The Sun. — London, England, 1841-05-28 00:00:00

IWENING EDITION THE , 4 PRESIDENT." We have been favoured by Captain M`Leod, of the Ta gus Peninsular Mail-steamer, with the following extracts 'Tom the log-book of the Portuguese brig Conde de Palma, from Rio de Janeiro to Lisbon. It contains but little in formation in addition to that already published, but, in the present anxious state of the public mind, everything which may be supposed to bear on the question of the safety of this long-expected vessel will be read with interest : " On Friday, the 23d day of April, at 4 p.m., in lat. 31 deg. 24 sec. N., and long. by chronometer 40 degs. 83 sec. W., of Greenwich, saw a very large steamer under canvass, without showing her colours or making any sig nals ; the raddlewheels were not in motion, nor was any smoke issuing from her funnel. "Next morning, at six o'clock, saw her again, under two square topsails (fore and main) and latteen s ails (1. c. fore and aft), steering N.N.E. ; the wind was at east, with moderate weather." On the 25th the wind veered to N.W., and blew strong, which would prevent the said steamer reaching the Wes tern Isles. The following questions were asked by Capt. M`Leod of Catain Almeida of the above-named vessel, and his answers are annexed What number of masts had the steamer ?—Three. How wits she painted ?—AII dark colour. Did she appear to be under her own or jury-masts ? Her own. What colour was her funnel ?—Not certain. Did you observe any water issuing from her scuppers, as if they were pumping ?—None observed. What was the nearest distance you were to her at any time ?—Four English miles. • Did her -bulwarks, or any part of her, appear to have suffered from had weather ?—Did not appear to have suf fered. Are you positive they did not show any colours, or make any signal indicative of wishing to speak with you ? —None whatever. How many knots an hour do you think they were go ing ?—Three or four knots (miles). Did they appear to hold a good wind, or make a great deal of leeway ?—A great deal of leeway. Mention the sails she had set on the first day you saw her ?—Flying jib, jib, foretopmast, staysail, square fore sail, topsail, topgallantsail, and fore and aft foresail. Mention what sails she had on the second day ?—Fore and aft mainsail, square maintopsail, and mizen ditto. Could you have communicated with the steamer on bog). daps ?—Yes, we could. Had the steamer a figure-head ?—Could not distinguish. Did you observe any boats hoisted up on board of her ? —One quarter-boat. How long did the northwest wind continue which sprung up on the 25th ?—Five days ; afterwards it was west and W.S.W. When did you make the land, and did it agree with your reckoning ?—On the sth of May, and agreed ex actly, with the reckoning. How did the steamer bear off when you first saw her ? - 2 -N.E. by N. four or five miles. How did she bear on the morning of the 24th, at six o'clock, and what distance ?—N.N.W. fivo or six miles. Did you view the steamer through a telescope ?—Yes. SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. FROM TILE DAILY PATERS OF YESTERDAY. GLOBE.—The Times takes the very unnecessary trouble of trying to prove that the parallel which we drew between the measures of Pitt's government for the defeat of the Fox and North Coalition, and those now expected—does not run on all fours. The fact is, no such strong and questionable course is contem plated as that of the Tory King of those days, and the Tory Saint, or idol, of his choice. No such dag gers are as yet drawn between the Crown and the faithful Commons. It is now no question of turning out Ministers in whom the House of Commons had confidence for a young and untried Minister in whom it had • none. It is no question of bringing the will of the Monarch (rather extra-constitutionally) to bear, in the Lords, on measures which had been passed by the Commons. The question is, whether Ministers, in whom the House had confidence last year,—in whom the House opened the present session with very sufficient confidence, and very suffi cient reasons for it, in the results of their policy in the interim—the question is, whether those Ministers have not that confideuce—and if not, why not ? The votes on the Irish Bills afforded no demon stration of a transfer of the confidence of the House of Commons from the Whig to the Tory party ; and the result was rather a drawn battle between par ties than anything else. Whigs voted in Tory ranks, and Tories assented to Whig speeches. Neither is the San don vote a sufficient reason for resignation. There, too, the Tories were enabled to borrow a strength which was not their own. Ministers have a right to place the ensemble of their measures before Parliament, and to make it clear whether it is for ono, or for all of them, that they are said to have lost the confidence of the House of Commons. The Sovereign also has a right to know the grounds on which that confidence is withdrawn— if withdrawn it has been; because that knowledge must guide the choice of future councillors. Finally, the Crown has a right to exercise its prerogative of appeal to the country by a dissolution, if the " want of con fidence " of the House of Commons is founded on rea sons of the justice of which the Royal mind may not be satisfied without a constitutional reference to the sense of the nation. The whole question as to the propriety of a dissolution depends on the question as to the pro priety, and necessity, of the measures on which Ministers are to go to the country. If those measures are proper and necessary, and if their authors are prepared to prove them so, what constitutional objection can there be to com pleting the demonstration,and then enabling the constituent body to affirm or reject their views ? Is there any person who believes these measures really important, and who does not believe they will be forwarded by the course which is taken by Ministers ? Is it the friends or the enemies of these measures who complain of that course ? If the friends, then we will acknowledge the justice of all that is urged by their enemies. If the enemies, then we will only say that we never expected their sanction ' • and that if Ministers had received it, there would be a strong presumption they had gone wrong. STANDARD.—We deny that there is any unwilling ness on the part of Sir Robert Peel or the Conservatives to meet a discussion of the Corn-laws, though, for the ex cellent reasons assigned by Lord Melbourne in the pre fixed passage, they might not choose to provoke one. It is very stupid, however, to surmise of Sir Robert Peel and his friends that they have an expectation of evading the threatened discussion. Thoy well know that, what ever may be the fate of Sir Robert Peel's motion, the ene mies of the public tranquillity will have both the power and the will to move the subject of the Corn-laws, and with just the same effect, whether they occupy seats on the right hand or on the left of the Speaker. If, in deed, the Conservatives had the power to prevent a discussion, the effect of which must be, as Lord Mel bourne says, to cause " a most violent struggle," to " stir society to its foundations, leaving behind every sort of bit terness and animosity," " to convulse society to its centre," "to excite man against man," " leaving behind the deepest feelings of discord and animosity," &c. &c. &c.—if, we say, the Conservatives possessed the power to stay this deluge of social evil, it would, no doubt, be their duty to exercise that power; but they have it not, and the utmost that they can hope to do is to limit the opportunities of those by whom the pest is let loose, for doing which the conduct and circumstances of the criminals, in matters not connected with the Corn laws, supplies the proper occasion. The Morning Chronicle, we are pleased to see, anticipates that the Mi nisters will be defeated on this night's motion :—" We do not mean to say that we think the monopolists cannot muster a majority. We expect they will. They are not amongst the most helpless classes of her Majesty's subjects. No Ministry has ever yet been encountered by so formidable a conspiracy of sinister interests." The sinister interests are the landed interest, the colonial in terest, the shipping interest, the anti-slavery interest, and—why should we suppress an interest once of some consideration in England ? the Protestant interest. Against these Ministers choose to array their force of money-jobbers, millowners, and Romanists ; but this does not fix the character of conspiracy upon the combined English and Protestant interests. This, however, by the way. COURIER.—A weak and incoherent attempt has been made by the Ministerial papers to justify the tenacious re tention of office by their patrons, in despite of the public opprobrium in which held, by an assimilation of their po sition with that of the illustrious Pitt, in his memorable struggle against the disgraceful coalition of Mr. Fox and Lord North in 1783. We should be little inclined to meddle with this wretched juggle of distorted facts and per verted reasoning, which otherwise in more parti cular detail has been successively and conclusively dis posed of by our contemporaries of the Standard, the Herald, and the Times, but that we have reason to believe Ministers have had the audacity . to impose this mendacious parallel, dressed up in specious form, upon their Royal Mistress, as their justification for retaining office against the declared inclinations and without the confidence of the people, and, moreover, by way of in dir,,,ct, but well understood, exhortation, that they should be regarded as victims of devotion to the royal will, whom, under similar circumstances, her Majesty's august grandfather, George 111., of glorious memory, would have upheld with unflinching firmness aganist the voice and the condemnation of Parliament. However for the time, these daring misrepresentations of history may be successful, we cannot doubt that the truth must ulti mately prevail when that illustrious lady, mistrusting the honesty of councillors by whom both royalty and the country have been so often and disgracefully misled and betrayed, shall apply the energies of her own Royal mind to the study of those exemplary passages in the reign of her noble grandfather. She will then find that an unprincipled faction, in one House of Parlia ment only, had coalesced to cripple the Royal preroga tive and to deprive the Monarch of the faculty of se lecting his own servants ; that the people at large were more indignant and decisive still in reproba tion of the nefarious project and conspiracy than their betrayed Sovereign ; that they earnestly and re peatedly prayed him and his Minister to deliver them from the scourge of an insolent majority and a packed House of Commons ; that that House was not dissolved until obstinately persisting to obstruct the public busi ness; and that, when dissolved, the people amply justi fied tie appeal of the Monarch and his Minister, as well as their own previous addresses in reprobation of the fac tion, by the return of an overwhelming majority of good men and true to a new Parliament. THE STOPPAGE OF THE SALOP AND NORTH WALES BANK. SHREWSDUET, TUESDAY EVENING.