The Sun. — London, England, 1837-12-13 00:00:00

14 vie w• name the protection of Don Carlos.—( Hear.) Don finallyduel ca pitulated,and the agreement—the inter- P ort agreement--then entered into between the Queen of ugal and her allies, the Evora Monte treaty, was inserted tion4.additional article. In an historical work on the revolu 4, l iiSpain, by Walton, he found a translation of this treaty . B so , I s Royal Highness the Infante Don Carlos shall le ave with his suite on the 30th of the current May, for Al. l tlega, where he shall embark. In tour tn his Journey t hi t h er the Marshals of Portugal will k i te et for th e p ersona l sa fety of his Royal Highness and i tioy , and p rov id e f or hi m such escort as his Royal Highne ss e 3, 6 M out. !si oee he Spanish subjects who may be in Portugal , compro ' in the service of his Royal Highness, shall be received kProrisio na l d epo t a t S a ntarem, whither they shall go un slell escort as may be necessary for their sec urit y . of The Portuguese Government shall give them the means subt totri sist ence in the depot until they may be abl e to g o there- N:lithout danger to some other place of reside nce. " rt in pursuance of the stipulations contained in this treaty, k e ts euggested by Mr. Grant, the Secretary of his Britannic th o 'VY's Legation then in Portugal, that these 950 persons )i i i ni .`" be assembled at Aldea Gallego, and that proper pro- Iv! should be made for their protection. This was done. tit_ r e Were then but two ships of the British flett there to `e th em et,, e away, and in these vessels 240 embarked, and were :Yetl to Antwerp and England, according to the terms of it !hi , s left 680, whose liberty , up to t his time, had been calledt in question, either by the Portuguese or leite( er em , per Government. At Aldea Gallego these men were te ed defenceless and unarmed, and instructions were after %it given to them to go to Santarem, on the understanding et all necessary provision would be made to insur e their e, 1 0 , e 1 and protection. No such p r otection was, however , af fro'ed to them, but still this body marched the whole distance Aldea Gallego to Santarem in the short space of five se Y i 3 ' s It was melancholy to recal to mind the hardships o they had to endure during those five days. Suffice it s t l h tY that i n one short month, from the 30 th of f la y , 1833, vitt, 30th of June following, no fewer than 272 of them fell N i els to either assassination or disease, brought on by hun ttiand improper treatment.—(Hear, hear.) From Sante e, ta a deput a ti on from this unhappy body subseq uentl y went to t i:hon, and represented their forlor n and unha ppy condition 1 N .,. Portuguese Government. Upon this they were removed o, o 'Santarem to Torres Novas. The deputation, the House e ot t nd understand, travelled from Santarem to Lisbon with their liberty having been once ca lled in q uestion. l th ere Were also permitted to go on board the fleet, and had Th e been room for them they might have re mained on board. e r e was not, however; they therefore returned back to %tar eon to communicate to their companions the answer s ki t", they had received from the Portuguese Government, T o ,.. tn ey then were allowed to proceed to their new destination er "el Novas, and bad as had been their sufferings before, qtheir real misery commenced. It was not until the ar -011111 of the Ambassador of Donna Christina that the foi tunes „° emigrants claangesl—that their hopes were slashed to th:lv ; for it was tile* for the first time that they heard of ocrntentio* to deliver them up to flee tender mercies of a k e .:rnment so liberal and humane that its most cherished ge set" was the buteser of women and the desolator of towns village-.—( Hear, bear.) Ia their next march from Torres v( ta to Peniche numbers of them fell a sacrifice to the ma lug bands of peasantry by whom they were attacked. and 'engh they travelled under a military escort, not a soldier len- guard fired a single shot in their defence. When they h 'ved at Peniche they were followed by two cartsful of their e t :laded companions, and even at Peniche they did not fare ite `ltr. for oae of thew, a Colonel, was heartless l y massacred t ,, 0 hovel where he had been placed. From t his p lace the k eliter part of them were sent on board the hulk Don Pedro, 7 the remainder, about eight in number, were transferred oie tlae C a stl e of St. Julian. It was an extraordinary state ,eat, but nevertheless a true one, that out of 680 men there p f l „ s diminution, in the short space of three yea rs and a half, 8b produced solely by disease, brought on by cruel and treatment—(Hoar, hear.) The account on which 1, 1 made this statement was dated the 19th of Novem toitta but of course he had no mcaas of knowing how 16,1' had perished since. He thought, however, that the s o -, ,1e fact of such a diminution having taken place within oilt l i zaited a period was in itself enough to startle that House till _ to require her Majesty's Government promptly and at k ce to interfere in their behalf.—( Hear, hear. ) said that k Onneequence of the absence of the Noble Lord, he would et the his statement of facts, and he should do so ; but he `,ne same time must entreat the House to bear in mind the permi t situation of those unfortunate persons, and to M me him to refer to letters which had been received from ti e ke of the prisoners—men whose honour could not be The confirmation of the statement which he had made. th ue Honourable Gentleman then read letters from several of 4 !. prisoners, describing their wretched condition. Having fished the perusal of these letters, the Honourable Gentle en went on to say, he thought that this was a case in which 1, Strong arm of power ought to be used, and he did hope the tt,'‘ttsb who had Government would advise tlie instant liberation of i f committed no crime—who had not been guilty i o v iolating any law. He knew it had been said that Don Car -1 was in want of soldiers, and that these parties would be an ke qUisition to his cause. This was not the case. These priso wsre willing either to be exchanged or to go to any o ther country than Spain. They were ready to sacrifice their tee iirights although they did not consider themselves as pri to,e rs of war-4 Hear)—but they were not w;lling to whom t Zered up to the tender mercie; of a Goyernmeht from hait companions had suffered so deeply. He held in his Julianasattdan ocial return from the officer In command at Fort as to the number of the prisaners confined there 92 find board the Hulk. In the fo rmer the number was ;in the latter 230 besides ni ne ladies. The whole of ane n d prisoners were kept in unjustifiable and cruel confin ement, Was stated that they were n ot all o wed even a sufficiency of i n Provision s . There was not , he believed, a case parallel this to b e found in the history of any country of which t ee was a record.—( Hoar.) The Hon. Member then read t ae ft "e letters om Commandant Roderi.*tiez to Don Ramon qS alvador. These letters were down to the 19th of last month, 4 o ,,eti they showed that, instead of liming relaxed, the sufferings herethose prisoners had rather increased, and that their numbers tti e re almost daily diminishing, from the severity of the treat vent they received.—( Hear. ) The object which he bad in 1 1 1 el y in mentioning the few facts which composed this mon r°l2e and unheard-of case was, that the whole of the papers, * l itb the answer of the Portuguese Government, should be laid loe tbe table of the House, in order that it might be seen t "ether the sufferings of these persons, inflicted under a I l i e !'t,Y by which protection was guaranteed to them by the 11 : 4 1 : fish Government, was not only a violation of the law of e t . , 3118 . but a direct insult to this country. The Hon. Gentle tan, in conclusion, moved for a copy of the Convention of same, Monte ; and also a copy of the letter enclosing the ti r ne, addressed by Mr. Grant to the Infante Don Carlos ; t !c , a copy of the letter addressed to the Secretary for Fo- Zgll Affairs by the Commandant of the depot of Spanish &rants detained in the hulks, mid in the prison of Fort St. ‘ l ,ian at Lisbon. th Lord J. RUSSELL said that as there was no objection to e production of the papers for which th e Hon. Gentleman hi 'ered, it was no t hi s i ntention to offer any opposition to the . s. l'rition. As t o D on C ar l os , a ll he would say was, that h e was vt s lest fortu nate i n b e i ng a ll owe d t o l e ave Portugal, because had '1 not been f or t h e B r iti s h Government, had he remained i n t hat country, he would, in all probability , he would , i n all pro , ability, have been taken and tried for high treason. (Cries of Hear, hear," from the Ministerial benches.) , Mr. BORTH W ICK said that D on Carlos was full y sensi ble. so were the prisoners, of the conduct o f the British Go vernment at that time, He held in his hand the correspon ,it"ee connected with the treaty of Evora Monte, and he must Z~that much credit was due to the British Government for Course they pursued on that occasion, and he only hoped e o ° , Y would now act in the same spirit , and not allow themselves (t pe influenced by th e machinations of others elsewhere. — 'ear, hear.) %Colonel E VANS said that there had been great alacrity on th t part of the Honourable Members opposite to go into l b ° general subject during his ab sence from this country; and, tc'mpliance with the expressed w ish of many Hon. Members n 's his side of the House, he was most anxious to bring it 'rward not so much as regarde d himself, but because he ;W ed; s uc h a course to the officers and soldiers who had served der hi m , an d against whom aspers ions had been poured out both in that House and by the press, under the influence bl,'„ e t he Hon. Gentlemen oppo site The fitting opportunity 1.17`1 not yet arisen for entering upo n such a statement, and l erefure he now gave notice that it was his intention, irnm oetely after the recess, to bring the whole subject under their : 11 tideration.