 1,148,7551.; iv fiveluties of Mr. Pitt, the amount Captain SCOBELL considered that the statement of years following had been I , l4 ,Le e ar a s in f o o u l fo llowin g the - the Hon. Member the Secretary to the Admiralty was lion of duty under M r. Robinson 1839 d it be i f a n d at )e out very satisractory, and he thought it would 1,500,0001. In the five years following go far to show that the country was perfectly safe.— i 1,849,081.; and in 1850 the amount had been (after the i ll e cr n e . a A se le of b the duties) 1,167,99(1/. From these premises the (Cheers.) The speech should properly have pre aridncritetheneddeudtitehastetntlpieedrtuutgieusesaheowulidneba,ebeuqtubaylisdedil ceded the debate on the militia last , night, for increasing it would have dissipated the doubts which many not b y , s s in o c n e F t r h e e nch wines—a course which would Honourable Members entertained with regard to the minishing the defence of the country. He rejoiced that the be the more just , Portuguese had systematically ra w ct a ic s ab f le, or at all events, as Admiralty had thought proper to avail themselves of disregarded the Methu a e a n ina treaty._ ueprecating any resort to ' fraud, he oopinion that a duty of every means of defence for the purpose of guarding the o a p n en ad ing va tn lo e re d ni nn d r u t ty n Is. a gallon on French wine, an swering timeFanearlysr assuming t h a e s British Channel. leade t would Admiral STEWART rejoiced in the employment of in e cr a e n a s e equitable duty, and at the same e Possible to the 1 franc octroi duty mercantile steamers in cases of emergency, but be consumption of real (not s purious) ces sti two yearsoonf could not shut his eyes to the fact that in the mixed erows which manned them there might be great difficulty in and to an acce ssion wine, o in a e n ago to the Noble Lord the obtaining that amount of discipline which was necessary memorial present ed ac revenue. According to ri , n all vessels employed as a national defence. He Member for the City per annum. Now it appeared that in Paris should feel rejoiced at everything that would add to the the amount of wine y consumer , at 1 franc duty was at the cordiality of feeling between the mercantile marine and rate of 216 bottles per head T i n ar y l i d eld a a h r a venue the navy.—(Hear, hear.) An Hon. Gentleman had consumption of wine in this stated that there were not ships ready to go to sea, but the extent of three bottles per he n a of three millions, in place of one milli z it to w be ld increased to only he overlooked the fact of their screw-vessels; and he (Admiral Stewart) hoped the day was not distant when r b a e ised ie s e vjt t h n s l o s m n uch di ffi culty. Supposing the amount to vessels of war would no longer put to sea unaccompanied sum r e a d in Hamhur ott i l l es per head (half of the amount th e ton g revenue would be bene fi ted to by a tender or screw. There was an important ques- the extent of four m illions per t annum. Such a revenue tion asked—" How was the active list to be kept would enable the Government s get rid of much of the efficient?" That was a very difficult problem.—(Hear, house duty, to reduce those taxes whi ch te pressed upon the hear.) He did not say the late Government had solved comforts of the people, and would lead a n p e rospective re the difficulty, but they had taken an important step peal of the malt tax.—(Hear, hear.) ad already towards the alleviation of the di ffi culty.—(Hear, hear.) stated that the monopoly of the Oporto Win e b C ompany It could scarcely be done by reference to the years of enhanced the price of wine in Portugal. He mi g h t add that it was intimately connected with the sub subject fought the o ffi cers, as in other countries, for Lord Duncan matter of his motion, for it was well known that exce ssiv e jt fought one of his greatest battles at the age of seventy taxation on comm odities nded of this kind not only checked corn ) years.—(Hear, hear.) Another great problem was the petition, bu A t t t t e he r t e o se c n re t ate an artificial taste for spurious manning of the navy and the state of the gunnery. The Govern gunnery afloat now was as different as possible from that articl es. eaty their system of taxin g moment the Portuguese o e rts, got 350,0001. per in use at the close of the last war—as different as a a m nnum , more out of the pocketsor tri, people of this coun blunderbuss from a rifle. He now anxiously pressed on try than they were fairly entitled o T he Hon. and the notice of the Admiralty the fact that they could not Learned Gentleman concluded by expressing his g belief that pay too much attention to the education of the seamen' the adoption of his motion would lead generally to more gunners of the fleet. He denied there were tyrannical friendly commercial relations between this and other officers in the navy at present; the day for that class of countries. men was passed over, and he asserted the British navy The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—The Hon . was better treated than any other class of men in the and Learned Gentleman has e n te r ed upon a very long an d, abbe I collect, a very accurate narrative of the history of the public service. wine trade; he has sketched it from the period of. -the French Captain HARRIS regarded the statement of the Secretary t rea t y o f 1787 , an d has gone back, indeed, to the treaty of the Admiralty as most important, particularly as it was o f M e th uen . I can assure the Hon. and Learned Gentle): divested of all official reserve. He did not admire that offi- man that I entirely sympathise with the policy recom cial reserve, because the French and Russians were quite mended by Mr. Pitt—a policy founded on a high corn . aware of the resources of this country, both by sea and land. mercial principle. I recognise the great advantage which —(Hear, hear.) The arguments of the Hon. Member for both countries derived from the policy then pursued, but I Bath was, that we had not a sufficient number of steam- may be permitted to say, that the principle adopted by Mr. vessels to prevent the advent of a foreign power to our Pitt was the principle of reciprocity—(Hear, hear)—and shores. And almost in the same breath he said, that our de- that although we have at several periods reduced the fences were sufficient, He (Captain Harris) was at a loss to duties on French wines, we do not find that France has reconcile these two statements. manifested the feeling of reciprocity for which we were in- Captain SCOBELL had stated that we had a sufficient debted to Mr. Pitt. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman has number of ships, but that we had not men to m an them , also stated some genera l pr i nc i p l es o f taxa ti on , to w hi c h I Captain HARRIS said that was the case, and that was also give my assent. I think with him that reductions of the reason why Parliament was now called upon to provide taxation may lead to increased consumption, but at the same some additional defences, which would be available in case time I feel bound to take into consideration t hei circumstances of sudden emergency. He was truly glad that the Govern under which that increase of consumption may take place.— Lent, at the eleventh hour, had proposed to by means of a reserve force. He had himself sugges ted that cons id e rable reduction in the wine duties in 1831, and I plan, and he hoped that in working it out, some marg i n t h er efore think it is necessary, in reference to the revenue of would be left to the Board of Admiralty to lay down such the country, to treat the subject with considerable caution. regulations, especially with respect to the service of warrant The motion of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman is not, in my officers in the coasting trade as they might deem necessary. opinion, accurately expressed. He asks for a Committee to He was glad that his suggestion as to a naval reserve had inquire into the cause of the decline in the revenue derived been adopted by the late Board of Admiralty. from the import duties on wine. Now, it is not accurate to Mr. HUME said the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stafford) bad say that there has been a n y decline in th e revenue so de satisfactorily proved that our coasts were not so denuded of rived. And to sho w that lam correct I will p lace before protection as had been said. He trusted that the Admiralty the House the last return, onl y j ust receiv ed of t h e Pb would not allow the practice of sending home shi s. f r s tate of the wine trad e for the last f our years — and to bring bullion merely for the purpose of giving wa tentage to the captains. The Hon. Admiral (H. Stew art) a aPrte)r here, perhaps , t he Hon. and Learned Gentleman will p ardon ew me for saying that I think, in order to form an opinion as had talked of the high feeling of our naval officers, and had to the state of the revenue derived from the import duties stated that they were well affected to our commercia l on any branch of commerce, it is more practical to look to marine. How could tbat be the case when our naval officers l the times in which we live than to those of the Methuen would not throw out an anchor or a cable to merchant vesse l treaty or the French treaty of 1787.—(Bear, hear.) Now in distress without demanding salvage? This was an here is a return of the quantities of wine retained for home which ought to be remedied. No captain of a French abuse consumption, and I will first take revenue; for it is upon American man-of-war ever demanded a shilling for se e • e s 0 the decline of revenue that the Hon. and Learned Gentle rendered to a merchant vessel, but in this country man y man has dwelt. The return is drawn up to the last our o ffi cers had sued in the courts to obtain payment f rom moment, and, from it, it appears that the amount of duty merchants for services rendered to vessels belonging to them . received on wine in the year 1849 was 1,732,000/. ; in 1850, An order had, he understood, been already issued remedyin g * a portion of this abuse, but he hoped the Government wo u ld 1,767,00 0 /. ;in 1851, 1,821,000/. ; and in 1852, 1,777,000/. The House will perceive there is a slight decline for 1852, complete what they had so well begun in that respect, and but that is entirely attributable to the large quantities direct that our officers should afford assistant to mercha n t of wine take n for home consumption by vintners and vessels in distress without claiming any salvage. He must licensed victuallers in anticipation of the increased con state that a very great improvement had of late ye ars sump by strangers visiting the metropolis to see the been effected in the pay, provisions, and accommodatio n s Amer'- Great Exhibition. It is a curious circumstance that all of our sailors. No di ffi culty was experience by the cans in manning their navy, and he could not con • the arrangement made in this respect were ill judged and why the English navy should be an exception. lie ceive led to very great disappointment. Not only our own cowls doubted -men congregated in . the metropolis, but especially much whether the proposed naval reserve would do much good. If the House considered the statements made in the speech of the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stafford), and considered also the speech made the day before yesterday at Paris by the President, in which he stated that he wished to cultivate most amicable relations with other countries—that he in tended to reduce the armament of France, and that the law was re-established--he thought they might dismiss the sub ject of a Militia Bill altogether.