The Sun. — London, England, 1835-07-17 00:00:00

ing to the :provisions hereinafter contained." Thus it ap peared Wiat the first edition of the Reform Bill reserved the rights of every freeman, and them only • but afterwards that reservation was extended, in the secondedition, to evert inchoate right. The provision was afterwards again altered in Committee, but not for the purpose of restricting the rights of freemen, but, on the contrary, for the purpose of further extending them, for, in the third edition, the reser vation was gallantly extended to the fair sex, as it was pro vided that " every person who shall hereafter marry the wi dow or daughter of a freeman in any city or borough where the right of becoming a burgess or freeman, and of voting in the election for such city or borough is acquired by marriage, such widows or daughters having been born previously to the passing of this Act, shall thereby acquire a right of franchise." That Bill was sent to the House of Lords on the 22d of Sep tember, 1831, and rejected by their Lordships ; but the Noble Lord, in December of that year, introduced a new Bill, in which there was a clause which, in introducing it, the Noble Lord himself said he thought would give general satisfaction. The clause reserved all the rights of freemen in perpetuity, but excepted from the exercise of the franchise all honorary and non-resident freemen, and all those who obtained their freedom subsequent to 1831. Now, did not the whole of these proceedings give a finality to this provision cf the Act that could not now be separated from it ?—( Cheers)—for if the provision was merely meant to be temporary, why except ho norary and non-resident freemen, and those freemen who were not admitted to the freedom until after a certain day in 1831 ? Did the Noble Lord not intend, when this provision was in troduced, that the right should be perpetual? and were not those exceptions meant as a security against bribery and cor ruption ?—(Hear.) He (Sir R. Peel) could not help saying that it did tend to destroy the confidence which the country entertained, that a final settlement of the elective franchise had been made, when it was found that the Noble Lord was a party to doing away with rights which had for a long time belonged to the class of freemen by prescription, and which had so r ecent l y b een conf i rmed to them by a measure intro duced by the Noble Lord himself.—( Hear, hear.) As far as the argument rested upon the final settlement of the elective franchise by the Reform Bill it was conclusive—(Hear, hear) --and he would add, that it did shake the confidence which the country should feel in the settlement made by the second charter of the liberties of the nation—(Cheers)—whe n it was found that it was about to be altered in so essential a particular. The Noble Lord had spoken of the Hon. and Learned Member who introduced the amendment making a show of feeling and great sympathy for the poor in wishing to preserve the rights of the freemen. He (Sir R. Peel) did not pretend to any such sympathy ; and he had no hesitation in telling his Hon. Friend, that if he persisted in bringing forward the amendment of which be gave notice, to allow every man who should be on the burgess -roll for the time being to have a right to vote at the election of Members of Parliament, he (Sir R. Peel) would decidedly had said oppos e it.—( H ear , h ear .) Th e N o bl e L ord that the freemen had been guilty of great and extensive bri bery. If that was the ground upon which they were to be de prived of their rights, the matter ought to be plainly and openly investigated, and it should be proved that they were guilty; but it was not fair that, upon a general declaration made by the Noble Lord, or any other Member, and without the sha dow of proof, that their rights should be destroyed, and that without any express declaration to show the reason for their being so destroyed.—( Hear, hear.) It had been proved that corruption was not confined to the freemen.—( Hear.) In the case of Stafford, it was proved that the 101. householders had been as guilty o f b r ib ery and corruption as the freemen had en. His Hon. and Learned Friend had said, Stafford was the only bor oug h i n w hi ch br i bery among the householders bad been proved, but that was not the case. It had been P ro ved bef ore a C omm i ttee of the House, that at the elec ti the 10on for Live r p oo l i n 1830, extens i ve b r ib ery took place among /. householders. It might indeed be said that the free men had been also bribed, but was the bribery confined to the irieerneo; and wh o b r ib e d th em ?--(Cheers.) The Ri g ht Hon. Baronet then read an extract from the evidence of . r ' W. Myers, who stated that he was a merchant in Liver !)o3ol, and had been employed at the election. He was deno minated a treasurer, and was employed by Mr. Ewart's Com .eatudtee•--(A laugh.) Hi s b us i ness was to di sperse money r ° II the electors. He had paid money to persons in re able ranks of soc i e ty. .50/. was the high es t p r i ce p a id aeriL'ot,e: It was paid to a retired brewe r . A p erson w h o de satisfied himself as a ca pt ain of militia got 351., b u t not b e i ng it 'Led, he came back and got 101. more.—( A laugh.) Three s e e , ll of the name o f H oward, who were very respectable, got pi each, A ship-carpenter, who was very respectable, got , 12 . 1., but then he came very early to the poll. He kept "gat the middling classes got most money because they ti ° ff. He could give no idea of the total expense of _t.! election, because there were several other treasurers; i l at he knew that the sum which passed through his own ends was about 34,000/.—(Cheers and laughterr) Thus it 4.l.P..Reared that more than the freemen received bribes. He ofitting Peel) thought it very probable that the lower classes freemen did participate in this system of bribery, but ad that to be the case, it was quite clear that the higher Cla sses participated also, and their crime was more aggravated ""eY had not the same temptations.—( Hear, bear.) This showed that it was not fair to disfranchise the freemen for a crime of which they were not the only persons guilty, and that e TAtild say without any pretended topsmathy with the poor. 13- Besides which, if the freemen were be deprived of their rights as a penalty for their corruption, the penalty ought not to.. att ach to th em t ill t h ere was direct proof of their guilt.— . r . e wished to say one word on the general subject of the exten sion of th e f ranchise. He was averse to extending the fran chise,,i, bec ause he thought it tended to unsettle men's minds. with respect to the general principle, he did not intend to °PPose the -new franchise, nor would he have been prepared to pr opose the franchise of freemen if it were not already in .)._cistence, but finding that it was so h e was for maintaining it. He was for having one general system of voting through out the coun t ry , b ut there was no necessity ° for pursu ing the course proposed. He admitted, however, that he should be sorry to see this right of voting extended to every town. Not content with the 101. franchise, the Noble Lord proposed a much more extensive class of voters. The Noble Lord, therefore, must be perfectly assured that the holders of the 101. qualification were perfectly capable of exercising their right. He, however, was by no means satisfied that the hold ers of such qualification were a better class of persons to be intrusted with the franchise than those who had faithf u ll y served a s even y ears ' apprent i ces hi p. The Noble Lord, however, now proposed a much more extensive right of suffrage than that which be gave by the Reform Bill, namely, that a man not di rect l y connected with the borough, provided he had paid rates for three years—and those rates might even be paid by the landlord—could vote for the Council of the town. The Noble Lord, however, said that a man neither by birth nor servitude should be entitled to the right of voting, He tho ug h t t h at a man w h o h ad served seven years gave as . good a test of upright conduct and capability of properly ex ercising the elective franchise as paying three years' rates for a small tenement.—(Hear,) He was satisfied that the for mer was a much better test than the latter. Therefore seeing the right established, and not objecting, under the circum llancesr to ha v i ng a different right from the comm on e l ectoral right, he saw no objection to the proposition. He repeated, he was quite ready to punish freemen if it were br oug h t h ome to them that they had abused the franchise ; but he thought that otherwise, under the present circumstances, it would be unfair to deprive them of their privileges • and above all, be should do so because it would lead to the belief that the Reform Bill was not a final settlement of the franchise.—(Cheers.) On these grounds, ther e f o re, he should vote for preserving th e rights of the freemen.