—( Hear.) The Hon. G entleman ( Mr. Borth itk) had complained of pr i so ners being confined in th e hulks 4 1It iravelins of Fort St. Julian ; b ut what, he should like to 1 1 1 , ° ''f, had that to do with the Englis h Government? Such a b t rge might be made against the Government o f Portu g al ; ti ii t t then the House should recollect wh y the y were confined—, f t t they were confined as prisoners of war.— ( . ‘ Hear, hear' (I tn the Ministerial benches.) The complaint was, therefore, lo ßPoundless one, and the only question was whether a ravelin , 44 not better as a prison than a hulk. It was, however, 0 vo - alPlain e d that the Portuguese Government had violated the ert'N'ention Carlos of Evora Monte ; but was it not clear that the fate t/ on involved that of all those who followed him p er guard ?—( Hear, hear.) T he y were, in fact, national ei e!end'44lerson the and cons e will oqufeeither ntly ththe e disposal of them could not or the British seta ,vernrnents. He would not at present go further into the ei la connected with the conduct of Don Carlos ; but he f r ost be allowed to say that any one would be led to suppose 111 the statements of the Honourable G entleman o pp osite t hat h they were in entire ignorance, or the facts were so mystified te s o t , ' they could not understand the m, for otherwise they would 11 1 commit themselves by coming forwa.d so frequently as 1 4 -Y ,had done r.s the advocates of Do n Carlos. They must klutog e th er i gnoran t of the Durango dec ree, or the fife) tub subjects who had been massacre d under that decree, ee or ul eY never would have taken such a course.—("Hear, . fro m the Ministerial benches.) iet e r CANNING had not come d own p re p ared to enter Ij a general di-cession, but he was happy to know that the o thennurable and Gallant Officer opposite intended to bring su bject connected with his own p roceedin g s before the 14, „- t ', T e at an early period after the recess. Ile could assure te ""ontahle and Gallant Officer that there was no wisl• • Part of his (the Conservative) side of the House to ,v i kli„:7 - from such a discussion—(hear. hear)—but lie must le 'ae, e d to say that the Ilonourable and Gallant Office; l'ef e ," just cause of complaint in consequence of any Ivli e : ne e hick had been made to him on any one occasion (1.1 - the affairs of Spain were mentioned in his absence.— ear, hear.C olonelof EVANS had nothing to complain of on the grounii Ille e t ' ut ten with respect to the Right Honourable Gentle ati nor had anything been said by him which lie could feel Palatable. With regard to what the Hon. Member (Mr. k tkiii tilth c Or th i itt?iv, Bortheick) had said about his being actuated by feelings of humanity, and not by political motive:, all he (Colonel Evans) could say was, that it was this observation which had caused him to rise. He said that, on the score of humanity, and without any reference whatever to policy, Don Carlos was the last description of Prince who was entitled to either the sympathy or compassion of that House.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. HUME said it had been stated that nothing to the prejudice of his Honourable and Gallant Friend had been said in the course of the debates referred to; but did the Hon. Baronet not recollect that on the very day information of a slight defeat experienced by his Honourable and Gallant Friend was received, an opportunity was sought to bring the whole subject forward; and that aspersions and charges were then made, not only against him, but the whole corps which he commanded. With a full recollection of all that took place when the matter was brought forward, he could only say that he was glad his Honourable and Gallant Friend would have an early opportunity of going in detail into the whole subject, as the conduct pursued towards him was any thing but fair. Mr. LUCAS would never shrink from the discharge of his duty, and he would feel himself perfectly at liberty to speak of the conduct of the Gallant Officer in a public sense, or of any other individual, whenever lie felt it his duty to do so. If the Honourable and Gallant Offieer was absent from his duty in Parliament upon that occasion, he felt quite sure that all who took a part in that discussion would have felt better pleased that the Honourable and Gallant Officer had been pre sent. What he wished to assert was the right of a Member of that House to express his opinion upon any subject under discussion. Colonel EVANS said that the Hon. Member had asserted the privileged right of a Member of that House to speak freely of the public conduct of any individual. As far as the general conduct of any individual, he did not mean to deny that right. But did the Hon. Member mean to say that there was any in stance of a similar course to that which had been pursued towards him and the troops under his command? If the Hon. Member could point out any instance where a similar course had been pursued towards a British officer or the troops under his command as had been pursued in his case he would then consent to the applicability of the vague generality which the Hon. Member had put forward. Mr. WYNN considered that the right of a Member to dis cuss the public conduct of any individual in a public point of view in relation to any questions before the House could not be denied. (So we understood the Hon. Member, who was indistinctly audible.) Mr. L A MBTON, on the occasion of the discussion respect ing Spanish affairs, thought that the Hon. and Gallant Officer had been very severely dealt with. Mr. GO ULB URN had never spoken harshly of the con. duct of that Hon. and Gallant Officer, nor did lie suppose he ever should. But when a question came before the House as to the policy of continuing British subjects in the service of a Foreign State, when persons who objected to that policy, and who might entertain strong objections to the course that had been altogether pursued, it was impossible, notwithstanding any delicacy that might be used, not to say something which might be disagreeable to the feelings of an individual engaged on such service. H could state that when his Right Hon. and Gallant Faiend ( Sir H. Hardinge) had brought forward his motion he had abstained from using many documents that bore upon the conduct of the Hon. and Gallant officer, and he did so from d feeling that he was not present to defend himself. After a few words from Mr. H U ME, in explanation, Sir S. CANNING was quite sure that when the proper oc casion came Hon. Members would not shrink from the discus sion. The discharge of a public duty was not to be set aside upon any grounds such as had been expressed. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that no person ever raised a question so entirely preposterous as to deny the right of any Hon. Member to state his opinion freely upon any subject before the House. So far from that, it was net only their right but their duty fully and freely to discuss any matter in which the public interests were involved. No question had been at all raised on that point. All admit ted the right—the question was as to the proper exercise of that right. No one doubted that it was perfectly open to any Hon. Member to dispute the policy of the Order in Council as to the continuance of the British Legion in the service of the Queen of Spain. He was also ready to admit the right to speak of the conduct of the Legion, and of any officer either in his public or individual capacity. Colonel EVANS said that any irritability that bad been evinced might arise from the fact that he had used ono or two words which might have been misinterpreted. He had spoken of calumny and asperity ; but he used those expressions in re ference to the eonduct cf the public press, which had received countenance in that House, and he would take for granted that nothing had occurred which was in any way unparliamentary. Sir C. B. VERE was present at the debate in question, and he could assure the Hon. and Gallant Officer opposite that his situation and personal gallantry were fully considered, and he did not think, on that occasion, that there had been any tendency to throw any thing discreditable upon the