—(Hear.) Our colonies did not require ships of war for their protection. It was singular to notice that no mention had been made in this discussion of the United States, which, in fact, was the only com peting power with us as to a mercantile marine. At the termination of the Mexican war the United States reduced their naval establishment in order that they might husband their resource', so that they might more effectually employ them if a war should break out. This was an example that the Government of this country ought to follow. He wished to encourage our commercial navy. Let free trade be the word, and then we should find no difficulty in manning our navy. He would merely add, that the statements which he had heard from the Government was extremely satisfac tory—( Hear. hear)—for it evinced on their part an anxious desire to improve the condition of the navy, and also to at tend to practical su ggestions made by others. Mr. W. COWPER wished to refer to one statement which had been made by his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hame), who ap peared to have got ri d o f his usual good temper when he spoke in somewhat disparaging term s o f t h e o ffi cers o f our navy. Those offi cers had onl y received entitled to receive by the law, and thereforewhat they were rights. they could not could not They e a y ec w us e e r d e be blamed, for demanding their legal . o ;.notives. earnen, gallant and honourable men, and they of being actuated by any grasping or unworthy naval re (Hear, hear.) He approved of the system serve, which he thought would furnish a body 0 1: who would be paid and bound to assemble and when required. He considered that blame was 0 4 1 i s ti hips to be placed on Government for taking into account stltY. amount of naval strength of foreign powers. Our inea n i of defence ought to bear some proportion to the means o e attack possessed by foreign powers. He was of opinion that our defences were not altogether in so satisfactory a atate as they ought to be; for he believed it would be found that France had relatively a greater naval strength than we had. He did not think the fear of invasion was such a folly as had been described. He felt satisfied we were by any means dragged into a war with any foreign power, that power Would most certainly attack us by attempting to invade our Shores. Colonel Moore, who had treated the subject scientifically, was of opinion that any attack upon this country would most probably be made in several places simultaneously, so that if our naval force were concentrated c)4 any one place, the attack s at the two others would very likely be most vigorous. It was said that disembarkations Were dangerous things—no doubt; but that did not prove that they were not likely to be attempted, or that they might not be successful. For, in war, the most audacious attacks were often the most successful. Captain PECHELL said he was sorry he had not hea r d the speech of the Hon. Secretary for the Admiralty, b u t h e Understood that the Hon. Gentleman had recommended some sort of system for the defence of the coast. Now it wa s absu r d t o place guns in a coast town without fortifications; it w as only the way to get the place battered down. Mere guns were no defence aga inst steamers with p ro j ectiles. Did the Hon. Gentleman then mean merely to mount guns? Mr. STAF FORD.—No. Captain PECHELL.—Did he, then, mean to fortify the Coast towns? Mr. STAFFORD.—No. Captain PECHELL.— Then what did the Hon. Gentleman mean ? Mr. STAFFORD.—As the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman Was not in the House when I spoke, he can scarcely expect to understand what I said,—(Hear, hear.) I said the south eastern coast was now defenceless.— ( Hear, hear.) Captain PECHELL.—WeII, let the Hon. Member make another. disposition of the naval force. He hoped such a system as that of the martello towers would not be recurred which was nothing more than a system of jobbing hy, there had been a great ditch dug 30 miles long and Sheet wide, which was expected to stop a French army that had crossed the Vistula or the Rhine.—(Laughter.) h owever, it was really too bad that Hon. M embers sh oul d delay th e b us i ne ss of the House by prolonging a discussion of this sort-( Loud cries of " Hear, hear," in the midst of . Which the Gallant Gentleman, as if perceiving the applica "on of his observation to himself, sat down.) _ i Mr. ANDERSON shortly replied. He was so gratified vlth the extremely satisfactory speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stafford) that he should withdraw his mo lu.s--( Hear, hear.) He first wished to explain two po i nts. ilie expense of the system he proposed would only be about ANA a yam . ; Aildibtobioct of Ail loboim OSPeCi#IIY tryt.t... foreig ners, t H ha ea t r t , h h e e f a e r r , ei a g n n d er a s instead of wine drank beer, and particularly quantities.—(Hear, laugh.) po lt r, T e r i• represented esenteCl enormousto di m i n ution in the consumpticn of the year just drank nothing bu t London p orter, and this accounts for the apparent co nc luded. But even in 1851 there w a s not a g eneral de cr ease in the revenue derivablei from wine. The diminu tion was only in one article. Especiallyanticipation of an augmented consumptio n of that article by foreigners, the trade diminution Compared only in that artiele that a . appears.. with little foresight took port wine out of bond; and it is out of bond in 1850, in anticipa lionwith 1849 and 1850 there is an increase. A consie.erable quantity of wine was taken . there were, in 1851, 340,000 gallons, and, in 1852, 447,000 of the Exhibition. Of French wines taken out of bond, gallons; so that in the year just ended there is an excess of 107,000 gallons. Of Spanish wines there were, in 1851, 2,469,000 gallons, and, in 1852, 2,553,000; showing an in crease of 84,000 gallons in 1852. The diminution, there fore. has been in the wines of Portugal. Of the wines of Portugal taken out of bond for home consumption, there were, in 1849, 2,446,000 gallons; in 1850, 2,648,000 gallons; in 1851, 2,800.000 gallons ; and in 1852 (showing a diminution), 2,524,000 gallons. Comparing 1852 with 1849, however, there is an increase. The Honour able and Learned Gentleman will see, therefore, that the terms of his motion are not correct.—(Hear, hear.) The quantities of wines of all kinds, including Cape, retained fur home consumption during the last four years are as follow :—ln 1849 there were 6,136,000 gallons ; in 1850, 6,251,000 gallons ; in 1851, 6,437,0V0; and in 1852, 6,280,000 ; the last year exhibiting an excess over 1849 and 1850, and nearly equalling the great year 1851. Therefore I again say it is erroneous to assert that there has been any decline in the revenue derived from wine. —(Hear.) Sir, if the Hon. and Learned Gentleman really requires a com mittee to inquire into the revenue derived from wine, I, knowing the assiduity which he would bring to bear in the investigation, will not oppose it.—(Hear, hear.) But it appears to me that he is perfectly master of the facts of the men - . , The principles of in this llouse.—( Hear, hear.) case, n e o c d; o b na t y ar vi e h a i l e s h o a the e eat number of other Gentle- Honourable and Learned Gentlemen appears to me on consideration that Committee he would not with even the arrive at more Perhaps, motion n e i n e t r accurate h a e c h eel as m therefornow stated. w ould apply are familar to most of us, and it iib. results than he has , therefore, ei f t e e l:8 e l: tt it o sl n fid . e r w d i t h Learnedthe a eeGentlemanurate an ut, at be t d h u e engage the attentio t n he of .anheand able one winetinhbe considering House,duties musta nd the notn collectione ces press s a ril his y of the revenue ,of appears to me that there are country;m superior claim to consideration atyth a e rticles which possess Chan cellor of the Exchequer than the (Hear, hear.) Undoubtedly it would hands of the deal with the duties on wine. We might verycii possible to and not at the same time injure revenue; but l i l t ish dutiee, necessary to proceed with caution. At the sane time, be must repeat my opinion that if import duties are to b m e ej di minished, there are many articles which have very superior claims over the different wines imported into this country.—( Hear, hear.) Lord PALMERSTON said that if the Right Hon. Gen tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not now able to answer the question which he (Lord Palmerston) was ties; 'none time,win about to put to him in connexion with something which had fallen from the Hon. and Learned slember who had in troduced the motion, he would perhaps furnish the required information on a future day. His Hon. and Learned Friend (Mr. o pAerntsetevvv)inheadcemy i adverted pan to the great abuse practised at the n reference to the wine trade between Portugal and this country. Her Majesty's late Government had had representations made to them that the regulations established by the Portugues Government with regard to the Oporto Wine Company, and the practices of that company, were inconsistent with the stipulations of the treaty of 1842. It was the opinion of that Government that these representations were well founded, and that im pediments and restrictions were imposed upon the exporta tion of wine from Portugal, and on its importation to this country, at variance with the 4th article of the treaty. Strong representations were made to the Govern ment of Portugal on the subject, and at the time at which he (Lord Palmerston) ceased to be Secretary of State for Fo reign Affairs, an understanding had been established between the two Governments that after the general election had taken place in Portugal, the Portuguese Government would remedy the abuse complained of- that either by some altera tisn by the executive Government, or by some new law to be proposed to the Cartes, the practices of the Oporto Com pany should be placed in harmony with the regulations of the treaty to which he had referred. Ile felt bound to say that the Vroyilumeut of kortugal not only Adraittta that the re-, LONDON, gulations complained of were at variance with the stipula tions of the treaty, but stated their willingness to make the two harmonizs. He should be glad to hear what was the state of tho communications between the two Governments on this subject at the present mom•:nt, and whether the Por tuguese Government had taken any steps towards redeeming the pledge they had given ? Mr. HENLEY said that communications on this subject were at this moment being carried on between the Govern ment of this country and that of Portugal; that her Ma jesty's Ministers fully appreciated the importance of the question, and that no pains should be spared to bring it to a satisfactory conclusion.--(Hear, hear.) Mr. ANSTEY said he felt obliged to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for his courtesy, and would so modify his motion that it should simply be for a " Committee to inquire into the revenue at present derived from wine duties." The motion, in its altered shape, was then agreed to. THE BALLOT. Mr. H. BERKELEY then rose to bring forward his mo tion in reference to the ballot. He said that they had before them the prospect of an immediate general election.