The Sun. — London, England, 1841-05-26 00:00:00

N• w ards. 1 - 1 by the !chains,. It of the !a re bet politt it as almost infer epee, the plat!' regated it sport to ware not Lions as it the ea t " t was e n licious ar• Ingemente ie present curse vino ation that lw in trog!t Prince* tydoefrotiin; rter, were id,Perren, )ry to all ranee haS the gist the lei' .partrnento Beaufort; Lch' goet, g et, Vil• n•r, ;ton; 2oekerell; elms Ka& Gregory, odringten, Vausittart, nted 61116 Est slb; 1 Crated (Bell) 12 ** cerstu; ' t h e legal o rsair sio nning wag 1 1 1 . ice • a lengt h ' (S . Bst 7114 • , I :ottoni A ...... r unning good race Lten a.1°14 Tst ALIO' 501 Nell tickle . ) I, •• ....... 5 ..... ••• • h e, All ; and Mr. rs. All Four, the !rsous7 e distane romedall• length ; g Bet 01b; for 2'501' 0 1 1 a 0 2 3 t!T 4 dr 5 d r G dr pinP e ra , i e _bs where nd 1 10 ; intle alt a O ' nd M own t the ()dd. lish 01 'onolly ;oft Day lohnes , sield Teseltine lucLle ;. War V. Bol e id , et npleto"" liarlOVl 4agg v . crAtell' fat., P e ttit. 'allow a Y • leo a ' . lartley• ;happlo• Jann. Sutler. tobinsof h Day, P a ' Loge , s. )arling. 1. jones: L nd Cava doubtful. TO' from tket at the WO.; lue se ,e ; the Fa' s ,, be ho u 5 u o bi) lurks or irgents' ned t° de .he C 4 : O , If the T r ill A stant' o , tatenle ti the cau,..51, er e d 0 ,1 itog t i s an °o¢ a 0 Ser“ the occoPY, e li 5 ; , c art 10, iy 0 ' ) )11 . de la e`' „ , t, , he I" "e el' ; leas c ross , ' on one 15th il )st i; stantintye Eon ill P o d nOP l e er vif of sr! Turt, Isa, of hlg 'i t' the t ie a tr e a t tht t : , ate of 00_, , 3rs P sss s they 9 11 lotting 0P _ 00 „ , bathmg „ : ea to be In black, rises ao 1.0 vi n otoo' r . 1 , oedia t-4 co lt 3 eg t 00 2,0 1 '1 3 c, 1:e0 10 ra y :t th e ; l ig of t liberoo donit'd tinou' L 0011 ;h ton i !,:,6 tore -,101 he st A ' oo ; and e , i t fl'o thi a •t ° , Of Do se ai bi sigeT co pi y to ght7, o o p e al to f 05- t he for j, 1 ,419 0 1,0 ,e4+ jd sera tellg ;vs nd bet J ' 0 194 '" e !rst si o p 0' ; 6bi litttil lolJ Orl t ° re d od • ,L• • j MORNING EDITION IMPERIAL PAALIAMEN:f HOUSE OF LORDS, May 25. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY, in the absence of the Lord Chancellor, took his seat on the Woolsack shortly before five o'clock. The North of England Railway Bill, and several other Private Bills, were read a third time and passed. Several Private Bills were read a second time. FREE TRADE. The Earl of ROSEBERY presented a petition from the Town Council of Linlithgow, and also a petition from the inhabitants of the borough of Linlithgow in favour of the Government measure for reducing the duties on corn, sugar, and timber ; also a petition from Stirling to the same effect, but stating in addition the opinion of the petitioners, that until corn was admitted free of duty Te measure wou ld not g i ve sat i s f act i on to t h e country. the latter part of this statement the Noble Earl stated he did not concur. The petition was subse quently withdrawn on account of some informa -11IY• Also a petition from the members of the Scottish Church in Manchester against patronage. The LORD CHANCELLOR then entered the House, and took his seat on the Woolsack. MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS. Messengers from the Commons brought up certain Bills Which were respectively read a first time. WHITSUN HOLIDAYS. The D u k e o f WELLINGTON asked from what day to day it was intended to propose the adjournment of the House for the Whitsun Holidays. Viscount MELBOURNE—From Friday to the Thurs daY follouing, according to the usual custom. Lord REDESDALE presented petitions from the -Inverness burghs in Scotland ; from certain parishes in W estmorland, in Suffolk, in Kent, and in Lincoln shire, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Also a petition from two individuals named Forester residing in Kirkcaldy-, praying the House to agree to any mea sure for a diminution in the taxation on articles of 10(3 ( 1 . In the prayer of this petition he did not concur. EXPORTS. The Earl of RADNOR seeing the Noble Earl opposite in his place wished to draw the attention of their Lordships to the paper respecting the official and declared value of the exports from which the Noble Lord had last week quoted, for the purpose of showing that from 1830 to the present time both the official and the declared value of the exports had gradually risen ; and he had indeed stated that during one year there had been a railing off, but that he had said was a matter that frequently occurred, but the Noble Earl had omitted to draw their tLboerdships' attention to the last sum in the paper ; and impression left upon the House was, that the ex ports had been gradually increasing. Indeed, upon that Impression the Noble Earl had founded his argument, when he asked how could the manufacturers be in so dis tressed a state as they were represented to be. If the No ble Earl had quoted the last sum, it would have ap peared that there was last year a considerable defalcation Iq exports. The Noble Earl had quoted the official value of the last year, which showed an increase, but he had omitted to quote the declared value, which showed a considerable defalcation. The Noble Lord had referred to the great falling off in the declared value, and had said that in former years it amounted to nearly eleven millions, and appealed to him (the Earl of Radnor) that so larg e a f a lli ng more, off was one which required something in the way of explanation, than the mere observa tion that such things were of common occurrence in commercial transactions. The Noble Earl had stated that the official value was nothing more than a de claration of the quantity of the article red,manufac t w hil e the declared value demonstrated its value ; and if any Noble Lord would look at the returns, he would find a statement of the difference be tween the official and declared value, which would explain the matter. In the course of the last twelve years, the o fficial value had gradually risen from 56 to 102 millions, and on the other hand the real value had increased from thirty-fi ve to only fifty-one millions. The necessary con quence of that was th a t t h e rea l va l ue o f the art i cle had 13 ecti continually diminishing, because if it were otherwise it would have gone on increasing in the same ratio as the official value. That was to be attributed to the pressure of the dear corn years ; so that the manu facturer had not only to contend with the high price of corn, but in the falling off in the price of his own i nanufactures. He had received a letter fr mi a gentleman hi the country a day or two 'since, who stated that In Manchester, Birmingham, and the other manufacturing districts, the state of distress was such that pen could not write, tongue could not tell, nor the heart conceive it. Being on his legs h e cou ld not h e l p alluding to something that had occurred in the course of the debate last night. The Noble Lord stated that a great country, densely po pulated, should provide food for its own inhabitants. lie would ask the Noble Lord to name any great country which, either in ancient or modern times, had ever pre tended t o grow corn erough for their own con sumption.—(Hear, hear.) The republics of Greece he believed did not ; Crete and Sicily were the granaries of Greece. Rome certainly did not; Sicily and Egypt were th e g ranaries of Rome. This country was, also, an example of the same f ac t. Th e Noble Lord ' had, the other evening, talked of our ancient Corn laws, Now the object of those laws was to do that which it was the duty of all Governments to do —to take care that the people should not be starved. Parliament during the last 150 years had certainly endeavoured to make the country grow sufficient corn for its own consumption. That Parliament had been composed of landowners. It had been said they did not legislate for their own interests, but it did so h a p pen t h at t h e so l e obj ec t of their legislation had been to endeavour to force the country to grow corn sufficient for their own consumption. During the first half of the last century they had so far succeeded as to make this 811 exporting country, but during the last eighty Years the attempt had failed : 1750 was the climax —from that time the export of corn gra dually diminished until 1770, since which time this had been an importing country. Now he should like to know whether the power and greatness of the country had been greatest when it was an importing or !to exporting country ? Undoubtedly since it had been an i t ti b i e po r ti ng country. Every ten years since 1760, i mportation of corn had gone on gradually increasing, with but one exce pti on un d er t h e A ct 1815, but under the present law importation !lad greatly increased. Had our power diminished !It consequence ? Was it not notorious that an export- Ing country was always a poor country ? Look at Ire paenrdity; t o h f at was an exporting country. The exports of earn from Ireland had recently diminished, and the pros- Ireland was increasing. The same as the ;are With regard to Scotland ; while it was a poor coun rY, wa s an exporting country ; since it had become Z r °s P e roos, it had been an importing country. There iee, to attempt to make a great country grow corn suf of ai r for its own consumption, was flying in the face cause experience. The Noble Lord was very angry be . _ not L for Lord d peeches of his had been quoted against th e --- (the Earl of Radnor) could only say, that if d ot h subjects,No ble L:r had been a person of small note,—if he log the :e t n always prominently forward in proclaim- Noble 4 :etrines which he now repudiated,—if the had not always been looked up to on thosd Might,' perhaps, have been unf a ir t o h ave made those quotations. But the Noble Lord had been almosvb'elyiolioekdeduP to, his opinions had been considered tas oracular and never had they been so deser alvort of up to as in 1815, when, in a speech in those doctrines which he now repudiated, thattlt Noble Lord had actually foretold almost all had that sinc e occurred as a consequence of tt 1 f• ]a since h ear .) Th e N o bl e L or d h a d dis ,4!y Pointed out the manufacturing distress, from provedothlaet that distr ess must f a ll back upon agriculture. Lord h a d very properly characterized the at tempt to feed the people of the country excl u si ve ly t rea l the produce of the country as an a tt em pt locut down the population to the consumption, cut d own t h e man to the size of the bed, instead of .t n g ti !enitig the bed t o t h e man. Let them look at , ‘T ti e n rctiester and Birmingham at the present moment. t ?; e they not there attempting to cut down the man to zeal, e bed ? But the Noble Lord said that such was the and such were the improvements in agriculture, fo°rat now they s h ou ld b e able to grow corn sufficient the consumption of the country. Why, t h e exper i- I n h eta had been tried for