cha racter of the Hon. and Gallant Officer. Mr. HORS MAN thought that, on the occasion referred to, expressions had been made use of calculated to produce sore ness. If he recollected rightly, something like the term "hireling" had been made use of. With regard to the right of discussion which had been asserted, it was a right which no one denied : the only objection that could be was to the rain nor of the exercise of the right. During the absence of the Hon. and Gallant Officer great alacrity had been shown to bring forward questions affecting, his conduct ; but now that the Gallant Officer was present the same alacrity did not exist, and he was forced to give notice of his intention to bring for ward the subject himself. Lord SANDON said that there were no grounds for the charges which the Hon. Member had made. The same ur gency did not exist now as had existed last year, and the Hon. Member could therefore draw no analogy from the circum stances of last year. As he (Lord Sandon) was on his legs ho must beg to allude to an observation that had fallen from the Hon. and Gallant Officer. He seemed inclined to cha racterise as the supporters of Don Carlos all those at his (Lord Sandon's) side of the House who felt disposed to question the policy of the present Government respecting Spain, but be fore the Gallant Officer did that, be would ask him was lie prepared to take upon his own shoulders every cruelty that had been committed at the other side ? When the Hon. and Gallant Officer was prepared to do that, he might then talk of the supporters of Don Carlos. Sir H. VIVIAN was present when the Right lion. and Gallant Officer ( Sir H. Hardinge) brought forward his motion respecting Spain, and he was ready to say that both that Gal lant Officer and the seconder of the motion had treated the question in that manner which his Hon. and Gallant Friend had a right to expect. He regretted that many severe ex pressions had been made use of concerning the troops under the command of his Hon. and Gallant Friend. Mr. BORTHWICK trusted to be present when the Hon. and Gallant Officer would bring forward his motion, for it had now assumed a proper form. He did not now mean to discuss what had been said about Don Carloss. He had been stig matized as a blood-thirsty tyrant, but that at least was a reason why they should not allow one whom they so stig matized to outstrip them in the race of humanity.--[Here Lord Palmerston entered the House.] As the Noble Lord had made his appearance he would state that, had he been earlier present, he would have had the honour of enlarging more at length upon the subject which lie had brought forward. Lord PAL ME RST ON regretted he had been detained by business elsewhere. He would have been in the House earlier; but the notice of the Hon. Member for Evesham was the 13th on the Paper, and he did not anticipate it would have come on so soon. He regretted that his absence should have in any way shortened the speech of the Hon. Member. The motion was then put and agreed to. Mr. BROT HE RTON rose for the purpose of moving for a Return connected with the Collegiate Church of Man chester, when— Lord J. RUSSELL requested the Hon. Member to post pone the motion until after the recess. It was then his inten tion to move for a Committee to consider Church Leases, and the whole question would then be discussed. He trusted the Hon. Member would, under those circumstances, consent to postpone the motion. Mr. BROTHERTON expressed his acquiescence in the suggestion. THE SUNDERLAND UNION. Mr. A. WHITE rose to call the attention of the House to the administration of the Poor-law Amendment Act in the district of the Sunderland Union. It would be in the recol lection of the House that a short time ago a discussion arose I on a motion for the appointment of a Committee to inquire into the distribution of relief under the New Poor-law Act. On that occasion the Hon. Member for North Durham made observations of a character which had given great cause of dis satisfaction. In the report of his observations which appeared in the Morning Chronicle the Hon. Member was represented to have said— The SPEAKER called the Hon. Member to order. Ho should not say what the Hon. Member was stated to have said, but what the Hon. Member had stated. Mr. WHITE was glad he had been set right. What the lion Member had stated was to the effect that in Sunderland alone, immediately after the Act coming into operation, pa- ' rochial relief was suddenly withdrawn from two hundred un happy children, and dark rumours went abroad of the myste rious disappearance of many of those innocents, and though no cases of child murder had actually been proved, yet too much reason existed for supposing that many of them had been abandoned by their mothers to starvation. As Chair man of the Board of Guardians, of that Union, he (Mr- White) felt it his duty to assure the House that his statement was not founded in fact. Statements of that kind going abroad through the medium of the public press were calcu lated to have a most injurious effect on the public mind, and it was not surprising that the riots took place. This state ment had produced a strong feeling of indignation at Sunder land. He felt bound to call on the Hon. Member for S iuth Durham to (as we understood) state the authority on which his statement rested, and he should conclude by moving for the production of the correspondence which took place be tween the Board of Guardians at Sunderland and the Secre tary for the Home Department. Mr. LA M BTON seconded the motion. Mr. LIDDELI, said the observations he had made in the speech in question were not directed against any individuals, and least of all against the individuals composing the Board of Guardians in Sunderland. What he referred to had taken place so far back as the winter of 1834, two years before any Commissioner had gone to Sunderland—before any Union was incorporated—before any Board of Guardians was formed. He felt called on to set himself right in the presence of many who had heard what he had said on that occasion. In speaking of the Poor Law Amendment Act lately applied to the Northern counties, and with a very g reat difference of Opinion as to its applicability. he ( M r . Liddell) divided his observations under two heads—first, with reference to the principle ; and secondly, with respect to the practical operation of the Act. --( Hear, THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 13, 1837. hear, hear.) He had expressed himself strongly upon the harsh enactments of the Bill, and stated his desire and hope, if not for their repeal, at least for their amelioration. He further stated that the bastardy clauses were a source of great dissatisfaction ; and that he was informed that in Sunderland alone two hundred bastard children were de prived of relief: He had in his hand a copy if resolutions agreed to at a vestry at Sunderland in 1834, the fourteenth of which declared that no relief would be afforded to bastard children after that week. When the population of the Union was taken into consideration, and coupled with this resolution of the vestry, it would not appear that the information which he received with regard to the two hundred bastard children was an exaggerated one: and ho was of opinion that when the requisite Returns were made, there would not be found any great discrepancy between his statement and the truth.— ( Hear, hear.) With respect to the allusion as to the dark rumours of the disappearance of several of the children, he had only alluded to them as rumours, not as facts ; but if it were true that the enactment of this law were followed by harsh measures on the part of the parochial authorities, such proceedings were well calculated to excite such rumours. Mr. L A NIBTON thought the Hon. Member highly culpa ble in not instituting every possible inquiry before he had hazarded such assertions. His statement with respect to the two hundred children was one calculated to shock huma nity, and to excite very strong feelings in the poorer and less educated classes ; and before it was hazarded as the statement of a letter, of which the writer's name was not given, the Honourable Gentleman should have written for further information to the respectable individuals in Sun derland, from whom it might easily be procured.—( Hear.) He should have written to the Bolrd of Guardians, stating what he had heard, and requesting to know from them whether there was any foundation for it.—( Hear.) Had he written to the Board of Guardians, he would have found that, notwith standing the vestry minute, no parochial relief had been re fused to bastard children in 1834. Were the circumstances such as stated by the Hon. Member, he (Mr. Lambton), re siding as he did within a few miles of Sunderland, and being in communication with all classes, must have heard something on the subject.—( Hear.) But, so far from any such rumours being in existence, he had never heard of them, nor did they make against him at the late election, though he was known to be favourable to the new Poor-law Act. The Hon. Member, however, now backed out of his statement of the " dark ru mours."