—(Hear, hear.) He did not know whether his Hon. Friends cheered for joy; at all events, it was a prospect full in their view, and with that election all the glaring faults of their electoral system would be brought into full play. The electors would be soon exposed to the realities of those evils which he had been endeavouring for several years, though fesbly, to por tray. He asked the House for permission to bring in a Bill with a view to alleviate those evils. They had last year a .great influx of foreigners from every part of the globe visit ieg this country, and they found us a quiet steady people who were very much attached to order. Let the same visit ors but come here in .a few months hence and they would find us in the midst of the most admired disorder. They would find us engaged in a kind of electoral saturnalia, and when they witnessed the riot, drunkenness, and debau chery that would then exist— that tyrannical intimida tion that takes place on such occasions, they might be induced to fancy that they had got amongst a nation of madmen. If ever an election bid fair to be marked with violence, the election that was about to take place would have that attribute. A rich and powerful party, after a lapse of several years, had just obtained power—they have just raised the honied bowl to their lips, and it depended upon the general election to determine whether they shall drain it to the dregs, or they shall be obliged to hand it over to others. A fearful struggle will, no doubt, take place, and already the note of preparation has gone forth— already crowds of low attorneys have crept from the police and bankruptcy courts (where they have been hitherto engaged wringing their fees from the hands of poverty and vice), to become electioneering agents in the ranks of the wealthy and the noble. What was the nature of their agency? It was a certain inquiry into the lives of the electors, in sweet to hind out their misfortunes and liabilities; and the develish ingenuity with writes, they create screws to force from electors a dishonest and unwilling vote was almost beyond belief. If such was the agency, what was the attorney ? Their trade was the elector's coa -1 science—their means, the elector's misery —their em ployers, the House of Lords—the result, the House of Com mons.—(Hear, hear.) If any persons were bold enough to deny that position, and to take up the cudgels in such a quarrel, he would refer them to their own knowledge of the whole community; and beyond that he would refer them to that excellent little work of Mr. Dod, in which they would find that there were 96 borough Members of Parliament elected through the direct intervention Peers —(Hear, hear.) He would refer them also to their own Committees, and to their own canvassing -books used at their own elections. And if they wanted further evidence, he would refer them to the statements which were made in 1842, when he had the ho nour of seconding the motion of Mr. Ward —statements en tailing the kind of screws that were used at elections, and quoted from books of candidates in the different counties and boroughs. He had before him evidence in support of those statements. He had the analysis of the evidence that was taken before the Committee that sat in 1835 to inquire into the malversaticn of the franchise. It was not the aristocrac alone tat were the gilty prties, but the democracy was to the full as tyrannical as the aris tocracy ; and between the two the electoral interest was condemned to much suffering. He would only quote one case from that book—that of a man who was dear to their Protectionist hearts. It was the case of a regular pet Tory, and withal that of a very honest man, placed under the bar of proscription. James Gilbert, is his examination, stated that he resided in Birmingham, and was a licensed victualler and wine -merchant, who took an active part in the election of 1831 for Birmingham. He said that he canvassed for Richard Spooner, Esq., that there was an extensive system of intimidation practised, by which the votes of the electors were in fluenced. He said he was a partisan on the Tory side —that he had always taken a part in those elections for a period of 40 years—that he had known instances within his own knowledge of votes being influenced at the previous election, and he particularly mentioned three strong cases. On being asked respecting political unions, he said he thought that such unions contributed greatly to the promotion of a system of exclusive dealing, and that if it were not for such unions Richard Spooner would never have had a seat in this House. To the question whe ther he did not think that many men as strong partisans as himself would not rather have a system of secret voting, he said he could not say; he had heard their wives express such an opinion often; but a good Tory never flinches.— (Laughter. ) He was then asked whether he thought a good Whig ever flinched. He said he could not tell, for he never kept company with such gentry.—(Loud laughter.) He then went on to say that a Tory never preaches about reform, for it was no good for them to do so; but he preaches gene rally that the Church was in danger.--( Renewed laughter.) The witness, though most reluctant to speak in favour of the ballot, which he said would not be kept secret, said he be lieved it would be a good thing to many if their votes were unknown. He himself would never advocate it, because he said he was brought up a Tory, and would rather go to the workhouse than change his politics. He further stated, that if they had a system established at that election by which nobody could know how the electors voted, Mr. Spooner would have been at once returned; but, as the case was otherwise, many persons voted against their own opinions. In conclusion, the witness said that it was certainly very hard that an honest man should be injured for conscien tiously exercising his privilege. He (Mr. Berkeley) sub mitted that that was a tolerably fair account of Birming ham, though given nearly twenty years ago. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer said, in the recent debate upon national representation, that " cor ruption at elections co u ld not b e stopped by law; it must be done by elevating the tone of the community." It struck him (Mr. Berkeley) that this was rather a novel position for the Right Hon. Gentleman to take up, and it would ap pear that the Noble Lord the Member for London, and those Hon. Gentlemen who were endeavouring to legislate against bribery, have been proceeding in the wrong direction. Why do they pass those sessional orders against the inter ference of Peers at elections if no legislation was to take place or. the subject? Why should they pass the stringent Bribery Bill—or why should they occupy themselves in the futile endeavour to stop the evil it the statement of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that they were all wrong, was correct? But how were they to elevate the tone of the community? His Hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham had told them that out of every election at Birmingham there were 1,000 electors who dared not go to the poll under their present system. He asked them, in addition to those electors, to consider how many refused to be on the registry. They could then form some opinion as to the frightful curtailment of the franchise which takes place under this system. At the last election for Bath 430 electors had stated that they dared not go to the poll, for if they did they should shut up shop. He now asked the Right. Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer to tell them how the tone of the community was to be elevated. Now it struck him (Mr. Berkeley) that the only mode by which this was to be done was by education. But then they saw men whose education was superior to the same class in any part of the world— noblemen and gentlemen—lending themselves to depress the tone of the community by the practices they encouraged at elections. He said that this talk about elevating the tone of the community in the face of such difficulties was a mere farce; and they could not be surprised if these honest and rough-handed men would reply to them in the language of Lord Duberly, " fine words butter no parsnips." He hoped that the Right Hon. Gentleman would be able to show the advantages of an elevated tone in the community to those noblemen who at the last South Nottingham elec• tion hunted the unfortunate electors out of haystacks, and afterwards sent them like caged rats to the poll. Why, in stead of fixing their attention upon isolated places like St. Alban's, he might go through the alphabet of boroughs and towns in which there were similar practices resorted to. He might quote Bridport, Bristol, Birmingham, Coventry, Car low, Cashel, Clonmel, Denbigh, Exeter, Gloucester, Here ford, Halifax, Leicester, Leominster, Lyme Regis. Westmin ster, Youghal. There- were also the counties of Cheshire, Clare, Devon, Denbighshire, Essex, Kerry, Limerick, Water ford, Wexford, &c. He should like to know how they were to improve the electoral system by elevating the tone of the community in connexion with the course they had re cently pursued in reference to Sudbury, St. Alban's, the Scotch burghs, ,Harwich, and Gloucester? Why, was it not a patent fact that this system of demoralization was en couraged by the best educated men of the land ? He had now to deal with the speech of his valued Friend the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Perth (Mr. Fox Maule.) He might have passed him over but that he was patted on the back by the great leviathan of the press, who quietly embalmed him his speech in a leading article. His Right Hon. Friend gave two reasons for his conduct in reference to the ballot—the one was for the vote he had given in favour of it ; the other for the part he took against it. The reason he gave for voting for the ballot was this—that, although he thought the ballot a bad measure, yet, inasmuch as there were some ficticious votes in Perth, which he was unsuccesful in his endeavours to get rid of, he voted for the ballot by way of a cure. Now that was an extraordinary mode of legislation. The Right Hon. Gentleman, it appears, was prepared to g i ve w h at he considered a miserably bad measure to Great Britain and Ireland, in order to cure a little rascality in Perth. The Right Hon. Gentleman stated his reasons for voting against the ballot to be these—that it had never been the means of establishing liberty and protecting the freedom of the press or of defending and maintaining the law. Now he (Mr. Berkeley) admitted that the ballot did none all it did was to enable the elector to give had in the Carlton and Reform Clnb box as they e such a result. The Right an u nbia t ss il er s u ; nfettered vote. He believed that such a Houses Gentleman was but raising shadows Honourable of knocking them down. Louis for the purpose chosen President of France Napoleon was most secret and solid description. And under a ballot of a were considered by some persons those same deputies, who o b f al t l h o ballot e could secure then, the working of the ballot in r as martyrs, were also elected by favour of the institution.