The Sun. — London, England, 1849-02-03 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 3, 1849 , fee neon be entertained by those who advocated era e new system that the old one would be adopted; but he wished to ask the Hon. Gentleman who bad talked so loud in favour of the new course of policy, who rejoiced that yesterday the duties upon food were prac tically at an end, why those duties were alone made the object of reform? W.hy, he asked, when they heard so mach about the poor man's loaf; did they hear nothing about the poor man's loaf and the poor man's slice of cheese.--( t, hear.) He put this question to those consistent politicians, those free-trade economists, and disciples of the new school, which advocated the abolition of protective duties the 'o the retrenchment of the nationa l expenses, w hy, in ‘ootBe of last session, when they h a d commenced the ir agita. agita tlba, their voices were not ra ised in behalf of_ the poor meet's butter and the poor man's slice of cheese? — (Hear, hear.) They made no effort to cheapen these articles, and allowed the Chancellor of the Exchequer to swell his budget by their aid. Sharp accountants as they were, how he would ask were they to get the 300,0001. ob tained by the sliding duties scale which expired yesterday? Did they think, though 5-6ths of the duty were paid by the foreigner, that the people of this country would be scared by a name, and which never could be more, than a name and a delusion, from going back to the system which had afforded a fair return for their produce —by the adoption of a moderate system of import duties? The free-trader looked not to the interest of the consumer, but the Protectionists looked to the in terest of both producer and consumer. They could not forget the magnitude of the interests in volved, and the claims of their old labouring poor, and they were desirous of meeting the heavy charges by framing taxation in accordance with a statesmanlike system, and not in accordance with an impracticable theory. They must remember that they had assiduously endea voured to establish a system in which all duties on imports or for excise were to be done away with. It remained yet to be seen how far those who had been so ready to destroy a system, would be abl e t o re - es t a bli s h the means by which the several departments of the Government were to be sup ported.—(Hear, hear.) They must recollect that if they had in their endeavour to carry out certain theories developed certain principles, and set themselves against anything like protection, they might very probably have to resist the application of these principles against themselves. The farmers were considering even at the present time what to them was the advantage of an expensive Government, and when asked to look into the advantages which they en joyed, they merely replied that they had nothing to attend to but cheapness ; and he had to inform the gentlemen opposite that there was even now a coalition among them, sot weak, nor destitute of•those elements of combined opera tion the evil effects of which they had so fatally expe rienced. He was himself about to attend a great public _meeting in which the consideration of the retention of the malt tax would be actively taken up, in which those present would energeticallydiscuss the whole principles of import duties. When asked to look at the importance of our colonial empire, they replied what was the colonial empire to them, for they .found. that the colonies were, in many respects, protected -even against themselves. In making this assertion, they were, undoubtedly, going upon high ground. They had themselves set the example of attacking protection, and must expect that the arguments which they had so fluently used would be retorted with equal force and good will. .gonourable Gentlemen would recollect that some time ago a considerable quantity of tabacco was grown in Ireland, and in some of the districts of England. But this growth had bees stopped, and the home consumer had been sacrificed, in order to secure what had been deemed an unjust monopoly for the colonial producer. Was it not natural, then, that when this sacrifice had been made for the sake of revenue the home farmer should believe that there was as little consistency as prudence in their opponents- So long as we were to keep our invaluable, but at the same time our expensive form of government, so long, he con tended, must we be able to levy taxes sufficient to meet the expenses of the Government, and also those of the public creditor, which we could not do unless Ministers returned to the system which they professed to denounce. For them to be scared by the term " protection," or to be in 'ited by the term " free-trade "—to form their financial sys tem on such a theory as they had promulgated—was not compatible with the institutions of this country. With re specs to the relief of the poor in Ireland, he had heard with aerprise and very great regret that it was not the intention of the Government to propound any measure, not even to lay down the principles of any measure ; but, instead of that, they. proposed to throw the whole thing before a Committee of Irish Members, which was anything but statesmanlike, wanly, or bold for the Government to do at the commence ment of) the session. With regard to the poor-law, whether the area be larger or smaller, the question was considered to be one at all events of first-rate importance. He wes not going to discuss that question now. If there was-one subject more than imethewon wtileli the Governmeet could obtain accurate and decisive information, it would be the very one subject on which Ministers now declined to legislate. He maintained the Com mi.mion, and the Government through the Commission, was in full possession of the public opinion, either for or against the diminution of the area of taxation ; and as far as in formation went, at the rising of that Commission, no snore valuable information could be obtained then that which was at present before the House. Any measure which might be proposed ought to be of im mediate efficacy to Ireland, or it should not be passed by the House. It appeared that the Government had merle up their mind to enlarge the area of taxation, but what he called upon them to do was to stato to the House how far they were prepared to stand by the Irish Poor-law. Many opinions had been expressed on the subject. A very influential journal in Ireland protested against the relief of the able-bodied poor. There was a strong feeling among the clergy that the system of tithe commutation should be different to what it was ; and, again, there was a large class who were of opinion that the burden of taxatlen should fall entirely upon the landlord. Hee-therefore, would ask the Government not to let another postteout-to-Ireland before they stated how far they were able to- stand by the principle of the poor-law, what conces sions they were prepared to give, and what principles they were willing to maintain.—(Hear.) He understood they could not bring forward any measure because the Government were not united in opinion upon the Irish poor-law, and 'therefore he charged them not to resort to the miserable etsnae that it was impossible to legislate when Irish Mem here could not agree on the subject.—(Hear, hear.) The best way to act for the welfare of Ireland would be for some member of the Government to come forward;in a states manlike manner with some definite proposition, and wait the issue whatever it might be.—( Hear, hear.) They could bring forward coercive and restrictive measures without re ferring the matter to any Committee, and why could such a coarse not be adopted with regard to the poor-law? The fact was the Government were not united,- and in order to shift the responsibility from their own shoulders they pro posed the appointment of a Committee.—(Hear, hear) With regard to the points of the amendment, he had already trespassed too long upon the time of the House to say much upon them ; but with regard to the foreign policy of the corebry, he must be allowed to express his regret that the Speech from the Throne did not contain the custo mary paragraph, stating that her Majesty still continued to receive assurances of friendship from her various foreign alies.—(Hear, hear.) With regard to colonial matters, after the very grave charge which the -Hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose had made against the Noble Lord at the head of that department, he should be very much ,suprised if the Honourable Gentleman did not follow up that charge; while if the Hon. Gentlemen succeeded in turning out the present Secre tary-he appteheitiled that the Noble Lord who at present filled that office would be quite ready to admit that the co lonies had grown too extensive to be governed properly by a single department.—(Hear, hear.) He voted for the amend ment of his Hon. Friend the Member for Buckinghamshire because • he felt that when other interests were mentioned, the oldest and largest interest ought not to have been omitted from the Speech. Either the agricultural interest was flourish ing, and ought to have been a matter for congratulation ; or the agricultural interest was suffering, and ought to have been a snbject of condolence; but at this time, because they could say nothing congratulatory, her Majesty's Government had deter mined to say nothing in the way of sympathy. That was treatment which, he thought, the farmers of England had no right to expect from the first Minister of the Crown. That was not the course which the representatives of the agricultural iritarost could allow to pass unnoticed, and therefore they Lad s right to propose this amendment. The agricultural Interest had a claim to the sympathy of the Legislature, and those who conceded that claim would vote for the amend ment, while those who were indifferent as to whether the Itrieultural interest was flourishing or in dill cnities would no doubt vote against it. But let aria tell the House and the Government that the farmers would experience the deepest regret when they found no sympathy prevailed in thlit, House fereheir sufferings; but notwithstanding the abuse which bad eenheaped up on th em , no t w ithstanding they were consi deredh lit fallen interest, they still had the means of making their r ep r esentatives understand their feelings—they still had the means of punishing the silence of those who showed themselves indifferent to their interest.—(Hear, hear.) Sir W. SOMERVILLE said, after the extraordinary statements of the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, the House would perhaps allow him to say a few words upon the subject of the Irish pooneaw, to which the Hon. Gentleman bad ,so often referred. The Hon. Gentleman accused the Government of tampering and trifling with the question, but how could t he Ho n. Gentleman sustain that charge, when, it was remembered that the course the Government ge pursued on this ve r y q uesti on last session met w ith almost the entire approval of all the e e alprpoishintteenintbeorfs for delay Government asked themslb ject unlfoiuntandYatiolanadforreithveeidr the on the Committee a :bl a e Gentleman taunted them with of a CommissionH Honourable in quiries. But the denounced them because nth with indecision, and”r did upon the question, by enlarging not at once enter l et him re min d or taxation ; but Hon. Genes reducing the area of maters connected with the Irish tlemen that there were other than the area of rating. G o . poor-taw of more importance keep the promise they made * *ernment had determined to last session, that at the commencement of the present session f a Comttee they would concede the appoin tment o mi im e immense po on this rtance subjeee, and looking at the objection Th overn of the question, he could no t see what could be advanced against that cou rse. e Govern ment were perfectly ready to propose an y measures which were likely to be calculated to alleviate the suf ferings of the people. With respect to what ha d been said concerning the Irish Poor law Committee he had to reply, that it was not usually understood that the members of the Committees entered upon the task with a determination to be unanimous. No ; they entered upon the investigation for the purpose of hearing and collecting the best evidence, upon which they arrived at a re milt. He confessed he was surprised to hear the exagge rated statements of 3lr. Grattan. That Honourable and Learned Gentleman had said he was :a ruined ntan.—(Roars of laughter.) Mr. GRATTAN (jumping up, and with much emphasis)— no.