the last eighty years, and Marled. Agriculture had gone on p rogress i ve l y .proving, and yet the proportion of production to consumption was smaller now than it had been for pre "ding years. Lord Grenville, in 1815, had r idi cu l e d the idea of this country g r ow i n g c or n su ffi c i ent f or i ts h Ow n . , c onsumption as something perfectly c hildi s h, an d — th a " as ked, - What population—the present population, or e PoPulation two years hence ? But great things ,'7,ere to be d one b y t h e i ntroduct i on of new manures. fhere were chemic a l manures ; there were manures from China, which were to increase the production : Is tly. He had heard of one gentleman who was to 7.te two cargoes of birds' dung from South America. W£hat was to p ro d uce such a quantity of corn that there oul d be no d e fi c i ency for home consumption. Such they raised sufficient one year, what was to be done, in a Year of sc arc i ty ; an d in a year of abundance what would they do with the extra produce ? Neither in an cient nor mo d ern h i story could any country be pointed out which raised sufficient for itself; unless, indeed, it were the kingdom of Israel, where the fertility of the soil e xceeded that of any other country. The Noble Lord had told the House the other night that if it were true that th e country did not grow enough f or i ts own con toMption, h e wou l d consent to an alteration. In alluding l the importation of foreign corn, the Noble Lord had denied that 900,000 uarters, which was the average quantity for th e last eleven years had been imported in each o year. H e had stated that ' for six year s th ere was o necessity f or any i mportation at all. Ever since this present law had b een i n existence, there had been that amount of importation, and they were more dependent pon foreign countries than they had been at any former period. A statement was made by ofth ewaNgoebslbeyLtohredprliacset night with respect to th aregulation' Of corn ; and he had noted Ad am Smith to prove that it w as the rice (the Earl Corn oii by which wa ges were at booka regulated. H e n andor ) had e takenthen found some z. : trouble to look i n t o th ocitotly the reverse. lie had doubt, the passage to which the Noble Lord, Ix. must alwayshad yereferred.by n u a s n t at le • b and it was there stated tha g t es a V., his his work, and that his wa hi e ch su tl ffi le ci N en o t b I lutintain him. That was the sentiinei:sut: given the words. tioe Lord had quote 1, though he had not quoted the work Lord ASHBURTON said he had not all ; he Ind referred to a pamphl'et by Lord John 41144011. tin WHARNCLEFFE said the Noble Earl fintttled to re f er to speeches made on a former. was not that it had The Mar qu i s of LANSDOWNE said ,rught. been done eve v night. Lord *HL, I tNCLIFFE admitted that it had been done, but it was irreelar.—(Hear, hear.) had The xturqui, of LANL I OWNE said that th een systematically b violated. rule `Th __!gear, hear.) *Earl of RADNOR said it was ad! g!V first time f.. that he had heard - rules - laid down on the other side of the House, which were not followed. by Noble Lords on that side.- 2 -(Hear, hear.) The other night he was told that he had no right to allude to a paperwithout giving notice of it.—(" No, no," from the Duke of Wellington.) He referred, not to the Noble Duke himself, but to the Noble Earl behind him (the Earl of Wicklow). He had seldom seen the rule observed. With respect to the pamphlet of Lord John Russell, the Noble Lord had quoted that to show how little reliance was to be placed upon political economists. The Noble Lord had, a few years ago, complimented the Government for establishing a professorship of political economy : —(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had changed his opinion since that period. In the Report of the Commission on Handloom Weavers, wages were shown to depend upon the demand for labour, not upon the price of corn. The Earl of RIPON said the Noble Earl was en tirely mistaken in supposing that he had denied the existence of distress in the manufacturing dis tricts, as well as in assuming that he had omitted all reference to the declared value of the manu factures exported in the last year. What he had stated was, that in considering the distress which existed. they should take into account all the causes which could combine to produce it ; that the distress was such that any rea sonable and prudent man would pause before he come to the positive conclusion that the whole of it was to be at tributed to the Corn-laws. The Noble Lord had repre sented him (Lord Ripon) as referring to the declared value of the last year, as not being considerably less than that of the antecedent year ; and, as leaving the House underthe impression that the declared value had increased in the same proportion with the official value. That would have been an absurdity of which he did not think the House would be willing to accuse him. He had not only.not so represented, but he had specifically mentioned, it as less thaii the antecedent year, and that the only proper way to judge was by the average of several years. He said there was not a correspondent increase in the price as compared with the official value, and there never was. The only reasonable way to judge was to take the average of se- veral years. There was no analogy or proportion whatever between the real and official value. The farmer was affected by the laying on, or reduction of, duties, the improvement of machinery, and the consequent reduction of the cost of production, and the variation in the price of the raw ma terial. All these formed important elements in the price of the article, and, added to these, they were to take into -consideration the state of the currency. He would seriously and earnestly implore the attention of their Lordships to these matters before they came to that House with a proposition which would unsettle one particular branch of indus try, and produce distress which it was impossible to foresee. The more he looked at the subject the more the difficulties with which it was beset presented them selves. He thought any system of Corn-laws was pro ductive of difficulty ; but then it was only a choice of evils. He had been charged with the. introduction of a law to fix the price of corn at 80s., and to grind down the poor man. But he always had maintained, and he did maintain, that it was to make 80s. the maximum and not the minimum price. What was the fact ? That the average for the seven years following was 695. 1 ld.— (Hear, hear.) In 1822 the law was altered, and 70s. substituted, and the average price for eleven years after that period was 58s. 9d., and since the adoption of the present law the average price, instead of being, as was 'anticipated, 635. or 655., was only 575. 7d. He had given his consent to the alteration because he thought it would be beneficial to the working classes. He would add that, so far as. he was concerned in the management of his own property, from the date of that Act he had always proceeded upon the presumption that corn could never reach 80s.—(Hear, hear.) Lord ASHBURTON thought the speech of the Noble Earl had been so ably answered that he would not have said a word had it not been for some personal allusions. He did not mean now to defend a life of twenty-six years, but he would refer the Noble Earl to those Noble Lords around him, whose change had been much more recent than his own. Even the Noble Earl below him (Earl Fitzwilliam) was then a high protector of corn.— (" No, no," from Earl Fitzwilliam.) He might be .wrong, but the conversion of the Noble Lord at the head of the Government was of only a few weeks.—(Hear.) He denied that the distress in the manufacturing districts was attributable to the existence of the Corn-laws, and re ferred to Mr. Field e n' s i n t en d e d-t o -be-spoken, but printed, speech, to bear him out. In 1815 the consump tion of cotton was 80,000,0001b5., it was now 480;000,0001bs., while the wages of the labourer had fallen 75 per cent., but this was attributable- to' the greatly extended use of machinery. He never for a moment thought or said we could ever be independent of foreign countries, but he said we should be so, as far as we reasonably could, by giving such protection to the producer of food as would enable him to supply, the country so far as possible, not for his own advantage, but in order to protect the masses from periodical star vation. The laws of the country ought not to tumbled about upon every trivial or temporary distress. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE, having been .intrusted with many petitions on the subject of the Corn-laws, would take that opportunity of saying that he trusted the question would be calmly and fully discussed at one period or another. He must deny that the increased exports showed that the manufacturing interest was flou rishing. Machinery was greatly employed, and it must be kept at work, although the goods had long ceased to be profitable ; the true criterion to be taken was the value of mills. Their Lordships were deeply interested in the success of the manufacturing interest, therefore it was right for them to know that during the last eight years the exportation of machinery had been steadily in creasing. Our neighbours were taking our machinery for the purpose of rivalling us in manufactures.; it was right that their Lordships should know that during the last two years the amount of machinery exported was 2,100,000/. Their Lordships might say, why allow the machinery to be exported ? The answer was, if it was prevented, the men who made it would export them selves.