The Sun. — London, England, 1841-04-29 00:00:00

EVENING EDITION e - snit hit a profit appearing upon the rate of 51. What he (L ord Morpeth) sai I was that it was just as open to them to say that it should be evidenced by an occupation raised at the net annual value of 81. When be demonstrated, as ev en the Noble Member for North Lancashire admitt NI he hr d done, that the t-st of profit above rent and charges pi oposed by his Noble Friend would go very far to disfran el , ise the whole of the present constituency of Ireland, his eble Friend and the Honourable Member fur Halifax d ktinctly stated that they had never even dreamt of a taking this their sole ground-work fur the franchise c r constituency of Ireland, but they proposed after t he adoption of the words which bad already been assented 1 oby the House, to annex another additional or alterative ; qualification for the possession of the franchise. He then stated that his Noble Friend's proposal of a test of profit, above rent and charges, would not be objected to by her Majesty's Government as a clear addition, but whenever k brought forward they would be happy to adopt it. They insisted, however, that that additional or alterative condi tion, should be a rating of the net annual value of 8/., and upon that, whether considered simply as the sole proposi tion, and as the sole condition for the construction of the franchise in Ireland, or whether taken as an additional and alterative qualification upon the issue of having a net %rated value of Si., they bad determined that the sense of tae House should bo fully and deliberately ascertained. The last Report of the Valuation Commissioners had stated that it was impossible to ascertain exactly what the rating would be while the tenure remained uncertain ; and such must evidently be the case, for it was clearly impos sible they could guess at the valae at which the landlords might be inclined to put their land. The Right Honourable Gentieman had also alluded to the num 1-ier of teammate which would be left above the va- Ste of 51., and quoted the number of those tenements in opposition to his (Lord Morpeth's) assertion, that the proposed franchise would not greatly increase the existing electoral body in keland. Now, the assumption of the Righttlien. Baronet went to this, that all the holders of tenements ix Ireland above 5/. were males ; and that, in addition, they were all possessed of such leases as wonld .euzitle them to the elective franchise. Sir R. PH EL dissented from the representation made of his sentiments by the Noble Lord. Lord MORPETH was at a loss, then, to understand few whit purpose the Right Hon. Baronet had made the quotation. The Right Hon. Baronet had said that he had not snakiest itiformstion either to propose a franchise him deself„ or to assent to any one which might be proposed by 'ter Vlajesty's Government. All he could say was, that they had not been chary either in collecting or producing all the information within their reach ; but ho had all along contended, from the very nature of things under the Poor-law, as it existed in Ireland, that it was impossible they could legislate upon full information during the course of tine present Session ; he would remind the House that they had not undertaken the task to remodel the existing franchise until they had felt themselves compelled to do so by the attempts made to remodel and recast the existing franchise, competed as it was with the system of regis tration ; we that they bad no option but either to bring for ward the present measure, or to allow them to alter the Irish franchise in such a manner as would render it ut terly incompatible with anything like a theory of a repre sent ative system.—(Cheers.) Al'r. Sergeant JACKSON complained of her Majesty's Gov ernrnent having brought forward a measure for pla&ng the whole qualification upon rating, without hav ing obtained sufficient information upon the subject, and laying that information for the guidance of Hon. Mem bers on the table of the House. He thought the Bill of the Noble Lord (Stanley) was a manifest improvement upon the system of quarterly registration, which had been productive of manifest evil and inconvenience in Ireland. 11r. H. GRATTAN could not too strongly condemn the course taken by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman op.. posite, in now asking for further information.—( Cheers.) It. vas altogether a political farce. The Noble Lord below him was not the man to extricate any country—cer tainly not to extricate Ireland from a political difficulty. After six hours' discussion, the Noble Lord bad been un able to get into the pith and marrow of his subject, and he had got through that discussion with the satisfaction only of a single admirer.—(Cheers and laughter.) The •ir hole proceeding was a shameful, base, political juggle— (Cheers and laughter)—which could amuse none but the avowed enemies of Ireland.—(Cheers and laughter.) He did not think that any blame ought to be attached to the individuals who had brought forward this Bill. This great question was kept as a ball, to be thrown about as the interests or prejudices of parties might di rect. The proceedings of that night would be read in history. The conduct of the Noble Lord would be seen with astonishment, and with still more astonishment that of the Right Hon. Baronet. The Right Hon. Baronet had said that Ireland was his only obstacle, and here wore two modes by which he might surmount it, but be would net adopt either. He had not the courage to do so. If he had his Gallant Loader beside him, instead of the Ithuriol (Lord Stanley) at his side, he might stirt up, not in a fiendish shape, but in that in which be gave emancipation to the Catholics, and gave liberty to the Ca tholic, the Protestant, and tle Dis'entcr. Gentlemen might treat this subject as lightly as they pleated, but so him God, he (Mr. H. Grattan) would never con sent to abate one tittle of that liberty which was the birth-right of the people of Ireland, and in defence of which h e teas eetesrniaed to risk everything but his character and tionour.—(Theers.) 'Tile House then resolved itself into Committee on the Bid!. .0n u.s being proposed in clause 2 to insert the words " fot.neen years," Mr. HUM E said he wished to ask whether it was in ti-.need to give to the people of Ireland the franchise that ceght to be given, and which might be secured to them, Or only such a franchise as they could exercise at the wish enether ? The Nubia Lord, the Member for North letecaehire, had said that he hoped the Irish landlords woubl exorcise the same influence over their tenants as was exercised by the landlords in England, and that the lei:al:Dr.'s had a right to refuse leases it the tenants would riot tame to some arrangement with respect to their votes. NWha t was this clauses, .aster such declare; iens, but a mode of rod nf: the present posseseors of the franchise of their votes? Tlio Noble Lord below him, on the 4th Feb. male use of these words, " I feel too strongly attached to the princi ples of popular lawny not to desire that the groat body of the people of Ireland should feel that the majo rty of the Mc aibers sett from that country to this House exproesed their feelings."—( Loud cheers.) But it appeared to him (Mr. Hume) that the Noble Lord and Min. Members on both sides of the House held out expectations to the people of Ireland which they had no intention to ruralise.—(Cheers.) How was it possible that ti, people of Ireland should be satisfied with the present state of the representation as compared with that of 'Scotland and England ?—( Cheers.) In these countries it appeared front the returns that every one grown up man in five had the power of voting for a Member of Parlia ramt to represent the district in which he lived. That sisso:ved that in England and Sccel led four-fifths of the no ett were disfranchised. The Right Hon. Baronet op pr site knew the discontent which that injustice produced. Hear, hear.) 'lnc Right Hon. Baronet had, there it re, encouraged and supported the Government in in ceeasing the military and police force to keep down the detainee of the people throughout this island for politi cal justice.—( Hear, hear.) It the people of England and Scotland were makiag great effort: to obtain a share of the- rights withheld from them by the unjust laws of Par mere, and he was happy to say that millions were now or ed in thoso effort:, what must be the discontent 4,f the people of Ireland when only one in twenty had a voice in tie representation ?—(Cheers.) Did the Noble Loa l helow him thick that the people of Ireland would be saislied even if his clauses kept up the ratio of represene tatien ?—( Cheers.) The population of Wales and Soot lend eisountoi to somewhat about three millions, of whom 120.4100 were electors In Ireland, out of a population of eiget millions and upwards, there were but 98,000 eke ;ors.—( Hear, hear.) He said that the people of lie- ' lend would be lees than tnel :f they submitted to such a st to of things._(Cheers. ) He thought a property qua lit;x:ation was essentially ern:axons ; but ne did not ohject to the Noble Lord's (Lord Morpeth) principle of rating, vcl Lich afforded a rational means of distinguishing a fixed i„liabitant from a vagabond. Not even the white slaves of England, or the black slave: of the West Indies, had so much to complain of as the people of Ireland.—( Hear, lifinr.) The sentiment expressed by the Noble Lord the Member for Northumberland, that the people of Ireland ocgl.t to be represented by persons of their choice, was a *cry pretty sentiment.—(Cheers and laughter.) But what (rood was that sentiment if the roan did not stand up to hi; colours and give practic al effect to it ?---( H ear, hear.) He (Mr. Hume) was unfortunately absent the ot'aer night. —( Cheers and laughter from the Tory benches. ) If be had been present he would have expressed his opi nion that neither Whigs nor Tories me tot to do justice to Ireland.—(Cheers, and a laugh.) Although he ad mitted that the Whigs certainly broeght in an excellent measure, if they had left out the clause requiring a lease. —(Hear, from Lord Howick.) He had taken the trouble to look to the qualifications under the English, Irish, and Scotch Reform Bills, and he found that they were of 82 different kinds.—( Hear, bear.) Was it any wonder then that there was so much difference of opinion amongst the serious trifeunals which had to decide upon disputed qua lifications ? All the confusion arose from the want of equal laws, which was of more importance to the poor man than to the rich, because the rich man could afford to - purchase the expensive proteetion of the Courts. He en treated the House not to agree to the clause regarding lesseeholds. Let it be enough that a man should have re sided six months upon the premises from which he is qua lit d. they did that, he was satisfied the people of Ire laud would be oontented with seeing a disposition to do them justice.