The Sun. — London, England, 1835-06-25 00:00:00

been set aside by an authority which could not be denied its competent to make such a decree. Don Carlos and Don Miguel being, as he had said, at the head of troops in Portu gal, it was agreed between the two powers—Spain and Portu gal—that the former should send troops to banish the two Princes from the territory of Portugal, and Franceand England were invited to be parties to the treaty. The preamble of that treaty stated, that the Governments of Spain and Portugal, " being impressed with a deep conviction that the interests of the two Crowns, and the security of their respective dominions, require the immediate and vigorous exertion of their joint efforts to put an end to hostilities, which, though directed in the first instance against the throne of Her Most Faithful Majesty, now afford shelter and support to disaffected and rebellious subjects of the Crown of Spain, and their Majesties being desirous at the same time to provide the necessary means for restoring to the subjects of each the blessings of internal peace, and to confirm by mutual good offices the friendship which they are desirous of establishing and cementing between their respective States, they had come to the determination of uniting their forces, in order to compel the Infant, Don Carlos of Spain, and the In fant Don Miguel of Portugal, to withdraw from the Portuguese dominions." The preamble then went on to state that the Regents of Spain and Portugal had addressed themselves to their Majesties the King of Great Britain and the King of the French, and that their said Majesties, the Kings of England and of the French, "considering the interest they must always take in the security of the Spanish monarchy, and being fur ther animated by the most anxious desire to assist in the esta blishment of peace in the Peninsula, as well as in every other part of Europe ; and his Britannic Majesty, considering more over, the special obligations arising out of his ancient alliance with Portugal, their Majesties have consented to become par ties to the proposed engagement." The object of the treaty, it would thus appear, was not alone the establishment of peace in the Peninsula, but also the pacification of the whole of Eu rope. Soon after this an event occurred, for which, though the spirit of the treaty might be said to have provided, inasmuch as it went to secure the tranquillity of Spain as well as Portu gal, yet no actual and formal provision had been made in words. That was the arrival of Don Carlos in Spain, and his placing himself at the head of an armed force as a claimant of the Crown of Spain. In consequence of this it was deemed advisable to enter into additional articles to the former treaty. By the second of these articles Great Britain engaged "to furnish Her Catholic Majesty, with such supplies of arms and warlike stores as her Majesty may require, and further assist her Majesty with a naval force." There could be no doubt that the supplying of arms and warlike stores as completely identified Great Britain with one of the belligerents as much as if she had actually engaged in the contest with her own troops or forces ; but he would contend that the spirit of the quadripartite treaty engaged her to that, and he thought the Right Hon. Baronet must come to the same conclusion, though he might nut per haps concur in the expediency of that course. He would now say a word on what had been urged by the Right Hon. Baronet as to non-interference in the internal quarrels of other States. He would admit the doctrines of the Right Hon. Baronet to a certain extent. But the spirit of the treaty did not imply any such interference. The necessity for it arose out of an acknowledgement of the legitimate dominion of the Queen of Spain over that country which she now ruled. But it was well known that when a civil war broke out in any State, there was no writer on the law of nations who had laid down any principle which would prevent any other State from taking the side of that party which they might wish should succeed. No doubt, however, the right of interference in such case was general ; and if one Government supported one party, ano ther Government or State !night support another ; and there fore, the party which interfered acted with their eyes open, and ought to be presumed cognizant of all the consequences. But in what was done in the case under consideration no new principle had been established, no dangerous precedent had been created, and every case of such interference must be deter mined on by a prudent consideration of the particulars connected with it. The Right Hon. Baronet had laid some stress on one point which he ( Lord P.) admitted was an important one—he meant the danger of troops raised for Spain, being armed, organized, and disciplined within these realms. On that point he must say that it was most distinctly intimated to the Spa nish Ambassador that such a course could not be permitted, and that as soon as the troops were raised here, and before they were armed, they must be sent out to Spain. On that point, then, there could be no difference ; it had been already arranged; but as to the other objection of the Right Hon. Baronet—namely, the danger of having bodies of men, ac customed for a time to military life, and haviar , acquired mi litary habits, coming back to this ceuntry without b having any claim to any future provision in consequence of their services, he owned that he could not see any more inconvenience in it, than in the annual disbanding of some of our own troops who had not served sufficiently long to entitle them to a pension. The Noble Lord, after briefly recapitulating the chief points of his arguments, concluded by contending that nothing was done with respect to Spain, beyond what we were bound to by ordinary treat). Mr. FE CTOR should compromi , e his dignity as a British senator, and his duty as a British subject, if he did not raise his voice against the course taken by the Govern ment of the country on this important question. lie deeply regretted that any British Government, or Admini stration, should tarnish for a moment tha laurels that had been so nobly acquired by a British army in the Peninsula, and that an army of mercenaries should now be sent out thither from this country, under the auspices of his Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. He used the word " mercenary," without intending it at all offensive ly to - the Hon. and Gallant Officer (Col. Evans) who was to be the future Commander-in-Chief of this force ; but he called the force " mercenary" in the ordinary meaning of the term, as applying to a body of strangers fighting_ for hire in a country with which they had no connexion. They had no connexion with the country, and that cause could not justly be called liberal which opposed the rights of his Majesty Don Carlos of Spain, who was at the head of the legitimate Go vernment.--(" Oh, oh," from the Ministerial side.) He would assert that the actual Government of the country was under the domination of an ambitious and unprincipled female.— (" Oh, oh.") He had no hesitation in avowing his decided opinion as to the legitimate right of Don Carlos, as his (Don Carlos's) principles were those which he (Mr. Fector) advo cated.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. WARD, after the magnificent introduction of the Hon. Member for Dover who had just sat down, confessed he did expect something to follow in keeping with his commence ment ; but having heard him through with some attention, he owned that there was not, in all that the Hon. Member had said, one fact or argument which he would condescend to answer. The only point which had any thing of novelty to recommend it was this,—that they were now told that Don Carlos was the legitimate Monarch of Spain, not by the grace of God, but by the special favour of the Hon. Member for Dover.--(" Hear, hear," and a laugh.) However, he (Mr. Ward) would not then enter into the question of legiti macy, but would go to the question before the House, and to the fact of the manner in which the subject had been intro duced by the Noble Lord (Mahon), to the great delay of other business. He would at the same time admit the courtesy with which the Noble Lord had put it off from a former even ing. But he was sorry, as the Noble Lord had thought pro per to bring on the question, that he had not the manliness to put it into some shape in which the House of Commons could pronounce an opinion upon it. Instead of this, the Noble Lord had moved for papers which were in the hands of every body. - Lord MAHON said they were not in the hands of anybody but his Majesty's Ministers. Mr. WA RD—That might be strictly the fact, but they were accessible to all, and the fact was their contents were already well known in the country. Why had not the Noble Lord put the motion into some shape in which the policy of Govern ment might be decided upon, and give the Commons of Eng land an opportunity of deciding in its favour, as no doubt they would have done by a decided majority? Referring to the use of a naval force from England, acting in conjunction with the acknowledged sovereign of a country, as stated in one of the additional articles, the Hon. Member proceeded to con tend, that by the law of nations it was under such circum stances as those of Spain perfectly justifiable, and that a force so acting would have the right to exclude the admission of other powers coming to assist Don Carlos. He would go further, and contend that a naval force so employed would be justified in excluding neutrals from the ports of Spain, and he cited as a precedent the case of Denmark. There were, he maintained, many circumstances which justified the Govern ment of this country in interfering to uphold the present con stitutional Government of Spain. It had acknowledged the bonds of the debt contracted by the Cortes under a former Government.