The Sun. — London, England, 1842-06-29 00:00:00

ELECTION COMMITTEES. BELFAST. The Cemmit:oe - for - Conducting the Belfast inquiry met I yesterday at one °CIO& The . CoMMittee-room was I not opened till two, when it appeared that it had been decided to roimit the public, as in the case of the South ampton inquiry. The Committee consists of Mr. Liddell, Mr. Cripps, Mr. Pretheroe, - Sir B. Hall, Viscount Ebrington, Mr. Shawe, Mr. East, and Mr. Dennison. Mr. Emerson Tennent was present, and took notes of the prdceedings: The first Witness called was Mr.B. Gordon,- who stated that he was. a , burgess of Belfast, but not a registered • elector.. lle knew Mr. Dunbar intimately ; he did not . stand as a candidate at the last . election. Ile could not tell whether his reasons for not standing. were connected with any pecuniary arrangement, pend ing the last. petition. He was in London by accident, and was-present at an interview between Mr. Campbell and Mr. ti Neil, but had no authority to act. It was on the Wednesday morning that the Committee was to meet. Ile had no communication with Mr. Bates its to his (witness) taking any part in the compromise, but he glad .good deal of conversation about the petition. The conver sation between Mr. M'Neil and Mr. Campbell, referred to a t;nner one, at which witness was not present. It began - by - Campbell stating that he must have a thousand pounds ; Mr. Campbell was acting in behalf of the Liberal and petitioning party. The reply of Mr. M'Neil was, that if' the petition went on it would cost both par ties a great deal of money, and that it was a pity some . ;:arrangement had not been made. The thousand pounds was demanded to cover the expenses, 'as he had been 600/. - out ot pocket, and was sure that he owed 600/., more. The 4001. more was required to defray the expenses of the petition. Its• the matter was left to arbitration whether a thousand pounds should be paid or six hundred pounds, it was understood that Mr. M'Neil and Mr. Campbell should do their utmost to prevent a contest. . Mr. M'Neil was called. Was a Direetor of the Northern Banking Company. He was not aware that the Conservative Fund was lodged in the Bank. Ile did not know anything more of the Conservative Fund at the last eleetion, except that he subscribed ino/. to it him- He did not pay it into the Bank, but handed it ever to Mr. S. Thompson. There were other subscrip tions. He believed Mr. Gordon, the last witness, was also a subscriber. A Mr. Fenton also subscribed. He could not recollect the particular sums and names ; the whole -amount he hail heard was about 4,05)01.; he. did not know whether through the medium of the Bank, they could get at the amount of IIfiFEWS,' as he could not tell -whether Mr. Thompson kept it in the - Bank in his own name or not. He was in Lon don at the time the petition Was pending, on other hnslries•-;, and interfered to make an: arrangement, burr cot as compromise. He did not think that a coin promise where the petitioner had his prayer granted in 11,11, proposition or the arrangement passed from to ale. Campbell. He first suggested that the Conservatives should resign and go to a new election, and that himself and Mr. Campbell should use their in fluence to prevent a contest, as they had had five in the last ten years, and had spent ten thousand pounds on the last petition, when they unseated Lord Belfast and Mr. G ibson. Mr. Campbell regretted that such an arrange toent had not been proposed before they left Belfast. He and Mr. Campbell came to no agreement that day ' • ,he asked for money, - demanding a thousand pounds. 114 did' not agree to that, and the next morn ing Mr. Campbell called at his rooms, and represented that a great expense had been gone to in bringing wit nesses to London, and that it would cost as much more •' to get them back again, which might have been avoided had the, arrangement been concluded at Belfast. Wit ness thought that there was some justice in the representation, especially as the presenting the peti tion would only obtain the petitioners a void elte tion He agreed to let it be a void election, and - on condition that there should be no contest at the ensuing election, he agreed to pay Mr. M'Neil 600/. had not paid that sum, as he considered one of the conditiona was that the election should be gone into. The arrangement was made on the day the petition was tried. lie had heard that there had been bribery on both sides, butt did not know any instance of it. WO proof was to be 'Offered on the petition of bribery or personation. They got the opinion of Mr. Austin as to the validity (eche election, and it was unfavourable, four of the deputy returning-officers being under age, which was of itself sufficient to vitiate the election. Bribery was alleged in the petition, but no evi dence was taken on it, though AI:. Campbell told him he was prepared with evidence on all the points in the petition. There was no threat held out of start ing other candidates. He believed that Mr. I)unbar's Motive for declining to stand was a personal, not a pecuniary, one. Mr. Johnson subscribed, he be lieved, 1,000/. to the fund, but Mr. Emerson Ten neat did not give a farthing. He was not an elector, and did not vote. He did not know that any Conservative Committee was appointed ; he had attended meetings of ten, twelve, or twenty persons at a time, but he did not consider himself a member of the Committee. He did not read the case submitted to Mr. Austin, but ~aw his opinion ; that opinion was given to the oppo site party, and they got a copy of it. Mr. Austin was connsel for the opposite party. The opinion applied to every allegation of bribery, personation, and every sin under the sun usually put into an election ne:tition. The pint which he thought they shouldnot ,to tight. against, and on which he acted, was . . . . d-ine Of :file Inoths, and the juniority ottlyi Re yht-, arrangement was never put .••. Tito list, of 'deputies was mail„ I , Q be Nip. 'Vernon, the Returning-officer, and shown to both partieS, by whom they wore approved. He was intluels'eed by the state of the constituency, to propose the arrioigetm , nt ; the ikt of voters contained 5,000 flaw s, but h o dlid not believe that the bona fide voters were more than 2,000. The di&rence arose from a great unrulier of persons within the last eight years having removed ,two or three times, and appearing on the list jer o , flaw, or even wore times over. Under the Reform also, a large number of low persons had been put on. the , registry, who ought not to have been. put there. The state of the town, during an elec tion, was extremely riotous and • disorderly, and ttrisirand the state of the constituency, was what induced him to propose the arrangement. He had not yet paid coll.; but, Übe had done so, he was quite sure that his party would pay him again. He considered the 600/. was merely to reimburse the other party for the expense they had been at in bringing witnesses from Belfast. While the arrangement was pending between him and Mr. Campbell, Mr. Gordon and Mr. Ross were the only persons he c ommunicated-with. He did not communicate with them at all till after the petition was decided, and then he did not state the particulars, but merely said he had every reason to hope that there would be no contest at, the next election. He believed there might be some persons IA Belfast who were dissatisfied with the result iif the arrangement, such as those who had cars to hire, and those who were disappointed of what they might have expected to get. SOUTHAMPTON 'ThPi Committee met yesterday at twelve o'clock, the S. Worthy in the Chair.. Mr4IF,Aa.N said that as the presence of Mr. Blanchard was very necessary to him, as- being the agent of the Con servative party at the list election, he hoped he would be called before the Committee to give his evidence. Mr. BAtaEn said he would call Mr. Blanchard as soon as possible. Mr. Bla.nclinrd said that' he was looked upon himself as an agent in the ease. The eftmastAm said that there could be no objection , tti Mr. Blanchard's being present in that character. . . •Mr. Blanchard then withdrew to procure a written ap pOiniment of agency, and having produced one was al lowed to be present. • John Fleming Luce, who was called yesterday even ing, and did not answer to his name, was called again this morning: The Committee finding that he was not forthcoming, .Tohn Horn, a messenger of the House, was called, and proved that a summons was sent in the usual way to Mr. Luce. John Wren was recalled and examined—A bill for 301.. dran n by the witness upon Mr. Woulfe, of South ampton, and discounted by Mr. Abrahams, was handed in and proved. Mr. Stebbing had - the books relating to the festival which was given in Southampton in his possession. Saw them with him. Cross-examined by Mr. HEARN—With regard to the suppers and refreshments, which he stated were prepared in almost every public-house in Southampton, he would not undertake to give the names of any of them. He voted in 1820 for the Liberal candidates ; in 1830 ,he 'voted for the Tories; in 1832 for the Reform candidates; Aid not vote in 1835 ; in 1837 he voted for the 'Tories; and in . 1841 . for the Tories. He stated in his petition that the loshr,•eandidates in 1835 expended 2,0001.; had that in formation through Mr. Sharp, who exerted himself for Liberals; Mr. Parks, of Great George-street, told him . sO when he went to get his petition drawn. He stated in .his petition that the Conservative party lost 3,000/., and tate Liberal party 2,500/., or about that- sum, at the election of 1837. The late Mr. FAlWarcl Oak told him that the Tories expended that sum. He aleard *Om Mr. Parks, through Mr. Sharp, . that the Liberals ost 2,500/. ; to the best of his belief Mr. Pirizs told him that Mr. Sharp told him (Mr. Parks) s o. ' With.regard to the sum expended in 1841 he had his 'information from the same source. He means to say thet the names on the Finance Committee which he handed iii were those to whom the organisation of ex tensive brib..ng was committed. He was not a member of the Coincnit'Ve. Considers himself a member of the Bribery C-mflittee because he unfortunately was engaged in •-• various acts . of bribery. He was in the Filmic e Committee three times. Had not' a - right to go . thert I. - The Finance Committee sat up stairs in the Dolphin, the General Committee sat below stairs. Did not see Mr.',Abrahams in the Finance Com mittee. Put his name •,:lown as one of the members 01" it becaus e h e earr i t xl out the arrangements • of bri bery made, - by elr. He did not sec Mr. :itehhing titero. He put his name down because Mr. - i •eb,w" , a • told him th a t; Mr. tebbing dealt out . tne money very sparingly. Stebbing was the She riff, and h e did not rpri ., eir The room on that, account. Alt. Mackay 11 .