—(Hear, hear.) He would now move to leave out the word " leasehold." The CHAIRMAN said that ho must first read the clause. The clause having been read, Mr. HUME concluded br moving that in the req u ir e d tenure one year should be substituted for fourteen. Lord MORPETH expressed a belief that the amend ment would not materially diminish the dependence of tenants on their landlords, and he could not, therefore, eupport the amendment. Mr. O'CONNELL thought that the proposition of his Hon. Friend the Member for Kilkenny would not enable him to obtain his object, as it would induce landlords to give short notices to quit, and tenants could not then be put on the register. He would move an amendment to the effect that the franchise should be enjoyed in Ireland on the same terms as in England, so that there might be -identity on the aebject between the two countries. Mr. HUME said that if, as was stated by his Hon. and Learned Friend, his amendment would not attain the end he desired, he would be ready to withdraw it. Mr. C. WOOD expressed a wish that occupation should be substituted for a leasehold tenure, and he was, therefore, favourable to the principle of the amendment of the Hon. Member for Kilkenny. Mr. HAWES also expressed himself in favour of the amendment. Mr. PIGOT was opposed to the amendment. He was of opinion that if it were adopted, it would lead to an (m e re l y gar distribution of power in Ireland. Mr. NPPITH O'BRIEN atepported the amendment of the HOD. Member kir Kilkenny. In calculating the con- stituency that would be formed under the proposed fran cbise, reductions must be made for persons possessing two or three or more holdings, for tenements rated above the value, fur tenements held by minors, and for tenements held by joint tenants. The gentlemen appointed by Go. verrorent to report on the subject had stated that it %as impossible t 3 ascertain the number of persons rate.' above 51. who wee possessed of such leases as would en title them to the franchise ; and he thought he was fully borne out in assuming that not more than one-half would be entitled to it upon the Government proposition. This would give one person in every 84 of the population of Ireland a vote ; and according to the returns laid before that House in 1832, one person in every 24 possessed the franchise in England. He disapproved of giving the landlords the power of regulating the franchise by granting or withholding leases at pleasure ; it was most unconstitutional, and, looking to the growing• indisposition of Irish landlords to grant leases, a rapid di minution of the constituency must be the inevitable con sequence. The only argument he had heard against the amendment was, that under its provisions coercion would be carried to a greater extent than at present ; but the experience of England and Scotland went to show that leaseholders were as much exposed to intimidation from their landlords as tenants-at-will, while the experience of Ireland proved that such was the indomitable spirit of pa triotism in that country, that voters would not be restricted from an honest and independent exercise of the franchise by fear; and he challenged the Attorney-General for Ire land to show that the tenant-at-will in the rural districts attached to the towns were one whit less independent in the exercise of the franchise than the leaseholders of counties. Mr. O'CALL AGH AN supported the amendment; he was convinced that the time was approaching when the possession of the franchise in Ireland must be based upon something different from the possession of a lease. H e was astonished at the arguments of the Attorney-General for Ireland. There were upwards of 5,000 voters in the several districts attached to Cork, and he could state from experience that there were no men more independent than the tenants from year to year. They were no t to be inti midated. The leaseholder was much more in the land lord's power, as be might refuse to renew the lease when it expired, but the tenant from year to year as he was not so exposed to loss from his landlord's displeasure, was con sequently more independent. Sir D. J. NORREYS would prefer giving the fran chise to a yearly occupation at a higher rating than to a leasehold occupation at a lower one. Mr. HUME meant merely to try the principle of lease, or no lease, by this amendment. The amount of rating would be matter for after-consideration, he had no objec tion to a 5/. rating. The Noble Lord, the Member for Northumberland, having declined to press the principle, he was determined to bring it forward. Mr. WARD considered they were merely fishing for a franchise. The Noble Lord ( Howiek), in proposing the occupation franchise the other evening, had never told them what amount of occupation he intended to propose; and, as regarded that subject, all authorities seemed op posed to each other. Now, what was a Member, who knew nothing of the subject, to do, but to support that Bill, which, as had been justly observed by the Hon. Gentleman opposite, the Government had brought for ward on their own responsibility, and which there was some possibility of carrying, it it could obtain anything like a united support.—(Loud laughter from the Opposition benches)—but if every Member brought forward his own proposition for fixing the franchise, while the Opposition acted steadily together against suffering the franchise to be touched, the result must be that the Bill would be lost.—(Loud Opposition cheers.) It was was very well for Hon. Gentlemen opposite to cheer, but they should recollect that there was as ltttle probability of their being able to carry their own measure for paring down and crippling the franchise.—( Cheers.) So that the only result of these discussions would be a great waste of time. Mr. HUME did not like the lecture of his Hon. Friend. —(Cheers from the Conservatives.) It was all very well to say they should act together, when they knew what to do. He knew no more of what were the intentions of the Government than did the man in the moon.—( Cheers and laughter.) No one knew what they were, and he did not believe the Government knew themselves.—(Cheers from the Opposition benches.) One day they brought down a most admirable Bill, and another day down came the Noble Lord and proposed most material alterations in it, and thus they went on changing every three or four days. He had intended to support the clause of the Noble Lord the Member for Northumber land, and had asked him if he intended to press it—find ing he did not intend to de so, he (Mr. Hume) had deter mined to bring forward the present amendment. Was it to be borne that they should say to the people of Ireland, you have everything to entitle you to the franchise, but if your landlord refuses you a lease there is no help for you, ' and you shall not have it. If the Noble Secretary for Ireland had intended to devise a mode far throwing the whole county representation of Ireland into the hands of the landowners he could not have hit upon any expedient more effectual than rendering the possession of a lease ne cessary to the acquisition of the franchise. The people of Ireland had been badly treated. They seemed to think that Irishmen were beasts and might be trampled on. It was an insult to them to legislate for them in such a man ner. Let them do as the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin had so frequently entreated there to do—make the Union a reality, by putting Irishmen upon the same foot ing as Englishmen, and they would soon find that Ireland would be contented and happy. Mr. LUCAS said the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had made it a c'aarge against Members on that side of the House, that they did not act consistently with regard to this measure. He ( Mr. Lucas) contended that there was nothing intelligible either to support or to op posc.—(Hear, hear.) If the Hon. Gentleman would show him something tangible upon which to ground his opposition, it should not be wanting; but he confessed ho was quite at a loss in the present state of the matter. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, and who wanted something tangi ble to support or to oppose, was last year one of those who urged that it was necessary, in order to place the fran chise of Ireland upon a sure foundation, and to prevent eternal disputes in the registration, that they should have a fixed and definite franchise—mere fixed and more definite than under the existing late.—( Hear, hear.) Doting the present Session the Hon. Gentleman had contended that it would be most unwise to attempt to fix the fran chise in any way whatever, and that the true course to pursue in a plan for the registration of voters was to leave entirely out of the question the definition of the fran chise.—( Hcar, hear.) Whatever differences there might be on that side of the House, it would not be very diffi cult to show that they did not differ more than the Hon. Gentleman had differed from himself.—( Hear, hear, hear.) With regard to these particular words of the clause, he certainly thought it would be better to take the clause as a whole, and to discuss it upon its general merits, and he intended fer the present to reserve his opinion as to its ef feet. But as a good deal of discussion bad arisen upon it, he would state what were the difficulties which any Go vernment or any individual Member would have to expect in dolling with the question, and in the next place, what were the various advantages of 'the various propositions which had been made. First, then, there was an im mense difference in the way in which the term 40s. free hold was to be understood as applicable to the two coun tries. Trio freehold tenure of this country had been laid down in various books as compri ing a tenure not less than a tenure for life; a tenure for a term of years was not considered a freehold tenure. Though the definition was the same, the class of persons and the interests o!_ feeted were very different. Amongst the 40s. freeholders in England they would find small farmers, artizans, and men in small country towns and villages exercising the trades of tailors, shoemakers, and various other occupations, who %%me entirely independent of a landlord. They would also find persons in the situation of day-labourers, some of them on the verge of asking fur relief from the parish, yet ma king a struggle to preserve their small freehold of 40s. This was a class of persons, on the whole exceedingly in dependent, earning their livelihood by honest and iadus• trious means, not immediately connected with landlords. They were very much diffused through the country, and as it ,had often been held in the family for a long period, were very proud of this small freehold inheritance. A freeholder of this class whom he had met with in Devon shire, told him that the inheritance bad been in his family since the time of William the Conqueror. It was, on the whole, a very independent class of voters, and the franchise was of a nature easily established. In Ireland there was only a small number of persons who bad freeholds in inhe ritance. When the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) proposed in 1829 to disfranchise the 40s. freeholders, and it was asked that the freeholds in fee simple should be ex- ' empted from that disfranchisement, it was stated in the first place that it was not advisable to make any distinction ; and in the next place, that there were but a small number of persons—in some counties not more than five or six— t33l,sost:Aniaettmleemr exemption. The eseTraipetion, propertyand w i h o o l w re o la u a ld d b w e a s s aved for merly hold for a long term of years, and that was not con sidered in lase as a freehold tenure. The 401 freeholders did not at all correspond with the sante class . of voters in England. They wer e not t h at numerous generally dif fused, andindependent cl ass o f persons who' had held this small freehold from generation to generation, to which be had alluded as forming that class of voters' in England. Generally speaking,s, the freehold was a freehold for life and he believed very commonly during th e ti me of the 40; freeholds they were held for the lives of ve r y old persons and often could not be reckoned a s o f more than se ven , years donation. It was obvious that a tenure of that ki n d was very different from the tenure which existed in thi s country. But then they should also take into account the great difference ' which existed between the state of society in England and in Ireland. The 501. tenants-at-will were generally persons agreeing in political opinions with their landlords ; there was at least no great difference of feeling or of interest between them. Although the landlord might or might not attempt to coerce the vote of the tenant, there was no great difference in either case. The state of society was one of harmony and agreement, rarely interrupted except en great political OCocca sions, and as that of the Reform Act. In Ireland it was im possible not to be struck with the great diversity of feeling which prevailed between the great class of great