The Sun. — London, England, 1835-03-25 00:00:00

iterion n of property, was ite years. t would to amount of tithe d tithe paid, not hey should inciulre paid from the land en ascertained the :41 species of land, aissioners Ns -ere to scions that rc g is- LThe Mapistrates l e as their guaoe the in °, 41 • No h,:ri" tnere w g to a fixed arid ► wer e to ascertain o aid the aMount f ere to st.ihe i a ,rtes on a cu.icola 'apace, or uncer' le data furnished. amount of tithe i g ht, which would the Magistrates be L e decision of the ig into account the and the jt:stice hat such a poWer ntally attending 3 n s by the late Bilt be deducted from ie Bill to th e• p ub• es wer e to be sub 3ut. these rates and principle, and only of its capabilitieS er . Thep rincile, s Bill, I am sure, a country. Iliac land , rofits of the e upon it II that e result would be a value of the land le liabilitie s of the qu alities and capa. the value of the re erected upon it. onstan t process of ce rtain their alue., ithe was not t° he money charge , °ll verage of the tains ad was to be taloa on the arable an ✓ is a stranger, to be paid ? ithes for five) ears, !ty presented itself. charges of the pa s a knot which it tea arid charges ate shes in which die ove r the oiller that a general de' a false rule for $ IY unfortunate tbat arges a rule should "11, then, reference Quarter &spina"; ork ? It *rare' [tie of the land, t° a soil, or to a n; Pe' or parisbes, but the of resident Ae' t° g ht be desir able a district, tbat asi r esourer i Why should a 41 ,7 wedded to ldi- tti tage? Paris. va luators, with Or their justa.po9i: gistrates were , to wou be rea' >read over all 1 ,1 ill landlords ve,,i• , by the plan be th e some p arisbe S is t of rent ; when ut was to be regt,s' a parish was 112; sb to be placed le 's ; then it was O il ; to be brought f°,'; rhich deserves to k i) , ion. It is said amountie of by determined bi t b an, labour, autc er e farm produCed tri in 300/, aud there will be a Oat at of his rent. le amount of e",:f amounts to 25rt: the Payttent of „ f a' itit, then it is ei d er be a con.,idere:: tithe is as 20 1. ith e then coraes Li n the profit or.tobo: le Quarter Sessiust air district , and '- ad capability o b:anti f 'n eral order a£6ll iet, without reran, ct i ons , to the p; ious segm e nts it' be it hardships Mato ; capabilities of l a , t ie occupier.to nic"„, es. The dfferell parish and increL nfair extent. l'ibe ray. Take Wu it will be seen li°ce th cases. lo P 1 1 3 3i1l Noble Lord's .4 lands and dinlilii;th at land on the 9 ' 9 0 an acre, while di e soil on the e was 4 5 . an a cts' bide, riefly on one ,'OO, i e tax pros, t wo districts, It if the other, ef ' her one spal`lber tier when that If the burthe m a re struck, it a°9l'd the rich 100150.01 Ild produce gel the greatest evi l ; t be the House Al l ato ing now ref re vet ,ord—hav i° st?l93 for looking e t 1 ; in its operatioBP'tv giving more s t oo bjections to di e ., 0 0 first objectioa fie ound of the so r b ortion betweeo iple? The 11(721;• 'ves exceedingfibti naintain the I.l °o al to trench ea 4 n, is to encour:of ) This princir,teti it has b een a n &ached to fi ca r. ) 1 I° ~,` ion has long ed for by roYoos e years ago. o,3sf ,ey emb racco ey related tt:4o s, and in ivbs"tijose the tithes ia, ro of clerical 100 a large space, op, the corninat3S or ey, or for le t !,aP ;e documents aoig, tart' arrangellithese ). Many of 4at ended with ge'ese , wasf g le rpi nn sanction, sacl the trouble, • firing Win c ad, 4 rties. In oPC 4 6 Ct. If theSe for legalizing cee? areat advailt3ptlo t e P j a lit al o f distin c i ts governinc and each Ira icult to lay o° t ` r io ,ever, I shal l r, by local 1'°5,01 If the peorle,i to rule shall arP but shall be 01),,eri ;mutation on appointinent woe small number, lan, ution of this Ittve widen, ar e to crio , ;loners to SOP tio., facility .to tbetibas 'mutation tha __t ty o f the .rtssisti, witnesses or. ;uld be to eflect:„ id owners of titfa, :ommutp.tiotnu; ,reo ry body '3 rtia app en that to° to a cotaproln i . betweendial! iv the Conitaiso erg to invite, by notice, both the tithe-payers and tithe- Proprietors to a meeting, for the purpose of entering int o a compromise. In every parish notice would be given to both parties to meet ; and to the meeting the Commissioners should send a person of tried legal knowledge Thanedir cliscretion to hea r th e c l a i ms o f b ot h part i es, examine relative weight, and suggest the proper course to be amicably pursued. I would not bind the Commissioners to one Particular course, or fetter their discrimination or their J u dgment. I wou ld, accord i ng as circumstances might arise. allow them to change their views and look at every feature in the case narrowly. I would allow them to look at the ques tion as if through a microscope. I would not bind them to take the average of the payments of the last five years as their unerring gu id e, b ut allow them to take occasion a lly ano th er S tandard. I propose that two-thirds of the tithe payers in each p ar i s h s h ould constitute a majority in the compromise to be enter e d into, provided the Cl erg y man consente d . B ut st ill I sho u ld h ave the arrangements made under the cognizance and sanction of the Board of Commissioners sitting in Lon 'clOrl. My object being to facilitate voluntary commutation, Which h as b een already cerried to such an extent, and release t. that sp ec i es of arrangement frees the expense and difficulties het now belong it, I woe s id at the same time throw some safeguard s a roun d it, ana prevent it from being abus e d. It is lcf r m for thi s reason I would have the superintendence and sane t ofthe C issioners. According t o th e pl an I p ro - P the ayment or a corn rent may be substit u t e d f or ainoid for bat this substituted payment should vary with the price corn ; I do not mean with the price of wheat, for, in ii e corsse quenee of the ch ange i n our agr i cu l tura l system, an d t h e tuations in the. corn market, I do not think wheat a proper triterion; but I say wheat, and oats, and barley ; and let the tiisrliecieti:eviv.hether th e average b e qu i nquenn i a l or septenn i al, be neeid i dly the avera ge p r i ce o f a ll the diff erent ki n d s o f corn. is it my i ntent i on to h ave t h e serv i ces o f Ass i stant b -arristers on this occasion, for my great aim is to make the. Plan as simple, as cheap, and as brief as possible. This plan would embrace the lay proprietors as well as the Clergy; their cc anent too to a final and amicable adjustment of the tithe com e"ition s h ould be deemed as necessary as that of any other. tly plan will affect all alike, lay and clerical. Th e n as t o th e Mop of the diocese, one object of the Bill will be to din lacose with his consent, which has been rendered necessary nere tofore under th e Tith e C ommutat i on Bill. H owever, Bs6 pnot entirely discard the influence or authority of the , who should be allowed some superintending powers, p for I would allow him such power in the selection of the visit - leCommissi oner ( so we un d erstoo d t h e Ri ght Hon. Baro tg') Should th e part i es meet f or t h e purpose of commute it'll, and in the process of negociation any difficulty arise, I, P r opose that reference be made to the - Board in London, swhose d ec i s i on I trust would he. considered satisfactory and n al The comp os i t i on h av i ng b een once agree d on , the tithe (vner should have some remedy for recovery. That remedy Pro Pose sh ou ld b e b y act i on or distress. In the case of a l andlord a ll ow i ng tithe to be paidiby the lessee, deducting the amount of tithe from the head rent, I mean that there should be a revision every five years, in order to allow the parties to regulate the price of corn, and remodel the standard by which 1 ~,1e a mount of the compositi on i s t o b e fi xe d. I s h a ll limit the to five years, to see how it may work, for I propose it not • a permanent measure, but as an experiment. The tithe- B ill er and pay er w ill see b y exper i ence o f the w orking of the n what course i t wou ld b e most prudent for them to pursue, tr ouble both will fi n d t h emse l ves released from the expense and r ouble of applying fora private Act. It am sure . the effect °I the Bill will be to extend the system of commutation over mos t of the parishes in the empire. My great object has tell to ren d er t h e Bill s i mple and intelligible, the instru -Int of an am i ca bl e arrangement, without compulsion. Let 2 ; Lave c ommutat i on at fi rst, whether we have redempt i on t_er or n ot . If t h e measure shall have the assent of this House, tb •touu shall determine, by consenting to this Bill, to facilitate e r c ommutation of tithes, you will I think take effectual secu- P t Y by leaving all its details to be decided by a Commission artially selected, and by the voluntary consent of the rti es inimediately interested, subject always to the controul, i ns c onsent, which I m a k e indispensable, of that superintend the aeahority, in the construction of which I propose to give to Z'hurch a voice for the purpose of preventing any injury th at Its interests. I say if you will take this course Ido hope u a foundation will be found in the safest and most secure manner for the settlement of a question which has been the ' e rne of di sco n tent f or years, which has been the source of rat expen se i n th e s h ape o f li t i gat i on ; an d h as , moreover , et e ,,Ta afraid, been the cause of much local irritation ; an irri "oo the spread of which I am confident has only been prevented ate before said, to read the testimony of those most conver nt with the operation of the tithe system in all its bearings, Vn t e tots out feeling satisfied 'that the conduct of the Clergy in country,as a body, in respect to the collection of ts e s entitles them t o th e c h arac t er o f th e greatest libe e;LtY, and that they h av e sa cr ifi ce d ever y p ersona l an d te; ell lliary interest to the desire of retaining the rela en'lls of friendly good will with those over whom they th e placed.