— (Ironical cheers) He said that con stitution as an example highly in ,He claimed, late I t , he anc b e a u ll n o d t. er t H b conducted with admirable order, and that characterised strong contrast to the riots and disorder w hic h the elections in this country. Under the French ballot men . of talent, good conduct, and respectability were elected the elections T he F y ra f n o c r e m w ed er a e Belgium also afforded a brilliant instance of the working of the ballot. In the Chambers there, the aristocracy of birth, of talent, respectability, and landed property were strongly was perfectly satisfactory- —(014 oh.) The Right Hon. Gen tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with that extra ordinary ability and ingenuity which marked all his speeches, seized upon the facts of a disturbance having taken place in New York during an election, and quoted a letter for the purpose of showing that open bribery and in timidation had been there practised—that assaults were committed by the electors, and the ballot-box, Whi c h he said was the cause of all this, was smashed to pieces. The Right Hon. Gentleman, with extreme plausibility, lays this all to the fault of the ballot. Now, having resided for six years in America, he (Mr. Berkeley) could only say that he never saw an election conducted there except with the greatest order and tranquillity, and in speaking to Americans he had always heard them held this language—" We scarcely want the ballot here, because there is an absence of bribery and intimidation. But you want it in England, be cause you have the law of primogeniture, and the law of entail, whereby property is accumulated and lodged in the hands of a few persons;' consequently the tyranny of certain classes is felt." He would ask how the statement of the Right Hon. Gentleman could prove such a state of things as he argued had existed in America ? Did the House think that if open voting had been established there that intimida. tion and bribery would be checked? It was the simple fact of a disturbance having occurred in New York, which might have taken place anywhere, that furnished the Right Honourable Gentleman with an argument against the ballot. When he said that the Go vernor thought it advisable to recommend the Legislature to take measures to put a stop to bribery and corruption, he should recollect that there was not one word uttered with respect to the inefficiency of the ballot.—(Hear, hear.) He would now read a letter which he had received from an Ame rican gentleman of great respectability. (The Hon. Gentle man read the letter to which he referred. It described the destruction of a ballot. box at an election riot, in one of the states of the American Union, and concluded with the fol lowing passage :—" The destruction of the ballot-box will at once point to the fact that it was held in no great estima tion by the promoters of intimidation and bribery ; and I think I may venture to make the calculation that we shall find that our local Legislature will pass a stringent law on the urns subject s of h ohl dh e bribery, loc a a te r d i recommend in a place ofi t o h r s e t s i e n c h f r u i t t y ur . ) t_h e ( H y o e t a i It was.highly probable, he thought, we might hear at no distant period that other disturbances had arisen, and that other ballot-boxes had been broken up. In the Carolinas, for instance, in Alabama, in Maryland, and Virginia, the ballot box was the protection of those who wished to do away with slavery —( Hear. hear.) In those States the ballot-box pro tected the advocate of emancipation from Lynch law. In the ballot-box in the Southern States bad taken root the benign principles of Christianity, and from the ballot-box , ushed forth the glorious truth that, of whatever colour the skin of a man might be, in the eye of God his soul was but of one hue. (Hear, hear.) When, therefore, they saw the enemies of the abolition of s'avery desiring to put aside the ballot-box in America, and when they saw also those who wished to keep Englishmen in serfdom declining to give them the protection of the ballot-box here, then he said a i s h •e r t y a v s o t h r r o n o g t c t a h s e e had o b t e . el ( m c a b d e s e o r s u . t ) , a n i l h t e h a a t r g a h c m as e e h e t s n t i h r s e e l y d against the ballot were merely colourable, and gentlemen opposed it, not because they doubted its efficacy, but be cause they believed it would be perfectly elicacious.—(oh, oh.) He was strongly brought to this conclusion by read ing an account of a large Conservative meeting, which took place the other day in the city of Bristol. That meeting consisted of a very influential body of Conservatives, who had met to select a candidate in the place of his Honourable Friend and Colleague (Mr. P. Miles), who had expressed his intention to retire from the representation of the city at the approaching election. The chair was taken by Mr. Vining, a gentleman of great respectability, with whom be (Mr. Berkeley) had the honour of being acquainted, and the sen timents which fell from that worthy gentleman were strictly Conservative, at the same time that they were full of can dour and redolent of the most Arcadian simplicity.— (Lauelater.)__B_Y way of illustration, he begged to quote a short extract from Mr. visung's speecn, which ho hod takon from the Bristol 'Gazette. Mr. Vining said: "What is the use of registration if a man is to vote by ballot? And what is the use of inquiring bow a man is going to vote when he may conceal that vote by the ballot?"—(Laughter.) ." Why," said Mr. Vining, " a man may register one way, and vote another!" Now, perhaps Honourable Gentlemen were not au fait in discovering the meaning of that expression. It meant simply this, that political partisans paid defaulters' rates—and churchwardens were adepts at that practice—and thus secured the insertion of the man's name on the register, one of the modes this which were resorted to of bribing beforehand.--(Hear, hear.) " Why," said Mr. Vining, " a man may register one way and vote another," " Suppose," continued Mr. Vining, " you give a man 51., he may receive the money and vote another way.—(Laughter and cheers ) You are making a man disguise his real sentiments and meaning. You are making a man determine to conceal his sentiments. If I purchase a man," said Mr. Vining, " and I am not able to know how he is going to vote, he may vote against me, though he has said he will vote for me.—(Great laughter and cheers; and Voices—' That is what we want; you would not then have us under your thumb.)"—(Laughter and hear, hear.) " Gentlemen, said Mr. Vining, waxing a little warm, "I feel that the majority of you are with me ; now then, I will ask, let us eo-operate cor dially in supporting true Conservative principles—(Loud laughter) and promoting the welfare of the State," said Mr. Vining "and our own interests." (Hear, hear, and laughter.) There, then, was a candid Gentleman, and he (Mr. Berkeley) would be equallycandid. What were the faults which Mr. Vining found with the ballot ? It would ruin his politico-commercial transac tions. Poor injured gentleman ! When he had bought his man, it would be altogether doubtful whether his living bale of goods would be delivered to the consignee.— (Laughter.) It was not because the vote was given in secret, but be cause the 51. note was sunk in the ballot-box.— (Hear, hear.) With regard to the ballot not stop ping intimidation, why it was a farce to argue the subject. The fact was that Gentleman refused to trust the people. They believed that the tendencies of the people were de mocratic. But in his (Mr. Berkeley's) opinion such a feeling as that very much resembled the feeling of a man who supposed that under the foundation of his house there war a subterranean fire, and that some day, by some con vulsion of nature, a crater must burst forth in his kitchen.— ( Hear, hear, and laughter.) The Noble Lord the Member for London (Lord J. Russell) told them the other night, on bringing in his Reform Bill, that he thought the people were entitled to some reward for their exemplary conduct. Yet, unfortunately, the Noble Lord was one of those who denied to the people an act of simplejustice.—(Hear.) The Legis lature had defined the franchise, settled the electoral quali fication, and invested a man with the privilege of voting. How, then, in the name of justice and of common sense, could they refuse to protect the elector in the exercise of his chartered rights ?—(Cheers.) They who refused to trust the people now, did they refuse to trust them on the 10th of April, 1848? If the people were so ill disposed then as they were represented to be now, where would Hon. Gentlemen be at this moment? On the 101 of April, 1848 (continued Mr. Berkeley), you appealed to the people pro aria et focis, and they stood at your thresholds armed, and were cherished guests at your tables and firesides. But when I ask von to give them the means of voting as they please, and trust them with the use of the franchise, you deny it In conclusion, the Hon. Gentleman observed that, although he was wedded to the principle of the ballot, he was not equally so to the details. All he asked was, a fair trial of the ballot. If Parliament liked, let it be per missive. —(hear.) Let it be adopted only in those cases where it might be demanded by a certain number of the electors, and where the constituencies numbered 1,000 voters and upwards if they pleased. But, at all events, he hoped the House would permit him to bring in a Bill to give pro tection to the electors at the polling-booths, and, in so doieg, perform an act of abstract justice to the people, and at the same time do honour to themselves.—(Radical cheers.) Mr. BARROW said the lion. Gentleman who had just spoken was rather unfortunate in having alluded to the last election for South Nottinghamshire; for the fact of his (Mr. Barrow's) standing in the House of Commons at that mo ment was the best possible proof of the absence of intimidas tion on the occasion to which he referred.—(Cheers.) He knew that, in part, he owed his success at that election to the assistance of some gentlemen who were themselves friends of the vote by ballot not because they sought it for their own sakes, but because they believed it would be a protection to their friends and neighbours. They were well aware of his sentiments with respect to the ballot when they gave him their votes, and he felt perfectly satisfied that they would give him credit for the honesty of his principles at least, in venturing as he did now to declare that he was not a convert to the necessity of the ballot, and that, so far from believing it would deliver the people from a state of serfdom, he believed it would increase bribery and demoralisation to such an extent as would be positively frightful to con template.