—(Laughten ) Sir W. SOMERVILLE thought he heard the Mon. and Learned Gentleman say that if he was a younger man he would go away from Ireland, as staying would lead to his becoming a ruined man. Mr. GRATTAN—Hear, hear. Sir W. SOMERVILLE—Now what did the House think was the rate of taxation in Celbridge,:the union with which the lion. Gentleman was connected—the rate was 7 3 / 4 d. in the pound--(Roars of laughter.) • Mr. GRATTAN (raising his eyes and hands aloft)—Oh I f—(Laughter.) Sir W. SOMERVILLE—The expenditure was 71-d. in the ppund, so that the Celbridge Union had now money in the bank. The Honourable and Learned Gentleman also Said that 400,000 able-bodied men could not obtain em ployment, and that they were receiving rations of one penny a day : now this was an er roneous statemen t, s ince the highest numberi tiring the year in the receipt of relief was 65,000.—(Hear, hear.) He thought he had a right to complain of these exaggerated statements, statements which were eminently calculated to give English Ontlemen erroneous information as to the real state of Ireland. He was bound to state that there were many parts of Ireland in which the people were not so poverty-stricken as was represented. Mr. GRATTAN explained. Thank God, he was not an Irish Secretary.—(Cheers.) The rates in the Celbridge Union, which were voluntarily contributed to by many of the landlords, amounted to ls. 3d. in the pound. They taxed themselves, and got rid of the fine gentleman the Government had sent over from Downing-street. Colonel Conolly, whose death he deplored, Lord Cloncurry, Mr. Kil patick, and several others contributed sums of 101., 81., and 6/. for this purpose, and one person employed 38 persons upon a piece of land of 20 acres, which showed what Irishmen could do when they liked. Sir JOHN WALSH blamed the Government for not de vising, ere the meeting of Parliament, measures to remedy the defects in the present poor-law. They must bear in mind that the condition of Ireland had been altogether changed since last year. Had not this change taken place, the charge of the Hon. Baronet might be well founded. On that occasion the Right Honourable Gentleman the Secretary for the Home Department had stated that, in his opinion, he and his friends had only wished to get rid, by a side wind, of the con sideration of the poor-law altogether; they might retort the same accusation, for truly they had more reason to en tertain a similar apprehension. A Committee, in the hands of a dexterous politician, was of all things the most useful and convenient machine in the world, for postponing the consideration of any question whatever. Not that he, and, those who acted with him, would oppose a Committee. On the contrary they would do all in their power to promote the object of the Ministers, but they could not help feeling that the Government ought to be in the present receipt of sufficient information to proceed to a de cision without any further delay.—(Hear, hear. ) This was a matter which could not be postponed for a year for the simple object of getting at a conclusion which might already be given. There was a great and growing evil, which ought to be instantly met. He would now allude to a matter, which during the last session had excited much attention, and to which the Noble Lord at the head of the Government had given at that time what, he must say, he thought an insufficient but an evasive reply. The Noble Lord on that occasion stated three grounds to justify the presence of the British fleet in the Bay of Naples; the first was an alleged violation of the flag of this country—some Neapolitan ships of war having, it was said, shown the English flag to deceive and capture Si cilian vessels ; the second was that there was an intention of establishing a forced loan in the kingdom of Naples, to which British subjects might be compelled to contribute, if there was no protection near them ; the third was, that the neutral waters, as they were denominated, had been en tered upon by a Neapolitan vessel in pursuit of a Sicilian. Not satisfied with this explanation, he (Sir J. Walsh) put the question whether Admiral Parker had either propria motu, or acting on instructions received from home, inter posed in any way in the quarrel between the King of Naples and his subjects, or attempted to prevent the Nea politan fleet from sailing for Messina. He (Sir J. Walsh) did not charge the Noble Lord with any breach of faith to him or to the House ; but on that occasion the Noble Lord did distinctly state that up to that point of time England had not interfered in any way whatever between the contending parties. The inference of the Neapolitan Government from this statement was naturally enough that the English Go vernment would not in anywise interfere, because there was no cause for such interference. It appeared, then, that Sir W. Parker offered no obstruction to the sailing of the Neapo litan expedition. If any valid reason existed why he should have interfered, there was the time and place for it ; but none occurred, because it was considered that the British Govern ment had no ground to justify them in making any demon stration as respected the King of Naples and his re volted subjects of Sicily. The expedition to Messina sailed—it was successful—Messina was captured, and the King's authority established. It appeared to be probable that this authority would be also re established in the remainder of the island, when her Majesty's Government thought fit, in conjunction with France, to interfere in the question. On what ground did they so? Was it on the ground of the atrocities alleged to have been committed in the war, and if so, by whom were they committed. These questions had not, however, been answered. He (Sir John Walsh) admitted the vast responsi bility of the Foreign Minister at the present time • but he conld not help contrasting the views of the Noble ',Ord who presided over the foreign. affairs of this country as regarded other institutions, with those which he enforced in his own department. That department was tarried on upon the principles of a .Nesselrode or a Metternich, and the principle which the Noble Lord seemed anxious to introduce was to set aside all the powers of Parlia ment as regarded the Foreign-office. He (Sir John Walsh) however, hoped that House would never blindly subscribe to such a doctrine, or renounce the right of inquiry into subjects which so largely influenced the destiny of the civilized world. Another topic of the Address was the large measure of financial r_form which the Noble Lord proposed to bring forward. For whatever large re trenchments the Noble Lord could safely make in the ex penditure of the country the House would be grateful, but there was a great inconsistency between the 'toner and lan, gunge of the Noble Lord on this occasion, and his tone and language on the same subject last year. "I will never consent," said the Noble Lord, " to disarm England in the present state of the world." On that occasion also the Noble Lord said he would never consent to be led astray by a feeling of economy to prostrate the power of the country. The Noble Lord had touched upon the affairs of Ireland, and had pronounced one of the most deserved eulogiums he had ever heard on the present Lord-Lieutenant. One part of Lord Clarendon's proceedings deserved particular . praise; it was the mode in which he answered deputation and replied to addresses. To one address Lord Clarendon appropriately replied, that he hoped an end would be put to that system of pernicious political agitation in Ireland, which more than anything else disturbed the peace and checked the progress of the country. He agreed with these sentiments of Lord Clarendon, but then, he asked, if political agitation was per nicious in Ireland was it salutary in England? Was agita tarion to',be put down in Ireland by force and by coercion Bills, and was it to be allowed to reign unchecked and un controlled in England? For what were the agitations at tempted to be got up in Manchester and other places? Were they not in th nature of pernicious political agitations? Were they to be governed by club law—that is, by the law of clubs?—(Hear, hear.) In France they had put down clubs ; and he would tell the Noble Lord that, ere long, the Government of this country must grapple with the evils of political clubs in England.—(Hear, hear.) He would sup port the amendment of the Member for Buckinghamshire. Mr. M. MILNES had hoped, when he saw the Hon. Mem ber for Northamptonshire (Mr. Stafford) rise, that he did so for the purpose of telling the House that, after the speech of the Noble Lord at the head of the Government, the Opposi tion had agreed not to insist upon pressing their amendment. He had hoped so, because an amendment of this kind, brought forward by one who, he presumed, was now the recognised leader of the Opposition, was a very serious and solemn step, and one which they would hardly have been justified in taking so hastily even if we had actually been plunged into a continental war, or if every kind of misfor tune had accumulated on the head of,the country by the inns prudence of Government, But when the charges upon which the amendment professed to be founded had been proved to be erroneous, he really thought the Opposition would not do justice to themselves with the country if they persisted in so grave a censure upon her Majesty's Government. Neither would such a course be at all consistent with the generous character of the Opposition in former sessions ; anti it persisted in it would be a sign that the Government must no longer expect that justice and moderation of which there had been so many previous instances.—(Hear, hear.) It seemed to be assumed by Hon. Gentlemen opposite that the country was in a state of rapid declension. He did net agree with them in that opinion. On the contrary, he thought that better prospects were at hand—that trade and commerce were improving, and that there was no reason for believing that the agricultural interest, by the event of yesterday (the entire abolition of the corn-laws), had re ceived a blow from which it could not recover. The Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire had asserted that our exports, so far from being lessened by the confusion and tumults on the continent, had been larger last year than in the preceding year. By what moans did the Hon. Member learn that fact, when no papers on the subject had vet been laid upon the table of the House? The Hon. Member must either have had some secret source of information of which other Members knew nothing, or he must have indulged in a very reckless assertion.—(Hear, hear.) The charges against her Majesty's Government resolved themselves principally into questions of foreign affairs. He presumed to call upon the House to beware how they condemned, in the solemn manner which the amendment did, the peaceful policy of her Majesty's Go vernment, for it was above all things important to bear in mind that the conduct of the Secretary for Foreign Affairs had been one continuous and successful effort to preserve the peace of Europe during a most difficult and perilous time; and he thought ho had a right to call upon the people of England to accept his conduct in that sense, and to demand from the House that they should grant it to have been such. —(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire had asked whether the Government were co-operating with the Universal Peace Society. Now, although he (Mr. Milnes) could not indulge in the hopes in which those amiable enthu siasts seemed to indulge, yet he believed that there was a growing opinion in the country to an extent of which many Honourable Members were little aware respecting the wickedness, the miseries, and the abominations of war. —(Hear, hear.) He "believed that this opinion was the re sult, not of mere Christian emotion, but of a strong and intimate conviction that if statesmen chose to set their minds to it—not perhaps every act of violence, but certainly the greater part of the contests which desolate the world, might be avoided by means of peaceful mediation.—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Milnes) fully accorded with that feeling. He deeply respected it ; and he believed that it was the feeling upon which his Noble Friend at the head of the Foreign Department had continuously acted. He blamed the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire for having carefully concealed in the course of his speech that but for the very acts which he condemned it would hardly have been pos sible to avoid a continental war; and in proof that such was the case he briefly referred to the state of affairs between Naples and Sicily, between Austria and Sardinia, and Prussia and Denmark. Such was the wise and Christian policy of his Noble Friend ; and if by some hazard it had not entirely succeeded—if his great hopes had not been entirely realized, were they to say that the principles on which he had acted was absolutely unjust, and that the attempt ought not to have been made ?