- nd " Mr.. 13nnt'tt there. Sow Mr. Deaeon. i n 10 general fin maittoe vroom during the e;tnrafig. (Th e l i p :, • ess tact ~vent • over the evi dence he • Ltl book.) fie hall rev( cting the menaoranduin In his )ossession when he got the tipeaker's warrant ' rent tiring him to 'produce all books and papers, He did not produce that book.— Mr. Abrah ams d i d not from- see the book the time he.wrOte.his name it it. j t was a day or two be fore the election that Mr. Abrahm ns wrote his name in it. It was during the day. He wrotd the name at his shop -door. He (Abrahams) called wit a , mss as he was passinr, it is a jeweller's shop in the Iligh- n reet, ,Southampton. Jt is a public street. 'There mos no p e , rson present when fae wrote his name. His conuitini ; 4 lo‘ Ise was not far distant. It might be from 14 to 20'feet away. Wheni he received Mr. Abrahams' signature he believed he went home. The first time he showed it was, to Mr. Mackay to obtain the money for Twyford. He directed Mackay's attention to Abraham's signature. The first person he showed the book to after the election was Mr. u4Woulfe. He is a Whig. He showed it to him two months previous to the inves tigation before the late Committee. He did so because Mr. Woulfe was a friend and a tenant of his. He showed him the book, and said to him, you see what I can reveal, and I would wish to protect Mr. Abrahams. Hethough lie was justified in showing the book to him, from the treatment he received. To _ the COMMITTEE—The proteotion he requir ed was, that knowing the manner in which he was mixed up with the transactions of the late election, that the case should be laid before counsel to advise him how he was to proceed. He ap plied to the leading Conservatives of Southampton when he received the Speaker's warrant, and they did not off.er him the least protection. They left him to himself. Does not know what to attribute this change of conduct on the part of the Conservatives to. Had no fear that Mr. Woulfe would tell that he had such a book. The next person who saw the book was a member of the House of Commons. He does not at present recollect his name. He is a Scotch Member. After the late pro ceedings before the Southampton Committee he had no 1 wish to keep it a secret that he possessed this book. He had frequent conversations with Mr. Blanchard. lie told Mr. Blanchard that he spent money in bribing voters. He did not tell him he would blow up the Tory party. He saw Mr. Blanchard in his (witness's) house. It was a short time before the election. It might have been before the book was shown to Woulfe. Has not any dates. The book was at home when he appeared before the Committee. It was in his desk. His wife had the key of it. She saw the book. He never said that he was offered 3001. for the purpose of selling the Conservative cause. He never said so to Mr. Abrahams, or to the like effect. Did not say so to Mr. Pike or Mr. Coulson. If any person swears so, he will swear what is not the fact. He never received a shilling, or was made any offer by the Whig party. Mr. Abrahams was in the habit of discounting bills. He discounted a bill for him for 301. four months previous to the election. Mr. Abrahams gave him a cheque on his banker for 261. 10s., and kept 31. 10s. for discount.—(Laughter.) Mr. SlilELsuppose Mr. Abrahams is of the Jewish persuasion ?—(Laughter.) Witness—He is. He did not say anything to him about his signature. He asked him for protection. The witness then went on to detail the circumstances of Callan's case, and said that he told Mr. Parks he was offered 100/. by Mr. Brown. He did not know why it was not stated in the petition. The cross-examination was proceeding with, when it was announced that the Speaker was at prayers, and the Committee adjourned till twelve o'clock to-day. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS (From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.) MONDAY, JUNE 27. POOR-LAW AMEIVDMEN7' BlLL—in the Committee: MINORITY of Thirty-nine (Tellers included) who voted in favour of Mr. T. Dancombe's Amendment : Brotherton, J.—Salford Hollond, Robert—Hastings Brownrigg, J. S.—Boston Hume, Joseph—Montrose, &c. Callaghan, D.—Cork City iumphery, John—Southwark Cochrane, A.—Bridport James, Sir W. C.—Hull Collins, W.—Warwick Lawson, A.—Knaresborough Colville, C.—South Derby Marton, Geo.—Lancaster Crawford, S.—Rochdale Napier, Sir Charles—Mnrylebene Denison, E. B.—West Yorkshire PecheU, Captain—Brighton Dumdas, Admiral—Greenwich Richards, Richard—Merioneths Egerton, V. Tatton—Cheshire Sandon, Lord—Liverpool Egerton, Sir P.—So ut h Cheshire I , choletield, J.—Birmingh am Feilden, W. J.—Blackburn Sibthorp, Colonel—Lincoln Ferguson,Sir R. A.—Londonderry %Vakley, Thomas—Finsbui y l'rrand, W. B.— Knaresborough Wilbraham, Hon. R. a—Lanca- Fitzroy, Linn. Ilenry—Lewes shire Greenall, P.—Wigan Wortley, Hon. S.—W. Yorkshire Grimaditch, T.—Macclesfield , Yorke, H. IL—York Raiford, Henry—Leicestershire Hall, Sir Benjamin— Marvlebone Hamden, Renn—Great Marlow Hawkes, Thomas—Dudley TELLERS. Duncombe. T. S.—Finsbury /ridden, John—Oldham Tellers included) who voted for , which continues the Poor-law MINORITY of Seventy-six (' postponing the kirst Clause. Commissioners for five years : Ainsworth, Peter Duncombe, T. S. Arkwright, George Eaton, R. J. A. ttwood, M. Email, R. Beckett, William Farnham, E. B. Benett, John Ferrand, W. 8.1 Illack.stone, •W. S. Fielden, J. Blake, Mark Fitzroy. Hon. H Bowring, 1)r. Gore, Montague oroadwood, Henry tireenall, Peter Brockichurst, J. Grimsditch, Thomas Brothertou, J. Halford, H. Brownrigg, J. S. Hall, Sir B. Buck, L. W. hampden, Renn Burroughes, H. Hanmer, Sir John Busfeild, William Harris, Jehn Q. Callaghan, D. Hawkes, T. Cardwell, E. Henley, J. Warner Christopher, R. A. Hervey, Lord A. . ochrane, A. Hodgson, Frederick Collins, William Hornby, John Colville, C. It. Humphery, J. Crawford, W S. James, Sir W. C. Denison, E. B. Jervis, J. D'lsraeli, Benjamin Lawson, Andrew Douglas, Sir 11. Liddel, H. I'. Duke, Sir James M.isterman, John Mundy, E. Miller Napier, Sir Charles O'Brien, A S. O'Connell, D. O'Connell, J. Pal.r.er, Robert Palmer, George Pechell, Captain Polhill, Frederick Pollington, Viscount Richards, R Scholelleld, J. Sibthorp, Colonel Smythe, Ho G. Stewart, John Stuart, H. Taylor, J. A. Walker, R. Wallace, It Williams, W. Wodehouse, Hon.E. Yorke, H. R. TELLERS. Wakley. Thomas Wortley, Hon. J. 3,. Same Clause :—Amendment proposed, to leave out the words " Assistant Commissioners :"—Question put, " That the words' Assistant Commissioners' stand part of the Clause :" The Committee divided : MAJORIT Y— AYES, 228. Acland, Sir Thomas Fuller, A. E. O'Brien, J. Aciand, T. D. Gaskell, J. M. Ogle, S. C. N. A'Court, Captain Gibson, T. M. Palmer, R. AdclerleY. C. B. Gill, Thomas Palmerston, Viscount -.1.....,:tfiu.--ai.___ Gladstone, W. E. Parker, John Alford, Visco unt ----- " - Allix, John Peter Antrobus, }Around Bailey, J. Baring, W. B. Baring, F. T. Barrington, Lord Riteson, Robert Bellew, tt. as. Bentinck, Lord 0 Beresford, Major Blackburn, John 1. Blake, M. J. Bodkin, W. H. 9otfield, Beriah Bradshaw, James •iramston, T. W. Broadley, Henry Brooke, Sir A. B. Brotherton, J. Browne, R. D.- Browne, W. Bruce, Lord E. Bulkeley, Sir R. B. W. Boller, C. Bailer, Sir J. B. Y. Burrell, Sir C. M. Burroughes, N. N. Bit fel d, Wm. Cardwell, Edward Cavendish, Hon. C. Cavendish, Hon. 0. Cnarteris, Hon. F. Chelsea, Viscount Chetwode, Sir John Childers, J. W. Cholmondeley, H. Chute, W. L. Clayton, R. R. Clerk, Sir G. ('live, E. A. Cive, R. H. Cowper. Hon. W. Craig, W. Gibson Cripps, J. Darner, Hon. Dawson Darby, George Downey, Hon. W. Denison, John Evelyn Dickinson, F. H. Douglas, Sir Howard Dugdale, W. S. Duncan, Lord nuncios, David East, James Buller Eaton, Richard J. Ebrington, Viscount Egerton, W. T. Eliot, Lord Elphinstone, Howard' Escott, Bichkam Fstcourt, 'l'. G. B. Evans, William Fellowes, Edward Filmer, Sir E Fitzroy, Hon. H. Fleming, J. W. Blower, Eir James Follett, Sir W. W. Forbes, William Forester, Hon. G. Forster, Matthew Gcrdon, Hon. W. Gordon, Lord F. Gore. Robert Goring, 11. D. Goulburn, H. Graham, Sir J. Greenaway, C. kTrey, Sir G. Grimston, Lord Grogan, Edward Hale, R. B. Hamilton. W. J. Harcourt, G. G. Hardinge, Sir H. Hawes, B. Hervey, Lord A. Hill, Lord .Marcas Hobhouse, Sir J. C. Hogg, J. W. Hope, Charles Howard, Lord Howard, I'. H. Howard, H. Howard, Sir R. einwels. Lord Hughes, W. B. Hussey, Thomas Hutt, W. Jackson, J. D. James, W. Jerruyn, Earl Johnstone, Sir John Johnston; Hope JellifFe, Sir W. Jones, T. Kemble, Hem Kerr, D. Knatchbull, Sir E. Knight, Henry Gaily Knightley, Sir C. Labouchere, H. Lascelles, W. S. Lefro.y, Anthony Legh, George*C. Lennox, Lord A. Lincoln, Earl of Lindsay. H. Litton, E. Lockhart, William Lowther, J. H. Mackenzie, W. F. MacGeachy, F. A. Mainwaring, T Mangles, B. U. Manners, Lord C. Manners, Lord J. March, Earl of Marshall, W. , Marsham, Viscount' Marsland. H. Martin, John Martin, C. W. Master, 'l' W. C. Meynell, H. Hiles, P. W. S. Mitchell. T. A. Neville, Ralph Nicholl, J Norreys, Sir D. Norreys, Lord O'Brie ',lA.lStafford Peel, Sir - Rohert, Peel, Jon Allan Pentlarves, E W. • Plumridge, Captain Plumotre, J. I'. Polhill, F. Pollock, sir Fred. Ponsonby, Hon. John Powell, Colonel l'raed, William T. Pringle, Alexander Pusev, Philip Rashleigh, William Reid, Sir J. It. /tree, E. B. Iticardo, John Lewis Rose, Sir George; Rous, Hon. Captain Rundle, John Hushbrooke, Colonel Russell, Lord John Russell, Lord E. Ryder, 0. D. Sanderson, R. Scarlett, Hon. R. C. Seymour, Sir H. B. Shaw, F. Shell, It. L. Smith, Abel Smith, Vernon Somerville, Sir W. Stanley, Lord Stanstield, W. R. Strutt, Edward Stuart, Lord J. Stuart, W. Vidiers Stuart, IL Stint, H. C. Sutton, Hon. H. M. 'Pathos, C. ft. M. Thesiger, F. Tnompson, Ald. Thornely, Thomas 'll rnhill, George Tollemache, F. J. Trench, Sir Frederick Trevor, Hon. G. R. Trollope, Sir John Trotter, John Mina, Henry Vane, Lord H. Vernon, Granville Vivian Hon. Captain Waddington, H. S. Watson, W. H. Wawa', John T. Welby, G. Fade Whitmore, T. C. Wodehouse, Edmond Wood, C. Wood, Colonel Wood, Colonel T. Worsley, Lord Wortley, J. Stuart Wyse, Thomas Yorke, Ron. E. T. Young, John TELI.LIIB. Fremaritka, Sir T. Baring, 11 B. :NORITY—NOES, Duncombe, T. S. Etwall, It. Belden, J. I:errand, W. B. treenail, Peter Grimsditch. T. tiallord, H. Hall, Sir B. flanmer, iir John Harris. John Q Hawkes, T. Henley, J. W. Hodgson, F. Hodgson, R. Hoßond, Robert Jervis, J. Arkwright, George Attwood, Bagge, Wm. Blackstone, W. S. Brocklehurst, J. Brownrigg, J. S. Buck, Lewis NV. Callaghan, Daniel ..:oclirane. A. Mundy, E. M. Napier, Sir Charles O'Connell. D. O'Connell, J. Pechell, Captain Pallington. Viscount Richards, Richard Scholefield, J. Sibthorp, Colonel Taylor. J. A. Walker, R. Wilbraham, R. B. Williams, Wm. Cpliins, w. Cplville, C. R, Z:rawio;cl, W. S. Denison, E. Beckett Douglas, - Sir C. K Douglas, J. D. S. Duke. Sir James TELLERS. Wood, Benjamin Wakley, Thomas SAILING MATCH. ARUNDEL YACHT CLue.