—( Hear hear.) He could speak without any prejudice on this subject, as he was not a bondholder ; but there was another point in which we were inter ested, and which there was every reason to believe the present Government of Spain would concede at no dis tant day—he meant the acknowledgment of the independ ence of the South American colonies. These were questions in which the interests of England were greatly mixed up, and which, he would contend, would justify our interference to up hold the Queen's Government in Spain. The next question then was, whether the manner in which we proposed to inter fere was such as might wound the feelings of the Spanish people, or such as would conciliate their good will. He be lieved that the force destined to act under the command of his Hon. and Gallant Friend would fully conciliate their good will. He would admit that the Spaniards were in general averse from any foreign interference in their affairs, but it was when such interference was made without consulting their wishes. We interfered at their request in 1809, and were cordially received ; and so were the French when requested to interfere in 1823. The only parts of Spain hostile to foreign interference were those provinces where the people enjoyed particular privileges ; but their hostility related more to their own privileges than to any general national feeling. He regretted that the Queen's Government should have removed those privileges, but the Cortes, under a former Government, had taken a similar course. The Ho nourable Member went on to contend that the cases cited by the Noble Lord (Mahon) were not analogous to cases of interference for the support' of Constitutional Govern ment. He was not surprised at the desire expressed by the Noble Lord (Mahon) that his Hon. and Gallant Friend (Colonel Evans) should vacate his seat for Westminster pre vious to his assuming his command in Spain. It was well known that his Noble Friend (Lord Eliot), whom he also had the pleasure of knowing and of esteeming, as all who knew birti,rnusf.do, was the chairman of the Westminster Conserve /sive Society; and the Noble Lord (Mahon) might very natu f i rally desire to get his Noble Friend to step into the shoes of 10 . the Hon. and Gallant Officer as Member for Westminster. ;;,,,* s'he Hon. Merril*, after one or two remarks which did not *: reach the gallery;*.referred to the intended expedition of the Hon. and Gallan(Officer (Colonel Evans) to Spain, and ob it,- serfbil *it it oiv,that he had been raised to the rank of a Major ' eneiaLiii 14 : Aesty's service, he would go out with that ? 1‘.........„ . ...." prestige of military rank that would aid in its way that came to which the skill and bravery of his Hon. and Gallant Friend would under any title so mainly contribute. Mr. O'CONNELL rose for the purpose of noticing one or two omissions in the speech of the Noble Lord and the Hon. Member who last addressed the House. Interference had been objected to, but he was sorry it had not been carried much fur ther. He should like that it had extended so far as to effect a restoration of their privileges to the Biscayans and people of Navarre, for he was sure that such a restoration would have done more for the cause of constitutional government in Spain than almost any military aid could achieve without it. He was sorry not to see the Hon. Member for Dover (Mr. Fector) in his place. He supposed the Hon. Member was gone to take some refreshment after his great labours.—(A laugh.) That Hon. Member had thrown away a vast deal of virtuous indig nation against those members of Government who had taken any part in the interference with Spain, not thinking for a mo ment that the Constable of Dover Castle came in for his full share of it—(Hear, hear)—for it was admitted on all hands his Grace (the Duke of Wellington) had carried the qua dripartite treaty into full effect, and had supplied 40,000 stand of arms to be used against his Majesty Don Carlos, King of Spain, as the Hon. Member for Dover was pleased to call him. Yet the Noble Duke would, no doubt, be as much praised for his conduct by the Hon. Member for Dover as the present Go vernment would be blamed by him, though both had acted fully in the spirit of the treaty. He (Mr. O'Connell) must pro test against Don Carlos being called King of Spain. He had now as little title to that character as he had chance of gain ing it, now that the arm of British valour was let loose against him. Interference had been objected to, but he would con tend that we were justified in interfering on the side of con stitutional liberty. It was the interest of every state to sup port the cause of freedom. Let it be remembered that the Holy Alliance, though asleep, was not dead ; and that its members would take every opportunity that presented itself of trenching on civil liberty, and would even deprive this country of its freedom if they could, as they had deprived some of the German States of taxing themselves by their own representa tives. The Hon. Member for Dover had complained that the Spanish revolution was tarnished by the introduction of foreign troops. He would not say so if he were a Whig, for he would not in that case have banished from his recollection that our great revolution of 1688 was greatly aided by the introduction of whole battalions of Dutch troops. Referring to the late mission of Lord Eliot to Spain, he thought it was most humane and praiseworthy, as it went to put an end to the barbarous and atrocious practice of destroying human life, not in the ordinary chances of war, but in cold blood. The blood not only of prisoners taken in battle, but of persons dragged from the quietness and supposed security of private life, was mercilessly shed by both the contending parties. The case of the unfor tunate young O'Donnell must be still fresh in the memory of all who heard him. He was taken prisoner, and with a sort of mockery of mercy he was offered his life if he would recognize Don Carlos his sovereign. The brave young sol dier refused to betray his duty and was shot like a dog by order of the monster Zumalacarregui ; but these out rages on human nature were not confined to one side; they were perpetrated by both parties, and Zumalacarregui was, if possible, exceeded in cruelty by General Mini, whom he would also designate as a monster. He (Mr. O'Connell) deeply regretted that he had once acted as a steward at a dinner given to honour that man, and that he had paid him a compliment, but of course he did not know at the time he was capable of such cruelties as he had since been guilty of. All men should raise their voices against such monsters. After a warm eulogium on the character of Bolivar, whom he described as having, after the first heat of the civil war in South America (in which he had been obliged to re tdiate by blood for blood), succeeded in putting an end to the inhuman practice of butchering prisoners in cold blood, the Hon. and Learned Member concluded by expressing his conviction, that his Hon. and Gallant Friend would never as sociate with any who could sanction such a pnactice. Mr. G. PRICE must say, in justification of Zumalacar regui, that he never destroyed a prisoner until his repeated offers of a cartel to exchange prisoners had been refused. With respect to the case of O'Donnell, he (Mr. Price) knew that Zumalacarregui had received him as his prisoner, and treated him as his friend, and sent to General Mina to offer him in ex change for another prisoner ; and it was not until after he had received Mina's answer that he had no prisoners, as they were all shot by his orders, that Zumalacarregui, in retaliation, and to put a stop if possible to the evil, by showing to what it must lead, ordered O'Donnell to share the same fate as the prisoners at the other side had undergone. Having thus disposed of the case brought by the Hon. and Learned Member; he would now advert to the general question. The Hon. Member then, re ferring to what he had said on a former occasion, repeated that troops so sent out could be considered only as mercenaries. He did not believe that. the Hon. and Gallant Colonel was actuated by any mercenary motive, or by any idle desire of adding fresh laurels to those already gained. However, without applying the term mercenary or leader of condottieri to the Gallant Officer, he w shld say that not one in 100 of officers or men who should go out would have any other motive of action but their pay ; and if the Gallant 'Colonel should dismiss all who were not as brave and as disinterested as himself, he would have to sail on his expedition with perhaps sonic officers, but with very few soldiers.