—The excitement consequent upon this unfortunate occurrence has consi derably increased since yesterday, and sufferers from a distance continue to arrive in this town hourly, in the hopes of finding the calamity of a less wide-spread and severe extent than rumour had assigned it. Rumour for once, however, had not exaggerated in this instance. The liabilities of the bank are far greater, and the probabili ties of their liquidation far less, than had been antici pated when the stoppage was first announced yesterday in a hand-bill, of which the following is a copy, affixed to the outer door of the establishment in the Market square : " SALOP AND NORTH WALES DANK. " Messrs. Price and Edwards deeply deplore the ne cessity they find themselves under of closing the bank and suspending their payments. This announcement is made, as may be supposed, with much pain, but a sense of duty to the public and themselves unfortunately ren ders it necessary. So far from having at any time con sidered the affairs of the bank in a state of confusion or derangement, Messrs. Price and Edwards have always been led to regard them as not merely satisfactory, but as flourishing and prosperous, and it was only upon a very recent investigation of the accounts that they had any reason to believe otherwise. After such investiga tion, and a deliberate consideration of the circumstances, the course they have now taken appeared to be the only proper one left them to adopt ; and whilst they un feignedly regret the inconvenience it will occasion to many parties, they beg to add, that every available ex ertion shall be used with a view to the fulfilEnent of their engagements._ "[Corn Market, Shrewsbury May 24, 1841 . " Many melancholy cases of 'hardship have come to light to-day, and others still more affecting are now looked for. So divided is public opinion as to the pro babilities of a favourable dividend, that in some instances four sovereigns have been refused for a 51. note, and in others 1001 . in notes have been off ere d f or 20 sovereigns. Report variously estimates the liabilities at from thirty five thousand to one hundred and fifty thousand pounds, Even supposing the latter to be the correct sum, it is thought that the private fortune of one of the survivin g partners would be more than equivalent to its disch arge, but for some recent family arrangement s , w hi ch are likely to lead to some heavy expensive litigation between that gentleman or his heirs, and the creditors of the estate. It is not impossible that the stoppage of this bank may have a material influence on the approaching election for c om Shrewsbury - , as the funds of the Conservative club w ere among the deposits. Messrs. Benjamin Disraeli and Tvellmlitone'be ha candidates n i n m h n e d T b o e r Tory before interest, en would m do ce their canvass among the susceptible electors of Salop. well thisfact REMARKS UT CAPTAIN WIXOM_ Captain Almeida appeared to be an intelligent man, and willing to give every information in his power. I implored of him to state nothing but what was positive truth, and he assured me that all he had said was fact ; and he deeply regretted that he knew nothing; of the President steamer being missing, or he would have spoken the steamer he saw. On my rigidly examining him, he declared that the steamer alluded to was as large as a frigate. After the most serious and mature deliberation, my own opinion is, that there are good grounds to suppose it was the President, and the probable reason for their not communicating may have been that they had pre viously fallen in with some vessel homeward or outward bound, and transferred their passengers and received sup plies from her and that they were making the best of their way to the nearest port in the Western Islands. Whether the President had a square maintopsail or not when she left New York I don't know ; hut that is no reason that they should not have fitted one when their engines, wheels, or boilers, became disabled, and they were lett to depend on their canvass alone. It will be necessary to ascertain where her Majesty's steamer Dee was on the 23d and 24th days of April, as I was informed at Lisbon that Vessel was on her passage home ffem the West Indies. When ascertained that it could not have been that vessel, then I am firmly of opinion it must have been the President ; and as they -were then in the parallel of latitude where the trade winds commence, it may be many weeks, from the date they were seen, till they arrive at any port. At the date they were seen their nearest port was in th e Island of Fayal, one of the Azores or Western Is lands, bearing from them per compass, E.N.E. 708 miles. The French Government should be written to •to ascertain whether they had any large steamers that were lilzely to be in the parallel of latitude and longitude where this vessel was seen, going out to or returning home from any foreign porti all this would greatly tend to.eomilk; to a conclusion who the stranger was. The Portrianiese brig Conde de Palma must have passed pretty close to the steamer during the night of tho 23d of April, and not having seen her can only be accounted for by the haziness of the night, and there being no ro.ooldigkt ; for when the Captain saw her again in the corning, bafore it became very clear, she was broad on the lee bow, and he told me she looked like an Indiaman under jury masts ; but as it bjcame clearer he most dis tinctly recognised her to be the same strange steamer they had seen the previous day, now bearing N.N.W. five or six miles, and under the same sail and circumstances in, every respect. Captain Almeida had been in Lisbon several days, whet-. a friend who was dining With him was deploring the supposed loss of the President steamer, when Capt. I.lmeilil immediately exclaimed, "I must have seen her, for we passed a krge steamer about ten days before we arrive(74 under canvass, withoat any smoke coining from her flianel or wheels in motion, and it is noted in the log look :" the log was sent to:, and it clearly proved to have been 4hserted ; and this fact was corroborated by iLe passengers, one of whom, an officer Of engineers, named Frietas Germanes, told Mr. Vanzeller that he had made a memorandum of it, which I was most anxious to ttaba, and called on him for that purpose, but he was a nfortunately absent, and I did not get it. We sailed the ttafne afternoon for England, Monday the 17th of May, &et day Capt. Almeida made the previous declaration. EXTRAORDINARY CASE OF CHILD STEALING. On Monday, the 17th of May, a Highland woman, earned Kirsty Ross, called at the house of Peter M‘Lach inr, sailor, Ann-s;:reet, Port Dundas, and requested lodgings. Mrs. M'Laehlan, observing she was a stranger, and unable almost to speak a word of English, bade her come in, and said -he could not give her lodgings her self, but-she would send a girl with her to a house in the neighbourhood, where she would be a3commodated. Next morning Ross returned, affecting to thank Mrs. - NI-Lachlan for this kindness, and asked if she might have breakfast p which being granted, she took the child, a boy four months old, and, fondling it for some time, said that sho would take a walk down to the house where she had passed the night, and pay her way, and get her umbrella—taking the infant along with her. Mrs. 41•Lachlan could not suspect any danger to her baby, by such-a proposal, and the woman was allowed to go. Tne time appearing long before she returned to break fast, a girl was sent down to the lodging-house, where she ,vas informed that the woman and child had loft gime time since. Surprised a little at this intelli gence, Mrs. M‘Lachlan thought she must have mistaken ner why back, and went out in search of her ; but soon all hope frain this cause forsook her, and she g ave wa y to the most poignant grief for the false confidence which m b e placed in the base woman who had robbed her of her child. The whole of Port Dundas and Cowcaddens wore soon informed of the fact—but still it was believed that the child would be restored before nightfall. But no; nothing transpired to unravel this mysterious affair Next morning, a gentleman who lives on Garnet-hill, having heard of the lamentable occurrence, called on the bereaved family, and caused bills to be printed, and made a minute investigation into the circumstances. lie was informed that a Highland woman, who lives in the neighbourhood, had said that she thought she knew the thief of the child, and attempted to assuage the moth er ' s grief, by assuring her that no injury would be sustained by the infant, for as soon as the woman's purpose was serVed it would be restored. This person he subjected to a most rigid examination, and elicited from her, with much, difficulty, some traces of the flight of the heartless fugi tive. He learned from the keeper of the Round Toll, at Black Quarry, that a Highland woman, with an infant ocrapped in a tartan shawl, had inquired, on Wednes ela.y afternoon, for the Aberfoyle carrier, and on learn ing he was not past, walked forward on the road, As fills was in the direction where she had formerly been a servant, Ewan Kennedy, a Highland man, was imme diately despatched after the carts ; but, being five hours behind them in starting, it was not expected that he would overtake them before they reached Aberfoyle, a distance of thirty miles. From inquiries, however, which ho..made on the road, he did not