—( Cries of " Order, order," and " Hear, hear.") Gen tlemen opposite seemed very sensitive and huffy on this point. Why did not the Hon. Gentleman give his authority for the statement respecting the 200 children, or for the dark ru mours 2—( Cheers.) The rumours, it appeared, were in some provincial paper—surely the paper might be named. There could not be that delicacy with respect to a newspaper which actuated the Hon. Gentleman with respect to the writer of this letter.—( Hear, hear.) As the Hon. Gentleman would not give his authority for either the one statement or the other, he (Mr. Lambton) considered him highly culpable for having made them.—( Cries of " Order," and " Hear, hear.") The inhabitants of Sunderland would perceive that the House did not credit either the statement or the rumours, and they would have no other effect than throwing ridicule or censure on the Hon. Member.—(Cries of " Order, order," and " Hear, hear.") Mr. ING HAM deprecated any attempts at throwing un merited odium on the Poor-law Amendment Act. After a few words from Mr. Alderman THOMP.FON and Mr. WILBERFORCE, Lord J. RUSSELL said that, whatever might be the merits or defects of the Act, it was sot fair in parts of the country where its introduction was looked forward to with so much excitement and alarm, that statements so exaggerated and so calculated to increase and swell the alarm should be nightly made in that House upon such slight inquiry and with so little foundation.—(Ministerial cheers.) Ile admitted the candour of the Hon. Gentleman, but it was hard that, putting forward such a rumour, a gentleman so influential, and representing such a respectable constituency as he did, would withhold his authority, and thereby give that rumour the sanction of his name.—( Hear, hear.) He hoped there sult of the discussion woul•l make the Hon. Gentleman more cautious in future not to make such catements without full inquiry. Mr. LIDDELL did not think it fair of the lion. Member opposite (Mr. Lambton) to allude to a speech he did not hear, more especially when he ( Mr. Liddell) complained of having been misreported.--( Hear. ) Mr. LAMBTON admitted that he was not in the House on the occasion referred to, as he understood the debate was not expected to come on. Mr. HUME contended that the explanation of the lion. Member for North Durham was not sufficient. He had re ceived a letter from the Chairman of the Board of Guardians, requesting that he would endeavour to remove the impression made by the Hon. Member. It was true the Hon. Member for North Durham admitted that he did not make the state ment with respect to the two hundred bastard children of his own knowledge; but he said he was fortified in the fact by a gentleman better acquainted with the state of affairs in Sun derland than anybody else. Now, after what had occurred, where was the candour of the Honourable Gentleman in with holding the name of his informant ?—( Hear.) Unless that were given, the House would be warranted in drawing its own csnclusions as to the matter, and the lion. Gentleman would not do well if he did not produce his authority.—( Ministerial cheer:.) Ten days had elapsed and neither the statements or rumours had been corroborated, though there was a suffi ciency of time. This was the mariner in which all the alleged cases of cruelty under the Poor-law Act ended. They all failed, when traced to the source.—(Ministerial cheering.) What was the result of these vague and unsubstantial ru mours? A letter bad been sent to the Chairman of the Union, threatening that if the Act should be brought into force there his property would be burned, and that not even his life would be safe.—( Ministerial cheers.) What was it which created the excitement at Bradford and other places but such ill-con sidered and erroneous statements ?—( Cheers.) The expla nation given to the House was anything but sati , factory. There were only 142 bastard children in the whole Union, and as the vestry resolution only applied to one of the three parishes, it could include only 50 or 60. So much for the gross ignorance of that authority which knew more of Sun derland than anybody else. Mr. LIDDELL said, with respect to the facts of the case he would move for the production of the vestry books, and they would show whether any and what number of children received relief after December, 1834. Mr. A. WHITE said, if the Hon. Member did not give up the author, he thought the House and the country would be justified in the assumption that he was himself the author. After a few words from Mr. G. F. YOUNG, the question was put and carried. EDUCATION OF THE POOR. Mr. GOULBURN rose to move for leave to enlarge the number of the Committee appointed to consider of the educa tion of the poorer classes in great towns in England and Wales, by the addition of the names of Mr. Pusey, Mr. Gladstone, and Mr. Acland. The Gentlemen whose names lie proposed to add were perfectly unexceptionable, and pos sessed peculiar claims. On the question being put, Mr. P. THOMSON thought the proposal of the Right lion. Gentleman was objectionable, inasmuch as it deviated from the rule laid down that the Committee should be com posed of the Members for large towns. If this principle could be got over he had no objection to other Hon. Mem bers serving, and would offer his own name as a sacrifice. Ws name might be struck off, and one of the names proposed be substituted. Mr. WAKLEY thought the Committee ill-constructed, and he thought also that 24 hours should be given after the nomination of a Committee, for the purpose of affording the House an opportunity of a scrutiny as to the parties selected. Sir R. PEEL said that what had taken place only con firmed him in the opinion he had expressed the other night of the policy of giving a short notice of the names of those who were appointed to Committees. The appointment of Commit tees as at present regulated was likely to produce the impres sion that they were a sort of patronage exercised on the part of the Government. He did not think the question before this particular Committee partook at all of a party chtracter, but be thought they would be greatly mistaken if they argued from such a circumstance that it was one in which the country took no interest. He therefore thought that the only remedy against such inconveniences would be to inform the House be forehand by a short notice, of who it was that they proposed to constitute the Committee, so that the House and the public might be informed of the sort of tribunal before which the ques tion was to be judged. After a few words from Mr. S. O'BRIEN, Captain Woon, sad Mr. HAwEs, Mr. HLTME would cm Monday or Tuesday—he thought Tuesday would be the snore coavenient day—move a resolution that the lames on Committees should be submitted to the House before the Committee was appointed. Mr. HARVEY agreed with the suggestion that the names of a Committee should be mentioned beforehand ; but he should be sorry if the House fell into the opposite error of at tempting the balancing of parties. Sir R. H. INGLIS, with respect to the general question, thought it one of great importance, and should suggest that it would be advisable that each Member individually should affix his name to the Report that he approved. Mr. GOULBURN said that, as there appeared a great disposition to accommodate, he should, with leave, withdraw his original motion. Leave was given for the withdrawal, and it was then under stood that Mr. Gladstone (the Member for Newark), and Mr. Acland (for Berkshire), should be substituted fur Mr. P. Thomson and Mr. Hawes. Mr. BROTHERTON sail that the Committee had no , now any of the Members for Lancashire upon it, nor of Mid• dlesex. The SPEAKER said that it would be advisable en all oc casions of nominating a Committee that Hon. Members should ascertain previously whether the Honourable Members named were willing to serve. EXPENSES AT ELECTIONS. Mr. HUME rose to ask for leave to bring in a Bill to de fine and regulate the lawful expenses at elections of Members to serve in Parliament for England a'id Wales. The Bill was founded on the Report of a Committee appointed to exam ine into the expenses of contested e l ec ti ons . One of the principal points with which it dealt was the expense r,nd conveyance of returns, and by its provisions, if adopted, returns would be transferred through the post, in place of the irregular manner in which they were now conveyed, while the necessity of hav ing them on a 41. or 51. stamp, which existed at present, would be obviated. But the principle of the Bill nas to transfer the expenses of the erection of booths and others of that nature from the candidates to the counties. It was his (Mr. Hume's) belief that if the counties had to provide these matters at their own expense, they would be done at considerably less than half the cost they were performed for at the expense of the candidates. In Middlesex , for instance, the cost of erect in g booths at a contested e lection was n ever less than six hundred pounds, whereas, if the county had to pay for it, one-third of that sum would be found