—The first above-bridge sailing match of the season took place on Monday, the distance being as usual from the Temple-gardens to Wandsworth-meadows and back. Since the establishment of this club, which is governed by many of the gentlemen holding office in the Royal Thames Yacht Club s fresh regubitions have taken place in other sailing societies, and we believe, with one exception only, it is the only club that-contends annually above bridge. The freshness of the wind, the equality of the yachts entered, and the fineness of the weather, combined to render the match both interesting and attractive. The prize was a very handsome silver cup and cover, and the following had been entered to contend:— Briton, 7 tons, Mr. J. Gardner, blue—Ocean, 5 tons, Mr. Rees, white over red—Dauntless, 7 tons, Mr. T. Edwards, blue with red cross—Hazard, 6 tons, Mr. Charles, red, white dice—Rocket, 6 tons, Mr. Stanton, red over white. The wind was W. N.W., and as much as the little fleet could well stand under. At half-past three the Commodore, T. Hewes, Esq., having taken his seat in the cutter, the signal was given and they were off. The sailing up was such as to show the powers of the boats to a wind, and in a succession of boards the science of sailing was developed toits utmost extent. The Rocket had the weathermost station, but the Briton led the way up, the Hazard 'waiting close upon her, and the Ocean third. The Briton held her way beautifully, gradually draw ing further in advance as the wind freshened, but falling off when it. became more calm. The Briton first rounded the flag boat off Wandsworth meadows, the Hazard about 200 yards a stern of her, and the Ocean a trifle more in the rear. The light running work was to come. and the Briton was gallantly spanking before the wind, when they encountered an accident. In lowering the sprit of th e m i zen to pass under Battersea bridge, the boom of the Briton rested on the yoke of the rud der; the boat, of course, sheared, and her bowsprit took the pile, and tore the bits out. The Hazard, in consequence of this mishap, ran by her; but the captain of the Briton, having spliced, went in pursuit, and, in the last board in Lambeth !leach, near ly overhauled her. The Hazard, however, con tinued the lead, and won the match ; but in earning in the bowsprit was close on her mizen. It was won b y a second only, oniy. m The match was very numerously attended. A large steam-frigate o f 540-horse power is about to be constructed in the dockyards at Toul on . P r i nce de Joinville, in his voyage to America , paid great attenti on t o th e application of steam to naviga tion, and tins constructi on i s , i t is said, to be made after the models which he visit e d. The Hamburgh Correspondent states from H anover June 15, that the Chambers of that kingdom will be pro rogue d on the 3d of next month. The Ki n g , it is said, intends to go to the baths of Ems, and will, in the autumn, be present at the military exercises in the provinces of the Rhine. THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY MORNING, JUNE 29, 1842. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. • The Duke of WELLINGTON said the. Noble Lord certainly could never have thought that letters strictly private could have been - laid before that House. It was stated that these letters were priVate, but that they had been quoted in the Report which had been laid before the Housc.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord wished to know to whom all these letters had been addressed. and he wished to have all the answers to them.—(llear.) He (the Duke of Wellington) thought it was a motion to which the House should not agree ; and if the Noble Lord had given 'notice of his motion, he (the Duke of. Wellington) should have recommended him 'net to move for private letters. He thought his NOble Friend should withdraw his motion, and it might be a very proper sub- , ject for discussion hereafter, to inquire how far the let ters were written with a view to influence a Report. Those private letters might perhaps come out in that discussion._ _ _ . HOUSE OF LORDS, June 28. Their Lordships met at Five o'Clock. Several Bills upon the table were advanced a stage. A message from the Commons brought up the Muni cipal Corporations Act Amendment Bill (Ireland), Ron ma's Naturalisation Bill, Les Bazielles' Naturalization Bill, and other Bills, which were severally read a first time. IRISH MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS BILL. On the motion of the Duke of WELLINGTON, this Bill was read a first time. The NOBLE DUKE also gave notice that he should move the second reading on Thursday , next. THE FOREST OF DEAN BILL. _ _ This Bill went through Committee, and was ordered to be read a third time on Thursday. ADMINISTRATION OF OATHS. r. The Earl of MOUNTCASHEL replied. To all the letters which Mr. Phelan wrote, he signed himself as " 1). Phelan, Assistant Poor-law Commissioner." Now, if Mr. Phelan had signed his name just " D. Phelan," it would then appear as if they came front the individual D. Phe lan ; but " AssiStant Poor-law Commissioner" being an nexed made them official documents, and public thkett tnenta, n otwithstanding the word " private" was pre fixed. Ile did say, then, that the Poor-law Commis sioners were bound to furnish those letters. Sufficient time had elapsed, to have enabled them to have obtained answers from all the persons who had been written to. He thought that such conductshould not be borne ; if their Lordships, however, were.sonteiit to bear it pa tiently, be was content to do so too. He begged leave to withdraw his motion. The Duke of RICHMOND objected to the Noble Lord's withdrawing his motion, and moved instead—That it be rejected. The question was then put. and the motion was rejected. The Earl of MOUNTCASHEL gave notice, that on Friday he would present a petition from the Medi& Association of Ireland, on the subject with which he had this evening troubled them. In presenting that petition he would have an opportunity of going more at length into. the . whole question.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) JURISDICTION OF JUSTICES. On the motion of the Duke of RICHMOND, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lord Chancellor, the Lord President. the Duke of Richmond, the Bishop of London, the Bishop of Durham, the Marquis of Lans downe, the Bishop of Salisbury, the Bishop of Chichester, Lord Melbourne, Lord Wynford, Lord Brougham. Lord Cottenham, and other Noblemen, were appointed a Corn mittee to inquire into the . mode of administering oaths. Th e LORI) NCELLOR informed the House that the Bill which had passed for uttering the jurisdic tion.of Justices of the Peace, would come into operation in the middle of the quarter sessions, and thereby occa sion great inconvenience. He had prepared a short Bill to postpone the operation, which he now laid on the table. The Bill was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second ti lone tomorrow. The House then adjourned. ROUSE OF COMM-ONS, Jane 28. The SPEAKEK took the Chair shortly before Four &Clock. The Sheriffs of London appeared at the bar and pre sented,a petition from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Commons of the City of London, in Common Council assembled, stating that the petitioners had learned that bribery and corruption were practised at the last gene ral election for Members to represent the Commons of England in that House, which, if persevered in, would subvert the Constitution anti revolutionise the country, and thereby destroy the happiness of the people. Tho petitioners, therefore, prayed that the House would take measures effectually to prevent the recurrence of such practices in future. PRIVATE BILLS. Rotima's Naturalization Bill was read a third time and passed. The Lords' amendments to the Stockton and Hartle pool Railway Bill were agreed to. The amendments to the Report on the Blackburn and Chorley Road Bill were read a second time, and the Bill was ordered to be re-committed. _ _ The Lords' amendments to the Liverpool Poor Bill were agreed to. NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRh L AND). Mr. SEIAW presented petitions from places in Ire land against the present system of National Education in Ireland. had been taken to apprehend the perpetrators, of it.. None had as yet been taken, but he hoped that the leaders would soon be brought to justice. BUSINESS 01? . .mE HOUSE. Mr. LABOUCHERE had last night understood the Right Hon. Baronet to say that he should to-day first move the third reading of the Tariff Bill, next the third reading of the Colonial Customs Bill, and then the Committee on the Poor-law Bill. Now from the Votes it appeared that the Right Hon. Baronet had given notice that he would move the third reading of the Tariff Bill first, then the Committee on the Poor law Bill, and lastly the Colonial Customs Bill. Sir ROBERT PEEL said the Right Hon. Gentleman was perfectly right in his recollection. He (Sir R. Peel) was surprised when he saw the Votes this morning; and if the House had uo objection he would adhere to the course which he had originally proposed to the House. COINAGE OF HALF-FARTHINGS. Mr. HLJME, seeing the Right Hon. the Master of the Mint in his place, wished, as a proclamation had been sent to him with respect to the coinage of half-farthings, to ask whether it was a hoax or really the ease? Mr. GLADSTONE said the Hon. Member should by right have put his question to the Chancellor of the Exchequer ; he would, how 'ver, inform him that it was riot a hoax that the Government intended to make an issue of such coin ; it was not, however, a coinage in tended exclusively . for the people of this country, bat such a coin being in request in some of the colonies, it had been thought advisable to issue such a coin. DISTRESS IN PAISLEY. Mr. WALLACE, seeing the Secretary of State for the Home Department in his place, begged to inquire if it was true that the Commission and Commissioners, who had been intrusted to provide for the destitute poor in Paisley, had been withdrawn ; and, secondly, whether they had left means behind them to provide fir the desti tute population? Sir