find the Round Toll man's story corroborated. No woman had been seen on the Abarfoyle carts, and, as it was excessively wet, he was shout to lodge for the night in Strathblane. From some information which he obtained there, however, he was in duced to pursue his journey by way of Drummond, and on arriving there matters began to brighten. The story of the capture was there before him, and the whole town turned out to assist him in the pursuit. The woman was known there ; her name was Kirsty Ross, and had left th-place a few months ago, pretending to be with child to a shepherd of the name of M'Neil. In the direction of the farm where M'Neil was employed in the capa city of a serva:.t, rill bent their way, and there theculprit v% as found feeding the child with a spoon. No language can express the astonishment of the shepherd when this discovery of the treachery of his quondam sweetheart was revealed to his wondering eyes. The woman herself was by no means so much affected, and as for the poor iiifant, every eye was directed to it to see how it had fared during its long journey ; and, to tell the truth, there did not appear to be much wrong with it. It had now been throe days absent from its mother, and subjected to spoon meat, which it had never tasted before ; but it ap peared what it wanted in its mother's milk was made up to it by the pure air of the Highland hills. Before the arrival of the p a rty w h o a pp re h e nded the culprit, s h e h a d I) %len to the ruling elder of the parish, and said that the child w aB ApNeirs, and requested to be subjected to Church censure in order that she might have the privi lege of baptism on the approaching Sabbath. It is pro lxmt-la„Nleeu, he r a_.ias object in all this was to drive a marriage with she seemed to be pretty expert in doing business, it is not unlikely this might have ' been consum mated, had her detection been a little longer delayed.- -Glasgow Post. A CLERICAL OFFENDER. At a seaport town on the west coast of Scotland, there lived, until within the last few weeks, a clergyman con nected with the Established Church, but not one of the beneficed ministers of the place, his cure of souls not being blessed with an endowment. The clergyman of whom we write was quite an exemplary man in his out ward walk, a rampant Non-intrusiomst, and run after as a model of piety by all the devout ladies in the locality. None ever dreamed that one so holy could yield to the lusts of the flesh ; and great, therefore, was the outcry raised a few weeks ago, when it became noised abroad that his Reverence was on terms of improper familiarity with a married woman of doubtful reputation, who lived apart from her husband. The THE SUN, LONDON, PRIDAY, MAY 28, 1841. godly ladies, turning up the whites of their eyes, declared the tale to be a foul scandal, propagated by the emissaries of Satan against one of his most powerful ad versaries, and when his Reverence was himself appealed t^, he declared before God that he was innocent, and da red his enemies to the proof. A respectable medical gentleman had chanced to mention the story in conver sation; and he was immediately assailed with the wrath of all the petticoats of the place, who were continually running after his Reverence. An action of damages was ordered to be raised by the clergyman for defamation of character, and the preliminary of sending a lawyer's let ter had been gone through, when some additional dis closures put a stop to the action. The Presbytery of the district had found it necessary to make inquiries into the scandal against their reverend brother, and witnesses were, we understand, prepared to prove that he had taken lodgings for the frail female in a neighbouring watering place, where he was in the regular practice of visiting her—that sho had re cently given birth to a child, but not until every effort had been used, by means of drugs, to procure abortion, which, however, only succeeded to the extent of atte nuating her own feeble frame, and led to the death of her offspring—that the father of the child was the clergyman to whom we have alluded. When the Presbytery had assembled for the purpose of entering upon the inquiry, a written acknowledgment of guilt, and expressing great contrition for the sin which he had committed, was laid before them from the reverend offender, which, of course, put a stop to all further proceedings. Within a day or two thereafter, the reverend culprit disappeared from the place, and is understood to have sailed for one of the British colonies. The affair, as may readily be supposed, has created no small sensation in the gossiping commu nity where it took place.—Glasgow Argus, TORY LIES. TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN. Sm,—The Tory cause must needs be a very bad one, when the party deem it necessary, in order to prop it up, to have recourse to the most barefaced and wilful mis-statements, or rather I should say, atrocious false hoods, as daily appear in their Journals, both morning and evening, by which their country friends, who have no means of ascertaining the real state of the case, are so constantly misled. As an instance, take the following account, furnished by the Morning Post of Monday last to its fashionable readers. It is there stated that, on the occasion of the late Draiving-room, as Lords Melbourne and John Russell were proceeding to the Palace, they were received by the very great number of most respect able persons standing near to York House, with the most marked and determined hostility, and that for a full hour they were obliged to bear the pelting of the pitiless storm ! ! As one of the lookers-on at this very spot, I take upon myself wholly and entirely to deny this most impudent assertion. So far from this being the case, during the few minutes, and not the full hour, as the Tory Post affirms, that the carriages of these Noble Lords were detained in the line near to York House, they were approached by the persons then and there as sembled, when the Noble Viscount and his fellow labourer in the people's cause were • most cordially and enthusiastically welcomed by repeated, long, and loud cheers, and which continued until they turned into the Court-yard leading to the Palace. Lord Palmerston was also well received, as he deserves to be, for his straight forward and manly conduct on all occasions. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, ONE OF THE LOOKERS-ON NEAR TO YORK HOUSE ON THE QUEEN'S BIRTHDAY. IRELAND.-GENERAL ELECTION The question now for Irishmen to consider is, whether they will pass under Ole Caudine Forks, and surrender the liberty they have alhieved to their avowed and deter mined enemies. A change of administration in England would be a mighty grievanee. To Ireland it would be destructive. This all feel, and, accordingly, we are all prepared for the struggle. We repeat it deliberately, we shall not only hold our own, but add considerably to our numerical strength. Unfortunate Colonel Bruen. notwithstanding all his sacrifices of money and temper, will lose the caunty of Carlow, and no mistake. He knows it, and though he may screw his courage to the sticking place, he will go to the hustings with the feelings of a losing gambler. Indeed, he has already gambled a very good fortune on Carlow. Heaven be merciful to him ! Colonel Thomas, it is understood, has already sounded his retreat from Kinsale. Five or six thousand pounds is enough to throw even at such a beautiful borough as Kinsale. Emerson Tennent—our old friend Fuscus Amyntas— has got tired of Belfast, we hear, or, what is more likely, Belfast has got tired of Emerson Tennent. He cannot —even if he was in funds—stand another brush. With regard to Mr. Dunbar, we imagine that gentleman will find, on comparing notes, that he has little chance for Belfast, " at the present momentous crisis." If Ned Litton should be mad enough again tc stand for Coleraine, he must post the coals to some purpose, that we can tell him. He is not yet—nor is it likely he ever will be—Solicitor -General. And this puts us in mind of the Sorry Sergeant. Ban don has been kind to him—but he has done nothing for Bandon. It is true he only went into Parliament to work fur himself ; but though he did work and sweat, he has clone nothing. It is possible, however, that he will try his luck again. In for a penny in for a pound. At all events, he will not be permitted .to walk over the course. Portarlington will be fought for, and Mr. Dawson Darner will have to 'resign. He had no business at all to go into Parliament as a Tory. He was a sort of Li beral in former times, and we wore willing to take him. —Dublin Evening Post. Mr. HILL said that the other party had had since August to consider the matter, and this was the first time that such an insufficiency had been hinted at. The proof required was ex ceedingly long, as it related to lands severed from an estate in the time of Queen Elizabeth, which then had been of no great value, butwhich now from the mineralswhich had been discovered under the land became of immense value, and one of the wit nesses who had proved the boundary of the land in question, had died since the trial. _ _ . The Soucuon-GzerRAL asked until Saturday to consi der the question. Whatever their Lordships thought right he would do. _ _ _ Mr. HILL hoped the Court would gin him the costs of the reference. . The SOLICITOR-GENERAL objected. They had on the first meeting given distinct notice of the defendant's intention to appeal to the Court, and if the plaintiff after that chose to go on it must be at his own risk. Lord Chief Justice TarKDAL suggested that that question had better be left to the Muter, to which suggestion both par ties acceded. _ _ _ With respect to the amended plea it was ordered that the de endant should put in his amended plea in a fortnight, and that it should be a plea issuabla so as to bring on the case for trial at the next assizes. were perfectly satisfied of the propriety of the course adopted on that occasion. Several of the relatives and friends of unfortunate people who had been sacrificed lived in his neighbourhood, and were most anxious to have their case investigated. Mr. LABOUCHERE, who was almost inaudible, was understood to say that the vessel alluded to was not an English vessel, and interference with their regulations, however desirable, was a matter of very great difficulty. To the particular questions that had been put by the Hon. Gentleman, it was obviously impossible for him to give any satisfactory answer. Mr. FLEMING presented petitions from three parishes in Southampton, praying the House to address her Majesty to remove from her confidence her present Mi nisters, in whose conduct and policy they could no longer feel either confidence or safety.