—( Loud cheers.) Captain BERKELEY had no doubt that he should be taunted with voting for the amendment for some electioneering purpose, but he could assure the House that the only reason that would i n d uce him to pursue the course he intended was, at he thought the claims of the freemen were founded in ju3tic e. --- -( Loud cries of " Question.") A. TREVOR observed that the speech of the Right um. Baronet would go forth to the country as a certain proof h of e .. t ?e flagrant ignoran - ce of the Noble Lord.—( Cries of Hear, fre 'r.) He was returned to that House by a large body of year: t o L ere i e R n7 - (" Hear, hear," and cheers)—and he would appeal he ig ( li s t i H r on and Gallant Friend whether, durine the ten Durl l Henry Hardinge) had represented the city of i• am, he had not found the freemen of it a most intel btenft and. upright body of men, and who were utterly incap.a sO being bribed. —( Loud cries of Oh, o h.") [The noise and confusion became so great that we were incapable of hear s'neg a single sentence that fell from the Hon. Gentleman for .overal minutes. Mr Fector and Mr. Hughes Hughes rose I order, and stated if . silence were not procured they would Irt.o_ve.the adjournment of the House. At length partial silence tenobtained.] We understood the Hon. Gentleman to con leur that the Noble Lord in this measure proposed to ride o nthi t n he rights of industrious and upright men against whom t a had been proved, in a manner which was disgraceful Ile Minister. The Government pretended to be friends of p res rt i , and had b roug h t f orward a measure of the most op ti:lre and unc a ll e d f or c h aracter—indeed not to be equalled dent (: :a nnal s of Parliament. If they would establish a prece -their Ybbin g poor men of their rights, which would justify wh ets ln king away those of rich men next year, who could tell bu s , u s er the precedent might not affect the noble house of Wo- Vir'.---,..(Lud cries of Oh !") th e nu _u• P. THOMSON had heard no new argument, since d Ol 4 l F'tion had been last discussed, against the principle laid 13 a ,. 0 the Bill, notw i thstanding the speech the Right Hon. net had addressed to the House.( Cries of " Oh !" and Rigltarr hear.") Th ere was nothing in the speech of the bench es ll°n Gentleman—( L ou d c h eers from the Opposition th e , respo n d e d to b y cheering from the Ministerial side of tre nd. enso)—which had made the slightest impression on his caged his Th e Ri g h t H on. Baronet bad ac try ; 0 1 1 118 Noble Friend of ind u l g i ng i n i ngen i ous sophis a maste r e R ight lion. Baronet, h owever , h a d prove d h i mself Cully ao e —(Loud cheers)—for he had care }louse, stained from touching on the r i g ht s b e f ore t h e tremarks Right Hon. Baronet had indulged largely one! B aronet otouching our existing rights. The Right Men were to be Ile allowed in ad dwelt on the fact, that the rights of free eirn to enter tehtreserved under the Reform but not to Bill. On that point it was unnecessary for (Loud cheers into „ contest with the Right Hon. Baronet.— t e u e u ss t a t s iirefo •s from the Opposition benches.) It was unne r him to do o, because he conceded to the full ex tent osergument ; but he contended that the point did not Right the case before the House.--( Hear, hear.) The Wheth er °n• Baro net h a d dwelt at great length on the fact, andvvit2iTe not the freemen had exercised their rights well, vt°ii.'O r r they were or were not exposed to corruption.-- pr_ e a ) If he were inclined to argue with the, Right M oss arenet, he thought that there would be no difficulty in eri t h'",:lg that he was in the wrong.—(Hear.) He differed tS at Right Hon. Gentleman on another point, and thought tili . t hey' were to remedy any defeas in the Reform rim„:--(e_heers.) They were at liberty also to apply pc ...)4o"wes,_,,here punishment was required ; but he denied that s" lllo,l t4lsgs under this Bill, the suffrage to freemen, .....,...,... being, w hich of the Lro uble should was alpenalty. He contended that Lit stood upon: other grounds; and in the view:taken of it by the Right Hon. Baronet, he did not touch on its merits.—( Hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet did not touch much on the general policy of the measure ; but he seemed to say that the Govern ment intended to deprive the freemen of the rights they now enjoyed; and they wished to do this by a side wind.—(Loud cheers.) He ( Mr. Thomson) would say to those who main tained this argument, that. if this proposition were carried they would be establishing a new right of voting, which had hitherto been unknown.—( Cheers, and cries of " No, no I") He said unknown, because the freemen voted under corporate rights ; and (as we understood the Right Hon. Gentleman) the rights created under this Bill were essentially different, and the free men were inconsistent with them. They proposed to treat new corporations, and to give corporate privileges to other classes than those who now held them—to select those best able to exercise these rights, and to withhold the suffrage from those who did not appear fit to be entrusted with it. They proposed to establish a new class of rights in the country— a corporate right different from the ordinary corporate rip ht (The Right Hon. Gentleman proceeded to make some further observations which were inaudible in the gallery.) Lord F. EGERTON agreed with his Right Hon. Friend in thinking that the Noble Lord had resorted to sophistries unworthy of the leader of a great party in that House. With regard to the observations of the Right Hon. Gentleman who had just addressed the House, that it would be absurd to give the power of electing Members of Parliament to those who were excluded from a voice in the election of corporate officers, he (Lord F. Egerton) would only say that in many in stances freemen had exercised the former right when they had not exercised the latter. He had not been in the House when the Reform Bill was passing, but he cer tainly entertained a better opinion of the Honourable Gen tleman opposite than the Right Honourable Baronet the Member for Tamworth appeared to entertain, when he pro phesied they would so soon violate the understanding with regard to the finality of that Bill. The Noble Lord (Althorp) who then led that House said " Thus far shall we go but no further," and he (Lord F. Egerton) little expected to see a member of the same Government take the earliest opportu nity of endeavouring to defeat by a side wind that which, at the passing of the Reform Bill, they induced the House to believe was intended to be perpetual.—( Cheers.) He could not conceive a greater violation of consistency than was in stanced in such a proceeding. Mr. WARD observed that the monotony of the argument resorted to on the other side of the House was exceedingly singular. He regretted the necessity for interfering with the rights of any class of freemen, but he was afraid that the necessity did exist for doing so in the present case. Let Hon. Members refer to the report on the Corporations of Ipswich, of Norwich, of Cambridge and others, which he had not. time to enumerate, and they would find there the most convincing arguments to induce them to discontinue the use of the elective franchise to a certain class of freemen, who, it was proved, had suffered gross demoralization through its exercise.—( Oh, oh.) He would ask whether Hon. Members had read the reports he referred to, and, if so, whether they did not consider this bear ing ?—(No.) " But I do," continued the Hon. Member. He maintained that those Reports exhibited a most complete system of corruption and demoralization. But that was not the only argument. They were not to take away their fran chises without giving something in exchaege.—( Loud cries of " Question," during which the Hon. Member in vain endea voured to be heard.) He maintained that expediency was the only thing they had to do with. It was upon that principle that the forty-shilling freeholders of Ireland had been disfran chised by the Emancipation Act. Mr. H. HUGHES rose amidst violent expressions of im patience. We understood him to refer, first, to the case of Ipswich, in which he maintained that, so far from a gross system of demoralization having existed, only six cases of corruption of freemen had been proved before the late Com mittee.—( Loud and increasing sounds of impatience.) The inconsistency of Hon. Members opposite was not confined to isolated instances. Many of those Hon. Gentlemen came into the House upon their reputation for liberal opinions, and their avowals in favour of universal suffrage ; yet those were the very gentlemen who now came forward to disfranchise a large part of the constituency which already existed.— ( Cheers, and loud cries of " Oh, oh.") He would now refer to the title of the Bill. What was it but " for the better regulation of municipal corporations ;" that said not a word of the robbery of franchise.—(" Oh, oh," and tremen dous confusion.) Then let them look at the preamble, it only provided for the local government of the corporations ; nothing was said in that about the wholesale annihilation of freemen's rights, which, in the city of Oxford, for instance, would reduce one-half of the freemen constituency.