The Sun. — London, England, 1835-06-13 00:00:00

nd disatged in the contest, were to be thrown as a hurthen On tie resources of this country? MELBOURNE in reply said that this was neither the ri,,..)zt courteous nor the most convenient /node of obtaining information. However, with respect to the in q uir y made of bim by the Noble Lord, he had no objection to say that those who entered the service of the Queen of Spain must look to the Government they meant to serve for all the consequences to arise from that service. They would enter it of course with their eyes open to what they were doing, and therefore they must take all the chances connected with the service in v-liieh they engaged, and should these chances prove un favourable to them, they would have no claim, either for cotruensation or otherwise, on the Government of this country. le Duke of WELLIN GT 0 N on Monday should move for production of the important papers connected with the sub?ct, for the purpose of drawing forth more distinct expla nati ,ns than had yet been given. '.; le Marquis of LONDONDERRY looked upon this Mat .3r as one, at the present moment, of the highest import ance ; and he hoped that due notice would be given of the day when the Order in Council was to be taken into consi dera,iou. `The conversation then dropped. 1, :le Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from a Mt Johnson, residing in Smithfield, against the removal of tan - .i,hfield Market. CANADA. 1 he Earl of ABERDEEN had not the slightest wish to embacrass the Government, nor should he now have intro du ed the subject, had he not seen in the Gazette the appoint ment cf a Noble Lord to the office of Governor. That fact jus'ified him in bringing forward the question. He should state to their Lordships what was the condition of the question at the resignation of the late Government; and that statement would afford the Neble Lord opposite a very fitting opportu nits to make known, La far as was consistent with the public set :ice, the course which the present Government intended to pursue in this matter.— Hear, hear.) Their Lord sh;ss might be aware that in the early part of last year a series of resolutions was ps ;.setl by the House of Assembly. These resolutions, which wese ninety-two in number, embodied a variety of grievances, ,snd. branched int.) several subjects, which comprised much crimina,! l ve mat ter, both against the local Government and the Governmet at lame. The resolutions were communicated to the Imperiat liament, and at an early period they were specially referred to a Committee of the House of Commons. That Committee narrowly investigated the subject, and continued its labours for upwards of three months. After examining every document of importance, and hearing the evidence of several individuals, th ‘y made a report in July ; but they delivered no opinion upon tb matters which had come under their consideration, merely la: ,enting the prevalence of misconception, and trusting that tho Government would adopt the measures requisite for putting an cud to the existing differences. From that time until the 'dissolution of the Noble Viscount's Government, he was not ay: are that any steps were taken in accordance with the hopes of the Committee. True it was that the Right Hon. Gentle msn who then filled the office of Secretary for the Colonies di 1, on the very day of the dissolution, the 15th of November, ade,ess . ss a despatch to Lord Aylmer, informing him that it was lit* intention to transmit to him plenary instructions on every point ; but the dissolution of Parliament prevented him. s , Were it not for that dissolution," said the Right Hon. Gen tk .nan " despatches would be sent to you on the 17th of N wember." This he (Lord Aberdeen) would only state, that wl. itever might have been the intentions of the Right Hon. Gsntleman, no such instructions as he contemplated could have been transmitted by the time specified. Of any such instruc tions not a vestige was to be found in the Colonial Office ; nor was there a record of any opinion in respect to the settlement of the disputes in Canada. When he (Lord Aberdeen) suc ceeded to the Colonial Office, he entered upon a question en tirely new to him, and without the aid of any papers or any plan prepared by the preceding Government. He delayed not sulking himself conversant with all the bearings of the sub ject, and, after a certain period, he came to conclusions, by which he was induced to address to Lord Aylmer a despatch, announcing the intention of his Majesty's Governmett to ap point a Special Commission for the purpose of inquiring into, and, as far as lay in their power, of redressing the grievances dirt might be submitted to them. At the same time he pre sented Lord Aylmer with a general view of the spirit in w'tich the instructions for the Commission would be drawn Out. The contents of that despatch Lord Aylmer commu nicated to the House of Assembly. It was inserted in the celonial newspapers, from which it was copied into the jour ne's at home ; and hose Noble Lords who had seen the de spatch would, he was confident, attach no blame to the spirit by which the then Government was actuated in their anxiety to effect a proper settlement. By that spirit the Government was actuated throughout, and up to the very moment of his q u'tting office he took all those steps which, in his humble igment, could lead to a satisfactory termination of the unfor ti nate disputes. Having obtained the concurrence of his col leagues in the course of policy he recommended, and having veseived his Majesty's approbation of that course, a Noble Earl ss appointed Commissioner, and the first week in April fixed upsn for his departure for Canada. That office was relinquished be the Noble Earl, after the resignation of the Ministry ; but 14s was confident that if the Government of the Noble Vis ct, 'nt had been disposed to continue the same policy, and make sto material alteration in the instructions which had bean d, awn ot os the Noble Earl would willingly have proceeded in the execution of his duties ; and he (Lord Aberdeen) would have wii;ingly taken upon himself his share of respon • !Ability for those instructions. To detail their nature would of course be highly improper on his part, and, therefore, it u ould be sufficient to state that they were in strict con rmity with the declarations which he made in that Ii use. They embraced the largest possible concessions, and wee of the most conciliatory character ; but at the same time n t inconsistent with the maintenance of those principles which to him appeared indispensable for preserving the King's domi s on in those provinces. Short of those principles, the instruc t .-ns to question were founded upon maxims of the utmost con c iation. When he talked of liberal concessions, did he mean that the Canadians had no claim to them ?—( Hear.) By no means ; and he could not understand what interest the country • buld have in dealing with Canada otherwise than on the most liberal and comprehensive principles of conciliation.—( Hear. ) Fist, however, the Noble Lord, who succeeded him as Cobo -1 Secretary, did not think proper to make use of the in ructions in question. Most sincerely did he hope that the euurse which the Noble Lord had thought proper to adopt would be followed by advantageous results ; but he confessed i, was not without serious apprehensions that he regarded the ange which had been made in the proceedings. In the first ,ce, much delay was occasioned, and that delay it was pro f ble would be productive of considerable detriment to the sa tss'actory arrangement of the differences. He could not re f: aim from expressing his regret that the persNl entrusted with c execution of the important office of conc ili a tion—and he gged to assure their Lordships that he meant no invidious lusion—should be the individual whom his Majesty's . 4 .7 443 - a rnment had chosen. After the steps adopted by his Ma j •s,y's Government, it was, as he before stated, impossible fur the Noble Earl appointed by the late Ministry to have con . tted in office. He could only say that with that Noble Earl had had no personal communication, nor was the Noble Earl e supporter of the Government which offered him the appoint . nt. With no appointment had he more reason to be sa t , :led than with that of the Noble Earl, and deeply did he regret that his valuable services had, after all, not been called i to requisition. From the appointment of a Governor and t :stain-General of the North American Colonies, it ▪ s natural to infer that no Commission would be resorted —( Hear, hear.) If he (Lord Aberdeen) could have seen t o expediency of immediately recalling Lord Aylmer, prid appointing a new Governor, he should not have I sitated in preferring that course to sending out a Commis • nier whose powers must be more limited than those of a Go t ~! abr. _But by all accounts it appeared that not only was a es. Governor to go out, but also certain Commissioners. aSach an arrangement appeared to him useless—even worse than useless. His motion was, that there be laid upon the ta -1 'se a copy of the Commission by which Isis Majesty had been Fussed to appoint the Earl of Gosford Governor and Captain ;ones.. 