The Sun. — London, England, 1835-06-02 00:00:00

1 IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. . H or 7s :_s- Juhrs 1. Lord HATHIaTON (Mr. Littleton) was introduced, and took the oaths and his seat. Lord DENIUN took his seat on the Woolsack at five o'clock. Petitions praying for additional grants for the endowment of Churches in Scotland were presented by the Duke of Gor don, the Earl of Haddington, and Lord Lynedoch. Lord ROLLE presented a petition from a place in the county of Devon in favour of the Great Western Railway. Lord DACRE presented a petition from Berkhampstead, signed by the Rector, Overseers, &c: praying the House to pass a law whereby the funds left for the support of Grammar Schools might be applied to all branches of education. The Marquis of WESTMINSTER presented a petition from Banff against any further grant of money for the purpose of extending Church accommodation in Scotland, as the Churches now in existence were not filled. Some of the petitioners had been entrapped into signing peti tions on the other side of the question, and they were most anxious that their real sentiments should be known.—( Hear.) The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition complain ing of agricultural distress, from a place the name of which was not heard in the gallery. The Earl of DARTMOUTH presented a petition praying for the protection to the Established Church, and an alteration in the Catholic oath; by which Members of that religion might be prevented from voting upon any questions which involved the safety of the Established Church. The Bishop of LICHFIELD and COVENTRY being officially connected with the vast population from whence this pe tition came , had been requested to support its prayer, a prayer in which he entivoly concurred. The table of that and Of the other House of Pirliament would ere long be crowded with petitions of a similar nature, and he hoped that his Majesty's Govern ment would be induced to review the course they were about to pursue—a course which must ultimately destroy the Irish Church. AFFAIRS OF SPAIN. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY would take the op portunity to ask a few questions of the Noble Viscount (Mel bourne) upon a subject of very deep interest. He did not wish to originate any •discussion upon this important affair, but if the Noble Viscount had no objection, he would feel it as a favour if he would communicate whether— since his last accession to power--(Hear)--any thing what ever had been done by his Majesty's Government to interfere in the affairs of Spain ? Whether any instructions had been given to the cruizers on the coast of Spain to support the Queen of Spain's Government? Whether any arms and stores bad been furnished to her from this country ; and if so, whether they had been paid for and in what mode, and finally whether any vessels had been fitted out, and at whose expense? Viscount MELBOURNE said no such instructions as those stated by the Noble Marquis had been given to the cruizers. With respect to the other questions, he could then give no answer. If the Noble Marquis had given him notice of the questions he had asked, he (Viscount Melbourne) would have informed himself upon the subject; as it was, he would do so, and state the result of his inquiries to-morrow. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY presented petitions from Durham, Gateshead, and other places, in support of the Church of Ireland. ISLINGTON MARKET BILL. The Bishop of LONDON having been requested to present a petition upon the subject of this Bill before its second reading, and finding that he would not be able to attend in his place to-morrow, when the Bill stood for a second reading, would take the liberty of presenting the petition then, and expressing his anxiety that this Bill might pass. The petition came from seventeen hundred and thirty four inhabitants of Islington, who, from long experience. were aware of the intolerable nuisance arising from Smithfield market as at present conducted. Ile had himself had some years experience as a resident of London, of the evils that arose from the present state of Smithfield market, in a moral as well as a political point of view. It was not, however, part of his duty to look at the case in the latter point, or consider what the graziers lost by the injury done their beasts, but it was a part of his duty to feel a deep interest in the moral evils that resulted from the manner in which Smithfield Market was conducted.—( Hear, hear.) The great part of these evils would be removed if the House would pass the Islington Market Bill. The main objection against this Bill was, that it conferred upon an individual the power of levying certain tolls upon the beasts higher than those which were levied by the Corporation of London. It was quite ob vious that this evil would speedily correct itself. If the graziers were not satisfied with the charges made at the new market, they would continue to send their beasts to the old. He should have preferred himself if sonic public body had come forward to support this undertaking, and had offered similar conveniences ; but as such had not been the case, he thought that the individual who had done so was entitled to great credit. He trusted that their Lordships would approve of the Bill. A NOBLE LORD, whose name we could not learn, presented a petition from the parish of St. George, Hanover-square, against the Grand Junction Water Works Bill. THE MARRIAGE LAWS. Lord LYNDHURST presented a Bill for the purpose cf regulating the Laws relating to Marriages which were now invalid, from the parties being too nearly related. By his Bill he proposed to enact that where a marriage was contracted within the limits of consanguinity—if not disputed—if a suit was not instituted within two years from the date of th© marriag, s, or within six months from the passing of the Act in re gard to marriages which had been contracted—then the marriages should be held inviolable—that no party should be at liberty, after that period, to call them in ques tion.—( Hear, hear.) As the law at present stood, a man might arrive at the age of twenty-five, might then marry, and have a family without the least suspicion of his being illegitimate ; but if the parents of that man were within the degree of affinity allowed by law— ( Hear)—it was in the power of any party, even from motives of envy or malice, to institute a suit, and have him declared illegitimate. That was an evil which he wished to see remedied as speedily as possible. He moved that the Bill, be read a first time. Lord BROUGHAM said the House ought to feel obliged to his Noble and Learned Friend for tho Bill he had then presented. He (Lord B.) was only sorry that it was not more comprehensive. He was sorry that the Noble and Learned Lord had taken an example trom modern acts of limitation, and given six months for the commencement of suits. He was of opinion that the old principle was much bet ter; and it would greatly improve the Bill, to say in it that from and after the Ist of June, 1835, no suit should be in stituted for the invalidation of any marriage that had been con tracted. He trusted that the Noble and Learned Lord would consider the point.---( Hear, hear. ) Lord LYNDHURST said if the House was of the same opinion as the Noble and Learned Lord, he would be very glad to give in, and amend the Cheers. ) The Bishop of EXETER suggested that the Bill should be so framed as to embrace marriages of the kind embraced in the Bill, which were contracted in a foreign country. Lord BROUGHAM said there would be no difficulty on that head. Petitions in favour of the Church were presented by the Earls of CAMDEN and HARROWBY, and the House adjourned till to-morrow at ten o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS. JuNr. I. The SPEAKER took the Chair at two o'clock. NEWCASTLE AND CARLISLE RAIL-WAY BILL Sir J. GRAHAM presented a petition, signed by 347 Pro testant clergymen and Dissenters of Carlisle, praying the House not to insert any clause in this Bill prohibiting travel ling on the rail-way on the Sabbath. Mr. AGLIONBY begged to remind the House that the population of Carlisle amounted to no less than 25,000 souls, and that this petition was signed by not more than 347 persons. Sir J. GRAHAM did not know the exact amount of the population, but he believed that the petition was signed by al most every minister in Carlisle. The petition was laid on the table. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. After some conversation between the SPEAKER and Sir J. GRAHAM, respecting the early hour at which the House met, and the absence from the Votes of any other notice than simply that "the Speaker would take the Chair at Two o'Clock," without any reference to private business, The SPEAKER said that the Right lion. Baronet was quite right in stating that there was no specific notice in the votes that the House would commence with private business, but the ordinary practice was that private busi ne s s s h ou ld take precedence of public business. RAILWAY BILL RESUMED. Sir J. GRAHAM said an Hon. Friend of his had given notice that he would object to a particular clause in this Bill—that Hon. Member was not then in the House, but if he were present and made the motion, he (Sir J. G.) would support it. He would therefore move that this clause should be omitted. The SPEAKER suggested to the Right Hon. Baronet that he should make his objection to the clause on the third reading of the Bill, in which the Right Hon. Baronet acquiesced, and withdrew his motion. Mr. P. HOWARD had given the Hon. Member alluded to by the Right Hon. Baronet due notice, and had taken every opportunity to act fairly towards him ; he therefore thought it hard that this clause should be allowed to hang over after that Hon. Member had lost his opportunity. The Hon. Gen tleman concluded by moving that the report be received. Sir R. H. INGLIS would not occupy the House for any time. The existing laws were against allowing travelling on the Sabbath, and the exception was in its favour ; when a party, therefore, came for new power, it was in the discretion of the House either to grant or refuse them, as they thought most accordant with the law of God and the law of man, in the present instance. The Act under which this Company carried on their concern, was an Act containing a clause pro hibiting travelling on the Sunday, but the Bill which the Hon. Member proposed to lay on the table was to repeal this clause, and to give unlimited power to the Company. Mr. HOWARD—The Bill did not moot that question. Sir R. H. INGLIS was aware of that, but the effect of re-• pealing the clause would be to give such power. He called upon the Hous e t o p ause an d cons id er whether it was, under such circumstances, consistent with fair legislation that this Bill should pass. He had given notice that he would move the insertion of a clause, prohibiting travelling on the Sunday —he would not then make his motion, but he would do so on the third reading of the Bill. Mr. POTTER understood that the Hon. Baronet (Sir R. H. Inglis) was not opposed altogether to Sunday travelling, but only during the hours of divine service. Sir R. H. INGLIS was opposed altogether to travelling on the Sabbath. The Report was then received. Mr. WALKER presented a petition from the Mayor and Corporation of Londonderry, in favour of the Londonderry Improvement Bill. On the motion of an HoN. MEMlltit the Londonderry Im provement Bill was read a second time and ordered to be com mitted. . _ _ Mr. BROTHERTON brought up the Report of the Com mittee on the Preston and Wyre Railway Bill. Mr. DIVETT brought up the report of the Committee on the Ashburton Road Bill, and the Liverpool Building Bill. Lord HENNIKER presented petitions from Suffolk, pray ing for an alteration in the law of debtor and creditor, and complaining of agricultural distress. - . - - SCOTCH CHURCH. Sir C. FERGUSSON presented petitions from Forfar, Kircudbright, and several other parts of Scotland, in favour of extending Church accommodation in that country. Similar petitions were presented by Captain Gordon, Mr. C. Bruce, Mr. Sinclair, Sir Andrew Agnew, Sir Philip Durham, and Sir Michael Shaw Stewart. General SHARPE and Mr. DILLoN presented petitions against any further grants. When the question was put that these petitions be laid on the table, Mr. C. BRUCE begged to take that opportunity of refer ring to certain charges which were made by the Hon. Mem ber for Falkirk (Mr. Gillon), before the recess, against Mr. Buchan, one of the most estimable and respectable gentlemen connected with the Church of Scotland. That Rev. Gentleman wrote to the Hon. Member to disabuse his mind of the misap prehension he laboured under, and respectfully called upon him to retract the observations he (Mr. G.) had made in this House, for the accuracy of which he had taken upon himself to vouch. A correspondence ensued in the course of which the Hon. Member praised the Rev. Gentleman for his zeal and ability in diffusing the blessings of a sound religious education, notwithstanding which admission, he repeated his attacks on Wednesday week, in a speech which was only repeated and occupied a closely printed column in the Courier. He was then proceeding to vindicate the Rev. Mr. Buchan from the charges made against him by the Hon. Member, when Mr. CU RTE IS rose to order, as he considered it irregular, and tending to provoke discussion, to refer to petitions pre sented at so remote a period from the present. Mr. C. BRUCE would throw it out of consideration alto gether. It was first charged, that in the returns of the General Assembly Committee, a church was omitted to be mentioned, for the purpose of deceiving the public ; secondly, that the accommodation for Dissenters was also omitted; and, thirdly, that the most improper means were resorted to for pro curing signatures to the petitions in favour of a grant to the Established Church of Scotland. On the part of the Rev. Gentleman, he (Mr. B.) denied these charges, and in conclu sion hoped that the Hon. Gentleman would be more cautious in making such unfounded charges for the future. Mr. GIL LON defended himself from the imputations cast upon him, and again repeated that the omissions he had men tioned were made, and that the most disgraceful measures were employed to procure signatures to petitions in favour of the Established Church of Scotland. On the part of the people of Scotland, he protested against any grant of public money to the Church of Scotland, as an act of the grossest and rankest injustice. Sir G. CLERK had several petitions to present to the same effect, and would therefore beg leave to make a few ob servations. It was said the object, on the part of the Esta blished Church of Scotland, was to injure the Dissenters—he, in the name of the Establishment, protested against that doctrine. The efforts of the people of all denominations under the volun tary system fell short of what the country required—it was the duty of the House to supply the deficiency, and to provide religious instruction for the poorest men in the land.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Whether the sum required was 10,0001., or an infinitely larger sum, there was no way in which the money of the public could be more beneficially em ployed, or one more consistent with the principles of due eco nomy.—( Hear, hear.) He thought that the House could not in justice refuse this very moderate demand of the people of Scotland. Mr. O'DWYER was far from saying that if there was a unanimous call on the part of the people of Scotland for a grant of public money that it should not receive the considera tion of the House. But the public opinion of the people of Scotland was very much divided upon this subject. Many of those who were so loud in their exclamations against a grant to the Roman Catholics, why were they not here to oppose this grant to the Presbyterians of Scotland, who were as much op posed to their notions as the Roman Catholics ? If the great members of the Presbyterians were anxious to build ne..v churches, they could find means to do so without coming to the public Treasury.—(" They do.") In Ireland, a country in finitely poorer, the Catholics supported the Protestant religion, and at the same time their own ministers. He had not any coo scientious scruple to prevent him from voting for this grant it' it were proved to be necessary. A yearly grant of 8,0001. was made to the College of Maynooth, and if that House should think fit to refuse this grant, he believed that the refusal would produce nothing like national dissatisfaction.—( Hear, hear.) If any Hon. Member should move that this grant should be refused, there would be many persons found on that side of the House who would more readily support such a motion than one for giving a new grant to the people of Scotland. Mr. II A LLIB URTON had presented a petition signed by 1,000 persons of the Establishment, against this grant ; and he had another petition from a Dissenting congregation, which would have been signed by many of the Establishment, it the Dissenters would have consented to their so doing. It was not therefore fair in Hon. Members to state that persons of the Establishment did not petition against the further en dowment to the Church of Scotland. Mr. Serjeant JACKSON conceived thatthere was a much greater difference between the Roman Catholic and the Esta blished religion, than between the latter and the Presbyterian religion. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman was proceeding.to comment on the speech of the Hon. Member for Drogheda (Mr. O'Dwyer), when The SPEAKER said that it would he a serious interruption to the business of the House if there was to be a lengthened discussion upon the presentation of every petition. Mr. Seregant JACK SON begged to dissent from the ob servations of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite. If the tax for the support of the Church were taken off, it was certain that the tenant would have so much less rent to pay to the landed proprietor. Mr. WALL ACE presented a petition from Cupar, in Fife shire, against any further grant to the Church of Scotland. With reference to this subject, he would say that there were 14 parishes about the town of Cupar, in all of which there was more Church accommodation than required. He believed it was a fact that there were large sums in the hands of proprietors of Church property, which had not yet been applied to the purposes for which it was levied. Mr. WILK S thought the Dissenters would oppose any grant which would only be in substance a new church-rate levy. Petitions were presented by the Attorney-General and the Lord Advocate from various places in Scotland for and against any grant to the Church of Scotland. CASE OF MR. CHILDS. Mr. WIL KS presented petitions from the Dissenters resident in, and within twelve miles of London, pray ing for a restriction in the jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts, and the extinction of Church -rates; from 1,150 Pro testant Dissenters, to the same effect ; and one from a place in the county of Norfolk, with a similar prayer. As the matter had been already sufficiently discussed, he would not enter at any length upon the subject further than to express his opinion, and that of the Dissenters generally, that it was a case of great hardship and oppression —(Hear). The Hon. Member alluded to the triumphant procession which had ac companied Mr. Childs on his liberation, and which had roused a spirit of resistance to oppression, as connected with the Church, which would do it more injury than almost any thing else. Sir RONALD FERGUSON, as the Hon. Member for Ipswich was not in his place, begged to correct a statement made by him relative to Archdeacon Glover. That venerable clergyman had requested of him to state that the information upon which the Hon. Member had proceeded, was quite erroneous. Mr. BANNERMAN presented petitions from hand-loom weavers of various parts of Scotland, complaining of distress, and praying some legislative relief. Mr. C. BRUCE presented a petition from a place in Scot land against the appropriation of any portion of the Irish Church revenues to secular purposes. Mr. PARROTT presented a petition from 600 householders of Torquay, praying for Vote by Ballot. Mr. BROTHERTON presented some petitions from hand loom weavers, complaining of distress. Mr. HARDY presented a petition to the same effect, from 6,000 hand-loom weavers of Bradford. COUNTY RATES. Mr. E. BULLER presented a petitio►► from the county of Stafford on the subject of county rates, praying for a reduction of the same. In the year 1793 the whole ex pense of the county gaol was 1,0561. In the year 1834 it was 51601., but there was a proportionate increase of prosecutions. He trusted that Government, in considera tion of the distressed state of the agricultural interest, would take this matter into serious consideration, with a view to the establishment of a general fund. The peti tioners also complained of the increase of expenses, arising from bridges and turnpike roads ; and also of the enormous salaries of some of the county officers. The petition was signed by 5,000 persons. Mr. CURT EIS presented a similar petition from Sussex. Sir J. WROTTESL Y supported the petitions. Lord R. MANNERS presented some petitions from the county of Leicester, complaining of agricultural distress, and praying for a modification of tithes. AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS. Mr. HAL FORD supported the petition on agricultural dis tress from Leicestershire. He contended that the distress was considerably heightened by the pressure of the manufactu ring upon the agricultural populations, the former exceeding the latter by 3,000. Of 139,303/. 6s. levied in Leicestershire for rates, 108,000/. were directly levied upon the land, 29,0001. upon-houses, and only 13,000/. upon mills and manufactories. In one parish alone, where there were 2,780 acres of good land, there were only 69 agricultural labourers, while there were 301 manufacturing labourers Between the years 1826 and 1832, the rates in that parish were never less than but i 1829 they amounted to 3,636/., being 85 per cent. upon the parish assessment. No country in England suffered more from the circumstance of this pressure upon the agricultural popu lation by the manufacturing population, which was employed by the capitalists as long as their labour would yield them a profit, and were then left a burthen upon the parish _.. • HORSHAM ELECTION. Sir T. FREMANTLE, the Chairman of the Horsham Election Committee, brought up the report, which declared Mr. Hurst to be duly elected. CHURCH REFORM. Mr. CARTWRIGHT presented a petition from a place in MEMBERS' PLEDGES. Staffordshire against the appropriation of Church property to any but ecclesiastical purposes; also a petition from a place in Northamptonshire to the same effect. Mr. SHAW presented a petition from the Clergy of the diocese of Cork, against the contemplated measure of Church Reform. Mr. POTTER presented a petition from 400 inhabitants of the borough of Wigan, which place he had the honour to re present. The petitioners evpressed their approbation of the proposed measure of Ministers for the settlement of the Irish Church, and the appropriation of its surplus revenues, to the support of a liberal system of education amongst all classes. They also prayed the House to sanction the Reform of the municipal Corporations of the United Kingdom, placing it on such a basis as will give the people a proper coutroul over eorporate property, and the election of their own civil officers. He begged to say that he most heartily concurred in the libe ral and enlightened views of so great a number of the inha bitants of Wigan. Mr. LUCAS presented a petition from the town and county of Monaghan, praying that the House would adopt no measure to divert Church property from the purposes for which it was designed. The petitioners state that they view with alarm the progress of measures which, under the specious name of Reform, have no other tendency but to create re volution and anarchy ; and they pray the House to preserve in their full efficiency all the venerable institutions of the country. The petition was signed by 10,000 most respectable people, and demonstrated that not only the Protestants, but the Presbyterians of the North of Ireland were adverse to any measure calculated to impair the efficiency of the Esta blished Church.—( Hear, from the Opposition benches.) Sir GEORGE CLERK presented a petition from (as we understood him) the Synod of Glasgow and Ayr, in favour of the Established Church of Ireland. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he had a petition of quite an opposite nature to present. It was from the city of Edinburgh, and signed by 14,000 of its inhabitants, in favour of the proposed measure of Church Reform. The House might have some idea of the length of this petition he informed it that the postage of it amounted to not less than 43/. 15s. 4d.—( Laughter.) The petitioners approved the resolution the House came to on the motion of his Noble Friend, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, and they prayed the House to adopt speedy and effectual mea sures to remedy the abuses connected with the Established Church of Ireland. Lord MILTON expressed himself favourable to Church Reform, but would not pledge himself to adopt such measures to attain that object as the petitioners suggested. Mr. A. JOHNSTONE begged to call the attention of the House to a very unprovoked attack that had been made upon him and' published in the Journals of the day. He would now only say, in reference to it, that he was informed a petition was to be presented respecting the fulfilment of the pledges he gave his constituents, and which was now in the hands of the Honourable Member for Hastings, (Mr. Elphinstone.) He (Mr. J.) begged to ask the Hon. Member when he purposed to present it, in order that he might be enabled to give an answer to such charges as should be preferred against him in it. He hoped there would be no delay in presenting it. Mr. ELPH IN STONE, in reply, had to say that a petition had been intrusted to him, referring to the circumstances under which the Honourable Member held his seat in that House. He had an interview with the petitioner, and he was authorised to make an offer to which he hoped the Hon. Member would accede. He desired to refer two docu ments to the same distinguished individuals (Lords John Russell, Mr. Spring Rice, and Dr. Lushington) to whose arbitrement this subject was before referred.