—("Ques tion, question," " Oh, oh," and ironical cheering.) Mr. POULTER rose, but was assailed with impetuous shouts of " Oh, oh," " Question, question," &c. The Hon. Member, who held a paper in his hand, in vain endeavoured, by gesticulation and appeal to the Hon. Members in his im mediate neighbourhood, to obtain a hearing. The most con fused sounds, mysteriously blended, issued from all corners of the House. One Hon. Member near the bar repeatedly called out " Read" in an exceedingly bass and hoarse sound, not tone, of voice. At repeated intervals a sort of drone like humming, having almost the sound of a distant hand organ or bagpipes, issued from the back benches—coughing, sneezing, and ingeniously-extended yawning, blended with the other sounds, produced a tout-ensemble which we have never heard excelled in this House. This scene lasted abou ten minutes or a quarter of an hour, and terminated in hearty cheering as the Hon. Member resumed his seat. Mr. HARDY rose. The united voices of the House, though somewhat exerted by prolonged exertion, were raised against him. The same sounds we have just described were renewed, with some others which we should be at a loss to describe. After some minutes of passive resistance the Hon, Member sat down, and order was obtained. The numbers were— For the Amendment Against it 262 _ _ Majority against the Amendment 2B The Committee then divided— For the original clause For the amendment 234 Majority for the original clause 2B The Hon. J. G. PONSONBY then moved, pursuant to notice, as a proviso, that the children of all freemen born be fore the sth of June, 1835, and also all apprentices in boroughs, shall have and enjoy all the rights and privileges to which they would have been entitled but for this Bill, excepting the right to vote for Members of Parliament. The few observations of the Hon. Member in support of his motion, were inaudible in the gallery. Lord J. RUSSELL said a few words, but in too low a tone of voice to reach the gallery. The Noble Lord was under stood to oppose the amendment, on the same grounds as he had opposed the previous amendment of Mr. Praed. Mr. PHILIP HOWARD supported the amendment. He thought that apprentices in boroughs had a clear vested right in the enjoyment of those privileges which their forefathers had possessed, and that the House ought not to disfranchise them. He was of opinion also that the amendment ought to be adopted upon that principle of uniformity which ought to be dear to every Reformer. Cord SA NDON looked upon the clause in the Bill to which these amendments referred as an anomaly. It was not con sistent with either the principle or general provisions of the Bill ; and when, therefore, the Noble Lord (Lord John Rus sell) talked of not going out of his way to favour the class of freemen, in order to be true to his own doctrine he ought to agree to the amendment proposed, the effect of which would be, to confine the measure strictly within its own limits, in stead of permitting a departure from its objects, in an attack upon the rights of the freemen. The Noble Lord, by this par ticular provision of his Bill, went out of his way to make an alteration in the Reform Bill. This had been so fully argued, that he need not again go over the ground. The class of ap prentices had inchoate rights which, he contended, that House was bound to respect and uphold ; and he sincerely hoped that his Noble Friend, although he had negatived the previous amendment of the Hon. Member for Yarmouth, would accede to the alteration proposed by one of his own supporters. Lord JOHN RUSSELL maintained that the interference with the privileges of freemen referred to by his Noble Friend who had just sat down, was strictly in accordance with the principle of the Municipal Reform Bill. _ The clause in ques- tion was necessary to secure the due working of that measure, and it could not therefore be said with justice, that its inser tion was a departure from the principle of it. Mr. AGLIONBY could not allow his Hon. Friends on that side of the House, nor the Noble Lord on the other ( Lord Sandon) to stand alone before the country as cham pions of freemen's rights and privileges. Let them but show him that the class to whom this clause referred possessed any just rights, any rights that they had exercised for the benefit of the people, for whom alone such rights were conferred, and he for one would be quite as ready to step forward in their defence as either of his Hon. Friends or the Noble Lord.— ( Hear, hear.) They had utterly failed, however, in making out any such case. They had not pointed out one right en joyed by the freemen in the exercise of which it could be said the public benefit had been consulted. He was afraid that his name might not appear in that black and red list which he saw in the hands of Hon. Gentlemen, and which he presumed was for publication to-morrow morning. He thought there would be a publication—he had seen symptoms of separation for something of the kind; and fearing that his name might not be in the black list, he came forward to claim his share of the unpopularity of the vote just given with his Majesty's Government. He honoured the Government for their whole conduct with reference to the Bill. He would not, therefore, leave them to be held up by their opponents to the whole country as the enemies of poor men's privileges, which he well knew to be the object of the parties whom he had ob served so busy with the red and black list.—(Cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman had proceeded to read from a paper which appeared to be one of the lists be had adverted to, the follow ing- passage :—" The freemen of England and Wales are to be robbed of their rights—( Cheers from the Opposition benches) —by a majority of the Scotch and Irish Members."—(Re nerved cheers from the Opposition.) Now, he denied that there was a majority of Scotch and Irish Members of that House, but so long as Scotland and Ireland sent Members prepared to advocate such a measure as the present, he cared not what their numbers might be. He had given the House a specimen of the efforts making to bring his Majesty's Govern ment, and the supporters of this measure into disgrace with the country.—( Hear, hear.) He had not, however, read all the incitements put forth upon the occasion. He would not state from what part of the country the following came, further than that it was where freemen prevailed ; but it was of a piece with what he had already read. The Hon. Gentleman read as follows :—" Brother freemen ! The real object of this is to de prive us of our rights, and assist the Government to carry those cla.use , , in the Corporation Reform Bill, by which our children are tu be rubbed of their birthrights,"—(Cheerb.) He was , not surprised that these sentiments should meet with the ap plause of the beaches opposite ; but be "should feel obliged to i THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, JULY 17, 1835 • 1 any of those Honourable Gentlemen who joined in the chaos to tell him what were the birthrights of the freemen here spoken of. If they consisted of any thing granted, or held for the good of the people at large, he should be as ready as any one to give his vote in favour of the freemen and their chil dren. But if, as he believed was the case, the rights in ques tion were exercised for the perpetuation of abuses, by which, so far from the people benefiting, the people were actually ground down to the dust—( Cries of " Oh," from the Opposi. tion)—if they were forthcoming for the support of every cor rupt Government, and actively employed against every spe cies of Reform in particular, then he must say that he should be for depriving parties so using powers entrusted to them for the general good, of all such powers and privileges, under whatever name it might be the pleasure of individuals to re cognize them.—(Cheers.) He would next read to the House a paper containing similar sentiments, and coming from the same place.—( Loud cries of " Name," from the Opposition.) He did not think he need name the place ; but, at all events, he would read first. What he was about to read came from a town for the representation of which there was a Whig and Tory candidate, and was stuck up as a placard upon the most conspicuous places. It was to the following effect : " Brother Electors 1 Can you believe it possible that the Whig faction in this city have determined to rob you of every right and privilege which you and your ancestors have always en joyed? Can you, I say, believe it, that our worthy Whig can didate will not be at the expense of a chair; no, he will not even allow you to see his face after the election ! The usual attendance of constables, band of music, chairmen, chair makers, &c., &c., will not therefore, be required. Brother electors I will you, can you, sit down quietly and witness every feeling of decency to be outraged.—( Laughter.) If these are the blessings to be bestowed upon us by the hacknied and misapplied names of reform and purity, then away with them ! and let us at once arouse from the delusive slumber, and have a man who will not profess one thing and mean ano ther; not a man who, under the beautiful garb of purity, takes from us the birth-right of Britons."