—( Loud cheers.) It is, Sir, because I feel that e l aisdowners of England have a deep interest in the settle ;ent of this question—it is because I feel, from past experi ;nee-, that the Clergy are desirous of seeing the tithe question e.ttlee in a manner which, while it shall be consistent with t e ;r:Y equitable principle, shall be:freed from all litigious diffi- Lc t 'es that I ask the House—confidently hoping I am select ]ay the surest mode, not of effecting an immediate, but for si s ng the foundation for a permanent, settlement, by securing amicable compromised, and voluntary agreement of the te se great parties interested—to give me their concurrence to I e resolution lam about proposing.--( Loud cheering.) Sir, so ll it e l g t to move " That it is expedient to give facilities for the a commutation of tithe in the several parishes of Freeland and Wales, and for a payment in money in sub stitu la4 th ereo f , to be applotted on the titheable lands in each i 4' ll ; such payment to be e subject to variation at stated pe ns to the price of corn ; or for the allotment of 1 ;; 41 in lieu of tithes in parishes wherein the parties concerned ay consent to such allotment." The resolution having been put from the Chair, p A ' ir • E. J. STANLEY put a question to the Right Hon. r o "net, whi c h, we presume , r e l ate d to t h e construct i on o f t h e Posed Commission. Is Sir R. PEEL was understood to state, in reply, that it 1:8 intended the Archbishop of Canterbury should be a mem r„, of the Board. dl r GISBORNE wished to know whether tbe stoneCommis e was to have the power of deciding on questions of modus, rout appeal to any other tribunal? e ee ' ir R. PEEL, in r e ply, o b serv ed th a t th e qu est i on of tith e h e ' 4a Was much narrowed by a late Act. His desire would t o leave the point to be decided by the parties interested. ve t he parties desired to avoid expense, and should with that l e, consent to take the decision of the superintending Com less'oner, there could be no objection to his entering upon the l ti clo, having first intimated that his decision so required e e en ,Kl be considered binding. If, on the contrary, they should s e e, d .oe the interference of the Commissioner, and desire the case befor e of a Jury, he should not object to their scndiog the nefor e one. t oe ", ll *. E. J. STANLEY asked whether it was the con of two-thirds of the occupiers, or of two-thirds of the te tn " n ‘r, flora, that the Right Hon., Baronet required to consti. t o t ne basis of the commutation ? If it was left with the temporary occupiers, be thought great injury would be done o fo he th e permanent interests of the owners, inasmuch as the '„er, having perhaps but a few years to retain possession Isi es "le land, wculd have the power of saddling the latter of,", a heavy amount of commutation. While in possession t e '," House, he would take the opportunity to call the at ."°o of the Right Hon. Baronet to an objection, and he ti°ught a very 'mild objection, urged last year by the Right t e ? i n ' Member for Essex (Mr. Baring), upon a proposition e ie ng made to fix a permanent valuation upon land by esti ti:lng the value of one year's crop. Such a test the Right e r ,,,; Gentleman denounced as most fallacious, very properly str i ng that unl ess it were p oss ibl e t o sa y th e same l an d ld every year yi e ld an equa l amoun t o f p ro d uce , it wou ld tr opossibl e to determine its value by estimating the pro -41:),,ie. of one year. Now this objection he considred quite e e rcabl e to ihe question under consideration Supposing a ti m r i l rate of tithe were now fixed on the' tend upon a calcultt the; °f last year's produce, on the very delusive supposition ak t ", t he land would in every future year yield an equal h e " lin t of produce, that would be a fair assessment ; but he e e _ g ee ' scarcely say that such a basis would be found in most in peeies very fallacious. Suppose the corn laws should be re oee ell, would not any fixed payment estimated by the crop of kg ri of, the current years prove a very great grievance to the ge e eulturist ?—( Hear.) Why, if those laws were repealed, a t o " P s rticn o f th e l an d now grow i ng corn would be devoted val ise e as cultivation, and nothing could he more unfair than to b e e lls w Pasture corn - grow i ng l an d. If th e difficulty to which k e to it lded c ou ld b e got over h e t h oug h t t h e Ri g h t H on . Ba eet's plan held out very great hopes of something like a per flt settleme n t o f th e quest i on .—(H ear . ) Iti os i s t ; PEEL, in reply to the first of the Hon. Member's of ii t ' e rls, had only t o say that it was the consent of two-thirds t ee e lando wners which his measure would require as the t o f . a of th e commutat i on. Th e occup i ers would be required s e te notice to the owners that the Commission was about to lio n .nPoll the commutation, and that before any final deci thee s com e to, the consent of the owners would be deemed val ue erasable. Hi s rep l y to t h e secon d quest i on was t h at t h e la ki: of the actual tithe of the land, and not the value of the tee ee l t t s elf, would form the . basis of the . assessment. The main Jo u l e s against any injustice being done to either party, be e be found in the principle that the commutation was to -n lunta rse cs, n'ouel WOOD thought there was little danger of a de ese 00 is. u the p ro d uce o f t h e crops i n f uture years. A t pre tile 1 one thought o f a pplyi ng ca pit a l t o th e im p rovemen t o f tite o lt lll, inasmuch as the profits went into the pockets of the ti er , °r vtiers, in s t ea d o f t h e cap i ta li st. If, h owever , t h e ques taig.ewtas determined, an immediate improvement in the land Pos e d b expected. He could not help thinking the plan pro tte . e Y the Ri g h t H on. Baronet was calculated to a ff ord the rk:llturists very great relief.—( [fear, hear.) oth er ' C. PERG USSON was muc h a f ra id t h a t an y pl an s ere than one of a partly compulsory and partly voluntary na le ei `than secure the object the Right Hon. Gentleman had Int e e e r w ' In his opinion the history of Scotland about two k en , Cd veers ego, supplied a model for a plan of tithe settle devised ' little liable to objection as any that could possibly be h ad hi ; and he regretted - the Right Hon. Baronet had not tresenst attention directed to it before he came down with his li e f] Proposition. The plan to which he alluded he would see. Y state to the House. The difficulty of ascertaining the eeelecx..tithes in Scotland having occasioned great dread of le - L r i.Y and confusion, it was r e ereed by all the great lad sthet by the t axmen or leaseholders, and b y t h e Clergy, eetel43 matter should be referred to their Sovereign, accorn tsbeT a request that he should fix some principle by d CI 1 tbeL tr !e sssestrnent should be in future regu ate . ler es til Asi ss the then King,., complied with the request, and, after "wing the question maturely, wade an award, a copy of _ THE SITN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 1835. • watch would be found in the lih:atry of the House, and which in his ( Mr. C. Ferguson's) estimation laid down the very best possible principle on which a settlement could be based. •By that award it was provided that every owner of land, and every taxman or leaseholder, should have the power of bring ing the tithe owner before a Commission, which should be possessed of authority to value the land both as against the clerical- and lay impropriator. The only difference, indeed, made between lay and clerical impropriators, was that the set tlement with respect to the former should be permanent; and accompanied by a provision that the tithe-payer might redeem the tithe, and which, in the case of Clerical tithes, it being considered that they constituted the fund for the maintenance of future Clergy, a rent charge on the land was substituted. The result of the adoption of this plan was, that in the course of three years, there was no such thing as tithe collected in Scotland —( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet's plan as it now stood, contained a vast deal well worthy the consideration of the House, and he for one was quite prepared to give it the attention its importance merited. He thought, nevertheless, that the people of England expected a measure far more' decisive than it appeared they were likely to obtain from the Government. The English farmer was expected to be able to say, "in a few years I shall have my land tithe free ;" and he was sure any measure which tended to disap point that expectation would not meet with general approbation. Mr. ROLFE did not rise to offer the resolution any oppo sition, but simply to state his conviction that a purely volun tary system of tithe commutation would be found absolutely ineffectual. The Right Hon. Baronet had referred to a Par liamentary document as affording evidence favourable to his plan ; but if he (Mr. Rolfe) was not much mistaken that very document Went to prove that not one out of twenty of the cases it referred to was a case of redemption by corn rent. They were almost all cases in which the tithe payer got rid of the burthen altogether. The plan of commutation by corn rent hal been already tried in the parish of Stoke-upon-Trent, and although there was scarcely a spot in England where the principle was more likely to take effect, it had been found not to have succeeded. The Bill which authorised the trial to which he alluded proceeded upon the plan of voluntary com mutation, and contained three principles; first, commutation in land ; secondly, commutation in money ; and, lastly, com mutation in corn rent. The result'of the experiment was that most of .the commutations were in money, but a few in land, and not a single one in corn rent.