—(" No, no, from several Members of the Opposition.) He (Mr. E.) was then prepared to present the petition, but as this was rather an unprecedented proceeding, he thought it better that the Hon. Member should adopt the course which he had suggested. The documents he alluded to were a statement of the Liberal electors of St. Andrew's, which was drawn out in May last, and an affidavit. Mr. HUME rose to order. If the Honourable Gentle man was not about to present a petition his course was disorderly, although he was aware of the circumstances under which the Honourable Member for St. Andrew's held his seat. Yet, as this course was without a precedent, he submitted to his Hon. Friend not to persevere in it, but at once to present the petition he now held in his hand. The SPEAK ER made some observation, the purport of which we could not catch. Mr. A. J 0 HNST ONE thought that the courtesy which it was usual on the part of the House to extend towards all its Members should be extended to him by allowing the petition to be presented. Mr. ELPHINSTONE again rose, and stated that he had a petition to present from several of the constituents of Air. A. Johnstone, stating that that Hon. Gentleman had pledged himself to resign his seat when called upon to do so. Mr. BENNTT rose to order, amid loud cries of " Read the prayer." Mr. ELPHINSTONE said the prayer of the petition was, that the House would be pleased to take into its consideration a matter so deeply affecting the character of one of its Mem bers.—( Laughter.) Mr. GO U LW/ RN doubted whether the House could re ceive such a petition. The Hon. Member had been elected by his constituents to represent their interests ; it was for him alone to judge what line of duty he ought to pursue, if the electors were dissatisfied. When he appeared again be fore them, it was for them to mark their opinion by not returning him. Mr. HUME rose to order. An Hon. Member had risen in his place, and said that his character had been affected, and such being the case, would the House, at a Member's own re quest, refuse him the only means by which he could put the House in possession of all the facts of the case ?—( Cheers.) Mr. W YNN could not conceive how the House could entertain the petition. If every thing that any petitioner chose to suggest was to be considered as an attack upon the character of an Hon. Member descrying inquiry, the House would have nothing else to do but entertain such inquiry. The object of the petition was to call upon an Hon. Member to resign his seat ; according to' the Constitution of the country, no Member could do so. It depended wholly upon the pleasure of the Crown to confer an office upon him by means of which he might vacate his seat. In his opi nion there was no shape in which the House could call upon a Member to resign his scat, and that being so the whole point was, whether the petition should be received? The House, it was true, if it chose, might listen to the discus sion ; but he thought if it did, it would never be enabled to come to any decision upon it. Mr. HUME was astonished to hear what had fallen from the Right Hon. Gentleman who had just addressed the House, because the Right Hon. Gentleman either made a motion or supported a motion for the expulsion of Mr. Walsh, who it was alleged had forged certain Exchequer Bills. The House expelled him. He (Mr. Hume) opposed that motion on the ground that if the House was once to begin to censure moral guilt on the part of its Members, there would be no end to its labours.---(Cries of " Hear, hear," and laughter.) The Right Hon. Gentleman, he believed, supported the motion, and the House by a very large majority expelled Mr. Walsh. He merely mentioned this to repel the idea that the House had no jurisdiction. Mr. WYNN merely wished to state, in answer to the Hon. Member for Middlesex, that he spoke either in total ignorance or entire forgetfulness, in speaking of the case of Mr. Walsh—(Laughter)—of one little circumstance, merely, that Mr. Walsh had been convicted by a jury.-- ( Hear, hear.) The only doubt then was whether Exchequer Bills were or were not articles, the embezzlement of which were felony ; but Mr. Walsh had been found guilty upon an indictment tried at the Old Bailey.—( Hear.) Mr. HUME said the decision against Mr. Walsh was re versed, and therefore he stood in the situation of having no charge against him, as far as the law was concerned, of moral guilt. Mr. ELPHINSTONE thought the House was competent to decide upon the question. Mr. METHUEN rose to order. He thought the House ought not to have its time taken up with questions of this kind, it being a contest purely between the Hon. Member and his constituents. Mr. ROBINSON thought the petition should be with drawn, or that the Honourable Gentleman should have an opportunity of explaining. As far as his experience went, he could say that in every instance of this kind an op portunity had been afforded to the Member to justify his con duct. It was a mere question of feeling, and he considered the discussion to be altogether irregular.—(Hear.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL understood the Hon. Member to bring forward this petition in order that there might be some decision upon the subject. Now he certainly agreed with the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite that this was a kind of question upon which there could be no decision by the House.—( Hear. ) It was a question between a Representative and his consti tuents with regard to certain statements which he was supposed to have made to those constituents—( Hear, hear) — he therefore would recommend the Hon. Gentleman not to bring forward a petition of this kind, especially as he was not prepared with any specific motion on the subject.—( Hear. ) Mr. ROEBUCK hoped that the Hon. Member would bring forward the petition.—( Hear, hear.) It would be unjust to allow this charge to hang over him which did hang over him, and would hang over him, unless he was able in the House to wipe off the stain that was then upon him ; therefore the House was bound to give him a hearing. The SPEAKER said it was for the House to consider whether it was that sort of petition which was within the re cognition of the House. It was a question for the House to consider whether they would enter into discussions between Members and their constituents, and in doing so they would also consider what the consequences of such a course of pro ceeding would be.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. JOHNSTONE said he was ready to adopt any course the House would suggest ; either to avail himself of the in du!gence of the House now or at some other period, but cer tainly he was very anxious to give an answer to this moat ex traordinary charge.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. PR YME understood that the question before the House was whether this petition should lie on the table—(No, no)--- he was quite aware that that question would not be put, but he :;tll , l suggest to the Hon. Member that when the petition was brought forward, he would give him an opportunity, whatever might be the ultimate decision of the House, of making his ex planation.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. SHAW apprehended that without any motion before the House, any Honourable Member might claim the indul gence of the House to give any explanation in answer to a charge affecting his character as a Member of the House. Mr. JOHNSTONE was proceeding to address the House upon the extraordinary nature of the charge preferred against him, which, he said, arose out of a pledge which was given by him ; when Sir ROBERT PEEL rose to order, and said he could not TtlE SUN, LONDON, lIMSDAY, JUNE 2, 1835. help thinking that this course was likely to involve the House in a very considerable difficulty. It was quite clear that this was a matter over which the House had no jurisdiction.— (Hear, hear.) It related to a Member who had made some engagements with his constituents, with which, how ever, the House had nothing whatever to do ; and if the Hon. Member persisted, he would be taking an advantage of the petitioners by making a statement which they could not answer ; and, besides, that it would be establishing a most dangerous precedent. If the Honourable Member volunteered an explanation, he thought he must admit that he would be taking an advantage of which he ought not to avail himself, and though he ( Sir Robert Peel) did not participate in any charge against him, he would have another opportunity of explaining himself to his constituents, and a better one too, as the question did not properly come under the jurisdiction of the House.—( Cries of " Hear.") Mr. F. BUXTON said the Honourable Member was no doubt anxious to vindicate himself, and it would be rather hard if he were not allowed an opportunity to do so. He recommended the course suggested by the Right Hon. Baronet ; at the same time he hoped it would go forth to the world that no imputation could be substantiated against the Hon. Gentleman.—(Loud cries of " Hear.") Lord HO WIC K concurred with the Right Hon. Baronet, and thought if they allowed this proceeding to go a step fur ther, the House would establish a most dangerous precedent. —( Hear.) It was stated that the Hon. Member had pledged himself to resign his seat if he pursued a certain course, but he trusted the House would never recognize that principle.- -( General cries of " Hear, hear.") The Hon. Gentleman had been attacked in the newspapers, and a course was be fore him by which he could explain himself to his Constituents without bringing the matter before the House. Mr. ROEBUCK would ask whether the Chair had not put the question whether the petition should be received, if so, was it right that any Honourable Member should be called to order while speaking on the question ?