—(" Hear," and a laugh. ) As to the arguments which heal been urge-I by the Noble Lord, he congratulated him on having come forward to ad vocate a code of national law for which he.could find no pre cedent, for none could be found. The principle of interfering in the internal affairs of a country, unless those affaies endan gered our own safety, was one which might be productive of the worst consequences. If this principle were once esta blished, what security could there be for the peace of Europe ? One state might send its mercenaries at one side, and another its mercenaries at the other, and thus in the two great divi sions of parties into which most countries were split, the whole of Europe might soon be embroiled. This country had no right whatever to interfere in the internal arrangements of that country, nor in the question whether Don Carlos was King, or Christina was Queen of Spain ; this was a Spanish affair from beginning to end, in which the Spaniards themselves had alone the right to interfere. He further would urge, that nineteen- twentieths of the people of Spain were on this sub ject themselves so feeble, so apathetic, so lost to principles of attachment to their new and liberal Government, that it was necessary to search through every shambles in Europe to get men to fight in support of a cause in which the natives them selves manifested so little interest. In conclusion, he must say, that the moment the English soldiery thus raised set foot on Spanish soil, from that moment the honour of the country would be for ever extinguished.—( Hear. ) Mr. H. BUL WE R said the Right Hon. Baronet had in the first place stated, that the act of the Council in the pre sent instance was, in his judgment, much to be regretted • and that he disapproved of the Government adopting a line of policy which went to sanction the intervention by other Go vernments in the domestic disputes of another state or com munity. He (Mr. Bulwer) would beg to ask the Right Hon. Baronet what had been the course of policy pursued by Go vernments with which he 'had himself been connected under precisely similar circumstances? The Right Hon. Baronet had first come into the House in 1810, and it was not many s years afterwards that the remarkable event of Bonaparte re turning from Elba, marching through the whole of France, and arriving at the capital of that country, occurred. The question was then agitated by the Legislature of this country, whether it might not then be expedient for this nation to inter fere in a much more direct manner than was proposed in the present instance. On that former occasion did not the, Right Hon. Baronet give his sanction to the Government which adopted and pursued such a course of interference in the domestic disputes of France—disputes in which the whole of that country was ranged on one side, and foreign troops no matter how distinguished the officers who commanded them on the other, ?—( Hear, hear, hear.) In that case there had been a direct interference by foreign force, and he (Mr. Bulwer) was not prepared to deny that the Right Hon. Baronet, in acquiescing in that line of policy of the then Go vernment of this country, had taken the only course which could at that time have been adopted. But the Right Hon. Baronet had said, that if this country interfered, what was to prevent other Governments also from interfering ? Did the British Government prevent the interference of other fo reign countries on the occasion to which he had adverted ? ( Hear.) Had the Austrian Government then been stopped in its career to ask advice Certainly not ; but the Austrian forces were marched forward at so rapid a rate as to have ar rived at their destination before official intelligence of the com mencement of the march had reached this country.—( Hear. ) One word with regard to what had fallen from the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, the Member for Sandwich, who had just sat down. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said that the policy pursued by his Majesty's present Government was an entirely novel course, and wholly without precedent. He begged to ask the Hon. and Learned Gentleman what had been the line of policy pursued by Queen Elizabeth in times quite apposite with the present—in times when a struggle prevailed on the continent of Europe, as at the present mo ment ? Queen Elizabeth then would not interfere by a decla ration of war against the Spanish Monarch, but she did permit her subjects to engage in a cause much similar to that now under discussion, and with that permission not less than 10,000 men, under the command of Sir Horace Vere, went to Spain. —( Hear, hear.) It had been said, that the auxiliary forces now raising in this country would know nothing of the merits of the cause in which they were about to fight, and therefore would be guilty of a moral wrong.—( Hear.) He (Mr. Bulwer) doubted much whether the men who had fought with glory under the Duke of Wellington, were able to dis tinguish between the rights of those who disputed the crown of the nation for which they fought.—( Hear.) It was suffi cient that the men now levying were engaged in a cause which they believed to be a just one ; by doing so they might be deemed indiscreet—they might be thought enthusiastic—but still he thought no obloquy could or ought to reach them. Sir J. ELLE Y said it appeared that the Spanish Govern ment was to defray the expenses of these auxiliary corps; but if these corps depended upon the faith of the Spanish Govern ment they would find themselves greatly in error, for that na tion was not now able to pay even the interest upon what she owed, and therefore she was not very likely to be able to furnish instanter any very considerable sum for the maintenance and support of these auxiliary forces. The expense, therefore, would eventually fall upon this country. He was convinced that every thing that a gallant soldier could achieve would be ac complished by the Hon. and Gallant Member for Westminster, and he (Sir John Elley) only lamented that his Hon. and Gal lant Friend was not about to go out in the command of troops already in a state of discipline. The evils of' a want of disci pline had been sufficiently shown in the instance of the con duct of the French infantry at Waterloo, as contrasted with their previous conduct and achievements. Their failure arose from the hasty manner in which they had been promiscuously congregated from varipus parts of the French Empire—they never had been before together either as troops or comrades__ were officered by strangers, and the consequence was a total want of union and c9nfidence ia the ranks. Hence it was that THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, JUNE 25, 1835. the French infantry had failed; and how could it be expected that the band now raising in this country could without dis cipline succeed ? His Hon. and Gallant Friend was well aware of the accidents to which the service in the Spanish Pe ninsula were exposed, and that it required the very best state of discipline to conduct a war in that country. There required strategy and tactic to act upon—a knowledge of the country was necessary, and, above all, he ( Sir John Elley) would ad vise his Hon. and Gallant Friend never to leave this country until he had secured in his military chest that amount of money which would defray the expenditure of the army for at least six months. He would advise his Hon. and Gallant Friend to bear in mind that, whatever promises of succour the Spanish Government might make, that succour would never reach him. He ( Sir John Elley) had served in Spain, and had an opportunity of becoming tolerably well acquainted with the disposition of the Spanish people. He knew that they would promise every thing; and he was equally certain they would perform nothing.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) He had known them to send intelligence to the army at one moment, and con tradict it the next ; and he well remembered on one occasion, orders reached the British army from Madrid, desiring it to hold its ground, when, at the same moment, the enemy had been two days in Madrid.—( Hear, hear.) If the British army had been exposed to these difficulties, what was to be expected from hastily raised and undisciplined troops ? What were the operations which his Hon. and Gallant Friend had to under take ? What was the definite object he had in view ? These queries ought all to be answered and made known, because he was convinced that eventually this country would be the pay master of these auxiliary forces.—( Hear, hear.) In conclu sion he would again entreat his Hon and Gallant Friend not to stir from this country without the " sinews of war" being first afforded and secured to him.