J. GRAHAM said that the gentlemen adverted to had not been sent to distribute public money, but charitable funds raised for a charitable purpose, and their servicesbeing no longer required they had left Paisley. The subject then dropped. -CORPORATIONS (IRELAND) BILL. Lord ELIOT moved the third reading of the Corpora. tions (Ireland) Bill. Mr. O'CONNELL said that the Government were entitled to great credit for having taken upon themselveS to bring forward the present measure. He believed it would be productive of great good. The Bill was then read a third time, and passed. NOTTINGHAM COMPROMISE. The Order of the Day was then read for the attend ance of John Walter. Esq.. at the bar of the House ; and Mr. Walter having come to the bar, The SPEAKER then called upon the Clerk to read the Special Report of the Committee, presented yesterday. The Clerk having read the Report, . The SPEAKER said that he had now to ask Mr. John Walter, whether he had any further statement to make besides that contained in the Report just read ? Mr. Walter said he begged to assure the House, that in refusing to attend that Committee he was very far feuds offering any disrespect to the House ; neither did he feel any reluctance to lay before the Com mittee appointed by that House the fullest explanation in his power of all the transactions in which he was personally concerned as connected with the late elec tion far Nottingham ; on the contrary, he should feel excessively painetLif he were prevented, by what he conceived to be a paramount duty, from rendering obe dience to the House by declaring all he knew. He hoped that it would be considered additional proof of his re spect for the House, if he abstained from consuming its time by any lengthened defence of the course he had taken—a course dictated by the deepest and most con scientious sense of the obligation imposed upon every subject of the British Crown, to stand upon his constitutional rights, and to demand that he should be tried by none but an impartial tribunal, to which personal prejudice and affection should be alike unknown. He had receive] a summons at a quarter past three o'clock last Friday, requiring his attendance forthwith, with an injunction to produce paperS he had never evenseen, especially the much talked of compromise. The House was now in possession of the grounds which had induced him to take the course he had pursued.. He believed it would be difficult to find any parallel in the records of a free State, any example, any precedent, not already revoked with indignation by the public voice, for a proceeding by which a subject was to be arraigned before a Court, the presiding mem ber of which had used expressions of so much personal hostility as the lion, and Learned Member for Bath had used respecting him ; and the House would be pleased to observe that those expressions were used, not pri vately, not in a whisper, but openly and loudly in that very House, in the superior tribunal . itself from which the inferior tribunal, over which the Honourable Member presided, had emanated. He trusted, therefore, that he might claim the indulgence and protection of the House, when placed, by no act of • his own in so embarrassing a position. Having, with all deference to the House, made those observations, which be hoped would be considered in the nature of a respect ful protest, he would submit himself to any order which the Speaker would think proper to address to him, and he planed himself in the hands of the House. The SPEAKER then asked, whether any Hon. Mem ber had any question to ask ? No question having been put, The SPEAKriI, addressing Mr. Walter, said—You may -withdraw. Mr. Walter having, acs'ordingly, withdrawn, Mr. ROEBUCK rose an said, that he conceived he should best perform the duty in nosed upon him, which was a ministerial one, .as ChairMait of-the Committee appointed to inquire into certain proceedings relating to the late election at Nottingham, by moving simply, in the formal terms, " That Mr. Walter do attend the Committee, and give his evidence, to-morrow, at eleven o'clock. Sir W. SOMERVILLE seconded the motion. The question having been put, • Sir R: H. INGLIS ruse and said, that he retained the opinions he had already repeatedly expreSsed. He hal, On a former occasion. alluded to the position of the Hoe. and Learned Member for Bath, to whom he might now refer, without being guilty of any informality, because he was the -individual who had moved the attend ance of Mr. Walter. If he had been ini - orinei on a former occasion, he trusted he should not now be violating courtesy or propriety by addiessing himself more especially to him. He would not enter into the question how far the individual who had lately appeared at the Bar of the House might or might not have a right to complain of the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath. -Strictly speaking, no party had a right to allude to former discussions in that House. He hoped, however, that the House would not enforce in the present instance that technical rule. Mr. Walter had no doubt been guilty of a breach of privilege in re ferring to a former speech of the Honourable and Learned Member for Bath ; but. he (Sir R. H. Inglis) hoped and believed there was nis Hon. Member Who would think Mr. Walter had improperly violated any privilege by. making that allusion. Bat if that reference was made, and made blamelessly, and if the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath did not deny that he used those words, he owned he could not understand upon what principle the one could sit as judge, or the other could be blamed for refusing to appear as a criminal.—(Loud cheers.) He thanked the I-lon. and Learned rtecorder for Dublin for correcting an error ; Mr. Walter was not criminal it appeared, he was only accused. The distinction might be suffi ciently clear to a legal mind ; but it was not so clear to the majority of that, House as to make it very important what would be used. Practically speaking, every individual called before .that Committee, •by the acknow;edgMent mad© on the previous day, was summoned before an inquisitiori.(Hear, hear.) He used the word delibe rately. He was called before an inquisition, in which, without knowing who might have been heard before him, or who might be heard after him, he is to answer before an individual who Lad declared himself personally aggrieved by him. He was :here required to answer any such questions as the majority of the Committee might think fit, touching every matter connected with the last election for Nottingham ; and without seeing his accusers, without seeing any witness, he was compelled to sub ject himself to their inquisition.—(Hear, hear.) . He had understood that the Committee had. resolved that whenever an allegation was made against any individual, that person should have due notice given him of it. Would that be tolerated in any court of law whatever ?—(Hear, hear.) Was there any court in England, in which such a perversion and denial of law and justice would be permitted ?—(Cheers.) He did not look to one side of the House or the other; he appealed to the liaise generally, and he asked them as English gentlemen, whether they would consent to the continuation of this system ? He bad intended, a few nights ago, when he heard that an - Honourable Member had been refused admittance to the Committee as a party, though he was told he might be admitted if he insisted on his right as a Member, to have tried whether this tri bunal, giving it credit for every impartiality and desire for justice, ought not to conduct their proceedings on the same principles upon which every other Court of England, from the highest to the lowest, :conducted its inquiries, with one memorable exception. That exception was- the Star Chamber—and in another country there was another exception in the Inquisition. Let him not be told of time case of a Grand Jury ; that was a preliminary inquiry, and there was a wide dis tinction between that tribunal • and the tribunal which the house had; he ventured to say, too hastily, instituted,' A traduced persoil required to appear' . and subunit himself to. seven judges. Admitting that they were of absolutely unimpeachable character, was it fitting that an English subject should be called - before this tribunal without any power of protect ing himself, when, if it were a jury, he might challenge the jurymen? The Hoe. and Learned Member himself (Mr. Roebuck) would riot contend' that he should sit as a juryman at the trial of Mr. Walter, and if not as a juryman ought he sit as a Judge ? But the lion. and Learned Member was not the only party with whom the House had to deal. Mr. Walter had appeared at the lair of the House, had made his protest, and stetted his willingness to sub nut to its order. With that order he did not, in tl:e circumstances of the case, think it his duty to interfere. Who had been Mr. Walter's advisers, or whether he had had any at all, he (Sir R. Inglis) knew trot ; but, if lie had been his adviser, he would not have counselled him to take the course he had done. In his opinion he had relinquished the high ground upon which he might have stood. First, by writing the letter which he had done; and, secondly, by the statement that he had made to the House. Then they bad a witnes4, but a different case might occur. With that ;will ing witness they might deal as thy thought fit; but suppose an individual should claim the bn nrtit, not of the law of the country, but of the principle of ;he law? —(Hear.) An individual might claim to be-tried'before TITHE COMMUTATION ACT. The Bishop of LLANDAFF presented a petition from the Rev. Henry Bird, against portions of the Tithe Owl - mutation Act. _ _ The Bishop of LONDON--presented a similar peti tion, from a clergyman,,tn Essex. Tho Tithe Commutation Bill (England and Wales) was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Thursday. SLAVE TRADE. The Slave Trade Abolition (Argentine Confederation) Bill, the Slave Trade Suppression (Hayti) Bill, and the Slave Trade Treaties Bill were read a third time. MEDICAL CHARITIES (IRELAND). Lord MOUNTCASHEL rose to call the attention of the House to a subject very short of breach of privilege„ He had moved for a return of certain papers, and these papers had not been furnished to the House. Mr. Phelan had refused to comply with their Lordships' order to' give a return of the answers which he had re ceived from 93 persons, to whom his letter, marked private, was addressed. He made that refusal with the sanction of the Poor-law CommiSsion ers, from whom he obtained leave to insert in the appendix to the returns made by their Lordships' order, only fourteen letters which happened to be favourable to the views of the Commissioners. The latter gentlemen, assuming to themselves.