—( Renewed laughter, and cries of " Name 1" from the Opposition.) The city of York was the quarter from whence the paper came which he had read. In conclusion, the Hon. Member observed, that he should sup port his Majesty's Government in their opposition to the at tempted alteration in the clause relating to freemen, whether his name figured in a red or a black list. Sir M. W. RIDL E Y protested in the name of the whole body of the freemen of this country against the sweeping de nunciation pronounced by the Hon. Member who had just sat down. There had been, undoubtedly, many cases of delin quency on the part of freemen, for which they deserved in dividually to be punished ; but it was most unjust to ascribe collectively to the class the corruptions of a few. The birth rights and privileges of the freemen had descended to th em _ _ From their forefathers—they had been earned and paid fO1l; their labour, and ought to be preserved. The Hon. THOMAS DUNDAS said he was the Mem ber alluded to in the placard read by his Hon. Friend. He bagged to explain that since the passing of the Reform Act he had thought it his duty to preserve the purity of election as much as possible. He had therefore resolved to dispense with the ceremony of chairing, which he looked upon as a means merely of engaging a certain portion of influence in his favour. He had however given, for better purposes, to the town the full amount of the expenses of chairing.—( Hear.) Mr. — LOWTHER thought the House ought not to at tach too much importance to documents of the nature read by the Hon. Member for Cockermouth. Such a document ought not to affect the general character of the freemen of this country. Mr. H UTT said a few words, which were inaudible. Mr. ROEBUCK was also inaudible, owing to the groans from the Opposition by which he was saluted upon rising. Mr. HUGHES HUGHES thought the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell), looking at the last division, and seeing that there was defection in his camp, ought not to oppose the proposed amendment. Mr. GROVE PRICE complained of the interruption of fered to Hon. Members who rose to deliver their sentiments on this important Bill, and said he should move the adjournment of the debate = (Louderies of ‘‘ Oh.")_ Mr. BERNAL called upon Hon. Members to take their places, and preserve order. Mr. HARDY supported the amendment. He contended that the privileges of the freemen were of great value to them, as well in a pecuniary point of view as for the honour attached to the possession of them. He could not consent, without any evidence of the necessity of the case, to the spoliation of these persons. The Committee then divided— For Mr. Ponsonby's amendment 203 Against it Majority 3l The Committee immediately afterwards divided on the mo tion, "that the clause stand part of the Bill." For the motion Against it Majority 69 Mr. LENNARD, after some prefatory observations, which were rendered wholly inaudible by the general confusion and hubbub, moved the addition to the 12th clause of the follow ing words :—_" or who shall espouse the daughter of any free man of any borough, such daughter having been born before the sth day of June." Lord JOHN RUSSELL briefly opposed the amendment. Sir R. ITYVYAN (as we understood) supported it. Colonel SIBTHORP was averse to proceeding further with the Bill at that late hour ; and moved that the Chairman report progress. Lord JOHN RUSSELL remonstrated against the pro position. The Hon. and Gallant Member must be aware that the state of the public business was such as to render it highly expedient to get through this Bill with as little delay as possible. Colonel SIBTHORP said that he was as tired of the Bill as the Noble Lord could possibly be ; but still it ought to be discussed at proper seasons. After a feiv remarks from Sir R. INGLIS, however, Col. Sibthorp withdrew his motion, and the Committee divided on Mr. Lennard's amendment. For the Amendment Against it Majority It was then moved, previous to the re-admission of strangers, " That the Chairman report progress, and ask leave to sit again," upon which the Committee again divided. For the motion Against it Majority --157 The clauses up to 48, were agreed to with a few verbal amendments. The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and the House resumed. Mr. HUME begged to ask the Noble Lord, as the whole of the Bill had not been gone through that night, what course he intended to pursue? Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied that he should move to morrow that the Bill be proceeded with, when he hoped it would be carried through. In that case ho should move that the Report be received on Saturday, and that the third reading be taken on Monday. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at two o'clock. DIVISIONS LAST NIGHT ON THE RE-COMMITMENT OF THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BILL. For Mr. Ponsonby's motion Against it Majority in favour of the Government 3l For Mr. Trevor's motion that the clause do not stand part of the Bill Against it Majority in favour of Government 69 For Mr. Lennard's motion . 50 Against it Majority in favour of Government. _HOUSE OF LORDS, JULY 16. LOAN SOCIETIES. On the motion of the Duke of RICHMOND the Loan Societies Bill was read a third time and passed. Petitions were presented from Orkney, Inverness, and other places in Scotland, in support of the Established Church of Scotland. ST. STEPHEN'S CHAPEL. Lord DUNCANNON laid on the table the report of Sir R. Smirke and other architects, relative to the ruins of St. Stephen's Chapel. be false. The assertion of his (the Bishop of Exeter) was confirmed by the statement in Dens's work to which he had previously referred. He believed he had now said enough to convict this public functionary, of putting forth, if not of holding opinions, which rendered him very unfit to hold the office of a Commissioner of National Instruction. He felt that he was justified in making the charge, and that a prima facie case had been made out against him. If it was found that he (the Bishop of Exeter) was wrong, he would come forward much more cheerfully to retract these charges, than he had made them. The Right Reverend Prelate then presented a petition from a clergyman who had formerly re sided in Ireland, but had been obliged to fly to England in con sequence of the persecutions to which he had been exposed. lie begged to say, with respect to a petition which he had formerly presented from the Reverend Mr. Nangle, of Achil, that the persecution to which the children who attended the Rev. Gentleman's schools had been exposed, had entirely ceased. The Bible which was sent forth in 1816 under the authority of Dr. Murray's predecessor, to whom he believed Dr. Murray then acted as coadjutor, the Douay Bible of 1816, was put forth with notes of the Rhemish translation, and among them was the following :—Deut. xvii. 12.—" He that will be proud, and refuse to obey the commandment of the priest—that man shall die." Another note was—" Here we see what authority God was pleased to give to the Church guides of the Old Testament, in deciding, without appeal, all controversies relating to the law, promising that they should not err therein (and punishing with death such as proudly re fused to obey their decisions) : and surely he has not done less for the Church guides of the New Testament. The good must tolerate the evil, when it is so strong that it cannot be redressed without danger and disturbance of the whole Church ; and commit the matter to God's judgment in the latter day. Otherwise, where ill men (be they heretics or other malefactors) may be punished or suppressed without disturbance and hazard of the good, they may and ought, by public authority, either spiritual or temporal, to be chastised or executed." He should refer only to one more note. Speaking of Pilate's expression-- Matt. xxvii. 