—(Hear, hear.) It had long been said that we were so rich in iron and coal, and other minerals, that we must always have the advantage over other coun tries ; but we had all those advantages during the last few years, when foreign countries had made such rapid strides towards rivalry with us. We had great advantages in that respect ; other coun tries had less ; and without saying to what cause it was attributable, there was a loss of power on the part of the manufacture of this country in the general markets of the world. No person who knew the Noble Earl (Ripon) could doubt the purity of the motives which actuated him in proposing the system of' 1815, but the fact that experience had led to the modification of his system, and the effects produced by the present system, might have induced him to re-consider the whole subject. He im puted the bad workingof the present law to no man as a reproach, but he contended that a greater fluctuation„to the amount of 40 or 50 per cent., had existed under that Corn-law than in countries where no Corn-law existed. The systeni of averages had had the effect of putting the power of the Legislature into the hands of other and in terested parties, the worst persons in whose hands it could be placed. Noble Lords talked of a fixed duty as a delusion ; there could be no greater delusion than to call the present sliding scale a protection to agriculture, Samples of corn in 1839 had been brought into the market a few days before the averages were struck, for the pur pose of controlling the averages, and parties, by sacrific ing 60,0001. or 70,000/., had made 200,0001. or 300,0001. at the expense of the revenue. - -(Hear, hear.) The - evil was not only inflicted on the farmer of having foreign corn thrown into the market, but much derangement had been occasionedin the currency which had reacted on the bank, in consequence of the export of the precious metals to pay for the corn thus suddenly thrown into the market. This would have been innoxious had it taken place gradually and regularly, as it would do under the operation of a fixed duty. But under the present system it came like an inundation, and deranged not the corn market only, but the whole system of our commerce. The same thing had occurred in 1840. At that period persons friendly to the Corn-laws, millers having stocks of corn on hand, had come to the Board of Trade and had represented what was taking place ; and the Board of Trade had convinced them that such was the state of the law,. so inoperative was it, that it was im possible to afford them any redress, the duty of that Board being merely to administer the law, and these bein€ , evils inherent in the law itself. He thought then that a case had been made out against the operation of the law, and calling for the interference Of Parliament to protect the interests of the whole com munity, and he believed that this subject ought not to be discussed except as one affecting the interests of the whole community, and that the landed proprietor, manu facturer, the farmer, and the - labourer were all equally interested in having the question settled upon its proper basis, and that any error would be attended with great mischief to the whole. In 1829 the system had been altered because it had failed through over-protection, which h id proved so mischievous to the farmer by its un due stimulus, and the consequent over-production, that it had reduced Fria s t such an extent as to be ruinous to the fer.ner himself. His Noble Friend had last night alluded to the return of Mr. Cunin Gri daine relative to the supply of Paris with food, and had spoken of the inadequacy of that supply, and of the mise rable lean state of the oxen on which the inhabitants of that 'city were compelled to feed ; but those lean oxen were the creatures of protection. It had been stated in the French Chambers that it was a duty they owed the graziers of France to prevent the people of Paris ob taining fat oxen from other countries, and they were told to eat on, in the confidence that the ultimate result must be that after an indefinite number of years the graziers so encouraged would produce fat • oxen.— (A laugh.) It was a fact worthy of notice that those countries which were dependent on a foreign supply had never suffered from scarcity. Such had been the case with Holland for the last two hundred years, under every political vicissitude. Such was the case with Switzerland, where there were no Corn-laws, and which contained a greater proportion of p oor l an d than any other country in Europe, and in which not only manu factures but agriculture was increasing. He could not, in supporting the present measure, take to' himself the , virtue of making any sacrifice, although the whole of his property was in land, for it was his sincere opinion that the proposed measure of a fixed duty would have the effect of increasing the prosperity of the landed interest. The present system had been tried during three experi ments, and had failed in each, and he thought they were justified in abandoning it. The Duke of WELLINGTON agreed with the Noble Marquis that it would be most desirable to confine the discussion of this subject to the effect it would be likely to produce on the general prosperity of the country, and to avoid those irritating and ex citing topics which were brought forward every night on the presentation of petitions, apparently merely for the purpose of still further exciting that state of hostility which it appeared to be the intention to excite on that subject throughout the country, and he hoped the Noble Marquis would recollect the sentiments he had uttered that night, and discuss the subject not as it related to one class only, but to the whole country.--(Hear.) With regard to the frauds in tie averages, he hoped the .Noble Marquis would take VII it SUN.: LONDON. WEDNESDA Y, MA Y 26,4;841. care to..provide some legislative remedy. for.th.ose el ilk; whether the law remained as it was, or whether a fixed duty was to be substituted for it ; for he understood that the fixed duty was to depend in some degree on the averages,—that there was to be a sort of a sliding scale; and he hoped the Noble Lord would take care nu; to leave a door open to the same frauds in his systeni as he had complained of in the present one. He had been in office under the former system, and he could assure the Noble Lord • that there had been no want of frauds under that. EnormouS fortunes had been made under that system, and great frauds had been committed, and he was afraid that frauds would be practised . under every system ; but he had never heard of any frauds under the existing system except those mentioned by the Noble Marquis. One argument against the present system was, the great fluctuation in price which it occa sioned ; but he could prove that the fluctuations in price which it occasioned were not so great as in many parts of the world. The fluctuations bad been greater in Hol land than in this country, and in that country there was no duty. He held in his hand a return of the differential price of corn from. 1829 to 1838 in different places in Europe. In England the differential price had been 31s. ; at Odessa and Memel 555. ; at Dantzic 545. ; at Amster dam 485., and at Rotterdam 265. Now the difference of price between Amsterdam and Rotterdam could• be accounted for by the fact that Amsterdam was situated . in a thickly-populated district, where there was a great demand, and Rotterdam is a district not so densely po pulated. Now in this country there was a greater de mand for grain than in any other part of the world ; the people would have the best grain for food, and consider ing the consumption of the . country, he was prepared to contend that the fluctuation was not so great as it was in other countries, and that ground for alteration failed entirely. He thought the subject ought to be brought on forgeneral discussion either in a Committee of the whole House or on the second reading of a nil!, and he trusted the Noble Marquis would prevail upon his Noble Friends to abstain from those exciting topics, in which they were apt to indulge on the presentation of petitions. Allu sion had been made to what had fallen from his Noble Friend, relative to the increase in the imports on cotton. It had been said but small profits were made upon the manufacture of this immense quantity of produce, but that appeared to him to have no connection with the question of the Corn-laws. The fact was, the improve ments in the machinery and the introduction of steam had enabled the manufacturers to manufacture with very little cost. They did not make the profit now they did fifty years ago; but they still made profits, although those were diminished by competition—not by competi tion with the foreigner, but. by competition at home. Other manufacturers; who were aware that profits were to be made, although not so large as formerly, entered the field, built new manufactories, established machinery, and thus introduced fresh competition. He believed that the lower class of manufacturers were suffering distress, and that their condition was well worthy the attention of Parliament. The Noble Lord had alluded to Birmingham ; now from the official returns, which ' showed an increase in the exports of hardware, he should consider that Birmingham, Sheffield, and other places interested in that trade were in a state of prospe rity, and looking to the declared as well as the official value of exports generally, he was of opinion that the manufacturers . were not in such a state of depression as had been attempted to be represented. Lord ASHBURTON and the Marquis of LANS DOWNE mutually explained. Earl FITZWILLIAM considered that the most valu able part of the very valuable speech of the Noblp Duke was that in which he recommended that the House should seriously consider the subject of the Corn-laws, either in Committee or otherwise. Now he (Earl Fitzwilliam) had three times endeavoured to induce their Lordships to adopt such a course, but without effect. With respect to the lean oxen in France, it should be recollected that not only did the protection to the -lean ox prevent the intro duction of the fat ox into France, but it also prevented the introduction of French manufactures into Germany and that was his great objection to the Corn-laws, and to all prohibitory laws, that they interrupted the coiumerce between different countries. With regard to the table quoted by the Noble Duke it was a table of medium prices, not of averages, for it was made out by the Consuls without any regard whatever to quantity. He - thought the fixed duty proposed by the Government would give to the English agriculturist that to which he was fairly entitled, a pre ference over the foreigner in the English market, and would more than compensate him for all those burdens in the shape of local taxation, which were represented as pressing so heavily on the land, although he for one did not think the landholder was more burt dened than any of the other classes. He - believed tha the sliding scale, as at present constituted, offered a very great temptation to fraud. The Noble Earl concluded by presenting upwards of one hundred petitions in favour of an alteration in the Corn-laws, and one from the Jewish inhabitants of Edinburgh, praying for a removal of the Jewish disabilities. The Marquis of NORMANBY presented petitions praying for a removal of the Jewish disabilities, from Shields ; also a petition praying for a revision of the Im port Duties, from Haddington ; and a petition from some place, the name of which we could not catch, praying for the abolition of Church rates. Lord PRUDHOE presented several petitions against any alteration in the Corn-laws. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented several pe titions praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws. The Marquis of BUTE presented petitions from St. Asaph and two other places against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Their Lordships then adjourned at Half-past Eight o'Clock to Thursday next. HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 25. The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four o'Clock. Mr. G. W. WOOD brought up the Report of the Committee on the Southwark Improvement Bill. On the motion of Mr. J. A. YATES the Great Leinster and Munster Railway Bill was read a third time and passed. NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE IMPROVEMENT Mr. GREG p resente d severa l pe titi o ns to a simil ar effect from parishes in Lancashire and Yorkshire. Mr. W. PATTEN presented seventeen petitions from ditrerent parts of. Lancashire praying for an imm diatt and total repeal of the Corn-laws., Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice that he would, on Thursday, move that the petition of Patrick Collins, complaining of a denial of justice on the part of the As sistant Barrister of the Queen's County be printed. Colonel SIBTHORP Moved for a return of all the Bills passed during the last and present Session of Parliament, and also of th e : Bills discontinued •er rejected. Lord SANDON wished to ask a question of. the Noble Lord opposite. Two most important Bills had just been brought from the Lords,. the Boroughs Im provement Bill and the Drainage Bill. He wished to know from the Noble Lord what course he would pro pose to take with.thetn. Lord J. RUSSELL sail they very important Bills, and he would be most sorry that they should not become the law of the land. However, he could not upon that oc casion answer the Noble Lord's question. Mr. HUAIE presented a petition from an im prisoned Chartist, complaining that his health had ma terially suffered in consequence of the harsh treatment he had received, and praying that the House would agree to the motion about to be made forhis liberation ; also one signed by. 9,820 of the inhabitants of Stockport and its vicinity, praying for the liberation of all Chartist prisoners, especially Frost, Williams, and Jones, who had been illegally committed. Mr. (YCONNELL presented a. petition from a la bourer named . John Roe, of Nottingham, stating that he had only 7s. a-week, out of which he had to maintain him self, a wife, and four children. He complained of various grievances, especially that he and his class were not re presented 'in that House, and praying that freedom might be given to all political prisoners. POLITICAL OFFENDERS. Mr. T. DUNCOHnisaid,as the principal object sought by the numerous petitions he had to present would be fully detailed in his address on the motion on the paper, he thought he would best consult the feeling of the House by merely asking the • House to receive the petitions, and stating the numbers by which they were signed. The large petition was signed by rather more than 1,300,000 of the industrious classes. The others were signed by—from Manchester, 9,997.; Newport, 5,300 ; Chorley,. Stockton, Congleton, Gate house, Cardiff, Holt; Montrose, Newcastle, Dublin, Nor folk, Chester, Derby, Ripon, Northampton, and 23 plae. , 4 in the neighbourhood of London. These were signed by 48,884, making, in all, the signatures 1,348,848. he first prayer of these petitions was this:—" Your pe- titioners therefore pray that your Hon. House will permit a humble address to her Majesty, praying that she may be graciously pleased to give immediate directions for the liberation of all prisoners now confined in the several gaols of Great Britain for political offences." The second prayer was:—" That your Honourable House will be graciously pleased to present another humble ad dress, praying that her Majesty will be graciously pleased to grant a free pardon to J. Frost, Z. Williams, and W. Jones, now suffering the penalties of expatriation in a penal settlement." The third prayer was, that this House, having done these things, would adopt the prin ciple f the Charter.—(Laughter.) Colonel SIBTHORP said he thought it would be but fair and satisfactory to that House and to the country that the Hon. Member who had presented these petitions should allow the prayer of the petition to be read to the House. He would, therefore, move that that be done.—(A laugh.) The Clerk then read the prayer of the petition. Colonel SIBTHORP said he was entitled to ask why the prayer was not annexed to the petition, which was the usual mode, instead of having the prayer separate and distinct, as in the present instance. Mr. DUNCOMBE said that if the Hon. and Gallant Member would take the trouble of unrolling, the petition, he would find that the prayer which had been read was a fac-simile of that attached to the petition. The peti tion which he (Mr. buncombe) now presented came from the female, operatives of England, Scotland, and Wales. The SPEAKER said that it was the larger petition of which the Hon. and Gallant Member wished to hear the prayer read. Colonel SlBTHORP—Certainly. Sir ROBERT PEEL said that he understood the Hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. T. Duncombe) had stated that the prayer of the petition which he held in his hand was identical with that attached to the large peti Lion on the table, and there was therefore an opportunity of learning its substance ; there would be moreover great difficulty in unrolling the latter petition on account of its great size. Under those circumstances he trusted his lion. and Gallant Friend would withdraw his motion. Colonel SIBTHORP said he had no wish to obstruct the presentation of the petition. It was his desire to see the petitions of all classes duly considered ; he would therefore do as his Right Hon. Friend suggested. The petition was then ordered to lie on the table. Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought the Right Hon. Gentleman had suggested the adoption of the best course that could have been pursued. He was glad that the Gallant Colonel had yielded to that suggestion, as other wise it, would have appeared as if he wished to make some jest of the petition. Colonel SIBTHORP said, with some warmth, that he did not require the admonition of the Noble Lord, and that he should treat it - as he did his public conduct with sovereign contempt. _ Sir R. INGLIS was sure that his Gallant Friend did not wish to cast the slightest disrespect upon those who had signed the petition. Col. T. WOOD thought that whatever became of the petition, however'it might , be treated by that House, it would be found no subject of merriment for her Majesty's Government. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that the Hon. and Gallant MeMber having disavowed any intention of treating the petition. with levity, he and the House were bound to believe that such was the fact. But this he felt compelled to say, that he never in his life saw anything more like levity than the conduct that had just _been adopted by the Gallant Officer opposite. Whatever might become of the petition, he thought it would be admitted on all sides that it would ill have become him to have presented such a petition without having its prayer stated and its allegations discussed. It was for this purpose that he intended to call the attention of the House to the petition. He was well aware of the delicacy of the question, and he knew that he might be told that he was trenching upon the prerogative of the Crown. But there were times when it became that House to advise the Crown in the exercise of its prerogative. An instance of this occurred in the case of Sir M. Lopez when he was accused of bribery. In the case .of Sir Manasseh Lopez, sentenced to two years' imprisonment by the House for bribery, a motion had been made for a mitigation of his punishment; and in the course of the debate it was acknowledged by Mr. Wynn and others that cases might exist in which it would be proper to petition the Crown to exercise the prerogative of mercy. Sir Manasseh,. though con victed of a gross violation of the laws, „ef the land, found his punishment at a n end after eight molitlis' im prisonment. He (Mr. Duncombe) begged to, state, there fore, that he was not altogether unwarranted by precedent in the course he was taking. He maintained, too, that that was a fit subject for the interference of the 'House ; and that the Government could not of its own impulse, any more than in the case of Sir Manasseh Lopei, well liberate the prisoners without an address to the Crown. The petitioners had at first sought for redress also for Frost, Williams, and Jones, as well as for an adoption of the principles of the Charter. When they . had done him (Mr. T. Duncombe) the honour of asking him to take charge of the petition, he had told them that if they mixed up the, case of Frost, Williams, and Jones, and the case of the Charter, with the main object . of the petition, they would greatly prejudice the cause they had so much at heart. Last year, when his Hon. Friend the Member for Westminster brought forward his motion for the re lease of Frost, Williums, and Jones on a point of law, the House negatived the motion by a large majority— not more than five, he believed, voting for it. He had . .told the petitioners, therefore, that there was no hope of the release of Frost, Williams, and .Jones, or the adoption of the principles of the Charter, during the existence of the present House of Commons. and that the House even thought that no further Reform whatever was necessary. His motion was con sequently entirely confined to the case of the home prisoners, and on the merits of that case alone, he hoped the subject would be discussed. The petitioners alluded to the treatment of prisoners in high life for the purpose. of showing the difference with which they and individuals in humble station were treated. They . stated that whenever an industrious man made a sedi tious speech the net of the law was spread around him leaving no chance of escape They had seen a Peer of the R Realm acquitted, and justly acquited they said, by, a Jury of his Peers on a charge of felony, because that charge had not been substantial. The petitioners also alluded to the sentence passed 'on Lord Waldegrave and whose which name, the sentences 'on Captain Duff. Now he (Mr. Duncombe) had an expla— nation to • offer on the last subject. was Itappeianrecl that petition,Captain and Duff, with some of those political prisoners had been con trasted, had the sentence of guilty passed against him. He had, however, within the last hour received a memo randum from a relative of Captain Duff, with a request that he would read it t o th e House. The Hon. Gentle man then proCeeded to r ead imprsonpmartenyt,toaraidbarnfitanle assault had been was z sentenced to six months the comm un i cat i on i n ques thDelicffh don, in which it was state. 