proprietors and the class of tenants who, under the tenure he had de scribed, had been intrusted with the franchise. They had the one party highly attached to an aristocratical constitution, very eager to uphold the Protestant Establishment of the Church, conceiving that the ancient institutions of the country must be preserved, as that which for them and their fathers has pro vided general security, and secured the succession to the Crown in a Protestant family. They had the class of persons below them—a very great mass of them at least, on the other hand deeply attached to the Roman Catholic religion, holding that they and their fathers had been injured and insulted by predominance and by exclusion, and seeking in the exercise'of their political rights, as far as possible, to do what they would consider as equalizing the balance, and to obtain for themselves and the class to which they belong a very large, and, as they think, a just share of political power. lie was not stating that the one party or the other were wrong in these views, or giving any opinion ow the subject; but he was stating it for the purpose of showing that, taindifferent feelings, imbued with so different a going ta such d i fferent miniiters of religion, and looking to a political contest and to the representation of that House as the means of embodying their sentiments, it was impossible but that the body of proprietors and the body of tenants should hold different opinions, and wish to exercise the franchise in a THE SUN, LONDON, THURSD Y. APRIL 29, 1841. different manner. During the existence of the 40s. freeholders in Ireland, there was an immense abuse of the franchise ; and the right of voting was exercised in a manner that had never been contemplated for the purpose of carrying an election. One source of abuse was the intimidation of landlords, under a strong political feeling that power was broken, or as the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir R. Peel) termed it, the weapon snapped in their hands, and the great body of Roman Catholic voters exercised the franchise in behalf of persons who held their own political opinions. It was then stated that the franchise was wrongly placed; that an immense number of fictitious freeholds had been created, and that it was necessary to place the franchise in more independent hands. The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite proposed a plan for that purpose, and looking to all the information which had been afforded, he could not concur in what was clone by the Government of that day. The Right Hon. Gentleman had asserted that there was an immense number of persons exercising this freehold franchise, and he had argued that, comparing the number of voters in England and Ireland, the number in Ireland was so large that it was impossible but that the franchise was abused ; and he had proposed that the franchise should be raised to 101. a year instead of 40s. Now in raising the franchise to 101. a year he thought the difference between an English 40s. freehold and an Irish 40s. freehold was totally lost sight of. It was clear that the franchise had been much more restricted in Ireland than was anticipated. However fair the Acts cf 11329 and 1832 might have been been framed, it was now abundantly evident that they had committed many mistakes in settling the county franchise in Ireland. In 1831 and 1832, when the Noble Lord opposite brought in the Irish Reform Bill, it was matter of reproach to him that he called upon the House to legislate without any information, arid Mr. Croker then said he supposed the Noble Lord would lay the informa tion upon the table the day after the debate, even as the Government of the present day were taunted ; but the fact was, there was no precedent for either case, and they were obliged to legislate upon general principles. In attempting to settle the franchise, they were compelled to adopt one that was new, in order to avoid introducing one which had already led to the loss of all former Bills ; therefore they had adopted the occupation and rating franchise. It was well un derstood that the landlords in England called upon their 501. tenants for their vote, and that without much evil to society, because they did not differ much among themselves, but it was very different in Ireland. There the landlords might, from conviction, have an anxious desire to support the Protestant religion, or wish to support a party not generally supported by the majority of the people of Ireland, entirely iii opposition to the convictions and feelings of their tenants, who must either come up and record their vote in opposition to their con sciences, or give an honest vote at the risk of losing their holdings. In his opinion, the 8/. rating, with a fourteen years' lease, would be in an independent position to give his vote according to his feelings and conscience. They had been anxious to chose that right of voting which presented the least of evil, and that was the clause as it now stood. It was said that many landlords would refuse the fourteen years lease. Un doubtedly they might, but on the other hand, if they made the franchise an occupation one, they would have the voters driven up to the hustings to vote against their conscience. He was most anxious to see tha country so governed as to avoid being brought into that state in which it was previous to 1829, and I for that purpose he was anxious that the people of Ireland should be allowed to govern themselves in their municipal affairs through their corporations—that they should have that check and control over public affairs which they ought to have either in Parliament or out of it. He was convinced that any legislation of that House which attempted to curb the people of Ireland, would entirely fail, and they would lose the best safeguard they had—the best the country had ever enjoyed was only since 1829, from which epoch the catholic had a regular and constitutional mode of ex pressing his complaints_ and asking redress for his grievances—of coming to that House, and if his complaints were just, obtain ing redress, if not of having their injustice shown. That was the privilege he wished them to retain, and with that desire he was anxious to see the Bill become the law of the land. Mr. LUCAS would venture to trespass for a few moments on the patience of the House, while he replied to the observa tions of the Noble Lord who had just sat down. The Noble Lord had charged him with having last year supported a pro position for defining the franchise, while this year he had op. posed it. If he - ,had changed his mind on that or any other subject, he would have no hesitation in coming down to the House and openly avowing that change, instead of giving an' new proposition a silent acquiescence. He had in his hand a report of the debate which took place on the occasion to which the Noble Lord had referred, and he had no hesitation in stating so much o; it as would place his observations in their true light. The Hon. Member here read some extracts from his remarks upon the subject of beneficial interest. He had certainly never expressed at that or any other time any observa tions that would give the House an idea that he wished to sub stitute a rating test for the beneficial interest or solvent tenant test. He had always experienced courtesy from the Noble 1 .,0rd opposite, but he should not accept it on the present occa sion at the expense of his friends. Sir R. PEEL wished to state the course he intended to take on the question then before the House as to whether the words " fourteen years " should remain, or the words " one year" be substituted. He apprehended that they had now before them the original proposition of the Government. It appeared to him that it would he infinitely fairer and bet ter that they should have the proposal of her Majesty's Go vernment made in that shape which would best meet their own views. It might be that by coalescing with the Hon. Member for Kilkenny they might carry the amendment of that Hon. Member ; but he thought it infinitely better that the Government should be allowed to fill up the blanks in the way they thought best. The course he should take between the proposition for one or for fourteen years was the same he shou'd take upon the proposition of a rating for Si. or for 81., and therefore not being prepared to admit that a tenancy or occupancy from year to year should confer the right of vot ing, the details being a matter of indifference to him, and yet being unwilling to go to a division without stating to the House what his opinions were, he should on the present occasion give his vote in favour of the original proposition, not because he approved of it, but because he wished to have the details of the measure fully ex plained, it being perfectly notorious that when the great ques tion came to be decided he should give his vote against the clause. Mr. C. WOOD should also feel it his duty to vote against the amendment of the Hon. Member for Middlesex. Nobody i was more sensible of the difficulty of finding in any way an in , dependent constituency in Ireland than himself, and it was with i' the view of obtaining an independent class of voters that his Noble Friend the Member for Northumberland had suggested his amendment. The mistake into which many Hon. Members on his (Mr. Wood's) side of the House had fallen on Monday night had since, he had reason to believe, been cleared up, and it was now obvious that the proposal of his Noble Friend was a clear addition to the franchise, without disfranchising one single individual who was enfranchised by the Bill of the Govern ment. —( Hear, hear.) Mr. SHEIL thought the statement of the Hon. Member for Halifax at variance with the intentions of the Noble Lord the Member for Northumberland. If the statement of the Hon. Member for Halifax was correct, and that the proposition of his Noble Friend was merely that their franchise should he ad ditional to that of the Government, and not exclusive of that franchise, would it not have been the duty of the Hon. Mem ber and the Noble Lord to have voted for the proposition made by the Government ?—( Hear, hear.) He questioned whether • the Hon. Member for Halifax could reconcile the conduct of the Noble Lord with the statement which he had just made. 'Uhe Noble Lord had distinctly an nounced to them, when the subject was first discussed in Com mittee, that his proposition should be not only an addition, but a substitution for the plan of the Government, and that he had repeated again and again. The Government proposition of an 8/. rating was a simple and single one, but the proposi tion of the Noble Lord was a franchise which depended upon tile excess of the rate beyond the rent. That, of course, ex cluded all who were rated at 81. but who had not an excess of rating beyond the rent.—( lieu, hear.) He hoped the Hon. Member for Halifax, and the Noble Lord, would set him right, if he had the misfortune not to understand them. The second proposition of the Noble Lord was for an independent constituency, without a lease ; but that was a point which the Hon. Member for Halifax was not very clear about. He hoped the Hon. Member and the Noble Lord would forgive him, if he ventured not to insinuate, but to state, that they did not appear to possess that knowledge of Ireland which such a pro position required ; and he must also sav, with regard to the amendment of his Hon. Friend behind him, although his Hon. Friend was Member for Kilkenny—(Much laughter).— he did not seem to possess a sufficient knowledge of the charac ter of the tenure in Ireland. He (Mr. Shiel) would ,not ven ture to pronounce with any great confidence upon the opinions and state of the public mind in Middlesex, and notwithstanding the connection of his Hon. Friend with Kilkenny—( Renewed 1 laughter)—he did not appear to possess the intimate acquaint- 1 ance with the state of the people in Ireland which such a proposition required. The Noble Lord's clause, which he would term the Chandos clause, or rather,the Howick clause, as applied to the people of Ireland, must depend fully as much upon the relations of the gentry to the people—upon the character of the gentry and the habits of the people, as upon the mere question of tenure.