—( Hear.) He thought he had a right to talk for an hour.—( Laughter.) Sir R. PEEL explained. Mr. JO HNSTONE said in compliance with the feeling of the Horse he should not force his statement upon it.—( Cheers. ) The Petition was understood to be withdrawn. THE ,RIOTS AT WOLVERHAMPTON. On Lord JOHN RUSSELL moving the Order of the Day for going into a Committee of Supply, Mr. TH 0 RNE LE Y rose to ask a question of considerable importance of the Noble Lord, and when he said that it related to the recent outrages at Wolverhampton, he was quite sure the House would favour him with its indul gence—( Hear, hear)—he had received a statement confirmed by Mr. Roaf, a Dissenting Minister, alleging that the soldiers were brought in in a most unexpected manner, as very few elections had passed off with less riot. Three persons had been shot, but although the military had been called into action, there appeared to have been very little confusion, the only breach of the peace being some one breaking four panes of glass at an hotel. He could not see why the military should interfere on such occasions, and believed it was quite illegal. —( Hear, hear.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I cannot but most deeply re gret what has occurred at Wolverhampton. I agree that it is a most painful and distressing occurrence. The Hon. Member has made a statement of certain facts that have been communi cated to him, and it is similar to one which was forwarded to me as Secretary of State for the Home Department, by the Rev. Mr. Roaf, a Dissenting minister. Immediately on re ceipt of it, I desired that the magistrates who had called in the assistance of the military should give a full account of the transaction : and I likewise communicated to the Com mander-in-Chief, that he might obtain an account of what had occurred. The Hon. Gentleman has proposed that an agent should be sent down by Government to make inquiry. The adoption of such a course would be liable to very great objection, inasmuch as the agent could only take the voluntary depositions of any persons who might come before him ; he would not be authorized to make any legal in quiry into the transactions, and thus the Government, after the inquiry had proceeded to a certain extent, might have no au thority or power to carry it further. All I can say is, that every account of this melancholy transaction which has been forwarded to my office shall be laid before the House. For my own part I am only anxious that the fullest inquiry should take place into the transaction. If any further inquiry should he necessary, after the statements of the different parties have le,sen received, I can only express my wish that it should be one of a strictly impartial description.—( Cheers.) In the mean time I can only say that no ex-parte statement, whether it come from the side that may be supposed to be excited by the fact of the mili tary having been called out, or whether it come from any other party, can fairly be taken as a statement of the facts, because there are on this subject a great variety of contradictory and conflicting statements. I will mention, in corrobora tion of this assertion, that in the account transmitted to me by Mr. Roaf, it was stated that the soldiers had furiously charged the people in the market-place, and that in turning the corner one of the horses fell, and was killed. The account from the other side was, that the horse had been struck by a stone, and that he died in consequence of the blow. It now appears, by the deposi tion of the veterinary surgeon who examined the animal, that he died of a wound inflicted by some sharp instrument, which had penetrated to the heart. I only mention this circum stance, to show what a great variation there is between the different accounts, and with how much caution the first state ments, relative to any transaction of this kind, should be viewed; the more especially when it h:is occurred just at the close of an election, when men's minds, both on the one side and on the other, are naturally heated, and when they are, consequently, most disposed to give credit to such statements as chime in with their own views, without investigating the subject very closely or impartially. I repeat, that I shall be ready to institute any further investigation ; and I am bound to say, that I do not think there is, either on the part of the magistrates or the military engaged in the affair, any disposi tion whatever to shrink from the fullest investigation of the circumstances.—( Cheers.) Mr. VILLIERS had also received communications from the borough of Wolverhampton, fully confirming the state ments made by his Honourable Colleague, though he was aware that much reliance was not to be placed upon what had taken place in the midst of excitement, and although he had gone over all the circumstances in order if possible to find out something to qualify the state ments and justify the parties implicated by them, he had been unable to find out any thing which showed that no riot had been proclaimed in the town, or that the soldiers had n o t been called upon to act with a violence, he believed, totally unparalleled in the history of this country.—( Cheers.) He had a guide by which he could measure the extent of the disturbances that had taken place in the town, for he had received a communication from persons who all agreed that the disturbance that did occur on Wednesday last could not be named in comparison with the disturbances that took place at the last election for the borough. At that election it happened to be his fortune not to be tl* popular candidate, and as he considered that his friends had been rather hardly dealt with, he applied to the magistrates, who stated they had no effective police; he then suggested that some precautionary measures should be taken to keep all quiet during the night ; this suggestion was coldly received by the magistrates. This he did not attribute to any difference in political opinions between the magistrates and himself, but to their knowledge of the disposition of the people in that town. The military were not then called out, and no disturbance took place. In the present instance, however, he was at a loss to know upon what grounds the Magistrates had thought proper to proclaim a riot in the town.- 7 ( Loud cheers.) In his opin ion there were facts connected with the conduct of the military that loudly called for the inquiry suggested by his Honourable Colleague.—( Hear.) He should consider the conduct of the military extremely illegal and uncalled for, till he was informed to the contrary by some military member of that House—( Cheers.) Were the military to go out and act according to their own discretion—( Cheers) — firing on the mob in a manner totally uncalled for? He en tirely agreed with the suggestion of his Hon. Colleague, that Government ought to send out some competent person to inquire into the matter. Such a course would tend to allay the great excitement that prevails in the manufacturing districts. It was in his opinion reasonable, just, and expedient, for the Government to send down an Agent to institute an inquiry into this melancholy occurrence, in order to let the people of this country see that they had a Government prepared, awl also willing, to offer them redress.—( Hear, hear. ) mr. FO STE R—ln consequence of the absence of his friend the Member for North Staffordshire, who was confined from indisposition, he felt it his duty to defend the con duct of the Magistrates of that county, and to vindicate them from the charges by which they had been impugned. He would, therefore, beg to read a statement of this melancho•ly disturbance which he had that morning re ceived from the Rev. Mr. Clare. He then proceeded t. read the letter of the Rev. Gentleman. " TO THE RIGHT MON. THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT. " MY Loan—ln compliance with the request contained in your Lordship's letter of yesterday's date, that the fullest information may be supplied relative to the proceedings subsequent to the close of the poll in this town, we beg to state, that during the whole of the last day of the poll the conduct of the multitudes of people as sembled in the streets was very violent; many respectable persons were rolled in the mud, arrd assailed with mud and stones, and some seriously injured; and we received repeated applications to send for a military force ; as, of about forty or fifty special con stables who had been sworn in , a nd were all that could be procured at the time, some did not act, and the rest were completely over powered. The undersigned, therefore, sent for a troop of the Ist Dragoon Guards from Dudley, six miles off, requesting them to come within a mile of the town, and to halt there till they heard from us again. At the close of the poll the number of people in creased so rapidly, and their behaviour was so violent, that