4 j ‘ ing t.i n i a a o t ee C n a c p e ta o i tn.. now well known, but th at i n no cence was not made known ' on the trial, from his unwillin g n ess to expose other par ties to punishment. Captain Duff admitted his being o f o n r a t the policeman.alle alleged o ffe i n li c s e p o n f t i b r e e i present at the commenc emen t of the disturbance, but no violence was then used by any party. In the second dis turbance Captain Duff had taken no part whatever. He separated from the parties, and proceeded on foot with a gentleman whom it was not necessary t o name, towards Salisbury Hill." He (Mr. Duncoznbe) thought it just, under these circumstances, that Captain Duff's name should not be mixed up with that of the other party. But let him pass to the treatment which the political of fenders had experienced during their confinethent.. He found that 444 i ndividuals in all had been convicted of 'political offences, of whom 398 had been . releasedprinci , pally on account of i ll health. On e o f t h ose parties, Mr. Cowan (as we understood), who had been sentenced to.two years' impriconment in the Wakefield House of Correction, year one o f which he had undergone, b a yi ng t h en b een liberated, stated 'in a letter the many hardsiiip.s he had endured during his confinement, The Ifon, Gentleman then read the letter, in which it was 'mentioned, among other things, that the prisoner Was rth4so- ill copse quence of an ulcer in his ld leg ebrought O n by severe pri vations, and which woU him an invalid for 'the " remainder of his l i f e. He 4 Pe" obliged, with the otlier prisoners, to rise. at half: past five o'clock in the morning ; they then washed themselves 4y a Imp, o f, water, which served fifty indiviCifos 1 444 , fthe after having been used by 'one' twos PqMPIO! 2;) woo to be uselesS to the others. In summer they worked from . sii in the Morning until six in-the evening; They had but a pint of gruel: and half • a pound of bread for breakfast ;on Sunday they had five ounces of meat. In winter they had to rise at half-past six in the morning, and to work during . the day without fire or anything..to mitigate their sufferings.. How different had these poor people been treated from the Hunts and the'Burdetts, when they were confined for political offences.—(Hear, hear.) - The next in order was that of George Henry Smith, who complained that he had been ill all the time he:.had'beenin prison—so much so, that he had taken twenty-three bottles, of medicine, besides pills and powders, and had had both blisters and plasters applied to him, and that upon his release he was called upon to enter into securities for his good behaviour to the amount of 7001. Was it not nonsense to call these poor. men, .when they were called upon for such heavy bail ? Why, they could not ask more for Sir F: Thirdett. Gregg died in prison from ' the hard work upon the treadmill hurting his back. Loyal stated that he had been induced by his solicitor, to plead guilty on a promise of pardon. His case was a hard one ; he was a sober, industrious man, who had been led away by the evil disposed leaders of the Char tists, and was one of those who were wounded before the Westgate ; he suffered. much from his wound, but he was . sentenced- to transportation for life,' which sen tence was afterwards commuted to five years' imprison ment in the Penitentiary. A petition had been pre sented in his favour signed by the late and the.present Mayor of Newport and 'l5O clergymen, gentlemen, and merchants; but it yet had had ' no - effect. There were other cases ; these were all that were connected with Houses of Correction, but these were not the only places where hardship was inflicted. Many complaints were made of. the discipline of the gaol of Manchester, while some of those who had been in the Castle at Lancaster spoke of the governor as a father and a gentleman. —(A laugh.) While so many were complained against it was his duty, as it was his pleasure, to bear such testimony to one who had exercised humanity. Mr. F. O'Connor was not put to hard labour, neither was Mr. O'Brien ; they were only under the same restrain that other political offenders were placed under in for mer times.. The question was, whether this treatment ought to be inflicted upon persons guilty of .political of fences—whether they ought to be treated worse than felons. Felons were not asked at the termination of their imprisonment to enter into sureties to keep the peace, but political offenders were ! Now that he asserted was treatment which political offenders ought not td be subjected to. He wanted 'to know what was to' be gained by keeping these individuals in prison. 'He' maintained that the public opinion was against the adoption of such a course. The cruelties that had been inflicted upon these parties, who had been guilty of no crime, was unworthy of a great country like England. These individuals had no moral stain upon them ; on the' contrary, the parties whose petitions he had presented would be considered by 'the people as martyrs. He would venture to say that the House knew nothing at all of human nature if they thought they could prevent the people entertaining certain opinions by persecution.—(Hear, hear.) This, perhaps, was the last opportunity. that House would have of receiving a petition signed by so many of their fellow-countrymen; it was, therefore, for them to say how far they would receive the petition and comply with its prayer. Ile trusted that he had done what he conceived to be his duty without giving offence to any one, or prejudiCing the cause of the petitioners. He now desired to leave it in the hands of the House, hoping and trusting that the opinion's which Hon. Members might express, and ;the vote they might come to in the present case, would cause joy and satisfaction to thousands throughout the coun try. He would therefore beg leave to move that an hum ble address be presented to her Majesty praying that, she be graciously pleased to take into her merciful considera tion the cases of all the prisoners at present confined for political offences in-England and Wales. Mr. -LEADER seconded the motion. Mr. FOX MAULE, who spoke with his back to . the reporters' gallery, and frequently , in a most indistinct tone of voice, so as to be quite inaudible at times, said that in rising to • address • himself to the House on' the subject which had been brought forward by the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, he must express his dis sent from the charge which had been made against that House of having treated with levity a petition relative to the national charter which had been presented to it some time ago: He (Mr. F. Maule) could bear testi mony that no signs of levity or frivolity were shown by the House on that remarkable occasion, when the largest petition which had been for a long period presented to the House, was introduced by the then Member for Birming ham, in a manner which he (Mr. F. Maule) was Sure obtained the approbation of all parties in the House, whether adverse or not to the prayer of the petition. On the present occasion no disposition was ex hibited generally to receive the petition with any levity. It 'was the petition of the working classes of that country, a body of whom, he might say, that whatever might be the causes which in fluenced them on certain occasions, had, during some months past of severe privation,_ conducted themselves in a manner which , insured to them the respect of the country at large, even though many of them made de mands for political privileges of so exorbitant a nature as rendered it impossible to grant them. With regard to what his Hon. Friend had stated, relative to th a t House interfering with her Majesty in the exercise of the ,pre rogative 'of mercy, he (Mr. F. Maule) thought the case selected by his Hon. Friend was by no means suited to the present question (as we understood). •He (Mr. F. Malik) was not one of those to whom it seemed right that that House should interfere with the Crown in the exercise of any of its prerogatives. He admitted at once that it was right that the representatives of the people should address the Crown on any subject they thought it to be their duty to their constituents so to do. But he much questioned the expediency of the House interfering with the Crown in the exercise of the prerogative of mercy; if they did so, it should be under the most urgent circumstances. In his opinion, the ,pre rogative of mercy was established in the Crown as an in- • herent right, for the purpose of extending it to all eases where its doing so was called for, as in cases of doubtful verdicts, &c. It was for that House to watch that the prerogative of mercy should not be exercised for any bad or improper purpose, But if that House took upon it self to address the Crown on the exercise of the piero gative of mercy, especially under such circumstances as the present, he feared that circumstances would arise, in which parties would be encouraged to enter into the 6om mission of offences, such as those which were called po litical, from a hope that a cotirse similar to thatnow adopted would be pursued in their behalf, He, there fore, doubted the prudence of the course now taken by his Hon. Friend. With respect to the details eniered into by the Hon. Gentleman, he (Mr. F. Manic) was not prepared to meet them—some of them, at least, 't'hich were quite now to him. But this he could say, that in no matter whatever had any sentence of the law been inflicted with, any 'great degree of severity. With • re spect to the meetings which those parties to whorl' the present motion referred had held, he (Mr. F. Maule) saw these meetings first begin in a constitutional niannevs and gradually assume that unconstitutional appearance which at last led to the interference of Government to sup press assemblies where good order ought to have pre vailed instead of seditious practices, which called' forth the immediate interference of the law and the autho rities. With respect to the open violation of the law which had been committed, they all knew that political offences meant something more than the word implied. Relative to the punishment, out of three hundret and seventy-nine convictions, there remained only thirty nine for punishment ; of those, nine were senkced to transportation, having been guilty of 4 'high treason ; one was sentenced to transportation Am ten years ; and of all. the persons who had been 'found guilty and sentenced to death, not one suffered Clio ex treme penalty of the law. The prayer of the petition alluded to addressing the Cirown for a free pardon for Frost, Williams, and Jones. He should be deqeiving the Houie and those individuals if he attempted to hold out any hope or a free pardon bei4g ex tended to thorn, He could hold out no such hope, either as an individual or a member of the Goverinnent. As for the other part of the prayer of the petitiob, that was matter for the consideration of the Hoto,e, trusted, therefore, that his lion, Friend, instead of per severing in endetivonring to obtain an address 4z) the Crown, would give that House an opportunity of discussing the principles of the Charter and embodying its principles, if the House agreed to them, in a Bill. With reference to the whole question he trusted that his Hon. Friend, having brought it fully before, the llotise, and having awakened the attention of the Goverm4nt to the situation of those individuals who were now in prison, would not . press his motion to a division, because he thought he could neither improve the conditiClA 1 1 ) , Which he was placed himself by the statements he had made, .or that of the -parties, With respect to the statement that had been made by his Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury, that Mr. O'Connor and Mr. O'Brien had not been pet to hard labour he must remind him that the 4eatcglees, if they were different, had been passed by the Judges, and that it was only in those instances where the Judges had ordered hard - labour to be inflicted that it was adopted. In conclusion he must say that lie deeply regretted the circumstances in which these several parties were placed, but of this he was certain, that the door to the l Royal clemency was no more shut against them than it NM to any other subject of the Crown I he therefiire trusted that his Hon, Friend would Withdraw the motion; • Mr. O'CONNELL said if his Friend the Hon. Member for Finsbury divided the House he should certainly vote with him. as he thought this was a case in which the House should press upon the .Government to di charge theSe parties, It was a ease in short in which the opinion of 'the House ought to be in favour of mercy. The Hon. Gentleman who had spoken last had adverted to the conduct of the working classes, and had passed' a high eulogium upon them. He had stated however that th ey had been. pun i s h e d t o d eter o th ers f rom committing similar offences. Now, what was the case ? Why there was no Chartism in the country.