—(Hear, hear.) He believed the Noble Lord had voted for the Chandos clause, having then filled the office of Secretary at War, although Lord Grey had entered his strong protest against that clause. If he recollected right the Noble Lord, in a speech made by him in 1835, complained that the Chanties clause had not worked well in England, and inveighed against the most scan dalous conduct of the landlords, the Tory party being par ticularly addicted to intimidation. Now what would be the effect of such a clause irs Ireland ? In England the landlords and tenants generally agreed, but in Ireland they did not, and on that account compulsion must be resorted to, and that was why the Howick clause for Ireland was so strenuously sup ported.—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Shiel) had spent a larger portion of his life than he ought in very exciting agitation. He knew what landlords could do, and how tenants could resist ; and he could tell them that leases made a very great difference. When there was a lease there was a barrier be tween the landlord and the tenant, and the rent could be paid. One of the most remarkable incidents in the agitation of the Catholic question was the enormous con tribution fur the defence of the persecuted tenants. He knew it had been said that such a collection could not be made again. But as the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin had said that he did net despair of the fortunes of his country, so he (Mr. Shiel) of the virtues of his countrymen never would de , spar ; and he did not entertain a doubt that if ever there was need, the same spirit of lofty generosity would be displayed which corresponded with the sentiments and heroism of former da)s. Suppose the Noble Lord the Member for Northumber land—and he begged pardon for the hypothesis —suppose he went to a tenant-at-will, and asked him for his vote, if the poor fellow told him " I have a wife and a large family, and I shall be served with notice to quit, and turned out, if I vote for you," rain ni e i t t if the Noble Lord pressed him and had the misfortune to suc ceed, and that a few months afterwards he saw him starving additional argument and shivering on the public road, would not the Noble Lord , cu if u h ld e h a a ir d ur a d ny ht f m eeli n n o g, ctohmatpethuesahtiigohnesfot for such i s n uff th er e in C g a ? - LHoornd. G m r e e m y b d e e r ela f r or edthathe a regretted the change made by the Chandos Clause, because he considered it, to a certain extent, Tipperary to define gum an " en h t is in favour of H t e h e (Mr. b s y he b i a i l ) lot. The his opixions. Lambeth . said . he called on the Member for He was speaking of that which he knew— He was speaking of a co . untry with which de fininghichßallot might say—" Give us protection, he was acquainted.. was acquainted. The advocates of the , let them of that with which he e s d ud by w s e ome , save the the eansiaeltd will from intimidation--gi ve us the Ballot, on as nota colour infliot for on agree." But if they would not give the Ballot, and protection to the tenant falsehood s i e n h d o e o p d e n ; d h e u n t c e. g i v e I t may sth b :irciardt whom they vested with that privileg e him a favour which would make hit eith er a slave or a martyr. Let them not leave , _ ra t to make a se lection the most painful—a selection that must re duce him to servitude the most ignominious, or tosuff • the most disastrous. He ( Mr. Shiel) had written to suffering persons in Ireland who had been, like himself , engaged in ma ration, and there was but one se ntiment amo ng them allagoln the subject. They all zencurred in saying that the person haling the franchise would be a slave in the midst of disturb ance, and a martyr in the midst of agitation. He would yen. tare to turn from the topics to which he had just been advert ing to the general matter which was under discussion —namely, to the course which under all circumstances it was wise and just for the House to pursue. He had remarked in the course of the discussion that a great deal of reference had been made to facts; but the references which had been made to facts were not made with that due attention to order and to method with which they ought. It occurred to him as not inappropriate very briefly to advert to the circumstances which led to the state in which the country and the House stood.—(Hear.) Let not the House be alarmed if he went so far back as the year 1825. He would not do so, if the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth had not adverted, on Monday night, to the opinions given at that time on cer tain subjects by the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin. It was perfectly true that, in 1825, he (Mr. Shiel), stated it to be his opinion that 40s. freeholders should be abolished. At that time the 40s. freeholders had not thrown off the yoke. They fulfilled the prediction of the Duke of Wellington, when he said in the Irish Parliament, that he was sure the 40s. free holders would vote with their landlords. In 1825 the change had not taken place, which subsequently slid. It was quite true that in that year the opinions of the gentlemen who were deputed by the Irish people to this country, were favourable to the suppression of the 40s. freeholders. They were anxious to have the Catholic question settled. He was sure the Hon. Baronet lamented very much, as they certainly did, that that opportunity had not been seized by the Tory Government to come to some settlement of that question. Well, that propo sition was rejected. He (Mr. Shiel) owned that he was sur prised that the Hon. Baronet adverted to the circumstances which then took place, because he was sure, when concessions were made a few years afterwards, under a strong exercise of a pressure from without, the Hon. Baronet must have felt that it would have been better if that question had been settled before such excitement had taken place, as to make the concession appear to be the result of a feeling different from that in which all concessions are made. , Well, the deputies felt that they had but this resource—namely, to avail themselves of the energies which the Irish people pos sessed. The 40s. freeholders were roused. The Waterford ' election took place. Victory after victory was soon gained by the popular party. Then it was that the power of the 40s. freeholders was developed, and not till then. The Hon. Baronet at length perceived that the settlement of the Catholic question was indispensable. Might he intimate to the Hon. Baronet that he could not help feeling surprised that he (Sir R. Peel) entered into an encounter with the Irish people. From the Irish people on that occasion he met with a most signal defeat. No man felt more regret than he (Mr. Shiel) did that the Hon. Baronet did not continue in the course of policy which he adopted when he made the concession alluded to. No compact had been made with the Irish people. His Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Dublin, when the subject was last under discussion , mentioned a fact which was of the utmost importance, namely, that there was a great meet ing at the Thatched House Tavern, of the men in whom the greatest confidence was reposed by the Irish people, and they agreed that Catholic Emancipation should not be obtained at the sacrifice of the 40s. freeholders. The Right Hon. Baronet admitted that the sacrifice of the 40s. freeholders was not the result of a compact. There was a protest entered by the Noble Lord, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and by the Noble Lord, the Member for North Lancashire, against the solvent tenant test. In a speech of the Noble Lord, he con demned the solvent tenant test as establishing too high a franchise.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") The man who made the protest against the solvent tenant test, was the man who had the Irish Bill in his hands, and he struck out out the solvent tenant test. Could ;tic deny that? In his answer to the Judge Advocate, the Noble Lord said, when called on to account for the speech that he made in the year 1832, that he could not account for it—that it was a misprint— that the reporters had made a mistake. But he would not attempt to account for leaving out the solvent tenant test. Lord Oriel was so convinced of the injurious tendency of the solvent tenant test, that he divided the House of Lords upon it. He (Mr. Shiel) would go for the interpretation of the Reform Act not to the opponents of it. He would go to the Liberal Judges of the land for the interpretation of it. By their decision he would abide. The Judges were divided on the subject ; and, coupling all those facts, he would say, it was incumbent on the House to settle the question. The Honour able Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, said that they ought ought not to build a new house, but repair the old one. He (Mr. Shiel) would say they ought to build a new one, but upon the old foundation—upon the foundation on which the Reform Bill was raised. The Hon. Baronet found fault with the Government for not introducing a Bill to define the benefi cial interest. Had not the Noble Lord (Lord Howick) voted for Sir Michael O'Loghlen's Bill ?—( Hear, hear.) The Honourable Baronet was therefore in the wrong, when he said that no attempt had beenmade on this question by the Government, because an attempt had been made again and again by the Government to define the beneficial interest. The Noble Lord (Stanley) found the majority of the Judges in Ireland in favour of the solvent tenant test, and he calcu lated that the minority who dissented would ultimately agree with the decision of the majority. That was the opinion of the Noble Lord. He then brought in the Bill, which did not define the franchise ; but since that time the Chief Baron had announced that he could not agree with the majority of the Judges. This being the case, it was manifest that the Bill of the Noble Lord could not be adopted. The Government w- re then driven to bring in a Bill, in which the franchise was to be defined. What had the Government done? They had got a series of returns from the Poor-law Commissioners, by which it was manifest that the rate was uniformly below the rent. It was perfectly preposterous to make the excess of the rate above the rent a test of the qualification.—( Hear, hear. ) He could not understand why the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, meant to insist that there should be an excess of the rate above the rent ; but if he did, it was ma nifest that 5-6ths of the constituency of Ireland would be disfranchised. (Hear, hear.) He was surprised that no Honourable Member on the other side of the House had yet stated whether they would adopt the rate as a founda tion for the franchise. The Learned Recorder of Dublin had stated that the rate mostly exceeded the rental. He (Mr. Shiel) was obliged to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman for his candour.