the sol diers were desired to advance immediately. Their appearance, at about five r.m., seemed to check the mob, and at six the under signed, Mr. Hill, informed Captain Manning, the officer in com mand, that he thought they might be sent to their quarters, which wa s done, though the mob did not disperse ; yet, as they did not proceed to acts of violence, it was thought they would be tran quillized, and Mr. Hill went home, about three miles off, At about seven o'clock P. M. the mob began to assail the Swan Inn, where some of the successful candidate's friends still were. Several windows were broken, and some persons attacked, and the undersigned Mr. Clare went among them with some special constables, and entreated them to desist; he was spit upon, and compelled with the high and special constables to retreat to the inn, and when he appeared at the vvindow he was assailed with stones, and struck while reading the Riot Act. The soldiers were then called out, and the mob commenced a furious attack upon them ; a street near the market-place was barricadoed with two carts and an iron chain ; many of the soldiers were struck with stones, and one horse was stabbed in the side, and fell down dead, while standing still, which is necessary to be stated, because it has been asserted that the horse fell while charging ; the undersigned Mr. Clare saw him fall. The fact of the violence of the mob during the election and subsequent to its,close can be substantiated by affidavits, if ne cessary ; and a declaration of approbation of the conduct of the ma gistrates and soldiers is, we believe, being signed. It was not until after the death of the horse that the soldiers were directed to fire, and the mob still persisted in their attacks, at times retreating to the church-yard close to the market-place, to which the soldiers could not for some time get access, and advancing again. Mr. Hill, who was sent for, and arrived at about eleven, states, that many discharges of fire-arms were heard by himself and others in different parts of the town, when all the soldiers were assembled in the mar ket-place, but whether ball was fired by the mob he does not know ; neither is he aware of any of the soldiers having been fired at that ni*.ht. At midnight another troop of horse arrived from Stour bridge, ten miles off, and Mr. Hill took six or seven special consta bles and these mounted soldiers, and visited all the outskirts of the town, clearing such public-houses and beer-shops as were open ; but the soldiers took no part in this proceeding, only remaining in the street to protect the magistrates and constables, in case of any sudden attack. "At about two o'clock on Thursday morning the town was quiet, and all the troops were sent to their quarters except sixteen, who remained on duty all night. . _ " Four persons have been ascertained to have received gunshot wounds, one of them in the knee, which rendered amputation ne cessary ' • and we believe one man is also wounded, n o t seve rely, by a sword: none are yet dead. " We should be doing injustice to the officers and soldiers em ployed, if we did not express our admiration of their steadiness and forbearance under circumstances of no ordinary provocation : only one example occurred to the contrary, in a soldier who was found to be drunk, and placed in confinement early in the evening. Seve ral swords were broken from the soldiers striking with the flat sides of them. " We have not been able to ascertain how many shots were fired, but as the soldiers have a regular number of cartridges given out to them, the report of the officers to the Commander-in-Chief will doubtless furnish that particular. " A statement has appeared in the London papers, purporting to be a declaration of certain persons before Mr. Roaf, a Dissenting minister, which is very much at variance with the truth. Two of the parties—one of them a special constable—have been heard to say before the mob, that they (the snob) must be taught to fire and mark their men. It is, we believe, ascertained that a bullet, stated to have been fired into a house in Queen-street, has been found, on examination, to be too large for the soldier's fire-arms. This requires no comment. " A report of the conduct of the mob, which rendered it neces sary for Mr. Briscoe, another magistrate, to read the Riot Act on Thursday and Friday nights, happily without the soldiers being called upon to act, has, doubtless, been submitted to your Lord ship, and we are happy to add, that this night has passed off with out disturbance. (Eleven, p.m. ) " We have the honour to remain " Your Lordship's obedient servants, "J. CLARE. " Wolverhampton, May 30." " HENRY HILL. He would take leave to observe with regard to the document he had just read, tbat he knew the gentlemen who had signed it, both of whom were gentlemen of unimpeachable honour, and incapable of the slightest deviation from truth. They had both acted as magistrates for the district many years, Mr. Clare having served in that capacity for no less than 40 years, and Mr. Hill having also been a most valuable and active magistrate for a considerable period. He (Mr. Forster) could state of his own knowledge, that during the whole period of their service they had discharged their magis terial duties with so much benefit to the country, with so much credit to themselves, and, what was more unusual, with so much popularity, that he was certain any reflection on their conduct would occasion the greatest surprise through the whole &strict. He had seen that day an individual from Wolverhampton who had assured him that the caution of the magistrates, and the forbearance of the military were beyond all praise. He had no knowledge of the circumstances that occurred at the recent election beyond the representa tions made to him, having been in London the whole time ; but he knew, from the immense extent of the population and the peculiarity of their character, that when they were once roused to acts of insubordination and violence, if they were not met by promptitude and energy on the part of the ma gistrates, scenes might be apprehended which would cause the stoutest heard to shudder.—( Hear.) His Hon. Colleague had alluded to what had taken place at his election. He held in his hand a letter written by a former representative of the borough (as we understood), Mr. W. Whitmore, calling upon the magistrates to protect the peace of the town by calling in the aid of the military; stating that the voters could not go to the poll, such was the violence of the mob ; that several of his friends were severely injured, and that he feared, had he ventured to appear in public, his own life would have been sacrificed to their fury.—( Hear, hear. ) He mentioned this circumstance to show that even the re forming candidates were occasionally exposed to the ex cesses of the population. This being the case, he again contended that vigour and promptitude of decision were abso lutely and indispensably necessary. Had the unhappy and misguided persons who fired the streets of Bristol attended to the King's Proclamation, and returned peaceably to their homes, they would never have received the injuries under which they were now suffering, and . under which they would probably languish to the end of their lives.—( Hear.) He had heard Mr. Whitmore state that if the military had not been called out at his election, the scenes of Bristol would have been re-enacted at Wolverhampton.—( Cheers.) The energy and promptitude of the magistracy of the district, however, had happily prevented the repetition of those scenes of devasta tion and bloodshed which more supine conduct would certainly have occasioned.—( Cheers. ) Mr. VI L LIE RS begged to remind the House and the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, that he had expressly said, that the difference between the statements that had been made, and the little reliance to be placed upon them, were the rea sons which rendered him especially anxious for inquiry. Sir JOHN WROTTE SLE Y hoped that the House would pardon him, if, placed in the situation in which he stood, he ventured to trespass on their attention for a very few moments. He had seen various statements of the transaction in the news papers, but he had every reason to believe that the account he had received was a fair and impartial one. In the first place it was highly satisfactory to know that no lives were lost ; and although they had unfortunately no security for the same re sult happening on any future occasion of a similar description, they had the satisfaction of knowing also that the laws of this country provided a sufficient and severe punishment for those by whose negligence or misconduct any fatal con sequences were produced. He felt considerable difficulty and much pain in addressing the House upon this subject. He had determined not to bring the question forward at all if his Noble Friend had—as he thought he ought to have done—sent down one or two impartial persons of known re spectability to investigate the whole circumstances of the case. --(Cheers.) This, it appeared to him, would have been the proper course; and had such a course been pursued, no power on earth should have induced him to bring the question under the consideration of the House.