- an " autocratic " power—(A laugh, and cries of " Hear" from Lord Glengall)—and defying their Lordships' orders, entered a minute on their books, that " Mr. Phelan might deposit in their office copies of such letters as he thought he might publish without breach of confidence, and that he might retain the others in his possession until they should be again called for." Now he (Lord Mounteashel) had had com communications with several of the persons from whom those letters, withheld by Mr. Phelan as confidential, were received, and those gentlemen denied in positive terms that they at all wished their letters to be suppressed on the plea of confidence, but on the contrary, they assured him that they were must desirous that their answers to the Assistant Commissioner's private letter should be made as public as possible. The Noble Earl then read a letter from a medical gentleman, addressed to Mr. Phelan, and informing that gentleman that, if the latter did not publish his letter, he (the writer) would.,--(llear, from Lord Glengall.) In fact, the Commissioners had deceived their LordshipS, and had made to their Lord ships' orders what he felt himself justified in designating as false returns.---(Hkar, hear, from Lord Glengall.) Then, when these measures were suspected, and an order was issued by their Lordships for the pro duction of papers, how did these Poor-law Commissioners act ? Why, they sneaked into a corner, and put the word "private" before them. They thus concealed the truth, and kept back the facts. He conceived that their Lordships had not been properly treated; and this was the question—had they, or had they not received proper treatment from those persons ? If their Lordships did not respect themselves others would not respect them.—(Hear, hear.) He need not remind them that this was not the first time such con • duct had taken place, and it had been enacted by the same persons ; he would just call to their mind, however, the occasion of John Butler being elected returning officer for Clonmel, when precisely the same conduct took place. He thought the Poor-law Commissioners had been guilty of a gross contempt of the orders of their Lordships' House, and he did hope the matter would not be allowed to pass over.—(Cries of " Move, move.") It was not his intention at first to have made a motion on the subject ; he begged now, however, to move "That all the letters which have not been furnished according to the order of your Lordships' House shall be furnished forthwith." Lord WHAItNCLIFFE said it appeared to him that the Noble Earl scarcely knew where to lay the blame of the conduct of which he had complained. He (Lord Wharncliffe) thought the Commissioners were quite ready to lay before the House all the letters, if their Lordships required them ; and he said so now on the part of the Commissioners. His Noble Friend seemed to think that this was a breach of the Act of Parliament. It was no such thing; there was no breach of the law at all. Now, with respect to these letters. They were written by Mr. Phelan, were all marked " private," and a paragraph at the end stated that they were to be con sidered as private. Mr. Phelan gave in a list of o whom these letters had been written. He receive answe o -S~:vrn of those they had the letters of fourteen who consented to the publication. The question, then, was, would the House of Lords compel the production of the remainder? (Hear, hear.) He thought that when a number of persons were applied to under. a promise' of confidence to express their private opinions upon any'subject, their Lordships would not require those letters to be pub lished. The Noble Earl (Mountcashel) stated that seve ral gentleman wished thoSe letters—it was in their own power to have their wish accomplished. The Duke of RICHMOND commended what had been said by the Noble Lord who last spoke ; and he thought it was much to be regretted that Noble Lords indulged in such strong language as their Lordship's had heard this evening, respecting public officers.—(Hear.) The Earl of GLENGALL would not occupy their Lordships by dwelling upon this subject, of which they would hear enough on Thursday or Friday next, when there would be presented to them petitions from the Me di cal Association of Ireland. He was not one of those who wished to use strong language in the House respect ing public officers, but he would say that there was not five lines of truth in the Medical Report of the Com missioners. The whole scheme of writing those letters, and making them private, was to get up that Report, for the purpose of placing the appointment of the medical officers in the hands of the guardians, who were all elected by the priests and the agitators. Lord MONTEAGLE deprecated those discussions in which the most unmeasured language of vituperation was indulged towards the Commissioners of Poor-laws, the late Government, and every one that did not concur i n the political opinions of certain Lords. Whilst ha could not agree that the Poor-law Guardians were the mere tools of the priests and agitators, he wou!ii con cede this much, that a great deal of political agitation and religious fervour had entered into the elections of guardians. But surely the course pursued bythe Noble Noble Lords oppoSite (the Earls of Mounteashel and Glengall) was calculated to keep up the irritation instead of (what all real friends of Ireland desired) allaying that irritation, and removing party feeling as much as possible from the consideration of the subject, from which, of all others, it ought to be excluded—that was the treatment of the poor.—(Hear, hear.) He thought that discussions of this kind could end in no good. The Poor-law Commissioners acted in perfect good faith, and so did Mr. Phelan. The motion of the Noble Earl was to have all these letters laid before them. He (Lord Monteagle) thought they could not act more improperly than by calling upon a person holding an official situa tion to betray a private trust ; and what could be be traying a private trust more palpably than giving up private letters to be publicly examined ? He thought such a course most inju.dicious, and he called upon their Lordships to oppose the motion of the Noble Earl. The Marquis of WESTMEATH supported the view s of his Noble Friends near him. He would not enforce the prodnetion of the letters, but he knew that they were obtained with a view to this Report, upon which a Commission was to be founded, with Mr. Phelan at its head: Lord WHARNCLIFFE said the Report could not have been founded upon the letters, because the letters were not written till after the Report was made.—(Hear, hear.) He must say that it did not appear to him that the least blame rested upon the Commissioners. Earl WICKLOW said the question was whether the Commissioners deserved those censures which the Noble Earl hail passed upon them for either of the acts which the Noble Earl had imputed to them, viz. :—first, break • ing the Act of Parliament ; and second, insulting the House. He (the Earl of Wicklow) did not think that the Noble Lord had made out his case. He (the Earl of Wicklow) said he could not think of any thing more inconsistent with good faith and justice than the publica tion of letters written under such circumstances. The Commissioners did not refuse to comply with the order of the House. On the other hand, they wrote to the writers of those letters to ask their consent to the pub- - lication, and they sent returns to the House of a ll th ose of which the publication bad been agreed to. They did more, for they informed the House that they would return the other letters without the consent of the Writers, if their Lordships thought it necessary to insist on it. He (the Earl of Wicklow) regretted the dismissal of Mr. Stanley from the office of Secretary to the Commissioners, and as the office was still vacant, he trusted he would be restored to it. Lord COLCHESTER. was of opinion that the order of the House had not been complied with ; and that no public officer, writiug letters on a public subject, had a right to mark his letters private, orhaving done so, to select, for return to their Lordships' order, what answers he pleased to select to suit purposes of his own.—(Hear,' hear.) That individual had no right to disobey their Lordships' order in whole or in part, or to make any selection as to how much of it he would obey. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that there could be no. doubt that, if their Lordships chose to insist upon the production of those letters, they must be produced. But the effect would be to prevent any person from com municating confidentially with any public officer. There could be no exercise of their Lordships' privilege more calculated to put an end to all confidence between man and man, and between public men and private indi viduals, than would have been the full enforcement of the order, in the sense in which it was interprete 1 by the Noble Earl (Mounteashel) ; and he therefore hoped that the motion would be persevered in, that their Lordships might meet it with. a direct negative. He hoped .by giving a negative to this motion they would show that they were not inclined to draw aside the veil between a public officer and a private individual. • • POOR-LAWS. Mr. R. YORKE presented a petition from the city of York against the continuance of the Poor-law Commis. sion, and against certain clauses of the Bill. EASTERN WARS—DISSENTERS' AFFIRNIA- TION. Mr. BROTHERTON presented a petition from the Peace Society of Liverpool, against the continuance of the wars in China and liffghanista,n. The Honourable Member presented also a petition from certain Dissenters, praying to be relieved from the obligation of taking oaths, which they believed to be against the law of God, and to be received as witnesses in Courts of Justice upon their affirmation. THE DEVON ESTATE. Sir J. Y. BULLER brought up the Report of the Committee on the Earl of Devon's Estate Bill. EMPLOYMENT IN MINES. Mr. FERRAND presented petitions against the em ployment of women and children in mines, from a place in Scotland ; and others against the New Poor-law from places in Yorkshire. COLLIERIES. Mr. STANSFIELD presented a petition in favour of a change in the system of working in coal mines. COLLEGE OP MAYNOOTIT. Mr. COLVILLE presented a petition, from Matlock, Derbyshire, against any further grant to the College of Maynooth. BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS BILL (No. 2). The House went into Committee pro forma on the Bribery at Elections