24., " I am innocent of the blood of this just man," the note said, " Though Pilate was much more in• nocent than the Jews, &c., yet he is damned for being the minister of the p eo pl e ' s w i c k e d w ill aga i nst his own con science. Even as all officers are, and especially the judges and juries, which execute laws of temporal princes against Catholic men ; for all such are guilty of innocent blood, and are nothing excused by that they execute the laws which are unjust, for they should rather suffer death themselves than put an innocent man to death;" That was the more impor tant to be considered, as one of the questions to be discussed was as to the duty of the judge and jury. Certainly the statements he had now read, were not made on the authority of the Bible. He did not mean to state that this had not been at all reformed, for it had ; but it had been published with the express permission of the Roman Catholic Arch bishop of Dublin. After having vise forth for twelve months, in an expensive large quarto volume, published however in numbers, that the people might be able to purchase it, it was discovered and reviewed in the British Critic, the attention of the people of England was drawn to it, and then one uni versal burst of indignation arose. On that Dr. Troy sent for the printer, and asked him how he could think of publishing the Bible as with his authority, when that authority had not been given, and that the thing had produced prodigious mis chief, not that it was wrong, but that being received in this way it had produced mischief. The bookseller asked him if he had not authorized a Mr. Macnamara to publish a Bible, and if a Mr. Walsh had not been appointed by him to revise the notes to it ? He admitted such to be the fact. Then, said the bookseller, that is the very Bible published under their direction. Mr. O'Connell, much to his honour, had taken up a part of the notes at the Catholic Board, and had required that a vote should be passed, disclaiming, as part of the Roman Catholic doctrines, something which was there said. Mr. O'Connell said, "If I thought it essential to the Roman Catholic Church to hold the doctrine contained in the notes to the Bible which justify the murder of heretics as such, and the breaking oaths with heretics as such, I would no longer belong to that Church"—he did not say compatible with, but essential to—the difference was material. But how was the motion met ? Other members said that those were not matters for them to discuss, and the utmost that was done was to appoint a committee to consider of the matter. When the day arrived for their making a Report, none was made, the thing was delayed ; it was again delayed, and again, till at length, after an interval of a month, the Roman Catholic Board ceased to exist, and by that notable contrivance saved the Ro man Catholic laity from the duty of disclaiming this book. Dr. Murray referred to " the opinions of Dens respecting the rights of temporal States to compel their subjects to embrace religions which their consciences did not approve," as if it was not beyond the right of political States to com pel their subjects to embrace religious doctrines of which their consciences would not approve. He was sorry to be obliged to say, that in his opinion Dr. Murray would find it difficult to relieve himself from the charge of actually and knowingly making a misstatement of the matter. That it was so he should prove by reading three lines from Dons. After having stated, on the authority of the Council, that those who disbelieved might be exiled, imprisoned, and put to death, and proved the right to such power by citing the proper au thorities, he came to the question, What are the punishments inflicted on those who were not the baptized servants of the Church ? The answer was, " Non baptizati prmdictus peones, quw ab ecclesia constitutor sunt, non incurrunt, utpote cede sim non subjecti." Those who were not baptized did not incur the penalty, for they were not the subjects of the Church. That was a distinct proof that these punishments were for offences towards the political state. Dr. Murray had ex pressed such opinions with respect to the Protestant reli gion as he could not dare to prove. He contended, then, that his (Dr. Murray's) holding such opinions, and his en forcing such a system of instruction for the Clergy of Ireland, rendered him of very questionable fitness for the situation which he held in that country—namely, one of his Majesty's Commissioners for National Education in Ire land. He thought that Dr. Murray had taken the best pos sible course, in addressing his letter to his Majesty's Prime Minister, as one whose duty it was to decide whether or not he would advise his Majesty—although no determination on the question might have been conveyed by a vote of Parlia ment, and he (the Bishop of Exeter) would at once say that he did not mean to call for a vote of their Lordships with re ference to this subject—to take any steps with reference to the continuance of Dr. Murray in his situation. It was, he re peated, certainly a very proper course for Dr. Murray to ad dress his defence on this very grave charge to the Prime Mi nister of the Crown, who had an opportunity of deciding on his fitness or unfitness for the high post and trust of confidence which be (Dr. Murray) held under his Majesty's Government. He applauded Dr. Murray for the manliness of his conduct in this respect. He had thus stated the grounds on which he thought himself justified in making the charge which he had brought against Dr. Murray ; and it appeared to him that he had, at all events, established a prima facie case against him. Dr. Murray would have similar opportunities to those of which he had before availed himself, to rebut anything which he had then stated. He assured their Lordships that if he were shown to be wrong in any of the statements which he had submitted, he should be as ready to retract it as he had then been in making it. He would go further, and say that he should feel infinitely less reluctance in making the retraction than he had felt in making the charge.—( Hear, hear.) Hav ing said thus much in allusion to Dens's Theology and Dr. Murray, he would conclude by moving simply, " that the petition of which he had spoken do lie on their Lordships' table." It was the petition of a clergyman belonging to the United Churches of England and Ireland, who had been driven from Ireland by illness, and who now lived within three miles of London. He stated facts, and expressed views which were the result of personal experience, as well as of accurate information. He would, therefore, add to his for mer motion, that not only should the petition lie on the table, but that it be read aloud by the Clerk. He would just before he sat down, state two facts which had come to his knowledge, and which he felt assured would be most gratifying to their Lordships. One was, that since the presentation of the petition of the Rev. Mr. Nangle, which related to outrages which had been committed on Protestant children and adults, by Roman Catholics in Achlin, these outrages had ceased, and ono of those who took a most active - part in them bad recently become a convert to the Protestant religion, and joined the congregation of Mr. Nangle. There was also another fact of a very gratifying nature, which he would state on the authority of one of the Inspectors of the schools of the Kildare-street Society, and which related to a man more distinguished for talent than any man of his day, of whom, as he was dead, it was agreeable to have to say nothing but what was pleasing. He alluded to Dr. Doyle, who, he believed, had changed his mind before his death on many points of conduct, if not of religion. The au thority for what he was about to inform their Lordships was one of the Inspectors of the schools of the Kildare-street So ciety, who had visited Carlow, and who there found Dr. Doyle, who, shortly before his death, notwithstanding all the vio'ent opposition which he had previously felt it his duty to give these schools in Ireland, visited the infant school of the Society, which at first he viewed with apparent grief : but after having made inquiries as to the orphan asylum under the direction of the same Society, he said (alluding to his des perate state of health, and speaking as a dying man), " I am now going, and I leave my blessing with you." The Bishop concluded by moving that this petition be read ; whch having been done, Lord MELBOURNE spoke as follows—l am sure your Lordships will give me full credit for not entertaining the least wish to protract this discussion.—( Hear, hear.) I think, !my Lords, t h a t suc h a di scuss i on as that which has been entered on by the Right Rev. Prelate, and the tone and temper ind spirit in which it has been introduced—although the manner and the terms in which it has been conducted are sufficiently courteous and unobjectionable--yet I repeat, it must be felt that the temper and spirit of it can tend to nothing but he creation of every species of altercation, and every kind of pro vocation—to the revival of ancient recollections, which should, by all possible means be avoided, and to the productioni in every shape, of aniruosity and discord.—( Cheers.) Most of the ar guments w hi c h the Right Rev. Prelate has now advanced, were used by a Rev. Brother of his, in a debate which took place in the House during the last session of Parliament. Here Is a story my Lords, referring to ancient times, in which iC is related that a Prelate was taken prisoner at the head of a body of troops, by some temporal sovereign ; and he was then de manded by the Pope, as being under his jurisdiction. The temporal sovereign is said to have sent back, in reply to the request of the Pope, the coat of mail of the Bishop, accom panied with this question, " Is this thy son's. coat ?"—( Re peated cheers.) I beg leave, then, to ask the Right Rev. Prelate at the head of the Church, whether he thinks that the speech which your Lordships have just heard, is a speech be comiag a Bi s h o p, even were th e t one , t emper , an d sp i r i t o f i t tuose whi c h h e i s d es i rous o f see i ng a d opte d b y any one of his suffragans?