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh. ) Mr. M‘LE AN rose amidst loud cries of " Question." The Hon. Member rose for the purpose of putting a question to the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Palmerston). Without further troubling the House, he begged to inquire from the Noble Lord at the head of the Foreign Department, whether the Northern Powers of Europe had not withdrawn their Ambas sadors from Madrid, and whether any Italian Powers bad re cognized the Queen of Spain's authority? Lord PALMERSTON believed it was generally known that Austria, Prussia, and Russia had not at present any Re presentatives at Madrid, and also that the King of Naples had protested against any change in the order of succession to the Throne of Spain. The SPEAKER felt it his duty to state, that what passed in the early part of the debate between the Noble Lord and the gallant member for Westminster had left, as he understood, an unsatisfactory impression on the mind of the Noble Lord. He understood the Noble Lord to have admitted that while the motives of the gallant officer and his associates were truly honourable, yet that, as a Member of Parliament, he could not approve the course they were pursuing, even though their mo tives were honourable. The gallant officer not having correctly understood the argument of the Noble Lord, had repelled the imputation in strong language. After an explanation from the Noble Lord he put the case hypothetically, and although he reiterated his hypothetical case, it was merely for the pur. pose of vindicating himself from the charge of having been out of order, and not with any view of giving offence to the Noble Lord. If the House concurred in the accuracy of this statement, he hoped that the Noble Lord would feel satisfied, and that both parties would express their satisfaction, and thus put an end to all unpleasant feeling. After a silence of some moments' duration, during which neither Lord MAHON nor Colonel EVENS manifested any dis position to rise,— Sir H. HARDINGE said, that though he was not in Howe at the time his Noble Friend ( Lord Mahon) had used some expressions which it would seem had given of fence to the Hon. and Gallant Member for Westminster, he ( Sir H. Hardinge) had heard the Hon. and Gallant officer's reply. Now, though he had only heard one part or side of the question, it appeared to him from what he had heard from the chair, that there ought to be no difficulty in the way of his Noble Friend and the Hon. and Gallant Officer coming to a satisfactory explanation.—(Hear.) He (Sir H. Hardinge) shoald ever feel it his duty to do all in his power to conciliate in such matters ; and he did think, after what had been stated, that his Noble Friend ought to rise in his place, and to state whether, under the circumstances explained to the House, he was satisfied. He ( Sir H. Hardinge) was bound at the same time to state, that sitting near his Noble Friend during the discussion, he had collected from him that lie was not satis fied with the explanation then given by the Hon. and Gallant Of f icer, and he therefore thought the interposition of the Speaker had become necessary. In that opinion he was forti fied and confirmed by the silence of his Noble Friend, and his refusal thereby conveyed to respond to the Chair. His Noble Friend had asked his advice on the matter, but he ( Sir H. Hardinge) had refused to afford it, because by doing so he could the more consistently rise to perform that duty of ce.e i llation which he was now endeavouring to discharge. It ap peared that the Hon. and Gallant Officer had said that he re ceived the expressions which had fallen from the Noble Lord with contempt and disgust, and that when the Speal , er had called the Hon. and Gallant Officer to order, the Hon. and Gallant Member repeated the assertion, putting the case, however, hypothetically. Now, as he ( Sir H. Hardinge) had collected from his Noble Friend (Lord Mahon) he understood his Noble Friend as consid , Ting that the hypothetical reitera tion was but a repetition of the original grievance. The Hon. and Gallant Officer, he thought, must see that his Noble Friend had not intended anything disrespectful to the Hon. and Gallant Officer or those under his command, and that his Noble Friend in styling the troops as mercenaries, had merely assumed the general impression that troops not employed in the actual service of the country might fairly, and without casting a dishonourable imputation, be stated to be mercena ries. He therefore did entertain the hope that, after what had passed, both parties would satisfactorily terminate the matter here.—( Hear. ) Mr. O'CONNELL had certainly understood the Hon. and Gallant Member for Westminster to have put the case hypo thetically in the first instance. Mr. GOULBURN made an observation across the table, which was wholly inaudible. Mr. WARD had also understood the Hon. and Gallant Member to have used the expression hypothetically in the first instance. Mr. F. FRENCH (we believe) was understood to express a similar opinion, and added, that after the explanation from the Chair, there could not be a doubt as to the propriety of terminating the matter here. Major BE AUCLERK was quite sure the Hon. and Gal lant Member for Westminster had misunderstood the Noble Lord, and he was equally sure his Gallant Friend would act with that generosity which was his characteristic. Sir E. KERRISON said, that as he still saw no disposition on the part of the Hon. and Gallant Colonel to explain that which he ( Sir E. Kerrison) should consider an insult, he should act in the same way as the Noble Lord had done. However, after the able manner in which the whole matter had been explained by the Speaker, he did hope that it would be now ended by an amicable arrangement. —( Hear.) Mr. H. BULWER said that every body who knew the Noble Lord must be aware that he would not intentionally say any thing personally offensive to his Hon. and Gallant Friend, or those who served under him. The Noble Lord had already disclaimed any such intention, and he was sure the Noble Lord would not hesitate now to repeat such his dis claimer. Major FANCOURT said that the Hon. and Gallant Mem ber for Westminster could easily state whether or not he had put the case hypothetically. After a few words from Mr. FINN, which did not reach us, Colonel L. HAY said, that after the explanation which had been given, the case ought to be considered as having been put hypothetically, and the House therefore had a right to expect an expression of satisfaction from both parties. Lord MAHON (after repeated calls upon the Noble Lord) said—l have nothing to add to the explanation which I before gave ; it is before the House, and has been rightly construed by the Right Hon. Gentleman in the Chair. I have, how ever, yet to learn whether the Hon. and Gallant Member used those expressions in the sense I conceived them, or in the sense in which others have construed them. Colonel E VANS.—The House will clearly see, from the terms used by the Noble Lord, that he exonerates me from any thing dishonourable ; yet there has been some confusion of expressions used by the Noble Lord, which led me to appre hend that the Noble Lord still attributed dishonourable mo tives to the officers about to serve under me. The Houle will also see that I cannot understand any distinction between those individuals and myself, and I am bound to repudiate any disrespect manifested towards them. If lam to under stand that no unworthy motives are attributed to them or to me, I can have no hesitation in saying that I do not wish to injure the feelings of the Noble Lord in the slightest degree. Lord MAHON--If I understand the Hon. and Gallant Officer does not apply to me the words "contempt and dis gust," I have no hesitation in saying that I am satisfied.— ( Hear, hear.) Colonel EVANS—As I understand the Noble Lord does not impute dishonourable motives to me, and those with whom I am associated, I can have no hesitation in saving that I am satisfied. — ( Hear, hear.) The motion was then put and agreed to. Lord MAHON, in postponing the order of the day for a Committee of the whole House on the Agra Government Bill until the next Supply day, said that the feeling which had been expressed on all sides during the discussion which had just terminated, ought to satisfy the Government of the necessity of recommending to the Government of Spain not to take away the privileges of the Basque provinces. Lord J. RUSSELL said that the motion of the Noble Lord had been given way to on account of the urgency of its nature, but he hoped the understanding with respect to the Municipal Corporations Bill would be adhered to, and that no opposition would be offered to now going into Committee on that Bill. Sir W. FOLLETT said that the next clause for discus sion was the one upon which his Hon. Friend, the Member for Somerset, had given notice of an amendment. His Hon. Friend not expecting the Bill would come on to- night was not in his place, and he ( Sir W. Follett) objected to the clause being proceeded with in his Hon. Friend's absence. Lord J. RUSSELL said that he had a new clause to sub stitute (as we understood) which would make the amendment of the Hon. Member for Somerset unnecessary. An HON. MEMBER wished to know from the Noble Lord whether, under this Bill, persons now ser v ing apprenticeships would have all the privileges reserved to them w hi c h were confirmed by the Reform Act. Lord J. RUSSELL said that the 10th clause referred to the pecuniary rights and privileges of freemen, and those rights and privileges would be given to all persons now serv ing apprenticeship. An HON. MEMBER inquired whether the Noble Lord would extend it to persons who should be bound apprentice before the Bill passed into law, Lord J. RUSSELL replied in the negative, and added that meant to extend the clause to those now actually ;truing thf‘ir apprenticeships. Mr. H. HUGHES wished to know whether the sons of Freemen would not be placed in the same situation as appren- Lices? Mr. S. RICE interposed and remarked, that all these in quirieswould come on regularly in Committee, and it was in- Convenient to discuss them now. Sir W. FOLLETT was very desirous of knowing the full extent to which the Noble Lord intended to go in the 10th chuse. If the Noble Lord meant to preserve all in choate rights, he should not desire any postponement of the clause. _ _ After a few words from Mr. BONHAM CARTER and Mr. ROBINSON, which did not reach us, Mr. C. BULLER rose to presnt a petition from the city of Canterbury, against certain provisions of the Municipal Corporations' Bill, but The SPEAKER called the Hon. and Learned Gentleman to order. Mr. KEARSLEY gave notice that he should to-morrow move, that the individuals committed by the House, and now in custody in Newgate, be brought up' for judgment.