—(tHear, hoat,) ono It He thought therefore tbat the Ho use to extond t h e arm of mercy, in order that it might he said that there were 114 political fiffel:l4M imprisoned in the country. _(Hear, hear,) The Hon. Gentleman had adverted to England and Scotland,_ but he had forgotten Ire land., He (Mr. O'Connell) thanked God there WM an political offenders in the prisella of %hat country. They therefore did nut want mercy. there. All that they asked far was instice.Hear, hear.) In conclusion he trusted the House would take the subject-motto f q pe tition into consideration, Mr. LE4 1 411 , could not allow a subject Of such i m portance tq the maintenance of peace among the V 1111• mt ipity to pass without making some few ellaerValions. There was a feethlg among the workie& clßssas,. that there was 9np for The tleh- and another for the poor. g e mast confess that his own opinion was of late there had been a great exhibition of partiality with respect to the treatment of parties who had committed offences, and at several meetings which he had attended lately. • the. course which had been ado to \vial 4:e4R . ect 'id,' Lord Capclige 4.94 Earl .. tout been coin- Ilad been • Ol3ted with respect to BILL. Upon the Report of the Bill being brought up, Sir C. GREY moved that the Amendments which had been made in the Committee, instead of being considered that day, should be taken into consideration on Friday next. Mr. ORD hoped the House would not agree to the motion of his Right Hon. Friend. Mr. INGHAM did not see any necessity for the mo tion of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite. Mr. LIDI)LE understood that the tolls were in all cases reduced, and that was all the petitioners prayed for, and he thought they would be satisfied. Mr. HINDE and Mr. BELL opposed the amendment, and considering what had taken place in Committee, they were astonished it had been brought forward. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, but no divi sion took place, and the amendment was negatived with out a division. On the bringing up of the Relied on the Newcastle upon-Tyne Improvement Bill, Mr. HUTT—I beg to move the amendment to this Bill, of which I have given notice, that all such parts of it as give the Council of Newcastle the power to levy a toll on flour, meal, and bran, be omitted. The neces saries of life are in every community most unfit objects for taxation. I need not, I am sure, say anything to impress such a trite fact on the House. Of all the arti cles, however, which constitute the necessaries of life, bread is that one which ought to be the last affected either by Municipal or Imperial taxation. But there happen to be circumstances which render the toll upon flour and meal by the Corporation of Newcastle peculiarly improper. Most of the flour prepared for the con sumption of the town and neighbourhood is ground at mills on the high ground outside the town ; consequently the wheat which is 'brought into Newcastle market first pays a tax as corn if carried out of the town to be ground ; the grist is then taxed separately on its reintro duction as flour, meal, and bran. Surely this is not pro per; and will not receive the sanction of the House. I know that it will be argued by my Honourable Friends that this toll has been long levied by the town of New castle by Act of Parliament, and that in the present Bill the rate of it is reduced. I contend that the imposi tion of such a tax on food, which is equally, by persons in all plasses of life, is utterly indefensible on any just or intelligible principle, and the circumstance of its being an abuse of long standing is not in my, mind an argument for its continuance. But it is not the case that by the operation of this Bill the toll will be reduced—the nominal amount of the toll will be reduced, but the toll will practically be increased. Hitherto the millers who reside outside the town have been permitted a very large rate of composition ; the old toll has never been really levied. A very respectable miller has informed me, that whereas he now pays a composition of 15/. per annum for introducing his flour into Newcastle, under the operation of this Bill he will have to pay tolls to the amount of 501. or 60/. I trust, therefore, that the House will sanction my proposition. After a short conversation the motion was withdrawn. and the Report was received. Mr. GREENE moved, That, in the present Parlia ment, all Bills for the more easy recovery of Small Debts may proceed through their several stages in manner hereinafter mentioned, in lieu of that prescribed by the existing Standing Orders:—That there be one clear day between the first and second reading; .that one clear day's notice be given of the second reading; that there be two clear days between the second reading and the sitting of the Committee thereupon, and due notice given accordingly; that petitioners against any such Bills may be heard before the, Committee on the Bill, on a petition presented at any time before the sitting of the:Commit tee.—Agreed to. . The Deanhead Reservoir Bill was read a third time and passed. Oii the motion of Sir J. Y. BULLER, the Exmouth Market Bill was read a third time, and passed. Mr. LOCKHART moved the third reading of the Monkland Canal Bill. The Bill was accordingly read a third time, and passed. On the motion of Mr. DIVETT, the Bristol and Exeter Railway Bill was read a third time, and passed. Mr. W. EVANS presented a petition from a place in Yorkshire, praying for repeal of the Corn-laws and revi sion of the import duties. Mr. 1 LUMI'TRE presented petitions from Margate and other places in Kent, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. _ Mr. SCHOLEFIELD presented several petitions from congregations of Baptists and other Protestant Dissen ters in Birmingham, Westminster, and other places, prayinw ° for the abolition of Chur c h- rates. Mr.. ROCHE presented a petition from Limerick, praying that the money granted for the improvement of the Shannon Navigation should be fairly expended ac cording to the original intentions of the Legislature. Mr. G. W. WOOD presented a petition, praying for certain alterations in the Poor-law Amendment Bill. Mr. TROTTER presented a petition from. Farnham against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Mr. EASTHOPE presented several petitions from dif ferent parts of Leicester against the Corn-laws. MORN' 'VG E . William Lovett. What, he would ask, was Lovett's offence ? Why he had written a political libel for which he - was punished, but in doing so he had committed no offence that affected his moral character. What, on the other hand, had been the conduct of Lord Waldegrave ? Why, he had been convicted of a brutal assault on a policeman; by which.he was greatly injured, and his life for some time despaired of. It was true that Lord -Wel degrave was punished for this, but what was the amount of the punishment? Why, Lovett, who had com mitted no moral offence, was confined , for a year in one of the most stringent and strict goals in the country ; while Lord Waldegrave was only confined in one of the outer wards of the Queen's Bench, where he could enjoy every luxury, and receive and see his friends. The only inconvenience he was subject to, was not being able to diive a cabriolet during the present fine weather, or go to the Derby.—(Laughter.) The Hon. Gentleman had said that these parties should not have adopted the agitation they did, but that they should have applied to their representatives in the House of Com mons. That was the chief Complaint, and the only re source which they had was to agitate, in order to make converts to their principles. What harm, he would ask, could it do to. liberate these thirty-three men? The Chartists were.not now agitating ; there was no danger of outbreaks in Manchester or Birmingham ; and, there fore, what harm could result from such an act of grace on the part of the Crown? He begged of the House not hastily to dismiss this petition from its consideration. Mr. GILLON denied that the petition had been re ceived with levity by the Members of that House. He believed there were many who would object to oto the whole extent of the demands made in that petition; but it would be most unfair to suppose that the Members of that House were indifferent to the prayers of 1,500,000 of their fellow-subjects. It appeared to him that the people having been shown that they could not recklessly set the law at defiance, some mitigation of the punish ment of these men 'might . now take place. He thought another reason for agreeing to the propositio n o f th e Hon. Member fo r Fi ns bury was, the great disproportion of the punishment to the offence. It was a sufficient jus tification of the assertion that was made in many quar ters, that there was one measure of justice meted out to the Peer and another to thepoor man, and he could not. help referring to the case of the Earl of Waldegrave, who was suffering a trifling imprisonment for what a man had a short time previously been sentenced to seven years' transportation. He trusted much to the returning good sense of the Chartists, and even if the Hon. Mem ber did not press his motion to a division, he was satis fied that the discUssion would be productive of much good. He believed that these men were beginning; to see the folly and a b sur dit y o f t h e i r con d uct, and he hoped they. would see no more of it, any more than of the unnatural coalition that had lately taken place be tween the Chartists and the Tories. He should give his cordial support to the motion.