—(Hear.) He would pray the attention of the House to this. ,The Recorder had stated that the excess of the rate would be above the rent, and yet the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, the other night, said that the rate was almost uniformly below the rent. They ought not to make the excess of the rate beyond the rent the test of the franchise. fle thought the Hon. Baronet ought to tell. the House what he thought ought to be done—(Cheers and laughter) —especially as the Noble Lord beside him had undertaken to legislate for the country. He (Mr. Shiel) had shown that the definition of the franchise was indispensable, as the Judges of the land were divided on the question. When the state of things was , uch as was admitted, and when Hon. Gentlemen on the opposite side found fault with Government, he thought they ought to say what rate they would adopt. It was obvious that the Noble Lord's (Lord Stanley's) could not be adopted, for by it the evils which at present existed would remain unreme died. Were they, then, to leave the constituency of Ire land in the state in which it now was ? There had been much controversy on the state of the constituency in Ireland; but documents had been laid on the table of the House which laid that matter at rest. The Noble Member for North Lancashire, when introducing his Bill, used the most offensive terms. He talked of the extent to which perjury was committed in Ireland. The Noble Lord introduced. a Bill, the effect of which would be to reduce the constituency still lower than it was shown to be. The county of Waterford had a popu lation of 150,000, and a constituency of only 803. In a dis trict of Ireland which contained one million of inhabitants, the constituency only amounted to about 4,000. He did not ask them to restore the 40s. freeholders, but they ought to place Ireland, with respect to advantages, on a footing analagous with that of England_ The poverty of Ireland was used to serve the purposes of debate. The Irish people had a right to an entire participation in those advantages , of which England was in the full fruition.—(Hcar.) It is true, continued the Hon. and Learned Member, that Ireland is not a rich country, but Ireland possesses some great qualifications for a large constituency. Ireland has made great and signal advances, and to a country which in every thing re specting social power is making such advances, to a country which has arisen from servitude to high mindedness, and has put off the habitude of depression, to a country in which great courage and determination is combined, as it is, with great morality and sobriety, to a c ountry which almost as by a miracle has given you signal proof of its social improvement, I say to such a country you ought to concede a very different franchise—to such a country you ought not to award the con stituency the Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire has prepared for them. Between the Bill of the Noble Lord, the Secretary for Ireland, and that of the Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire, this House must elect. For mark, has the Noble Lord the Member for, North Lanca shire given up his Bill ? Does he not persevere in it with all its vices ? Does he not still insist upon appeals to the Judges ? Does he not still insist upon annual revision? Does he not insist upon that system of oaths which gives rise to that " vil lanous perjury" he so much laments? And, under these cir cumstances, what course is the House to take ? Take the Bill of the I\ oble Lord the Member for North Lancashire and you take ambiguity, confusion, and agitation ; but take the Bill of the Secretary for Ireland and you take a Bill which fixes the franchise by a definitive standard, you take a Bill, which sets ihe conflicting statements of the law at rest, you take a Bill by which oaths are suppressed and perjury put an end to, you take a Bill by which the dissensions of the Judges cease, and you will then show your solicitude for the rights of the peo ple of Ireland, and afford them the most perfect satisfaction. • —(Loud cheers.) Sir R. PEEL explained, and quoted some evidence of Mr. O'Connell in 1825, containing objections to the 40s. franchise, and contended that upon such evidence the Legislature of the day had a right to draw the inference they did of the evils of the system. Mr. HUME said that although he bad been accused of ig norance through not being an Irishman, he know that by this clause no one could vote without a lease, and as the landlords would not give leases, the consequence would be that the clause would be one of disfranchisement. After a few words from Mr. W. ROCHE, which were in audible, Mr. O'CONNELL said he hoped the House would allow him to trespass on its attention for a short time,as he had been strongly alluded to by the Noble Lord and the Right Hon. Gentleman. He should be sorry that his Hon. Friend the Mem ber for Kilkenny should persevere in his intention to divide the House. It was totally unnecessary, for if he would look into the clause he would see that it was an affirmative clause, and there fore that he might after the present one add the clause giving even tenants-at-will the right to vote, provided they varied the sum by only one shilling, so that it was totally unneces sary for him then to divide the House. It was not very ma terial whether he took that immaterial division—for an imma terial division it would be, because as the Right Hon. Baronet and the Government would vote against him he had no chance whatever of a majority. He (Mr. O'Connell) had heard what had fallen from the Noble Lord (Russell) with great pleasure, yet not without regret. There was in his speech an exposi tion of some of those principles applicable to the government of Ireland, which if carried into effect would be eminently usefel ; but he did not think the Noble Lord's v indicatjon of the conduct of the Reform Ministry in 1832 was satisfactory. The Noble Lord went into the history of the 40s. franchise, and of its abolition, but he was not accurate in saying that the 40s. franchise was abolished on his (Mr. O'Con nell's) evidence, nor was the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peerin such a statement. He referred him to the very first answer he (Mr. O'Connell) had given, and which with the permission of the House he would read. He (Mr. O'Con nell) spoke of the different franchises in Ireland, under a lease, and did not speak of the 40s. franchise as in England. Being asked what 'would correct the evils of the 40s. fran chise, he answered—"lt is difficult to answer that question, the systein of the 40s. freeholders in Ireland, is differentfrom that in this country. There are, however, 40s. freeholders in Ireland, and with these I suppose nobody would meddle."..... ( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member proceeded to read several other quotations to a similar effect, and proceeded—but the Right Hen. Baronet said the 40s. freehold was abolished as a measure of Reform. It was the only i ns tance in which th e Right Hon. Baronet had shown himself a Parliamentary Re former. It was not because they were Catholics, but because there ere social evils connected with it, that the Right lion. Baronet became a Parliamentary Reformer. And what was the effect? He reformed by totally destroying. But was that a reason why the House should not now take' into consideration the extension of the franchise in , lreland to a similar class? During the period from 1825 to 1829 the abuses in the exercise of this franchise ceased, and the 40s. freeholders displayed their patriotism. While these abuses existed emancipation w as refused on the terms of correcting the abase. Had this been done a political slumber and apathy would have", passed over Ireland, and the peopl e of Ireland would not have found it necessary to make further exertions. The Right Hon. Baronet refused the auspicious lx.ioment. He roused the spirit and genius of the people of Ireland, and was compelled to grant them unfettered and un shackled emancipation. But the 40s. freeholders who shared in the battle `were not allowed to partake in the triumph—they were annihilated and destroyed. Then came the Reform Bill, and here he (Mr. O'Connell) complained of the Noble Lord (J. Russell) and his colleagues. He (Mr. O'Connell) opposed that Bill because o fits narrow limits and insulting nature. The Noble Lord had said Ireland had received the same ad vantages as England—that, like England, she had got corpo rate reform. But had she got the corporate reform which England had? Ireland was the poorer country, and this crime was committed against her, that whereas the burgess of every town in England who was rated at 6d. was entitled to vote, no burgess could vote in Dublin who was not rated at 101. Why make that distinction, but because they had the power to tyrannise over Ireland, and do her injustice, and exercised it with insolent domination, without reason or argument, and in defiance of the principle which said both countries should be united into one ? The Hon. and Learned Member then proceeded to quote returns exhibiting the comparative constituencies of the two countries. Is there an Hon. Gentleman opposite who will say that this is just and right, or that if the case were reversed, and if 95,0004 Irishmen had 5,000 voters while one million of Eng lishmen had but 4,000, they would submit to such a state of things? If any one did submit to it he would deserve no other feeling than contempt. He would appeal to the House for redress for these anomalies, and he would appeal from them to the people of Ireland, who would know how to obtain re dress for themselves if justice were refused them by Parlia ment. Again, the rural population of Wales amounted to 805,000 and the population of Cork to 703,000, whilst Wales had a constituency of 36,883, and the constituency of Cork amounted to no more than 3,835 voters. In the Courts in which he ( Mr. O'Connell) practised equality was said to be equity, but he was sure there could be neither equality nor equity in those cases. They had the power to continue this injustice ; but would it be prudent of them to do so ? It was safe for them now, but would it be safe for them before the next three months had passed over? Let them depend upon it that the people of Ireland understood the injustice done them perfectly well; they had heard it often, and it would not be his fault if they did not hear it again. They should recol lect these things when they came to deliberate on the course they were to pursue towards Ireland? How were they to deal with that country ? They ought now to be weary of the system of exclusion and insult ; while they seemed, on the contrary, as fresh fer the work as if they were now only at the beginning of the seven centuries of oppression. He was not content with the Bill of the Government, although he should support it. He could not get a better Bill ; and he certainly much regretted the change from a Si. to an 8/. qualification. The Government, he believed, had gained no accession of strength by the change, and they had suffered some disparagement by having made it. His Right Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Tipperary had told them what the Irish people were ; they had set an example of religious fidelity to the nations of the earth, and even those who might consider their faith erroneous should respect the firmness and integrity with which they adhered to it. There were now in Ireland upwards of 5,000,000 pledged never to take of the cup of intoxication ; and such a people would not tamely submit to the perpetuation of oppression. If they wished for a continua tion of the Union they should make it a union in reality, and not allow that 1,000,000 of people in this country should have only the same number of representatives as 1,000,000 in the other. By adapting the Ministerial, Bill they would take a short, small, and slow step in the way of justice and concilia tion, and one which would lean to other practical results. He trusted it would be taken as an argument in its favour (although it might be an indiscretion on his part to avow it) that if rating were to be taken as the test for the franchise in Ireland, that would soon become the law of the whole empire. It was but fair to couple taxation and representation. He believed that the measure would do much good in Ireland, for the people of that country were easily won by their affections, while they were never led by their fears. The Bill would have the effect of doing away with perjury—that great offence against God, and that stain upon the character of man. He had only one word to say as to the extension of the right of voting to tenants at-will. If the provisions for such a measure were made sufficiently extensive to render inoperative attempts at individual tyranny, he should vote in its favour. Give him a tenancy-at-will sufficiently extensive, and he should embrace it ; but the one proposed was not sufficient—it was riot extensive enough ; it would leave the voter exposed to the tyranny of his landlord, and there was no remedy for this except by extending the suffrage, or giving the voter that which he ought to have, the protection of the Ballot, which was a pro tection which they would not give. He would vote for the Government measure, and he was glad he was able to do so con sistently with his duty. He was desirous that the people of Ireland should know that the Government was making a strug gle for the rights of the country.