'per Canada, Nova Scotia, and the Island of ;New Lord la ;:s` LG said there Lordships were well aware rt .he magnitude and importance of the question. ' He had -i - tvv-stigateci it, and, after the most mature consideration, and the full and deliberate concurrence of his colleagues, he t ought it his duty not to adopt the measures of the Noble al. The Noble Earl had expressed his regret that the Iss. son appointed by the late Government as Commissioner ,d not gone out to Canada. He joined with the Noble Earl s that feeling of regret, and he could assure the House that i had been the most sincere desire of his Majesty's Ministers ts save availed themselves of the talents and services of that ,ble Individual. It was now, perhaps, time for him to in t,. •rn their Lordships what coarse his Majesty's Ministers in tended to pursue. The intention of the Government nss, instead of appointing a single Governor or Com sssioner, to appoint three Commissioners, the principle of which to be the Governor. What was now the situa feu of Canada ? Last year, as the Noble Lord had observed, ft. , House of Assembly sent to this country a petition f tai 'Aug a representation of their grievances. That pe t...sin was referred to a Committee of the House of Corn -11+,419, and nothing had been done respecting it since that eriod. With respect to the grievances of the Assembly, those were three modes which might be pursued. The first v is, either , at once instantaneously to reject every complaint, or to reject in part or to eoucede in part ; in both these cases a "shout inquiry, or to resolve to inquire into each grievance. IS 0 reject without inquiry would obviously be an improper line e., proceeding, and would meet with great opposition. The rances complained of in the petition had already been a Sorts a Committee of the House of Commons, upon which evidence was taken, which evidence, by order of the House, V.ss suppressed and not made public. These petitioners, if t ...i course to which he referred were adopted, would very na t, sail, say, " We came over to establish a case of grievance : true, you have examined us, but our examination has been wypressed, and you at once, without a public declaration, have r 'ected our demands." The second course likewise could Bat foe adopted, for it was open to similar objections, and would give just grounds of complaint to another party in Canada. 'I :le grievances in the petition in question were alleged to o:.ist by one particular party, and if the House did not reject their demands, the opposite party would cons pesin and if concessions were made the other p art y would also P be dissatisfied. There were now in this country two deputies, from Montreal and Quebec, specially dele g .ted to be heard in the matter of this petition. They would uadoubtedly have a right to complain if they found that concessions were made without giving them an oppor tunity of stating their objections. As from what he itsa already said, he thought he might conclude that some imquiry was necesary, the question now to be considered was *here should that inquiry take place ? He should certainly a t say that the proper field for that inquiry was amongst the peo- 1 plc complaining, and in that country to which the remedy was to be applied. Would not more Commissioners than one be necessary to inquire into the different matters requiring expla nation—into matters of such extreme variety, inot only politi cal, but legal, that he thought it was no disparagement to say that no one individual could grapple with them all in their whole extent ? It was not by merely receiving - information at this distance that a satisfactory conclusion could hope to be obtained ; but if it were really wished to ascertain what were the practical grievances complained of, and the practical reme dies to be applied, the best and the only mode to be adopted was to meet the - steady and sober-minded in their own country, and from them to learn the real state of the question. He had stated, he thought; sufficient to satisfy their Lordships. The Earl of ABERDEEN withdrew his motion, adding that though he could not 'blame his Majesty's Government for tile course they had pursued on the present occasion, yet, if by their ulterior proceedings they render it necessary, he certainly should consider it his duty to move for a copy of the instruc t tions given to the Commissioners appointed by his Majesty's late Government. Several private Bills were forwarded a stage, and their Lordships then adjourned at half-past seven o'clock to Monday L next. HOUSE OF COMMONS, JUNB 12. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Ten Minutes before Three o'clock. Captain ALSAGER presented a petition from an indivi dual against the London and Greenw ich Railwa y . BELFAST AND CAVE-HILL RAILWAY. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD moved the second read- ing of this Bill. Mr. EMMERS ON TENNANT after presenting several petitions against the Bill, one from a gentleman named Dunbar, who complained that his property would be seriously injured by it, begged to ask the Hon. Member for Dundalk why it was that the first Bill obtained by this Company had not been proceeded upon ? After some observations against the measure, the Hon. Member moved as an amendment that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. Lord CASTLEREAGH presented a petition from the landholders of Down, in favour of the Bill Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD, as this opposition to the Bill had been started, would take the liberty of en ::.ring into some details. One of the reasons why the rail-,7v had not been sooner proceeded with, was that the not been valued. The jury co uld not a g ree as hal! as to the value o the land, and the time for valuation then had expired. With rega,7l to the capital of the Company , it had the necessity ourchasin been originally fixed at 7,0 XOl., but value fixed u f po p n the land, ground for anew harbour, and the' ca ital. An application had had obliged them to increase their been made.io.the Government for assistance, and an engineer, that engineer. Bald, Eiq., had been sent down by them, anal he would read, to the House two or three extrac ts from the report of engineer. The Hon. Member then read some extracts, by which it appeared that Mr. Bald had highly approved of the railway ; that he estimated the cost at 12,000/. ; and that it would be most beneficial to the town of Belfast, and greatly improve and increase the agricultural re sources of that district. A slight deviation from the ori ginal plan was also suggested, and then the engineer re commended the Government should advance a sum of 10,000/. to assist the undertaking. These were the grounds on which the present Act had been applied for to enlarge and extend the powers of the Company, and after this explanation he trusted that no further opposition would be given to the second reading.—( Hear.) Sir R. BATE 6 ON, as a person not individually connected with the Bill, begged to say a few words. He agreed in what had fallen from the Hon. Member for Belfast, that if this Bill was a public benefit it should receive the supportcof the country ; but feeling that it was not a public benefit, but a job, he would oppose it, and second the amendment of the Hon. Member for Belfast. He believed that the Bill was for the advantage of private individuals, and not for that of the public. He believed it was a job, and he would oppose it as such by every means in his power. Mr. O'CONNELL thought it singular that the Hon. Member for Londonderry should state that he agreed with the Hon. Member for Belfast : the latter had said that the measure would be beneficial to the public, and the former had characterised it as a job. ( Hear, hear, hear, and a laugh.) This was rather a singular mode of agreeing. ( A laugh.) He hoped the House would allow the Bill to be read a second time, and if the proposition of the Hon. Member for Belfast, that the land should be valued, was not previously settled, that Honourable Member could oppose it on its third reading. A sum of 4,000/. had been already expended on the purchase of ground, and all this would be lost if the Bill was now thrown out. It was only fair to let this Bill be read a second time, and if the interests of every body were not attended to in Com mittee, no one would oppose the third reading of the Bill more strongly than he would. By going into Com mittee, the interests of every person would be consulted, and it would be impossible to turn the matter into a job. Un der these circumstances, the House, understanding the case, he was sure they would not prevent this Bill from going into Committee. Mr. RUTHVEN, as one of the original. _subscribers, pro. tested against this Bill being considered a job. Mr. PRYME objected to the Bill going into Committee. Before the parties to this Bill called for an extension of time, they ought to consider the terms of other private Bills to sa tisfy private claims. The Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin was mistaken in saying that there were only two peti tions against this Bill. Five petitions had been presented against it, and he held in his hand another petition from Bel fast to the same effect. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when there appeared— For the second reading ... Against it 111ajority for the second reading STANDING ORDERS. Sir M. S. STUART rose to move, pursuant to an instruc tion from the Committee on the Glasgow Water Works Bill, that he be permitted to make a special Report to the House that the Standing Orders had not been complied with. On the Hon. Baronet bringing up the special Report, Mr. AGLIONBY rose to bring the subject of the same Standing Orders under the special consideration of the House. The question was one which he was afraid he would feel great difficulty in bringing distinctly under the consideration of the House. He had no wish to oppose the Bill, but the decisions of private Committees were so frequently inconsistent with the standing orders, that he considered it to be his duty to bring the matter before the House, in order that some uniform practice should be established, which would be a very great conve nience to both agents and parties. The Hon. Gentleman then went into the history of the Bill before the Committee, and stated in conclusion, that his object was that the Report might not be received, so as to prevent the Bill being dis cussed upon its merits. For that purpose he appealed to the f.hair what course he ought to pursue. Sir GEORGE CLERK could not understand upon what ground thd Committee had come to the resolution that the Standi for the Order; ha d not been com p lied with. He thought the best course use would be to send back the Report to the Committee, with ins:!actions to proceed with the Bill. ittee on the Bill had acted Mr. WILK S thought the Coni 74 very properly, and he should support ir Report. The SPEAKER decided that the petition.'were at liberty to go on with the Bill, but as the Standing Orderi ruled that existing rates could not be increased or altered, that con:. l tiCsn must be imperative upon them. Col. PE RC E VAL gave notice of a motion that in the case of the Ennis election, liberty be given to Mr. Gurney the short hand writer and his clerk, and to Mr. Ley the Clerk to the House, to give evidence before any Grand Jury, Magis trate, or Committee of inquiry, in relation to any proceedings in this case. The motion was understood to be withdrawn, afterwards, on the ground of informality. THE PENSION LIST. Mr. L. BULWER took the opportunity of asking the Hon. Member of Southwark, whether it was his intention to move a Call of the House for Tuesday next, the day appoint ed for bringing in a motion of which he bad given notice. Mr. HARV E Y replied that it was his intention certainly to bring forward his motion, but when he should do so would depend more upon others than himself. The Honourable Member for Weymouth had a motion for the same day, which would take precedence, and would occupy some considerable time ; so that if his motion were allowed to stand for that day, it would not possibly come on ; and it would be a great inconvenience to the House to persist in a Call, when it was not likely the motion could be brought forward. But whenever that motion was submitted, he did intend to have a Call of the House ; and as there was a doubt as to the time which would be occupied by the motion of the Hon. Member for Weymouth, he intended to defer his own motion until Tuesday, the 14th of July. Mr. FOWELL BUXTON begged to assure the Hon. Member and the House, that he was determined to persevere in his motion. THE SLAVE TRADE. The HON. MEMBER, seeing the Right Hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for the Colonies in his place, would beg to ask him if any measures had been taken by his Ma jesty's Government to effect the release of slaves illegally introduced into the Mauritius, or if any steps had been taken to provide compensation► for the owners? Sir GEORGE GREY said nothing had been done since 1820 upon this subject. The greatest difficulty existed in establishing the fact of the illegal introduction of persons, and in establishing their identity. Under the existing law for the emancipation of slaves, those brought illegally into the Mauritius, and the other French colonies, became subject to an apprenticeship of a very short period, which was little re moved from absolute freedom. There was a power given to the assistant Commissioners under the Act to examine wit nesses, and award compensation. Mr. FOWELL BUXTON said the answer of the Right Hon. Gentleman was so unsatisfactory to him that he begged to give notice that an Hon. and Learned Friend of his would brim the subject before the House. Sir G. GREY said a few words in explanation. Mr. O'CONNELL thought it was only fair that the al leged owners should receive compensation. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. Mr. WAKLE Y complained of the great inconvenience of taking the ballot for the entry of names of Members as early as twelve o'clock. It was not , only an inconvenience, but a great injustice to Members who resided at a dis tance. He (Mr. W.) lived two miles off, and had to come that distance every day for perhaps 2 or 3 weeks, for the chance of getting his name entered, while Members who lived con tiguous to the House could come in at any moment. If the House were of opinion that it would be more convenient to take the ballot a quarter of an hour previous to the Speaker taking the Chair, he would submit a motion to that effect.—( Hear, 'l4 ' lE - SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, JUNE 13, 1835 hear.) As it appelred the House acquiesced in the propo sition, he N 'ould beg to move that the ballot be taken a quar ter of an hour' previous to the Speaker taking the Chair: The SPEAKER having put the question, Mr. BUCKINGHAM thought if the imposition were ac ceded to, they would have no ballot at all. On one occasion the names were entered seriatim, but this practice was abused. He suggested that any Hon. Member bringing down a petition to the• House should be allowed to enter his name on the list, and that any person being absent when called, his name should be put at the bottom of list. Mr. GOULBURN suggested, as the subject was likely to lead to discussion, the Hon. Member should give notice of a motion on the subject. Mr. WA K LEY had no objection to withdraw his motion, and would now give notice that he should bring the subject before the House on Monday next. DORSETSHIRE LABOURERS. The same Hox. MEMBER then presented three petitions from Glasgow, from Camberwell and Walworth, and from the tan ners of London, praying for the recall of the Dorsetshire la bourers. He would not then enter into any discussion upon ' this subject, as it would be regularly brought on on the 25th 0' next month. IMPORTATION OF WINES. The Ho:4. MEMBER also gave notice that he would move for a return of all wines imported into this country through the ports of Portsmouth, Plymouth, Falmouth, Weymouth, and Rochester, from January, 1834, to January, 1835. COMMISSION. The House was here summoned by the Usher of the Black Rod, to hear his Majesty's assent given, by Commission, to va rious Bills, for which see Lords' report. INVERNESS ELECTION. Mr. BANNERMAN presented a petition from John M' Queen (Agent for the petitioners against the election of the sitting member) praying for an extension of the time for considering the Inverness-shire Petition, and moved that the Order of the Day for taking the petition into consideration be discharged ; and that they be taken into consideration on Monday, July 1. Sir GEORGE CLERK made rob objection to the dis charge of the order, but thought that the time mentioned was too distant. Mr. BANNERMAN said that the petitioners required a great deal of time, on account of the distance which the petitioners had to go to collect evidence in support of their petition. It was then agreed that the consideration of the petition should be postponed until Monday next. IRISH TITHES. Lord MORPETH gave notice, that he should postpone his motion on Irish Tithes, which stood for Friday, the 19th instant, to the 26th instant. Sir G. CLERK wished to know from the Noble Lord whether it was his intention to introduce a Bill ? Lord MORPETH replied that he should bring forward his motion with a view to the introduction of a Bill, but he could not enter into the details until the time arrived. DISTRESS IN IRELAND. Mr. SINCLAIR wished to ask the Noble Lord if his Ma jesty's Government had received any official accounts of an alleged famine prevailing in the west of Ireland? Lord MORPETH said that the Government had re ceived official intelligence of a very painful nature on the sub ject alluded to, and that the matter was under the most anxious, but at the same time the most cautious, consideration of the Government. Whilst they had every desire to afford all the relief they could to the sufferers, they felt the propriety of avoiding, in the interim, raising hopes which might subse quently not be realised. Mr. SINCLAIR said that as the subject was in the bands of Government, he was satisfied. Mr. O'CONNELL observed that he feared, if any expec tation were held out of relief from the Government, the landed proprietors in the neighbourhood of the distressed districts would throw the burthen of relief, which should naturally fall upon themselves, entirely off their bands. IPSWICH ELECTION. Colonel PERCIVAL made some observations, which were not heard, respecting the Resolution of the House, that certain parties concerned in the conduct of the late election, should be brought up in custody.