quite sufficient. Colonel SIBTH ORP had watched the course of proceed ing adopted by the Hon. Member for Kilkenny in regard to the question involved in his Bill during the last Parliament. He (Colonel Sibthorp) was not one of those who agreed with the Hon. Gent'eman in the proposition that the candidate should be wholly absolved from expense in election, and he should therefore look closely at the Hon. Member's project. Whoever was opposed to it, he ( Colonel Sibthorp) should only say that he would always prosecu'e a course of liberal treat ment—(La ighter)—to his constituents. The Hon. and Gal lant Member then inquired what course the Hon. Member meant to pursue with regard to his measure, if introduced, and when he intended to propose a second reading? Mr. HUME wished the Bill to be brought in and printed, to give Honourable Members an opportunity of exa mining its details during the recess. On the third Wednes day in February he should move its second reading. He de sired to add, that the clause in the original Bill against " treat ing" was expunged from the Bill before the House, because it had been embodied in a Bill of the Hon. Member for Brad ford, who knew so much more of the subject to which it re ferred, that he ( Mr. Hume) was glad to have it taken off his shoulders. Sir R. PEEL—There is one part of the Bill to which I think the attention of the House should be specially called. I mean that which goes to the effect of relieving candidates from the expense of erecting booths, and transfers that cost to the counties. Of course the authorities on whom the burthen would be thrown by the Honourable Gentleman's Bill would be anxious to economize as much as possible ; and, under these circumstances, it was not at all unlikely that the accom modation provided by them in that point would be insufficient for the constituency. The poll could not, therefore, be taken in the time prescribed by the Act of Parliament, and thus many persons might lose their right of franchise by having no opportunity to poll. That is one of the evils to be apprehended from that part of the Honourable Gen tleman's measure. But there is another still greater in question—one which involves, perhaps, the impartial return of the candidate himself. Suppose, for instance, and it is no improbable supposition, that the authorities are in the interest of one of the candidates. There is a most useful provision in the Reform Bill, which enacts that if there be any fear of in timidation or disturbance, the candidate whom it is likely to affect can erect a booth wherever he pleases, provided he does it at his own expense, thus giving him the power of removing the polling place out of the influence of the inti midation or disturbance threatened. Now, the Hon. Mem ber's Bill obviates that provision by vesting the power of erecting booths solely in the authorities, and, to bring the matter to an issue, suppose that the authorities arc favourable to one candidate, what may be the possible result ? Why, they can, indirectly, by means of this power, influence the election, and place the return of the adverse candidate in jeopardy, or, indeed, altogether out of the question. The Reform Bill, as it stands, is very well in that respect, and does not need any alteration. Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. COUNTY RATES. Mr. HUME moved forleavo to bring in a Bill "to establish councili for the better management of county rates in England and Wales." The Hon. Member said that, like the former mea sure, it had been before the House in the past Parliament ; but it had not, he regretted to say, had fair play shown it—it was turned out. The principle of the Bill was involved in the solution of the question whether the ratepayers of counties had a right to be placed in the same position as regarded the assessment of taxes, their appropriation and expenditure, as the ratepayers in boroughs and corporate towns. The objectionable clause wa: that which interfered with the function of Magistrates in financial matters, transferring their power in that respect to the county council, and that clause being the principle of the 13111, was retained in the Bill then before the House to the same extent as in the original measure. The controul of the police force, as part of the expenditure, would be also vested in the county council. The details of the Bill were too nu merous to be entered into at greater length ; and he, there fore, hoped that the House would permit it to be brought in, for the purpose of being printed and put into the hands of Hon. Members during the recess. It was in all respects es sentially the same as the measure of the last session. Mr. A GLIONBY seconded the motion. Colonel WOOD said that the Bill of last year was rejected by a large majority of Hon. Members on both sides of the House, on the strength of a report made by the County-rate Committee about two Years since, and in the consideration of the present measure d'uring the recess, he (Colonel Wood) hoped the same report would be taken in connection with it. If the Hon. Gentleman did not amend it, in conformity with that report, it would meet the same fate as the former Bill. Lord J. RUSSELL did not intend to oppose the Bill in that stage ; but, at the same time, he was sorry to find that the Hon. Member had made it similar to that of last year. The principle of the measure he (Lord J. Russell) did not mean to oppose, as far as it gave the ratepayer a control over the expenditure of the rates ; for if the increase in county rates since 1790 were looked at, in connection with the increase of the poor-rates for the last four or five years, it would seem only fair and just that such right should be given to those who bore the burden. The Hon. Gentleman, how ever, had not acted wisely in introducing so many provisions unconnected with the principle of control into his Bill. In the Bill of the Hon. Member introduced last year, though there was nothing definite, there was still sufficient chalked out to give the county council the means of making a largo and expensive establishment. That was to be averted in any Bill on the subject. With regard to the judicial functions of the magistrates involved in the Honourable Member's measure, he (Lord J. Russell) was of opinion that that should be a distinct and separate question. If, under these circum stances, the Honourable Member persisted in introducing and carrying it through the House in its present form, he (Lord John Russell) would feel it to be his duty—the duty of the Government—to act as he had stated—that is, to take up the matter himself, and introduce another measure on the subject. The country, however, and the House, were indebted to the Honourable Gentleman, who had done good service to the public by bringing the matter before them; and he ( Lord J. Russell) was only sorry that he could not go all the length he went in his measare. But if the Honourable Member did not modify it so as to suit his views he ( Lord J. Russ-11) should take an early opportunity of bringing in a simpler measure with the same object. Colonel SI BTHO RP wished to know the course proposed to be pursued by the Honourable Member in regard of the Bill under consideration, and when he would move its second reading? Mr. A G LIONB Y fully concurred in the principle of the Bill, and undertook to prove that the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) doing the same, on his own admission, could not fairly object to any of its details. Mr. SANFORD thought that a simpler machinery than that proposed by the Honourable Member would be sufficient for the purpose ; and that perhaps the machinery of the Board of Guardians would be found the most effective. Some system which would give the rate-payers a controul over their own funds was much wanting in the country. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose to call the attention of the House to his motion on the state of the fund appropriated for the payment of the West India slave claims, and to propose the substitution of another species of stock as preferable for that purpose. Sergeant JACKSON moved for the return of all rewards offered by proclamation of the Lord-Lieutenant or Lords- Justices of Ireland, for the discovery of the perpetrators of murders and other outrages from the Ist of January, 1836, to the 12th of December, 1837 ; with the dates of the proclama tions, and distinguishing which of such rewards (if any) have been claimed and paid by the Irish Government, in consequence of information given pursuant to such proclamations ; and for the return of all crimes and outrages reported by the stipen diary magistrates and officers of police in Ireland to the In spector-General of Police, or to the Irish Government, as having been perpetrated in their respective districts from the Ist of January, 1836, to the 12th of December, 1837, distin guishing such crimes and outrages as were contained in the usual monthly reports, and such as were specially reported. QUEEN'S MESSAGE. The SPEAKER then left the chair, and the House went into a Committee on the Queen's Message respecting the grant to her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose to bring the subject before the House, which he did with the greater pleasure from the conviction he felt that all sides were disposed to entertain it favourably. He stated that in the last Parliament a question was put to the Government by the 'Member for Bristol, if it was their intention to make any ad ditional provision for her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent? He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) said no, but now he felt that the proper time had arrived, and accordingly he proceeded to propose such a measure, while the Civil List was yet under consideration, to which the subject might be said properly to belong. He hoped that the proposition would not only receive the approval of both Houses but of the people. through all classes of whom he was well aware the deepest feelings of respect and attachment prevailed for her Royal Highness, both for her own amiable and exemplary qualities, and for the admirable mode in which she had fulfilled her high and important trust in the education of the reigning Queen of England.