BBL—Report to be received on rsidny-. - MML ACh. r 6. Mr. LABOUCIIERE presented a petition from the inhabitants of Taunton, praying for the substitution of some other system or commu , :ication between the south of Ireland and the West of England. POOR-LAWS. Mr. COBDEN presented a petition from the Pastoral Congregational Church at Stockport, against thost por tions of the Poor-law Bill affecting the religious instruc tion of the poor. BRIBERY. Mr. BLACKSTONE gave notice that, in bringing up the Report of the Bribery Bill, he should bring up a clause disfranchising all persons °Tering- or receiving bribes. MERCHANT SERVICE. Mr. FITZROY gave notice that, on Thursday, the 14th of July, he should muve for leave to bring in a Bill to regulate the examination of all persons wishing to become masters of merchant vessels. ANATOMY ACT. Mr. MACKINNON, in the absence of the Member for Bradford, gave notice of his intention to move, on the 7th of July, fur a Select Committee to inquire into the working of the Anatomy Act. Sir R. H. INGLIS thought that notice had better be postponed till the Hon. Member should be present. SOUTHAMPTON ELEC rION INQUIRY. Mr. STUART WORTLEY brought up a Report from the Southampton (Town) Election Inquiry Committee, stating that John Luce had been summoned by the the Chairman ,on the 24th instant to attend and give evidence before the Committee yesterday that at :welve o'clock yesterday. his name was called and he did not attend—that he was again called this morning and did not appear—and that he had not taken any notice of the summons issued by the Chairman. The Report having been received, Mr. STUART WORTLEY moved that John Fleming Luce be ordered to attend this House on Thursday next.—Agreed to. MARSHALSEA (IRELAND) BILL. Mr. Sergeant JACKSON obtained leave to bring in a Bill to regulate the Marshalsea prison in Ireland. POOR-LAW. • On the motion of Mr. REDDING-TON, certain re turns relative to the administration of the Poor-law were ordered. BRIBERY BILL. Mr. MACKINNON wished to inquire of the Noble Lord, the Member for London, on what day he intended to take the discussion on his Bribery Bill ? Lord JOHN RUSSELL intended to have the Biii committed to-night pro forma, and to take the discussion on Friday next, upon which day he understood the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government had consented to give him (Lord John Russell) precedence. DESTITUTION IN IRELAND Mr. DILLON BROWN wished to ask the Noble Lord, the Secretary for Ireland, if he had received any account of the dreadful destitution from which the people were suffering in the counties- of Mayo and Galway ; if it was the intention of .Government to adopt any measures to alleviate that distress ; and whether any subscrip tions for that purpose had been entered into in the lo cality ; and, also, if the Government, case no private subscriptions 'should be entered into, intended to adopt any measures for the relief of that distress ? Lord ELIOT begged to state that the Government had received information of the great distress existing in different parts of Ireland, more particularly in the coun ties of Mayo and Galway, and throughout flu; province of Connaught generally. 'The Government was in constant communication on the subject with nume rous persons residing in those districts. The Govern ment had taken sucrimeans as had been thought expe dient to mitigate that distress ; but he did not consi der it expedient more • particularly to describe what those measures were. He thought it right to add, that, with very few exceptions, the persons residing in that neighbourhood, who were in a situation to afford relief to their. poorer neighbours, had come forward' to do so—(Cheers)—and he was happy to add that there was every prospect of the dis tress coming to a speedy termination. Mr. O'CONNELL asked the Noble Lord if the Go vernment had received any information that the people in the distressed districts had been obliged, through absolute starvation, to take the property of others in order to prevent themselves from peri4hing% Lord ELIOT'S an ;vier was inaudible in the galler- J• OUTRAGE Al' BANDON. Lord BARNARD wished to ask. the Noble Lord the' Secretary for Ireland if he bad received information that a party of gentlemen had left the town of Bandon for the purpose of dining on- the sea-shore ; that while they were seated at dinner a party of persons arrived in bbats, and, having left.their boats, attacked and violently assaulted the party who were dining? He wished to ask if the Go vernment h a d empowered a stipendiary Ma gistrate t o i nvest i ga t e these proceedings, and if that Magistrate had reported that the attack was a premedi tated one? Lord ELIOT said that the stipendiary Magis trate of the district, assisted by the local Magis trates, had, in the course of his ordinary duty, instituted an inquiry into the ease alluded to by the Noble Lord. The result of that inquiry was to satisfy the. Magistrate that the attack was wanton and unprovoked—that the party was a mere party of Pleasure—that the gentlemen constituting it displayed no party emblems—and that the music played no party tunes. He was quite at a loss to discover the motives for so cruel and wanton an attack. Every means a jury, against no one of whom they could make an ob jection ;,at all events not to be tried before a Committee, the leading Members of which had pronounced an opinion decidedly unfavourable to him. He could conceive no situation more painful then that of a judge, situated like the H m. Member for Bath, and for the lion. Mem ber's own sake, as much as for that of Mr. Wal ter, he would deprecate the Hon. Geutleman's continuance as Chairman of that Committee. In any other tribunal, but a Committee of the House of Commons, the Judge would shrink from presiding under such circumstances. Mr. Walter having submitted to the order of the House, he did not feel himself justified in making any motion for the purpose of preventing the Order of the House fr, an taking effect. Colonel SIBTHORP said he cordially agreed with all that had fallen from the Hon. Member for Oxford. He knew not whether more to admire the able speech of the lion. Member for Oxford, or the straightforward and respectful conduct of the gentleman who appeared at the bar. He gloried in the conduct' of that gentle man, and if it should be the pleasure of the House, to visit him with its pains and penalties, he would be the first to pay him a visit.—(Loud laughter`:) A more un constitutional and arbitrary system had never emanated from the British House of Commons.--(Hear, hear.) Sir GEORGE GREY thought the House ought not to be satisfied with merely adopting the motion, but that something should be done to enforce the authority of the Committee. He could make every allowance for the feelings of a gentleman who had been attacked in the House, and therefore he had no wish that any harsh steps should be taken ; but if he rightly understood the speech which had been made at the bar, the gentleman who made it had demurred to the authority. of the in ferior tribunal, though he bowed to the authority of the House; and he thought it most important they should not sanction any such distinction. He would therefore suggest that the motion should be followed up by an admonition from the Speaker. Sir R. PEEL said he was quite prepared to support the authority of the tribunal which had been regularly appointed by the House. The authority rested in fact not with the Committee but the House ; but it would be impossible for the Committee to carry out their powers unless they were supported by the House. Considering that Mr. Walter had expressed his readiness to submit to any order of the House, he (Sir R. Peel) on the whole thought the best and most dignified course to pursue would be to signify to Mr. Walter that it was his bounden duty to attend the Committee and give evidence. That he thought was the best course, which had also been adopted in the case of. Mr. Fleming, who had refused to give evidence which he deemed inconsistent with his character as a man of honour. The order of the HouSe, on that occasion, 'was, that Mr. Speaker should inform Mr. Fleming that he was bound to attend the Committee and give evidence, and also that, whatever objections he had to advance should be submitted to. the Committee for their decision. Sir G. GREY said that in the case of Mr. Fleming, there was no positive order of the House. Mr. Fleming was merely told that the Committee was the proper tri bunal to decide the matter. Sir R. H. INGLIS said the motion was that Mr. Walter should attend and give evidence before the Corn mi ttee. The SPEAKER then put the question formally that Mr. Walter do attend and give evidence before the Select Committee on election proceedings to-morrow, at eleven o'clock, and was about to declare the " Ayes " to have it, when several Hon. Members exclaimed " No." Lord HOWICK made an observation across the table which did not reach us. Sir R. PEEL had not said that the course pursued by Mr. Walter was in conformity with the course taken by Mr. Fleming, for Mr. Fleming had attended before the Committee, and stated the reasons why he would not give evidence. Mr. Walter had declined attending. Lord HOWICK entirely agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet, that the vote they were about to come to, was not to desire the Speaker to state that it was theeduty of Mr. Walter to obey the eummons of the Committee, but the vote they were ab.mt to come to was to give Mr. Walter a new order on the part of the House, and not an order to attend the Committee ; that was the distinction drawn by the Right Hon. Member for Davenport (Sir G. Grey). That appeared to him (Lord Hcvick) a distinction of very consi derable importance. Therefore he thought that the motion, instead of being in this form--" That Mr. Walter do attend the Committee to-morrow," should he—" That Mr. Speaker do inform Mr. Walter that it is his duty to obey the summons of the Committee, and answer questions." Sir R. PEEL said that what the Hon. Gentleman pro• posed was something in the nature of a censure on Mr. Walter, 'which was not called fir. Wh he ( Sir R. Peel) understood Mr. Walter to wish for was, a notification of the will of the House upon the matter. Sir R. INGLIS wished to ask the Speaker if the question had not been put. The SPEAKER said that his impression was that the question had been put, when the Noble Lord the Member for Sunderland rose, and no person had a right to rise after the question had been put. Sir G. GREY rose, but being met by loud cries of " Order, order," " Chair, chair," the Right Hon. Gentleman sat down. Lord