— (Cheers.) Allusion had been made to the advantage of the ballot in the clubs. But for his part, he confessed that a large portion of his objections to the ballot were the result of the ill-feeling he had witnessed in clubs in cases of black-balling. H e had seen so much mischief arise from it that even in those cases where, through the honour of the scrutineers and members, perfect secrecy was observed, he had come to the conclusion that the system had better be abolished. He was rather surprised to hear the secrecy of the ballot assumed as a matter of necessity. In proof, however, of the fact that it did not secure secrecy, he might refer to that country which had already been referred to so often, and in which the ballot had been in operation for the greatest length of time. He did not believe that secrecy ever had been or ever would'be obtained ; for he found that in Massa chusetts. one of the oldest states of the American Union, the bere him Legislature appointed a C ommittee last year with the express ws o e b he j re e e c t ch t ye o r u f th c hd o a n et r s s i et d hc e re r e i e n h y g a o i t n . which w A h h a d t me surely a nn e w t i h t they s c h o c u h d a s h e c e u x r f a r m om plethaeballot really did s that before him, ed to doubt ference to the b a ll ot as a cure for bribery, he thought he heard th e H on. Member for Montrose say not long inseparable vt h r e ago that he did not believe it would diminish bribery in small constituencies, at least; and if it would not diminish bribery in small constituencies, then he (Mr. Barrow) wanted to know how it was _likely to do so in large constituencies, because a large constituency was, after all, only an aggregate or mass of small constituencies, and bribery might be car ried on in one as well as the other.—(Hear, hear.) Upon this point, too, he would again refer to America, where the Legislature of the State of New York had declared that bri bery had increased, and was carried to a fearful extent, under the ballot, and that it was necessary to take steps for providing a remedy. Being convinced, then, that neither intimidation nor bribery had diminished under the operation of the ballot, he must frankly admit that he was still op posed to the measure. He believed it would be productive of an amount of hypocrisy and demoralization perfectly frightful to contemplate; and that the best remedy for the evils complainedof would consist in elevating the moral tone of the people. The fact that the independent constituency of South Nottinghamshire had carried his election against the influence of the powerful body who were opposed to him individually would of itself also tend to the same result. Sir B. HALL granted that the case of South Notting hamshire was a remarkable i ns t ance of the people having exercised the right of voting i n o p pos i t i on to the will of the aristocracy. But it sho u ld no t b e f orgotten that at that elec tion the Noble Dukes an d N o bl e L ords of that county drove the electors up to the p o ll t o vo t e against the Hon. Gentle man just out their obj ec t so f ar as the el ection of the Hon. Gentleman was concerned, yetritheali) is that d come t e w atl oalst e but an i so l a t e d ca se, represent e d and formed no reason w h y vo t ers i n other parts of the coun try should not enjoy th e p ro t ect i on of the ballot. With re ngnarmduteoretdhe m bo o r r o e ug t h ha h n e 2 ( o. Si oo r B. Hall) impossible, from the cir cums t ance that the constituency could exist.—(oh, oh, and a laugh.) The election previous to his own in that borough did not cost the candidates more than 300/. He was inclined to think that the riots referred to as having occurred in New York had arisen, not from the voting being by ballot, but the maladministration of th e e l ec ti on law. If ion.. Mefrom m bers wished to see the op era ti on o f the ballot in our own country, he would refer them to the annual parochial elec tions in the parishes of St. George's, Alarylebone, and St. Pancras, which were conducted with the greatest order and propriety. He should not detain the House longer as there was a motion en the paper for the assimilating of the county and borough franchise, which Hon. Members anxious for a as c w rie el s l dissolution were desirous should be discussed, s e as the ether should be known. order that of " Oh," and He could not understand such interruption on a the opinions i l n v io . ns vv o i f LL M i e A m m b s ers r o o n se on e side amidst "Divide." question of such importance.—(Renewed cries of made in 1847 it app eare d that Divide.") By a return 21 4 boroughs, with a constituen c y o f onl y 161,500 , returned 329 Members —a majority of that House. It was n o t or i ous that the con flicts of the two great aristocratic parties in this country for power depended entirely on the amount of money spent in electio ns . From the report of the Committee moved for in 1841 by the Hon. Member for Sheffield, it appeared that the Harwich election cost 8,3001., though there were only 187 voters, and that the Nottingham election cost 16,000/, though only 673 electors voted.—(Cries of " Divide.") No fewer than 86 Acts had been passed by Parliament to pre vent corruption and bribery. His belief was that the ballot was the only remedy, and be should, therefore, give the mo tion Ili@ cordial support. EVENING, MARCH 31, 1852. Mr. B. COCHRANE said it was a common thing for Hon. Members who introduced a motion to imagine the presence of some distinguished foreigner in this country, and to ask what opinion he would form of their proceed ings. The Hon. Member who introduced the present mo tion had supposed the presence of some foreigner at our elections, and had asked the House to imigine what opinion he would form about them. As such a foreigner would require a cicerone, he would advise the Hon Member for Bristol to recommend him, if he wished to obtain a know ledge of our electorial system, to take for his guide the celebrated Coppock. —(A laugh.) The Hon. Member for Bristol had congratulated the House on his present motion being opportune. He took a different view. In all the discussions of this question of the ballot, he never heard the reciprocity of the ballot started. He should like to know what their constituents would think if Members were to resort to the ballot in voting in that Rouse. If any candidate at the next election should make sunh a proposal he thought the distinguished foreigner would soon see that the popular view was not in favour of such a poposal. America had been referred to, as it often was, by Hon. Gentlernen opposite; but America was a republic, and we were Wising under a constitutional monarchy. If the Hon. Gentlemen wished to see the result of the ballot and universal suffrage in America, let him read the report of a late debate in Congress, and he would tied an interesting controversy between a Mr. Brown and a 'Mr. Willcox, which ended in Mr. Brown rushing up to Mr. illcox and knocking him down.—(Cries of " Oh.") There was another point of difference between the two countries. In America, before a Member could propose any change in the Constitution, there must be a majority of two-thirds of Congress in its favour, or a majority of two-thirds of the states; and after being proposed, and before it could be car ried into execution, there must be a majority of three-fourths of the states in its favour, and not, as in this country, a mere majority of votes. Reference had also been made to France. Was the Manchester school satisfied with the result of uni versal suffrage in France ?—( Hear.) Were they gratified with the proceedings of the 2d December, and with the re cent inauguration of constitutional government at the Tuileries?—(Hear.) The ballot had been described in better language than any he could use by au Hon. Member of that House. The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Ripon's opinion—he meant his former opinion—(A laugh)—of the ballot was stated in the debate on Mr. Grote's motion in 1842. On that occasion the Right Hon. Gentleman charac terised voting by ballot as inconsistent with the English character, and added that no hon es t man wante d t h e ballot.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Honourable Gentleman went on to state that the only persons to whom the ballot would be available would be " dirty, hypocritical scoun drels."—(Laughter.) Lately, however, the Right Hon. Gentleman had expressed at Carlisle opinions not certainly fifyourable to the ballot, but very much softened compared with his former opinions; and he added that circumstances might change his convictions on that point. Not content in 1842 with stating that only "dirty, hypocritical ecoun _ areas" needed the ballot, the Right Hon. Baronet went on to state that it afforded an opportunity for a man who pretended friendship to practice deception—that it offered a means for the gratification of revenge and bitter hatred —and that it was demanded only by the most contemptible sort of vaga bonds, merely to lend to a lie the appearance of a truth. (Laughter.) One could not improve upon such language, and it would be difficult to string more epithets together so expressive of bitter contempt.— (Cheers.) In his (Mr. Cochrane's) opinion they might as well try to protect voters from the east wind as from the influence of landed proprie tors. He was in favour of open and manly voting, and was opposed to a system which would result in a tissue of false hood. That evil was powerfully touched on in debate by one now no more—a great ornament of that House, and whose loss they all lamented. In the debate on the ballot in 1842, Mr: Shell admitted that the ballot would enable a man to promise his vote one way, and go to the poll and vote the other way.—(" Hear, hear," from the Opposition.) He confessed that he felt surprised to find Hon. Gentlemen opposite cheer that sentiment, because it was one which would justify the most flagrant political demoralisation. The Noble Lord the Member for London had not thought proper to introduce the ballot into his recently proposed re form scheme; but he did not feel certain that the Noble Lord might not hereafter pass into the lobby, in conjunction with the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Ripon, with the supporters of the ballot. He (Mr. B. Cochrane) looked upon the ballot as a most objectionable measure. It was easy to point out anomalies in the working of the British Constitu tion ; and the writings of the French Socialists were no doubt filled with the finest theories. But no attempt had ever yet been made to carry out those theories which had not utterly and ruinously failed, while the British Constitution had for ages given to the people of this country an amount of security and of freedom such as no other nation had ever enjoyed.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. COBDEN said he would promise the House that he would not trespass at any length on their time in dis cussing a question which had already been more exhausted in argument than any perhaps that had ever been brought under their consideration. It was an historical fact that Mr. Grote, in the course of his discussions on the ballot, had brought to the subject a degree of logical power and mental acumen, which:had gained for his advocacy of the measure the most perfect intellectual triumph ever known.—( Marks of dissent on the Ministerial benches.) He (Mr. Cobden) did not mean to discuss the fallacies which had been put forward by the Hon. Gentleman who bad just addressed the House. He would not seek to point out to that Hon. Gentleman the difference which existed between a Member of Parliament who came voluntarily into that House to represent the opinions of others, and an elector who had merely to give effect to his own individual opinion. That difference was one of those points which had already been demonstrated. Neither did he intend to discuss the thousand-times repeated objection of the Right Hon Gen tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer —that if the ballot were given to a limited constituency it would convert that constituency into an oligarcht; for that objection had been already a thousand times answered by this argument —that if the unenfranchised were fit to dictate to the en franchised, they ought themselves to be entrusted with the right of voting. (Hear, hear.) But Hon. Gentlemen oppo site were the very people who refused to extend to them that right. The intellectual mode of dealing with that question had already been triumphantly settled.