—( Hear.) In fact, the great majority of English landlords would just as soon allow their lands to.remain as they were at present, than redeem their tithes by a corn rent. The question was one of extreme dif ficulty, and all that wag possible to arrive at was• an approxi mation to justice.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet seemed to consider it merely as a question between tithe payers andtithe receivers, but it was much more, it was a na tional question,-( Hear, hear.) The great mass of the people were bent upon getting vid of tithes, and :the Bill that did not approach to that would' 'not give satisfaction.—( Hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet . told them that the 'consent of two-thirds of the landowneas'would be requisite as the preliminary step to the commutation. Now he would be glad to know how the landowners were to be found out ? HoW were they to b'e asaertained? An Hos. MEMBER—A 3 in the case of Enclosure Acts. Mr. ROLFE—The cases` were quite different, for in the one the Legislature did not interfere until the consent of land owners was obtained, but in the other the House would be obliged to legislate in the supposition that such consent could be obtained. In conclusion; the Hon. and Learned Member promised to give the measure his best attention, and his sup port whenever he thought it deserved it—( Hear.) Sir R. INGLIS approved of the plan which his Right Hon. Friend had submitted to the Committee on two grounds. First, on the ground that the working of the Bill was to be voluntary ; and secondly, that it was to be but a temporary measure. If he differed from any part of the Right Hon. Baronet's speech it was that in which he expressed an opinion that concession ought to be made to those who were willing to take tithes at less than the actual value. He had always looked upon tithes as property, and considered that they should be dealt with exactly like land. He sincerely rejoiced at the pros pect of settlement which the measure held out, and he was glad to perceive by the tone of the House that, as far at least as its principle was concerned, it was not likely to meet with opposition—( Hear.) Sir M. W. RIDLEY doubted much whether anything short of compulsory commutation would be found really be neficial. He hailed it as the beginning of a most beneficial system. He was rejoiced to find that the present measure had been received on all sides in a tone so favourable. Mr. C A YLE Y asked, were the two-thirds in number men tioned by the Right Hon. Baronet as necessary for fixing the amount of commutation, to be two-thirds in number of tithe payers, or two-thirds in the value of land ? Sir R. PEEL was understood to say land. After a few words from an HoN. MEMBER, whose name we could not hear, arid whoie voice was altogether inaudible, Lord J. RULS ELL was not disposed to object to the measure now before them, in consequence of the quarter from whence it came, nor to quarrel with the remarks that accom panied it. He did not, however, think that it was likely to prove effectual in its operation. When it was taken into con sideration the difficulties that attached to both parties en gaged in tithe disputes—the farmer complaining that he was unjustly taxed by the titheowner and the titheowner thinking himself in another manner equally unjustly treated by the farmer—it would not remain a matter of much wonder that such disputes were not the most easy of settlement. There was no doubt when the titheowner was indulgent that a com mutation was easily arranged, and tha.succession of another incumbent might then tend to improve the condition of the tithepayer. Looking at the whole of the question he could not think that the plan proposed by the Right Hon. Ba ronet was likely to produce the desired effect, and that there was no means of doing so but by the adoption of a compulsory measure. Mr. A. BARING perfectly agreed with what had been said with regard to the difficulty of a commutation, and he was the more convinced of it from the two tithe Bills previously intro duced to that House, and which had been drawn up with the greatest care, and with the assistance of the Noble Lord who had just spoken, and also from other schemes proposed to him, all of which went to show the almost invincible difficulty at ten•ling all attempts at a compulsory arrangement. The pre sent voluntary plan, he conceived, had this advantage—that it could not create dissatisfaction.—( Hear, hear.) When Hon. Gentlemen saw it work and do well, as he had no doubt they would, its advantages over the compulsory system would be daily apparent. He knew in his own neighbourhood of no less than six parishes where ineffectual efforts had been made to compound for the tithe, but which they had not been able ami cably to do, though under the new measure he did not doubt of its being done successfully. Mr. BLANI IR E had heard with great satisfaction the terms in which the Right Hon. Baronet had introduced the present measure. He had always thought and always said that a mea sure similar to the present was wanted, in which the tithe payers could make bargains with the titheowners, and come to Parliament without an enormous expense, and have their bar gains confirmed. As the Member who had introduced last Session the measure called the Tithe Stay of Suits Bill, he hoped and expected that the Right Hon. Baronet would pro vide so that the various law suits under Lord Eldon's Bill might be settled before the tribunal of that House at a less expense. He trusted that the measure would have the full and entire confidence of the country. Mr. ESTCOURT said the Right Hon. Baronet had said that if two-thirds of a parish agreed, they should have the power to force an agreement from the rest. Now, what he was desirous of learning was, that, supposing the reverse to be the case, and that two-thirds did not agree, but the smaller proportion did, or even an individual, or a single farmer agreed, could they or he have the power of calling in the Assistant Commissioner to arbitrate between them or him and the tithe owner ? . Mr. PR YME objected to the principle of the Bill. The commutation.was made on a corn rent, and the clergyman had an inducement to encourage inclosures. He thought the measure was at the present period of agricultural distress cal culated to produce great dissatisfaction. He did not quarrel with the details of 'the measure, but for this. solitary reason, that it was not on a compulsory principle. Mr. GREEN was sure that if Hon. "Gentlemen looked to the situation of parishes in this country they would feel com pelled to acknowledge ,that it was impossible to adopt the compulsory system. He had himself been a party to two of those enormously expensive proceedings under the present systeM to endeavour to effect a commutation, at.d in one case it had cost no less than 3,000!. The present measure, in re moving dissatisfaction alone, with regard to the great expense attendant upon commutation, would be a great benefit. Mr. E. J. STANLEY approved of the measure as far as it did go, and should support it ; but if he entertained one senti ment upon the subject more strongly than another, it was the necessity for a compulsory union of parishes. It was infinitely better than the present system of local Acts, but he hoped that it would lead ultimately to a compulsory measure. Sir R. PRICE complained that the uncertainty of the law for the last fifty years had almost invariably tended to induce decisions in favour of the Clergyman and against the farmer. —( Hear, hear:) He suggested that a declaratory law (so we understood) should be passed, explaining the law as it now stood. An HON. MEMBER wished to ascertain if he had under stood rightly that one Commission was to be appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, and two by the Crown. He was fearful if tl:e present plan were adopted it would produce no thing but combination in the larger parishes. It appeared to him that every man should be at liberty to commute his tithe individually, and not bound by the act of other individuals un less in so far accorded with his own interest. Mr. BARNARD inquired whether the tithe payers could put their lands under the provision of the Bill, for a period of more than twenty-one years, or whether the incumbent could consent to it ? Mr. HODGES said that the Bill would be received with great satisfaction in many tuts of England, particularly in those parts where tithes were very high ; in other parts, how ever, and they were many in number, where the tithes were comparatively low, it would not meet with such a reception. The Hon. Member asked, as we understood, a question as to the effect the Bill of the Right Hon. Baronet would have upon hop-growing parishes, and whether five per cent. might not be fairly taken off this article in the composition ? Mr. Div Err asked' a question of the Right Hon. Baro