—(A laugh.) y Sir W. FOLLETT again repeated his hope that the Noble Lord would defer the consideration of the 10th clau , e of the Bill. After a few words from Mr. HUGHIS HUGHES, the order of the day was read, and the House went into Committee on the MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BILL. Lord J. RUSSELL moved that the order of the day for :house going into Committee on the above Bill he read. _ liner a few words from Mr. GOULBURN and Sir WILLIAM FOLLETT, An HON. MEMBER asked whether the Noble Lord intended to preserve to apprentices bound since the passing of the Re form Bill all the rights secured to them by that Bill? Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the tenth clause, which they were about to enter upon, was intended to preserve to freemen their rights of property, and he meant to propose that those rights should be shared by all who had inchoate titles. Sir WILLIAM FOLLETT wished to know whether the Noble Lord intended to preserve to apprentices all their in choate rights; because, if he did not, he thought the clause should not be brought on in the absence of the Hon. Member for Somerset, who had given a notice upon the subject. Mr. B. CARTER was understood to say, that the only object of the amendment of the Hon. Member for Somerset was to preserve the rights of those now actually serving their apprenticeship ; and that would be done by the amendment of his Noble Friend. Sir WILLIAM FOLLETT still thought the clause had better be postponed, as he knewit was intended by several Hon. Members to move the preservation of the right of those who had inchoate titles to be freemen, as sons of freemen ; and the whole subject of inchoate rights would be more conve niently dealt with in one clause. The House then went into Committee on the Bill. On clause 10 being read, Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that he had two amend ments to propose in the clause. The first was to add the word " inhabitants" after " burgesses," in the eighth line, as there were places where the inhabitants were entitled to the privileges enumerated in the clause. The other amendment was to accomplish the object of the Hon. Member for Somer set, and preserve to apprentices the right preserved to free men. With respect to the inchoate rights acquired by the accident of birth, he did not think them worth so much atten tion as those acquired by apprenticeship ; nor could they be defended by the same arguments. It might be a hardshin upon those who had paid themselves, or had had paid for them by others, a premium upon entering into their apprenticeship, under the belief that they would enjoy certain advantages from the freedom they should thereby acquire—it might be a hard ship upon such persons to be deprived of a right for which they paid a valuable consideration ; but the same argument could not be applied to the case of those whose expectations arose from the circumstance of their being the sons of freemen. Mr. HUGHES HUGHES thanked the Noble Lord for his amendment, so far as it went; but he could not understand the distinction drawn by him between the cases of inchoate rights arising from apprenticeship, and inchoate rights arising from birth. If the persons concerned had not looked forward to being freemen in consequence of their blab, they would have been bound apprentice to their fathers, and thus have had the qualification required by the Noble Lord. As to the ac- ' cident of birth not being entitled to much consideration, lee would beg the Noble Lord to recollect that many of the mem bers of that House enjoyed their fortunes and titles by the ac cident of birth.—( Hear, hear.) Colonel SIBTBO R P considered the last amendment of the Noble Lord in the light of a sugar-plumb, to induce the House to swallow the pill by which it was accompanied. He considered it unfair to deprive freemen and their children of the rights preserved to them by the Reform Act. Heaven only knew what this Bill was preliminary to ; he supieee i. general massacre.—(Laughter.) Lord .lore` Russeee's first amendment was then put. Mr. GOUL B URN said that the circumstances of different boroughs were so various, that various modes of dealieg with them were absolutely necessary. He would mention one in stance—it was that of the borough of Morpeth, in which there were certain persons who were called free-brothers, who were neither burgesses nor freemen, but who formed, nevertheless, a Mass out of whom the burgesses were elected. These per sons were entitled to an annual income out of certain lands. He did not think that their case was provided for by this Bill. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER hopedthat the amended clause would meet all the cases which could be isentioned of the description alluded to by the Right Hon. Gentleman : if it did not, he would endeavour to extend it to such cases if possible. Mr. A. TREVOR said that his objection to this amend ment was, that it was a sort of half-and-half measure, and was, in fact, an aggravation of the original wrong. The first amendment was then agreed to. The second amendment was then put, and after a few ob servations from Mr. Estcourt, Mr. A. Trevor, Mr. William Ord, Sir M. W. Ridley, Colonel Sibthorp, Mr. Jervis, Mr. Goulburn, and Mr. Robinson, Sir ROBERT PEEL said it was desirable that this part of the measure should be settled upon a fixed and sound prin ciple. He knew it was difficult to suggest anything in which it might not be possible to show that some part of it was not in strict conformity with a general principle. But it seemed to be agreed by all parties that it was very desirable to get this corporate property available for the benefit of the com monalty at large. There might be special cases in which the property had been given to particular individuals ; but as suming that, by the original intention of the donors, the pro perty was for the benefit of the inhabitants of the boroughs at large, it was admitted that, by very long prescription, of which they could scarcely trace the origin,, this property had been appropriated to certain descriptions of inhabitants only, and that the right to participate in it wag i now only to be ac quired by birth, servitude, or marriage. It appeared to him that it would be consistent with respect to the original desti nation of this property—at least it would be as near an approxi mation to its original destination as it was possible to arrive at, if the House were to establish this principle—namely, that those who were not now married should not hereafter by marriage derive any right to participate in this property ; that those who had not yet entered into servitude should not have any such right ; but that those who had so entered into servitude should be considered as having an inchoate right; and that with respect to birth, those now actually born should be put upon the same footing as those who had now actually entered into servitude, while those who should hereafter be born should participate in the property only so far as they were members of the commonalty at large. He thought this would be putting corporate property into the hands of the common alty as speedily as possible consistent with justice to the rights of individuals. They would be respecting the rights of the existing generation at the expense only of a little delay. But this did seem to him to be an intelligent principle on which to place the question, and to which he would strongly advise the Noble Lord to accede ; otherwise the Noble Lord would be placed in a situation of great difficulty with respect to the claims by birth and servitude. If this principle should be adopted, after a certain period the whole of the corporate property would become the property of the commonalty. It was true that the share which these freemen claimed was com paratively small, but in his opinion the lower the classes were who claimed it, and the smaller their rights were, the more bounden was the House to respect those rights.—( Hear, hear.) If, indeed, they were dealing with a Rail-road Bill, for instance,- then the language to be held would be that the public good should take place of private interest; but, when dealing with the right of the humbler classes, a dif ferent feeling ought to guide their proceedings. He thought that the principle he recommended would be the best mode of conciliating that unanimity which was so desirable on this occasion.—( Cheers. ) Mr. BLACKBURNE rose amidst cries for Lord John Russell. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman however pro ceeded to say, that he thought the clause as it now stood, without amendment, was one better able to be supported upon principle than any amendment that could be suggested. any But if they were to have an amendment, then he perfectly agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet that the suggestion lie (Sir Robert Peel) had made was the next best principle. He (Mr. Blackburne) could not understand why upon principle he ought to consider the inchoate right of an apprentice before the right of any other person whatsoever ; for although it ' might be said that a person on entering into apprenticeship paid a certain sum of money for that purpose, and therefore expected all the advantages which the law gave to him, so a l so m ight it be said of the man who purchased his freedom ; and the House was aware that there were a great number of cases in which the freedom was purchased. Certainly the inevitable consequence of this Bill must be some interference with property that appeared, at least, if it did not really be long to the persons who were now in possession of it : there fore it was necessary to take care to act upon some sound principle ; and he thought it would be a sound principle not to attend to inchoate rights at all—( Hear, hear), but merely to preserve the rights of those who aro now in possession. If, however, Parliament should attend to inchoate rights, then he thought the proposition of the Right Hon. Baronet was the one that came the nearest to the principle embraced by the clause proposed by the Noble Lord.. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER quite con curred with the Right Hon. Baronet, that it was expedient that the House should deal with this part of the subject upon an intelligible and plain principle. He wished to call the at tention of the House to the distinction that ho conceived to exist between the right of property acquired in these bo roughs by means of servitude and the right acquired by birth He agreed with the Right Honourable Baronet that the great object we had in view was to make this Corporate property available in the shortest possible period to the interests of the community at largo. He would confine his arguments on the present occasion to the cases of right by birth and right by ser vitude. The right of servitude arose from contracts entered into either be the individual himself or by some person on his behalf, frittered away by such amendments its the present, it would be frequently in consideration of the payment of a sum of money, impossible that it could be carried on at all. He preferred in exchange for which he expected to derive certain pecu- the clause as it originally stood. niary advantages. In the case of a right acquired by birth, none Mr. P. THOMSON said, that if the principle involved in of these considerations arose ; there was no contract whatso- the amendment of the Honourable Member for Worcester ever : there was no payment of a fine upon the indentures ; were agree d t o , there would be no end to the extent to which there were, in short, none of the elements which peculiarly that principle might be carried.—( Hear, hear..) It was ad belonged to the case of servitude. - Gentlemen must consider, mitted that a line ought to be drawn somewhere ; and his opi that if they affirmed the question which had been raised rela- nion was, that the proper line to be drawn was that of appren tive to the right by birth, they would postpone—he would not ticeship, where a pecuniary consideration had been given, or say indefinitely, but for a very long period indeed, the attain- even if no pecuniary consideration had been paid to the corpo ment of that ultimate object which the Right Hon. Baronet ration, where a contract was entered into. If this line were opposite, in common with himself, considered they all had in drawn, it was his opinion that no hardship would be done to the view—namely, the realization of these funds for the common community. But if the amendment proposed by the Hon. interest. There was no contract in that case—there was no Member on the opposite side were adopted, this grievance pecuniary consideration—there was only the right which had would be perpetuated. accrued under the existing state of thines, which after all was Mr. WYNN contended that the House ought not to take a corporate right ; which after all, according to the statement away any property given by law without giving compensation. of the Right. Hon. Gentleman himself, was a question of He denied that any distinction could be made between appren usage gi afted on the original establishment of these Corpora- tices who had paid a fee and those whose masters had taken tions. He would not trouble the House any further ; his ob- them gratuitously. These apprentices had as good a right as ject had been merely to show the great distinction which ex- an heir, and the right of an heir was as good as that of the isted between the right by servitude and the right by birth, and person in possession ; and it was therefore unfair to deprive he trusted he had succeeded in doing so. these inchoate freemen cf their rights. He felt convinced that Mr. GOULBURN understood the Right Hon. Gentleman if th e I-louse too k away c uri e,: ate property it would shake the the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to hate argued that the foundations of all peteerte. present was a mere question of property, and should, there- Mr. G. F. YOU NG rese amidst loud cries of " Divide." fore, be considered apart from the considerations which might Ile would support the amendineet, because he did not think otherwise have been involved in its discussion. Ile contended that the principle of the clause could be adopted without dis that the principle laid down by the Right Hon. Gentleman credit and danger. was one of a most dangerous nature, inasmuch as it went to Mr. DIV ETT supported the clause; but amidst the cries establish a broad distinction between the security of property of " Divide," very little of the Hon. Gentleman's observations derived from inheritance, and that derived from purchase.— were heard in the Gallery. ( Opposition cheers.) The Right Honourable Gentleman Sir \V.FO L L l'. IT eon i e'en- el t hat the only intelligible Karl said in effect, " I will respect the right of . the ap- principle to be adopted ,‘,,..=, that every existing right, and prentice, because he has paid a pecuniary consideration for it; eeery existing ini.t.re-t, should be preserved. That war what but as the son of a freeman inherits a right which the other he wished, and he asked nothing beyond it. He admitted that acquired by his own purchase, or that of some person on his there was a difficulty as to where the line should be drawn, behalf, I will not consider his title to his property as heing but he contended that upon the whole the preservation of all equally good, or his right as being equally strong." Noe he vested interests was the beet that could be adopted. Whir would say that by drawing such distinctions, and deciding upon did the Noble Lord exeic t apprentices who were serving? such grounds, they would naturally shake the stability of pro- The Noble Lord said that. he did so because they had a perty in this country. Mark the way in which the principle pecuniary interest. Now lie (Sir W. Follett) contended would operate if the son of the freeman were not allowed the that there was no difference between an apprentice and the same advantages as the apprentice. In many of the boroughs son of a freeman. The apprentice had a right of which under discussion, only the eldest sons of freemen had a right lie came into possession at the termination of his appren to their freedom on their coming of age. In those boroughs ticeship, and the son of a freeman had a right which he it was the custom for the father to bind his second son appren- came into possession of when he arrived at the age of twenty. tice, with the view of enabling him to gain his freedom by one. Where then was the distinction between them 2—( Hear, servitude, trusting to the eldest son acquiring his privilege in hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite had argued the ordinary ,way without any apprenticeship at all. What that the exemption in question was a grievance and inconve would be the state of every family thus circumstanced if the nieace, but in his ( Sir \V. Follett's) opinion the rights of per amendment of the Noble Lord alone were introduced? Why, sons ought to haveprecedenceof inconveMeeice.—(leer, hear.) the father would be compelled unwillingly to disinherit the If the Noble Lord did not concede the point, he should per eldest son, because he relied upon the provisions of the Reform sist in dividing the Committee with reference to those who Bill, and trusted implicitly to his acquiring his freedom with- were now in possession of property, or who had inchoate rights out apprenticeship, and the whole benefit would be transferred to it. He intended to propose, that all those who, et the time to the second son.—( Hear, hear.) of passing the Act, were by inchoate right entitled to their The question was again put and carried. freedom, should possess it just as much as if that Bill had not Mr. ROBINSON then moved the addition of the following passed.—(Hear, hear.) He admitted the inconvenience aris words to the amendment :—" And also to the sons of freemen ing from the levying of tolls on certain classes of persons in a now born, who are at present entitled to their freedom in any corporate town; but still all existing rights .should be pre city or borough." served; because, if that were not the case, it would lead to Mr. MACLEAN begged to put a not improbable case, of very great inconvenience and hardship. He should propose which he thought the Committee should not lose sight, in that the right of exemption from tolls should be continued,- coming to a decision upon this point. A man, in the ex - ( Oh, oh, and Hear, heir.) He understood the Noble Lord pcctation of a family, frequently purchased his own free- I not to object to some part of his proposition,- but if he did dom with the view of making his son a free man ; whereas, riot preserve vested rights to the extent he (Sir W. Follett) if he wished him to obtain his freedom by apprenticeship , be I Proposed, he should feel it his duty to take the sense of the Committee on the subject.