—( Renewed cheering.) To his great regret, however, his Noble Friend had not done so. He had said, it was true, that he would lay all the statements before the House, and take any other steps that might be ne cessary ; but knowing the sentiments which existed in the country upon the subject, he ( Sir John Wrottesley) begged to tell the Noble Lord that such a course would not give satis faction to the people.—(Cheers.) He must tell him that it was of the utmost importance that some persons vested with very high authority should be sent down by Government to investigate the case ; for such was the state of excitement which prevailed, that if the Government did not do that which he considered was no more than an act of justice, he could not answer for the consequences.--(Renewed cheering.) He had received a letter upon the subject, which the indulgence of the House would permit him to read, and to make a few comments on. The first part contained a statement nearly similar to that which had been just made by his Noble Friend ; but having disposed of that part of the time during which the military were under the superintend ence of the Magistrates, it proceeded thus :—" Thus far I think there can be no real question ; but what followed certainly has surprised me. It seems that for an hour or two afterwards the soldiers rode two or three together up and down the streets, and occasionally fired at random, or up entries, by which a few persons were wounded, and it is as tonishing that so few were hurt. All the rest is matter of detail, which will no doubt be carefully investigated; but I really believe that the whole question turns upon what was done after the mob left the Market - place." — (Hear, - hear. ) He had known the town of Wolverhampton long ; he had had the honour of being educated there, and had acted in the capacity of a magistrate of the district for no less than forty years. He had been concerned in the greater part of the riots that had taken place there.—(Loud laughter.) He should have said he had been concerned in the suppression of the riots, and it was matter of the greatest satisfaction to him that during the whole of that time no property was ever lost, nor life in the smallest degree endangered.—(Cheers.) He therefore hoped he might be permitted to state what in his opinion was the duty of the soldiery under such circumstances. All he asked for was investigation. If it were true that an officer had allowed his men, under feelings of strollg excitement and irritation, to separate into small parties, and go armed and provided with ammunition into different streets, where they were not under his immediate superintendence, he grossly misconducted himself, and was guilty of a dereliction of duty. —( Hear.) He spoke in the presence of several General-Offi cers, and he ventured to say that not one of them would con tradict the opinion he had just expressed.. He recollected one case perfectly well in which he, as a magistrate, had considered it necessary to call in the aid of a troop of Light Dragoons, who were quartered near. He saw that it was highly desir able not to leave a particular place unguarded, and he begged the officer to allow a mere patrol to accompacy him to exa mine the state of the spot. His reply was, as he thought, a most proper one. " Sir," said he, "my orders are, not to allow my men to separate : so long as they are under my personal superintendance I can be responsible for them ; but the moment they separate, the control I possess over their actions is gone." He thought this the conduct of a prudent and discreet officer, and he mentioned the circumstance now in support of his view of the case—(Hear, hear.) All he wanted was investigation, and immediate investigation. He should not be satisfied with the investigation of a military officer alone. If what he had heard were true, the inves tigation of a general officer was considered by no means satisfactory.—( Loud cheers.) He advocated immediate and searching inquiry, because he was decidedly of opinion that in the present case there were good grounds for de manding it. No man regarded the army with higher es teem than he did ; but when statements of this sort were circulated, and believed by most respectable persons, he thought it due to the military themselves, he thought it due to the Government , he thought it due to every person concerned, that they should have an investigation conducted by persons whose impartiality could not be doubted, and whose character would place them beyond suspicion.-.--(Loud cheers.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL —After what has fallen from my Hon, Friend who has just sat down, I wish to address a few words to the• House. The House will recollect that I said just now that I had no objection to an inquiry into these transactions ; that, on the contrary, I wished for the fullest and most impartial inquiry.--( Hear.) My only objection to the inquiry proposed by the Hon. Member for Wolver hampton was, that a person sent down by Government to for ward an inquiry on the spot could have no proper authority to compel persons to come before him other than those who were - - willing to appear and give their evidence voluntarily. Still if, as my Hon. Friend says, an inquiry of that nature would be, more likely to afford satisfaction to the public than any oth er, can have no hesitation in acceding to his suggestion—(L ou e cheers)—and am therefore ready to adopt that course. Mr. O'CONNELL—Whoever is sent down can be fume' with the commission of the peace for the county.—( Hear.) Sir HENRY HARDING E—They had heard some kit ' Members condemn, others defend, the conduct of the militalry ! but it appeared from the representation of the Hon. Mem' for Warsall (Mr. Forster,) that in the estimation of the my gistrates, and every individual present, their conduct was be yond all praise.--( Hear, hear.) He was of opinion, from what he had heard of the circumstances, that the command i l officer and soldiers had discharged their duty properly, an all probability in a manner which had prevented atrocious scenes, similar to those which the supineness of the milit er Y officer at Bristol had encouraged in that town. He wish ed to ask the Noble Lord whether, in any of the official reports ue, had received upon the subject, the conduct of the military hao been in any respect called in question by the magistrates 1111. der whose orders they had acted? Lord JOHN RUSSELL—To the question the Rig h . l Hon. Gentleman has put to me, I have to reply, that both the statement of the magistrates and of the high cons table, S i !„ conduct of the military is spoken of as having been marked:,/ the utmost forbearance.—( Hear, hear.) Undoubtedly , I did not wish, in contradiction to what was stated on the et; posite side, to enter into any particular facts, because I tboug my so doing would lead to a debate on the facts in this HI; I therefore do not now wish to state anything more rhea So; authority of the magistrates and of the high constable upon 0 point. I think I may be allowed to say generally, that have that experience of the conduct of the British Arde. which should prevent our believing, on occasions of this to scription, either that they would be inclined to violat e the laws of military discipline, or wantonly and cruelly ease) re , persons in their power.—( Loud cheers.) All I can say 0 . 0 ply to the Right Hon. Gentleman with regard to what 0 , 5 e really the fact on this particular occasion, is, that I will ca ill an inquiry to be instituted, in which I trust the the tru th be elicited.—( Cheers.) relit Mr. SC HOL EFIELD hoped the House would P e , e l, him to read an extract from a letter which he had rece ls t o containing an account of the transaction, on which he e ! ,a place the most implicit reliance, as it came from a gentlOoo. of unimpeachable and unquestionable veracity. (The that Member here read the extract.) It stated in substance ti'ot that there was the strongest possible evidence to prove 100 the town was in a state of perfect tranquillity up to the e to of the poll ; that a stone was thrown at a window, which d, considered a breach of the peace ; that the Riot Act Was "first and that the military soon filled the streets; that they ".he dos or t he charged in a body, and then separated and galloped d the streets in parties of three, and two, and singly, firing used striking all they met—even old men and women. It recoup a, one act of individual outrage committed by a soldier, alto, eluded by describing the occurrences in front of the Doi much in the same terms as the extract from the Birus in9 ger• Journal which appeared in the newspapers of Y 3 . 