—(Opposition cheers.) Mr. MARK PHILIPS said he hoped the forms of the House, and the courtesy of the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) would permit him to put a question to the Right lion. Baronet respecting a statement made by him in a recent speech, in which he was pleased to refer to a conversation which he had had with a gentleman named Ashworth, one of a deputation to the Right Hon. Baronet from the Chamber of Commerce in Man chester. He wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet whether he had since received any information which had led him (Sir Robert Peel) to the conclusion that the statement which he made was erroneous, especially when he had referred to a pamphlet placed in his hand by one of the deputation, as one which they wished him to peruse, as expressing their opinions. Sir ROBERT PEEL said that he had not received any communication on the subject from any one of the parties.—(Cheers.) If he had received any direct communication from them, he would have immediately returned an answer, and if they had shown him any misstatement he had made, he should at once have cor rected it. But he had not received any such com munication. There were letters in public papers, but .the originals were not addressed to him. If it were wished he would state his recollection of the inter view with the greatest pleasure.—(Loud cries of " No, no.") Then he would only say that if he did receive any such communication he would immediately return an answer.—(Cheers.) THE NATIONAL CRISIS. The present is not be considered as merely a Ministe rial crisis, as the customary changing from Tory to Whig, or from Whig back to Tory—though the existence of the Whig Government may be involved in it—but as a national epoch ; as the first authoritative acknowledg ment, by the Sovereign and her Ministers, of the great principle that there is no longer to be protection of any one class at the price of injustice to all the other classes. This, at least, is the light in which we would fain view the measures proposed by the Ministers ; narrow, and perhaps imperfect, in their actual being, but pointing to mighty results. It is peculiarly satisfactory to Radical Reformers to be able to say, once in seven years, that their old friends and allies the Whigs, have really done something to redeem their character,—that they have "deserved well of their country." They have shown, at the eleventh hour, that which, though a tardy, looks like a genuine conversion, since it is displayed in an amendment of conduct. The precise date of any political conversion is generally of tri vial importance in itself, and the motives of public men, placed in embarrassing circumstances, will hardly ever bear to be too nicely scrutinised. Let their deeds speak for them. The Ministers have not advanced far ; that was perhaps impracticable, if they wished to carry any imposing force along with them ; but they have moved in the right direction, under the now fairly unfurled banner of Free Trade, and in the strength of a good cause. They have offered the country a fair oppor tunity of getting rid of some of the most galling and per nicious imposts that ever indirectly crippled the energies, and directly robbed a people. They have made a formal assault upon the most oppressive and severely felt of those monopolies which plunder the wealthy and starve the poor—namely, the Bread-tax and the Sugar-tax. The first duty of the people is energetically to seize and im prove the occasion offered—to be up and to be doing ! Ta it's Magazine. SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE. (LLOYD'S.) NOTICE TO MARINERS AND OTHERS. The following has been received at Lloyd's, dated Office of Committee of Privy Council for Trade, Whitehall, May 26, 1841. Sir,—l am directed by the Lords of the Committee of Privy Council for Trade to acquaint you, for the information of the merchants trading . to Buenos Ayres, that the Government of Buenos Ayres has issued a decree, in consequence of the war which has been declared against the Argentine Republic by the State of Uruguay, against all vessels not licensed by the Go vernment of the Argentine Confederation. I am, Sir your obedient servant, (Signed) DENIS LE MARCHANT, Secretary at Lloyd's. LAW INTELLIGENCE; COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, May 27. WOOD V. mozotwoon. Mr. HILL ( in continuation from our Paper of yesterday) said— He had been so completely taken by surprise at the trial that he had made no struggle against the case as it appeared, although he had expressly reserved to himself the right of appealing to their Lordships hereafter, because he felt convinced that there must be evidence in existence which would enable kim to dispute the validity of the deed, which on the trial had so completely taken them by unwise, and of the existence of which he had been unaware. Under these circumstances, seeing the defendant had been so com pletely taken by surprise, he trusted that on payment of costs the Court would grant a new trial. 'With regard to the refer ence at the first meeting, the plaintiff had been made distinctly aware of the intention of the defendant to make the present application to the Court, and no time had been lost in so doing. Their Lordships having consulted together, Lord Chief Justice TYNDAL said the only question for the Court to determine was whether the defendant had really been taken by surprise at the trial by the production of the deed in question. In cases where a party was really taken by . surprise, where like the present a large amount of property was involved, and where nice points of conveyancing might arise, the Court felt itself bound to interpose its authority to enable parties to submit their case fairly to a Jury, and to remove the case afterwards into a Court of Error, if such a proceeding should be thought expedient. Now it did appear to him from what passed at the trial that the whole conduct of the case was a surprise upon the defendant, and that he had no reason to expect that any deed would be produced, and that therefore the defendant was entitled to have an opportunity of laying his case before a Jury in relation to a document so important to the rights of prop er ty. H e was t h ere f ore o f opinion that , the rule for a new trial must be made absolute on payment of costs. At the same time he thought no blame attached to the plaintiff for withholding the deed from the knowledge of the defendant, as he had a perfect right to do so. Mr. HILL said that he thought the last few words which had fallen from his Lordship vt ould afford the plaintiff more pleasure than the decision of the Court would cause him pain, for he felt most acutely the imputations attempted to be cast on him in th e affidavits on the other side for withholding the deed. As a new t r i a l h a d b een gran ted, he hoped their Lordships would impose terms on the defendant to make him admit the l ong p roo f s w hich were tendered at the trial as to the identity of the land in question. The SOLICITOR.GENERAL said he had no wish to raise any doubt where none existed, but if he recollected rightly he was not quite satisfied at the trial as to the accuracy of the proof. Mr. HILL again urged that the admission should be mad e part of the t erms on Which a new trial should be granted. The SoLiciToit-GENERAL said that from the anxiety dis played by the other side, there was evidently something to be made by the admission. However, he was in the hands of the COW. He had no obj ect i on to the admission of all documents, IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF LORDS, May 27. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on. the Wool sack at Five o'Clock. The Earl of REDESDALE presented petitions from London and Westminster ; Mortlock, in Derbyshire ; and from the Protestant Association, against any further grant to the College of Maynooth. Lord STANLEY presented several petitions against Church Extension. Petitions against any alteration in the Corn-laws were presented by the Earl of Harewood, the Earl of Glen gall, and Earl Cawdor. THE VICTORIA PARK. On the motion of Lord DUNCANNON the Victoria Park Bill was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time to-morrow. _ _ _ The Earl of ROSEBERY presented a petition from Stirling against any alteration in the Scottish system of banking ; also a petition from a place in Stirlingshire in favour of the commercial policy of the Government. The Earl of WARWICK presented 150 petitions from places in Warwickshire against any alterations in the Corn-laws: The Noble Earl proceeded to say that these petitions were of a different nature from the petitions presented on the other side of the question. The names and the abodes of the parties who had signed them would be forthcoming whenever it might be required ; and he would defy any one to say the same thing of the petitions against the Corn-laws. These last were hawked about the country, or left for signature on the road between Boston and Birmingham, when the names of children, and of the whole household were affixed to them. _ _ The Earl of STRADBROKE presented 93 petitions from Essex against any alteration m the Corn-laws ; and several petitions to the same effect from places in Suffolk. The Earl of DARTMOUTH presented a petition from Birmingham, respectably signed, against the Jewish De claration Bill. The Marquis of DOWNSHIRE presented several pe titions from the county of Down against Church patron age. The Earl of WINCHILSEA presented several peti tions from Lincolnshire, numerously signed, against any alteration in the Corn-laws ; and a petition to the same effect from the Nottingham Agricultural Association. Lord SONDES presented several petitions from places in Norfolk to the same effect. The Duke of SUTHERLAND presented a petition from the royal Borough of Wick, praying for an alte ration in the Corn-laws. _ The Earl of BUTE presented a petition from'the Cor poration of London in favour of the Jewish Declaration Bill, and a petition from Newport to the same effect. The Noble Earl then gave notice that he would move the second reading of the Bill on Thursday next. The Earl of CARLISLE presented a petition in fa vour of an alteration of the Corn-laws, and a more liberal system of commercial policy, as most beneficial to our own population, and more just towards foreign nations. The Marquis of NORMANBY presented petitions from places in Scotland, praying for an alteration in the Corn-laws. The Earl of MOUNTCASHEL presented several petitions from places in the county of Antrim, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. On the motion of the Earl of DEVON, the Order of the Day for going into Committee on the Petty Sessions Bill was discharged. The Earl of RODEN presented several petitions from Presbyterian congregations in Ulster, against lay patron age in the Church of Scotland. The Bishop of LICHFIELD presented a petition against any encouragement of idolatrous worship in India. The Bishop of LONDON presented a petition from Bristol, signed by 10,000 inhabitants, praying for the suppression of the doctrines of the Socialists, which the petitioners stated to be unchristian and immoral ; also a petition from a place in Essex against any further grant to the College of Maynooth. ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONERS ACT AMENDMENT BILL. The amendments made in this Bill in the House of Commons were agreed to. The House then adjourned. HO US. - OF COJMONS, May 27. The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four o'Clock. _ _ The Burnley Small Debts Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. The Newcastle-upon-Tyne Improvement Bill was read a third time and passed, after a few observations from Sir CHARLES GREY, who begged to record his entire opposition to the whole Bill, but would not divide the House upon it. The St. Helen's Small Debts Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. On the motion of Mr. LOWTHER, the Dewsbury and Leeds Roads Bill was read a third time, and passed. On the motion of Mr. B. WOOD the Southwark Im provement Bill was read a third time and passed. Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice that on bringing up the Report of the Belfast and Cavehill Railway Bill on Fri day next he should move to insert certain clauses. Lord C. MANNERS presentsd two petitions in fa vour of Church Extension from the County of Leicester. Mr. lIINDLEY presented several petitions, one of which was from an agricultural district of Buckingham shire, praying for the repeal of the Corn-laws. Sir E. FILMER presented three petitions from places in the western district of Kent, praying for Church Extension. Mr. BROTHERTON presented sixteen petitions, praying for the repeal of the Corn-laws. Gen. SHARPE presented a . petition from Dumfries, in favour of the revision of the import duties proposed by the Government. Lord J. STUART presented nine petitions from Ayr shire, praying for a revision of the import duties, espe cially for a repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. RICE presented a petition from Dover to the same effect,. Mr. DARBY presented two petitions front Sussex against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Petitions were presented by Mr. Grote from the ward of Bishopsgate Without ; by Mr. Fort, from Clitheroe ; by Lord Dalmeny, from 1,700 inhabitants of Stirling and other places ; by Mr. Villiers, from six agricultural pa rishes of Buckinghamshire, rom Wendover, Hunting don, Board of Guardians Of Stourbridge Union, Mayor and Corporation of Walsall, School Teachers in the Potteries, Bedwith, Warrington (working men), Notting ham ; and by Mr. Bernard, from Greenwich, all pray ing for a total repeal of the Corn-laws. Petitions against the Corn-laws were presented by Mr. Christopher, from fifty parishes in Lincolnshire ; by Mr. Gaskill, from Wenlock ; by the Earl of Surrey, from Little Hampton, in Sussex ; by Lord Worsley, from eighteen places in Lincolnshire, praying for pro tection for home-grown corn ; by General Lygon, from Worcester, and by Mr. W. Buncombe from twenty places in Yorkshire. Lord DALMENY presented a petition from the Town Council of Stirling against any interference with the Scotch system of banking. The Earl of SURREY presented a petition from Sussex against the dissolution of the Gilbert Unions. Mr. ELLIOT presented a petition from Croydon, in favour of the commercial measures of Government. Ml. G. BYNG presented a petition from a place in Middlesex, praying for a total abolition of the Corn-laws. praying Sergeantfor j a A r e c p K e a l s cl o f N t h p r e e C s e o n rn t e - d l a w several petitions from places in Tipperary, aginst any alteration in the Corn taws. Mr. O'CONNELL presented several petitions nume rously signed from Dublin, in favour of a fixed duty .on corn ; also two petitions from Buckinghamshire, praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws ; and twelve petitions to the same effect from Manchester and the neighbouring districts. Lord SANDON presented petitions from Liverpool in favour of the Corn-laws. Mr. HUME presented several petitions from different parts of England and Ireland against the Corn-laws. The King's Lynn Port Bill was read a third time and passed. MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS. Messengers from the Lords brought down certain Bills. Mr. DUGDALE presented a petition from Birming ham, in favour of the resolution about to be proposed to the House by the Hon. Member for Tamworth. The substance of the petition was, that the petitioners vie w ed with alarm th e d e t er mination of her Majesty's Ministers to adhere to office in direct violation of the Constitution, and notwithstanding successive defeats in the House of Commons, and the manifestly increasing withdrawal of the confidence of the country. They deprecated the effort on the part of her Majesty's Ministers to raise a popular excitement by the agitation of the Corn law question—(Loud cheering from the Oppo sition bench es )— a t the present juncture of aflairs, and most earnest l y reques ted the House to vindicate the Constitution of th e cou ntry by: supporting the motion of which Sir R o b er t P ee l h a d gi ven notice. The petition w as signed by 2,740 of the most respectable individuals in Birmingham. " No doubt," said the Hon. Member, " ten times the number would have signed it if sufficient time had been allowed." An Hoii. M ENDER begged to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, whether the attention of her Majesty's Government had been called to a most lamentable occurrence which had taken place a short time since_namely, the loss of the William Brown emigrant vessel. He thought that measures should be taken to make it compulsory on all Captains of emigrant vessels to be provided with boats, and other means of safety. It appeared from the investigation that had taken place, that the lives of sixteen unfortunate people had been sacrificed in consequence of the neglect to provide such means. He wished to know what informa tion her Majesty's Ministers had of the affair, and if they VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE. Sir ROBERT PEEL, being called upon by the Speaker, then rose, and said,—Sir, I shall proceed without a word of needless apology, or elaborate preface, to address my self to the subject of the motion of which I have given notice for this evening. Sir, when on Thursday last the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer intimated that it was his intention to proceed with the business of the Government entertained a strong im pression that after the defeats to which the Government had been subject, defeats as I think indicative of the withdrawal of the confidence of this House, indicative of the inutility of their party to give effect to measures which they deemed important for the public welfare—l did feel after that notice, unac companied by the slightest expression of the ge neral views of the Government, that it was im possible for me to acquiesce in the propriety of that course, without taking some step, which should bring to issue the question, whether the Government did or did not possess the confidence of the House of Commons. Sir, I infinitely preferred to bring this ques tion to an issue in the most direct and manly manner, —(Cheers)—by a vote on which the sense of the House could be taken. I might have resorted to other proceed ings—l might have obstructed the course of Government measures of great importance to the commerce and indus try of this country. I mighthave thwarted the Government with obstructions to the grants of supply—l might have taken the course of proposing merely the postponement of some important bills, and thus in an indirect manner have tested the opinion of the House, but I thought it infinitely better on the first day, on which i the forms of the House permitted, in this direct manner to bring under the consideration of the House of Commons, whether or not it gives to the present Government its confidence. Sir, the resolution which I mean to propose, affirms two propositions. The first is, " That her Majesty's Minis ters do not sufficiently possess the confidence of the House of Commons to enable them to carry through the House measures which they deem of essential im portance to the public welfare." The second is, " That their continuance in office under such cir cumstances is at variance with the spirit of the Constitution."—(Loud Cheers.) Sir, my duty is to establish these two propositions; and if I do ,establish them, I will have a fair right to claim the assent of the House to my resolutions. My first proposition is— That her Majesty's Ministers do not possess the con fidence of the House of Commons. Sir, is it necessary for me to enter into details ?