—(Hear, hear.) It was not impossible means of preventainngd that the conduct of the Opposition last night might be the war beteen these two countries.—(Hear, tt il peaceful settlement of the disputes between Naple s I d of c e n a causing under stood a congress was ihngeara.n) H e internecine about to • meet on the affairs of Italy. He had lived in the Lombardo-venetian kingdom, and he had left with the conviction that the military occupation of by strangers unsympathizing and those beautiful provinces ungenial, could not continue without giving rise to a dissension. Admitting military ng occupation . to be a right thing, he had very little charge to arin b g is ag c a o i n n y st the t Austrian conviction that, so Government. But he must express long as the Lombardo- Venetian kingdom lasted no security for the peace of Europe.—(gear, Austria had made no advance in conciliating the people. The most suitable arrangement was perfectly simple. There was no confusion of race in that kingdom ; there was a determi nation to get quit of the Austrian Go a feeling which w as shared b y all classes, f rom the r n noble difficulties, to the peasant. The however, were now greater than before. Since the occup ation of M il an by ; the Austrians under Marshal Radetzky, the people had been kept down by a most crue l and oppressive rule. The Aus trians seemed intent on establishing a second Poland in Italy. When on all sides ex ce p t one, Lombardy had the sympathies of homogeneous populations, he did not believe that the military occupation of the country could be suc cessful. He could not, therefore, anticip ate any great ad vantage from the congress which had been proposed. The Honourable Member for Buckinghamshire—who he wished would take some other subject for jest than great constitu tional struggles—bad made extreme mirth of what he had called the sentimental cant of race. Composed as this nation was of so many races, they ought to be the last to indulge in such ridicule. But uo one could read. as with great plea sure he had read, the works of the Honourable Member for Buckinghamshire, where the predominance of race was the sole motive by which it was held the world was go verned, without feeling that the Hon. Gentleman at least was guilty of some inconsistency.—(Hear, hear.) With re ference to that part of the Speech from the Throne in which her Majesty expressed the hope that considerable reduc tions would be effected, it had been alleged that Ministers had been influenced by the proceedings of the Financial League in Liverpool; though the Government had, as soon as they entered office, expressed their willingness to adopt financial reforms, and the measures they had taken since showed their sincerity. Agitation was said to be detrimental to the general interests of the country, but all parties had got into a way of calling anything they did not like " unconstitu tional"—(Hear, hear) —and the word, when applied to the present agitation, seemed only to imply that the people were taking a deep interest in the question. Let the people of England understand that order was the cheapest possible thing, and let them confine themselves to that kind of as semblages and discussions which were so denounced, and no evil consequences were to be apprehended. Those leagues were a safety valve, by means of which revolutions were avo id e d ; and so long as the public feeling was expressed th rou gh such channels, this country would continue to enjoy the benefit of the Constitution, living under a blameless So vereign, an unoppressive Church, and a Parliament ready, in the main, to meet the wishes of the people.—(Hear.) Lord MANDEVILLE supported the amendment. Our interference in Sicily might have been warranted by our connexion with that country, particularly in 1812, but he could not but agree in the condemnation which had been pronounced by the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, on the conduct pursued by the British Government with re ference to Austria and the States of Lombardy. The most important of the many omissions in the Speech —not one of which had been satisfactorily explained by the Noble Lord —was that it did not contain one word as to the condition of the agricultural interest in this country.--(Hear.) Next to that was the absence of any allusion to the state of the colonies. He thought that our colonial interests, having no representatives in that House, were more especially entitled to their care, and demanded every possible support, for they were as much the offspring of the State as any other part of the empire. Instead of having protected, this country had injured, her colonies by legislation.—(Hear, hear.) There was nothing heard but complaints from every colonial pos session, and every account that reached this country con veyed some fresh intelligence of distress and suffering, of estates abandoned and lying waste, of buildings out of repair, of labourers flocking into the towns for work and food, and of destitution so great that in some cases the people had made houses of packing-cases.—(A. laugh.) These were subjects on which he thought the Government owed some explanation of their views to the House. Mr. HORSMAN said, he was unwilling to give a gene ral vote on the amendment without drawing a distinction between those portions of the address which he could cordi ally support and those which he thought objectionable. The Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire in his review of the effects of the free-trade policy of this country seemed to assert that the result of those measures had veri fied the predictions he had made respecting them on former occasions. He (Mr. Disraeli) having stated that, and having gone into a great number of statistical details, and of finan cial and commercial questions, to prove to the satisfaction of his party that his predictions were fully carried out, very consistently concluded his speech by moving an amendment, the last paragraph of which declared that " a large portion of the agricultural and colonial interests of the empire are labouring under a state of progressive depression, calculated to excite serious apprehensions and anxiety." Now, he was sure the Honourable Member did not mean to disguise his opinion that, if this depression existed, it was directly connected with those free-trade measures from which he had predicted unfavourable results in 1846.—(Hear, hear.) If, therefore, he (Mr. Horsman) voted for that paragraph of the amendment, he must be supposed to approve of the principles laid down by the Hon. ;Member (Mr. Disraeli), and to recant the opinions he had expressed, and to retract the course he had taken, with respect to free-trade in 1846. —( Hear, hear.) That was a step he was not prepared to take.—(Hear, hear.) The occurrences of subsequent years, and more particularly of the year just passed by, bad per fectly . satisfied him that the measure of 1846 had saved this country, politically speaking, from most appalling perils, and commercially and financially he expected that in years to come the empire would derive great advan tage from the adoption of a free-trade policy.—(Hear, hear.) The other paragraph of the amendment declared that the state of our relations with foreign powers was not such as to justify the House in addressing her Majesty in the language of congratulation. But, as the Noble Lord at the head of the Government justly observed, the speech did not call upon the House to indulge in the lan guage of congratulation at all. The object of the amend ment, however, must be best explained by the speech in which it was introduced, and in that speech he observed the Hon. Member stated that he viewed with serious apprehen sion the proposal for retrenchment which the Ministry had indicated, and that, going back to the history of past re trenchments, he had endeavoured to show they had been rashly undertaken, and had been followed by the most un happy results. The Hon. Member, too, had condemned strongly the system of " unwise economy" to which the Government, not from statesman-like motives, but from less creditable influences, were about to become subservient. If, then, he (Mr. Horsman) were to concur in that portion of the amendment, he must be supposed to assent to those doctrines, and to express his disapproval of the dimi nished estimates and reduced expenditure promised in the Speech from the throne.—( Hear, hear.) However the amendment might be in accordance with the views of the Hon. Member's party, it was one which he (Mr. Horsman) could not consistently support.--(Hear.) He could not vote for any proposition which would carry with it the conclusion that he was adverse to reduced expenditure; for he hailed with satisfaction any promise of it, and certainly he must say there was nothing in the announcement of the expected retrenchment calculated to excite any very serious apprehensions among the opponents of financial reform. Let the principles be once introduced, however, and it must be carried out still further. The aspect of foreign affairs was such as to fully justify the reduction of our establishment. Last year France had been the volcano from which the erup tion might be expected that was to lay Europe in ashes, but now there was but one political object in that country. From the President down to the lowest candidate for popular favour, every man who addressed a public assembly there talked of peace and of retrenchment. Already there was a popular movement in favour of those objects, which was fast swelling into a general agitation, and even the Marshal of France who commanded her armies had consentedto a reduc tion of from one-third to;a fourth of her whole force.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord who moved the Address had taken great credit to foreign Governments for having controlled the na tional will atm kept the people from war, but events had proved that the statesmen he praised had followed, not guided, the national sentiment. There were, he must say, two extra.or Unary omissions in the Speech. He could not but concur in much that had fallen from the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire with respect to our foreign relations, - - - - - - - - - Many of the facts he bad stated could not be - denied, not: could he (Mi. Horsman) conceive there was one man in the House who could assert that the state of those relations was such as was satistactory to the Parliament or creditable to the country; but at the same time he could not lay all the blame of this on the Minister; a great deal was attributable to Parliament itself.—(Hear hear.) The manner in which our foreign affairs was allowed to be conducted was a disgrace and a reproach to the country, There was a secrecy and a responsibility-in the transactions of them which shut the doors of the Foreign- office against all inquiry. If a question was asked with reference to any subject, the House was told that the public interests required the public to be kept in ignorance of it."—(Hear, hear.) If such an explosion took place as that in Spain, where, as the Hon. gentleman observed, the British Minister was kicked out of Madrid, so that the public could not be kept in complete ig norance, they discovered that there were two sets of dis patches in the Foreign-office— ene for the guidance of the Minister abroad and the other to amuse the Parliament at home.—(Hear.) They were told, moreover, that the English people took no great interest in foreign affairs. It was a fal lacy to say so. No man could take interest in a subject on which he was kept in the completest ignorance. But the people of this country must take an interest in every ques tion which affected their pockets. It had been laid down as a constitutional maxim by the English people that publicity was the best, if not the only guarantee for good government. If that held good in domestic, it equally held good in foreign affairs. Nations now-a-days had no secrets from each other. They knew the precise resources, power, and even the inten tions of their neighbours. They valued at a lower rate than in times gone by the arts of political rivalry. They knew the danger, as they had paid the cost of diplomatic rivals.