net, which was inaudible in the Gallery. Mr. GROTE wished to know whether the tithes in city parishes, would be put on the 'same footing as those in the country, and whether cities were' included in the Right Hon. Baronet's Bill ? The House should be aware that in many parishes in the City of London, tithes w ere ex t reme ly oppres sive and unequal in their distribution. Sir R PE EL—Considering that this is only the first stage of the Bill which I propose to introduce to the notice of the House, and also that there may be some objection to pledg, iug myself as to the particulars of it, I think it much better that I should not at present make any positive declarations on the subject, but reserve them for a future stage of the pro ceedings on it. With respect to the last question, respecting the tithe on houses, the difficulty is great to give it a distinct answer. I have given it much consideration, but much more is required before I am prepared to give any assurance', on that.part of the Bill. I shall next take the question of the. Hon. Member, who inquired . why I should not rather appoint five Commissioners than three. My reason for selecting the latter number, is the increased facility with which I have al ways observed business is transacted when the number of those engaged in it is small, and the better manner in which it is put out of hand. Of these three two are to be appointed by the Crown, and the third by the Archbishop of Canter bury. The power of appointment given to the latter, is in lieu of the power of assent., or dissent to composition at pre sent possessed by the Church. I was then asked by another Hon. Member whether, if two thirds of the landowners in a parish assented or dissented from a composition their decision should be compulsory on . the remaining third, however indis posed to it? The Hon. Member said also that this might give rise to intrigues, and cause much injustice. It was for the express purpose of putting an end to intrigue, and avert ing the possibility of injustice, that I proposed to appoi n t a superintending power—a Commission. In order that the owner may not control the lessor or the occupier, I mean to propose that no commutation shall. be final until it shall have been examined into and sanctioned by the Commissioners in London, as well as having received the consent of the incum - - bent, and two-thirds of the tithepayers. With respect to the question of another • Hon.- Member, as to whether it would not be proper to institute some standard wherewith to regulate the prices of corn, I can only say that the fewer elements in such a calculation the better._( Hear, hear.) Although of late years it has been assumed that the price of wheat bears a dis tinct and uniform relation to the price of all other species of corn, it has been found by experience that this relation is so very wide as to afford no substantial ground for calcula tion. Therefore, I think that the combined average price of wheat, oats, and barley, for a septennial or quinquennial pe riod, will be found more accurate, and quite sufficient for all useful purposes. It is on this general principle that that part of the Bill will he framed. The next question put to me was, whether, if two-thirds of the tithe payers of a parish did not concur in a composition, and that an individual or indivi duals saw it would be to their interest and advantage to enter into it as for themselves, they would be at liberty to dq so, and make a separate composition ? To this I should answer in the rcgative. The Bill which I intend to introduce will not per mit individual composition. Nothing would be gained by the, adoption of such a principle in the way of public advantage; and great evil might be done. To instance only one, the odium of collecting tithes from those not in composition would be in creased, when, as the probability would be, they contrasted their own Cenditinri in the lapse of time with that of those who had compounded, and compared the advantages enjoyed by the latter over them. The last question which was put to me was, whether the incumbent would have a power for extending the composition over a space of 21 years ? To this I have only to answer that, if the tithe owners, the tithe payers, and the Com missioners consent, the arrangement may be made perpetual. With respect : to the question relating to hop parishes, I think it is necessary that some special provision should be made for them ; but of what nature that provision should be, I have not yet determined. Ido not know of any more questions to be answered ; and I think that, on the whole, it will be found much better to postpone any others which may arise, until a future stage of the Bill. I shall then hear them, and give Hon. Members all the satisfaction in my power with much pleasure.—( Hear.) Sir R. PRICE said that the state of the law as regarded the whole subject of tithes was so very complicated and so very defective that the right of the clergy was absolutely un defined. He should, therefore, beg to suggest to the Right Hon. Baronet that the subject ought to be taken into consi deration. Sir R. PEEL said that the advantage of his Bill was that it comparatively put an end to the necessity of litigation by taking the best and cheapest mode of settling all disputed questions—voluntary agreement of the parties interested. If the Hon. Member chose to bring in a Bill to amend the law as relating to the subject of tithes, he might do so ; but he ( Sir R. Peel) thought it no part of his duty in connection with the measure before the House, to embrace that question at present. The Bill offered the option of voluntary composi tion, and gave a Commissioner empowered to settle to a great extent all cases in dispute, without any expense. If, after that, there was a litigation, it would be the fault of the parties themselves. But as to the policy or expediency of under takinf, to adjust every individual case arising out of the ques tion of tithes, it was not to be thought of then ; and even if it were, he doubted much whether any legislation could settle them ; for even if they were put an end to by one measure, they would spring up under another. Mr. DIVETT was understood to inquire whether the pay ment of the tithe rested on the owner or occupier of the land? and on which should the levy for it be made? Also whether 'the Commissioners should have the power of abatement? Sir R. PEEL said—The payment rests on the owner, but the levy must be made on the occupier. Ido not propose to invest any power of abatement in the hands of tbe Commis sioners. If I thought that making the composition compulsory would have the effect of benefitting the country I should not hesitate a moment in bringing in a Bill to that effect ; but, after discussing the subject in all its possible bearings, I have come to a contrary conclusion. A general plan to make composi tion compulsory could not .be brought to act without much trouble and great ill-feeliiig on the ,part of all concerned. The adoption of the principle of the Bill to be introduced does not, however, preclude the sub seque nt adoption of the compulsory principle, provided a necessity for it arises. I wish, however, to try the effects of the voluntary principle of composition first, to see the points in which it works well and those in which it may be found defective, and then adopt, the compulsory principle, if it be perceived that benefit will accrue to the country from it. By taking this course the country will steer clear of all the difficulties which beset the question, and leave themselves at perfect liberty to deal with the exi gencies of the case as they may arise. What I most depre cate in the compulsory arrangement is the chance of failure. Failure would throw the question back for years. The especial advantage of a voluntary one is that it leaves you, at worst, as it found you ; and that, even though you may fail, you are exactly in the same position as you were before. You can then take up the compulsory prin ciple, if you choose to carry it into action. I must say that I am more sanguine with respect to the success of the vo luntary principle than many Hon. Members, and my rea sons for it are these : when a property tax was imposed it met tithes as well as every other species of property, and conse quently they were included in the return made at the period. By the return of 1810 it appeared that the value of the tithes of England and Wales was 2,353,000/. Of this amount 1,532,000/. was under composition ; of the remainder upwards of 400,000/. was taken in kind, about a fifth of the whole, or, more strictly speaking, 18 per cent. of all the tithes in the kingdom. I need not adduce further proof, except it be the corroborative one that this amount of composition existed, even though the expense of entering it was enormous. I cannot help thinking that any argument on the failure of past attempts at commutation is fairly answered, when it is considered that each commutation was obtained at an expense for a private Bill of about 2,000/. But let us take care of voluntary commuta tion. Here are two parishes, Lancaster and another (Coeborn we believe). In 1824 a private Bill passed for the former, and shortly after another for the latter. By that Bill a Commissioner was appointed, the. vacancy, in case of death or any other cause,' to be filled up by the Magistrate. A corn rent was raised, and other arrangements in conformity with its provi sions, and to some extent. analogous with those of the Bill about to he introduced, entered into. How does the case stand? The measure, despite of the great expense