—(Cries of "Hear, hear," from the Opposition Members, and "No, no," on the Ministerial side of the House.) But he thought there were moral aspects of the question, which could be better argued at present than they could have been when Mr. Grote had dealt with the subject 17 years ago, because they had since had an opportunity of witnessing the effects of the ballot in the elections of a neighbouring country, under the most exciting circum stances, which showed the immense gain this country would derive from the ballot by the suppression of that fearful demoralization and violence which disgraced our elections. He said that the example of France, as regarded the moral aspect of the question, was conclusive. Six mil lions of people had voted in France in one day with universal suffrage and under the most exciting circumstances • and yet their votes had been given und er th e sys t em of the ballot without the slightest tumult at the polling places. But how were elections conducted in this country? Why, he could point out half-a-dozen places in which, although a few hundred people only had polled, the most violent scenes had taken place. In the Isle of Wight they had had an election, accompanied by the most tumultuous pro cesdings, and ending in the death of one individual. At Boston a gentleman had been imprisoned in his own house, from which he had not been allowed to move. At Har wich, before the election had terminated, the mob had stormed the hustings, and had carried away the materials of which they had been constructed. What had happened the other day at Enniskillen ? About 150 people had polled there, and such a riot had taken place that the armed police had to be called out, and had charged the mob with drawn sabres. Those were the scenes which occurred at our elec tions. But it was said that there had been a tumult at an election in New York. Now it should be borne in mind that all the New York journals had been horrified at that fact—that almost unprecedented fact, and had declared that those who had so interfered with the most sacred right of American citizens ought to be shot like dogs. But was that the language which was held in this country with re spect to similar scenes? By no means. The cases of Harwich and Boston were laughed at, and the case of En niskillen did not even excite a passing remark. That House had passed a great number of Acts to put an end to bribery at elections, and they were at present considering a Bill for constructing a tribunal that would deal with future acts of bribery. The effect of the adoption of the ballot in this country would be to repress those outward demonstrations of opinion which led to so many collisions. It would put an end to the system of flags and banners, and brass-bends, and to that drunkenness and disorder which at present disgraced our elections.—( Hear.) The public mind was daily becoming more and more favourable to the adoption of the ballot, because there existed a growing conviction that it would offer the most effectual remedy for the evils and abuses by which our elections had hitherto been accompa nied. Auother question which had been raised was whether or not they could make the ballot effectual; and it was said that it had not been found so in New York. But he be lieved that a plan bad been devised by which it could be carried most successfully into operation. The Legislature of Massachusetts had appointed a committee two years ago to inquire into and report upon the best mode of making the ballot more effectual, and the plan recommended by that committee was one, he thought, of the moat complete and satisfactory character. They had proposed that the Govern ment should provide adhesive envelopes of a certain form for all the electors, that those envelopes should be given to the electors on application to the proper officer, that the voter, after having written the name of his candidate or taken a printed ticket with that name, should place it in the envelope, then seal the envelope, and deposit it in the ballot-box in the presence of officers appointed for the purpose. He (Mr. Cobden) be lieved that that plan afforded a perfect security for secresy and a perfect security against fraud ; because all that had to be done was to take care that the voter placed one envelope only in the ballot-box, and any envelope that was not pro perly filled would be afterwards cancelled. That system had been adopted in Massachusetts, and had there been found perfectly successfuL But there were landlords in this coun try who would not be very scrupulous in exercising their power of coercing their tenants. The Noble Lord at present at the head of the Government had declared, in the month of June, 1837, that if the ballot were adopted, he, as an English landlord, would feel it his duty, not only to see whether an elector who was a dependent of his voted, but to see him put his ticket in the ballot-box. Now he (Mr. Cobden) should say he thought that a more unabashed act of despotism—(Load cries of" Hear, hear," on the Opposition benches)—a more scandalous outrage against the rights of citizenship could not possibly be conceived than that a land lord should insist on seeing a man as honest, and, perhaps, as intelligent, as himself, put his ticket in the ballot-urn. Ile would tell the Noble Lord who was at present at the head of the farmers' friends, that he (Mr. Cobden) and those who agreed with him upon that question would protect the farmers against such an inquisition; and the plan adopted in Massachusetts would set at defiance the prying eyes of the Noble Lord or of any other landlord. On another occasion Lord Derby had declared that he considered the tenantry of this country to be the political capital of the landlords—(Hear, hear) — and it would be for the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer to defend, if he could, the language of the Noble Ebrd upon that subject. On the 22d of February, 1841, the Earl of Derby (then Lord Stanley), in speaking on the Parliamentary Voters Bill, had said it was known that any man could ascertain the probable result of a county election, by finding out who were the great landed proprietors in the county, and counting the number of oc cupiers under them. But was it right, he (Mr. Cobden) would ask, that the farmers of this country should be alto gether deprived of their political rights, and that when they were made electors a number of faggot votes should merely be handed over to the landlords?—(Hear, hear.) H e be lieved that the farmers of England would not beprepared to hold the franchise upon such a condition ; and if they should be so lost to all shame, he felt persuaded that the operatives of this country would not submit to such a state of things. He would mentio n a fact, for the Purp ose of showing the feeling of th e operatives upon that su bj e ct. After the introduction of the late Reform Bill o f the Nob'e Lord the Member for London, which would extend the franchise to Si. householders, so that three.eourths df the operatives in the manufacturing towns in Yorkshire and Lancashire would become entitled to a vote—after th e introduction of that Bill a crowded Put'lic meeting ba d been held in Stockport, and the operatives who attended that meeting had unanimously agreed that if they did not receive the protection of the ballot, they would not have the Iran chise.—(Loted cries of " Hear, hear," from the Ministerial benches.) He believed that in coming to that resolution they had been quite right. It might be thought that a good many millowners would attempt to coerce the voters under their control in the same way in which the landlords had frequently been charged with coercing their dependents. But he (Mr. Cobden) stood there to protect people who had votes against undue influence of any kind, whether it pro ceeded from a landowner, or a millowner, or a customer, or a priest, or a mob.—( Hear, hear.) People holding the most contradictory opinions on every kind of question were em ployed is mills, and they ought to be allowed to give, by their votes, the fullest effect to those opinions. A Roman Catholic operative ought not to be compelled to vote in favour of a no-Popery candidate; and an operative who advocated what was called teetotal principles ought not to be coerced into the support of a candidate who was perhaps deluging a borough with intoxicating drinks. The difficulty they would encounter would be felt more among shopkeepers in such towns as Halifax and Hud dersfield than in such towns as Manchester or Leeds, where there was a great mercantile community. and where claeses were not so much divided into manufacturers and operatives. But in those smaller pl .ces to give the fran chise without the ballot would be an unmitigated curse to the population, and on that view of the question he should vote against an exteesien of the elective franchise unless he thought it was certain to lead to the ballot.— (Hear, hear.) He hoped Honourable Centlemeu would not go through the terrible process of acting against all reeding in Hansard, tor in two or three months they would be called again to speak their convictions and to act against all the cherished principles of their life; but what ever they did, he said, " Don't commit yourself against the ballot."—(Hear, and laughter.) Honourable Gentlemen might laugh; bat he said argument had settled it, the moral aspect had carried it, and it only wanted one more general election, that is, if Government dare disclose their policy, which he doubted, on a great question.—(Hear, hear.) He thought Government were trying to shuffle with that question.--(" Hear," and Oh, oh.) H e sa id f rom the f i rst he never believed Government would dissolve Parliament on the great question.—(Hear. hear.) Government had tried to get out of it ; and he had been informed that a Noble Lord had said that night something in the other House which led him to believe that the question would be got rid of by evasion and trickery; but he hoped there was spirit enough in that House, and if not in that House, in the country, to bring them to book.—(Hear, hear.) But if they dissolved Parliament it would be on the bread basket and the sugar-basin questions—questions in which every man, woman, and child in the kfngdom took an inte rest.—(Hear, hear.) He could tell them when opinions came into collision on such questions, they would witness scenes such as few former elections had ever witnessed.—(Hear.) If, however, the great question was not settled at the next election (we understood), we might be certain the Parlia ment would be a short-lived one, and that the fact of the great question remaining unsettled would lead to a dissolu tion.—(Hear.) He advised lion. Members not to put them selves in a false position, especially the young men.— ( Hear, hear and laughter.) There was hope of men under forty—they who were above that age only changed their opinions upon,; compulsion.—( Hear, hear.) He entreated Hon. Gentlemen, if they could not give an honest vote on this question, to abstain from voting.—(Hear, hear, and Oh.) He should vote on the question with the certainty that in three or four years at furthest there would be very little difference of opinion on it.