—(Cheers renewed.) My Lords, it is not for me to enter mto, or attempt to rebut, all tho coati°. DENS'S THEOLOGY. The Bishop of EXETER defended himself from the imputations cast upon him in the charge of having endeavoured to injure the character of Dr. Murray, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, in moving for the pro duction of the letter addressed by that individual to the Noble Viscount below him (Lord Melbourne). The Right Reverend Prelate proceeded to read extracts from the letter of Dr. Murray, and contended that he was not a fit person to hold of as a Commissioner of Education— ( Hear, hear). under his Majesty's Government. He held in his hand the work to which so much allusion had been made, (" Dens's Theology,") and which appeared to come forth under the sanction and authority of Dr. Murray, and in his (the Bishop of Exeter's) opinion, it contained matter not fit for the ears of the Protestants of that kingdom.—( Hear.) The Right Rev. Prelate then alluded to the conversion of the Rev. Mr. Nolan from the errors of the Church of Rome in February last, on which occasion he had stated that he had left a rich and pampered Church. In a letter addressed to a Roman Catholic clergyman, the Rev. Mr. Nolan asserted that Dens's Theology was a regular text-book at Maynooth College. The Right Rev. Prelate next read extracts from a Roman Catholic Catechism and other works, and contended that the doctrines, as promulgated in these, and as set forth by the testimony of the clergy of that Church, were unchristian and monstrous, inasmuch as in the con fessional they assumed the attributes of the Deity. Ireland was distinguished above all Roman Catholic countries on the Continent for its adherence to doctrines which were long since obsolete. He need only refer in proof of this to the office, still inserted in the Irish Roman Catholic Breviary, in honour of Hildebrand, by whom the Emperor Fi ancis IV. was deposed, and his subjects absolved from their allegiance. This Pope Hildebrand was a complete firebrand, and the most cha ritable thing that could be said of him was, that he was a reli gious maniac. The office in honour of him, although ex punged by order of all the Continental Roman Catholic countries from their books of prayer, was still conti nued and offered up by the Irish Priests.—(Hear.) There were many instances of this sort, to which he would have no difficulty in referring. ( Some manifestations of impatience were here observable among their Lordships.) These matters might appear tiresome or ridiculous to some of their Lordships, but they were of serious import to him (the Bishop of Exeter.) With respect to the right of Temporal States to compel their subjects to adopt whatever religious opinions they pleased, as alluded to by Doctor Murray in his letter, he regretted to be obliged to say that Dodo: Murray bad mod what be knew to versial matter introduced to your notice in the speech of the Right Rev. Prelate. I shall address myself to the only part of the question which can relate to myself or my col leagues, in the whole of the speech which the Right Rev. Prelate has delivered ; and that is, with respect to the con duct of Dr. Murray in sanctioning, or recommending, or using, or employing the work of one Peter Dens ; of whom, I dare say, your Lordships have never heard, until he was mentioned in certain public disputations which have lately taken place in this City; but who, I believe, was a professor of theology in the University of Louvain about the middle of the last century.—(Hear, hear.) Now in answer to the appeal made to me by the Right Reverend Prelate, I do not hesitate to say that I am extremely sorry that Dr. Murray is a Ro man Catholic Bishop ; I am deeply sorry that the Ro man Catholic religion prevails in Ireland at regret sincerely that the principles and tenets of the Roman Catholic religion have been established in that country—but I must beg leave to say, that the imputation which the Right Rev. Pre late has attempted to attach, or has attached, to Dr. Murray, of having adopted the work of Dens, is not, in my opinion, and so far as I can judge from the way in which the work has been characterized, a sufficient ground to disqualify him for the situation which he now holds in Ireland.—( Cheers. ) Let it not for one moment be supposed that I enter into any defence of this work ; it is, I dare say, sufficiently objection able, and it contains, I apprehend, the same objectionable doc trines which are to be found in all the Roman Catho lic works of that period. I am perfectly willing to admit that the members of the Roman Catholic Church are not remarkable for their tolerance ; but I say that if you allow to Roman Catholics the possession of civil rights, and an equal participation of them with Protestants, you are not justified in preven'ing them from holding those tenets and p r i nc ipl es , and recommending those works which undoubtedly have the sanction of the authority of their Church. The Right Rev. Prelate has also on very slender grounds, in my mind, made a charge of misrepresentation against Dr. Murray, and in very strong terms, though at the same time perfectly consistent with your Lordships' orders, accused that Bishop of asserting what was unfounded and untrue. The whole ground for this accu sation was, that Dr. Murray had spoken of the opinions of Dens respecting the right of temporal States to compel their subjects by confiscation and other punishments to embrace re ligious doctrines of which their conscience did not approve, instead of stating that these punishments were inflicted by the authority of the Church. To say, then, that Dr. Murray was guilty of gross misrepresentation simply because he interpre ted this work of Dens in a manner which I have described, does certainly appear to me to be a most unfair and unfounded charge preferred by the Right Reverend Prelate.—( Hear. ) If I understood the speech of the Right Reverend Pre late, the whole tenor of it went to prove that the Roman Catholic religion is of a much more bigotted and super ' stitious, of a far more virulent and violent, character in Ireland, than as it exists in the other Roman Catholic States of Europe. The Right Reverend Prelate alluded to these States as possessing inhabitants who, though they pro fessed the Catholic religion, were nevertheless under a greater degree of control by the State than the Roman Ca tholics of Ireland. The Right Rev. Prelate also accounted for the difference between persons of the same religion, though residing in different countries, by saying that this difference arose from the way in which the Roman Catholic religion was preached in Ireland, being a departure from or at variance with the mode established in other Catholic States. I do think, however, that there are other reasons which may more satisfactorily and justly account for this difference in the habits and feelings of those belonging to the same religious persuasion. One cause of the difference is, I think, that in other European States every disposition is manifested to con fer and communicate with the members of the Roman Catho lic Church, and by that means that a salutary and efficient con trol was exercised over their faith and its doctrines is beyond a doubt.— (Hear, hear.) In discussing this question, my Lords, I am most anxious to forget the di s p u t es , an d th e discords, and the bloodshed of former times.—( Cheers.) My Lords, I don't wish to go back to them. But when, my Lords, it is said that it has been the precept of the Roman Ca tholic religion to extirpate heretics, your Lordships must forgive me if I remind you that extirpation was also the principle and practice of Protestant Governments.—(Hear, hear.) When I say that, do not, my Lords, at all suppose that I mean to sanction those opinions which are generally , promulgated, that Ireland has undergone centuries of mis rule by acts of mis-government, because if you look into her history, you will find it very difficult to lay your finger on chapters where any difference in the policy of the Govern ment is related to have been adopted. But certain it is, my Lords, that up to the last sixty years the policy of the Go vernment of that country was the extirpation of the Roman Catholic religion.—( Hear, hear.) This design was first car ried into effect by the confiscation of the province of Ulster, _in the time of James 1., and bestowing it on Protestant sub jects. Then Lord Strafford attempted to Protestantise Con naught; but was diverted from his purpose by being called home to quell disorders in his own country. Again Cromwell deluged a great part of the country with blood, and extermi nated the inhabitants with fire and sword, for the express and avowed purpose of extirpating the Catholic religion; and, lastly, my Lords, the withering, desolating, and destructive system of penal laws was established, with a view of extirpat ing the Roman Catholic religion, by subjecting those who professed it to every loss, and inflicting on them every insult. —(Loud cheering.) These, my Lords, were a few of the means taken to extirpate the Catholic religion in Ireland. Let even these, my Lords, be weighed against the extirpation of heretics, dwelt upon in a page of Dens, one of the professors of theology in the University of Louvain.