—( Hear.) We understood him to give some explanation why some of them had not sur- rendered. The Sergeant-at-Arms appeared at the Bar, and, having been questioned by the Speaker, announced that in obedience to a resolution of the House and the Speaker's warrant, he had taken Mr. J. D. Dasent into custody. He then advanced to the table, bore out the mace, and returned to the bar accom companied by Mr. Dasent. Mr. GISBORNE had a petition to present from the pri soner at the bar. The petition, which he would beg to read to the House, stated—( Cries of " Withdraw ;" the prisoner was then ordered to withdraw)—Mr. Gisborne proceeded. The Hon. Member then read the petition, which in substance set forth that he stood charged with absconding in order to avoid giving evidence before the Committee. Though he might have been guilty of a breach of the privileges of the House, he did not mean to act in contempt of its authority. He was pre sent at the election for the representation of Ipswich, and took an active part in it in favour of the late Members. But hear ing of the petition, and unwilling to appear as evidence, as he was given to understand he would be required to 4 ; and anxious besides to give the sitting Members an opportunity of selecting the time for his examination, if this examination were thought advisable, he left the country of his own free accord, without the suggestion or dictation of any other person what ever. But, hearing afterwards from Mr. Kelly that certain charges were made, which his presence was necessa r y to refute, he again voluntarily returned, and appeared before the Com mittee, and gave his evidence freely and without reserve. The Committee had (so we understood) come to a resolution that the case of bribery was not made out, and that the sitting Members were duly elected. That resolution on further in.. vestigation they subsequently rescinded, and a greed to other resolutions, which included petitioner with others in the offence of abscondingato avoid giving evidence. That accusation the petitioner humbly submitted did not apply strictly to him, as he voluntarily came before the Committee to give his evidence, and he should not be confounded with Pilgrim and others, who were stated to have given their eviden ce by compulsion. In conclusion, be begged to say that he did not evade the exe cution of the Speaker's warrant, but voluntarily surrendered when he heard there was an order issued by the House to have him taken into custody. Mr. GISBORNE having only done a simple act of justice in submitting the prisoner's defensive statement to the House, would offer no objection to a proposition that he be discharged from custody, if it were consonant with t he feelings of the House. He would then move, " That the prisoner be repri manded and discharged." Mr. P. STE WA RT did not hear the Hon. Member's mo tion, but he supposed it was to have the prisoner discharged. To that he would not object, as he would be glad that the pri soner was leniently dealt with, for his case shou ld be considered apart from the other witnesses. Mr. CAMPBELL thought if he were reprimanded and discharged it would serve all purposes. Mr. AGLIONBY took a different view of the case. The, amount of the prisoner's explanation, so far from being an ex culpation, was a justification of his offence, and an aggravation of it. Mr. CHAPMAN thought tho witness was entitled to con siderable indulgence and favour. Lord J. RU SSE LL said this was a case that ought not to be so lightly disposed of. It was one deeply involving the pr i v ;!..4zes of the House and the freedom of election. After the Comnaltie".9 had deliberately resolved that the conduct of the prisoner was such as to warrant his arrest, it was not right he should now, on such grounds as those of his petition, be let off. It was asserted by the last speaker that the petitioner acted with a fine feeling of honour in returning to give evi dence. But was he not before guilty of bribery? and what could be said of such a man's sense of honour? The peti tioner besides said that he absconded from regard for the sit ting Members, and came back to serve them. Surely the House should receive such an exculpation with great caution. He professed to act from a sense of justice, yet it seemed he acted the partisan all through. The excuse of the petitioner. should not be received by the House. He .( Lord J. Russell) did not wish for any severe punishment against the petitioner, but he thought, however, that some punishment was called for. As the petition was to be re-considered onMonday, he thought it would be better to have him on that day at the Bar, to be dealt with as the House thought proper. It was not consis tent with the dignity of the House to let him off so easily, and if, on a future occasion, they dealt leniently with him, it would be in consideration of his ignorance. Lord STANLEY said his Noble Friend anticipated him in the view he took of the subject. If the House were to pass over such conduct lightly—if the punishment due to such in fringements on the privileges of Parliament and the freedom of election—were to be mitigated by the declarations of a pri soner at the bar, who it was natural to think would gloss over his own offence, and subdue it to the most venial peccadillo, that would only open the doors for rendering the purity of election perfectly ludicrous, a mere mockery. The present discussion was the result of the injudicious and improper haste with which the question was thus forced on the House. First a proposition was made to have the parties taken into custody ; next, when one of them was brought to the bar a proposition was made to forgive him. Another error committed was, that the House entered on an investigation of the case before the evidence was placed before it, by which alone it could come to a sound and just conclusion. Though it might be right to act at times, and in a partial way, on the representation of the Committee, still it was a bad precedent to leave so much to discretion of a Committee as to fix the amount of penalty ; that power should be left to the House, acting on the evidence before them. Hie opinion was that the prisoner should not at once be discharged, but remanded till Monday; and he hoped that by that day the evidence, on which alone the House should act, would be laid on the table. Mr. GISBORNE did not well understand the Noble Lord. Ile seemed to think that many unnecessary steps were taken Intohe table, the ends of Ru in this business ; yet really only one step was taken, that of t ordering aken t till the parties custody. If no step be eteo be e e t a ken l aid e n t tice would be likely to be defeated, as the evidence would evin not, in all probability, be before the House for a month. Much of the general evidence tendered before the Committee was inapplicable to the present inquiry, that which referred tO the scrutiny of the votes, for instance. Why, then, require the production of this mass of evidence, much of which was irrelevant, before coming to a conclusion ? Mr. P. STEWART thought the dignity of the House and the ends of justice would be sufficiently consulted by having him reprimanded. Mr. C. FIT Z SIMON said, all the other persons mentioned in the resolutions of the Committee were evidently engaged in a conspiracy to set the House at defiance, and foil the ends of justice; but the prisoner at the bar was undoobtediy au exception, for he freely came forward, and declared all he kn w. Lord J. RUSSELL made a remark, which was inaudible. Mr. O'C 0 NNE LI. said he could not agree in the view taken of the prisoner's mitigated offence. The House should not sacrifice justice to this mock clemency. The prisoner was a lawyer, the tendency and bias of whose profession led him to support particular parties. He (Mr. O'Connell) knew lawyers had these leanings. He himself was a lawyer, yet he would say that he never leant to any party.