attendant on it, works well in both parishes ; and, in point of fact, the only objection since raised against it is on the score of the cost which had been incurred in procuring it. That objection is obviated in the present Bill ; and I hope that, as the prin • ciple has been found to work well notwithstanding, it will continue to do so when the expense is abolished. The Bill proposes to give the power of accepting land in lieu.of tithes, but that I consider only the exception. I take the corn rent as the general rule, and the land as the exception. This Ido on the strength of the success of a similar mode in• Scotland, and to prove that there is nothing so vicious in the corn rent as might be supposed. The main question is one in which no party interests arc involved—no partial predilections to be indulged in. —(hear.) I shall give every suggestion, coming from every quarter of the House, my best consideration, and all that attention which is dui to it under the circumstances ; but I mean to proceed on the principle of the corn rent, be cause I firmly believe that any departure from it would preju dice the utility of the measure. Mr. DIVE - TT wished to know whether the. Bill would con fer a power of redemption ? • Sir R. - PEEL said that the power of redemption and its application was better reserved to the Legislature by the Bill, until it should be seen how the principle, of the corn rent worked. Mr. PEASE said that the county of Durham did not on the average produce more than fifteen bushels of wheat per acre, therefore that the tithes were paid by cattle rather than corn. He could not help saying that land which produced so little corn, which paid its tithe out of cattle, which was in pasture, and consequently becoming more and more impo verished every succeeding year, would not commute volun tarily. Fifteen bushels of wheat per acre, at 103. per bushel, would be sufficient to pay the landlord his rent, the Clergyman his tithes, and, moreover, enable the farmer to live ; but when the price was reduced to ss. per bushel, and the Clergyman got his 121. 103. per acre, there was nothing for the landlord and nothing for the tenant. If cases of that kind were not provided against; and he could assure the House that they were frightfully great in number, such a state of distress would ensue in the north of England as no power of language would be able to describe. He knew whole estates so circumstanced at this moment. Something should be done, and it should be done at once. He (Mr. P.) did not think that measure cal culated to confer the slightest advantage upon tillage lands, though he was free to admit that it would benefit grazing lands. Mr. ROLFE wished to know how was the tithe on fish, as Well as on fishing, to be dealt with by the Bill ? In the ex treme west of England, as well as in some parts of the north and east, these two tithes were levied distinctly. In the former it was easy to estimate the amount, becauSe it con sisted only of the tenth of the gross quantity taken ; but in the latter an attempt was made to enforce a tithe of the pro bable value of the fi s hing, which led t o i n j us ti ce an d ill-will on almost all occasions. Messrs. RictiAinis and C. FEsonssoN made one or two olr•ervations, the purport of which were not understood in the Gallery. Mr. GROTE wished to know if parochial surveys were necessary to composition ; and, if so, whether the parish would-have-to bear the expense? Sir R. PEEL said the expense, if such surveys were deemed necessary, was to be borne by the parish. The resolutions were then put and carried, and the Chair• man obtained leave to report progress and sit again. The House then resumed. RELIEF OF THE POOR IN IRELAND. Sir R. MUSGRAVE rose, pursuant to notice, to move for leave to bring in a Bill to authorize the relief of the poor in certain cases in Ireland. He was aware that it might be/ob jected to him that there was a Commission sitting at present in Ireland, for the purposes of inquiring into and reporting on the subject of the Bill he should move for leave to bring in ; but he would answer that objection by assuring the House that it was not his intention to press it to a second reading, until such time as the report of the Commissioners should be in the hands of every Hon. Member in the House. He was, however, quite satisfied that the report would be found to concur mainly with the provisions of the Bill. IF when the report should be made, his Majesty's Ministers thought fit to bring forward any satisfactory measure on the subject, he should even then willingly relinquish his Bill. To prove the abso lute and immediate necessity for such a measure as the one he proposed to introduce, he should beg to mention one fact. It was in evidence, on the authority of the medical gentlemen of the counties of Clare and Limerick, that a full fourth of the labouring population of these counties was carried off by dis ease, induced by want of the common necessaries of life. The object of this Bill was to enable Irish parishes voluntarily to extend relief to the poor, directly, or through the medium of Mendicity Societies. He would propose that parishes should be divided into sections, for the purposes of the Bill. He would conclude by saying, that the question of relief to the poor of Ireland was one of the greatest importance to the people of England. Mr. S. O'BRIEN supported the Bill. Mr. GO ULB URN would not enter into any discussions of the Bill before the evidence taken before the Poor Law Com- mission had been laid before the House. Considering, how ever, that the Bill would not come under discussion before the report was laid before the House, he should offer no objection to the present motion. He could only add, that he would take every measure in his power to expedite the printing of the re pok, so that it might be laid before the House with as little dehiy as possibid. Leave was then given to bring in a Bill. THE CHATHAM ELECTION. Mr. L. HODGES rose to move for a Select Committee to inquire into the allegations 'contained in a petition which he had preser.ted to the House in reference to the recent election for the town of Chatham, and which he had ' , brought forward on the 19th inst. The petition, had been signed by upwards of 300 persons, and it deeply affected the characters of Officers high in the employ of Government. He had intended to refer the petition ;t4-..the consideration of the Intimidation Com-. inittee,;but icaPpeared to him to be the general feeling of the House that it would be preferable to appoint a Select Com mittee of Inquiry, aad he should accordingly move that a Select Committee he -appointed. Sir R. KNATCIII3IJLL would beg leave to state to the lionse what were the charges which existed in the present case, and he doubted not that he should be able to convince the House that there existed no necessity for the appointment of a Committee. No public or private good whatever could arise from the proposed inquiry ; but he would rest his ob jection on a distinct denial of the total charge brought forward against the individuals in question. In reference to the peti tion which the Hon. Member had presented on a former oc casion, he had stated that certain rules had been established in the dock-yards, by which certain persons had the monopoly of supplying slops to,the seamen and marines who might be at those stations, and that on the occasion to which he alluded a special order had been issued restricting the admission into the yard to three individuals who had been in the interest of Admiral Beresford at the preceding election, while admission had been refused to those slopsellers who hail voted for Cap tain Byng. The lion. Member had further gone into a state ment of a Conversation that had taken place between two of the slopsellers and the Gallant Admiral. in which the latter had re ferred to the votes of the parties, and had connected the favour to be granted with the votes they had given. Now he ( Sir E. Knatchbull) held in his hand evidence on the part of the officers to prove that the allegation was altogether without foundation. It was perfectly true that the orders relative to the admission of slopsellers into the dock-yard had been re lapsed in. avour of the three persons in question. But then came the question, were or were not the three inpersons in ques tion engaged , and how were they engaged the election? Two of the persons were named Isaacs, and one of them Lu cas. Now it so happened that these two men named Isaacs were not voters at all.—( Hear, hear.) This had been as serted in the petition of the Gallant Admiral, and it was proved by a reference to the poll-books which he then held in his hand. Then with respect to the case of Lucas, it was not absolutely certain whether he bad a vote or not. It did cer tainly appear by the poll-book that there was a voter by the name of Lucas, but that person was described not as a slop seller but as a gentleman, and whether therefore he were or were not the Lucas alluded to was a matter of doubt. He next came to the allegation that a Gallant Officer had expressed himself strongly to the parties in question, that if Admiral Beresford did not succeed the Government custom would be taken from them. Now the Gallant Officer had acknowledged that he had had a conversation at that time with the parties in question, but that he was now unable to remember what that conversation was.