J. RUSSELL also rose, amidst loud cries of " Order, order," " Chair, chair," " Spoke, spoke," and was obliged to resume his seat. • The gallery was then cleared for a division, when there appeared— For the motion Against it Majority for the motion —l46 On our entrance to the gallery, Sir G. GREY was on his legs, and moved that Mr. Walter be called to the bar of the House, that the resolution of the House might be communicated to him. After a few words from Colonel SIBTHORP, Lord J. RUSSELL conceived his Right Hon. Friend was right in saying that the Committee lad authority to summon persons before it, and that persons were bound to attend to diet summon;. That was the course adopted with regard to Mr. Fleming, a Member of that House, and he supposed that they did not mean to adopt a differeat course, in the present instance. He conceived. the motion having now been carried, it was suffi cient that Mr. Walter be informed of the resolution of the House; but he did not think it was necessary to make such an order in every case. The motion having been put, Sir R. PEEL said he did not think the power of making witnesses attend rested in the inherent right of the Committee, hut was derived from the delegated power of that House. If the proposal originally made had been that the Speaker signify to John Walter, Esq., that he should attend, he would give his vote in favour of that resolution, because he did net see any dif ference between it and the one to which the House had just come. He thought the ends of justice would be answered by the adoption of the course he had proposed, and he did not see a very material distinction between that and the course this House had adopted. When, however, he assented to that, he did so on the ground that the Committee did not, require the assent of the House, but that they had already had the power to summon witnesses conferred upon them, and to send for papers and records. Lord HOWICK thought the proceedings on both sides of the House bad been extremely irregular; the more proper course to have pursued would have been to have passed the resolution proposed by his Right Hon. and Learned Friend. He would have voted for negativing the original resolution in order that a better one might have been adopted; as the House, however, had assented to the original resolution he thought the better course would be to adopt the one proposed. Mr. O'CONNELL said that no person could understand the resolution now come to as casting any reflection ; but no wit ness had any right to say he would not attend, on the ground that certain parties were not neutral enough to sit on such a Committee. He would suggest that nothing could be more mischievous than the idea that in a Committee appointed by the House it was to be a sort of bye battle whether a Member was sufficiently neutral to sit in a Committee. —( Hear.) Lord JOHN MANNERS said that Mr. Walter had ob jected to the Hon. Member for Bath ; that objection stood upon the record, and nobody had denied the validity of it. Mr. O'CONNELL must have been misunderstood by the Noble Lord. He did not consider a mere unsupported state ment, such as that which had been alluded to by the Noble Lord, sufficient. He meant that the party should present a petition to the House on the subject, and that the Member presenting the petition should move that the party be removed from the Committee. Mr. WAKLEY said that although it had been contended that the resolution-of the House did not convey any censure upon Mr. Walter, yet the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Devonport did convey a censure. The Right Hon. Gentleman had laid it down as a rule that all parties sum moned as witnesses were bound to attend most passively and most submissively; that whether summoned as a witness or a criminal he was bound to submit. He (Mr. Wakley) protested against such a doctrine. It constituted the very essence of a tyrannical disposition—( Hear, hear, from Colonel Sibthorp ) and in practice it was fraught with the greatest danger to the character of the House.—( Hear, hear, from Colonel Sibthorp.) He agreed with the Hon. Member for the University of Oxford in every sentiment he had uttered. Ile (Mr. Wakley) thought the House had been startled into a most ridiculous and uncon stitutional proceeding.—(Hear, hear, from Colonel Sibthorp, followed by shouts of laughter.) He should never forget the way in which Hon. Gentleman hail got -up, one after another, to answer in the most submissive manner questions which had been put to them in reference to a private transaction.— (Cheers.) He said it was a private transaction, the law took no cognizance of it—the law did not ho'd the parties engaged in it criminal—and before they hall commenced legal proceedings they had required parties to get up and cri minate themselves. The sooner they got out of it the better— ( Hear, hear, from Col. Sibthorp)—it would be better for the country. He was convinced, from what he had heard out of doors, that the general opinion was that the Committee was not an impartial one, and had not dealt out an equal measure of justice to all parties.—( Hear, hear.) He did not believe that his lion. and Learned Friend's Committee would tell anything new. Every one in the country knew that compromises had taken place, but the Report of that Committee would cast an unfair slur upon the character of individuals. He thought the practice a most dangerous one, and he protested against it al together. Mr. ESCOTT said he had two objections to the Committee of the Hon. Member for Bath. The first was, that it had been proved that the Hon. Member had assumed towards Mr Wal ter a hostile attitude, and he must dissent from the principle that an accused person could not call in question the tribunal before which he was to appear and give answer. The second objection was that the Honourable and Learned Member for Bath had last night stated that the Committee was determined to adopt the system of exclud ing the parties accused ; and, in facteall parties but those under examination. He should give his vote ageinat the attendance of . Mr. alter, because the proceedings were conducted on au unjust principle. Lord STANLEY thought there was some degree of mis conception on 'the subject. lie understood that Mr. Walter was summoned before the Committee, not a' an accused party, but as a witness, with regard to the facts of the case trusted to the Committee for inquiry. The proper time fur objections to the Committee was at the time it was formed, and the powers complained of delegated to it. No such objections had been taken, and the House bad appointed the Committee, for the purpose of trying certain offences. In the discussion that then took place, it was distinctly avowed that the object of the Committee was not to criminate individuals. In the course of the investigation, Mr. Walter was summoned, not as an acemed person, but as a witness ; and, iu that character, ha could not conceive that he had any more right to object. fi em any personal feeling, to attend that Committee, than a witness summoned before any other Election Com mittee, constituted in the ordinary manner.—( Hear, hear. ) It was on that ground he thought that Mr. Walter had now no reason to remonstrate. It was further his ( Lord Stanley's) (pinion that a Committee requiring the p.esence of a witness did not stand in need of any specific authority from the liou•e„ inasmuch as the House delegated to the Committee the pourer of sending for all persons, papers, and records, they might think 223 necessary ; and if any party objected to the constitution of Committee. he should take that objection when the Corrunitte , was being formed, and not after it had been constituted. Sir R. H. INGLIS said that his Noble Friend appeared misapprehend the object-for which the Committee had bee' instituted. The object of the Committee was to inquire int ecitain alleged corrupt transactions to which Mr. Walter INL;O4 said to be a party. Mr. Walter was, therefore, a party na only interested but accused. It was stated that that Was nt • the proper occasion for objecting to the manner in which tlt Committee had been constituted ; but Mr. Walter bad not ha . i tt an opportunity of objecting when it had been originally forme The SPEAKER was about to put the question, when - 3 .0 Captain POLHILL rose, and said he was much obligedl, the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath for the suggestintv, which he had thrown out, but it was in the power of Mr Walter, if he chose, to petition the House for the removal the Chairman. In order to enable him to do so, he begited t move, that, iristead of to-morrow, the neat day should be ap pointed for his attendance, in order to give him time to pet , tion the House. The SPEAKER was again about to put the question, who Captain POLHILL again rose, and submitted that he ha power to move an amendment.—( Cries of ‘• Chair, chair.") The SPEAKER said it had already been decided that Dli Walter should attend at eleven o'clock to-morrow.—( Hear.) The original question was then put, and carried without • division. Mr. Walter having been called to the bar, The SPEAKER (addressing him) said Mr. Walter, have to inform you that the House has come to the followin: resolution :—That. Mr. Walter do attend and give evident before the Election Proceedings Committee to-morrow, • eleven o'clock. You may withdraw. Mr. Walter then withdrew from the bar. Mr. ROEBUCK then brought up a Report from the Select Committee on Election Proceedings. stating th a t the Ger i " ' mittee haviest proceeded to the consideration of themaattef: referred to them, had thought it necessary to address a letter '- Mr. Alexander Cochrane, Member for Biidport, requestel him to attend the Committee on Wednesday next, the e instant, at eleven o'clock, and to bring with him all pert and documents relating to the last election for the bornAP Bridport. To that letter the following answer had been ceived by the Chairman :—" Sir,—l beg to acknowledg e the receipt of the letter which you have communicated to me fror the Select Committee on Election Proceedings, requeetine i la t e 3 to appear before them on Wednesday. the 29th instant , a a "., o bring with me all the papers and documents in my poese s t n relative to the last election for the borough of Bru i r r i Having bestowed the fullest consideration on the matter. beg most respectfully to decline to comply with the repo' s; The letter was signed Alexander Cochrane. The Girtonid had thought it necessary to refer the motion to the Howe' • order that they might take such steps as they thought 6t ' (Laughter.) Mr, ROEBUCK then gave notice, that in obedience yetihe r• request of the Committee, he would move to-morrow, that Cochrane do atend,the Comittee the nex mornin. Mr. G. W. t WOOD sugge m stee that he t motion should should be that the Hon. Member do appear in his place. at e Col. SI eITHORP gave notice that when the question et— et on for discussion, he should take the sense of the Houses e t " the said Committee be discharged.