—(A laugh.) This was a question that should be shifted.—( A laugh.) If it were not shed—(Laughter)—lnd that deliberately and rigidly, there could be no hope that the purity of election would be preserved. The prisoner was guilty of a grave of fence, and to prevent the recurrence of such misdeeds, and inflict condign punishment on the parties implicated in the present transaction, it was positively necessary for the dig nity of the House, and the defence of the freedom of elec tion, that there should be a complete sleffting of the case.— ( Renewed laughter, which we apprehend was caused by the Hon. Member pronouncing the word sifting as if written or spelt shifting.) Mr. HARDY said as the party at the bar was guilty of an offence that would subject him to a criminal prosecution in a Court of law, at the suit of Mr. Wason or the Attorney- General, it would then be rather severe to send him to judg ment with the brand of condemnation fixed on him by that House. He trusted the House would not act severely towards him, so as to raise a prejudice against him in any ulterior proceedings. Dr. LUSHINGTON said the question was one of vast importance to the House, as affecting its privileges, and to the country, as affecting the right of the people to choose, without restraint or fear, their own Representatives. If it were a good that the purity of election should be preserved, then it was a good that any invasion on it should be punished. An invasion, then, was clearly proved to be committed in the present case, and the House, in its duty to the public, should not overlook it. Before the passing of the Reform Bill bribery was so common and undisguised, that it might be thought, and was thought, an act of injustice to visit a few with the penalties of the delinquencies of the many. What was publicly practised was considered no crime, and the uni versality cf the practice gave a shelter and impunity to the few who were detected. 'But this kind of scut:l,lllg of guilt should be put a stop to. Such a proceeding was a mockery of justice. The eyes of the people were now open—( Question, question), and if ample justice were not dealt out to those who violated the freedom and purity of election, it woul'l cause general offence and dissatisfaction throughout the country.—( Cries of " Question," and symptoms of impatience.) Lord J. RUSSELL (as we understood) moved that the portion of the evidence relating to the prisoner be laid before the House. An Hon. MEMBER thought it would be well to make a selection of his evidence, and he hoped the Hon. Member (Mr. Gisborne) would make it. Mr. CHAPMAN thought all the evidence, except the part relating to the scrutiny, should be laid before the House. After a few remarks from some Hon. Members in a collo quial and inaudible tone, the proposition of Lord J. Russell was agreed to. SPAIN AND THE SOUTH AMERICAN STATES. Lord PALMERSTON, in answer to some questions from an Hon. Member, which did not reach us, said that the pre sent Government and the late Whig Government were anxious that Spain should recognise the independence of the South American States, and so prevent the uncertainty of the relations that existed between the parent country and her colonies. But the Hon. Member was mistaken in supposing that the nego tiations between the parent Government and the Agent of the South American States, were undertaken under the patronage or dictation of the British Government. The British Go vernment was not consulted on this point, but was, however, most happy to give its counsel and aid to carry it into effect. The present Government could not answer for the progress of this negotiation ; it did not yet know that any exchange of good feeling had taken place on either side. He hoped both parties would come to an amicable arrangement. Lord MAHON was glad to hear such sentiments from the Noble Lord. He hoped the wish of the Government was to carry such resolutions into effect. GENERAL TAXATION. Mr. ROBINSON rose to bring forward the following mo tion On the question that the House resolve into Com mittee of Supply, to move the appointment of a Select Com mittee to investigate the general taxation of the country, with the view to a repeal or reduction in such imposts as injuriously affect the interests of agriculture, trade, manufactures, and navigation, or those which may be found to press with unusual severity upon any portion of the community, especially on the working and productive classes. And further, to consider the propriety of instituting, if necessary, other taxes less ob jectionable in their operation, so as to simplify and economise the enormous cost of collection, and lessen the pressure by a more just and equitable distribution of the public burdens." (The rush of Members from the House when the Hon. Member rose to speak prevented us from catching his com mencing remarks.) The Hon. Member, at great length, pro ceeded to lay before the House the condition of the several manufacturing and commercial interests of the country, and then contended that at all events an inquiry into its cause ought, without further delay, to take place. Distress mani festly existed, and the country could not much longer con ttaite to bear the amount of taxation.. at present un posed. The poorer classes certainly could not bear it, and it behoved the Legislature to inquire whether it could not be more equally proportioned. The landed proprietors said that their estates were so deeply mortgaged they could not bear a property tax ; but they seemed to forget that the mortgagee would hare to bear the taxation on his mortgage. Why should not the funded property of the country be made to contribute its quota of taxation. He protested against the property of absentees being expended abroad without con tributing something towards the revenue of the country from which their incomes were derived. He was also disposed to inquire whether the corn laws ought not to be repealed? He was sufficiently candid to admit that, if the Select Committee were appointed, the ultimate object he should have in view would be the introduction of a property tax.—(Hear, hear.) Lord Althorp had entertained fluctuating opinions on this sub ject. In 1819 he had been against the imposition of a pro perty tax : in 1830, out of office, he was in favour of it ; and in 1833, in office, he was opposed to it. The Hon. Member concluded by thanking the House for the attention it had afforded him. On the question being put-- Mr. RICHARDS, in seconding the motion, expressed it as his opinion, that the country could not be maintained in a flourishing condition, unless some measure were adopted for augmenting the price of labour. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER alluded to the reductions effected by the repeal of the duty on drugs, on marine insurances, the abolition of the house tax, and the reduction of the duty on soap, adducing them as instances of the conformity of the actions of the Government of Earl Grey with their professions. He then complimented the Hon. Gen tleman on the singular adroitness with which he had avoided entering into the debateable question of a property tax. His Hon. Friend had on former occasions proposed the repeal of the assessed taxes, and of other taxes, to the amount of 15,710,0001. per annum, and from which it was clear that his wish had been to substitute a property tax for those which he had wanted to abolish. He would put it to his Hon. Friend whether the alteration of any tax upon any commodity did not so affect all who dealt in that commodity, that it was in cumbent upon Ministers to keep their plans a secret until they were prepared to lay them before that House? 