—(The Noble Lord sat down amidst loud cheering.) The Marquis of WE STM EA TH said that the Noble Lord had dwelt a great deal on the ravages made in Ireland by Cromwell with fire and sword : but the Noble Lord should not forget that Cromwell acted in the manner described after a meeting was held in one of the abbeys of Connaught, by the priests, for the purpose of murdering and massacring the Protestants. He was not such an idiot as to believe that these things could be totally forgotten.—( Hear, hear.) The Duke of WELLINGTON admitted that the present discussion would lead to no benefit, except so far as it might produce a knowledge of the real state of Ireland. A petition was presented, complaining of the persecution suffired by the Protestants in that country, and from that grew what bad followed since. He would distinctly and openly say that the Protestant people and Clergy of Ireland had reason—strong and frightful reason—to complain that their rights and pro perty were not sufficiently protected by the Government of the country.—( Cheers.) This want of due protection was in a great measure the cause of the animosities, heartburnings, and disputes that prevailed in that country. He did not wish to see a renewal of the dissensions and disturbances of Ireland. He deeply deplored them. God knew he would most gladly end them, and if there was alive one man more anxious than another to restore that country to tranquillity and good order he was that person.—(Loud cheering.) But it was not by oppressing one party and elevating another —it was not by extinguishing one species of property, the pro perty of the Church, that equality and the security of pro perty co&d be established in that country.—(Cheers.) It was this conduct of the Government, this supineness at least, if not criminal indifference, or perhaps partiality, that caused all this angry feeling in Ireland, and these discussions in that House. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said that, as to the allusions to the tone, manner, and conduct of his Right Rev. Friend (the Bishop of Exeter), he would say that he thought they were unjust. The conduct of his Rev. Friend was straight forward, fair, and justifiable in this transaction. He was not guilty of any inflammatory language, or of any act that did not become him as a Christian Bishop and a Peer of Parlia ment. He saw nothing of the incendiary about his friend ; and he did not expect that such an imputation would have been cast upon him as was by implication cast upon him. He (the Archbishop of Canterbury) when the subject of this standard work of Romish theology for the use of the Irish Priests was brought before the public notice, at onee to amaze and shock them, expected to hear some better defence than the letter of the head of the Irish Romish Church. He ex- pected some better explanation. He never wished to express his opinions pointedly. But really the time was now come when it became the duty of every one to withhold his senti ments no longer.—(Cheers.) The conduct of the Rev. Gen tleman, whose name had been introduced into the debate, was not to be passed over lightly, when connected with the prin ciples and doctrines inculcated in this most objectionable book. At one time it was calculated to excite indignation, at another time sorrow. He deplored that any Christian Pastor should have made such a defence. He (the Archbishop of Canter bury) would be the last man to foment strife or animosity be tween any classes of the people, and he fervently prayed to see peace and concord established ameng all classes—tran quillity and brotherly Christian fellowship in Ireland was above all things the dearest wish of his heart. He wished also to see the conduct of the Romish Priests in unison with the principles of the Catholic Church, to an especial con nexion with which' they advanced such a title. Let them show that their conduct was in harmony with the Church of Christ, and he would forgive many of their errors in the hope that they were involuntary.—( Hear, hear.) This standard body of Roman Catholic divinity was published by authority. There could be now no fair or even plausible denial of the fact. The work was not disclaimed before, and therefore it was sanctioned. There was nothing that could tend more to pacify Ireland than that the Romish Bishops should act in the spirit of the religion which they profess, and should disclaim the grave charges brought against them. Until they do this they must be held responsible for most of the disorganization of the country, and for the offences laid at their door.—(Cheers.) On these facts he (the Archbishop of Canterbury) reflected deeply. There was another thing that weighed heavily upon his mind : it was the conduct of the Romish Priests in denouncing from their altars the Protestants, holding them up to the misguided and sus ceptible multitude as objects of just vengeance, and periling not only their properties but their lives.--( Hear.) They were desecrating the place of worship, end using that in fluence which they should only exercise for the spiritual wel fare of their flocks to the detriment, nay, death of peaceful and respectable men, whose only crime was that they did not bow down before them, and acknowledge their supremacy. He was surprised that in a Church whose discipline was so strict—where insubordination was such a crime— that this con duct of the Priests, which was at once as abhorrent to all principles of Christianity as it was subversive of all social order and national tranquillity, did not receive the censure and check of the Church. He could not help saying that the impunity given to such conduct was a direct sanction of it. —(Cheers.) The persecution of the Irish Protestants at present was precisely the same as that carried on a gai n it the early Christians—the same tumultuous meetings—the same exclusion from all fellowship with their fellow-men—the same denunciation against their lives, their liberty, and property.--(Hear, hear.) The Romish Bishops, who saw the current of events running on with such desolating fury, did Ireland, and in Rot arrest_ it, incurrc4 as awful respousk bility. These Bishops ought not to allow the Priest thus to work up the feelings of the people to madness.—(Loud cheers.) If some means be not found to prevent this course things,of it will c on ti nue grow i ng i n m i sc hi e f f or genera tions. The Catholic Church was now accused before the world, and it was its bounden duty, if it valued its character as a Christian Establishment—if it valued the peace and prosperity of Ireland—to stand up, and clear itself from the charge of conniving at the mischief that was on foot. What he (the Archbishop) said he said deliberately, and with pain, and he hoped his words might be heard in a quarter where they might produce some good.--(Loud cheers.) The Earl of LIMERICK said the Noble Viscount by his speech did a great deal of injury to Ireland. He quoted in palliation of the doctrines and practice of the Roman Catbo lies the proscriptions and confiscations of James the First. But he neglected to state that the Catholics had previously forfeited the estates of the Protestants. In 1668, between three and four thousand Protestants, Clergymen, and Noble men, were prosecuted, and their estates confiscated. In the rebellion of 1798 he himself saw 26,000 Catholics regimented against Protestants, and headed by Priests. At that time he heard of the burning of two thousand Protestants in one barn, and before a Committee of Parliament be heard of the details of the conspiracy to root out the whole Protestant population of the country. The Noble Viscount alluded to equality of rights ; that was the deceptive slang phrase of the times. But was it equality to plunder one party for the gain of the other ? Were they never to have peace ? For his part he would make any sacrifice for it, and would be ready to forget and forgive, if--by this compact—he could secure the happiness of his country. Lora DLTNCANNON could not allow the charge made by the Noble Duke, that the Government had spoliated the pro perty of the Church to pass unnoticed. The Duke of WELLINGTON never made any such charge against the Government. He merely said that the Go vernment did not afford sufficient protection. Lord D C ANNON—WeII, did not afford protection. But the Noble Duke was long enough in office to bring for ward some measure for the relief and protection of the Church ; and during the six months he was connected with the Government the only mode of relief he suggested was to deprive the Church of its property—the Tithes. The late Go vernment did nothing for the Church, and the present Go vernment did. He ( Lord Duncannon) lamented this discus sion as much as the Noble Duke could ; and he saw that tho speeches made that night would not be very instrumental in diminishing that great evil—the influence of the Catholic Priests. (The Noble Lord made one or two observations on the subject of the petition which we could not hear.) The Duke of WELLINGTON was sorry ho was put upon his trial. A comparison was