—(Loud cries of " Divide, " and paid fer his indentures. In the first case be obtained no- benefit whatever for himself, but expended a large sum of `c Hear, hear.") money to procure certain privileges for his son. There were Lord J. RUSSELL said, that it appeared to him that the many charities for the education of the sons of freemen, and principle on which the clause was framed was in conformity where a man had eight or nine, it was an object of great with the principle laid down by the Right Hon. Member for importance to him to obtain an education for them at as Tamworth. For instance, that the present use of the common little expense as possible. There were many instances in land of a Corporation had originated in usage, but that the which individuals had made themselves freemen, at the ex- custom might not be for the benefit of the community. The pense of a much larger pecuniary outlay than they wou ld question was, not how the clause should be framed, but what have incurred had they acquired - the right for their children course was the best to pursue with respect to all parties? Act by apprenticeship, for the express purpose of procuring this in g on this p rinci p le he was anxious to p reserve all the p resent education. The adoption of the proposed course would en- rights of property as well as the kindred rights of property tail the greatest hardship and injustice upon these persons. growing out of them. If he was sure that the rights of indivi- Lord JOHN RUSSELL would state, in every few words, duals by birth and apprenticeship were the same as the inherited the ground on which he anticipated very great danger and rights of property, and could be preserved without attaching difficulty- from drawing the line proposed by the Hon. Gen- to it the sense of all descendants, he should not be so much tleman who had just sat down. The Hon. Gentleman had opposed to it. The latter, certainly, was not the sense the Come said--and he said, no doubt, with perfect truth—that the mittee had in view, nor was it in conformity with the principle father of a family would frequently pay a very large sum for of the Bill. If he understood the proposition of the Hon. and his freedom, because be knew his children would have the Learned Member for Exeter, certainly it did not go the extent benefit of' being the sons of a freeman ; and because, in the of preserving all future rights that might arise ; but that the event of his having eight or nine sons, it would be extremely rights of property now existing, as far as those now appren convenient to him to avail himself of the corporate funds tices, should be reserved. Still he thought that there were in their education.—(Hear, hear.) Let the House con- differences between the right by apprenticeship and the right sider the effect of the amendment now proposed r a person by birth. The apprentice paid for what he gained, and per who had purchased his freedom three years ago, having then baps had served four or five ye;trs, and might consider what he two se: , would have paid a large sum for their education, was now entitled to at tile end of his servitud e as part of the , s ael they would Ire entitled to the benefit of the schools to contract.—( Hear, hear.) Those, however, who claimed their r hich the Hon. Gentleman had referred, but the other seven freedom by birth could not say that their occupations had aos he might have afterwards, would be altogether excluded been adopted in consequence of the privilege they gained by from them. The adoption of the clause, then, woulcrbe pro- servitude. Admitting the right ,ef apprenticeship, he thought &active of the great hardship, that a man who had paid a a distinction should be made between that and the right by valuable consideration for the purpose of obtaining an birth. His only fear was that when he gave way on point, the education for his sons, would not obtain the benefit for secnr- same course might be pursued on this point that was adopted ing which he had expended his money. The principle now on the Reform Bill, namely, endeavouring to force him from sought to be adopted had been laid down in the first Re- one amendment to another.—( Hear, hear.) If he believed form Bill, and it had been met with the very objection he had the Committee were whlirig to adopt a principle of the kind just stated. laid down by the Hon. and Learned Member for E xe t er , he would be disposed to .say that the great object of the Bill, Lord HOWICK—It was perfectly clear to his mind, that namely, the establishment of a future good system of municipal if they gave way to the amendment of the Honourable Mem government in corporate towns, would be defeated, provided ber for Worcester (Mr. Robinson), they would open a doo r which it would be extremely difficult to shut , and ad o p t a they took care that they did not continue any municipal or po rinci le wlich ex silence would prove to be most ill-ad - litical rights which were injurious to the welfare of those for p p ised and injurious p . The Right Honourable Baronet had the good government of whom they were then legislating. v With regard to interference with individual rights, with re stated—he thought most unanswerably—that it was of the Bard to men's prospects of rising in the world, he should be greatest possible importance that the property of the Corpora as delicate as possible of interfering, and would rather pre tions should, at as early a period as possible, be vested in the serve a broad course than do injury to any such persons. BY community at large, to be employed for purposes in which pursuing this course, the progress of their legislation would the community at large were interested, instead of being felt- be more easy, and they would occasion less exasperation ; tered away as at present, in small donations to individuals, in and therefore he should say, if the sense of the House was in a manner, he knew practically, in 99 cases out of 100, con conformity with the proposal just made by the Hon. and ducive neither to their own interest, the public interest, nor the interest of the individuals themselves. He agreed with Learned Gentleman (excepting the exempting from toll, Sco.). he would much rather that the proposition of the Honourable the Hon. Member for Huddersfield, whose exertions on the Municipal Corporation Commission had been so unremitting, Gentleman should be adopted than that they should go to a and attended with so much benefit, that it would have been division on the amendment of the Honourable Member fo r Worcester. most desirable to retain the original clause if possible ; but he was convinced that its practical effect would have been to occa- Mr. SHE IL begged to observe, that if the abstract sion hardships which it would be quite impossible for the principle of the Hon. and Learned Member was agreed to, House to prevent or remove. It had been distinctly proved, with respect to the rights gained by apprenticeship and birth, tiin some boroughs persons, on entering into their appren- they must also preserve the rights which the daughters oi, cship, were compelled to pay, not merely the ordinary pre- freemen were entitled to confer upon their husbands. 11 ,. mium to the master whom they served, but a fee of 301. into this were conceded, they would be involved in all sorts of difficulties. the corporation chest—( Hear, hear)—as they distinctly said, with a view to the pecuniary benefits which were afterwards to After a few words from Mr. LENNARD, which were ID' result to them from the freedom so acquired. In these cases, audible in consequence of the loud cries of " Divide, divide," persons having actually paid for their freedom, it would be Lord J. RUSSELL said, that if he ri g htl y understood tbe quite impossible for that House to deprive them of it. It was proposition of the Hon. and Learned Member for Exeter, he quite impossible to distinguish the cases in which an increased would recommend that the further discussion should be I ° . ; premium had been paid with a. view to the ulterior advantages journed until to - morrow , and in the meantime he w ishe d to be gained ; from what he had just suggested, and as in all the Hon. Member would let him see the words of his cases of apprenticeship something was bona fide paid—some amendment, and he would then state whether he could agre e actual service performed—with a view to pecuniary advantages, to them. he thought it only fair that those pecuniary advantages should Mr. WARBURTON made some observations which we be preserved to the partiei interested. On strict legal prin• altogether inaudible in the gallery. ciples, inchoate rights might stand on an equal footing with The House then resumed, the CHAIRMAN reported prove° these ; but morally speaking, there could be no doubt that a and obtained leave to sit again to-morrow. ._ right which was inherited, and which was in itself a great The other orders of the day were th en dispos e d of, an d the abuse and an usurpation, stood on very different grounds from House adjourned at a quarter-past two. one acquired by servitude. He entreated the Committee to consider the practical effect of the amendment. They must remember that they were not only dealing