—(Hear, hear.) Captain SCOBELL rose, amid loud cries of "Divide." He would only detain the House a short time— [Here the interruption prevented the Hon. Memb er from being heard.] The Hon. Member for Bridport had referred to the Chancellor of the Exchequer's speech, in which he had referred to what had occurred in New York between two representa tives at Washington. The Right Hon. Gentleman did not see he was playing with edge tools. There were a great many points in that Right Hon. Gentleman's speech which ought to be set right, and if the House would allow him five minutes more.— (Laughter, and Oh) He represented a con stituency which sighed—which longed for the ballot— (Laughter) and therefore, in fairness, the House ought to give him a few minutes.—(Hear.) He would remind the Hon. Member for Bridport who had cast reflections on the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Ripon, that " they should not throw stones who lived in glass houses." If he was not misinformed, that Hon. Gentleman had advocated the ballot on the hustings. Mr. WALPOLE said the Honourable Member for the West Riding had put his opinions in favour of the ballot on two grounds connected with the political and the moral aspects of the question. The Hon. Gentleman said, if the ballot was introduced it would prevent certain evils which he would point out, and the moral effects would lead to an improvement of the moral condition of the people. He could show the Hon. Gentleman and the House that the ballot, instead of preventing the evils, as the Hon. Gentleman contemplated, would leave them as they were; or, rather, add to them.—(Hear.) He could show the Hon. Gentleman and the House that the moral effects which would flow from the ballot would, in a moral sense, instead of an advantage, be detrimental to the morals of the electors. Before he went into the two questions he would refer to some remarks of the Hon. Member for the West Riding. The first had reference to what the Hon. Member said respecting the ballot; the other had relation to the allusion made by the Hon. Member to a Noble Lord in the other House. The Hon. Gentleman said the extension of the franchise without the ballot would be an unmitigated evil. When the measure was carried for giving the right to vote to persons in boroughs and counties occupying houses of 51. value, of course the Hon. Member would not be found to have voted in favour of the measure (we understood). The observa tions on the Noble Lord he considered were not worthy of the Hon. Member, for he had not quoted accurately the words of the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.) The words which the Hon. Member used were very remarkable; he said that the Noble Lerd at the head of the Government had made use of the expression that the landlords of England looked on their tenantry as political capital. Mr. COBDEN—No, I did not.—(" Oh, oh!" " Order!") Mr. WALPOLE—I am not misstating what the Hon. Member said.—(Cheers.) Mr. COBDEN —I read a quotation from Lord Derby's speech.—(Order, order.) Mr. WALPOLE - I believe the words which the Hon. Member attributed to Lord Derby were, that the tenants of England were the political capital of their landlords. Mr. COBDEN I did not say so. —(Loud cries of " Oh, oh.") The Right Hon. Gentleman is only wasting his own time and ours in arguing on an unfounded hypothesis.— (No, no.) I quoted Lord Derby's words from Mansard— Oh, oh)—and I said, atter some other remarks interspersed, that he claimed the tenants as his political capital.—(Oh, oh, and groans.) Mr. WALPOLE—I should be very sorry to misrepresent the lion. Member. Mr. COB DEN—" Capital" is an American phrase.— (Order, order.) Mr. WALPOLE—The Hon. Member shall not put me out by these interruptions.—(Loud cheers.) That the HOD, Member used the words I have stated, and in the manner I have stated, I firmly believe, because they were taken down at the time.—(Continued cheering.) If not, let him retract them.—(Loud cheers.) The Hon. Member unquestionably went on to quote the exact language used by the Noble Lord at the head of the Government; but does that lan gauge contain the expression attributed to the Noble Lord by the Honourable Member?—(Loud cheers.) On the contrary, it pointed to this, that the occupying tenantry of counties and the landlords of counties entertained feel ings of mutual regard and goodwill towards each other, and in that way landlords exercised influence over their tenants. That was the effect of the passage quoted by the Hon. Member, and it contained nothing to Justify him in asserting that Lord Derby had said, or ever intended to say, that the farmers of England were the political capital of their landlords.—(Cheers.) Now, having corrected what I think an unfortunate misrepresentation, I will now advert to the two principal arguments of the lion. Member in favour of the proposition before the House. The Hon. Member said that the ballot would prevent bribery, and also the influence exercised by employers over the employed, and landlords over tenants. I deny in tote that the ballot would have those effects, and for these reasons :—ln the first place, it is ad mitted that the ballot can only produce these results by means of absolute secrecy. Now, when Honourable Mem bers assimilate the ballot used in political elections with the ballot used in private clubs, they forget that in the one case the voters, having only personal consi derations to deal with, conceal the manner in which they vote, while, in the other case—that of the political elec tion—men's political opinions are usually well known, and it would be impossible, therefore, that the requisite secrecy could be observed.—(Hear, hear.) We all know that much canvassing takes place before an election as to this or that person's political opinions. The feelings and intentions of voters would be collected at public-houses, clubs, and other associations. It is said that if a shopkeeper does not vote as his customers wish him, he is deprived of their custom, and that if a farmer votes against the desire of his landlord, he is ejected from his farm; but introduce the ballot, and the only difference would be that instead of these things taking place in consequence of what is known, they will take place on suspicion.—(Hear.) Again, it is said that the ballot will prevent bribery. The example given by my Right. Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequr the other night of 'the working of the ballot in New York is, to nay mind, a conclu sive answer to that assertion.—(Cheerseand " No.") The Hon. Member who says " No " could not have been in the House when the Hon. Mover, in his able and temperate speech, read a letter from an American gentleman, which began by admitting that the observations of the Chancellor of the Exchequer were substantially correct.—(Hear.) Mr. BERKELEY—The !statement of facts, not the infe rences drawn from them.--(Order.) Mr. WALPOLE—The Hon. Member's American corre spondent admits the Chancellor of the Eenxricnicechflaelenorqe:unaoecnfred'ishlesTltenahatxeyene_- cl m hp e e n dq state ment aside eorf as ee tl inferenceol a b s e t c h o a r t r correct, Nwv but bb yy denies tthh ee CA h hm i a s the House of Commons to draw its own inference from statement of facts admitt e d to b e correct.—(Cheers) The New York case appears to me a complete answer to the as sumption that the ballot would prevent bribery Then, if it will not prevent bribe_rmyh,4vtaasienkaendth under e de wh h o m s a . s in te t ai s in that caninvi e b l r a i b b l e e ry s c b re e cy p u c n an ishe b d e pose an election to run very close, ainuotdBboobdwy one or two votes, if corruption b practised ever so ex tensively on this occasion, h e pracn be Ate to detect and punish it if votes be how ill I t e s a u ns ° the ballot? Look at the elections recently in s Fiance under the ballet, d ble o r b t t l e e teecre T determined where so many votes were e meeated— more than could actually be given—that 'it was wittily remarked by an able first practical Dias writer in this country that that was the-Supposing tration of two negatives making in affirmative.obtainproofof the ballot were introduced, how Could you ustice to the party frauds committed, and how cauid you do l i d the election run who ought to be the reo entative, Blum . res been given fraudulently against close ? and should votes ha ve te e t there is another reason, (Hear.) But 1 o wn a ' t o t h makes me more anxious resie in a moral aspect, which the introduction of the b a llot. Now, I broadly contend th a t er a erson is emwered to exercise in this cou n t ry , whel2 n e e v ought p to exercise i po t under the influ any trust evhatever, üblicopinion.—(Cheers.) There is no ence and control ooftj'should be more irresponsible th an th e representatiel reason why the to v that high tribunal.—(Cheers.) Nay, more , _ ve bas as much right to ask what are the the repres o e i t t i lie constituents he represents as the constituents opinions right to ask in what way the repre sen t a ti ve exer cises the thin these walls in p ursuance o f t h e c h o i ce °is° h is duty eel those c ons tituents have made.—(Hear, h ear. ) I t hi n k , too , that the observations which fell f rom t h e lion. Member for I3ridp)rt, quoting the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Ripon, are not entirely to be forgotten; and, though those observations are somewhat stronger than any I am inclined to use—though I should not be tempted to state that everybody must be a scoundrel and hypocrite when Le exercises the franchise by the ballot, yet I say that this practice may have, in a moral aspect, a material influence on the character of the people—(Hear, hear)—for the opportu nity of concealment will give the opportunity for fraud, and for the indulgence of malicious and revengeful feelings, which could not be attended with advantage to the country.—(Hear, hear.) lion. Gentlemen who were in this House at a former period, when great debates took place on this subject, may recollect the pointed quotation made by the late Sir R. Beel, when he adverted to the effect WEDNESDAY of the ballot on the people of Rome. He quoted that ad - mirable passage from Pliny descriptive of the Roman voter, who bad lost all sense of dignity and all consciousness of right or wrong when exercising the franchise by ballot : Tabellas pnposcit, stilum aceepitoidem abjecit, caput desnisit,, neminem veretur, se contemnit."—(Cheers.) In a moral aspect, I maintain that the ballot would be found seriously detri mental to the character of the people of this country; and my firm belief is that, though by the introduction of the ballot you may by possibility prevent some undue influence of bad over good, yet you will not allow that legitimate influence to have the operation which it ought always to have—the influence of good over bad.