—( Hear, hear.) Too much could not be said of the unremitting and zealous attention which she de voted to the education of that child, the happy results of which they all appreciated and gratefully acknowledged ( Hear, hear.) The marriage of the Duke of Kent took place in 1818, an event which met on all sides with the warmest approval. It was approved and promoted both by Lord Liverpool and the Opposition, amongst whom there seemed to be but one feeling of high esteem for the cha racter of the Duke, arid a grant of six thousand pounds a year was voted by way of dowry. Lord Castlereagh at that period made a statement on the subject so able and eloquent, in illustration of the exemplary character of the Royal pair. and their claims on th e countr-y, that nothing lie might say could possibly put th e matter more clearly.—[Here the Honourable C;entleman real an extract from the speech of Lord Castlereagh on the 15th of May, 1518, on the question of the marriage of the Duke, dwelling especially on the well known estimable character of the family with which he was about to be allied. It stated that the lady, then the widowed Prin,cessofLeiningen, would, by her marriage with the Duke of Kent, be d e p r i ve d o f an income of 3,000/. a-year, appi o priated to th e ma i ntenanc e of her children, and of other Sources of income, amounting to 5,0001. a-year.] The Duke at that time was allowed 5,000/. by his father, and had 5,000/. more from his governments of Gibraltar and Canada,which the Parliament augmented at his marriage by 6,000/. more. In 1820 the Duke of Kent died, and the Duchess succeeded to that annuity, but some delay taking place in the payment of it the Duchess would have been destitute if her brother, the King of Belgium, had not allowed her a considerable sum. It was well known that the Duke died embarrassed; his property on the Conti nen t was no t ava ilable, and his Duchess, highly to her credit, aband one d h e r 6,0001. dowry to the benefit of his creditors, pr e ferring the reward of a good conscience to all ceived answers from all of thsin, but would fix Friday, def ni the enjoyments that the employment of her annuity in other tively, for the appointment of the Committee. channels could possibly bestow. From 1820 to 1823 the Du- The House, after the d.sposal of one or two Orders, ad chess of Kent's income was thus absorbed. Indeed, it never journed at a Quarter-past Twelve. could have been adequate to the wants of her position, and so it was felt by all reflecting men, and he doubted whether it was in any degree creditable to the British public that the de ficiency should have been supplied by a foreign King ; but the fact was that the Duchess of Kent would never have been able to maintain her positron in society if King Leopold had not allowed her 3,0031. a-year.—( Hear.) In 1821 this subject was again brought before Parliament, and 6,0001. additional was granted to the Duchess, all parties (as Mr. Canning had stated) agreeing in the grant, in testimony of the exemplary manner in which she devoted herself to the education of her children. In 1831 the subject was again brought forward, under Lord Grey, and Parliament voted an additional annuity of 10,000/. to the Duchess of Kent, in consideration of the in creased care and importance of her charge, arising from the proximity of the Princess Victoria to the throne. Ail these sums made 22,0001., the amount of the annuity to the Duchess of Kent at the present moment—all voted absolutely, and for her own life, with the exception of the grant of 6,000/. for the life of her Majesty, which, however, if the law stands unaltered, must still be paid in annuity to the Duchess of Kent, although she might apply it to some other object. He would therefore in the Bill which lie was about to bring in take care to remove that anomaly. The Duchess of Kent was the first individual who had stood in the position to the Sovereign which she did since the time of Henry VII., without having been either Pi in cess of Wales or Queen Dowager ; in either of which cases she would have been, as a matter of course, largely provided for. In 1814 the Princess Charlotte of Wales was allowed 50,0001. a year; in 1820 the Queen had an allowance of 50,000/. a year. In 1761 Queen Charlotte had a dowry assigned of 60,000/. a year. In 170 the Princess Caroline of Wales had an annuity settled on her of 50,0001. In 1831 the present Queen Dowager was allowed 100,000/, a year. Had the Duchess of Kent been in any parallel position she would al ready have been in possession of a large dowry by anticipation ; but respecting her real income, while superintending the early education of the Queen, she received fifty per cent. of it from her brother instead of the people of England. There was, he thought, great inconsistency in continuing to grant a foreign King 35,0001., and permitting him to pay it back for the sup port of the mother of their future Queen. Knowing their feel ings of respeet and regard for her, he did not anticipate any opposition to the proposition he should now make to the House, that 8,0001. additional annuity should now be allowed to the Duchess of Kent, in consideration of her increased proximity to the Throne, and the additional claims which she had ac quired by her conduct in the capacity of a mother and a guar dian on the gratitude of the people of En,gland.—(Hear.) It might, however, be suggested that she might still reside with the Sovereign, and thereby incur less expense ; but he con tended that such a choice should he left es a matter of free will, of choice, and good feeling, and not laid down as a matter of necessity. Such compulsion would be degrading in every respect to the Sovereign and her mother. The income of the Duchess of Kent had been infinitely less than that enjoyed by the Dukes of York and Clarence. The utmost increase to the public which the proposed augmentation would occasion would be about two thousand pounds a year. He had to apologise to the House for the inadequacy of the manner in which he had represented the claims of her Royal Highness, but he felt that those claims required only a simple statement, as he was sure no difficulties would be urged in opposition. He would, therefore, move that a sum not exceeding 8,000/. be granted from the Consolidated Fund to make an adequate provision for her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent. The Chairman having read the resolution, Mr. HUME said that no one could value more highly than he did the services of her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent in the education of her daughter, and no one could feel greater pleasure at the satisfaction and delight which her Royal Highness must derive from the result of those services. It was with pain he rose upon the present occasion, but the consequences of preceding extravagance showed that they ought to consider well before they set an example. 100,000/. had been granted to the Queen Dowager, and he was sure the country considered this sum profuse and extravagant. He ex pected that the Government would have come down to the House with a proposition to settle upon the Duchess of Kent the income which she was at present in the receipt of ; but he was not prepared to hear a proposition for any additional sum. He was anxious that her Royal Highness, who had so well earned the popularity she possessed, should not be the recipient of one shilling which the country would grudge. He did not think that the iecreased proximity of her Royal Highness to the throne at all required any increase of income. While her Royal Highness had to defray the expense of her daughter 22,0001. a year he considered a limited income ; but now that her Royal Highness was become one of the Royal family he regretted that due consideration was not had to that part of the question. Sir R. INGLIS was happy that the Hun. Member for Kilkenny had not opposed the resolution, for he had not pointed out any specific objection to the grant. He had only stated that it might teed to alienate the affections of the people. Let him not, however, suppose that this point would be misconceived by the country, although it might be by him self. The country owed a debt of gratitude to the Duchess of Kent which no money could. repay. He trusted that, after what had passed, the motion would be adopted unanimously. Colonel SI BT HORP said that he s'lould say a few words upon the present grant, which he felt it his duty to do as a guardian of the money of the people. When he heard of the King of Belgium, he could not think that there was much liberality in granting 3,0001. out of 50,000/. a-year. The Chancellor of the" Exchequer should have brought forward this proposition in a more full House than the present, or he ought to postpone it. Sir F. TRENCH considered that the country owed a debt of gratitude to the Duchess of Kent which no money could pay. This grant ought to be given to her, if only to enable her to continue the benevolent course which she had through life pursued. He wished to ask if her Royal High ness had not incurred debts ?