with the rights of land and common, but with the right of exemption from toll ; and they must remember that that exemption was already felt as a great inconvenience and hardship. There were two no tices of amendments in the printed list at that moment, the object of which was to deprive even the existing freemen of that right of exemption from tolls, which the present measure proposed to preserve so far as they were concerned. He ad mitted that this would not be an act of justice • but he con tended, nevertheless, that to continue for a period the termina tion of which no man could foresee, the exemption of a certain class of men from the tolls paid by their fellow-citizens was an inconvenience of so serious a description that the House, in stead of increasing, should be most anxious to prevent it. It was well known, he believed, that in the town of Liverpool one merchant had an advantage over another merchant in precisely similar circumstances, and with an equal amount of capital, of not less than 1,4001. He did not exactly know how much it amounted to per annum, but he thought 5001. He wanted to know how the Hon. Gentleman proposed to distinguish be tween the right of exemption from toll and rights of common and meadow, both of which stood, as he conceived, on pre cisely the same footing; all of which had been originally granted by charter for the common benefit of the whole town ; but which, in the process of time and process of occupation, had been alienated and perverted from their original use until they degenerated into a special exemption in favour of one part ticnlar class of inhabitants. —( Cheers. ) Sir ROBERT INGLIS felt bound to say that this was the very first instance in which he had heard the misapplication of property urged as an argument against the right to it. He was perfectly astonished at the doctrine laid down by the Noble Lord. Lord HO WICK must beg to interrupt the Hon Baronet for one moment. He had made a very serious charge against him, and he hoped he might be permitted to explain it. What he had said was, that he concurred with the Right Hon. Baronet in thinking it desirable, as soon as it could be done consistently with justice, that this property should be brought into the hands of the community at large. To show he importance of such a proceeding, he had adverted to its perversion from the objects to which it was originally intended to be applied, and to the little benefit its expenditure con ferred even upon the individuals to whose use it was chiefly applied.—( Hear.) Sir ROBERT INGLIS resumed—The Noble Lord would not do justice, if he consented to make the proposed distinc tion between the right by birth and the right by servitude. The right in both cases was equal—a pecuniary consideration had been paid for each. He held that the House had no more right, on general grounds of expediency, to divert the funds of the Corporations from their original source, than they had to put into one general hotch-potch the property of the Mem, bers on both sides of the House and apply them to the general purposes of the State. Sir ROBERT PEEL explained—He had specially re served the case of a special bequest, in which there was a clear legal right. He had excepted the cases in which the property of the community had been by lone perscription diverted to in dividual puro,oses, and he had added, with respect to this pro perty, that he did believe the intention was that it should be long to the community at large.—( Cheers. ) Mr. BLACKBURNE said a few words in explanation. He was of opinion that the Bill was founded upon the best principles ; but if it were to be allowed that the Bill should be LIVERPOOL COTTON MARKET, JUNE 22 We have experienced a moderate demand for Cotton to-day The sales amount to 2,500 bales, at full market prices, anu consist of 100 Pernams, 151 d. to 16d. ; 200 Bahias, )4d. to ibid. Remainder American, from Sid. to I lid., and a few Orleans, 130. ClDER.—Accounts from Bridgewater state that, from the appearance of the orchards in that neighbourhOod , larger crops of apples are expected than hare been know for some years past, and cider, consequently, is now selling for less than U. per hogshead.--Barnstap/s Advertiser. BIRTHS. On the 24th inst., at Chelsea, the lady of the Rev. George Everard, of a son. The lady of C. G. Wynne, Esq., of a daughter. 4thel4th inst., at Lindores, Fife, the lady of Captain .4. George late of the 2d Life Guards, of a son. On the 21st inst., at Bluebridge-house, Esse x , the wife of the Rev. W. C. Totton, of a daughter. MARRIED. On the 19th inst., at Charleton, Fee.;hire, James Montgomery, Esq., eldest son of Archibald Montgomery, Esq., of The Whim, to Eleanora, eldest daughter of the late John Anstruther Thomson, Esq., of Charleton. On the 24th inst,, at St. George's Church, Hanover-square, the Hon. Mr. Rowley, t o Miss Shipley, of Piccadilly. On the 24th inst., at Sutton, Surrey, Halbert Wathen, E 5 11" youngest son of the late Samuel Wathen, Esq., of Newhouse , Gloucestershire, to Harriet Louisa, second daughter of the late James Blunt, Esq., of Wallop, Hants. On the 20th inst., It St. Winnor, the Rev. John Daubuz, Rec tor of Creed, to Mary Uzella, eldest daughter of William Foster, Esq., of Lanwithan, Cornwall. On the 24th inst., William Richardson, A.M., surgeon, Bays water, son of the late Patrick Richardson, Esq., of Flatfield, Perth shire, N,11„ to Louisa, daughter of William Capps, Esq., Porches ter-terrace, Bayswater. DIED. At Tamworth, C. W. Conolly, second son of Colonel Conolly. On the 16th inst., at Woolwich-common, in her 14th year, Mary Hamilton, daughter of Thomas Stephens Davies, Esq., Royal Mi litary Academy, Woolwich. On the 15th ult„ at Philadelphia, United States, aged .2,5, Mr. George Smith, youngest son of the late Mr. William Smith, of Southampton-row, Russell-square, London. On the 22d inst., in Queen-square, Bloomsbury, Mary, wife of William Pulley; Esq., aged 79. On the 23d inst., at Uxbridge-common, Mr. Daniel Scott Nor ton, in his 58th year, On the 23d inst., in Great Ormond-street, Edward Francis, Esq. , of Gracechureh-street, and Waltham-abbey, Essex, aged 54. On the 22d inst., Mr. Condell, of New Bond -street, aged 75. On the 15th inst., at Partis College, aged 65, Frances Marl' relict of the late Morgan Reynolds. In Suffolk, aged 90, John Cobbold, E sq ., o f H o ly Wells, and for merly of the Cliff Brewery,. Ipswich. On the 4th inst., in his 76th year, at Dolydsl-y-cau, near Dolgelly, Dr. Owen Pughe, the celebrated Welsh Lexica" grapher. He was found in the morning lying on the bed with his clothes on, and is supposed to have died of apoplexy. His maser/ will be long cherished by the lovers of Cambrian literature. On the 10th inst., at Edgeott, Thomas Carter, Esq., of Upper Brook -street, in his 75th year. London Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, of No• 112, Strand, at The Sun Office, No. 312, Strand, in the coital of Alidcilelex. S. , .LE nr ' THE CC ING th UNITED KIN do hereby give at Ten o'clock PUT UP TO ford, several La and consisting Straps, Bolts, Boilers, Stoves, Persons wishi lwrintendent for Catalogues an Yard. THE SA COMP PLYMOUTH and Passengers ING at Nine o' Cowes, weather Oelock. Office, No. I. also at the St. office, Spread I conveyed to Cor THE RHIls GREAT GENE PACKETS. Passengers to C by these vessels civantages. Fi and other plae , powerful Steam lies, love. the (' ROTTERD. day and Saturd I C'ednseday and The well-kno CHANT and LONDON MI ANTWERP Sunday and Th Sunday and We alslo route to th eheanest. The 3 2 hours, the t and a most beat ta Cologne, 11. OSTEND, 4 night. Berths to Ro roan's, 61, Chai th e Spread Eaf th e Company, t For freight The General regularly for Ha Ind from Brigh General Stec ROY AI T HE E: Atimis-ii on K ING'S CUTLI of the best Ivor Silver-h Silver-h TROAIAS C( 13 EST I most al which never op wholesale and FRANKS and mty• DATEN AL and 80, t t'spectfully to i apply them (t Very best Beavt Second Qualit) Very best Live Second Qualit3 Ladies' Hats ether Caps . ENJA TENT, leaved from 5, W ARK, foot c „'ae Nobilit STOp ls sl l of Hortitulturii Cricket. Clubs, effectually resit May b. , had of A Paviiinn of dining 1000 . , 3,1 u, gu , es, N ew and Seco Fruit Trees; Rop es , Tarpau . Flagg and • Rooms decorat Orders, per A stand on 208, Picca.dill] I INTER _A Daily krriving in at Irelanci• HOLYH E Evenh:v• LEE;IS (f boncaster„ an 4 orning at Pendent Tall , Ind the Euler MANCHE Button, tray 111 orning at S EDINBUI Coaches, ever antes passeng their convenii SHREWS ton and Wart El ening , at a NOTTINI reduced fares every Afterni RATH am nitIGHT , Southampton ,„CHELTE Urwich„ 131 ‘-'lTingh and all parts ROYAL Hereford, Ca Stafford, and The Publi t a'ora the G' tiLUE BOA INN, Wood lonveyed fra PARIS, ( lind Italy, di, UNDER th TIIO] IGI-Ir I \ l ACE reatest imp inventor has editors of th, restorative, from eatarac saes of the .eft off after to contagion toast wholes 'commended t " , S. The Tylmnal bevo Iwd-itree 1 -0111 h. m. COPY at r eet ,, mow fbr a t, , ue tre a t b,///ell got do h. ,l °' t. ' N OT •annot zfloo "'Rain, Sir, fight restor 01 - I.SER' Sept. 22, 31 in'eparation.. knovv, that l'nrging the scrofulous n when toilim full) to ens] of labour." OLISER April i 9, to so mai'y new t• their vii 'verified tha `tile new ap ItIon ; ever) i'zo.dos of 1 'stoves pro . tet, tha stnne'li Ey tone to the Lcater.i„ the tt• effi cac y 'n•7l-1 exp,p 0 33Sy; 41 ? canniste ,:riature I and "'L. - Ave-nee 'tnade hay aud