'He called upon the House, therefore, to repose confidence in his Majesty's Ministers, on the grounds of the disposition they had already evinced to relieve the:country of taxation to the utmost prac ticable amount. The session was by far too advanced to enter into the Hon. Member's motion with any chance what ever of coming to any conclusion, and in the interval of the two sessions every branch of trade would be thrown into a state of confusion. He would remind the House that Parlia ment had never expressed its determination against any tax so strongly as it had against the property tax ; and it was upon that occasion that the then Mr. Brougham had made a motion, that all records of so odious a tax should be burnt by . the hands of the common hangman, or at least he went very near to that old Parliamentary precedent. He (Mr. Spring Rice) maintained that a property taz was to be reserved for the greatest troubles, and that in a time of peace it ought never to be resorted to. He was of opinion that the motion was altogether inopportune, and that it was totally inapplicable to his Majesty's Ministers, as they had given to the country every proof of their disposition to economy. If the motion I before the House had been a substantive motion, he should I have opposed it by a direct negative, but ho should now con tent himself with moving that certain words be left out of the motion. The Right Hon. Gentleman's amendment was moved in a voice totally inaudible, and as it was not put from the Chair, it was altogether lost to the gallery, and, as we after wards found, to the House itself. Mr. HARDY addressed the House in favour of a property tax. Mr. H AWE S said that the motion was only for an inquiry, which did not involve the necessity of carrying into effect the recommendations of the Committee. Mr. C. PELHAM said a few words in support of the motion. Mr. P. THOMSON said, it was not to the motion itself of his Hon. Friend that ho so much objected as to the result ap pended to it—a property-tax. Now he wished his Hon. Friend had stated, in a defined manner, what it was he meant by a pro perty-tax. Some men's minds viewed a property-tax in one shape, and others in another shape. It would be therefore very necessary in considering such a subject to define what was meant by a property-tax. Were Hon. Gentlemen prepared for the renewal of the whole system of inquisition that existed, and operated so banefully when the property-tax was in being during the war? He for one should never consider it fair to levy a p!eperty..i.tax solely upon what was termed a fixed in come, without at the same time levying it upon property in. vested in manufacturing and other interests, and he did not be lieve that this glass of capitalists was prepared to submit to such a tax at the present time. In considering this tax it would a l w ays be necessary to keep in view the effect it was likely to have upon home industry. It could not be denied that its ten dency must be to drive capital abroad, and such an effect could not fall to bo Mutt CaluipitA9B t 9 tilP 9per4thrt 3 Pluses, whose interests that House was always beund-to hold in its best con sideration. It must inevitably tend to a reduction of wages by expelling capital, and his main objection, therefore, to die riccellt mQtlAri WaS that it implied tt ppaperty tax ov an income tax. One of theiia taKe4 ho locked upon as a very just tax, if it could be levied, but he did not think it could; and the other he viewed as a tax injurious and unjust in its operation on the labouring classes. An income tp. sidered a good tux sbern.„. —.. Lie con. , tne difficulty was to expose capital Of every sort to the operation of such a tax without great injustice to those who had embarked capital, without the slightest expectation that such a tax would be laid on it. It might have been good to have continued this tax, but the voice of the country having called for, and accomplished, its suppression, it would be now most difficult and injurious to revive it; and, in the present circumstances of the country, therefore, he was not prepared to carry out the theory of such a measure into practice. 'With these considerations he should oppose the motion of his Hon. Friend. Mr. PEASE did not charge the present Government with any want of disposition to reduce taxation, for he had always borne testimony to their readiness to do so. No man, he be lieved, approved of a property tax in the abstract, as it had a peculiar tendency to cripple industry and destroy the manu facturing energies of the country. Ile was not an advocate for an income tax ; but he believed the people were already beginning to see that the real property of the country paid nothing in direct taxation, bearing any corresponding propor tion to the indirect taxes which they themselves paid, and would be very likely soon to call aloud for a more fair appor tionment of the burt hens of the country. He should vote for the present motion. Mr. YOUNG shortly supported the motion. Mr. GOUL B URN said, it had been said that the present motion was distinct from a property tax ; but such clearly was not the fact, because every Hon. Member who had spoken upon it dwelt on it as connected directly with a property tax. Hon. Members appeared to have entirely forgotten the cir cumstances under which the former property tax was imposed and afterwards repealed. Now, was it true that the opposi tion to the tax at the time it was repealed proceeded from the aristocracy ? Quite the contrary. It proceeded from the present Lord Chancellor.—( Laughter.) He begged pardon, from Lord Brougham, and he opposed it expressly on the ground of its tendency to fetter the industry of the country. The Hon. Member (Mr. Robinson) was not then in Parlia ment, and of course did not hear, as he did, the speeches then made by the Noble Lord against this tax, week after week and month after month. The arguments employed against it were, that it threw impediments in the way of trade and com merce, and interfered most injuriously with the industry of the labouring classes. How came it to pass, then, that at that time this tax was selected as the one most desirable to be removed, notwithstanding the variety of other taxes that pressed upon industry ? It certainly was not in deference to the wishes of the higher classes. He fully concurred in what was said on the present occasion, that, if imposed again, it should apply alike to all parts of the empire, to Ireland as well as to Engitt.td. IL: still continued of the opinion u!:i211 he expressed. on a former occasion, that the task of inquiring and determining what taxes it would be most advisable to repeal, or to alter or to provide substitutes for, belonged to the Go vernment, and not to a Committee. To refer such questions ,o a Committee would only be to increase the difficulties. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion Against it Majority against the motion —63 SUPPLY. The Speaker having left the Chair, and a vote of 7,6481. in in the supplementary Army Estimates, for increase of pay to certain Officers having been agreed to, Mr. BARING proceeded to move the Miscellaneous .Esti mates. The first vote proposed was a sum of 41,0001., to defray the expense of public works and the repairs of public buildings. Lord G. SOMERSET said the late Government were anxious to diminish this head of expense as much as possible. In proof of this the Noble Lord mentioned one or two trifling items that were not heard in the gallery. After a few words from Mr. ROBINSON and Major BEAU CLERK, Mr. POTTER said, in the vote before the House, of 41,2001. for public works in England, he observed some part of it was for the Tower of London. This he did not ob ; J ect to ; but as the public money was applied to keep that ancient edifice in proper repair, he thought the public ought to have admission to see through that building without l iving required to pay the exorbitant fees which were now demanded. No person could look through the Tower without being required to pay at least 7s. This he considered most improper, when the fends required to keep it up were taken from the pockets of the people. The case was very different on the Continent, where public buildings were open free of any charge ; and he saw no reason why the same practice ought not to prevail in this country, not only as respects the Tower, but 'Westminster Abbey, and all other public buildings. Mr. BARING would make inquiry into the subject. The vote was agreed to. A vote of 19,750/. having been proposed for Kingston har bour, Mr. PRYME would not oppose the grant now. On prin ciple, however, he was opposed to the grant of public money for local improvements. Mr. RUTHVEN regretted to hear the Hon. Member upon this occasion talking like a pawnbroker.—( A laugh. ) He did not expect to have heard him opposing this small grant for an object that was as beneficial to England as to Ireland. Mr. FINN said that 50,000/. a year was drawn from the Royal demesnes of Ireland and expended here. The expense of the Charing-cross improvements was extracted from Ire land. He should consider that no less than five millions of Irish rental were expended here. An Hon. MEMBER said this work was one of great pub lic utility to England as well as to Ireland. It could not be called a mere local improvement. Mr. A. CHAPMAN said no person could view the break water. at Plymouth and Portsmouth without being - eonvinced of the great utility of such works. Kingston harbour was one of the same kind; useful, not to the mere locality, but to the nation. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER considered that on such subjects there should be no national jealousy, and that buildings should be erected where they were required, without reference to the particular country. Mr. O'BRIEN was satisfied that if an investigation were made by a Committee a large balance would be found to be owing to Ireland. The vote was agreed to. 11,775/. for the expenses of Portpatrick harbour, and 5,417/. for Holyhead and Howth harbour were then Voted. On the vote of 16,0001. for buildings connected with the British Museum, Mr. HAWES said that they ought to have some knowledge of the ultimate expense. Mr. GOULBUItN said that as yet the work which bad been executed was rather under the estimates. On the vote of 12,0001. for the National Gallery, Mr. EWART made some some remarks as to the regula tions which he hoped would be laid down for the National Gallery. He trusted that it would be placed on a better con dition than the Royal Academy. An Hon. MEMBER briefly defended the Committee of Management of the Royal Academy. The vote was then agreed to. On the vote of 7,6651. for finishing the interior of White hall banquetting room, Mr. WARBURTON protested against applying the public money to so preposterous a purpose as the restoration of a banquetting room, in order to its being used as a chapel. Mr. EWART concurred with the Hon. Member, and sug gested that the building should be devoted to the purposes of a public library. At all events the building might be con verted to some useful purpose, Mr. F. BARING stated that for many years past the building had been used for the purposes of a chapel. The es timate, which was that of his predecessor in office, comprised every expense which would be necessary. Lord G. SOMERSET said that a smaller sum might have sufficed for the repairs, but not for producing the same archi tectural effect which the application of the present sum would produce. Major BEAUCLERK wished to know whether or not the chapel was intended for the humble classes as well as for the rich. Mr. WARBURTON expressed his intention to divide the Committee if the Government persevered in the vote. Mr. G. F. YOUNG said the Hon. Member was an utilita rian philosopher, but yet he had omitted to show what practi cal utility, there would be in restoring the building to its ori ginal state as a banquetting-room. The building was practi cally applied to a useful and beneficial purpose in being used as a chapel. Mr. A. TREVOR said the building had been used as a chapel for the last century ; it was always well-attended ; and to what better purpose it could be applied, he really could not see. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the Government were proposing no new application of the building, and why should they agree to discontinue that appli cation in the absence of any suggestion for converting it to a purpose of more practical utility ? Mr. WARBURTON on a former occasion recommended that it should be turned into a concert room.—( Hear, hear. ) After the musical festival at Westminster Abbey, the managers of several charitable societies applied for similar accommoda tion, but were refused by the Dean and Chapter. Now this building would be admirably adapted for the purposes of cha ritable societies. The use of it as a chapel was preposterous, and the beauty of the interior was certainly spoilt by the un sightly pews. Lord SAN DON considered the Hon. Member's objection hypercritical. The thousands who for the last century had at tended the chapel never complained of the unsightliness which was offensive to the good taste of some Hon. Members. Major BEAUCLERK said that as the public money was to be voted away he should move that one half the scats be formed into free seats for the use of the poor.—( Hear.) He was well acquainted with the parish, and such an arrangement he knew would be a great boon. Mr. BARING said it would be better if the proper autho rities were applied to, and the point well considered, before they came to a decision. Major BEAUCLERK was willing to leave the affair in the hands of the Hon. Gentleman. After a few words from Messrs. Jackson, Ruthven, O'Brien, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the House divided, when there appeared— For the grant Against it .... 24 Majority for the grant -92 PRESENT HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT. When we re-entered the Gallery we found the House dis cussing the estimate of 44,0001. for building the present tem. porary Houses. Mr. CURTFIS objected to the vote, as a most enormous PACIA Mr, BARING was of opinion that Wl' ° o;n Hon. Members considered the rapiditpvith ;le buildings were erected, the cleating awl's' the rubbish, and other circumstances, kite vote would not be deemed so extravagant. Mr. WAKLEY wished to know what arrangements were made for taking the divisions ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, referring to Mr. Ward's proposition on that subject, when he was Chair man of the Divisions, said that he had at first feared the pro position of two lobbies might interfere with the views which might be taken by the general Committee for the le-buil ding of the houses. He had since had time to consider a nd inquire upon the subject, and ascertained that his fears were g round' less, and the proposition would be carried into effect as speedili as possible. and Mr. CURTEIS had again looked over the estimates, t found a sum of 10,0001. voted for furniture. This wastue! infamous and disgraceful, and he could not sit and see publie money thus shamefully voted away for deal tables, and rue! chairs.—( Hear.) Mr. O'DWYER—If the money was wastefully lavished i t was not by the present Government. An Hon. MEMBER-Nor by the late. Mr. ROBINSON wished to know what check there 1 24 been over this expenditure ? Lord G. SOMERSET had no doubt that, when the Pe`" fielders came to be inquired into, that the erection had bee, made with as much economy, as, under the circumstances, 011; possible. The Committee had contrived that the ftwniture ?: the temporary, would be available for the permanent buila ings.—( Hear.) Dr. BO WRING complained of the want of accommoda ti°ll fo Committees. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said tba t i with regard to the expenditure, and considering that the wet had been pressed on since November, he was sure Hon. Al e „,, Pl. bers would not put the expense, whatever it might be, in c ° petion with the rapidity with which the buildings were 1)"., fected. He was sure that there would be no difficulty in P r°. curing the details of the expenditure. THE NEW HOUSES. to Mr. YOUNG asked what steps were taken with rega rd the new Houses? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER vita& derstood to say that there was already a notice of an adds" on that subject. THE LATE SPEAKER'S HOUSE. _ A. o f Dr. BO WRING asked what use was about to te Maw" the site of the late Sneaker's house ? replie d The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER reP -1 that the subject was before the Committee. The vote was then agreed to, as were also the following 6,0001. for additional expenses for cost-office establisistueliV 57,000/. for the salaries and retired allowances of offices the two Houses of Parliament. fair 012 ex7en,s of the two Houses of Parliame et ' o 36,5001. to make good the d e ficiencies in the fee fund of t Treasury. 10,1221. on the same account for the Home Departmen t ' 13,4871. on the same account for the Foreign Office. _ fit . 12,422/. on the same account for the Colonial De_partn" 18,6421. on the same account for the Board of Trade. the , 6,000/. for contingencies and messengers' accounts iu Treasury Department. 5,4141. for similar expenses in the Home Department. 31,500/. for similar expenses in the Foreign D e partine7 5,200/. for similar expenses in the Colonial Departmeu" 4,1501. for similar expenses in the Privy Council. g e p 22,0 4 32/. for the salaries in the office of the ComPt r° General of the Exchequer. • the 3,200/. for Messengers and miscellaneous expenses 01 1 office of the Comptroller-General of the Exchequer. THE UNIVERSITIES. ea t° On the next vote, n1'2,000/. for salaries and allowaucco. certain professors of the Universities of Oxford and bridge being Mr. TOQ;KE should certainly oppose any grant of they until th , : University of London had the privileges aceo rw ", it w t aich it had so long and so justly demanded. aff Mr. GOULBURN said that the Members of the.- ota sities of Oxford and Cambridge paid three times mote public in the shape of taxes than they received from theltbe The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ail l „,.i e r? question of the claims of the Dissenters to Unive rsitl .r leges, to which he was decidedly favourable, was in 'O c o e e nion too large and important a question to be decided i° tally by a vote of this nature. Mr. PEASE supported the grant. Sir itr• Mr. A. Trevor, Mr. Robinson, Colonel Parry, sela' Ridley, Mr. C. Fergusson, and one or two other Hon. t a pd hers made a few observations in support of the grsll,:poe pressed the Hon. Member for Truro to withdraw his of tion to it. 030 Mr. TOOKE said that it was not because the Un icti der refused admission to the Dissenters, but because theYe,,, voured to prevent the London University from bs rs. charter, that he proposed that the grant should, for thew:o sent, be suspended, but not altogether abolished. B e be for divide the Committee on the question, that the gran t the present suspended. The House divided, when there appeared— Ayes 845 3 Noes Majority ... The House then resumed Sale 43 e $ On the motion of Captain PECHELL, the . „ h er Bill was reported, and re-committed to the following Me Pechell, G. R. Vyvyan, Sr: R. Oliphant, 1-;„, j, Somerset, Lord G. Troubridge, Sir T. Heathcote, G. Labouchere, H. Goring, H. D. Hutt, W., Fremantle Sir T. Steuart, R. Guest, J.'" Rolfe, R. 