instituted between what would be done and what was. Into that comparison he would not then enter. He would beg to deny one of the Noble Lord's statements, that he was six months in office. The Govern ment with which he was connected only met Parliament for two months, and a measure was propos - ed that would put an end to the question, and the excitement caused by the Noble Lords opposite. He would not hesitate to repeat that the Go verrment did not sufficiently protect the property of the Irish Church. Viscount MELBOURNE explained. Lord A S 118 URT ON could not refrain from making some observations on the present occasion, It was the duty of their Lordships, and most imperatively the duty of that Right Rev. Bench, to inquire, and to ascertain, from whom and from whose hands the people of Ireland were to receive religious instruction. He would also say, as the Noble Lord had charged the Government which was so short a time in power with having done nothing for the Church of Ireland, that that Government never permitted the abandonment of any parishes in Ireland. He would say further that nine-tenths of the dif ficulties respecting the collection of tithes arose from the in cautious conduct of the present Government. Before th a t time there was practically no difficulty in collecting tithes. He did not mean to say that in certain parts of the country they did not produce irritation, but nine-tenths of the difficulties, he re peated, had been caused by the precipitate manner in which tithes were denounced in one of the Houses of Parliament. There, for the first time, were the Ministers of the Crown seen coming against the Established Church of the country. But the Noble Lord said that nothing was done by the present Go vernment that had not been in the contemplation of the late Government. He ( Lord Ashburton) should be most happy to find when the Bill for the commutation of tithes came be fore that House that such was the case. The Marquis of L ANSDOWNE rose for the purpose of distinctly declaring that if Noble Lords opposite alluded to any want of vigilance on the part of his Majesty's Government in Ireland in withholding their protection from his Majesty's Protestant subjects in that country, no man considered that a deeper censure on Ministers than he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) did, and no man could be more willing than he to meet the great authority of the Noble Duke, or any Peer in that House, if any case could be made out of protection— legal protection—having been withheld.—(Hear.) If any such act had been committed, it would have been the grossest breach of duty on the part of the Government, and one which ought to be visited by the most severe indignation and cen sure of that House. That was his opinion, as well as the Noble Duke's, and upon any case being made out, he should be perfectly willing to acquiesce in that censure. The Noble Duke, however, appeared to allude, not to any specific act of the Government, but to the whole course of legislation with regard to tithei ; and he would now take the libarty of remind ing that Noble Duke, that had the late Government continued in office, a Bill would have been settled, and the security of Ireland maintained. But he would still further remind the Noble Duke that it was Midsummer last year that their Lord ships rejected that measure.—(Great cheers.) He believed that the Nob'c Duke aFsented to what he was now stating. The Duke of WELLINGTON—No, no. As the Noble Marquis asks me, I do not assent to what he is stating. The Marquis of L A NSDOWNE resumed. He only wished to say that in the Midsuummer of last year a Bill was lost which was brought into another House, was approved of in Ireland, and which, lie would venture to say, if it had been suffered to pass, would have secured the property of the Irish Church, and by its disposition would have done away with that odium and hostility which for a series of accumu lating years had arisen from the measures in which the Legis lature had participated. The condition of Ireland and the state of its Church might have been relieved by a s s oc i a ti ng with the enactments relatmg to tithes those remedies which might have reconciled many to the Irish Church, and until _ _ Id reconciliation were effected he would tell that house that it might wish to secure the Iroperty to the Church, but it would not be able. He trusted that whoever was called to his Nlaesty's service would propose such measures as would se cure the due administration of the law, and secure property in Ireland, and that Parliament would adopt them in a way that would not offend the prejudices and be irreconcilable to the interests of the population. Lord ASHBURTON and Viscount MELBOURNE respectively explained. Lord FARNHAM rose to say a few words. It appeared to him that his Majesty's Government were now endeavouring to throw off from their own shoulders the odium of that Bill. He believed that many of the Irish clergy would sooner suffer starvation than that the Church of which they were members should be deprived of a single living. The whole con duct of the Government justified the Protestants of Ire land in supposing that they did not enjoy the same de gree of favour as the Roman Catholics. He had been in formed, and he believed it to bo true, that the most amia ble prerogative of the Crown—that of mercy—had been abused by the present executive Government of Ireland. Two parties, the one Protestant and the other Catholic, had un fortunately been concerned in rioting,, and they were sentenced by Lord Chief Baron Joy, the Protestants to three months' imprisonment, the Catholics to six. At the expiration of the three months the Protestants were liberated, and at the same time the sentence of the Roman Catholics was remitted. If the Judge who committed the prisoners recommended the remission, then he (Lord Farnham) had nothing further to say ; but from what he had heard he believed that both par ties were equally deserving of their punishment. If the pro perty of the Protestant Chinch in Ireland were not protected he was afraid that the period of restoring tranquillity to that country was more remote than was generally expected. The question having been put, the petition was ordered to lie on the table. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at a Quarter to Eight. MR. COOKE'S MEMOIRS OF LORD BOLING BROKE."—The Times in reviewing this new work, says, " These Memoirs must be considered an indispensable compa nion to the history of Queen Anne and the House of Hanover. They may be read, too, with advantage for other reasons. ' History,' Lord Bolingbroke tells us, 'is philosophy teaching by example ;' and it would not be difficult to extract from the political events of that period lessons for the instruction of the present. The striking traits in the character of Bolingbroke are the union in it to so remarkable a degree, of the man of pleasure, the man of business, and the philosopher, and the great inequalities between 'his political and speculative writ ings. Mr. Cooke has traced the general history with which the biography of Bolingbroke is inseparably interwoven, with care and ability, and has placed several incidents in that pe riod of busy intrigue in a strong and new light." -THE STUDENT," BY THE AUTHOR OF " EU GENE ARAM."—No work that Mr. Bulwer ever wrote is better calculated to show the bent and capabilities of his powerful mind, than the volumes before us : they consist of papers written at different periods, and under different feelings, all evincing the same noble tendency—the improvement of the human mind ' • and though they arc works of eloquence and passion, which, by the bye, are inseparable—though, as Mr. Bulwer tells us, they address the sentiment rather than the intellect, still they carry with them, even in their strongest glow of feeling, a natural and overpowering logic, which, while it kindles the imagination, strikes with sweet and grate ful vibration upon the unerstanding." " TIIE PASHA OF MANY TALES."—The ini mitable novels of Captain Marryat, " Peter Simple" and " Ja -cob Faithful," have met with perhaps greater success than any works of fiction since the appearance of the Waverley . Series ; and the rapid succession in which the gallant Captain pours forth one novel after another, gives indication of a genius al most as fertile as that of the lamented .Scott. These novels are unquestionably destined to take a place, like those of Field ing and Smollett, among the standard works. of English fic tion. The entire series consists of twelve volumes—!" The Pasha of Many Tales;" "Jacob Faithful," " Peter Simple," and " The King's Own." . - • Dr. Nordmann discovered in the e ye s in O s f uc tevera different species of Perch, eye worms, sometimes _ In a single eye he detected num bers as must have •interfered with the . d in is d u i n ff e e t re si n g t li p t ix of ts p 3 a 6 ss o m o g f objects. these animalcules ; when much increased, they often produce c.ateiects ic_the_eyes nf_the ashes they infest. , rith- our n to on.) word isiona T had ,bjec r vvas a nd nd an that urred bee n rate ing of on, he more pgres9