—(Loud cheers.) Will any man affirm, after the experience, not of one or two nights, but after long and continued experience—will any man affirm that her Majesty's Ministers do possess that confidence of the House of Commons which enables them to carry through those measures which they deem essential for the public welfare ? I am not speaking of occasional defeats, of casual obstructions to the public business. I speak of the general course which the Government have been obliged to take. I speak of occasions on which measures had been postponed almost without excuse. I speak of occasions when the measures of Government had been modified in deference to the wishes of those who opposed them. I am speaking of their failure to carry into effect those measures which they deemed it essential to recommend to this House. Sir, I am not speaking of one or two failures. I am not speaking of obstructions offered to a Government on its first formation.—(Cheers.) I am drawing my in ferences from the general events which have of late taken place—from their success in respect of legislation, and the degree of support they meet with from the House of Commons. Sir, I am speaking immediately in refe rence to the defeats they met with lately, and more espe cially that one which put a stop . to their finan cial administration, which following other de feats which they have recently sustained induce me now to come forward. Sir, I say that those repeated de feats afford decisive proof that the first proposition is true—that the Government does not possess the confi dence of the House of Commons in such a degree as to enable them to give effect to measures which they deem essential to the welfare of the country. if. that proposition be true, then I say that their continuance in office is at variance with the principles and spirit of the Constitution.—(Cheers.) I presume I shall hardly be called upon to define what I mean by the spirit of the Constitution. I do not speak of those theories which refer to some combination of monarchy, of aristocracy, and of democracy, each armed with offensive and defen sive instruments to keep each other in check. Sir, I speak of that system of Parliamentary Government which has prevailed since the accession of the House of Ha nover—(Loud cheers)—that the Ministers of the Crown shall have the confidence of the House of Commons. Sir, I speak of that sentiment which has prevailed during the whole of that period—in accordance with the just expression made use of by the Noble Lord whom I am glad to see opposite (Lord John Rus sell) in his able and dispassionate view of the British Constitution—" That the centre of gravity of the state is placed in the House of Commons."—(Cheers.) When I use the term Constitution I speak of that system of government which has maintained equilibrium be tween monarchy and democracy; of that system of go vernment which has harmonised the actions of those apparently conflicting elements—of that system of go vernment which by the constant, unseen, and almost unfelt interposition of slight checks has prevented the necessity of securing to the use of ex treme instruments and the collision of antagonist powers. That is the spirit of the Constitution of which I speak—that is the spirit of the Constitution which ap pears to me violated by the continuance in office of Mi nisters who have not the confidence of the House of Commons.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, I say that my impressions on that, subject are confirmed by reference to all historical precedent having analogy to this House—that they are confirmed by the authority of all eminent writers and all statesmen of the first practical experience in the ad ministration of affairs. They have also a melancholy confirmation from the actual experience of the positive evils which arise when another system of Goverment is substituted for that which has hitherto prevailed. They are confirmed, I say, by the course of historical precedents. I look to the period which all writers have stated as the period from which we may date this neces sary system of Parliamentary control—from the period of the accession of the House of Hanover, and I say, recurring to the history of administrations, you will find invariably, with scarce an exception, that the Minister, whatever may have been his power, however confirmed his in fluence, however long the duration of his au thority, —you will find that the Minister, when de prived of the confidence of the House of Commons, has: thought it incumbent on him to do ho mage to the principles of representative Government, advocated by his expulsion as Minister of the Crown. I begin with Sir Robert Walpole. He held office for the long period of twenty-five years. If I mistake not, he was appointed in the year 1715, and the termination of his power took place about 100 years from the period at which I am speaking, 1741. Sir Robert Walpole was dispossessed of power under these circumstances. A motion was made by Mr. Pulteney, to the effect that the Ministry had lost the confidence of the House of Com mons. That motion was negatived in favour of the Mi nister by a majority of 3, Walpole being in a minority in the Chippenham Election—the determination of elections chiefly influenced the party spirit of the time, and it was thought a convenient mode of testing the strength of a Ministry—notwithstanding that slight majority which he had on the question of confidence. After twenty-five years of authority, Sir Robert Walpole relinquished office. In 1782 Lord North yielded to the same influence. In the year 1782 two motions were made, the one I think by Sir George Rouse, and the other by Lord George Cavendish; the one motion declared it impossible for the House of Commons to place any confidence in the Go vernment, the other was couched in terms nearly similar to the present. The one motion was negatived by a majority of nine, the other by a majority of ten, but Lord North felt it to be his duty, notwithstanding this majority, to yield to the necessity implied by the with drawing of the confidence of the House of Commons, and his authority then came to a close. In the year 1804 Lord Sidmouth, having had frequent majorities to a great extent, but that majority being reduced to 37, Lord Sid mouth thought it his duty to re tire, and considered the majority of 37 to be indicative of the withdrawal of the confidence of the House of Commons. In 1812, on the first formation of Lord Liverpool's Ad ministration, on the motion of my Noble Friend, Lord Wharncliffe, then Mr. Stuart Wortley, a resolution was come to by the House of Commons that a more extensive Administration should be formed, that majority was decisive. With resp ect to the fa te o f the Administr a ti on of Lord Liverpool, and that Noble Earl resigned his trust into the hands of his Sovereign. An attempt was made to form another Administration ; but that proving ineffective, the Administration of Lord Liverpool was placed again in power. I think the next Adminis tration which yielded to the influence of public opinion, expressed by the House of Commons, was the Administration presided over by my Noble Friend, the Duke of Wellington in 1830. On the meeting of Par liament, on the question whether or no the Civil List should be referred to a Committee of the House of Com mons, we were defeated by the combination of par ties entertaining opposite opinions, and the House of Commons resolved by a majority of 39 to refer the consideration of the Civil List to a Committee of the House of Commons. I felt that that majority was sig nificant that we had not the confidence of the House of Commons. We felt it to be our duty to retire, but I think the Right Honourable Gentleman will recollect that his opinion anticipated ours.—(Hear, hear.) I do recollect that immediately after that motion the Right Hon. Gentleman, entertaining, I think, great and rational opinions—opinions which were in conformity with the opinions of many others, did upon that occasion,chrectly after the division, inquire from me, whether, after such an expression of the opinion of the House, it was the intention of Ministers to retain their places, and to carry on the Government of the country ?—(Hear, hear.) Sir J. HOBHOUSE rose amidst loud cries of " Order, order." We understood the Right Hon. Gentleman to say that since then he had made an apology to the House, for putting what he thought a very improper question.—(Great laughter and cheering.) Sir R. PEEL—Sir, at the time I certainly did not complain of any want of courtesy on the part of the Right Honourable Gentleman, nor did I suppose that it was done in any hostile manner ; and if I had enter tained any such opinion, I should not have referred to it at this time.—(Hear.) I did not entertain the opinion that there was anything eircourteous or liable on the ques tion of the Rigfit Hon. Gentleman ; but be that as it may, the Right Hon. Gentleman's opinion was confirmed by that of the House of Commons. It was not only the opinion of the House of Commons, but Lord Brougham in vain attempted to appease the impatience of the House of Commons on that day. My own opinion was so strong upon the matter, that the very next day I signified my intention to the Crown to retire from its service, and that very night, after the Right Honourable Gentleman had put the question, which never excited an angry feel ing in my mind, Lord Brougham said to the House of Commons, " Surely after what has taken place it will be better to permit the Ministers of the Crown to have time for consideration ?" When the proposal was made to appoint the Committee on the Civil List on the instant, Lord Brougham said. " Wait till to-mor row—don't do it now— don't appoint this hostile Committee"—but Lord Brougham's advice was over-ruled, and such was the impatience of the, House of Commons to proceed to some decisive act, which would imply the downfal of the Government, on that very night the Committee on the Civil List was appointed—on the very night on which we were left in the minority. The next Ministry, which also yielded' to public opinion, as expressed in the House of Com mons, was that over which I myself presided for a short time in the year 1834. I did carry on for some time an unequal contest against the powers leagued against me ; but I must say that the first time there was a posi tive obstruction to any acts of legislation, at that first time I felt it to be my duty to retire ; and I would beg to remind the Noble Lord that on that occasion, at a much earlier period, he implied his opinion that I, by holding power, was acting in a manner ;injurious to the public interest, by not having the confidence of the House of Com mons. So far back