—( Cheers.) If they failed, it would not be their faults, but the fault of those who opposed them, and their failure would be a sufficient intimation to the people of Ireland that they must make a hearty struggle to ob tain justice for themselves.—( Cheers. ) Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the Committee divided, when there appeared— For Mr. Hume's amendment Against it Majority for the amendment .-466 On our return to the gallery, we found Mr. HUME moving that Si. be inserted in the clause. in the place of 81. Lord MORPETH said he had tried to promote conciliation, and was not ashamed of so doing. It was for that purpose that he had consentedto insert 81. Mr. O'CONNELL said the conciliation was not made to the gentlemen opposite.—(Cheers.) That was another insult to Ireland. The people of that country had therefore not to complain of their enemies, that was a matter of course, but of those who called themselves their friends. Mr. SLANE Y said a few words amidst loud noise, which prevented a word that fell from him reaching the gallery. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion For the amendment Majority . . 434 126 _3OB On our return tliere were loud cries for adjournment. Lord J. RUSSP.LL said he thought as they had been die• cussing the question all the evening, and it was now 12 o'clock, they had better divide on the clause. Sir. O'CONNELL said he thought the reason assigned by the Noble Lord, was one why they should adjourn. He would not be taunted with proposing an adjournment on Lord Stanley's Bill, and opposing it on that one. The words " six months" were then inserted in the clause. On the question that the clause as amended stand part of the Bill. Mr. BROTHERTON moved that the House should adjourn, The Committee then divided, when there appeared— For the motion For the adjournment ... 9B Majority -330 - - On our return to the gallery we found Mr. HUME protesting against the course pursued by the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) with respect to the Bill. If the Government were determined that a good Bill should not pass, it would be better that this Bill should be put an end to at once. Mr. O'CONNELL then movel that the Chairman do leave the chair. Strangers were ordered to withdraw, but the House did not divide. On our return to the gallery, we found Air. WAKLEY protesting against the course pursued by the Government. The Hon. Member said ho was placed in a situation of extreme difficulty by the vacillating conduct of those below.—( Hear, hear.) He for one could not understand the tactics of the Noble Lord. If he had occupied the Noble Lord's position he would not have had courage to have faced the House in the manner that the Noble Lord had done. The first principles of this Bill had been abandoned. —( Hear, hear.) He would be very glad if the Noble Lord would rise from his seat, which it was his fixed determination to do. Lord J. RUSSELL said the Hon. Member for Finsbury had said that the course taken by the Government had placed the House in its present situation, but he (Lord J. Russell) imagined that, with respect to that, the question of st. or 81, did not make the smallest difference. The question was, whether the House was prepared or not to vote for the clause as it then stood. With regard to that, he could only say, that many Members having informed the Government they could not vote for so low a sum as 5i., the amount was raised to 81. He had never seen any Government that retained its own views on all questions without alteration. A Government dependent for support on a popular assembly could not be carried on if it did not allow itself to bend in the least degree to men who honestly gave advice and counsel to them. If the Hon. Member for Finsbury should become a Member of a Govern ment they should see the inflexible virtue which he would ex hibit. He (Lord John Russell) had done everything in his power to promote a division on the clause, and if that should take place he was afterwards prepared to state the course he meant to pursue. If the clause was adopted by a majority of the House, he should go on with the bill, if not he should deem it useless to proceed with the remaining clauses. He was sorry the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin had put a question before the House by which the Bill would be lost.--( Cheers. ) Mr. J. JERVIS strongly protested against being forced to a division. Sir T. D. ACKLAND said he could not consent to the motion being withdrawn. He rejoiced to see the truth of the old adage justified, " Nec lex est justior ulla quam necis arti fices arte perire sua." Mr. C. WOOD hoped the motion would not be pressed to a division. ' Sir R. PEEL thought that twice during the evening gen tlemen on that side of the House had given proofs that their desire, was to come to a decision upon the merits of the clause, and he thought a decision on the merits of the clause, taken in the usual way, would be more satisfactory than to take ad vantage of the supporters of the Bill ; yet he thought the House was now in a position to come to a decision, and if it gave way and permitted the Hon. Gentleman to withdraw his motion, he trusted they would receive a distinct intimation that no further postponement should take place, but that the Bill should to-morrow take precedence, and that the sense of the house should be taken on the clause in the usual and une quivocal manner. On that condition he would advise his friends to consent to the withdrawal of the motion of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. _ _ Mr. O'CONNELL said the advantage was not so great as Gentlemen opposite seemed to think, as the only effect would be that the Bill must be recommitted. Lord J. RUSSELL had no objection to give the measure the precedence to-morrow if the motion were permitted to be withdrawn. Sir ROBERT PEEL desired that it might be distinctly understood that the Bill would be brought on to-morrow at five o'clock. The motion was then withdrawn and the House resumed. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House Adjourned at Half-past One. ELECTION COMMITTEE. The Committee appointed to try the merits of the peti. tion against the return of Mr. Armstrong, for King's County, met yesterday. J. W. Patten, Esq., Chairman. Mr. Sergeant Wrangham and Mr. Talbot appeared for the petitioner ; Mr. Austin and Mr. Cockburn for the sit ting Member. Mr. Sergeant WRANGIIMA apprehended that according to precedent the only business for them that day was to exchange lists and adjourn. After a long discussion the Committee decided that, under the new law, there was no necessity for their ad journing on the first day, as was usual, heretofore, in Irish cases. Mr. Sergeant WRANGHAM then stated the case on the part of the petition. The election took place in February last. During the polling notice was given that the sitting member was disqualified, he being in receipt of a pension as compensation for the loss of his office of Receiver- General for Stamps in Ireland. The Learned Gentleman cited a number of Acts of Parliament to show, first—that the office in question was one which disqualified its holder from sitting in Parliament, and that receiving a pension in compensation for the loss of that office continued the disquali fication. He then cited other acts and decisions of the Court to show that a salary or pension coming through the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, was a pension during pleasure, and was revokable at the will of the Crown. The Learned Gentleman was interrupted in his address by the announcement that the Speaker was at prayers. The Committee then adjourned till to-day at 11 o'clock. The General Steam Navigation Company's steam-ship Monarch, Capt. Fraser, which left Blackwall on Saturday evening, arrived at Leith in 38 hours from her departure, after a splendid passage. POLITICAL. SUMMARY OF THE MORNING JOURNALS. CHRONICLE.—In the Times' article, announcing the election of Mr. Walter for Nottingham, the following com mentary is appended to its report of that event :—" Nottingham itself has postponed or cast away all the seductive theories of Ballot, Extension of the Suffrage, Abolition of Church -rates, &c., and has eagerly returned the man who stood boldly and honestly on his opposition to the Somerset-house triumvirate." We do not perceive by what logic, founded on the topics themselves, any necessary hostility can be demonstrated be tween opposition to the Somerset-house commission and the advocacy of Ballot, extended suffrage, and Church-rate abo lition. Because a man thinks that the pauper should not, by the refusal of out-door relief, be coerced into the workhouses, must he therefore hold that the dependent elector ought, by open voting, to he coerced into a dishonest suffrage at the poll •booth ? Because a man thinks that there should not be a distinct pauper class, deprived of the social freedom enjoyed by the more fortunate, must he therefore contend that there ought to be a distinct slave class, deprived of th e p o liti ca l freedom enjoyed by the more privileged in society ? Be cause he is adverse to the power of Commissioners to tax for the poor, must he needs be friendly to the power of churchwardens or archdeacons to tax for the Church? Cannot a man wish to keep out of a workhouse without also wishing to get into an ecclesiastical court? The leap is startlingly long from the premises to the conclusion. Although with no bond of logical connection, yet as embodied in the politics of Mr. Walter, there is the antagonism which our contemporary indicates. His hostility to the poor-law is identified with hostility to the ballot, the suffrage, and church rate abolition. He is not simply an anti-poor-law politician. He does the dirty anti-poor-law work of the Tory party. In voting for Mr. Walter, therefore, the Nottingham electors have made themselves the tools of the tool of the Tories. It is riot so much against the poor-law that they have voted, as against the ballot, the suffrage, and the abolition of Church-rates. The prac heal effect of their votes will tell much more strongly against these points than against that. Such is the first use made of the election by the Times. If the electors did not know what they were about before, they know it now. They have polled for coerced voting, for a restricted franchise, for Church rate impositions, warrants, and imprisonments. To those in telligent and sincere men among the working classes, who strive to raise the intellectual and moral characters of their fellow operatives, we would put it seriously whether they can expect the sympathy and aid which their professed objects merit. while they are, to all public appearance, identified with this unprincipled warfare against civil and religious liberty? The personal knowledge of, and confidence in, their integrity, must needs be limited. The public has a right to pledges. And any organised connection with the Chartist move ment in favour of Toryism, whether at Nottingham in the elec tion just decided, or elsewhere in anticipation of other elec tions, is a public pledge indeed, but a pledge of fraudulent pur pose, of crooked policy, and of disgusting unprincipledness. No perversion, fraud, or party tactics, however, should be allowed to obscure the fact that this Nottingham election is, to a certain ex tent, indicative of a public feeling relative to the new