—:(Hear, hear.) Mr. HUME thought the present was not the time to discuss the conduct of the ChartistS, but what they were to take into consideration was, whether, as had been urged by the Hon. Member who had preceded him, the punishment of these unfortunate men had not been greatly disproportioned to their offence. He believed much of the severity exercised towards these men arose from the unfounded apprehensions which then filled men's minds, and which subsequent events had shown to be.completely unfounded. He sincerely trusted that the Government would see the justice and expediency of re considering the case of these men who still remained in confinement, and confer a boon upon the millions of that country by restoring them to liberty. Mr. WARBURTON complained of the severe treat ment to which these men had been subjected, and which in itself formed a sufficient justification for a merciful consideration of their case on the part of the Govern ment.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. WAKLEY said the treatment of these men was a sufficient ground for the interposition of the Government, and he trusted the hint would not be lost upon them, and that it would not be necessary to press the motion to a division. Nothing had taken place in that country for many years which could be put in competition with the punishment of these men, and the Government might very fairly exercise some leniency to them, now that these events had passed away. He could not understand the awful silence that prevailed on the other side of the House—(Hear, hear)—unless it was that the Right Hon. Baronet was taking a careful review of the circumstances of the country, and that the confinement of political offenders might form one of its most prominent fea tures. • It appeared to him that a word from the Right Hon. Baronet would be of immense service to these men, and he hoped it would not be withheld. The Right Hon. Baronet and the House ought to view with consideration, and a merciful feeling of forbearance, the errors of these men, who had been incarcerated merely for stating their opinions in an honest and manly manner, at public meet ings. —(Hear, hear.) The working classes had no re presentatives in that House, and that it was which made them so restless and discontented, and justly so, and they would be undeserving the name of men if they were not discontented until they had representatives in that House. They were not called upo n t o su pp ort t h e prayer of the petition ; they were merely called on to support the motion of his lion. Colleague, and to that motion no man could possibly object. It merely prayed ; her Majesty to take into her merciful consideration the ' case of the prisoners confined for political offences, but it did not ask for their discharge, If the Ministers thought the motion objectionable they 'night I+i9Praill from voting upon it, and leave it to the decision of the House. It was a matter worthy of their consideration, that 1,348,000 unrepresented men had addressed That House in favour of These men, and he trusted it woidd meet with their favourable consideratiw, Sir R. PEEL did not think the Hen, gentleman had any right to complain of his silence, for he we,s, not, whatever other imputations might be cast upon him, chargeable with evading dilltenities.,—(Hear, hear.) He certainly would not pursue the course of the Hon. Member, and put AA Antbby a construction upon the motion of the lieu, Member for Finsbury. Why, the manliness of the Hon. Member himself would repu diate such a construction.—{Hear, hear.) The lion. Member had said that the time was come when these political offenders should be discharpd, and that the Crown would act well i n extending its mercy toward them. Let no Man Ytlttl fbr the motion under the im pression that the object merely was to pray her 'Ma jesty to take the case of these men into her gracious consideration. The real underetanding of the motion was—and the Hon, Member for Finsbury would not deny it—its real ohjeet was to obtain the discharge of these rquu, He should act in conformity with the prin ciples' on which he h a d always acted, namely, to leave the matter in . the hands of the Crown. He thought the consideration of those cases ought, con sistently with the Constitution, to be left with the Crown. The functions of the House of Commons were clearly separated by the Constitution from the prerogatives of the Crown. He remembered a similar instance to the present occurring when he was Secretary of Stitt% re specting Mr. Hunt, then a prisoner for a political of fence in Ilelester Gaol, and then he (Sir IL 'Peel) stated that he could not take itpon himself to advise the Crown to mitigate the piktk:4,ltment. It should he rainem bered that this was Ik a advice given to the Crown with respect to pup t hiliment inflicted by the adjudication of the criminal law, but given upon the opinion Of the House of Commons. It was, therefore, on constitutional grounds that he was unwilling to establish a precedent ' which ho knew might be easily followed —(Hear, hear) — and that he must resist the motion of the' Ho- ; nourable Gentleman, lie (Sir Robert Peel) opposed no Obstacle Whatever to the free consideration of these Q4kaa6s; he thought it was the duty of the Crown to consider them well, and to act upon the judgment thereby formed of the justice of continuing or remitting these punishments. On this point he gave no opinion, but he trusted the House would not be influenced by the desire to acquire ,popularity--(Hear, hear)—but would look to the permanent interest involved in considerations of this naturet xnd he trusted also that they would re member the painful duties which devolved upon the Crown in the administration of criminal justice. Re thought they would be placing the Crown in an mUteees sary and an unfair position Wiley persevered in claiming for themselves that favour and those opportunities •of showing indulgence which properly belonged t o t h e Crown alone. He was sure that. a popular assembly Would never ask for the infliction of punishment. He trusted he had now fairli , stated his opinions on this subje . et, op posing an *Stale .es to the cautious and merciful' consi deratton of these meat he only wished that where favour and lenity could be shown the grace of Slowing mightit belong to the Crown.--(Hear, heal,) Mr. EASTHQVg, who was very indistinctly heard, said he could PAt consent to give a silent vote on qie pre sent trcasioA, lie agreed, as a general principle in the sentiments and views laid clown by the Right lion. Baronet the Member fo Tamworth, Vitt he asked whether the present case Was not tut 'exception to the general rule F Might it not be expedient that the House should e-Np•e..ss itself favourable to the remission of the penalty in cases so distinguished from the general rule ? He trusted he should be pardoned for mentioning an mel diticual reason he had ;for voting for the motion, that some of the individuals of - the constituent body whom he one had of th these ehonourto represent had p resente d a pet i t i on t h at offenders should be so circumstanced that he might laecome a candidate for the representation of that taws in Parliament.—(" Oh, Oh," and "hear.") He (Mr. Easthope) desired that tb.ere should be no inter erence with the proper and just expression of an opinion of that sort. He intended not himself to interp(4) any obstacle to the expression of that, opinion and he eon sieleVed this as an additi ona l reason why lie should sup port the motion before the louse,-Hear, hear, hear,) Sir DE LACY EVANS said he thought it an addi tional reason in favour of this motion, that. the only two "Members, of that House who had expressed an opinion .against it, the Hon. Under-Secretary for the Home De partment, and the Right lion, Baronet (Sir Robert Peel), had not addressed themselves to the merits of the case, but had entirely defended the co l urs! they . toeit on some rather fine-drawn doctrines of Co,s NNW law,L-(Hear, hear.) He would again their attention to the fact that this petition waa sib nee up wards of a million of their fellow -subjects, and of class who were not r tß yAnted in that House._ Tti v. .,y eg iti e cl s i tio li n of not come Rix-amid . praying for an extensi e on a l v t fur themselves, but merely to solicit time the punishment of those raispidedPirlisti who sl. till exoses: main in the prisons of this eP, an e trusted Vst for &tat time Govern- Under the ellPYrkgtgAces h• w o f their ease,--dicer.) IntWOronld take a favourable connected with the Sir B. HALL said, that 1 11 county in which t called upon to take a re he outbreak had taken place a year and a half, ,41 0 . , had thenb ' ee ' ll m,,,•i ntte , from which responsibility tC h l e he'l)-'4ls dial Z t P4 - o ,li 4s n :: a ' - n aTh - f . tho s u .o g ln ht tl i e t l h r i at i) s cru d i.i t t ly , occasion. o in p t t e n d ion - wn it more tranquil or icß4k had come n n e o v t gi 7 su v:thstanding that the wo4TLin , A l ' - B s th a e ) r i:n t . t h ffl a in t tainneidatsetlajt-eahc most t e. P 97. d forwar to a Krcq red,nctien in consequence of the great stagnation of th • wuea p th n a la n ,ti: i o t n 1. the iron t i a a e .(Hear, hear.) . 1 - le ti.oggnt tnat if ever there was a time in which a in i eradul COnsideratioif shonl4, hp. given _ . . . • , • •. • to fraqes persons confined for political offences, it DITION. vas the present, when the whole country was in a state of tranquillity.—(Hear, hear.) He should, therefore , support the motion. Mr. AGLIONBY, who rose amid loud cries of " Di vide," said he thought the House having spent so many mhiis nduaete,ssintedeabna)ter s H o o f n le . s m s i e m m p h o e rtan r wh ce o , might d all to ow .st fi a N t - e e opinion on this subject.—(Hear. hear.) It was ad mitted that in one case, whatever might be the opinion as to the constitutional mode of procedure, the expression of an opinion by that House had Jed to a mitigation of the pun i shment, and he could not but think that any ex pression of an opinion by that House would have its w du o e um we n i o g t ht he wi h th teo t min he Cgrohiwn the . He quite agreed that Home-offic e tourg t et t it his respect t the o C t h r e ow j,.h Chartists, i s a t s, he t t t e h r ou o g f ht P t ( la p e tila y hli t d y not l d one their duty by them. If Hon. Gentlemen had attend e d more ma their general meetings and evinced more sympathy with the interests of that class, he thought they should not have heard so much of the disaffection which erieted. among them towards that House.