— ( Hear, hear.) Had the system of secrecy worked well ? No. The country had all the semblance of peace, without the eco nomy—they had all the cost of war, without any prospect of termination. —(Hear, hear.) The hange which had taken place in royal speeches lately as to the state of foreign affairs was remarkable. First, the House was told the Crown " had received assurances of friendship from foreign powers ;" next they were told the Crown " looked with confidence" to the continuance of good relations, Then came no confidence, but " a hope" that peace would be preserved, and now, in stead of " confidence" or " hope" there was nothing but "a desire" that a good understanding should continue between us and other countries.--(Hear, hear.) That paragraph of the Speech must have been prepared with peculiar care ; but, unless the phrase was accidental, it must create con siderable uneasiness. In what Court of Europe were they on cordial terms with the Sovereign ?—(Hear, hear.) In some the terms of diplomatic civility, if not broken up, were with difficulty sustained.—( Hear, hear.) He could not but ask by what fatal ingenuity it was that, after thirty-four years of peace, the Queen of England should be compelled to de part from the language of her predecessors, and to imply that she did not meet those royal courtesies to which she had a just right?—(Hear.) Of late years, so far from having fol lowed our old rule of non-intervention, we had made it the exception.—(Hear.) Interference with foreign States had become the rule, but we had not followed it so that it could be traced to any distinct principle. One week we interfered on behalf of the Crown, and upheld its influence, the next we gave aid to the revolted subjects, and prevented the Crown from reducing them to submission. Next week we disap pointed both parties, and gained the hostility of both. One censured England for going too far—another fir not going far enough. They had meddled everywhere, and wherever they had meddled most, there they were most dis liked. It was announced in the Royal Speech, that as soon as the interests of the public service would permit, the papers relative to foreign transactions should be laid before Parlia ment; which meant, when all interest in the subject should be lost, and when the public would not take the trouble to ascertain whether the documents presented to it were perfect or not. It was the duty of Parliament to take care that the public mind was not kept in a state of ignorance respecting foreign affairs. If Ministers were pursuing a correct course, nothing could strengthen more than the backing of public opinion ; if, on the contrary, it should appear that they were prosecuting an erroneous policy, the national interests would be vindicated by the restraints of public opinion.— (Hear, hear.) The vices of this system of secrecy were not confined to one department of the Government ; they were, if possible. even more injuriously developed in the Colonial office.—(Hear, hear.) If the mal-administration of foreign affairs was annoying to our continental neighbours, the mis government of the colonies harassed our own subjects. In the one case we risked our foreign relations, in the other we hazarded the allegiance whilst we sacrificed the interests of our own subjects.—(Hear, hear.) If anything could sur prise in the omissions "of the Royal Speech, it was certainly the absence of all allusion to the colonies.—(Hear, hear.) To read the Speech, one would suppose that we had no co lonial possessions, or that they were in such a state of blessed prosperity as did not call for even a passing remark. Yet, it was doubtful whether, at any previous time, our colonial possessions were in a more unsatisfactory, and, in circumstances somethingro it ds worseinomst than some respects, in a m ore per il ous s t a t e .—(H ear , h ear .) M an y of our coloni es were l a b our i ng un d er extreme distress, which had p somea feeling extraordinary discontent.of that discontent, Under ina in and others these Royal Speech opening a session immediately succeeding one in which colonial distresses and interests engrossed a large share of the attention of the Legislature, not the slightest allusion should have been made to the subject.—(Hear, hear.) The omission was the more remarkable' because there was hardly a paragraph in the Speech from the Throne but must have reminded its framers of the colonies. One paragraph speaks of " progressive improvement ;" was that remark applicable to the colonies 2—(gear, hear.) I n another paragraph reference was made to the revival of com merce; was that, aga i n, applicable to our colonial posses ' sions ? Another paragraph congratulated Parliament on the fact, that while troubles existed in other countri es , tranquil lity prevailed in her Majesty's dominions; was that appli cable to the British colonies? Retrenchment and economy were promised—but those again were l imited to h er Majesty's own territories. From beginning to end the Royal sp eech vaunted of prosperous prospects , but the boastful announce ment was so belied by tha condition of the colonies that their introduction into the Speech could only be accounted for on the supposition that Ministers no longer reckoned our colonial possessions a part of her Majesty's dominions. At what time did this surprising omission occur? Not only at a time when distress and-rain impended over the colonies, but when the correspentler es between the Coletrial Gov,-)rn ment at home and its governors abroad exhibited a mass of confusion and blundering almost without example. We saw Governor Grey in Jamaica furiously scolded by Lord Grey in Downing-street, and on the other hand Lord Grey was con victed of ignorant temerity by another Governor Grey in New Zealand.—(llear.) A stoppage of supplies was threat ened in one colony, whilst martial law and military execu tions to a frightful extent prevailed in another. Neverthe less, under these appalling circumstances, the colonies were passed over without the slightest mention. It was most nn fortunate that such a moment should be chosen for not only exempting the colonies from the royal sympathy, bat even excepting them by implication from the royal dominions. In conclusion, he must repeat that publicity was the only gua rantee for good government, and unless Parliament forced publicity, it would neglect its duty. Mr. SCOTT remarked, that the Hon. Member who had jest addressed the House had made a clever speech in oppo sition to the vote which he had announced his intention to give; but, much as he admired the Hon. Gentleman's ability, he confessed he would rather have had his vote than his speech. He (Mr. Scott) concurred in all that had been stated relative to the unsatisfactory position of our foreign relations, and thought that in such a state of things eco nomy might be practised by withdrawing some of our ambas sadors, or retrenching their expenses. As regarded the colonies, the House expected that the gentlemen who pre sided over that department in that assembly would explain the absence of all allusion to them in the Royal Speech. The whole of our colonial system was vicious, and that was attributable to the circumstance of their being placed under the control of a sort of Star Chamber in Downing•street. The local assemblies were so re stricted as to have only the right of complaint, without the power of redress. It would seem that for a colony to obtain a representative system it was necessary that there should be rebellion on its part, and payment of 2,000,0001. on ours. That had been the case in Canada, and was likely to happen at the Cape, though it appeared that the artifi cers in the workshop at Downing-street were mistaken in supposing that the constitution which suited the latitude of Quebec was adapted to that of Cape Town. The mal-ad ministration of the colonies had caused the dismemberment of the empire eighty years ago, and a similar result might be apprehended now, unless a change were to take place. It was necessary that the colonies should be secured against the vagaries of the Colonial-office, and admitted to the advan• ' tags of good government.— (Hear. ) Colonel SIBTHORP said that after the excellent speech of his Hon. Friend the Member for Buckinghamshire and the Jesuitical, weak, and imperfect reply of the Noble Lord—(A laugh)—admiring the one and despising the other—he could not be content at the opening of a new session to give a mere silent vote. The Speech they had heard read from the chair was not the Speech of her Majesty, but an omnium gatherem pie of her Ministers—(A laugh)—and, politically speaking, it was a falsehood throughout.—(Continued laughter.) Any man who placed such a speech in the hands of her Majesty ought to be impeached. There was nothing in it that was good, favourable, satisfactory, or consoling to the country— everything was black, underhand, and deceitful—full of fraud, trickery, and subtlety. It was painful for him to use strong language—(" Ohl" and laughter)— but he would not shrink from speaking inthe House or acting out of it. How much did he regret they had no longer amongst them 'the Noble Lord who with such fearless ability had opposed the Government. Not less than his Hon. Friend the Member for Buckinghamshire, not less than any Member of that House did he regret the early removal of such a man. Had that Noble Lord been there to criticise the Speech from the Throne he would have lashed the Prime Minister, as he had done before, and made him shake in his seat with the conscious ness of his misconduct.—( A laugh.) That Speeck contained a recommendation of economy. It was upon that principle that the Whigs came into power. But, had they ever prac tised it? It was stated that the revenue had improved. It that were so—if his Right Hon. relative the Chancellor of the Exchequer would show him that the revenue was in so prosperous a state as the Speech represented it to be, then he would ask him, in the name of the people of England, whether he meant to continue the income-tax and that most unjust tax of all—the duty on fire insurances. He could not place the slightest confidence in either the motives or the intentions of her Majesty's Ministers. Sir D. L. EVANS would remind the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the opinion was generally entertained out of doors that an injustice was done to the owners of personal property by the present imposition of legacy duties. He trusted that some inquiry would be made into this subject, with a view to show whether this injustice was more appa rent than real. He was glad the Noble Lord had announced reductions in the expenditure, and he only hoped they would be commensurate in extent with the wishes of the public. A revision and more equal partition of the taxation was also strongly desired by the country. He felt inclined to de fend the foreign policy of the Government against the attacks of the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, both with re spect to our mediation in the Schleswig-Holstein and in the Sicilian question. He felt bound to add his meed of praise to the Noble Lord at the head of Foreign Affairs, who had for so many years and with so much success, supported the cause of liberty in every country in the world.—( Hear, hear.) He would remind the Hon. Member for Stamford that it was now sixteen or seventeen years ago since he heard him (Mr. Herries) prophecy that it would be impos sible for the Noble Lord (Palmerston) to maintain the peace of Europe for six months, Mr. HERRIES intimated dissent. Sir DE LACY EVANS—But, notwithstanding that pro phecy, the peace of Europe had been preserved for sixteen years, and great progress had been made in the cause of liberty and constitutional government.—(Hear.) He thought the present Government deserved the greatest credit for the manly support they had given to that cause in every portion of the world.