Poor-law that demands attention from the Legislature. By several amendments, supported or suggested, we had evinced our opinion on this point before the Nottingham election was thought of ; and we shall not decline the additional force thus imparted to our reason ings. It will not be forgotten, that by the Tory leader and the Tory party was the five years' amendment (as to the Com missioners' term of renewal) carried in preference to that for two years only ; and for every practicable mitigation of what ever in the Act is n:ost stringent on the poor we shall continue to plead, although without contaminating the humanity of such a course by the hypocritical and treacherous sacrifice to it of reforms so essential for public rights and interests as the intro duction of the ballot, the extension of the suffrage, and the abolition of the Church-rate imposition. The Morning Post of this day observes, in a leading article on the late divisions in the Commons ;—" the people should meet and petition the Crown for the dismissal of Ministers who have not the confidence of Parliament. If these Ministers will not go out, according to the constitutional usage hitherto existing, we see nothing for it but to drive them out by the urgency of popu lar demand. "—Th e M orn i ng H era ld t h us a ll u d es to the recent Ministerial defeat on Lord Howick's amendment :—" What is to be done with a leader in the House of Commons so powerful that he is bearded by a majority of twenty-one votes on a ques tion which he and his colleagues in office have already declared to be vital to the interest of Ireland, to the welfare of the United Kingdom ? The remainder of the debate supplies no answer to that question, undoubtedly. But it shows Lord Howick in the consistent exercise of that unenviable uncer tainty of purpose which, having utterly wrecked his guardian friends by forcing a division on his amendment, leaves them to get out of their dilemma in the best way they can."—The Times remarks, with reference to the Nottingham election :—" The immediate effect of this memorable election must be, to esta blish, beyond controversy, the superiority in point of importance of the Poor-law question over all other topics of political dis cussion now agitated in England." MONEY MARKET and CITY NEWS FROM THE MORNING PAPERS OF THIS DAY. TIMES.—The following, it is understood, aro the members of the deputation appointed by the Scotch banking interest to proceed to London to oppose any alteration or innovation, by the Committee of the House of Commons now sitting, on the Scotch banking system, viz.:—Mr. Findlay, of the Ship Bank, Glasgow; Mr. Donald Smith, of the Western Bank of Scot land; Mr. Crosbie, of the National Bank of Scotland; Mr. Anderson, of the Glasgow Union Bank; Mr. Milnes, manager of a Dundee Bank ; and Mr. Kennedy, manager of an Ayr shire Bank. From what is allowed to transpire of the pro ceedings of that Committee during the present Session, and which would seem to be characterized by no vigour or directness of purpose, it may be anticipated that this deputa tion will possess a degree of power and influence very difficult for them to resist or to control. Up to this time the Committee, or a majority of them, are believed to be in favour of a single bank of issue, under Parliamentary superintendence, for the whole kingdom ; but as scarcely an of them possess any direct knowledge of the subject, they are liable to be turned round by any artful or intelligent witness. Altogether the Committee is said to be very well attended, but Sir Robert Peel and Sir James Graham, though continually there, and giving a certain degree of weight to the Committee by their presence, do not take any lead in their proceedings. Under these circumstances, it is of course vain to anticipate what the report is likely to be when it makes its appearance. Money, which has become scarcer in the course of the last few days, is now considered to have contributed as much to the heaviness of the English stock market as the holding off of speculators on account of the approaching budget ; and to-day prices continued very dull till the Chancery broker came in and bought rather largely of money stock, which at once changed the aspect of things, although the advance gained was not very considerable. At the close of business money was worth full 3 per cent., and the market steady. In the prospect of an alteration of the law affecting joint stock companies, there is much discussion in the City as to the best plan of rendering them legitimate mercantile under takings, and less objects of mere speculation than they have generally been. Some think that the promoters should be made liable to the shareholders for the amount of their deposits, and this because the practice of putting persons of high rank in the direction, has often been the means of inducing persons to take shares who would otherwise pay no attention to the speculation. As an advantage is gained by the employment of these high-sounding names, it is thought by some at least no more than fair that this great inducement to the shareholder should be attended with something like re sponsibility. The fact is, that the more signal failures among joint stock companies have occurred in undertakings in which the list of Directors was, on the face of them, of the very first character. The way in which speculations are carried on, and the means of giving a fictitious value to shares, are likewise becoming objects of animadversion. It has been observed in some instances, that when there has been a difficulty in dis posing of the shares in the first instance, various attempts have been made to force them to a high price on the Stock- Exchange. One of these, atich has obtained the name of a " rig," consists in buying up a larger number of shares than have actually been allotted, so that when the time for de livering comes there is less than the quantity contracted fur. The prices being forced up, in some instances an advertisement appears, that the holders may have their deposits returned, that is, after having paid the forced price of perhaps 251., they may have 51, returned to them. Another evil com plained of is, the recklessness with which Acts of Parliament are procured for Companies which have not capital to carry their undertaking into effect, and which it has been suspected, in some instances, have more tended to the profit of the pro fessional gentlemen employed, than to that of any of the Share holders. This is accompanied by another evil, which is the readiness with which men of property put their names to deeds, without making themselves aware of their contents, and that in conjunction with parties who have no property at all. This imprudence, which is induced by a mania for speculation, is the more remarkable, as the very parties who are thus making themselves liable for thousands of pounds, would per haps use the greatest caution in examining an ordinary private deed, when the spirit of speculation was not at work. As for the splendid hopes held forth by several companies in their formation, and the small results that have taken place, a cor respondent, who has observed the practical evils of these joint stock undertakings, as they are carried on at present, has sent a list of at least 100 companies, brought out in the years 1824 and 1825, many with splendid promises, and scarcely one of which is known at present even to exist. As this matter is now before Parliament, this is the proper time for making sug gestions, and no doubt much remains to be disclosed. - Some mercantile correspondents express a desire that the hours of attendance on 'Change should be altered, and that the poriod should be from half-past 3 to 4. The wish seems to be pretty general, but as no one likes to begin, and run the risk of being the only person absent, they think a closing of the doors at 4 would be the only way to affect the altera tion. The custom, now so prevalent, of living out of town at some distance from the place of business has, in fact, pro duced a change of circumstances which has caused this desire for a corresponding change in the hours of business. SUN.—The Funds were all up again to-day, the public by their purchases having shown that they do not participate in the in clination of some of the jobbers to speculate on the mad scheme of a change of Ministry. For Money Consols were worth 89i in the morning, and before the close, had got up to 90/ and 90i ; for May the quotations were firmer at 90i to 901; Ex chequer Bills were marked 13s. to 15s. premium ; and India Bonds 2s. to 4s. prem. ; Bank Stock was at 1711 to 170, a decline of nearly 2/ per cent. It is difficult to state the pre cise reason of this fall, but it appears to be the uncertainty which prevails as to what decision will be come to by the Com mittee on currency affairs, whether the issue of notes will be recommended to be taken entirely into the hands of a Board of Commissioners appointed by Parliament, or whether one bank will have that power conferred on it under certain restrictions. The value of India Stock was 254/; the Reduced Three-and- Half per Cents. were 97/ to ; and the New Three-and-a- Half per Cents. 98a to / 1 -. The settlement in the Foreign House takes place to-mor row, and hence we have had but few bargains. Spanish Ac tive Bonds were at 231 to /,, Portuguese (New) Five per Cents. at 34h, and the Three per Cents. at 20/, being a slight improvement. Mexican Bonds of 1837 were at 30 to 294, and Colombian Bonds at 224, which is but a fractional alteration on the previous rates. Brazilian Bonds were 69 to 4, Buenos Ayres 23/, and Peruvian 174. French Five per Cents. were at 113, and the Dutch Two-and-a-Half per Cents. at 52g. The Railway Shares, though with but a limited business doing, were more buoyant to-day. Great Western 29k to 30/, Ditto New 14i, Ditto Fifths 7/ ; South-Western 20h to 20g, and Birmingham 70 premium. Brighton were 2to 2*, and North Midland 20 discount. The return of the circulation of Private and Joint-stock Banks stand thus:— PRIVATE. For the three months ending in December last X 6,575,8.38 Ditto March last ...... 6,34579 Decrease ......................... 4:253,259 JOINT-STOCK• To Decemb er , 1840 ...... £ 3,798,155 ........ 3,644,258 ..... To March, 1841 Decrease , .............. : .......... £153,897 This exhibits at once the caution exercised by the banking interests in England and Wales. The Second Edition of The Sun, with the news from America, was the first intimation received in the City of the President's death. !: EVENING EDITI ON: CORN AVERAGES GENERAL AVERAGE PRICES OF BRITISH i OT I N, For the Week ended April ' - '3, 1841, made up from the Bet 4 rns 0 the Inspector: in the different Cities and Towns in Et SI 2 " an d Wales, per Imperial Quarter. Wheat Os d. Oats Harley I'4. 41 I Rye AVERAGES OF THE LAST SUE WEEKS. Week ending: WHEAT, IRARLEY.I OATS. I RYE. I BEANS. Pr,' ketS; —. .........• 11 . 1arch1 0 63 9 33 2 23 0 36 6i 39 7 X' ! 2,1 April 2 9 f4 0 32 8 23 6 35 7 39 4 , 3 ; 2 16 63 8 32 6 '23 5 36 5 ..1.9 6 3 i 6 23 63 8 32 4 M 1135 8I 5C5 3 a z 10 IMPERIAL AGGREGATE AVERAGES OF THE PI . X W r i" KS Wheat 63s. 116. 1 Oats ......... 235. Id. I Beans .... ......39 . sd; Barley, ' 3 03 ,d. 1 Rye DUTIES 011 FOREIGN CORN. Wheat 23s. Ad. 1 Oats Barley l3s. Wd. 1 Rye THE MARKETS. COAL M AItKET. Ships arrived since last market day, 3. s. d. s; Adair's Carr's Hartley Chester ..., • l6 0 Walls End Larnbton ...... ... r 2 . South Hartley l6 6 Walls End Stewart's Tanlield Moor.. 2O 0 Walls End Caradoc . !.2 .. West Wylam .... 16 0 Walls End Cassop Wylatu Walls End Hilda ... N 0 Hartley 1 .0 Walls End Witham :OUNTRY CORN MAR. ETS. Wheat. I Harley. Oats. Beans. re •". ---- —...... ---- —...--- Per Quarter. s. to a. s. to a. lE.to s. a. to s. sto • 481,: Boston Braintree 6, ighton 59 (8 28 35 24 28 39 % 4 39 41 Cambridge — 62 27 22 39 V Chichester 56 62 23 34 22 24 40 42 134 4 2 Dunmow 59 60 32 36 22 31 35 40 33 43 Grantham 3rimsby 5l 64 27 33 IR 20 36 33 Hailsham 53 64 00 31 23 25 36 40 24. 26 Hitchin 53 64 30 37 22 30 34 45 -.