—( Hear, hear.) lie should wish an amendment to be proposed for a sum that would cover those debts in addition to her income. lie knew not if this were the case. He was sure if debts had been incurred they were debts of necessity, and he would vote to have her set perfectly free. An Hen. MEMBER, who said that this was his first essay, observed that if the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman who spoke last was a well-wisher of her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent, he had shown it in a strange way, by alluding to debts of her's, which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had never named in bringing forward the resolution. Her Royal High ness might well exclaim, " Protect me from my friends." Sir R. PEEL said that be thought it would have been more satisfactory and respectful to her Royal Highness if her Ma jesty's Government had introduced the present proposition to the House when they brought forward the Civil List, or if at least they had then stated their intention to propose an in creased income to her Royal Highness. Many Members had left London who would doubtless be anxious to join in the general concurrence on this point. It would have been more satisfactory if an intimation of the increase had been given when the Civil List was brought forward. For himself, he fully assented to the proposition.—( Cheers.) On every occasion on which the name of the Duchess of Kent had come before Parliament, the House had felt that the grati tude of the country was due to her Royal Highness for the manner in which she had devoted herself to the care and education of her daughter.—( Loud cheers.) While the youth and health of the Queen required it, her Royal Highness had devoted herself to retirement and seclu sion—(Cheers)—and when, at a more advanced age, it be came necessary to introduce her Royal charge into society, the Duchess of Kent made no distinction of party, but intro duced her daughter to the leading men of all parties.— ( Cheers.) This was done with the most decorous hospitality; but it might have led to an expenditure beyond the bounds of her Royal Highness's income. Upon this subject, however, he would make no inquiry, nor would he express an opinion. He took it for granted that the. Government had made all ne cessary and proper inquiries, and he did not think that fur ther or minute inquiry ought to be made. There was nothing in the present proposition to startle the House or the country, and he thought it ought to meet the cheerful acquiescence of the House, as it certainly did with his. His respect for her Royal Highness, and the high value he placed upon her services in the education of her Royal daughter, made him heartily rejoice in the hope that the present resolution for an increased grant to her Royal Highness would meet with the marked concurrence and the general and unanimous feeling of the House.—(Cheers.) Lord J. RUSSELL said, that as no objection had been made to the grant, he had but little to say. With respect to not having introduced the proposition with the Civil List, her Majesty's Government did not think it right that this grant should be postponed until after the recess, as the Civil List necessarily must be. He thought there was quite a sufficient number of Members present, and he did not think a more proper time could be selected for the proposition being brought forward. lie thought the mode in which her Royal Highness had attended to the education of her daughter en titled her to the gratitude of the country. It was the wish of her Royal Highness that no grant should be proposed to the House for her use that did not meet with concurrence, and give satisfaction to the House and the country.—( Cheers. ) Sir R. PEEL, in explanation, said that it was not to the time of bringing it forward he had made any objection, but that no intimation of the grant was given on bringing forward the Civil List, which he thought ought to have been done. Mr. C. W. W YNN said that he could not understand how the new position in which her Royal 'Highness was placed as regarded her proximity to the throne demanded any increase of income. Her Royal Highness had at present a larger income than either the Duke of Sussex or the Duchess of Gloucester. He regretted that more opportunity had not been afforded for considering the subject. Sir E. SUGDEN fully concurred in all that had been said in praise of the Duchess of Kent. lie did not rise to oppose the resolution, but they ought to he satisfied as to the terms in which it was drawn up. Was it intended that this annuity should continue in the event of her Majesty's death? That would be the effect of the resolution as it now stood.—(" No," from the Chancellor of the Exchequer.) He ( Sir E. Sugden) was of a different opinion. It appeared to him that a difficulty would arise if a vote wire to be taken only for the 8,000/. This mieht be avoided by voting the 30 000/. in one sum. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER. said ;he difficulty alluded to by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman could not arise. The Resolution was agreed to, and the Re t ort received. The Report of the Civil List Acts was brought up, and agreed to, and a Bill ordered accordingly. THE PENSION LIST. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said there was an Order of the Day for the appointment of a Committee on the Pension List. He had written to some Members now absent from town, to ascertain whether it would be convenient for them to serve on that Committee. fie had not yet re HOUSE OF LORDS.—Dze. 12. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Val ooleack at five o'clock. The Marquis of LANS DOWN E moved the second reading of the Quaker; and Al( ray:ans Relief Bill. Lord BROUGHAM wi;'ied to know whether it was th.s Noble Marquis's intention to propose any extension of the re lief proposed by this Bill? The Marquis of LANSDOWNE could only say that be was not prepared to move for any extension of its clauses. Lord BROUGHAM said the only question was whether the Bill should extend merely to Quakers and Moravians, or whether it should be an Act of toleration going further. The Bill was then read a second time. THE DUCHIES OF CORNWALL AND LAN CASTER. Lord BROUGHAM said that he had now to rise to move for a Return to which—as he understood by a note he had received from the Noble Lord at the head of the Woods and Forests there would be no objections—. namely, fa. a Return of the net Revenues and Receipts of the Duch♦ of Cornwall, fir the years 1832 1833, 1834, 1835, and 1836, distinguishing each year, and the amount of the fines for each o: those years, also distinguishing each year's amount ; and a similar Return for the Duchy of Lancaster. It was evident that the Civil List would have to be regarded as a mere form if the House were to be called upon merely to assent or dissent from it, without having before their Lordships a knowledge of the amount of those revenues. The Duke of WELLINGTON observed that this was a motion for a Return of the amount of revenues which had never been inquired into, by that House before ; therefore, he put it to the Noble and Learned lucid whether such a motion ought to be made without notice. Lord BROUGHAM thought it a pity, a very great pity, that those revenues had not heretofore been enquired into by both Houses of Parliament, and quite as a matter of course when their Lordships were called upon to vest in the Crown certain revenues for the support of its dignity, could anything be more of course than for Parliament to inquire into what the amount of these revenues were, and what application the Crown had for them ? But, if the Noble Duke had any ob jection to the motion being taken in this way, he (Lord B. ) should have no objection to giving notice. The Duke of WELLINGTON submitted that it was usual when amotion of this sort was brought forward, of a novel nature, to give the House notice of it. Lord BRO U G HAM said no doubt the Noble Duke was quite aware of the nature of his motion. It was merely for a