—(Hear, hear.) He approved of the en ti re cordiality which the English Government had maintained with each successive Government in France. While that Government were actuated by a liberal and generous policy the cause of civilization and progress would be best promoted by the existence of a continued cordiality between the two Governments. Captain HARRIS complained that the Speech from the Throne contained no allusion to the suffering state of the agricultural and colonial interests. In the present state of public opininion he apprehended that nothing could be done with respect to the corn laws. He thought certainly that a fair trial ought to be given to the experiment. But the landed interest had, at the same time, a right to complain of the unjust burdens and assessments to which they were sub jected. On their behalf, therefore, he thought himself jus tified in saying that the Government of this country ought to lose no time in seeing what could be done for their relief. The next topic in the Royal Speech to which attention might I naturally be directed was that which related to the revenue. It was true that with regard to the revenue of the present year Very little information had yet been communicated to Parliament, and as they had few accounts before them, he could say little upon that subject, but he m i g ht a t least I venture to assert that nothing had yet appeared to warrant the satisfaction expressed in the Royal Speech on account of the condition of the revenue and the present state of the commercial interest. The cotton trade certainly appeared to be in a prosperous condition, but he ventured to assert that no other interest was now flourishing. Hardware, wool, and every other species of manufacture was suffering; cotton alone was in a state even apparently prosperous. That surely was not a condition of things that could be called free trade, but a plan rather which gave a vast advantage to the cotton trade, and to that solely. So long as there was a duty on the importation of manufactured cotton goods, it surely could net be said that this country possessed anything like free trade. In those proceedings which were taken for the alleged purposes of free trade and economical reform, there were spirits at work who were identical with those to whose agency no small portion of the disturbance which had oc curred on the Continent might justly be attributed, and he deeply apprehended that that party in this country were urging on and stimulating the endeavours of Hon. Members in that House whose voices were the most loudly raised in favour of free trade. Nevertheless, he gave the Hon. Mem ber ;for the West Riding full credit for the best inten tions; but at the same time he thought that Hon. Gentle man most grievously mistaken when he talked of looking forward to the time at which duties were not to be imposed for the purpose of aiding the revenue. He understood the lion. Member to say that he would do away with all duties for mere purposes of revenue, a project which could hardly be carried into effect at any less cost than that of national bankruptcy. He wished to add a word or two with regard to the proposed reductions in the army and the navy. Let it be remembered that these reductions were intended to take place at a moment when it was admitted that an in surrectionary spirit was rife in Ireland and the war in the Punjaub still going on. When the navy was mentioned in that House, he often heard it said that the nine or ten Bail-of-the-line which we had in the Mediterranean consti tuted a needless drain upon the resources of the country; but he looked to France, not as our natural enemy—that he should never say—but as the Power which, from local posi tion and inherent strength, must always be to us the most formidable for which we could at any time be called on to encounter. England, therefore, ought at all times to main tain a force sufficient to balance that great state and main tain the peace of Europe. Mr. COCHRANE did not think that the Hon. Member for Pontefract proved himself a very competent judge of what he was speaking of when he applied such terms as those of a great constitutional struggle to the events which in the course of last year took place on the continent of Europe. That Hon. Member had said that he regretted that he did not belong to any party, but he (Mr. Cochrane) might fairly say that the Hon. Gentleman had taken his place on the mountain of that House. To apply himself, however, more immediately to the Speech which they had yesterday heard from the Throne. There was evidently in that document, and what followed upon it, an indication upon the part of Minis ters to yield to the influence of pressure from without. He conceived that it was not right for any Government to be influenced by threats or menaces; and in those threats he saw something more than mere retrenchment. The Hon. Member for the West Riding meant to organize a force which was to override the Legislature, and dictate to the House of Commons. He (Mr. Cochrane) considered that, as a new League was now springing up in this country, they were entitled to examine the opinions and objects of the leaders of the movement. In 1846 the Hon. Member for the West Riding warned the landlords that there was a blacker spot in the legislation of the country than even the corn-laws, namely, taxation, and he announced that when his party were satisfied with regard to the corn-laws, they would organize an agitation against the landlords on the subject of taxation. The same Hon. Gentleman, in a memo rable speech which he delivered at Manchester in January, 1848, in alluding to the Duke of Wellington's opinions with reference to the national armaments, spoke of the Noble Duke in these terms :—" That the Duke was an old man, and had passed into the last verge of existence, and —without a figure of speech—was tottering to the grave." The Hon. Member for Manchester (Mr. Bright) said the other day at a public meeting, that he wished the people to be so repre sented that they might control the Throne and the House of Lords ; and he added that there was nothing that was un attainable if the same means were used to which they had before had recourse. He (Mr.lCochrane) regretted, after the enunciation of such principles, that the Government had given in the Speech those pledges of retrenchment; for it appeared to him that they were giving way to a pressure from without. Last year, when there were no revolutions on the Continent, and when there was not half the danger of war that existed at present, no allusion to retrenchment was made in the Royal Speech ; and he conceived that no man, looking to the state of the Continent now, could say there was such a prospect of peace as would warrant—he would not call it the retrenchment, but the disarmament now pro posed. He begged to remind lion. Gentlemen that Mr, Pitt came down to the House in February, 1792, with prog nostications of a fifteen years' peace, and with proposals for retrenchment, and that precisely a year afterwards that war was commenced which lasted for so many years. The motto of the Hon. Gentleman opposite was "Peace and retrench ment ;" but he considered that the motto of this country should be "Peace and armament." Mr. BANKES regretted to observe that no allusion to the interests of most important portions of the empire was made in the Speech which had been submitted to the Queen by her Ministers. He agreed with the Noble Lord (Lord Man deville) that it was their duty to take care that the interests of the British colonies, which had no specific representation in that House, should not be neglected; and this was espe cially necessary at the present time when it was notorious that the colonists were suffering extraordinary pressure. The Hon. Member for Montrose had brought charges of the grossest misgovernment against the Noble Lord at the nnact tn 1",:olc•ni h been satisiactorily answered. He ( Mr. Bankes) considered it the duty of the party with - which he acted, from respect to the memory of a Noble Lord (Lord G. Ben tinck), who was most zealous and indefatigable in sup porting the interests of the colonies, to endeavour, as far was in their power, to promote the welfare of those de pendencies. He believed, indeed, that the indefatigable application of his Noble Friend to the interests of the colo • nies tended greatly to shorten his existence.—( Hear. hear.) When he last saw his Noble Friend in that House, observ ing him to be greatly fatigued by his attention to the public duties, he endeavoured to prevail upon him to leave the House to obtain some necessary refreshment; but the Noble Lord replied that he was watching over the interests of the colonies, which he was determined to protect to the utmost of his power, and he refused to leave the House even for a few moments.—(Hear, hear.) No allusion was made in the Royal Speech to the condition of the agricultural interest. The pressure upon that interest was daily and hourly in creasing, and had already proceeded to an extent of which he thought the Ministers could not be aware, or they would have deemed it their duty to take some notice of the subject. The Noble Lord opposite had expressed his opinion that the changes which had lately been made with reference to the agricultural interest would ultimately tend to benefit that interest; but he would ask the Noble Lord what was to become of the agricultural interest in the meantime, oppressed as it was with burdens, especially in the shape of poor-rates—(Hear, hear)—which threatened to bring it into the same condition to which Ireland had been reduced? He joined most cordially in supporting the amendment of his Hon. Friend (Mr. Disraeli), and in condemning the Government for omitting from her Majesty's Speech any allusion to the two important interests to which he had re ferred. He (Mr. Bankes), and those with whom he acted, concurred with Ministers in the expression of satisfaction that, both in the north and south of Europe, the contend ing parties had consented to a suspension of arms for the purpose of negotiating terms of peace ; but it was perfectly consistent with that concurrence to state that they did not find in regard to our relations with foreign Powers any sub ject of congratulation.—(Hear, hear.) There were omis sions from the Speech, with regard to our foreign relations, of a very significant character. Last year this country ex perienced an unparalleled outrage and insult from a hitherto friendly nation. The British Ambassador was dismissed with ignominy and insult from the Court of Spain.—(Hear, hear) —and he thought it was due to the hononr and cha racter of this country that her Majesty's Ministers should now have an opportunity of affording explanations on the subject—(Hear.) The Spanish Government sent over an in dividual to explain the circumstances under which the Bri- tish Ambassador had been expelled, but the Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) refused to hold any communication with him ; and yet, after the insults this country had received in the person of its representative, the Spanish Ambassador was allowed to remain undisturbed in London. When some inquiries were made on this subject last session, the Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) stated that negotiations were then pending. He (Mr. Bankes) begged now to ask the Noble Lord wbether those negotiations were still pending?—(Hear, hear.) Was it not long for those negotiations to be going on for the vindication of the honour of the country, and for no satisfastory result to be announced? This was an omission which he thought it to be the duty of Hon. Members not connected with the Government to bring under the notice of the House, and for these reasons he considered the amend ment of his Hon. Friend the Member for Buckinghamshire to be justified in respect to foreign affairs. With regard to the commercial and manufacturing interests of the country he conceived the amendment to be also justified. The con dition of those interests was not a circumstance calling for the congratulation of the country. The Hon. Members for Manchester and the West Riding of Yorkshire might enter tain the idea that commerce and manufactures were in a palmy state of prosperity; and, should those Hon. Members vouchsafe to deliver in the Parliament of Engiand some of those speeches which they had uttered in the Parliament of Manchester, they might possibly convince Hon. Members on his side of the House, but, until that was the case, he must beg leave to remain of a contrary opinion. He believed, that so far from those recent alterations which had been made in the policy of this country having proved successful in se curing greater steadiness in respect to the industrial interests of the country, whether as regarded manufactures or agri culture, they had entirely failed. It was upon these grounds that he supported the amendment proposed by the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire.—(Hear, hear, and cries of " Question," and " Divide.") Mr. URQUHART said he could not give a silent vote on this question—(A laugh)—but must state some of the grounds on which he should heartily support the amend ment which had been proposed. After alluding to the ex traordinary commotions which had taken place on the con tinent of Europe, and the influential position which England under these circumstances might have occupied by the dis creet exercise of friendly offices, he thought it was a subject of disappointment that the Speech from the Throne could only announce that the Queen of England no longer re ceived assurances of a friendly disposition from her former allies. This was a momentous announcement, and amounted to an entire change of our condition in respect to foreign nations. He conceived that the Noble Lord at the head of the Government had entirely failed in controverting the ar guments of the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire with re spect to the events of the north and south of Europe. He ( Mr. Urquhart) maintained, with regard to Sicily and Na ples, that the intervention on our part was contrary to the law of nations. Besides, was this mode of proceeding by a British Admiral, proprio motu, a proper course ? Was it for this that we had ambassadors and a oreign- office ? But it was not an English admiral only that was to assume to himself the prerogatives of the Crown of England ; the Noble Lord had stated that the decision to interfere was the French admiral's decision, the English admiral following.—(Hear, hear.) Now, certain documents had found their way to the public, they were published in the Times of the 6th of October last, and the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell), in the correspondence he afterwards had with him (Mr. Urquhart), did not deny their authenticity; and from these documents it appeared that the initiary step was taken by the Ministers, and not by the admirals; that the French representative commenced with what amounted to a threat of war; that the English repre sentative followed in the same strain, and it was ten days afterwards (so far as appeared by these papers) that action commenced on the part of the admirals. He (Mr. Urquhart) would venture to give a warning to the Government.—(A laugh.) They had already been once broken by the Noble Lord at the head of the Foreign Department—they had once failed to come into office through him ; that Noble Lord, who had made England a personal affair of his own, and disposed of her as he would of his old wardrobe, would drag them down with him, unless they managed, before it should be too late, to separate his conduct front them, and form an estimate a little more accurate of what was befitting the honour and character of England. Lord PALMERSTON—Sir, I have three objections to state to the amendment which we are now discussing. In the first place, it refuses to give an opinion upon a matter on which no opinion has been asked; secondly, it does give an opinion upon two other matters, upon which that opinion is inconsistent with the fact; thirdly, it endeavours by a side wind to extract from the House an opinion upon matters of great importance, on which the opinion of the majority of the House is adverse to that of those who framed this amendment.—(Hear, hear.) As happens sometimes in let ters, the pith is in the postscript—(A laugh)—the important matter of the movers is contained in the last paragraph. That paragraph, which relates to the omission of any men tion of the colonies and of agriculture, is dexterously worded, but I think we have had revelations elsewhere, if I am not misinformed, and if none had been made the amend ment itself is sufficiently indicative, that the real meaning of that paragraph, and the real object of those who move the amendment, is to record their opinion against the doctrine of free trade—(Hear)—against the repeal of the corn-laws— ( Hear)—and against the removal of discriminating duties.— (Hear.) That intention has been amply acknowledged in another place; but I must say that it would be more fitting for those who entertain these opinions, and more satisfactory to the House and the public, that they should be brought before the House upon a substantive motion, instead of en deavouring, I may say, to trick the House out of an opinion on the mere pretence of an amendment to an Address.— (Hear, hear.) In the next plaee, the amendment calls upon the House to state that they can find no subject of congratu lation in the improvement which has commenced in the re venue and in the beginning revival of trade.—(Hear.) Now, I can easily understand that those who lament the improve ments of late years made in our commercial system with re gard to the policy of protection, and who condemn every movement made in the direction of free trade,—l can under stand how persons entertaining those opinions can tind no subject of congratulation in improving revenue and reviving commerce—(Hear) —because improving revenue and reviv ing commerce negative the predictions they made, and are the best refutations of them.—( Cheers.) In the first paragraph of the amendment it is proposed that the House should state that they cannot congratulate her Majesty on the state of our foreign relations. My answer to that is " Who asked you to congratulate her Majesty?"—(Laughter from the Op position.) If you say you cannot do so, my answer is " Wait till you are asked."—(Laughter.) Those who moved and seconded the Address never asked you to give an opinion on the foreign relations of the country.—(More laughter.) An Address is always studiously framed in such a manner as not to commit anybody—(Renewed laughter)—not to commit anybody to any opinion on the subject it embraces— (Laughter)—for those who move an Address have no wish to commit the House on subjects that may be matter of great, and serious, and prolonged discussion in the course of the session; and therefore it would be not only a de parture from ordinary usage, but a breach of propriety, to ask the House to do so on any of the matters contained in the Speech.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) But I must say that when the Hon. Gentlemen opposite state that they are unable to congratulate her Majesty on the state of our foreign relations, in answer to a Speech which an nounces that papers will be laid before the House explaining what the conditions of those foreign relations are, I think it may be well replied that the House would be stultifying it self to say that it is unable to congratulate her Majesty on matters on which, till they receive the information promised, they must necessarily be comparatively deficient in informa tion.—( Hear, hear.) But I go a little further, and I main tain, in opposition to the Gentlemen opposite, and in con tradiction to the amendment, that this House, and those who have attended in the slightest degree to what is pass ing in the world, might congratulate her Majesty on the state of our foreign relations.—(Cheers.) What is the great object this country has at heart? It is that, next to the maintenance of the interests of this country, which must always be the first and most prominent object, we should insure the maintenance of peace—(Cheers)—peace with the rest of the world; and next that we should, if possible, prevent the wars of other nations.—(Hear, hear.) Have these objects been accomplished? They have been accomplished, and for that I say there is matter of congra tulation in so far as it can be ascribed to the action of the Government of this country.—( Hear.) We have had it in deed from the mouths of those who oppose us, that it is in consequence of the action which the Government has taken that we are at this moment able to say we are at peace with all the world—(Cheers)—and that those hostilities which from time to time have broken out in other parts of Europe have been suspended by armistices, and are in the train of settlement.—(Hear.) We have not exactly heard of the true feeling that \ appertains to those who have been our accusers on the present occasion; but they peer out, as I shall have occasion to observe in reference to the speech of the Hon. Member for Dorsetshire (Mr. Bankes), for there the truth burst out—(Hear)—and we discover that the fault found with Government is that we are not at war with some of our allies.—(Hear, hear.) One great oflence has been that we have continued on amicable terms with republican Governments.—(Hear, hear.) There are those who think that the Government of a Republic is not sufficiently good company for the Government of a Monarchy.—(Cheers and laughter.) Mr. BANKES—I said nothing about France. Lord PALMERSTON—I did not connect the Hon. Gen tleman with what I have now said. We have been accused of sending an ambassador post-haste to Paris after the Re volution. Now, the relations between countries can only be carried on by Governments, which are the organs of na tions; it is only by those organs that nations can communi cate with nations. But what business have we to inquire what organs any foreign nation chooses to send here? What business have we to inquire whether the French nation wishes a Monarch, an Emperor, a President, or a Consul ? (Cheers, and counter cheers.) Our object and our duty is to cement the closest ti.s of frifT lo .l ,: 7 "tl7 — ' • • :;1.7 p , : rope—that neighbour of whom it was justly said that in war she would be our most powerful enemy, but in peace our most useful friend.—(Loud cheering.) There is nothing in the real interests of England and France to stand in the way of the most cordial friendship between the nations (Cheers.) There may be prejudices and passions, but reason and calm reflection are beginning to teach the nations themselves that there is nothing in the real interests of the two countries that can injuriously clash, and that it is for the good of both to cultivate the most friendly relations. — (Cheers.) I feel it due to those public men who have been at the head of the government of France since February last, to say that their conduct towards this country has been marked by the most perfect good faith, the greatest frank ness, and most friendly dispositions, and that they have evinced not only an anxious desire to be on the most friendly terms with England, but have also expressed invariably and sincerely to us those pacific dispositions with regard hto the rest of Europe which, attaching as we do great importance to the maintenance of peace, must be the foundation of a real good understanding between England and France.—(Hear.) We did not withdraw our Ambassador from France when the revolution took place. We could not give indeed those usual technical credentials that are given and interchanged between Governments established, because the first Government was by its very name professedly provisional ; but the moment there was a Government that assumed a permanent character those credentials were exchanged ; and since that time the relations between the two countries have been sus tained in the ordinary way.—( Near, hear.) Has this con tributed to the peace of the world? It has.—(Cheers.) The French Government were sincerely anxious to pursue a pacific policy towards all the other countries of Europe; but if England had rejected friendly intercourse with France—it she had scowled upon the Republic, and given the preference to others who wished to displace the peculiar form of govern ment which France had adopted—if we by these means had thrown ourselves hostilely against France, I will not under take to say that it would have been possible to maintain the peace of the world, which, during the last year has been of such paramount importance.—(Hear.) So much for our relations with France; and I humbly venture to think that there may be in that some reason why this country may congratulate itself, though Hon. Members opposite re fuse to join in that congratulation.—(Hear, hear.) Then comes the subject of what have been called " mock media tions." Why, anybody who has heard what has passed here and elsewhere, in the course of the last 48 hours, would imagine that never before this year was there such a thing as mediation.—(Hear. hear.) They would imagine that it was a newly invented operation, resorted to for some mis chievous purpose, and for which the Government who under took it deserved the severest censure.— (A laugh.) I must plead guilty to this crime long before the present year., It was my lot to be engaged in mediations many years ago, and fortunately, with considerable success.