—(Cheers.) Lord D. STUART ontended that it had been admitted by Lord Derby that that House did not represent the people, people c on for he had declared that he would not attempt to carry a quesxon, to which he had attached great importance, by a imina.lcoerdit t of intelli gent aMhewa s also at large i n it s f a vour. Something, then, must be done t o winced t h h e e hHadoustheeo great r Commons, majority mons, unl ess • place that House on a wholesome basis. The constituencies of the country were beset by two monster evils—corruption and intimidation, and therefore the voter required protection in the exercise of the franchise. For a long time he was him self an opponent of the ballot. The idea of a man boldly discharging his duty was pleasing to him, and he also wished to give the Reform Bill a fair trial, and see whether it would put down corruption and intimidation. That was in 1833 and 1834, and about that time an address was pabllahed to the constituents he now represented, advocating in the strongest terms vote by ballot and triennial Parliaments. To that address was appended the name of Benjamin Disraeli. The Right Hon. Gentleman declared that since then he had sown his wild oats, and he supposed that that was mtheenownloyolddesncervipetieosnceopfedgrdaninty. which ae h tb ad e oo ßi m gh e t t H o aonn.oGppenositltee conclusion to that arrived at by the Right Hon. Gentleman, and he thought they ought to try s ome remedy to prevent corruption and intimidation. B e agreed - with the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Walpole') that the best mode of pre venting bribery and corruption was the moral elevation of the people, and nothing could more tend to that end than the ballot.—(Cries of "Divide.") The most humiliating position in which you could place a man was, after bestowing on him the privilege of a vote, not to allow him to give that vote as he thought prop e r , and no thing could elevate him more than to give him that protec tion in the exercise of his privilege which would be afforded by the ballot. There was no measure more dear to the people at large than this; it was now their favourite question; an d founded, as he believed it to be, on truth and justice, it would, so far from promoting demoralization, increase mo rality among all classes—among the upper as well as sh e more humble.—(Divide.) The House then divided, when there appeared,— For the motion -• • • • 144 Against it .. ••• 246 Majority ••• —lO2 Mr. HUTT, amid some laughter, declared that it had bee his intention to vote in favour of the motion, bat that b y mistake he had voted against it. The House then adjourned at Twenty minutes after Twelve o'clock. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS. (From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.) TUESDAY, MARCH 30. BALLOT. Motion made, and Question put, " That leave be given to bring in a Bill to cause the Votes of Parliamentary Electors to be taken by way of Ballot." The House divided:— Pllkingten, James Reynolds, John Ricardo, Osman Rice, E. R. Romilly, Colonel Sadleir, Jan Salwey, Colonel Scholefleld, WilliAM Scobell, Captain Scrope, G. P. Scully, Francis Scully, Vincent Shafto, R. D. Smith, J. A. Smith, John B. Somers, J. P. Somerville, Sir W. Stanley, W. 0. litansfleld, W. R. Strickland, Sir G. Strutt, E. Stuart, Lord D. Stuart, Lord Sullivan, Michael Talbot, J. H. Tancretl, H. W. Tsunent, R. J. Thicknesse, R. A. Thompson, Colonel Thompson, George Thornely, Thome. Trelawny,'J. S. Tufnell, H. Tynto, Colonel Villiers, Charles Vivian, J. H.: Wakley, Thomas Walmsley, Sir I. Wawn, J. T. Willcox, Brodie Wfsiams, John Williams, IV. Willyams, H. Wilson, Matthew Wood, Sir W. P. Wyld, James TELLEBS. Berkeka, Henry F. Hall, SW B. MINORITY-AYES, 144. Adair, Hugh E. Hastie, Alexander Alcock, Thomas Hastie, Archibald Anstey, Thomas C. Henry, Alexander Armstrong, R. B. Heywood, James Barron, Sir H. Heyworth, L. Bass, M. T. Higgins, G. G. Berkeley, C. L. O. Hill, Lord Marcia Bernal, Ralph Hindley.Charles Bouverie, E. P. Hobhouse, T. B. Boyle, Colonel Hume, Joseph Bright, John Humphery, Ald. Brocklehurst, J. Hutchins, E. J. Brown, W. Jackson, William Clay, James Johnstone, James Clay, Sir W. Keating, Robert Clifford, H. M. KeoghoWilliam Cobden, Richard Kershaw, James Cockburn, Sir A. King, P. J. Cogan, W. H. Langston, J. H. Collins, W. Lawless, Cecil Corbally, M. E. Locke, Joseph Davie, Sir H. Lushington, C. Dawes, Edwar M'Gregor, John Dawson, T. V. Maher, N. Devereux, John T. Meagher, Thomas D'Eyncourt, C. T. Mahon, O'Gorman Divett, E. Mangles, R. D. Douglas, Sir C. Marshall, J. G. Duncan, Viscount Martin, J. Duncan, George Milner, W.M. Duncombe, T. Mitchell, T. A. Ellis, John Moffatt, George Enfleld, Viscount Molesworth, Sir W. Evans, Sir De Lacy Moore, G.A.:, Evans, William Morris, David Ewart, William! Manta, G. F. Ferguson, Colonel Murphy, F. S. Fox, Richard M. Norreys, Sir D. Fox, W. J. Nugent, Sir Percy Freestun, Colonel O'Brien, Sir Timothy Geach, Charles O'Connell, M. J. Gibson, T. M. O'Flaherty, Anthony Glyn, G. C. Osborne, Ralph Grace, 0. D. Paget, Lord Clarence Granger, T. C. Paget, Lord George Greene. John Pechell, Sir G. Grenfell, C. Pascoe Peel, Sir Robert Hardcastle, J, A. Perfect, Robert Harris, Richard Pigott, Francis MAJORITY alirpontla — eldoniu,ln.. NOES, 24 6 . Adderley, C. B. Farrer, James Miles, P. W. S. Archdall, Captain Fellowes, E. Miles, William Arkwright, tleorge Ferguson, Sir R. Moncreiff, James Bagot, William Filmer, Sir E. Moody, C. A. Baillie.e. J. Fitzpatrick, J. W. Morgan, 0. Baird James Foley, J. Mostyn, E. M. Baldock, E. 11. Forbes, William Mailings, J. R. Baldwin, Barry Fox, S. W. L. Mundy, William Bankes, G. Fuller, A. E. Naas, Lord Baring, Thomas Gallwey, Sir W. P. Napier, Joseph Barrington, Viscount Galway, Viscount Newdegate, C. N. Barrow, W. H. Gaskell, J. M. Newport, Viscount Beckett, William Gilpin, Colonel Noel, Gerald J. Bennet, Philip Gladstone, W. E. O'Brien, Sir Lucius Bentinck, Lord H. Goddard, A. L. Ossulston, Lord Beresford, William Gooch. E. S. Packe, C. W. Birch, Sir Thomas Gore, W. R. 0. Palmer, Robert Blandford, Marquis Goulburn,Henry Palmerston, Boldero, H. G. Granby, Marquis of Patten, J. W. Booth Sir R. G. Greenall, G. Peel, Colonel Bowles, Admiral Greene, Thomas Reel, Frederick Bramston, T. W. Grogan, Edward Pennant, Colonel Brentridge, Richard Grosvenor, Earl Plowden, W. R. Bridges, Sir B. Guernsey, Lord Portal, Melville Brisco, M. Gwyn, Rowel Pugh, David Broadwood, Henry Hale, R. B. Reid, General Brooke, Sir A.B. Raiford, Sir Henry Renton, John C. Bruce, C. L. C. Hall, Colonel Richards, Richard Buck, Lewis W. liallewell, E. G. Runabald, C. E. Buller, Sir J. Y. Hamilton, G. A. Rushout, Captain Banbury, William Hamilton, J. H. Russell, Lord John Burghley, Lord Hamilton, Lord C. St. George, Chris. Campbell, Sir A. Hardinge, C. S. Scott, Francis Cardwell, Edward Harris, Captain Beyiner, H. K. Carew, W. P. Hatchell, John Seymour, Lord Castlereagh, Vise. Hayes, Sir E. Sibthorp, Colonel Cavendish, C. C. Heald, James Smith, M. Tucker Cavendish, G. H. Heathcote, Sir Smollett, An Caylcy, E. S. Renee" G. H. W. Somerton, Viscount Chandos, Marquis Heneage, Edward Sotheron, T. 11. Chaplin, W. J. Henley, J. W. Spooner, Richard Charteris, Francis Herbert, 11. A. Stafford, AugeustuS Chichester, Lord J. Berries, John C. Stanford, J. F. , Child, 6anith Hervey, Lord A. Stanley, Edward Christopher, R. A. Hildyard, R. C. Stanton, WH. r e l ille Lindsay,on.' p d in, y eo a rxsd,di Colonel r .. 1 B . Christy, Samuel Staunton, Sir G. Clerk Sir G. Hill, Lord E. Stewart, Admiral Clive, R. 11. H. S vlVT T SS , tt h a t e l ruu ayosraciltrolle' Stuart Inwra Thomas Aide Clive, H. B. Ilope,H. T. J. , Sir T Te re u l n ,o e r n , t, G S . ir it d . .. Cobbold, J. C. Iloth am , 'Lord Cochrane, A. D. Hudson, G. Cocks, T. S. Hughes, W. B. Codrington, Sir W. Hutt, William Thesiger, Sir F. Collins, Thomas Inglis, Sir R. H. Compton, H. C. Jerm yn , Earl n J j lnol Jones, Captain Townley, R. ta Conolly, Thomas Cotton, W. H. Trollope, Sit J. Cowper, W. F. Tyler, Sir G. Cubitt, William Knox, W. S. Currie, 11. Langton, W. 11. Tyrell, Sir J. Davies, D. A. Deedes, W. Denison, J. E. Villiers Viscount Lennox, Lord 11. G. . Disraeli, B. Lewisham Vis count Vivian, J. E. Dod, J. W.• yse, R. H. R. H. Douro, Marquis of Littleton, E. B. Duckworth, sHiromj.eWaddington, H. S. Walpole, S. H W. er, r i ow e . r n dr. r y Walsh, Sir J. Duff, George S. Lopes, Sjx• Ralph Walter, John Duff, James Watkins, Colonel Lowther, Colonel Duncombe, A.' Duncombe, 0. Manners, Lord G. Lygon, General Whiteside, James Duncombe, W. E. Mackie, John Boone, Colonel Wigram, Lams Mahon, Lord Williams, T. P. Du Pre, C. G. 3 m3 i i arch, Earl of East, Sir J. B. EE E E g gv d e ee w r r l : ar t.o o n n n d :, s ' iv S v ii i i r l.l e i P T nr a . m. y j. w W W o e e r gg lis P l tex e r y ° ,: 6 3l L e o r idi s . C. Manners, Lord.C; WW:driele;e:SE:lmand Wynn, H. W. Yorke, E. T. Elliot, J. E. Estcourt, J. B. B. Mastennan, John v - wing , S ir Min Tannius. Matheson, Colonel Mackenzie, W. F. Farnham, E. B. Maxwell, P. Bateson, T. Lockhart,L: Manners,nat, W. Ilex Majesty, accompanied by the Princess Helena, the COURT C.IRCULA R. Princess L ou i sa , and Prince Arthur, and attended by the rode out on horseback Marchion ess of Ely and Msjor-General Buckley, visited her Royal Hi g hness the Duchess . of Gloucester yesterday after noon, s autoyGalloußczthenreLlssopusrtePeicAclabdedrity. yesterday morning, attended by Colonel Bouverie. of f bad a dinner party yesterday at Buckingham a ll n uc li k y hrisham Palace. the gardens TThhee ae l e n il Palace. Band of the Coldstream Guards attended during dinnner. The Earl of Verulam has relieved the Earl of Morton in his duties as Lord in Waiting to the Queen. Celonel the Hon. A. Nelson Hood has relieved Captain the Hon. J. Denman, R.N., in his duties as Groom in Waiting to her Majesty. Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent visited the Duchess of Gloucester yesterday, at Gloucester House. A deputation on the subject of the Dundalk and Ennis killen Railway had an interview with the Earl of Derby yesterday, at hie official residence in Durning-street. Lord Campbell had an interview with Mr. Secretary 'Walpole yesterday at the Home Office. Colonel Wood had also an interview with the Right Honourable Gentleman. The American Minister had an interview with Sir John Pakington yesterday at the Colonial O ffi ce. The Lord Advocate arrived in town yesterday from Ly. mington. Mr. James M'Queen had an interview with the Right Honourable J. W. Henley yesterday, at the Board of Trade- The Oxford University Commission had a meeting yester day, at the o ffi cial residence of the First Lord o f the Treasury in Downing-street. Captain Moorson, C. 8., had an interview with Lord Col chester yesterday, at the Board of Trade. Dispatches were received at the Colonial Office yesterday, from the Governor of the North American P rovinces. The Oxford University Commission had a meeting on Mon day, at the official residence of the First Lord of 'the TreA sury, in Downing-street. Present—The Bishop of Norwich, the Dean of Carlisle, the Master of Pembroke, the Rev H. J. Liddle, J. L. Dampier, Esq., th e Rev. Professor Powell tie Rev. G. 11. S. Johnson, and the Rev. A. P. Stanley (Se e -et ary. [ADVERTISEMENT.]---Boll owa o BUS for the Cure of Nervous Debility and Determination of Blood to the Head. —Extract of a letter from Mr. John Lloyd, of Erwn-wen Harlech, Merionethshire. " o Professor Holloway. Sir,—l think it my duty to inform you that for a long period I was afflicted with giddiness and sw i ramf • g in the head, attended by loss of appotite, and generally impaired health. Every means had failed to give me relief, and at length it became so alarm ing, that I was afraid of going out without an attendant. Mr. which Hu ghesiicmine chemist, of id d llar , lech, advised me to try your am perfect cure, and restered use to healthhaPPi t and say he ds t t ren y effected g th.l l 4 i by all Druggists and at Professor Hotoway'sEstablibbalegt, 244, Straud, Loniou. few pre bad so reed