-:--( A laugh.) It' was a general and discursive conversation, which had taken place sometime before the election, and which was not connected with. it.. There were one or two other cir cumstances which bore upon the decision of the caso. The Gallant Officer stated in his opinion that he had given the permission to the two men Isaacs, and to Lucas, without the least reference to party feeling, and that they remained at perfect liberty to be engaged on whichever side they might please. If the House should think fit he should feel no ob jection to the appointment of the Committee, but he would rely upon the character of the House that after the statement he had made, it would not deem it necessary to employ the public time upon an inquiry so unavailable to any practical advantage. Mr. HODGE S said that when so serious a charge was made against an Officer of so high a grade, he would maintain that it was the duty of the House to entertain it. It had been said that two of the men in question were not voters, but they had stated to the agent of the Gallant Admiral that if they had had votes they would have given them to him.—( Hear, and a laugh.) These men were upon this admitted whilst all others had been excluded.. He would now allude to the employment of the band in favour of the Government candidate, and he had to add that the regimental colours of th e R o y a l M ar i nes h a d been taken from the staff, and had been borne amongst the flags of the Gallant Admiral. This he believed was not a proper purpose to which to apply the colours of any regiment. He had to add that the petition was signed by many persons who had voted for the Gallant Admiral. Mr. V. SMIT H supported the motion. Sir E. KNATCHBULL explah;cl: Mr. HODGES then read a part of the petition, which contained the allegation of partiality in the admission of the parties in question into the dock-yard. Mr. O'LOGHLEN maintained that the statement of the Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir E. Knatchbull) did not contro vert the allegations of the petition. Sir G. CLERK said that upon the arrival of several ships of war to be paid off at Chatham, and when a large pay ment was to be made to the men, the Commanding Officer had thOught necessary to regulate the mode in which the slopsellers should be admitted to supply the men, and that lie had made inquiries into the character of the slopsellers, and that upon . the result of these inquiries he had thought fit to admit three of them only. Now so far from these men being supporters of Admiral Beresford at the election, two of them had nn votes at all, and the third had been an active agent in canvassing for Captain Byng.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. WARBURTON thought the statements of both the parties ought to be considered by the House as exparte. He wished to know if it was not a fact that when it was made known to Colonel Tremonier that this petition was in preparation he did not send round an orderly to the different shopkeepers, ac quainting them that the exclusive order he had issued had been recalled? This order of exclusion did not appear to be neces • sary for the purpose of any military discipline, but seemed solely to have emanated from political feeling. This state ment, hOwevcr, he admitted was only exparte, as was that on the other side, and therefore it was that he considered a Com mittee so necessary to inquire into the real facts. Mr. FRESH FIELD had the honour of being acquainted with Colonel Tremonier, and from his knowledge of the high character and proper sense of his duty as an officer, as well as in his capacity as an elector, that belonged to that officer, he did not believe there wasthe slightest foundation for the charge preferred ag a i ns t hi m i n t hi s pet i t i on, t h at he i ssued the order in question from any political feeling whatever. Was not Colonel Tremonier justified in saying to the electors of Chat ham" Return to the Government some of those favours which it had conferred on the town?"—( Loud Opposition cheers.) If he had the honour of being a military man he should feel himself as will e n titl e d ,t o h o ld political opinions and to ex press thorn, independently of any controul of any Government, as any other person in the community. Mr. ORD was informed that the order of exclusion issued by Colonel Tremonier on the occasion was an unprecedented order at Chatham, and that it could be proved by the evidence of respectable tradesmen that the order proceeded from poli tical feeling alone, and was dictated by electioneering interests. The animus of the transaction was shown by the conversation which Colonel Tremonier 'held with the returning officer. Sir J. HANMER said that the order of exclusion was Cleary issued only for a temporary purpose, and as soon as that purpose was answered the order was rescinded, on the 14th of February. He would seriously ask the House if they were to pay attention to words alleged to have been spoken by Colonel Tremonier to somebody in the street during the heat of a contested election?. Did it become the dignity of the grave senate of the Commons of England—( Oh. oh)—to take any deliberate proceeding upon words thus spoken, not with any idea that they should ever be brought under the consi deration of that House ?—( Cheers from the Opposition.) Sir R. FERGUSON rose as a military man to protest against the doctrine laid down by the Hon. and Learned gen tleman opposite (Mr. Freshfield), that the Officers of the navy, army, and marines had not as good a right to express their political opinions as any other class of men. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said that the Officers of marines were bound. to vote for the Government candidate. Now, he would tell that Hon. and Learned Gentleman that military officers were as independent in their political opinions as he was. He should wish to know if Colonel Tremonier had as vet received anything from the present Government?—( Oh, oh. ) ° But perhaps they had been t oo s h or t a ti me i n o ffi ce to d o ai t y thing for him. If so, he was sure they would be too short a time in office to do much for the future.—( Cheers from the Opposition, and cries of Oh, oh, from the Ministerial side.) Mr. FRESHFIELD, in explanation, said that the Gallant Officer whCi had just spoken had altogether misunderstood what he had said. What he did say was that officers of the army were under no control to act in support of a Govern- It) o / ment candidate, for that although they were officers, they were I still citizens, and had a right to vote as they pleased—( Hear.) Mr. MACL E AN hoped the House would throw overboard all the loose allegations that had been made on both sides. Sir E. KNATCHBULL rose, amidst cries of Spoke, spoke. He said, since the commencement of the debate he bad consulted with a friend of Colonel Tremonier out of the House, and the result was that that friend, on the part of Colonel Tremonier, was most anxious that every inquiry should be gone into on this subject, and, therefore, he (Sir E. Knatch • bull) for one had no longer any objection to the appointment of the Committee.—(Cheers.) Sir R. PEEL—It would be with very great reluctance, Sir, that I should consent to the appointment of .this Com mittee. I can very well understand why the Gallant Officer and his friends may be anxious to have this inquiry take place, and have a strong personal wish that the Committee should be appointed, feeling, perhaps, as they do, that the explana tions from this night by the friends of the Gallant Officer in this House are not completely satisfactory. But I cannot say that the personal wish of an Officer is 'a conclusive reason why this House shall appoint a Committee.---( Hear.) Re ference has been made -to some observations which the Gallant Officer is said to have made to some other person, as well as his having used his military influence over the voters at the election. Now if any inquiry shall take place at all, lam clearly of opinion that it should be limited to his official con duct as an Officer, and should not extend to words spoken by him while in the full possession of the elective franchise him self. The Reform Bill gave him the elective franchise, and with it the right to speak his political sentiments freely, and I, Sir, for one r never will countenance an inquiry into sentiments so expressed.—(Cheers.) To appoint a Committee' for such a purpose I consider to be nothing short of an inquisitorial proceeding.—( Cheers.) For my own part Ido not think that there have been sufficient grounds laid for the appoint ment of any Committee whatever in this case : but if there should be any, I move, Sir, that the inquiry of that Com mittee shall be limited to the official conduct of the Gallant Officer, and to the alleged abuse of his military authority. Sir G. GREY fully concurred in what had fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet that a mere casual conversation was not in itself alone sufficient ground for the appointment of a Com mittee of that House to enter upon an inquiry. But the Right Hon. Baronet seemed to be in ignorance of the real facts of the case as stated in the petition. If the Right Hon. Baronet read the petition be would have found that the peti tioners expressed their confidence that that House would not allow any military authority to interfere with the right of elec tion.—( Hear.) The order issued by Colonel Tremonier the petitioners alleged had been most partially acted on ; and they felt convinced that this partiality was designed, from the conversation which Colonel Tremonier had held upon the subject. He was alleged to have said, "If Chatham does not return Admiral Beresford, 1 hope the Government will shut up half the shops in the town."—( Cheers from the Op position.) He hoped, under all the circumstances, that the Committee would be granted. He himself knew many bo roughs that were subject to "similar influence, and be had been told by several electors that they could not give him their votes in consequence of this influence, unless he supported the system of voting by ballot, to which they knew he was opposed. Such a question as this ought to be made to hinge upon the personal character of an officer. He knew some of his own intimate friends, officers in the army, men of the high est worth and honour, who, from not being well road in the Constitution of the country, might not he over-scrupulous in using their influence at an election, and miglit: often, without knowing that they were doing anything wrong, .•::2trel,7 their zeal to outrun their discretion. Sir R. PEEL--The private conversation has been much insisted on. Now, with a view to the object proposed, it ap pears to me that it would be quite sufficient if the Committee confined their inquiry to the circumstances under which the order was issued by the Commandantfor the exclusion of slop sellers and others from the barrack-yard without a special order of admission from the Commandant. An HON. MEMBER—WiII it be competent to a Committee thus appointed to enquire into the conversation? Sir R. PEEL—The Committee will take the course they may judge fit upon that point; but if the Committee be ap pointed in the words first proposed it will have the appearance of an inquisition into private conduct. Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE saw no objection to the first amendment suggested. Mr. GROTE said the Committee would be of no use un less they could enquire into private conduct as far as it tended to influence the election. Sir R. PEEL—The Committee would not be preCluded from enquiry into the bearing of the private conversation. He would persevere in the amendment. After a few words from Lord JOHN RUSSELL and Mr. AGLIONBY, the House divided— For the original motion For the amendment l3O Majority against Ministers —3l The following Committee was then appointed— Hodges, I'. L. Strickland, §ir G. Mackenzie, J. A. S. Knatchbull, Sir E. Geary, Sir W. Ebrington, Lord Troubridge, Sir E. Marjoribanks, S, Stanley. Lord -- Trevor, Hon. G. R. Inglis, Sir R. H. Grey, Sir G. Ord, W. Clive, Robert Berkeley, G. C. Hay, A. L. Clements, Lord Wood, C Ashley, Lout TIMBER DUTIES. Mr. BARING rose, pursuant to notice, to move that the House do go into a Committee of the whole House on the timber duties. On the question being put that the Speaker do leave the Chair, Mr. P. T HOMSON wished to know what course the Right Hon. Gentleman meant to pursue upon this important question ? If he was correctly informed, it was the intention now to go into a Committee of the whole House for the pur pose of moving a resolution, on which a Bill would be founded, and that Bill afterwards referred to a Select Committee, for the purpose of inquiring in the whole subject. If this was the course meant to be taken, he would offer no objection to it. Mr. BARING said, the Timber Duties, as they now ex isted, were the result of a Committee which sat in 1821 or 1822, so that they had been thirteen years in operation. He would not now inquire how far these duties were at first proper or expedient. However that might be, they had given rise to so much conflicting interest that it became absolutely neces sary to come to Parliament upon the question. There were two notices upon the paper relative to this subject—one to equalize the duties, and the other for the appointment of a Com mittee. The present duty was, on Baltic timber 555., and on Co lonial timber 10s. It appeared that in the present state of the law, the practice had grown up of fitting out ships in British ports, of chartering them to the Baltic for timber, and thence to Canada, from whence the Baltic timber was re-shipped and landed in this country. The reduced duty offered sufficient inducement to this operation, for the Baltic timber was thus imported at 10s. in place of 555. This practice had been go. ing on for two or three years, and the year before last not less than 1,300 cargoes had been thus imported, to the great loss of the revenue. These, and other facts, appeared from infor mation collected at the ports from which the trade was carried on. It had become, therefore, indispensable to alter the law. His only object • now was to propose a resolution on which a Bill might be founded. That Bill he would then propose be referred to a Select Committee for the purpose of inquiring into the whole subject. The reason why the question had be come so pressing now was that if Government took no step re lative to these duties, a great number of ships now on their way to the Baltic must be paid the whole freight. To prevent this the interposition of Parliament was now required. As se: veral important interests were connected with this question, and as several ships at this season of the year were on the point of sailing, he thought it right to state that it was not the intention of his Majesty's Government, whatever might be the inquiry, to propose any alteration which should take effect during the present season.—( Hear, hear.) As arrangements and contracts had already been made, it was proper that those connected with the trade should at least have security against any interference with their commerce during the present sea son. This was only in accordance with common justice; but he had to state an additional reason for deferring any altera . tion to the next year. If the trade was not protected during the present year, duties to the amount of two or three hundred thousand pounds would be lost to the revenue.—( Hear, hear. ) At present he should abstain from all discussion of the general question or from giving any opinion of his own as to what might hereafter be the wisest course for Parliament to adopt in legislating upon the subject. He should strictly confine himself to the introduction of the Bill, the objects of which he had just stated to the House. The SPEAKER then left the Chair, and the House having gone into Committee, Mr. BARING moved a resolution to the effect that it is the ()pinion of the Committee that an alteration be made in the duties on timber. Mr. WARBURTON should make no opposition to the proposal of the Right Hon. Gentleman, but he should have ,been better pleased if he had simply endeavoured to correct the anomalous operation of the present law by which timber was conveyed from the ports of Europe to the North American colonies, and then brought to England at a duty lower than that on timber freighted to England direct from the Baltic. On what principle could the present - scale be defended? Though the difirence of freight as between the Baltic and North American ports was 15s.—the Baltic freight amounting to 20s. and the Nth American to 35s.—vet the difference in the duties was 455., thereby leaving between the 153. and 455. a difference of 30s. Here ivas an inequality which could not be justified, even under the principles of restricted trade. He would not oppose the. Right Hon. Gentleman's proposition, for b e w as willing to accept from the Government anything in the shape of a revision of those duties. Mr. ROBINSON said, when the time for discussing the general question arrived he should be prepared to consider it as not es affecting the colonies alone, but all the other great com mercial interests of the country. if it could then be proved to . _ him that the protecting duty . in favour of the colonies was greater than under all the circumstances they were entitled to, he would willingly give his vote for putting the duties on a proper footing. Mr. CARRUTHERS would not allow the statement made by the Hon. Member for Bridport to go unanswered. The difference between the duties—one being 10s., and the other 55s.—was not an injurious difference, because, when the duty on Baltic timber vi as only 40s. the price was nei ther more nor less, but just the same as now. The colonies, however, were henefitted, and properly so, when it was re membered that they consumed British manafactures, employ ed British shipping, and largely contributed to the British revenue. Mr. HUTT hailed the proposed appointment of a Com mittee with the greatest satisfaction. Mr. G. E. YOUNG regretted that it had not been pro posed to alter immediately that anomalous' scale of duties which injured the revenue, and could not possibly benefit the cnsumer. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON said that there was no ques tion which ought: to excite greater alarm among the shipping interest than• the present, and he greatly regretted that it was intended to accede to the motion of the Hon. Member for Manchee i ter. Mr. BARING had - to state, in answer. to the Hon. Mem ber's question, that notice was given to those connected with , the trada, of the intentions of Government in the middle of February, early enough for every possible purpose, and before any arrangements were far advanced. He therefore did not expect that any claim of compensation would arise. It was necessary for the Government to take some step in reference to this question, and they thought it was the most ad visable course to submit it once more to the consideration of a Special Committee. It was intended to throw the question completely open to the full and fair consideration of that Committee. Mr. G. F. YOUNG hoped that the Government did not intend to pass over a claim for compensation, supposing it should be proved that arrangements had been made before no-. tke teas given. Dr: BOWRING was grateful at hearing the mention of " consumer" in the course of the discussion. He hoped the day would arrive when his interests would receive more con sideration. A distinction had been drawn between the col°. nies and foreign countries. There ought to be no distinction. If the foreigner came forward with a cheaper article than the colonies, it was to our interest to purchase from him, mid we might rest assured that he in return would take our commo dities.