as the 2d of March, the Noble Lord had observed, that no Ministry had ever stood before, with respect to the House of Commons, in so extraordinary a position ; and the Noble Lord ob serving the evil influence which my attempt was pro ducing on public affairs, said that he was daily leaning more and more to the opinion that we ought to revert as speedily as possible to the old practice of the Constitution—(Loud Opposition cheers) — and that while persons exercised the powers of the Crown in whom the House of Commons reposed no confidence, they imposed the necessity of making motions most in convenient and perhaps unconstitutional, such as that which had been made for the removal of a Noble Friend of mine who had been appointed to the Rus sian Embassy. The Noble Lord said to us, You i by remaining n : ,power are alone responsible for any de lays or obstructions, or for any offence to which by your acts the Crown is exposed, and the Noble Lord concluded by stating his opinion that we ought to revert to the old practice of the Constitu tion—that the Ministers of the Crown ought to possess the confidence of the House of Commons. — (Loud cheers) And to show how little the Right Hon. Gentleman thought that he had given him personal of fence by the remark which he 'had made in 1830, the Right Hon. Gentleman in 1835 shared the opinion of the Noble Lord, and in 1835 told me that the fault did not rest with the Opposition but with myself, and that the course I was pursuing would be the fruitful source of more evils, for that nothing could be a more fruitful source of evil than for the Minister of the Crown to endeavour to govern by a minority of the House of Commons—(Loud Opposition cheers)—and Sir, being fully sensible of the diffi culties of my position, as soon as the Noble Lord had carried a resolution implying that no adjustment of the tithe question would be satisfactory, except an adjust ment consonant with the views of the Noble Lord, as in dicated in the resolution, I did not wnit for the further progress of the Bill, but considering that determination as an indication that I did not possess the confidence of the House of Commons—seeing in it an obstruction to an important measure, I resigned office.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) I did not do so when I was defeated on the question of the election of the Speaker ; I did not do so when I was defeated on the Address, but the mo ment I found the progress of legislation was interrupted that moment I resigned.—(Cheers.) In speaking of Administrations which have yielded to the authority of the House of Commons, I have omitted to mention a case in which the precedent appears at first sight to be somewhat different ; I mean in 1780, when Mr. Pitt, notwihstanding the adverse votes of the House of Commons, remained in office, and continued to hold office, until he could take the opinion of the people.—(Loud cheers from the Minis terial benches.) But I contend, Sir, that the circumstances of that case are in no degree analogous to the present. The circumstances of the contest between Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox in 1783 were these. On the 17th December, 1783, the Bill which had been brought in by Mr. Fox for the regulation and management of the affairs of India, was rejected in the House of Commons. On the 17th December, on the very same day, the House of Com mons resolved to go into a Committee of the whole House on the state of the nation on the Monday following. On the 19th of December the Government of Mr. Fox and Lord North was dissolved, and on the 19th December Mr. Pitt was appointed Minister. But before Mr. Pitt could take his place as Minister in the House of Commons, an address to the Crown was moved not to dissolve Parlia ment. At the outset of the Government before even there was time for the re-election of Mr. Pitt, his seat being vacated by the acceptance of office, an address to the Crown was moved not to dissolve Parliament, and his Majesty was earnestly entreated to hearken to the advice of his faithful Commons, and not to the secret advices of particular persons who may have private interests of their own separate from the true interest of his Majesty and his people.—(Hear, hear.) An adjournment of Parliament took place. Parliament re-assembled on the 12th of Ja nuary, 1784, and before any one act of the Government could be submitted to the consideration of the House of Commons. On the very day o n which Mr. Pitt appeared in the House of Commons as Minister of the Crown—on the very first day , a resolution of the House was come to, " That in the present state of affairs, it is peculiarly necessary that there should be an admin tration which has the confidence of this House and of the country." On the 16th of January, four days after the meeting of Parliament, it waS moved by Lord Charles Spencer " That the appoint ment of his Majesty's present Ministers was accompanied by circumstances new and extraordinary, and such as do not conciliate and engage the confidence of this House, and that the continuance of the present Mi nisters in trusts of the highest importance is contrary to constitutional principles, and injurious to the interest of his Majesty and his people;" consequently the objection to the continuance of Mr. Pitt was not that the confidence of the House of Commons was withheld from the measures which he proposed. There were surmises—no ; allegations, that Mr. Pitt owed his power to the exercise of undue influ • ence, that the King's name had been made use of for the purpose of—(The remainder of the sentence was lost in loud cheers.) The objection, therefore, was taken at the outset to the Administration of Mr. Pitt. Before Mr. Pitt could take his seat, hostile re solutions were come to; and before he could bring forward any one act of Government upon which the sense of the House of Commons could be taken, resolutions were affirmed implying objections not to the acts of that Go vernment, but to the principle upon which it was consti tuted.—(Hear, hear.) And the battle which Mr. Pitt was then fighting was not in opposition to the principle that a Minister ought to have the confidence of the House of Commons, for the purpose of carrying on the Government. But Mr. Pitt contended that Mr. Fox, who had a majority in the House of Commons, was at tempting to control the constitutional prerogative of the Crown, and without reference to attempts at legislation—without reference to pub lic acts of the Government, was denouncing that administration, and implying before hand the want of confidence in it. It is true that there were in that case repeated resolutions implying a want of confidence on the part of the House ofCommons. But I say the circumstances of that case are not analogous, that they did not imply a a want of confidence on account of the Acts proposed by that Government, but on account of the suspicion that it owed its origin to unconstitutional motives, and that it was the duty of the House of Commons from the first to dissent from and to reprobate its appointment.— (Hear, hear.) It was upon that principle that the great contest took place in the years 1783 and 1784, which led to the dissolution of that Parliament, and to the election of a new one. But is this a case at all analogous to that ?—(Hear, hear.) AM I ob structing the course of a Government at its first formation ? Am I depriving it of an opportunity of submitting its measures to the consideration of the House ? Am I not arguing, " You have had the oppor tunity, in repeated sessions, of laying before the House of Commons the measures you deem essential to the public good. They have, in some cases, been greatly altered by the prevailing influence of your opponents; they have in othe rs c ompletely failed, meeting with little support either in their principles or details; and the long continu e d ex perience of your weakness is the foundation of the resolution which I propose.— (Cheers.) Sir, I say, then that constitutional precedent, that the records of history, with one exception, that of 1783 , which is not analogous to this, support my position that Ministers not possessing the confid ence of the House of Commons have felt it their duty to relin quish office. I say again that the authority of pub lic men and public writers comes m aid of con- EVEN ENG E'DIT:IOI%T•.~ etitutional precedent. The authority of gr. tr Burke, the authority of Mr. Fox, and the S thority of all who have advocated the on principle of representative Government are 1 130-- with my opinions on this point and confirm the which Ihold. Take the opinions of Mr.. Burke. Mr.Burk.e says—" That the House of Commons should respect his Ministers is essential to his Maesty's service. It is fit that they—that is, the Minister.% " s hould yield 0 Parliament, and not that Parliament should be new Or s delled until it is fitted to the Ministers. If our authoritYLlts only to be held up when we coincide in the opinion of n' t Majesty's advisers, but is to be set at nought the memos, it differs from it, the House of Comm ons will sink int° t mere appendage of the Administration , and will lose th.a_ position important character which, inseparably connecting It' honour and representation with the acts of this Hase , enables us to afford a real, effective, and substantial sal:: port to his Government. It is the d eference shown a our opinion when wo dissent froi n the ser vants the the Crown which can alone give authority t° proceedings of this House when it con curs in their raneir. sures." What were the opinions of :Mr. Fox ? Fox says, that " the true, solid, and .incontrovettwbo basis upon which a_frm and efficient Gov , ernment eaa s built is on the confidence of the House of C ow Mr. Mr. Fox spoke of that cordiality and un:,;on w hich con . stituted the vital spring of the British Gov ernmen t * said, "Had not the majority of the House , of Codon almost from time immemorial, governed the countrfo; Was it not the confidence of the House of Ce rti p lg te ry which had given energy and efficier tcy 10 and Administration ? Was it not the co. ifidencev concurrence of the House of Comi sons'it had given stability to every act. Was it m 4 througaio, clashing with this primary principle that so. many cile mities happened in some of the reigns pric 1r to the volution ?" Mr. Fox said again—" Howes e r disagri 0 able the issue, it must be imputed to : those ;or thought themselves wiser than the House,. an d Fos alone must'answer for it to the country." Did ku r ' do f say that it was the duty of a Minister constantt I t°,:f e t to the House of Commons ? Did not Mr. Fox elai7 he himself the right of proposing such measur es 1,"0- deemed important for the public welfare, noitwitli s T t he ing the difference which there might be with part° 05 House of Commons ? He did so. He said t hat li e et et 3- 5 r - far from meaning that he thought a Minister - wl , lO justifiable in differing in opinion from the Holoe' v kell man in the situation of Mimster would be more he to differ from that House than he should, but ape° the would adhere to his opinion, and when he foinitl big House and he thought differently he should res i t' office, and say to the House of Commons, " o° 7 another instrument to carry on the public busin et to am no longer fit to serve you." Those were the opi i o tit of Mr. Burke and Mr. Fox. No, Sir, 4,0- me to refer to another constitutional authority, the at l i ; je li rity of the Noble Lord. Sir, in that work to w it I have before referred, and to which I have r eferred ` S o sincere respect, repeating again that I think it takiee moderate, dispassionate, and able view of the prineiPl of the British Constitution, we have not the dictunfido the Noble Lord, amid the heat and excitement k e Dri• House, but his deliberate opinion as a writer on th e n of tish Constitution with respect to the relative positilonl the Crown and the House of Commons. The Noble c,o' says, that the accession of George I. was the era wh e , ll vernment lie by party was fully established in Englitaa• cl og says the financial diffusulties which followed the w ifi ce to up of the war, contributed to give greater irnportt n to the House of Commons, and he uses:that expr e s s ,. : ',.; which I have before referred, " and to place w it ' "su ite House of Commons, if I may so express myself , the %sill of gravity of the Constitution." The Noble S.ord chic describes, in powerful language, the consequence s r ule must follow from a departure from tha t „ r oil: He says, "otherwise these measures will be :tbw.„..."snd these promises will be distrugted—(Chee rsi finding all their steps obstructed, their effo r ts „ ot itir be directed to the overthrow of the C'''soble tion."—(Great cheering.) Now, Sir, although tt Tics' Lord is in office, yet I will not take so extreme A ., 0 as he has taken of the consequences of persev ers1;100' this system. It may not follow that; 50 . , ters so obstructed will meditate the 0 los of the Constitution ; but the other e , follow, for they are the consequences of It'reSo ing to govern by a minority. You cannyoleve*/ the influence in this country of party disaffection. J-P you meet this Government with party motionr,cerdie don't you come down and lend it your support without reference to its merits, and if Zt.,"- you will enable it to proceed. But the Nobl e' orl scouted these things. Ile says that from Pa rt y feu° strength, and he said, further, that he never , t ,br any one fear party conflicts except meek sophers--(Long and continued cheering)—effernins 0101 and sentimental women. Those who attemp t W Pools° with a minority will be met as I was every night b Y 1 118 , motion or other for the purpose of preventi tsBd public business going on. In consequence continuance of those motions I was obliged to li e 00 t % ! such will be the case with the present GovernT iva i 51'" 1 (Hear, hear.) But this I will say, that of all t ot 11 0 :' trations there never existed a Government P ti ta t met with less obstructions than the , 9:, They had never met with mere facti n " - d e d vexatious opposition. I say, without any exten_4Al to prehension of the overthrow of the Governire", s Ido say, that practical experience Pr°,.." t hey us that the Noble Lord is right--th" 1 ",,; ( 10, 4 ' will he great evils, absolutely 13 , 1 ' a „ -r evils will result in the administration of plow - o f from the incursion on the constitutional role' tv the tempting to govern without a majority. Look io ta state of affairs since the present Government (On: for office. Let me take three measures, one brougmi t d ward at its commencement, one at its maturity, an 10 ,0 supposed to be brought forward at its e' Let me take the history of the AppropHation Clati<got me take the history of the Jamaica Bill a nd the these Duties Bill, and can I see what has taken p lace 00 01 three questions, without coming to the conclusion 50r the authority of the House of Commons was 11, ) ,' et ported by the course pursued. — (Hear.) Sir, -L.,per taunted the Noble Lord with abandon in g the litss,: priation clause; I thought he was placed in °,i o tion of necessity, which upon the whole T . o' advisable for the public interests that there sbe'w r igli° l3 , settlement of the question—without the aPPr ° P eo essi i l, clause. But can I conceal from myself that the a th e arose out of the weakness of the Government, and fi!e, want of the confidence of the House, which t w i t' Government no other alternative than to recede fr c ' the most express engagements ?—(Cheers.) Tal ce , t a i t maim Bill, and look at the evil consequences tulioneOle on account of its abandonment. The Gre ve vit is brought in a Bill, the object of which of 1,1 1 1 extinguish the Representative Governme nt j t11,e1); colony of Jamaica. They failed—we ()pe e o no and they were compelled to bring 01 in conformity with our suggestions. But w hat statement of the evils anticipated from the courseloostlh, was made by the Noble Lord at the head of her f lor ,; Government, and the Noble Lord the Secretaryjt t* Colonies ? The latter Noble Lord said ce, e i obvious that in Jamaica the authority of th e , to es to , would be greatly weakened by any vote of t he ,s o Commons giving support to the contumitcY sembly of Jamaica against the proposition of the . 11 e pt ters of the Crown, and by continuing in ,0010oe ministration of affairs, not having a ° 4 degree of the confidence and support of th15000:4 to carry on these affairs, we shall be exposing to tlboo the colonies of this country."—(Hear.) Lord It t , said, " I say that the Jamaica Bill is of parainon-cipsit,l'o pensable importance for the great object of ems?, fnt,',o and that the vote of the House of Commons P. e'lit this measure. Not only that, but it demonstrli reicl sufficient clearness such a want of confidence 111 , &Y e t body of the other House of Parliament, that 1 v of i i pt not contiuue the administration of the affaii;,oPoit Majesty's Government in a manner that would, be ep iel. o i beneficial."—(Continued cheering.) That I'm-° l° o l ol o you yourself gave as to the degree in which die d Vo l e interests of the empire would be compromise 4, 1 attempt to govern, without possessing suf 6 ,„ e ,,f e pg g t confidence of the House of Commons. tb the case of the sugar duties, and can any one -,. the position .of the Chancellor of the Exch e q uer he o ha satisfactory or a proper one ?—(Hear, h ea,- rtof After stating the grounds upon brought forward his proposition—(g ea w . holding out expectations of relief to the e,_ 4 () o' o s. consequence of these measures, was it a e°, ll & o e reiO r i' lated to exalt the authorit of the House 0 ' ti to find the Chancellor of the Exchequer , cl ropo sitl o o day last, having been over-ruled in hisj erte ral ,t O . O O and after the declaration of the Attornel -- (0opo st we must consider the Budget as a whole--,L.,JcelPf 1 t i cheers)—was it a becoming position of the ulmlogy, ip the Exchequer to move, without a word of aP°Aself ) adoption of the existing sugar duties P 1. 11e1 5 conformity with the previous resolution ? These are conclusive proofs that the Noble, fr( ) . „, prophetic anticipations of the evil aris i %o the obstructions of Government was practl e oft ) alized, as we, ourselves, have had an o pp o etunl i t) o3,,, serving. Is this for the credit of the l' u sily, t, e Commons ? Is it for the maintenance of lts v rity as a branch of the Legislature ? Y t te you the consolation, that whatever authorld 00 1 , 0 detract from the House of Commons is conferr e su re s a fi r Crown ? Alas ! no.—(Hear, hear.) Your Ine, A , subversive of the authority of the Crown. -"dot, pe pear to a superficial observer that this is a Pl io til'i c ief strength of its prerogative, that the Crown o aP ie l enabled to support a Ministry without 3 feet ttha in the House a Commons, but that is an imp S gt of_t/ of the case.—(Opposition cheers.) The intet:lentioitle Crown and the House of Commons are Ic i 0.0 1 (Hear, hear)—and the only authority reqiiirett t he J eo t interests of the State. You cannot aim a bIOW 3 witi t at iti and legitimate authority of the House of Com l-o°ll g ,y,l ! o pt' inflicting one on the Monarchy. But character r i t s ' is terdl to the authority of the Monarchy—to those 31' 11 ,.„ c0 representatives of it in this House—to those l e ' cr o f measures in this House on the authority of t r i ti eiv b Cannot it be supposed, Sir, that the t gior itfj oi r this is maintained in the House s without a I.tthe , t il where is the compensation for the positive tithollot, gerous spectacle of inefficiency and want of a_ ge. t o e Perhaps you may " though we have not the House of Comno ns c e e sufficient indication that we possess the confitienwitkettO country : "—(Hear, hear.) First, I should sai tse d elk say, as Mr. Pitt.. said to w e li t te lox, it is dangerous to admit any other rice nits it 1,04 of public opinion than the House of Conn i T . l 4 00 %. , 1 * / ,j that it is dangerous to set up the imlh l sen tlin ho t of constituents against their authorised rePr e t we 6 a t the House of Commons. It is important tba od t/ 1 not be brought to this unseemly con flict, t oo , th should not be implied that the House of C (iirri , de q O ll l l not speak the public sentiments. If Y ° , l ' truth of that argument,---if you recur to the authority of the constituents,(tw to 5 " P ° e le to the House of Commons ? Can you e v oo sa y Oa' as , 1 ,.. 1 of electors during the present Parliament, tbt"' IV that confidence which is withheld troyhoi'l 4 House of Commons ? I know not a tie cancies have arisen since the assembling v jkato,