—( Hear, and laughter./ e, Mr. ROEBUCK gave notice that to-morrow he wouldlo°,%t as an instruction to the Committee, that has no Member of chid House, except such as were Members of the Committee, sh otl be allowed to be present. CUSTOMS BILL. for On the motion of Sir R. PEEL the Order of the I) 3 Y the third reading of the Customs Bill was read. - „ t o Mr. T. DUNCOMBP presented a petition from thirtie jo market gardeners, praying (as we understood) for a redt ta ' of duty on foreign onion seeds. COALS. Mr. J. JERVIS said that he believed now was the P r es time for moving the insertion of a clause in the BBL ! e : clause was the same in substance as that of which he had 1 1 t be notice as a resolution to be adopted on the bringing tap ° s ee Report. He trusted the House would bear with a few eb i e e vations from him upon the matter. The object of his *PP ; 0 , tion was to prevent an additional tax being placed on °rot shipping, which would go to paralyse the rapid spread of sn ia interest, and he proposed to do that by engrafting a pr ep a ll the Bill to authorise her Majesty's Treasury to allow l oc s coal bona fide consumed in steal* vessels a dof f the commensurate with the duty paid. it would be unjust tell!! country were to derive an advantage from contracts which e' c u e e, never have been made if such a duty was imposed et t esse e The effect of imposing a duty on coals used in steata-le'ee would be to prevent long-voyage steam-vessels from ear s i li ' es out a sufficient supply, and the result of that would be tbsee ee e would ship their coals at foreign stations. Many of ther en e, voyage steam-packats were at present in almost a stale of u ' o ,3i ruptey. and their difficulties would be increased by the acid'. ), to duty on coals. The Government ought to afford faeilit' e e to such steam-vessels, or he was afraid they would put an . e , n i tiou long steam navigation altogether. The Steam Naeieeed Company presented a memorial to the Governmert, P rsi tbs ' for a reduction of the duty on coal, but the reply was t eat b , t . Government could not consent to it. He considered eof was highly impolitic to fetter the steam-shipping, inte re e se the country, when it was possible to relax it. His claw` to t that it was expedient that a drawback should be allow e co ( coals exported, on proof that they a ere intended for the vireo steam-vessels on their homeward voyage, such proof beg t he to the satisfaction of the Lords of the Treasury, and tha' reo f Lords of the Treasury themselves should decide what tha t ,l e eo should be. He apprehended, therefore, that there could c o ed objection to the machinery of his clause. It v 4 1 4 , 40 01 that steam-vessels would receive additional ewe' 0 0 0 through the operation of the tariff ; but that PI tbS would not be realised, because sailing-vessels would h' / es el 3 .` benefit of the increased importation, while steam-vise s be subject to the additional duty upon coals. a nd Mr. WALLACE supported the proposal of the elee' es big Learned Gentleman. He thought it was a perfectly rwe ee ip one, and that the Government should have no hesitan ' adopting it. Il e {hav 't pt he CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER sate ' 9 ,teee had consulted the officers of the Custom-house or of the proposal made by the Hon. and Learned but they had shown him that, it it were adopted, it the way to frauds against which it would be it guard. That was one of the circumstances which Government to reduce the duty. He trusted tie smile concur in this opinion, that it was inexpedit the resolution of the Hon. Member. Mr. HUME said that steam navigation was an greetest importance to the country. It had dt the country ; the country had done nothing for it, and Belgium they voted money ter steam nasegatio did not receive any encouragement. He thougl allowance ought to be made, because it could be with almost perfect accuracy what amount of cog --(Hear, hear.) He hoped the Right Hon. Ba not tie their bands for the sake sf such a trifle as fi"; pounds ; but that he wouel trust to the certificates the owners. Sir C. NAPIER perfectly agreed with the 11' for Montrose, who had used all the arguments"he hail an t ` to ad ,pt. He knew how difficult it was for steam pro Ir o Of , to get their money. The only company thrivieg Sc or e Gener.tl Steam Navigation ; they were paying good ,':0 01 for their money, but lie doubted, if they calculated t''' dot: . value of their vessels, they would deem it prudent to eve r They had seen most laudable exertions on the part of I s At' steam companies to extend steam navigation across eee Es • lantic, and to distant shores, and the Chancellor o f tb oos . chequer was doing all he could to put a stop to suc h J • ih worthy exertions by placing an additional duty ee covi th tbi objected to the duty, and trusted it would not meet w , sanction of the House. o ptiol Mr. M. ATTWOOD supported the proposal for t ee coals used in steam-vessels from the duty. D'e i Mr. GLADSTONE' stated the main grounds e P ee tier' the Government refused to accede to the proposal of co 1 1; and Learned Gentleman. The Government had m ature {we sidered the subject, and had come to the conciusion thstileeed could not be guarded against if the drawback were a er ile With respect to a drawback—in what way could the P coo tors of steam-beats he prevented from purchasioke b esero s , abroad, and obtaining the drawback upon it on their Fi lo t b d on British coal which had pale the duty? The loss ,w 0 0 : Government would incur by this and other fral e gat w greatly ceunterbalauce any advantage to the publi c small difference in the expense of steam navigation. o f !., Mr. P. M. STUART supported the propesitioll tobe Hon. Member for Chester. It would confer a greet , the struggling steam-navigation of the country. Sir R. PEEL said, the Hon. Gentleman bad sta l e s teci sti °ll ; belief that the Government was disposed to grant a r e reit If, then, they came to a decision unfavourable to t he !or d . , tion, it was the decision of a Government disposed totrb:e favourably ; and, therefore, the presumption would be _ n on were convinced of the great danger of fraud. of pet the payment of draw backs one of the worst uses otesterei, money. The Right Hon. Baronet here read a ‘ e r e tref e 'e cation from the Shipowners' Society, signed by 311.' th e re Attwood, showing that the amount of the drawbac k hen, 0, 00 would be but 5,0001., even at the es. duty. What, t" ropo siti i ? they to think of the great losses which, it was said, the ss eo e i e of this duty would inflict on the owners of ste al ' be " One Hon. Genlleman had said that he could not se e t through these drawbacks— r . are Mr. P. M. STEWART—No; I said the u cl " could not see i:s way.—( Lau g hter.) bed ' vrir, Sir R. PEEL—The Hon. Member for M o ntrose , 0 0141 posed that there should he an estimate taken of th e ' lo di P ou r every vessel, and that every vessel consuming one !oilseed b oar of coals per hour should have a tight to claim as- te r re .he she was on her passage, which would amount to 1• 0 ;1, day. Now, if a vessel were on her passage for I rfrore 0' would have a right to claim upwards of 3 Government. Mr. HUME—Suppose she was to go to the mo p ' i be 4 : 1 0 0 Sir 11. PEEL—The Hon. Gentleman's answe r to eo oo 04 . he put, of a passage of 100 days, was—suppose she 11., had moon. This was the first time the Hon. Gentlemse re it n indulged in poetic fancies. se An HON. MEMBER—it takes but fifteen days to s tee de_ the Atlantic. ertre i n o see Sir R. PEEL would take the medium betwee n area eel°, and the voyage to the moon, and make it one io n t bate' b esis (Laughter )—and let them look at what an e%P en4e ,00 13 ,4 0 entail on the Government. He hoped the h o use a t a I: er ot tate before it granted a drawback on coal coro•urne( of ch • distance from home. The most experienced odic Ca nt venue were of op:nion it would not be safe to g io drawback. Lord SANDON thought the Government were ... .elle es e this instance, with the nicety of the Custom-bonseeeesh.,:elii It was not likely that the two great company`' ; , it interested in this matter, would commit any frail" cit otit o s, e t not be worth their while.—( Hear, hear.) The M e l t e o f coal the ship consumed might be easily calculateed be gtl , the logs, and the parties who it were supposed seen' tha t fraud ought to be above suspicion. o oV erf- t Mr. JERVIe replied. He would only bee t e se es th! the proposition of the Hon. Member for Montrotisande of He would leave the matter entirely in the ee l Treasury. .eree 4 The House then divided, when there appeared-- 4 2 I P' s d Fur the clause • .................. s 4 ................. 3 8 Against it morii3tiyioangtaointshtethgealcielaryuswee...f.o.o. .... ............ ss Ori; On our r e A - l a a d j Mr. GLADSTONE on his legs, pi opting, V,, a 9 far .eoea dj e tending the provisions of the Act of George 10 0 ';,, th lated to making returns of the aye! sugar the prottuce of the British West 00 - , produce of the East Indies and the elauritius..on ef t he . . o u t Mr. LABOUCHERE thought the operati to e ~,,sgbo t would interfere materially with the averafSeee ons the t esee ss e produce confusion and error in any com par! , _ o of fort' hereafter be instituted between the average that the o: future years. tiefl eturY Mr. GLADSTONE thought it would be sa lee o r clause should be read again. b cou ld be Mr. BARING was of opinion that there ntl jectinn to the general average which the non' f o posed. eson t oe the re— 01 0 t be age prices to bags Mr. P. M. STEWART presumed that u ty fit the average was, that they might know the ee p a e ose t osP to ! I ts! He thought it wou ld b e b e tt er for that 11 :t r A th a o _cg, averages, u as i prt t ic le osedbyhr his iv the average aggregate. R i ght Hon. Friona, t Tire House eh t e v rnt a s s tohl t v h ec e cci n i ai t read s:lf a t it second c c o 7 , lt e c ' e G'' ,, c i g rd Ss tio i t rea. l l B 11 b' The House resumed, when then aus he added to u. and agreed to, and °Herd tie rider passe tinge og‘tba.s , sutl )n t „ s or El i , iris t n t tbe objCe,t;b tone atuf vi ek , • "Iffc r o lion ught 1,%te0,! be atq'dit. 3aronet 0..03 five th ° ‘!. l 7l4 !3 given I bet [lon. A whic fre s h tion (Lai Ways coul,