—(lronical cheers.) The Government of which I had the honour to be a member was able by meditation to prevent a rupture be tween France and the United States, and also to make peace between France and the Republic of sllexico. Other smaller but also important mediations I do not mention—(A laugh) but those two at least were events from which considerable consequences must have followed. But in this sweeping censure on mediations my predecessor in office, Lord Aber deen, must take his share of the blame. Lord Aberdeen, in connexion with Russia, mediated between Persia and Turkey, and also between Denmark and Sardinia. I say nothing of the mediation in the case of the River Plate, which is still going on, part of the censure for which I must divide with him—(A laugh)—but I trust some paragraph will be inserted in the amendment contain ing a due portion of blame to Lord Aberdeen as well as to me. Mock mediations ! One would suppose that media tions were merely diplomatic dramas got up for amusement, and leading to no result. Take the mediation between Denmark and Prussia. Was that a mediation of ours? Far from it. It wad a mediation which this country was asked to undertake; and, although it has not yet come to a final close, it has at least had the advantage of obtaining a sus pension of hostilities, establishing a temporary peace, putting an end to that interruption to commerce which hostilities had for a long time produced, and i trust laying the founda tion for a satisfactory and honourable adjustment between the parties.--(Hear.) The Hon. Member for Buckingham shire said—" You should have let Denmark alone. Your me diation began just when Denmark was supported by strong and active allies, and if hostilities had been allowed to go on Denmark would soon have settled the question." What was that, in other words, except the advocacy of an European war? There was Germany, on the one hand, running wild after some particular doctrine in regard to the Duchy of Schles wig, and Denmark, on the other hand, strong in her opinion as to her right to that Duchy. Demark was sup ported by Russia and France—war was going on—Denmark was thrust into the field, and about to apply to Russia and France to aid in sustaining her claim; while Germany was already in the plains of Schleswig ; —what was that but a general European war?—(Cheers.) And we are blamed, forsooth, for having prevented it.—(Cheers.) That is offence the first : that is the first article of our impeach ment. Sir, I feel no alarm as to the opinion to which the House will come upon that subject.—(Cheers.) Then, as to our mediation between Austria and Lombardy,—what was its history? In May the Austrian Government sent over here a diplomatist who had been before a chargé d'affaires to this country, Baron Colloredo, asking the good offices and mediation of England between Austria and her revolting subjects. That diplomatist proposed certain terms upon which the mediation was to proceed. We said it would afford us the liveliest satisfaction to mediate between Austria, who had been so long and so closely in alliance with England, and any portion of her revolting sub jects; but to propose that which we had reason to know would not be accepted by the other party would only be a waste of time, and therefore we observed—" If you will add so and so to your proposals, which we think will be accepted, we will then proceed in our efforts to establish peace between you, Austria, and Lombardy." What was the answer? The Austrian diplomatist said—" I am not authorised to accede to your proposition, but I do not feel justified in rejecting it; I will take it ad referendum; I will gd to' my Government and ask their opinion upon it." I believe the proposal was afterwards made directly by Austria to Lombardy, but was not accepted, so that that measure fell at the time to the ground. Latterly things took a different turn. The Aus trian army being reinforced gained considerable advantages. Application was then made by Sardinia to the Government of France for assistance. The government of France stated to us, in pursuance of those relations of confidence and good faith which existed between us, "If you will join us in carrying out a mediation between these parties, and endea vour with us to settle terms of peace between them, we will act with you ; but if you refuse to do so, we shall be unable to prevent military interference in the affairs of Italy."— ( Hear, hear.) We assented, and that is the real fault of the Government of England.—(Cheers.) It is because we pre vented a war in Italy, which would have infallibly led to a war in Europe ; it is because, in joining France in her sincere and pacific offers of friendly mediation, we prevented events which must have brought on a general war —that we are now impeached by the Hon. Gentleman opposite.—(Cheers.) That is crime the second ; but, Sir, I feel the same confidence as to the opinion of the House upon that part of the impeach ment.—(Bear, hear.) It is said that we are imposing terms on Austria. It is totally untrue. There is no imposition of terms—nor any intention of imposing terns. We stated why we thought certain arrangements would lead to the well-un derstood interests of Austria, and promote a pacific termina tion ; but it was for Austria to determine whether she would accede to them. I hope she may. If not, it is as free for her to refuse as we feel ourselves free to offer. Then as to the mediation between Naples and Sicily. That mediation was repeatedly asked by a person whom (following the example of the Han. Member for Buckinghamshire) I may call the Xing of Naples.—(Cheers and laughter.) Lord Minto was sent from Rome, express by the Neapolitan Government. When that Noble Earl went to Italy he had no instructions to go on to Naples; but the Neapolitan Minister in this country expressed to me a wish that Lord Minto might do so, giving an assurance that if he did he would be most cordially received. My reply was, that it was no part of Lord Minto's instructions to go to Naples, but I said that he should imme diately have his credentials, and that the moment he received direct intimation from Naples that his presence was wished for he would forthwith repair to that Government. He went; and was in constant communication with the Neapolitan Go vernment, at ther express desire and request. He was urged by them to go over to Sicily to communicate with the Pro visional Government there, with a view to effect an amicable arrangement; but that intervention unfortunately did not succeed; for, meanwhile, the news of the revolution in Paris had arrived there, which altered very much the state of feel ing in Sicily. Lord Minto thereupon returned to Rome. In mentioning Rome and Lord Minto I must notice what has fallen from an Honourable Member, who has attributed to the presence of a Signor Sterbini at a dinner given by Lord Minto the lamentable events that have since occurred in that city. I can assure the Honourable Member that Lord Minto did not receive Signor Sterbini at any dinner, and that so far as an imaginary dinner given some twelve months ago had produced the unfortunate events that have since happened at Rome, I can say that Lord Minto is perfectly innocent. Well, we withdrew from the mediation, retaining at the same time a great interest in the affairs of Sicily, because those who know the degree in which the British Government was connected with the establishment of the constitution of 1812 in Sicily—that sort of assurance given by our Minis ters of that day—not amounting, however, to a guarantee that England would afford her assistance to the Sicilians in sustaining that constitution, must see that any Government of England could not avoid taking a lively interest in the affairs of that country. But then came the question whether the expedition which the King of Naples was about to send to Sicily was or was not to be put a stop to. No instruc tions were given to interfere with that expedition. It sailed, it reached Messina, and commenced operations. I have heard it said that Messina was the stronghold of the Neapolitan army. God help me! The idea of that being a stronghold to the Neapolitans! They had been driven out of Palermo, but had not been driven out of the stronghold of Messina. But when they no longer found resistance from that town, and after the flag of the Sicilians had been hauled down, and the very idea of hos tilities had been given up, they did for 48 hours continue a savage bombardment, destroying houses, palaces, churches, and public buildings. After that they sent a body of troops into the town to complete the destruction which the bombe, shells, and cannon, had not effected. They laid waste three miles of suburbs, burning, plundering, and mur dering as they went.—(Hear, hear.) Well, Si r , t h e Ad m i rals hearing this, and seeing what had happened, although men accustomed to scenes of war, but still accustomed only to war carried on according to the practice of civilized nations —(Hear, hear)—they felt revolted and disgusted.—( Hear.) But they felt more. They knew that the town of Palermo was doomed to the same fate which had been inflicted upon Messina, and they said, " We cannot permit it, and although we have no instructions upon the subject, yet, upon our own responsibility, we will stop these atrocious proceedings, at least till we have received the decisions of our respective Go vernments." They did so, and they established an armistice. What were the Governments of England and France to do in a case of that sort ?—(Hear, hear.) Was it fitting that civilians sitting here in their comfortable homes—men who have never seen a shot fired or blood shed in the field—was it fitting that they should be sterner than those Admirals, accustomed to all the horrors that are considered to belong to ordinary wars? Was it fitting that Palermo should be suffered to share the fate of sJessina? Why, Sir, even those who now seek to condemn us I will not think so ill of them as to believe they would have assented to such a proposition. lam sure that no statesman would, under such circumstances, have taken any other course than has: been adopted by us. It was our duty t o follow it up by negotiation. That negotiation Is now going on, and I am not without hope that it will be satisfactorily concluded. If that consummation should be acco mp li shed, I shall feel no regret that the Admirals took upon themselves the responsibility of interposing between the two contending parties. But time is of great value in this as well as in other cases. If an arrangement had bee n proposed at the moment when the smoking ashes of Messina were before the eyes of the Sicilians, they might have refused terms which may now beaccepted without difficulty. On the other hand, the King of Naples may perhaps now consent t o an arrangement' which, in the moment of his victory, or, as he might think, his triumph, he would have been indisposed to agree to. (Hear, hear.) At all events, we have the satisfaction of thinking that. the mediation of England and France upon that occasion prevented great calamities to Sicily, and I trust also that while on the one hand that mediation secured hap pineaa and constitutional freedom to Sicily, it may also lead o :Is3 IseenerS eet'c res., f f 1 1 - 1. ipi. upw. of Lhe carne These are the crimes for which this House is called upon to take the unusual step of pronouncing a condemnation upon her Ma jesty's Government on the first evening of the session—a condemnation proposed, be it observed, without waiting for the papers which are promised to be given —a prudent mea sure, doubtless, on the part of those who know full well that, when the papers do come. their censure will not be received, and who think it may be good policy to endeavour to obtain a vote before the grounds of that vote can be laid before the House.—(Cheers.) I should think that the animus of the mover of the amendment showed itself a little in the speech of the Hon. Member for Dorsetshire. That Hon. Member said that the Spanish Government had last year offered an affront to the Government of England ; and the Hon. Member took rather more credit to himself than I am at all disposed to allow him, by assuming that it was in con sequence of some motion or speech of his that the Govern ment had requested M. Isturitz, the then Minister of Spain in England, to return to Spain, in consequence of the dis missal of Mr. Bulwer from Madrid. I can assure the Hon. Member that he is entirely in error on that subject, and that he had no share whatever in the decision of the Government on that occasion. —(Cheers and laughter.) But the Hon. Gentleman also said that it was now so many months since that insult had been offered to this country, and that we had not yet obtained redress ; that we had remained entirely pas sive under that affront; and he asked where was the spirit and dignity of England. Now what does this. mean, except that we ought to have gone to war with Spain in consequence of that affront? We desired the Minister of Spain to go back to Madrid in consequence of the Minister of England having been desired to quit Madrid for London ; and although I admit that that was an affront, although I feel that reparation is due.