return of the net produce of those Duchies. He had strictly confined it to a Return of what monies came to the Crown from those quarters ; and he now gave notice, that he should move ler the Returns on Thursday next. WEST INDIES. Lord BROUG H AM moved for the Return, of the real value of Exports to the West Indies and Mauritius for the last 10 years, up to Janu try 1837, distinguishing the amount of each year. ADDRESS TO HER MAJESTY—THE DUCHESS _ _ _ OF KENT. Upon the Order of the 11. , ..y being read, for taking into con sideration her Majesty's Message to the House, and after the Message was read by the Clerk at the table, Lord MELBOURNE rose and said, he had the honour yesterday to bring down from her Majesty the Queen the Message that had just been read by the Clerk at the table; and he bad now to move that their Lordships take that mea sure into consideration, and that they return a general Ad dress in answer to it, stating their readiness to concur in it, by agreeing to any measure necessary and fitting for carryi❑g the object of it into effect. With re spect to the general objects of that measure he was sanguine enough to suppose there would be but little difficulty in their Lordships agreeing ; he was sanguine enough to hope that the loyalty and affection which their Lordships felt for her Majesty, and the gratitude which they must be anxious to evince to her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent, for the fidelity and success with which she had discharged the important duty which had been imposed upon her—he was sanguine enough to hope that from all those motives combined, upon the present occasion, in order to mark those feelings, some accession would be made by their Lord ships to the income of her Royal Highness, such as became the different station in which she was now placed—an income which, whilst it gave to her Royal Highness the means of supporting her station, would not be in, consistent with the feelings of Parliament. With respect to the subject coming before their Lordships before the measure was brought up to that House originating in another place, it would be unnecessary for him to give any reasons or to enter into any details, either as to the amount or anything con nected with that measure, which would have to be fully en tered into when the measure came to be carried into effect. He trusted that the matter would be so arranged and so pre sented for their Lordships' consideration, that they would all concur in an Address to her Majesty expressive of their readi ness to carry into effect her Majesty's wishes. The Noble Vie count concluded by moving, that an humble A ddress be presented to her Majesty, returning Thanks for her most gracious .Message, and to assure ht r Majesty that that House, always desirous of manifesting its du' y and attachment to her Majesty's person and family, would cheerfully concur in all such measures as would give effect to her Majesty's most gracious Message. The motion having been put from the Woolsack, Lord ELLENBOROUGH thought the Noble Viscount was incorrect in supposing that it was usual to answer a Message like the present without having put the House in possession of tho measures which were to be founded on it. In the ease of the Message which had been sent down to that House relative to the Royal Dukes, Lord Liverpool had stated that be thought . it improper to move an Address:in answer until their Lordships were in possession of the measures to be brought in. Viscount MELBOURNE—In the case of the Message re lative toiler present Majesty when Princess Victoria, which he believed was on the 3d of August, 1831, the course adopted was similar to that which he now proposed. Lord ELLENBOROUGH understood the rule to be that the Message having come down on one day it was to be taken into consideration the next. The question for their Lordships to consider was whether it was not usual to state first what were the measures to be brought in. Viscount MELBOURNE—Certainly not, certainly not. lie might be mistaken, but if they referred to the journals of the House their Lordships would find that such was the ewe. Lord ELLENBOROUGH—The Journals could not be referred to for statements made by any of their Lordships. If the Noble Viscount would take the trouble to look at the book which he held in his hand, he would perceive that Lord Liverpool considered it improper to take such a course. Viscount MELBOURNE would only repeat that the course pursued in 1631 was precisely that which he now sug- Bested. The Duke of WELLING TON thought that there could be no difference of opinion on the subject of the address. His Noble Friend near him had merely referred to what had oscurred on a former occasion, by way of precedent, and to ascertain what was the usual practice. It was quite certain that there was no intention in the mind of any Noble Lord to throw any obstacle in the way of the Address ; and when their Lord ships would recollect the care which her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent had taken of her Royal Daughter, and the advantage which the country had derived from the number of years for which she was left without any provision whatever for the expences attending upon that care, he was con vinced that there was not one Noble Lord in that House who could for a moment doubt of the expediency of at once moving the Address in answer to her Majesty's most gracious Message. With these views, he should certainly support the Address, which seemed to be opposed by no Noble Lords, whether it was according to precedent or not. . Lord ME LBO URNE said that the House was not called on by the motion to vote for any specific grant, nor to say that they would assent to aoy measure which the House of Com mons might think proper to send up to them. They (the Lords) had before them what was done in 1831, on the 3d of August. On that occasion it was stated that there was an inaccuracy in the Message, inasmuch as it was there mentioned what the specific measure was to which their Lordships would afterwards be called upon to assent. On that occasion Lord Grey stated in the strongest terms, that the amount of the grant which might he made in accordance with the Message must be set tled by the other House, and when it came up to their Lord ships, it would he for them to say whether the allowance would be *sufficient, and that was all their Lordships could say as to the details. On that occasion no objection was taken to the course proposed by Lord Grey, and he (Lord Melbourne) had thought th,t it was the ordinary and general course pursued on similar eccasi tns. The House therefore was only called upon to acknowledge the Address, to express its loyalty to the throne and its affection to the Royal House of which her Majesty was the head, together with its readiness to give all consideration to such measures as should come from the other House in compliance with the Message. Lord BROUGHAM begged leave to read the Address again, and see whether the House was about to do anything or nothing. The Noble Lord then read the Address. Ha understood the meaning of the Address to be that it was de sirable to make a provision for her Royal Highness tha Duchess of Kent, to make up for the deficieney of the present income of her Royal Highness, owing to her altered position by the elevation of her Royal Daughter to the throne, whereby her Royal Highness is placed in the rank of Queen- Mother. If the Address went no further than to express the attachment of their Lordships to the family of her Majesty, and their desire in any way possible to contribute to the dignity of the Crown which her Majesty wears, and the comfort of the family to which she belongs, and of which she is the head, nobody could object to an Address meaning no more than this ; for it pledged this House to nothing. But if the Address were taken with the Message to ple(ige this House to concur in whatever mea sure might be sent before it from the other House for an in creased provision for the Duchess of Kent, it was his (Lord B.'s) opinion that their Lordships should pause until they knew the effect of their acquiescence, and what the other House should grant. Lord Grey, in 1831, said that if the grant from the other House was too small their Lordships should not concur in it, And they should also refuge their assent to it. There might be a rivalry in titt , House between parties desirous to outbid each other in the disposal of the income of the public to shew their loyalty, and in that case a proposition ni:ght come up, which probably one or two, and he would not say more than one or two or their Lordships, might think excessive.—( A laugh.) The Address, if carried, pledged the House to whatever was sent up from the other House. Now in his opinion it was necessary that that should be modified. He spoke with great diffidence upon the question—he agreed with the Noble Duke (Wellington). 50(1 he believed that every Member of that House, as well as of the House of Commons, and nearly the whole of the na . io n, joi.ied in every respect and good eishes for the illustrious mother of our respected Queen. Her conduct -111