0. day.) It had given him great pain to hear the Hon. her for Walsall (Mr. Forster) speak in disparaging ter el ; oo . the population of Wolverhampton. He had been long ;le netted with that part of the country, and knew the pe10)0 well. He had stood a contested election for the PPul of town of Birmingham, and although party feeling TP. of high at the time, no instance came under his observalion, a stone or the slightest missile being discharged. The co ld Member for Walsall aspersed his neighbours, and be of only say that his opinion was totally at variance from t b '' re t s the Hon. Gentleman. The electors of the borough i t e ll. most estimable body of men, peaceable, intelligent, 1 10 " conducted. Geode' Mr. FORSTER begged to interrupt the Hon. man. He had said nothing about the electors. D tbal Mr. SCHOLEFIELD resumed—He was quite accar,";O gentlemen entertaining the Hon. Member's political oPnlr:od endeavoured to create a disunion between the electersatej the people. In his judgment the non-electors were a s : beta as the electors. He was sure the non-electors of Birelleir) were as excellent a set of men as any in that House. - -- 4 , The case of Bristol had been referred to, in which W itt 0 . tary had done too little. Let them remember the case at here chester, where the yeomanry had done too much--eve n M all there was no resistance on the part of the populace. ryas events he felt quite certain that it would be a most dangecos course to allow the military to be lightly called o ut s h t e PO , tested elections, by men whose opinions were not on that pular side. Let the House and the people remeor:,:oo of very few men of liberal opinions were in the Coutor nt arily the Peace in this country. If clergymen would O' P- ft , rola come forward to read the Riot Act, they must expec t tlisi strong feelings excited against their cloth. Why ne ed ld„ voluntarily enter into situations which few men vi () ; for' forced into without shuddering? Why need they ee lli n - idieti ward to display their Christian charity by ordering the ti s. :,, let; to fire upon an unarmed multitude ?—( Hear, hear.) "- sea ter confirmed the statement that the soldiers rode 'W o os down the streets firing at random, although the tono.e. perfectly peaceable, and he thought under such eircuMacos the House could not but be alive to the necessity of an 0 (hate and impartial inquiry. The letters referred t o were follow : " We have the strongest evidence to prove that the to-be fore tranquil up to the arrival of the military, which was justa'the the poll closed. About seven o'clock a stone was thrown the Swan window ; this was considered a breach of the peace ;v.nse e iet Riot Act was read, and the military were immediately upon the people. They first charged in a bowiesy th n t oot rated and galloped up and down the streets in pof three, o • and even singly, firing at and brutally strikino• all they came P e - p it with the flat of their sabres, and even using the point. old men and even women did not escape their fury, but were ;ect vagely beaten and cut down by the ferocious soldiery- 11 , # 'ssa able persons at their own windows were wantonly fired e" fir es the town was in fact given up to an infuriated soldiery. Ne, sho t were, I believe, lost ; but a great number received sab re fin " wounds. Three boys were severely wounded in the leg' the it was found necessary to amputate one of the boy's leg 9 e i lf' others lie in a precarious state. I dare not trust lur iot sr say all I saw and heard ; there was, however, one f io sitt stance which I witnessed that I cannot forbear 55 55 , 0 : t sir and which is sufficient to show the brutal spirit t';n4oo mated the soldiers on this occasion. I was at an upper ” e stl); in Queen-street ; a soldier was savagely beating a person bel:„ the proprietor humanely opened his door and pulled the 0.7.0ek the soldier aimed a furious blow at him, which fortunateli ' t the shutter. The soldier then called some others L and ; fVfbl or six drew up on the opposite side of the street. He ar t hron, is a nest of damned scoundrels in that house—we will Ja e tb,,e the door :' they then coolly put up their sword' and took ° b - o f to" fire-arms. I called to them, and told them that no bres,,,„ t tir, peace had been committed, and to fire at their peril ;ni t itl' t sisted and went away. The same soldier came a fterwarn a heard him say to another, There's something suspi cions 40: house—l have a d—d good mind to fire through the d eer ' „ v ar . : warned him of the consequences, and he rode off. As a w stance of the peaceable disposition of the populace, I b e _ t t., Co one fact. The street fronting the Swan, where Goodrit'titi mittee sat, had been newly Macadamized, and a great (171 pia, loose stones lie about ; yet on the morning after the alleg e :OW' counted but four panes of glass broken, some say five: ifi th t fe v( the people were so riotously disposed, it is surprising t" s " windows were broken. of It is worthy of remark that no person (of the Tory Partnpeo.ll been hurt, and, as I before mentioned, only four or fir,.B ,„reetall glass were broken, on the first night, at the Swan• firptsi the dragoon's horse that was killed, it appears that the se';‘,.cd riding furiously - up the market-place, and two of the Il e vo tio;i i on getting tip . the horses, it was found that one had been. b with a sharp instrument between the fourth and fifth _ i l ,;01 0 ..a` e penetrated about five inches, and it is supposed that the e t ., ys+% upon one of the soldiers' swords • no one was within twe et . , 1 . it of the soldiers at the time : no bullet was found in the h°'".' , not true, therefore, that the horse was shot." gist r sl6 Mr. FORSTER, in explanation, said, that the 111-a ge r under whose orders the military were called out w i e s . bo tleman of known liberal opinions, who had supportett,' t igq. Colonel Anson.—( Hear, hear.) He denied having ntiflot the character of the population—all he had said 1 111 ; co lbe knew its peculiarity ; it was principally composed 1:" and persons engaged in iron-works. BUR O D ' After a few words from Sir CHARLES 13 '-' which were inaudible, Of bin :, Mr. HUNIE saM, that the Right Hon. Gentletnan n o ilita% ( Sir H. Hardinge) had spoken of the conduct of there,tit as if it were free from blame ; of this he was quite an incr., the people expected from the Government that soehLaad been should take place as would satisfy them that there g reat improper conduct.—( Cheers.) He had heard " 11 r, o ' n side r ; gret and astonishment that the Noble Lord did ne h - e joqin%; necessary to send down a special agent to conduc t w helie l- to He must convince the people of this country, t" E t.„ r neot,„g they were unwarrantly attacked they had a Govev protect them, and that no injustice would be endure t• c o a t he did this, it would be impossible to prevent some g'-ej tee, vulsion in periods of excitement and irritation. He the h°P the Noble Lord would give such instructions that „ s i r tigation which was to take place should be a perfectlyiel 0001,..° impartial one, and that all local influence on either 5w..,,d be avoided. He trusted that the inquiry would be e rite co .. st iov with a deep anxiety to ascertain the truth, and a deter e ca l t to on the part of the Government to completely sift th ., it ' IA ': It was an unfortunate circumstance, but nevertheie.coor true, that whether in Ireland, as in the case of Ra t i, lar_. or in this case, there never was an instance in willeraliar chief was done by violence to the people witho ut a c h i s p being concerned in it.—(Cheers.) He hoped that rio, C t jesty's Ministers would take care that no more lc r• ) be If should be appointed to the Magistracy.—( Hear, be e• rt t 0 was the wish of his Majesty's Government to salLP:r e , character of the Church, they ought to remove all Clie "pier from the Commission of the Peace.—( Hear, hear.) c 7 ist acte l ' no circumstance which would tend more to raise the .. col ovei of the Church in the eyes of the people than such a ' Cio In every instance in which the Clergy interfered erfects Magistrates, even if their interference was itse" h o right, it had a bad effect. He would only add that be,noe,ol that care would be taken by the Government t hat the would be perfectly fair and impartial.—( Hear.) ) re An HoN. MEMBER (we understood Mr. Char trin W ho testimony in favour of the Magistrates and frilly -al' t ote conduct he declared to be highly praiseworthy. He r against the doctrine advanced by the Hon. 11de/fiber le d c oos e verhampton, when he said that he did not see any g oo Inu it ' that why the military should ever be eal)ba out in cases of tbsi Mr. VILLIERS explained. What he said w as, in should pot fire, Mr. CH ARLTON could not see what use t here tly fire' calling in the military at all if th e y were not allowed.. to —( Hear.) The military when called upon were oblifnvil suppress the riots, and in order to do so they inflicted.reoher that they might prevent a greater evil. The Hon. 7 6 1 tbat then read an extract from a letter, in which it w as fits ".. 9 four the wound inflicted upon one of the dragoon horses w 7 w ere inches and a h a lf d ee p, while the spurs o f the dragooO to only two inches long, so that it could not be said is that t 0 MO • wound was inflicted by the sp ur, He would put