—( No, no.) Mr. CARRUTHERS considered the colonies as part and parcel of the State.—(Cheers.) It did not follow that be. cause we purchased from a foreigner he would become a cus tomer for our manufactures, and that he would satisfactorily shoes, when the proper time for discussion arrived. After a few words from Mr. Warburton,• Mr. Young, Mr. A. Chapman, and Mr. F. Thompson, The resolution was agreed to, and the House resumed. SINECURES. Mr. F. BARING brouzht forward his motion for the re appointment of the ComMittee on Sinecures. The inquiries": of the Committee of last SessiGn were stopped by the dissolu tion of Parliament, and as an investigation into colonial sine cures and cases of compensation for abolition of office was highly necessary, he apprehended: there would be no opposi tion to his motion. He trusted.: that the report of the Com mittee would enable them to:f:•ume some rule for regulating all future cases, particularly those of compensation for abo lished offices. The allowances to superannuated public ser vants were under a certain limit and regulation, but where offices were abolished, the only guiding principle was that some saving should be made. • • He had in: his hand a long list of pensions and sinecures, but Jie should not read it to the House, as his motion would most probably be agreed to. Sir R. PEEL said that he had called for the minutes or the late Board of Treasury immediately on his coming into office, for the puritose of carrying the recommendations of the Committee into effect. The question was then put and carried, and the following Committee was appointed : Bariu : !, F. Ord, W. Peel, Sir R. ! Bethel, R. Mosley, Sir 0. Evans, G. Grote, G. 'Terries, 3. Roche. 1). Lincoln, Earl of it. Lenna , d,:y. B . , Penclarves, - E. W. Bannerman, A. , - - - -- -- - - 1 'Greene, T. Fremioitie, Sir T. Graham; Sir J. Stewart, H. Ew::rt, W. Ruth veil, E. Pringle, A. Gladstone, W. E. Brarn,ton, T. W. Smith, Ven;on Seholefield, J. Hume, Joseph Fector, John Minot Knatehbuti, Sir E. Cavendish, G. Oa the motion of Mr. ROLFE, the Illegal Securities Bill .passed through Committee, and the House adjourned at One O' Clock. LIST OF THE MAJORITY On Mr. Hodges' motion. Harvey, 1). W. Hawes, B. Hay, Colonel L. Heat hcoat, J. Heatlicote, R. E. Heron, Sir IL t{indley, Charles th,7„ - h:;use, Sir J. C. Hodges, ` l . Hoskins, K. Howard, E. G. Hutt, W. Johnstone, A. Kemp, T. R. Kerry, Earl of King, B. Labouchere, H. Leader, John Temple Lefevre, C. S. Lennart', T. B. Lennox, Lord J. G. Littleton, E J Lushington, Charles Maule, Hon. Fox • Maxwell, J. Mangles, W. L. MarjoEabanke, Marsland, H. M'Cancc, John Mackenzie, J. A. S. M•Leod, It. M'l'aggart, J. Milton, Viscount Morpeth, Viscount Mullins, W. F. Musgrave, Sir R. Murray, J A. O'Brien. C. O'Connell, J. O'Connell, Maitric2 O'Connell, Morgan O'Connor Don O'Loghlen, M. Oliphant, L. Oswald, J. Oswald, R. A. Paget, F. Parrott, J. Pattison, .fames Parnell, Sir H. Pease, Joseph Perrin, Sergeant Phillips, G. R. Adam, Admiral i::iptiby, H. A. Al ton, 4. Baines, E. Baring, F. Barnard, E. G. Berkeley, C. F. Bernal, B. Bewe,, Bish, 'l'. Blamire, W. Bowring, Dr. Brady, Denls C. Bridgman, Hewitt Brocklchurst..l. Brothertun, J. Buckingham, J. S. Burdon, W. W. Horton, H. Campbell, Sir J. Carter, J. B. Cavendish, Hon. G. Cayley, E. S. Chalmers, Patrick Clay, W. Clements, Lord Clive, E. B. Codrington, Sir E. Collier, J. Crawford, W. S. Dalmeny, Lord Dennistoun, Alex. Divett, E. Duncombe, T. S. Dundas, Dundas, J. C. Ebrington, Viscount Evans, G. Ewart, W. Fergus, John Ferguson, Sir R. Fergusson, It. C. Fielden, J. Finn, W. F. Fitzsimon, C. Gaskell, D. Dillon, W. D. Gisborne, T. Gordon, R. Grattan, J. Grote, G. Gully, J. Halliburton, D. G. Potter, IL Power, P. Poynta, W. S. Price, Sir R. Pryme, G. Pusey, P. Ram6den, 3. C. Rice, T. S. Robinson, G. R. Roc!ie,. W. Rolfe, R. M. Rooper, Bonfoy Rundell, Jollu yizksell, Lord Ruth7en, E. Uuttive:4 E. S. Schcletield. J. Shell, R. L. Spiess, Alexander Stanley, H. T. Stanley, E. rt Stewa, P. M. Strickland, Sir G. Stuart, Lord James Strutt, E. Thomson, C. P. Thornley, Thomas Tracey, C. H. Trelawney, Sir W. Tulk, Charles A. Tynte, C. K. K. Villiers, Charles I'. Waklcy, Thomas Walker. C. A. Wallace, R Warburton, 11. Wcmyss, Capt. Whalley, Sir S. White, S. Wigney, 1. N. Wilks, J. Wilbraham, G. Williams, Sir J. Williams, W. Williams, W. A. Wood. Alderman Wvse . _ • T2LLERS. Grey. Sir G. Steuart, R. PAIRED OVF. Scee, Colonel Speirt o Captain THE ARMY ( From the Limerick Chronicle.) The 36th depot have received no route to march from this garrison, it is therefore supposed the 30th will be an augmen tation to our force. The 56th depot, from Ternplemore, re lieve the 30th, in the event of their moving from Clonmel bar racks. The squadron of the 7th Dragoon Guards, in this garrison, leave the middle of next month for Dublin. The Royal regiment, at Athlone, is likely to replace the B.sth Light Infantry at Galway, in summer, in which case the 52d Light Infantry, at Enniskillen, expect to move for Athlone. Lieutenant-Colonel Basden, C. 8., 89th regiment, is in command of the troops at Carlow. Captain Hughes's company, 52d Light Infantry, has re turned to Enniskillen, head-quarters, from Ballyshannon, hav ing been relieved on detachment by another company of the same regiment, under Captain Streatfield. Captain Swan's company, 52d, from Omagh, has also joined head-quarters, on being replaced by Captain Bentham. The following Staff Officers will change Ist of May next ; Colonel Riddell. from Dublin to Armagh ; Colonel Warre, from Cork to Dublin; Lieutenant-Colonel Bainbridge, from Armagh to Cork. SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. LICHFIELD RACES—YESTERDAY. • Trial Stakes of 10 sovs. each. Mile. 5 subs. Mr. Evans's Presto, 2 yrs Mr. Finden's Fidelio, 2 yrs Mr. Mott's Luck, 2 yrs Tony Lumpkin and a b. f. by Bedlamite were not placed. Yearling Stakes of 25 sovs. each. T. Y. C. 7 subs. Mr. Giffard's Sister to Miss Charlotte Mr. Mott's Rosetta, by Royal Oak Mr. lliassey's Triton Mr. T. Evans's Sister to Presto Two others started. The Farmers' Plate not run when the post left. BETTING IN THE COUNTRY. CHESTER TRADE CUT, P. P. 4 to 1 agst Lord Westminster's Abbas Mirza 9 to 2 agst Mr. Most n's Birdlime (taken) 15 to 2 agst Sir J. Gerard's Manchester (taken) 3 to 1 agst Sir IL W. Bulkeley's Lambkin 11 to 1 agst Mr. G. Cook's Red Rover 12 to 1 agst Mr. Whecidon's Giovanni The Cardinal is amiss. DONCASTER ST. LEGEK. 12 to 1 agst Mr. Ridsdale's Coriolanus 17 to I agst Mr. Johnson's Jupiter 18 to 1 agst Lord Orford's Ascot 20 to 1 agst Lord Chesterfield's Her Majesty 20 to 1 agst Mr. lleseltine's Mamsel Otz 20 to 1 agst Lord Derby's Verbona 5 to I agst Mr. Ridsdale's lot TERMINATION OF THE MATCH AT CHESS BE. TWEEN TILE DONCASTER AND LEEDS Ct.urss.—This match was commenced by the Leeds Chess Club on the 14th of March, 1834, and the first game was declared won by the Doncaster Club on the I Ith of November ►ast. The second game was resigned by the Leeds Club (after a cgrere contest) on the 17th of March, 1835, the Doncaster Club winning the match in two successive games. ILLNESS OF M. T. SADLER, ESQ.—We regret to learn that that eminent philanthropist, N. T. Sadler, Esq., is at present very seriously indisposed at Belfast in Ireland. His recovery was for some days despaired of, but according to the latest accounts he is somewhat better. We understand that his illness arises from an affection of the heart. --Leeds Intdlligencer. STATE Ok' CRIME IN LONDON.—By the cri minal returns showing the number of persons taken into cus tody by the metropolitan police, and the result of the charges, in 1834, •which have been recently printed, it appears that 64,269 persons were taken into custody, of ivhora 34,499 were discharged by the Magistrates, -26,302 were summarily con victed or held to bail, 3,468 were committed for trial, 2,565 were convicted and sentenced, 351 acquitted, 329 not prose cuted (bills not found), and 23 whose cases have not been ascertained. The criminal charge under which the greatest number appears is that of uttering counterfeit c0in,929 having been taken into custody under that charge, of whom, however, 819 were discharged by the Magistrates, and 98 convicted and sentenced. The charges of murder have been 26, but only 11 prosecutions upon them have been instituted, and nine con victions obtained, of which last eight were declared man. slaughter, so that only one execution followed. Not less than 19,779 have been taken into custody fo: drunkenness, of whom 10,944 obtained their discharge without tine, and 8,835 sum marily convicted. A comparative statement of these rsturas with those published the three previous years shows that from 1831 to the end of 1834, there is a decrease in the number of persons taken into custody of 8555, an increase during the corresponding period of .513 of committals for trial, and of 1,459 convictions by ,lagistratcs. The comparative state ments of the intermediate years, following one another, do not exhibit any very remarkable cliff.:renee, the increase in ono year of some cases being s couutcrbalanced by a decrease in the next.-21forniny Paper.