'M. Elphinstone, Howard Bowring, Pr. Wigney I. N. Callaghan, 1). Agnew, Sir It• a Pease, .1. Ragshaw, John Sheldon, lg. R. Young, G. F. Roche. D. Potter, B. cs iggo Hawes, B. Hogg,. J. W. irldloy, Sir M. W. - - On the - motion of Mr. HARDY, - the- Brti)ery at E1e14,4 Bill was read a second time, and committed to the Committee on Bribery at Elections. On the motion that the Civil Courts (Ireland) Bill be a second time, to i .• Mr. Sergeant JACKSON proposed that it be referred Committee. Mr. LYNCH said he would second the motion. Am eit A Select Committee was then named, but they were 7 10 a, all of them Mr. O'Connell's reputed nominees, and the meration of the names caused some merriment. fel leg Colonel PERCIVAL said if the Bill was to bee we; to a Select Committee it should not be a one-sided Co' Oil' Mr. Sergeant JACKSON thought the princip le 01 t fa ' r should be discussed. He objected to the present mode ° ceeding. ais sov Sir J. GRAHAM observed with regret a ' n ovel ..i . ar chievous proceeding of late growing up in the Houseyi tIt l parting from the usual and proper practice of disco?! 001 principle of Bills on the second reading. It was sen' rra d discuss the principle of this Bill now, as it is to be rel e ita e, a Committee up stairs. The consequence of referriegot VP taut Bills to Committees of that kind (of the P res ir e a of td he knew nothing, but it seemed from the remars a st , 'L Learned Sergeant, who ought to be considered P v- e ) rity on the point, that it was a very important oll ap S de l that the Select Committee would decide upon it,' ~ 01 1 House and the country would hear no more of I V t ° became a law. That was a bad practice, and be at 64 • the Government not to overlook a consideration of tb s ii til The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER., it suggestion of the Right Hon. Bsn'Onet was a good 7„ t • tee ‘°- thought it better that the appointment of the Core" - the present Bill should 1 -;e postponed. " d_ dr i tla The SPE AK Kr, said, after the judicious retner li t o bvz i Right Hon. P:d.ronet, he would observe that a materiel ti lc m iPP in cohdinting the business of the House was grade 7, place ; and he would not say that it was a chang e : b s o p better. No doubt, from the great accumulation of some alteration was necessary ; but then that altereti°ll, -fir Precedents made after the deliberate consideration of the whe' e t hogi g A l . Precedents once established would be quoted as G aits" and be found difficult to be changed. If there were 1 it should be made with the sanction of the House. .'...0 0 7 .. o rf pu The appointment of the Committee was then P and, the other Orders of the Day having been di/Il '' """iett the House adjourned at a Quarter-past One. BIRTHS. ff On the 11th inst., in Lower Brooke-street, the lady ° ,j 1 Leveson Gower, Esq., of Titsey-place, of a daughter. ;1;0'; On the 11th inst., in Gloucester-place, Portman-squsref J of John Kingston, Esq., of a son. On the 7th inst., the wife of W. H. Dowse, Esq., ba ts. f a law, Pratt-street, Camden-town, of a daughter. ~,.d ga il'e On the 11th inst., at Clapham-rise, the lady of Rich.-->/ Esq., of a daughter. MARRIED. ,010( On the 11th inst., at Lullingstone, the Rev. Ni cl r r" Vicar of Edgware, Middlesex, to Harriet Jenner, secen d potf 1 of Sir Percival Hart Dyke, Bart., of Lullingstone Castlel iu t 5, 1 On the 11th inst,, at Allhallows, Thames-street, Va°7llF4l i ranee, Esq., to Alio Mary Ann Green, of Queen •street, a Dv ! On the 10th inst., Dr. Thomas Davids, of Amsterdam, t /1 daughter of the late Sampson Lucas, Esq. On the 11th inst. at St. Andrew's Church, re , 1 Hooper Holloway, Esq., of Lamb's Conduit-street, to 1 1 7fo garet, youngest daughter of the late James Collin, Esq. , 0 • , Abbey, Surrey. _.,, P i le On the 10th inst., at Northaw, Herts, Thomas 1 1 7 '"13r Esq., to Elizabeth, only daughter of the late Thonw c o Hughes, Esq., of the Middle Temple. ' efot'' On the 11th inst., at St. Pancras Church, James Curl,. 1 Esq., of Liverpool, to Jane, eldest daughter of Broome 0 01, Esq., of Brunswick-square. On the 6th inst., at Woburn, Bedfordshire, Mr. Johl Cl3ejl o ll of the Strand, London, to Eliz abeth, sixth daughter of 1 6r ' Hall, of Woburn. On the 10th inst. at St. Luke's Church, Old-street, , .01$ Holbos i Simpson, of York-place, City-road, to Maria Gilley, el°: ter of Mr. Robert Howden, of 01d-street-road. rf tic DIED. ad i On the 4th inst., at Camberwell, Surrey , Rosa, twin - ol of James Mounsher, Esq., R.N. in her 18th year. let On the 11th inst., at Stoke Newington, Martha, re/ I .4 0, late John Withers, Esq. On the 10th inst., Elizabeth Mary, wife of Robert re' Cobourg-place, Kennington. Gr' sftw On the 11th inst., at her brother's house, Lowe r • street, Elizabeth Pdley, late of Richmond, Surrey. _.d i• it On the 22d ult., at Lisbon, in her 1 8th year, Miss tin, of 51' On the 11th inst., in his 83d year, Mr. Richard O us .d George-the-111artyr, Southwark. 0 ,,* On the 2d inst., at Belle Vne, near Liverpool , ' . by Esq., Lieutenant R.N., aged 45 , son of the late John Leif; of' Esq., of Mayfield, near Manchester. 1.10 /' i On the 10th inst., at Upper Gore, Kensington, Mr. of Conduit io street, st H ., a a n t ov c e i r ie -s st q e u r ar -p e l , ac i e n , his n 6 n l i s n t g y t eg on r: On yo, the late Thomas Netherton, Egg., of his Majesty n s e l O on n the i 10th in.t Mr. Deptford and Plymouth, asses, - , • 4 i WOO y ....e 9th inst., Mary, relict of the late Mr. ,0, 'rhos. Youens, of Lamb's Cae° p',i of Liverpool, and second daughter of the late John N i el ? , 1 of Hackney. AO' Edith of O H n en t r h y e s 9t rn h it i n n , st E . ;cl a y 11Iorden College, Blackheath, Seri' ° i i 0.1 the Ilth inst., at lii.nwell, aged 14 months, ; youngest child of Alexander Y oun g S p earman; Ilsq : 1 ,AOlO On the daughterl l of Cap el ns t. , a inei Cure,D e Devonshire-place, o n t s hs q.,aged i r e -pl a c e l , 0 . F r e d e is e a eldest "-- London : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNLIV 112, Strand, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand , in to' of Middlesex. Seamorc-plat Fixtures, Clocks, Cl Staff,', and ship's resid On the 'Nen the 19t TEH ( .m, finfas, ottom; glasses, 84 1 smaller Fixes and ornamen , mahogany we bedding ; the other fixture! To bo ---- Cic;l' and catalogto Regent-stree The eePar Rent-street, Precisely. The Earl of of his Lc At the Galli.] ( the south 1835, at T THE ( of abo Hock, Mosel: Old Port, Sh Lordship's rt 'whence they To be taste Week preeedit Battersea, S Nine Elm: bridge-rna( opon Field At the Calle] yard), on ' Tprecisely, i E H ] import hattersea, co on the north laving czten with docks, a Nine Elms eligible for I frequented to trances, gard( sea-bridge, I Elms. The tin lease at oli ' , hole of the 3rear. Printed pal livery twenty one shilling e street, Stran Temple ; and trance in the and Wandsw( to attend at t the sale to po At the Galle street (the 30, at Two THE MIA] ill g Saville-st anti-room, se To be vie' Albany Cour 1 /}loln printer 14 Q ; also on street. Weybridge, Pleasure C sidence, wi At the Galles (the south 1 833, at T Executors I.ot hie, itntds,m with f F to year at tin Lot 2.—A he commodati, o pposite to 0 %bout two ac: M. T ye, ter lion may be 1 To be T i n , ens and four, ? 4 r. Rainy, Messrs. Clac days preeedir Berkeley-squ At the Gall (the south 1835, at T 111 - 1 E Grout °n the west s !flake up slit R) a family of t le offices of s tabling for t OTo be vie 0. 14, R eg , aurt eßn GREA ' 4 104 Stab] At the Gal' street (th( June 30, a VERY with i lawn's • le rooms Min g i t ; e., situate i t e t e, and in t - " t ett. Hel /e4rs arc um APri n t e d , pa trentryt:NLyc r , _ GRE Spac expired, tc and at r( leasowhic At tf e Gall( (th e south 1 1 43 ; 5 1 - co l x :i n t '7. 0 : 1 .1 : - elvambc librar dr ,lex ; ampl -- -oble coact Printed r 41 P, of NI _ N'acious i ng-housn Within th lire(' Ter Qt or izi rr t eri t : ,:i eea and Gall (th(the e souti 1 835, at '. n P lirb ML It , e . !l v gent. a n : r Y eapacic "r coal tratio to To be vic 11-,..,...,ent ihksitle, c] \ Vharfin g Vreehohl 1,, the n bridge -1-c q Messrs 4 t the Gall (th e sow: at Two o tutor s of IHE trim fer tli itTht, Altar t ar nes, en so a eon, tld- the .; -road ella r a e P ß l e ci o T 1, 1.° be r: t t ' o • 4ll ed part v s e. 3 at t' tell o s e t d Pt. C , ettorct.itm __` -x