—(Hear, hear.) Lord SANDON said that, although on a former occa sion, he had expressed his sympathy with the working classes, he could not carry out the sympathy in the manner now proposed. He could not consider the objections of his Right Hon. Friend (Sir R. Peel) as matter of official etiquette. He represented a large constituency of the working classes, and he dared say their feelings gene rally sympathised with these political offenders, though he knew of no constituency so free from the taint of Chartism. But at the same time he could not overcome his constitutional objection to the motion, however much these persons might have been misled—however much they might be "more sinned against than sinning," and, however, much agitation from a higher quarter had urged them to the very verge of the law, but. punished them severely for trespassing one inch beyond it. Lord J. RUSSELL said, with reference to the case which had been alluded to and which he had brought before the House many years ago, he believed it was a strong exception to the general rule, because, whereas in this case, the advisers of the Crown might think themselves at liberty to advise a remission of the punishment; yet where the House had interfered to ask for the prosecu tion of offenders, the Crown might think itself restricted in its prerogative. It was with that view he bi aught for ward the case of Sir M. Lopez. Having elicited flpm Lord Castlereagh a declaration that the motion he zuade should not be any obstacle to the remission of any part of the sentence which the Crown might think fit, lie moved the motion that been alluded to. That case appeared to him a particular exception to the general rule, but motions of this kind were generally felt to interpose great oustacles in the way of the consideration of these eases by the Crown, in the way in which they ought to be considered. Petitions in favour of offenders should be addressed directly to the Crown, and not to that House. He had felt this difficulty greatly with respect to a case that oc curred some years ago, that of the Dorchester labourers. It appeared to him, in reviewing that case, that what ever were the reasons that induced the Judge to pro nounce that sentence, after . a certain time it might be the duty of the Secr e t ar y o f S tate to advise the Crown for its remission ; but the greatest difficulty he felt in so advising was, that a motion had been made and repeated in that House upon the subject, when he was obliged to declare, that if that motion was carried he could not advise a remission of the sentence, although he might feel . on other grounds that it might be unjust to those men to refuse it. But having given that notice he had felt since that considerable evil had resulted from it, and that the favour was received not with the acknowledgements due to the Crown for its mercy, but with boastings that though the House of Commons did nut directly interfereee motion had been made to which the r em i ss i on o f t h e sentence 'was due, and not to the clemency of the Crown.—(Hear, hear.) He therefore hop e d th at H on. G entlemen would consider that those who were charged with the responsible duty to advise the Crown upon (theen•tubjeets, instead of feeling themselves assisted by the interpoSition of the House, felt themselves reetriceel by it. Feeling fearful that the effect of this motion would: be to produce others for offences of a similar kind, and that offenders would thus be induced to look to parties. in. that House to take up their case, and not to look to the Crown as the natural and constitutional Source of mercy—on these general grounds, and without saying a word on the other points, he should give his vote against the motion of his Hon. Friend`the Member for Finsbury. Col. SIBTHORP opposed the m o ti on . Mr. 'WARD begged his Hon. Friend the Mem'eor for Finsbury to reflect on the nature of the motion,, and not to press the House, under the circumstances, ee a di v i s i on . His Hon. Friend had sten the imputatioroa to which the motion gave rise they were told it was -not 'a motion honestly beetig•lit forward, but haa reference to 'questions out of doors. The best answer, however, to that impu tation, into which he was /sorry to find that the Noble Lord the M em b er f or L i verpool had fallen, was, that the petition had been in prep ara ti on f or many months, and that it has emanated at a time when no one entertained the remotest idea of a dissolution. His (Mr. Ward's) opinion was, th a t if his Hon, Friend had been desirous of submitting his motion to the House at the moment most etulialeussing to Ministers he would have chosen the sent,.because it wee impossible for any Government,' what ever their. tioelings might be, to concur in it without ex poeten themselves to the imputation of taking such a course for the purpose of L e • gainin g popularity out of floors.—(Hear, hear.) t them d h=ose unworthy considerations, and look solely. t di o scar the merits, of the case ; and on that subject he should say he differed entirely from the Right lion. Baronet the Mem ber for Tamworth and the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies, because he did think there were eireumstatwes in the case which not only warranted, but in some degree called for the interference of the House. Political crimes were very undefined in their nature ; and although he did not cell-se-re either the Judges, the Juries, or the Government under whom the late prosecutions had taken place, lie did feel that some of those political offenders had been treated with great severity.' IF admitted, however, that in other instances the grievous nature of the crime committed Merited the severest punishment. There could be no doubt, too,_ but it was necessary a t th e ti me t h ese prosecutions hadbeen begun, to take strong measures for the peace of the corn munityee.(Cheers.) Still he was persuaded that many of those parties now in confinement had more . than ex plated the offences they had committed. He was at the same time of opinion that after the explanations which had been given by the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Co/onies, proceeding his H Friend might inj ure hi s own cause by on ivi sion. Lord SANDON explained. He had expressly guarded himself" against any imputation on the motives of those who had supperted the motion. He only referred to the inconvenience which might arise from the interposition of thn :douse at that particular time. Mr. T.- DUNCOMBE said that his only object in bringing forward the motion was, that he might give effect to the wishes of the numerous body whose petition he had presented that night. He had confined himself to the case of political offenders at hothe ; and he was rather surprised to find that his Hon. Friend, the Under Secretary for the Home Department; had mixed up with that subject the principles of the Charter, and the case of Frost, Williams, and Jones. He complained of the injustice of the treatment which many of the offenders had undergone ; they having been in many instances confined in houses of correction with hard labour, con trary to the sentence of the Judge. The subject was one which well deserved the consideration of the House ; and his belief was, that he would betray his duty to those whose interests he represented, if he did not call for the opinion of the House. If he was sure the case of those individuals would be considered with a view to their dis charge, he should be too happy in withdrawing his mo tion ; but as he had no assurance that an Act .'of Am nesty, so much desired by thousands out of doors, would be granted unless an Address was carried to the Throne, he should divide, with the hope that lie would have with him a majority of that House. The House then divided, when the numbers were— For the motion Against the motion 5B Majority The SPEAKER then gave his vote against the motion, and it was consequently lost. CHffialiAtA TES. Mr. HAWES presented several petitions from Dissent ing congregations, praying for the total extinction of Church -rates, and the abolition of Beclesiastical Courts. Mr. DENNISTOUN presented similar petitions from four dissenting congregations. Mr. C. WOOD presented six petitions from Dissent ing congregations in Halifax to the same effect. • Captain PECHELL presented similar petitiOns from 4,460 inhabitant's of Brighton assembled iu public meet ing, and from a Dissenting congregation in Sussex. Sir A. DALRYMPLE presented a petition from a to pass_ any law hurch of place in Sussex, prayi ng the House , not of the C against the right s an d privileges England. Mr. EASTH a great number of OPE presentedpeti tions from Dissenting congregations inLincolnshire, and from Moorfields, Bethnal-green, and other dist r i cts of London, praying for the aboli . tion of yhurch-rates, and. against the practice of the _ecclesiastical courts, an d that no further grants of publi c , money be made for theioux. poses of Church Extension ; also a petition from (John Lowry, the vicar of Burleigh, in Cumberlaild, iii favour of the abolition of Church-ra tes. A BOLITION OF CrIURCH-RATES. The Has. AumnEa then rose to brimg forward the to mot i on o f which he had given notice, forlea,ve bring in a Bill to abolish Church- ra t es, and • to empower the the s'i - tablished Ch urc h to levy a tax on the me mbers of L pews n d seats for the maintenance of Churches. He said h e wa s sure he would not in vain entreat the House to abstract itself from the excitement under which th e House and the country existed for some time, and apply its attention to a subject which, though not so exciting, eras not less important, inasmuch as it related to the re ligious establishments of the country. He was Confident that the House would set the good example of showing, that in. the midst of that excitement it was not prevented fiqra interfering in a subject which was intimately con nected with the religious interests of the country. He was confident tho House would, in this discussion, divest itself of all party views, and, above all, rid themselves of av imputation that whatever differences of opinion might exist amongst them on the subject, their object was not to diminish the just influence or, above all, to inter fere with the due exercise of the religion oithe c,stablish rnent. There was one feeling with which he (Mr. B.) approached this discussion, anti that was surprise at this question being allowed to remain so long unsettled. It would be in the 'recollection of . the House that there was scareolz one individual of rank, &ti ne . tion, or influet",, row in the House, b r . w h o had formerly a seat is, that had not considered that the question NN' ,eno of importance and difficulty, and whi c h ought ka. be set at rest. lie would call the attention of the House to sentilaentJ- , ...' of men o f eminence,as to the neces,- siiy wArmg. this question. [The Hon. Gentleman i wre wad extracts from speeches of Earl Spencer, Lord. amaley, and other Hon. Members, in the debate on tbis subject in the year 1834, in which the expediency of setting the question of Ch k --urc..-rates at rest was enforp ed.)