—(Hear, hear) —and although I trust that the Spanish Government, when they come calmly to reflect upon 'the matter, and see how insufficient were the grounds upon which they acted, may be inclined to make reparation, yet I am not prepared to go the length of the Iton. Gentlemen who think that we ought to have declared war in order to revenge that insult.—(Hear, hear.) I have been accu se d somet i mes of being rather prone tot ate measures leading to war. The war party, however,now sit there. [Pointing to the Oppo sition Benches.]—(Cheers and laughter.) The Hon. Mem ber seemed to infer that all the papers connected with the question had been laid before the House last year. What he wants, then, it remains for him more clearly to explain. My Hon. Friend, the Member for Cockermouth (Mr. Horsman) complained that the proceedings of the Foreign -office were involved—although he did not blame me in particular. —for he admitted it had been the case from time immemorial,—that the proceedings of the Foreign-office . were involved in a mystery which was highly mortifying to his curiosity.—(Laughter.) Now certainly I do feel much for the inquisitorial disappointment of my Honourable Friend. I can assure him that when I was out of office I should have been equally gratified to have the run of, I do not say all, but the principal—the pick—of the interest ' ing dispatches received at the Foreign -office.—(Renewed laughter.) I can assure him also that it would be exceed ingly interesting and amusing for the Members of this House to have delivered to them, with the votes, the latest dispatches written and received by the Fo reign-office ; but I much doubt if this would contribute , to the maintenance of peace, or conduce to the real inter ests of the country.—(Hear, hear.) In the first place, it happens not to be in accordance with the constitution of the kingdom, which vests in the Crown, and not in the House of Commons, the conduct of foreign negotiations— (Hear, hear)—but I can assure ley Honourable Friend that if there is one matter more than another which is certain to involve the country in difficulties, to render them incurable, and to lead to unavoidable ruptures, it is popular assemblies taking possession of diplomatic transactions.- (Hear, hear.) The very publicity which he wishes to see established would be fatal to accommodations in ninety-nine cases out of 100. If the answer to a proposition which had been made in the course of a negotiation were next week published to the world, how could you expect the Government who objected to the proposition ever to retract or modify its ob jection?—(Hear, hear.) You would pin it and nail it down to its first objection, and you would render accommodation impossible. You would set the self-love of the two parties against each other; and you would reduce them to a position from which there was no way of escape except that which was adopted by duellists in similar circurn,tances.—(Heer, • hear.) I believe there is in this country an Anti-Duel ling Society, and I trust they will interpose to prevent my Honourable Friend from carrying into practice the principle which he so eloquently advocates. There is one mediation to which I may allude as an ex- - ample in point. There was a question arose between France and the United States in 1834, and by some misfortune the Chambers of France and the Congress of the United States became pledged to a difference of opinion; and the two countries wee in that state in which, without the intervention of a third friendly power, it would have been impossible in honour for either party to avoid corning to the arbitrament of arms. But by our friendly offices the ' matter was adjusted and peace preserved between the two countries.—(Hear, hear.) This, then, is the state of the matter.—We stand here charged with the grave offence of ' having preserved a good understanding with the representa tives of France, and having thereby contributed essentially ' to the maintenance of the peace of Europe. We are charged also with the distinct offence of having put an end to the hostilities between Denmark and Schleswig, which might have led to a European war ; and having induced Austria and Sardinia to lay down their arms, when their difference , . - might have involved the Powers of Europe. We are also accused of having prevented great calamities in Sicilyan.d of labouring to establish friendly relations betweers the King of Naples and his Sicilian subjects. These are the charges which the House is now called upon to determine for or against us. We stand here as the promoters of peacit —as the parties who have laboured assiduously to prevent • war, to narrow its range if it should break out, and to put an end to it as soon as possible. We stand here as the pro moters of peace—under charges brought against us by the - advocates of war. I leave th e H ouse to decide between us, and I confidently look to the verdict which the House will - give.—(Loud cheers.) The Marquis of GRANBY then moved the adjournment of the debate. Lord J. RUSSELL said he should take the sense of the ' House upon that proposition. They had had two nights' de bate already, and it was evident that there were many matters contained in th e Add ress which must be frequently discussed in the course of the session. —(Hear, hear.) He put it to the House, therefore, whether, if they now adjourned the debate, they would not be setting a bad example--(Hear, hear)—and whether it would not be better to decide now upon the amendment, in order to begin the next week with practical discussions.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. HERRIES supported the motion for adjournment, on the ground that he and other Members were anxious to ad dress the House upon the amendment, and that they could not expect to be listened to at that late hour.—(Cries of "Go on," and "Adjourn.") He hoped the House would agree to the adjournment, on the understanding that the debate should positively conclude on Monday next.— (No, no.) If the debate was adjourned then the Noble Lord must not be offended should the subject of foreign affairs be again brought under discussion, nor attribute it to any want of courtesy.—(Cries of "Divide, divide.") • Mr. M. MILNES rose, but was met by loud cries of " Oh, oh !" amid which he sat down. He again rose, but encoun sering a similar reception resumed his seat. Lord J. RUSSELL said he certainly could not complain of what he had said to the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Herries), if the topics mentioned in the Address should be again brought under discussion in reference to any mea sures which might be laid before the House on a future oc casion. —(Hear, hear.) On the contrary, he thought such a course would be of advantage to the dispatch of public business. If the Noble Lord perceived that the general wish of the Nouse was for a division, as it seemed to be—(" No, no!" and loud cries of " Divide")—he hoped he would give way to it, The Marquis of GRANBY begged to assure the Noble Lord that it was not on light grounds those who acted with him had departed from the usual practice of the house in voting an Address to her Majesty. They had done so solely from a conviction of the great importance of the interests which had been lefeout of discussion—(" Divide, divide !") - and they wished to adjou rn t h e debate on Monday, as it was the intention of himself and of his Right Hors. Colleague to call attention to the state of those interests. The House then divided, when there appeared-3 Against the adjournment 221 For it Majority • On our return to th e ga ll ery we found. —l4l Mr. DISRAELI addressing the, House, in the act of with drawing his amendment. Atter what the Noble Lord at the head of the Government hac, stated with respect to those subjects again coming uncle's discussion, and, on the under standing that he would proceed on Monday next with the business of which he ha .d given notice, he would not press for a division. The Address was then agreed to, and a Committee ap pointed to draw it up. BOARDS OF EXCISE AND TAXES. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then moved for leave teibring in a Bill to consolidate the Boards of Ex cise and Taxes into one Board of Commissioners of Inland Revenue, and to make provision for the collection of such revenue. The object of this Bill, he observed, was to secure efficiency in the conjoined departments and to promote eco nomy. The Commissioners would be reduced from twelve to seven, and it was anticipated that the ultimate saving would amount to not less than 70,000/. or 80,000/. Mr. HERRIES trusted that the security of th revenue would in no degree 'ae impaired, and that the combined boards would work as efficiently as the divided boards did. Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. THE WOODS AND FORESTS. Lord DUNCAN moved the appointment of a Select Com mittee to inquire into the expenditure and management of the Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues of the Crown. Lord J. RUSSELL had no objection to the motion, a Simi lar Committee having been appointed last year. The Earl of LINCOLN thought it quite right that this Committee should be re -appointed, because last year they had advanced but a short way in their investigations. They had lest the services of the Noble Lord at the head of the Woods and Forests as a Member of that House, but he hoped the Government would be properly represented on the Com mittee. Lord J. RUSSELL was quite aware of the disadvantage they would suffer from want of the Noble Lord at the , head of the Woods and Forests as a Member of the Com mittee. He had communicated with Lord Carlisle on the subject, and the Government would endeavour to supply his place. The motion was then agreed to, and the Committee ap pointed. On the motion of Mr. PARKER, the House, on its rising , was ordered to adjourn to Monday next. The House adjourned at a Quarter to One o'clock. BTHS. At Ramsgat e , on the 27 th ult., the lady of A. Robinson? Esq., R.N., of a son. At Chelmsford, on the 29th ult., the wife of the Rev. P. Prescott, of a daughter. On the 29th ult., at Vicar's Cross, the lady of G. FoMott. Esq., of a son and heir. On the 30th ult., at Harewood-square, the lady of Jane° Talbot, Eq., of a son. DIED. On the 25th ult., at Ostend, Lieutenant E. Tyndall, R.N. On the 25th u l t., at Hammersmith, Elizabeth, widow 01- , the late G. Bolton, Esq , of Manchester, aged 76. On the 27th ult., at Exmouth, Elizabeth, wife of J. C. Pigo , ..t, Esq., aged 76. On the 27th ult., at Romsey, Hants, the Rev. J. JenveY , M.A., aged 55. On the 29th ult., at Cambridge, aged 30, William G' Esq., 8.A., of Christ's Hospital. On the 30th ult., Alfred Gell, Esq„ of Eastbourne, Si second son of E. H. Cell, Esq., of Lewes, aged 32. On the 31st ult., at Brompton, Dr. George Fownes, F. Professor of Practical Chemistry at University College, don, aged 34. On the 21st ult., at George-street, Portman-square, ag Miss Elizabeth Gibb s , on l y surviving sister of Major. G , Sir Samuel Gibbs, K.C.B. London: Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNI No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. Strand, in the Precinct of the Saroy, in thy mat Middlesex, Saturday, February 3, 1349. 3 2 sson, iussex, F. R.S., Lon- ed 82, [eneral r . G, of r. 112, qty of 4„,‘ 7 1 That will be 1 7th Feb of Nino Letter, lined by riience, i taking 1 ou will " That and his Septernbi to his I treaty of brother J his heirs, 1819. " That and alarr by the Es the rights seizure, c Of the set be . a disa 1 riously '4l people of Par,' and " That Iroperativ and damp express ti of Control Cor IHE n they are Persons as dermentio the said I] both days Per the stt hospital L FOrms o ticulars, In Lary, any Tenders m the said 11 appointed Sext, at ( pared to to - It is to security Co Tenders w. TA 14th day TENDERS Lad Y-d ay r buildinga ; 1 48 ; a 11( Alio, 13' for 18N ye 1 2. on the Wary -plug Further I at the Office , THE There l That fc I trust TIII in I Arid pli And, ti) IA Tou "Adder Your 11.0 dou " Yes Th e al, now " Yes 8w vi 44 T in ~ I Yer; As ev e " Yes,' I notie( All tha Proves f or 4484retjeti Attue aterneld Of er. e , 1,7 rrerate b7‘'wer ii h yrsay t ° "lng ec o ,.. A .H tttu nnam 11 (lib n um , br e ., an( d o . jock flo. • 0 7s' Ant 4t4tl an( ~,2 cloth i 74 e 4 you NewpWeed aft ] b ot ir iti at , r c lb %est, or 7" Coate Felt quail )4 do g a t , g at , re and btOt oti c In% N „ e e • -- Th Ot ie „,47 nZ re ' s 1f not _ ki t re tutni abete ra %Rs Litter mad , p url ,. GI ken,'" 3G and 8( to , raalair4 1, 00, ke,,Tm 4 od ) ,„_ of b e 1 4 1 1, 11 : 6 41 1 1 Pt theirl,, ee i thatr gr and et tlii 11 Tak e tiotica Sato tiao!veral tiro, 4 44 day az +at "T•