--- Ipswich 5O 66 29 35 21 26 37 40 36 41 Lewes 59 66 30 34 t:2 2:3 31 34 34 • Lynn 5B 67 28 32 '22 26 36 40 36 .4 8 Maidstone 59 69 36 39 26 32 38 40 Norwich Petworth Romford 5O 74 30 35 22 30 36 44 36 44 Sandwich 62 71 30 31 26 30 55 43 39 411 Tnetford fo 62 30 32 24 97 39 40 40 444 Wisbecti ....,_ 60 65 2S 34 21 !eti :',6 39 34 37' Witham 5l 64 98 34 26 31 36 42 33 421 Yarmouth 62 66 31 34 124 30 40 41 39 39 LIVERPOOL CORN Al ARKET.—ApriI 27 WilEkT, English, White, per 7016.... --- Red 9 2 9 6 Scotch, Welch, and Manx Irish, White 7 2 8 4 -- Red . '7 0 8 4 Foreign OATS, English, Welsh, as Irish Foreign nARLEY, English, Malting, per Imp. quarter... ------ Scotch and Irish, per Nibs. Fitethrlg BEANS, English, per Imperial quaxtcr Irish, &c. Foreign PEASE, Englisn, per 1 mperial quarter --- Foreign FLOUR, English, per i 28011,. - Irish C.IATSIGAL, English and Irish, per • 140Ibs .NIOAN CORN, per 480th. RYE, per Imperial quarter MALT, per Imperial quarter ot Scotch, per 451 b.... 40 42 35 40 44 36 39 36 40 34 45 37 40 31 3i 36 40 38 40 38 40 40 42 36 44 :35 43 39 40 ::6 39 36 42 1 40 41 •April 27. 93. 44. to lOs 0 Ii 92 9 6 6 10 A 0 72 8 S 70 8 4 8 0 1; 11 210 3 6 31 3 2 0 ti 0 0 , 34 9 3 . 7 3 10 4 2 36 3 9 443 0 45 0 39 0 41 0 40 0 42 0 40 0 41 0 38 0 39 46 0 49 0 41 0 47 0 26 0 27 6 35 0 36 33 0 38 it 44 0 02 11- SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE. (LLOYD'S.) VESSELS SPOKEN WlTH.—Econotnist, Newport to Quebec,. 15th inst., lat. 42, lon. 10; Neptune, Plymouth to ditto, 24 lat. 44, lon. 26 ; a Swedish brig, frmn Pernambuco, 31st ult., lat. 32, lon. 38; French barque Loins, from Calcutta, same day ; Centurion, London to Calcutta, 11th ult., lat. 47, lon. '22, by the I. 0., arrived at Cork. Vrinity Yacht, bound to St. Michael's, Bth inst., lat. 39, lon. 23, by the Hank, ar rived off Dover. James, of London, lat. 5 N., lon. 21 W. ; Renown, of Greenock, lat. 7, lon. 21 ; I. sabella Ellen, of Lon.- don, lat. 49, lon. 7, by the Esperance, arrived at Portsmouth. Proteus, from Manilla and Singapore, lat. 14 S., lon. BW. ; Gondolier, Liverpool to China, lat. 5, ion. ; Janet, of Aber deen, lat. 2 N., lon. 23, by the Fourteen, arrived in 6* Downs. Melville, Messina to London, 22d ult., lat. 38, lon. 4; Shannon, Alexandria to Clyde, &c. ; Greyhound, Palermo to London, 28th, in Gibraltar Bay ; William Brown, Alogadore to London, 20th inst., lat. 47, lon 8, by the Tally-ho, arrived at Plymouth. Augusta, Calcutta to Cape of Good bound Jan., off Cape St. Agullas ; Elizabeth (with troops) to Madras, 4th ult., lat. I, lon. 23; a ship, supposed the Ser— pentine, for Trinidad, 23d, lat. 19, lon. 40; Fishermen, Of Jersey, 12th, lat. 46, lon. 17, and Alexander, from Liverpool, same day, by the Milford Reas, arrive xl at Plymouth. ARMY AND NAVY.—The i Tay Number of th,o United Service Journal, and Naval and Military Maga zine, contains, among other interestir g papers:—Voyage` of the Adventure and Beagle—Naval Recollections of the late American War—The Mutiny at Vellore, described by an Eye.witness—Tbe British Colonies .considered as Mili tary Posts, by Lieut.-Colonel Wilkie—Personal Adven tures in Georgia, Circassia, and Russia, by Lieut.-Colone l P. Cameron—Narrative by Lieut. Whitt . R. NJ., of bli! Capture and Imprisonment by the Carlis tit—The Mids to f Other Days—Notices of Steam Naviga tion—Albuherat Sir Henry Hardinge and Colonel Napier, in reply to Sir Lowry Cole and Colonel Wade—Abuses in Merchant Vessels—Remedies for Accidents in Stearn Navigation-- -. New •Armaments of the French Navy—.. Armaments of British Steamers—Distributions in full of the Navy and Army, with all the Professional Intelligence of the Month. MRS. MABEItLY'S NEW NOVEL, 4 , T0 ... 1 LOVE MATCH."—We are requested to state that the Pc7 novel, The Love Match," by Mrs. Maberty, authores__ of " Emily," in 3 vols. is published this day by Mr . of burn, of Great Marlborough-street, and may nom b e had at all the Libraries. Mr. Colburn has also just published the following new works of fiction —l. De Cliff' +rd ; or, the Constant Man, by R. Plumer Ward, Esq., as thor of " Tremaine," " De Vere," &c. 2. Joan of As; the Maid of Orleans, an Historical Romance, by T. J. Searle, Esq. 3. The Engagement. a Novel. 4. The Moneyed Man; or, the Lesson of a life, by Horace Smitb, Esq. 5. The Marriage Mart, or Society in India, a Novel, by an Intim] Officer. 6. Greville ; or, a Season in Paris, by Mrs. Gore; and 7. Legendary Tales of the Highlands, by Sir T. Dick Lauder. EDITED BY THEODORE Hoox, ESQ.--The May Number of " Colburn's New Month ly Magazine and. Humorist," contains—Fathers and Sons, by the Editor • A Tale of a Trumpet, by Thomas Hood, ,Esq. A PassaF ; 8 in the Life of Orlando Scrubb, by Laman Ellanchard, Es Thoughts on Prefaces. A Visit to the Paris Bourse. Flo' reign Sporting, by Nimrod—lndia, Ceylon, Russia, Gib raltar, New South Wales. The Bequeathed ,Heart, by 11. B. Peaks, Esq. The Life and Adventures .of Chants; Chesterfield, by Mrs. Trollops', illustrated by Phi:. Mi gbt against Right, a Romance of the Tyrol, by the Ho. E. Phipps. Debtor and Creditor, or an Old Account ne wly stated. Time's Changes. GOLD WATC HES.—A variety of excellent and carefully finished Second-hand Gold Watches, many of then i in accordance with the latest taste, with Gold Dials, JewAled, &c., are offered for selection, price Eight Guineas each, At T. COX SAVORY'S, Watchmaker, Gold and Silversmith, 47, Cernhill (Seen doors from Gracechurch-street), London. A printed warranty will be given, with fixed terms, on whit ib the Watches will always receive any attention required. Second-hand Watches purchased in exchange. SPOONS, FORKS, &c., superior to Silver for du rability, equal in appearance. Table Spoons er Forks, 12s. ; Dessert, 10s. ; Tea Spoons, ss. per dozen; Table Candlesticks, 8 inches high, 7s. per pair; the particular metal of whist, these articles are made is so like silver, that it can only be told from it by the stamp ; every article made ix silver s manufac. tured in this material by RIPPON and BURTON, Wells-street, Oxford-street, Who, to prevent imposition, confine the sato of it to themselves. Catalogues of prices gratis. BIRTHS. On the 25th inst., in Brook-street, Grosvenor-square, the Lady of John Alexander Hankey, Esq., of a daughter. On the 21st inst., at Drumcondra, Dublin, the lady of Assis tant Commissary-General Dinwiddie, of a son. On the 24th inst., at Newbottle Abbey, Dalkeith, the Mar- , chioness of Lothian, of a son. On the 24th inst., at North Brixton, Mrs. Edward Flower, of a daughter. On the 25th irnt., at Great Carlton, near Louth, the lady d the Rev. Stewart Forster, of a daughter. On the 26th inst., at Dangstein, Sussex, the lady of Jan' es Lyon, Esq., of a daughter. On the 24th inst., the wife of Mr. Walter Duke, surgeon , Hastings, of a daughter. On the 24th inst., at Everingham Park, the lady of W. C. Maxwell, Esq., of a son. MARRIED. On the 15th inst., at St. Luke's, Chelsea, James Bramridges EN., of Tunbridge Wells, to lady Colebrooke, relict of the late Sir James Edward Colebrooke, Bart. On the 22d inst., at Sandh'urst Church, Francis Buchanan Hoare, Esq., of Gloucester, to Gertrude, second daughter of W. Cother, Esq. , of the same place. On the 22d inst., at Brussels, Simon Pincoffs, Esq., of Man chester, to Matilda, second daughter of the late Solomon Gomes Da Costa, Esq., of Nelson House, Stoke Newington. On the 2tith inst., at Tottenham ' A. Abney Walker , Esq., to Elizabeth, daughter of the late George Anderson, Esq., of Monastreven, Kildare. On the 27th inst., at St. Mary's, B r y_anston-square, G. G. Y Richardson, Esq., of Sigglesthorne, orkshire, and Percy cross, Fulham, to Amelia Caroline, youngest daughter of John Bryant, Esq., M.D., of the Edgware-road. On the 27th inst., at St. Margaret's Church, Westminster, the Rev. Anthony Cottrell Le froy, of Ewshott House, Hants, to Anne, Commons,d augahnd Duke-street, terofothec.sltarteee, John Rickman, ,Esq., o f th e House of On the 27th inst., at St. Giles's Church, Camberwell, J. ts. Forman, Esq. o f Edinburgh, Advocate, t o H e l en K y d , e ld e st daughter of W. Scott, Escly of Cambe rwe ll -grove. On the 27th inst., at t Marys, Islington, Alfred, third son of the late M r. Samuel Rion, of Clapham, and Cockspur street, to Maria Louisa, youn ges t d aughter of Mr. Jame s Buyer, of the former place. DIED. the 20th inst., after a few days' illness, John Ea New Broad -street, and Barge-yard, Bucklers buvOrynn,siTnEutslegised"6a@ysl, th year of his age, most sincerely and deeply l am ented by his family and friends. On the 21st inst., at Elwick Hall, Durham, Mary Leigh , relict of the late Rev. W. Dickins, aged 72. On the 24th inst., Mr. William Painter, of Fleet-street. On the 24th inst., in Clifton-street, Finsbury, the Rev. J . Evans, M.A. V icar of Scalford, Leic estershire, and for 2 4 years head master of the Steyning Grammar-school, Sussex. On the 24th inst, Elizabeth, wife of Mr. William York, of Mitcham, aged 61. On the 25 t h i nst. , Ed war d, son o f E use bi us S ay , E s q., of Bury-street, St. James's. On the 26th inst., Arthur Blenkarne, third son of James Stocker, Esq., of Guy's Hospital. On the 26th inst., William Mann, Esq., of Newington causeway, Surrey, aged 72. On the 25th inst., in Torrington-square, Miss E. Perigell. of Berry Pomeroy, near Totnes, Devon. aged 67. On the 26th inst., at Brixton, Mr. Charles Schlotel, of the Stock Exchange, aged 36. On the 27th inst., Mary Bunn, youngest child of Robert Menzies, Esq., of Upper Stamford-street. In her 80th year, at Wem, Shropshire, Mrs. Hannah Wil liams, the mother of Sir John Bickerton Williams, Knt., LL.D., F S.A., of that place. On the 21st inst., at Lion's-down, Herts, A. Reid, Esq. London: Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, .° f No. 112, Strand, at The Sun 011ie°, No. 111!, Strand, ►n the county of Middlesex,—Thursday, April 29, Is4l. • Q HIP k 3 M, Her 11( `PiusslDEzi• At the I. Erielids to ntshopsgatt the followir • Admiral tt Ist. `props That"the tered en tin the directio 2dly._proi That this progres s of twos in pr, an undertal idly; —.pro/ That this efficient ser Honorary A designs of tl 4thly.—Prc That the ' 'night lion. eiety; and t dents, for tl have suppor sthly.—Pro That the lire due in Esq., the St went of the tention. to it 6thlY• —Pro That the the Chairm for the judici lions of the the past yea] 7he Chai It was pro That the night lion. Chair this di 6, Bnekl SHIPS The COI COMPANI TUESDAYS 1I y receive isseng T er e s n i ( Register, fra Zealand; to , The Tend nad, on appli The Direc Tender. Dated at broad street THE CLAUDI alnateurs of to supply all bent or expo &c., at They hare VIEWS, of the most rerc from the lir CLAUDET clas;iiarel; CHEA N-f articl Drawings, ai SHEET GI thick and CROWN NI FLUTED al COLOURE ancient. PAINTED GLASS SI Sold, who TUN,at the Where lists o CAU'I' l tZTRAcT TB Among tl more destruc etuset tbem duces tbo loft substar of the Teei *Lila away drop out will the loss of T On this su 4 _,..%lseervations J olloware ear %agog' could nuisance es based to proc _tag a skilful 1 seoses of eth feeling than smell are ali people, who I to the disgust Could sucl and gums, or breath, they ?rofessional bus much in good state besides, is n( If twenty prc very much c; And how oft, If the marri smote" The Irian Well known I rtieneed thi desirous of 1 1 re tl by eve , it is in ilexion, vender that hough the: oloured.. It11;;compl Rood set of Atimotieei, N On the ethe i breath, whit *variably p Regular ti tre an ornar tens nhe dc deaveur, by to artificial deficiencies able object, repulsive „..11onsieur ‘ l , l ford:•stre , Clergy, and eenttnues is ral Marmon • 'England, Mtbstance h 'ration is pe the cavity ilardens int( arresting all he most ex( 'action unn aged pers, rael, diseas beauty, to T 'south, file the roots or ritttre, With thi4 ad "ear tat, at A strAgle Ar A Set A complete A 'complete 'mounted I charged 1 An entire S neral Tee ate as 4 I T a n_ l j a t u O C swerin g n Toth in ma !Nice.q. you tee Op t ilifiwfx ~:.,, . . Annu: