The Sun. — London, England, 1842-04-12 00:00:00

EiPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DAY. GLOBE.—Sir Robert Peel, succeeds very well ip argument while he can hguip . (;4l hoininenz ; and only fails when he must address himmai directly to great national interests. Ile demonstrates very triumphantly that his opponents have, at one gotiod, declared that beginning the year with a 4604 must lead to an in come tax, and at another, that avatension of probate and legacy duty to land would be inexpedient. All that is very fair by way of retort upon taunts of inconsistency; and heads of parties will always find missiles enough of that kind in Hansard. Whether Sir Robert Peel or Lord John Russell is more liable to citations ad verse to their present position on the income tax we neither know nor care. Whether the former has been more uncivil to the clay soils, and clod pates, of country gentlemen, or the latter more ill-tem pered towards his Opponents in general—is wholly indiffeient to us. We ask only, which of these statesmen now represents the most national policy. It is singular nobody seems to have a word to say for Sir R.Peel but himself—for we can hardly deem his Chancellor of the Exchequer, oor man !--whose fate is to play Bertrand to his Robert Maoaire—eny exception. The utmost any "independent" Member can bring himself to say for his policy is, that "he 'votes against his own conscientious conviction " for Sir Robert, for fear of worse. So much for his Corn Bill and Tariff, and for the sentiments of the power ful party who brou c ght him in expressly to prevent Corn-law and Tariff reform. And then, as regards the income tax, is there a soul who, in sppech or writing, will say a word in favour of that ta, in or out of doors ? STANDARD.—We are not for ourselves ashamed to confess that our care for the success of Sir ,Robert Peel's financial plan is in no small degree connected with anxiety for the success of the prin ciple of Sir Robert Inglis's motion. Let the finan ces of the country be placed in a healthy condi tion—let a rational financial system be adopted to retain the finances in the healthy condi tion—and we trust to the right spirit of the country to force upon its gi g :isktors the discovery that nations have duties beyond making war and " devising trade" duties, to the discharge of which the British empire is emphatically summoned by Him whose summons we may not disobey. It mey be said that these considerations are not very intimately connected with a proposition fot making 1501. a-year the unit . upon the income tax scale. We reply, that every proposed amendment in such a case is a fault found—a fault 'found not only in detail, but the principle of the measure— • and this being so, we hold it to be the duty of a manly disez-etion' to overlook the fault, for the mike of the final and general good, which the multiplication of faults alleged must have the effect of defeating. Mr. Shell "aired his common places" with eon • sicierable liveliness and pretension at the close of his speech; Ise affected to apprehend a great increase of perjury from an income tax, and contrasted the zeal which had been shown to suppress Irish perjury by Lord Stanley's Bill with the indifference to perjury seemingly mani fested in the introduction of an income tax. Now, without meaning to suggest any offensive recollec tions, we would remind that the oaths to be'adminis tered by income tax Commissioners—Van"' are to be administered, which is yet doubt*l—ere to be admi nistered to a very different class of persons from the oaths adminietearod under thepresent Irish registration laws. No sari be sworn (if Ely are to be sworn) izi England Ana income is net eillitnated at more than MCI. a-year, wad these area) te worn only in the rare case of a disputed surcharge .; but the complaint against the Irish perjuries is, that they are committed by persons whose real income is lea's than 101. a-year —and we have the evidenee of Roman Catholic Bishops, Roman Catholic Peers, Roman Catholic Members of ttie House of Commons, Roman Catholic barristers, and Roman Catholic solicitors, for the fact, tli_it the class of persons rssesaing less than 101. a-voai in Ireland are frightfully (Bishop Magaurin's word) prone to slight the obligatloti of an oath. Now, this eatenot he said of the classes of persons of 150/. a-year income, or, thanks to Vrovidenee, of any other class in this country. MURDER AT PUTNEY. Vern inp?ortlnt inflirmation Mt" conveyed to the stat ion-hon RC in Regent's-park„ at nine .o'clock yesterday meeting, from which there eau be little., or no - doubt. notwithstandlug all the statements that have appeared. that Good, the supposed murderer, if not already in cn,:tody, is at St. Alban's or Hertford. The party who brought the intelligence is a farmer, residing at Whetstone, of the IMMO of Elliot ; he states that between ten and dives o'clock yesterday fore noon he was let the Torrington Arms on Finchley Common, when a man was drinking at the bar. Elliot at first took no notice of hbn, but snbsequently was struck by his appearance, which strongly resembled the description of Good in the hi% circulated in and about the metropolis. Elliot mentioned his suspicions the landlord, who was also of the satn.a opinion. During this conversation the man was ,Handing outside the door, en the stepa of the inn ; ha betrayed a very un settled state of mind, and was yery dejected in his coim tenance; he had a large walking-stick and a bundle. Mr. Elliot and the landlord were satually convinced, at length, that the man was Gookatutwere consulting as to the best method of Retir,: in order that he should be ap prehended, when he ram off the steps of the house into the road, at the same Jaime hailing a St. Alhan's coa_di passing at 4he time, on which he mounted, and before Elliot or the landlord of the Torrington Arms In❑ could recover. themselves it order to dztain the coach, it was some distance an the road towards Bar net. Mr. Elliot, itt giving the information, says he has no doubt, the man is Goad, het there is one cir cumstance which makes this suspicion almost a cer tainty ; whilst the man was sit the inn, he went back wards, and after he had left, a coloured cotton hand kerchief was found by the pot-boy in the privy, which was in a very filthy state, from the stains of hard clotted blood ; no person at the inn over possessed the handker chief, and there can be no•doubt it was dropped by the suspected patty. Mr. Inspector Aggs, and two policemen of the S immediately on receiving the above information, proceeded in a post-chaise to St. Alban's, and it is to be hoped that they will be fortunate In tracing the man. The handkerchief is in possessiee of the landlord of the Torrington *raw. It has not yet been ascertained whether there are any Initials 19 it, as it remains in the state it was found. The following additional l ikiti,itlar3 relative to Good have been obtained by one of our earroipendents from a source ni,on which reliance may be plasei —.About eight or nine years a;zo Good filled the situation of eoselisnah with a gentleman who resided at No. 17. Brewton-place; and while in that ser vice he was suspected Of pillaring, and. was at length 'taken into custody upon, a charge of robbitig his master of a cloak, wet tried for the offence, and ordnoud to be transported for seven years. tie we not, howeverossint out of the country, but, after bele; at the hulks a,boost four years, was set at liberty. Wbsaa Good was ie ins wash...E. he was coo. bidered to be , a sesrried man, •awl isi.s wife, or the woman who represented isers-lf as too,. bilgud near the Two Brewers' public-house slt Claphans, .and Good used to e o home to see bar two or three titan a week. had at this tine; one chili, thee quits en infant, which is supposed to be the same child (bat sifsis with the prisons/3' a. the time of the Seal discevery. Gmt.Dies taken into custody upon the cbarge• of stealing the cloak at Southampton, by Sergeant Bonny, mid is well kneessi by 'a great number of other men belonging to the P division of police; he was generally called " Irish Dan ? ' i* the neighbourhood of Brixton. After his term of Irneritonment bed expired, he again returned to Clapham, and remained there for stubs time, when it is be lieved be to Ireland, and upoi his returning to this country he 'obtained a service witb r. Nottidge, one of the Magistrates for Surrey. fro* Which service he 3443 discharged cutler the circumstances that have already been detailed. Gnat i. described by those who knew hiee well as being a passion's* and brutal fellow ; and it was laaowss that he was the habit of ill-using the horses that were placed in his care, and the neighbours frequently expressed their anrprire that Mr. Stilells should have kept him itchts 'Or rice. It is the opinion of persons acquainted with his habits ‘ that he has not left Londe*, but that in all pro bability he is lywitenncealed in the " rotiteries" either of tit. Giles's or Westminster. The criminal records furnish the partioulars of a crime of a sitnilar charactip cornmilted about Om year 1761 by a French man named Theodore Gardelle. Gardena lodged at the house of a Airs. in Leicsater-sgea,ro. Oa Febrnary 19. 1761, it appeared thistle went into her room for some purpose, and, as t afterwards appeared is evidence and from the prisoneir's ron • f eis j O n, some altsweation took place betweew them ; he pudicil her, and her foot catching *tate carpet, she fell ; her head struck the bad-po . t with great violence, and the blood gashed from her month. Ile ilk., it appointed, struck her on the throat with a comb, until she was quite quiet ; he then laid her on the bed ; went out of the room and locked the door. Gardelle, in order to hide the evidence of the crime he had committed, resolved upon destroying the body ; he accordingly removed the iotestistes, which he threw into a water-closet, then cut ne the limbs, cut th e body into pieces, and scattered them over the floor of a loft that was not generally made use of, in the hope, as he said, that the pieces of flesh would dry and perish with out putrefaction. He also burnt during the night some of the bones of the wretched woman. It is•-a strange circumstance that although there were other perioae.in the house for several days, no suspicion of anythilleArong was entertained, and while Oardell e Was burnuag*, of the body, upon a person observing that there was an unpleasait smell to the house, he replied, "Chat the fire . " Th e Th some one must have thrown a bone upon the absence of the woman King at length caused suspicioa, and Gardena 1 1 h IMP questioned about her ; he then said that he expected par omo *night, and should set up for her. It . Vpsored th at h e did not ee t o bed, but occupied the 'HAM ditriaidug of th e bed' in the manner stated. Gardelle was at length saloon Into custody, and upon a search belt* made, tion remain • thy body w er e found in the loft. The prisoner subsequently made a confession 'of all ithustreet.henhdo gusi:fe:t;wuthnitdcahteexhneisefurotemd the circumstances above detailed. He was tried at the Old Bailey Sessions ifs 101 " Apri ca l 17 17 i 6 ed i, pn z ra : in the Haymarket, opposite Pt gaol in a cart, Vic tim had resided. When the vehicle arrived opposite to it, it made a stop, and Gardelle turned round and was observed t o to s cene of his grime. After his r gaze attentively at execution, the body was hung i% "pains upon . H . ounartsyv Heath. SIATIATICS OF TUX Orr Ror Or SCOTLAND.—In the Rev. Mr. Lorimer's work, published sops rare so, the reve rent gentleman ha; shown that the Dsou-intrusion party were the salt of the Kirk, amt that, during the cold reign of iMode ratism, many evils of a serious nature preva iled. It s not a little curious that, since the wild men attained the ascendancy, there have -been exactly fourteen ministers deposed, seven of whom belonged to the Non-intrusion, and seven to the Mode r9.te party in the Ch urc h. Th e crimes tisich led to the depo sition of the revs Non-intrusion brethren were fornication, or other acts of grass immorality. The seven Moderates were all membersanof of the P res b ytery o f Strathbogie , and came under the b the Ecclesiastic a l Courts, in eans - ,:quenee of rendering obedience to th e l aws of t h e land ! :-.-Aberdeen Herald. ELECTION COMMITTEES. • LONGFORD. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to explain at great length the process of registration . The voter is r quired to swear to an affidavit, which is kept among the records of the county, thus affording a constant means of detection and conviction of perjury if the voter has obtained his franchise on an improper quatificat on. He stated that there was no registry in Ireland at all. When they said the registry they used the word to describe what was analogous to it. The re gistry in Ireland was only first the certificates (in the possession of the voters themselves) , next the bundle of affidavits ; there was a book of the names of the voters, but it was only drawn up for the convenience of the polling, and could not be produced as legal evidence. In the English sense of the word, there was, nothing like a registry in Ireland. The right of vote depended entirely on the certificate, and if a person loses his certificate. he loses also his right to vote ; for this reason the affidavits are considered by the law as the check, and answer the purpose of a public re eord. His whole argument was directed to showing that the whole Irish system of registration, as far as the power of hives. ligation goes, is more searching and extensive than that of Eng land, and he strongly contended that, in law, the decision of tie Assistant Barrister must be considered final and conclu sive, and net to be altered by the Committee. In conclusion, he pointed out to the Committee the extreme inconvenience that would arise from opening the registry; there were al ready 283 votes objected to, and should an equal number be objected to on the other side, the Committee would have to in vestigate the qualifications of between five and six hundred voters, a large portion of the whole constituency of the county. Sergeant WRANCHATI, in reply, on the part of the peti tioner, after some introductory observations on the line of ar gument used by his Learned] Friend, urged against these argu ments the decision in the case of the election for the 'say of Cork, in 1835. In that case the sitting Mem bers were returned by a majority of more than six hundred, but that majority was composed of the votes of non-resident freemen, and it was decided that these votes were invalid. He met the alignment of inconvenience, by stating that the greater number ofthe votes would be disposed of by the decision of the Committee, on theprinciples on which the cases turned. The principle of the vote being annulled by an insufficient qualifica tion, once asserted and laid down, the fargreater number of the eases would be disposed of by that decision, without the necessity for a detailed inquiry into each case. The argument of his Learned Friend would go to give finality to the decisions of a Court that had not even the power of sending for, or compelling the atten dance of, witnesses. Neither in Ireland nor England had the barristers the power of sending for witnesses. The Learned Counselthen described the operation of the Scotch registration, showing that the decision of the Sheriff was never considered final, as there was an appeal from him to the Sheriffs of the three neighbouring counties ; nor could the decision of these latter be considered final. Their 4ecision could be revised by the Court of Review, and the House of Commons possessed a power, as a final tribunal, over the decision of that Court. Inf act, in every case the Legis lature had reserved to itself the right of reviewing the decision of the registering officer, whether he be Barrister or Sheriff, both in Ireland and Scotland. The argument was interrupted by the announcement that the Speaker was at prayers. It will be resumed to-day. SUDBURY. The Committee met at 11 Jciock. The Counsel for the petitioners were engaged throughout the day in examining witnesses in support of their ease, but no material fads were elicited. The chief object appeared to be to connect several gentlemen with the transactions which are made the grounds of the petit*. PEEL'S OU F-GOING MAJORITY. (From the Third Edition of The Sun of Last Night. The Income-Tax Minister is on his last legs. He stands to-night only on his own—a • majority of ONE ! " None but himself can be his parallel !" And as a certain Gentleman in the lower re gions, whither another Gentleman is going, gets always his due—we now call on the people to PETITION !—PETITION !!—PETITION !! ! and KEEP up the STEAM 1 FATAL COAL-PIT ACCIDENT, SEVENTEEN LIVES LOST, AND ELGIIT SEVERELY INJURED. Manchester. Saturday Night. This melancholy accident took place in the exiensiCe cos mines of Messrs. Swyne and Lees, known by the name o " Flowery Fields," situate in the township of Newton, Lanea suire, a small village, about six miles from Manchester. It appears that about eleven o'clock on Friday mornin; the men in the mine, and the banksmen at the first entrance to the mine, were thrown into the greatest state of alarm by hearing a rumbling noise, accompanied by a tremendous shock, which was quickly followed by an explosion and an emission of ignited inflammable air. The alarm spread, but no assistance could be afforded the unfortunate sufferers. It was known that there were 26 persona in that part of the mine where the explosion took place. In this state of suspense things remained for several bones. Meantime Alr, Potter anu Mr. F. Tinker, two surgeons in the neighbourhood, arrived to render medical aid. After the lapse of some hours the medical gentlemen deemed it safe to proceed in search of the missing sufferers, and both of them in company of a number of miners and the underlookere descended the shaft, and after a protracted and dangerous search, they succeeded in finding ei n eht of the missing colliers, inn, unfortunately. all qu'te dead, some of thew having been suffocated, and others much bruised and burned. Shortly afterwards Covell more were :ound near the same place, but also dead. 'I he search was prosecuted, and in about an hour afterwards the remaining ton were dis eovered. One of them, a person named John Bowker, was in the la.t agonies of death, and the others in a pitiable state of exhaustion, especially an elderly man named Grimshavr. Th.' su - germs succeeded in saving the lives of eight out of ten. John liowker died sonn after he was found, and Grimshaw was •o far spent that all efforts to preserve his life proved fruitless. It was nearly four o'clock this (Saturday) morning before all the killed and injured were got out of the mine. HAMBURGII MAIL. Bostt.tw. Aran. 4.—The King of Hanover gave to-day the first grand dinner since his return from New Strelitz, at which all the Princes now here were present. • HANOVER. Aram s.—lt is reported that the King imme diately after his return from Berlin, will go to St. Petersburg!' to be present at the fetes on the 115th anniversary of their Ins.. pbr al 'il.jesties' marriage. It is added, that his 111aje4ty will afterwards pay a visit to England. --Hanxburgh papers, April b. ',ALA I AN 5U54../t Aritll.9 Aetnal Debt, ISt p,er cont. kothsphad's Laren. 6 per C. Itta% Loan orrhirt7 ;11111ons, 4 per 611 3 per C0tt.....,..... ••••••••••••••••• y .PRVen -•-•••••••••••-• ••••••-• '42 *411) ! P 4 1,9 n of CW7,1'2412,4 pun Cent. P4 Sod,. tv et Coramoree, 4 4per Cent. ...... It! sus.]: 04 Belgium, 5 per 7: 4 % Cols! Society ltzeoung e en London. (short) . —Brussels Papers, April 9. A tis'rst Ia N ru —Vtarrria. Aram]. sleeper Coots. Motalligues hoar per Ckintil• in.*** v.v., • •••• •••al•es • • • .0 • Olt ••• ••NI WO • *NO ( 5 , 1 Thine n•r Cents. 7aki lizck hsrcs 1616 11AMBU IIGH BOIiSENIIALLE, APRIL 5. Uneey. Austrian ; per Cents. Bank Shares nelo.liussian Loan i js ...sr Russian 5 per Cent.. Ist series, MIA 1. 4 6,h, Ins,riptim , , Ist 5erie5.......... Series SOA, Data in Certificates . !ta t 111 New 4 per I cut. (1549) Dutch .t.ctual Dcbt. _% per Cent. ...... ...- 51% Ditto a per Cent. Polish Bonds 154 New Tickets Anglo-Danish Losn ' 3 per Cent- .......... MTh Spanish, New 5 p .r Cents. EXCHANGH*I Oa LON HOPI. 11,901111 MM, APRIL • —I3 IF/lA.—Two months, 13 614. Pirrs mammon, acn :A) fee° months, 38 3-11 RIGA, APRIL s. -Three Xontha, ....rocAldiii.l4. APRIL 1.--Seviffity-tive days. 12.14 Lairste, APRIL :.—Two Eno ths, 6. 23. PRUSSIA N FUNDS.-13eaLIN ' APRIL 5. Bills. stoney. Si. schuld. Sch., 41, per cent. lO4 104% Prussian English Loan, 1830,4 per cent Exchange on Landon, three months 6 227 8 6 22% —Prussian State Gazelle. April 6. THE MARKETS PRICE OF Me:AO. Ina higher , rtite of Are, rhe Mar%llia is MI. for 41b. Conf. Bread may be had at 4.1. Prt ICE LW OIL Rape Oil. brown, per ton Vil 1 Shoo re6n-d I.tusoeci 0i1..... 24 14 Lina,ed Oil Cake at tn, hilil (pot LOW) 1?: A pee . ake, per to.. PitICES OF SEWS. Per Cwt. Per Quarter • .Jew E,gl.sh Ileo C10rer...653 SOstSt. Fein ..._.................—s 2611 bib Old 1•it.,... Ditto --a a —al Rye Chase —s S.Ea its New Foreifin Ditto.---a 75s inslPiteey Grass -8 -S —• OW Diil4.l)iito —s —a —,ll..onseed, fur feediog ...---s 52s 56. Weer White t taror 54s Ms 6561Dit-o, for sowing .......—a 5Ps fits Old Ditt.. Ditto ...... - --s . s --sMitto, for crushing ....—s 57s :Ais "spiv 'Fro oil —a 20s 40sillem'. .... - .... ..........-.—a 4 , s 52 1 Old Ditto -.is 20s iills'esinary ... .. ....... .- .... .--e 8411205 fr. loll= 8 —s ....SI l'er B.ishel. ttloglish Cetreqray —s 50s 51s White 114u5t5rd....104 Od to 13s Cd ilibreign Ditto s tlis Xs'Brown Ditto. ..... ...12sOd to 14s rd Coriander ... —B a —5Tate5.......... 54 Cd to 7e 6d PRICE OF TALLO W , SOAP, &c. per 1121 b. lown Tallow ... ..... .......42 S 61Melting Stull' 41 14 fl Yenor; Russia White ........ ................. n 0 01Gravets ..... 0 16 0 Snap Ditto 0 0 0 Good Dregs •..•••............ 4 4 el COAL MARKET. Ships arrived since last market.day," 29. .. d. R. d. Fuddle's West Hartley l7 6 Walls End _Morrison 319 0 1 - lebburn Main .15 ! Walls End Mareart's 11olywell Main.-- .......... .10 0 Walls End Whitwell l3 0 New Tantielci Moor l3 6 Walls End Caradoc 2O 6 Ord's Redhes l4 u Walls End Hartlepool 7O Pontop V. indsor ..... South Pontop Tentishi Moor Bute's l4 6 Walls Et.d Rowburn le r Malls End dorloith .. .. lB 3 'Walls Snd H0pper........ Wails End Hi1da............. 16 6 Walls:End 1110uth Durham 17 3 Malls End Killtngworth ... 16 9 Wails End Bdymour Tees l7 1 Walls End 14.4‘hu.r.berland 15 2 Walls End Tees Hetton Walls End Perkins . 15 0 Wat s 1.1,.(1 Tee. —..... 19 0 Walls And Himmel'. ... 20 0 Walls End West Tee 5......... 16 0 Walls End Hetton ....., ..... 90 0 Cowpen ..................... t 6 U Walls End Lambton ...... ... 'A h, COUNTRY CORN MARKETS. Wheat. Barley. Otita. Beasts. e per Quarter. s. to 8. 5. to a. s. to s. s, to S. to 1 68' 8 1 -- 2 6 48 40 1 :_ Itexham 44 74 36 38 t. 3 28 Si o rpeth bo 5% 2 4 34 18 2, 40 4 2 — 36 S . Penrith — 06 33 2 5 4hetlield — 84 32 23 43 44 Winchester 60 66 '26 311 20 20 40 42 35 aF Per Bushel. s.d. s.d. s.d. s.d. s.d. s.d. s.d. s.d s.d. s.d Carmarthen 69 G 0 00 40 00 19 56 00 0u 0 7owbrldge 76 80 0 0 4P 00 3 0 5 0 53 u rip Swansea 7O 8 0 S 8 44 20 3 8 5 6 60J 6 01' Per 8011. Barnardeastl'l4 n IS 08 9 90 4 0 749 6 11 r 0 o 10 rhtrham 146 15 6 76. 90 0 600010 A 0 0 Richmond l2 ti /8 SlO 0 11 0 A 0 7410 0 140 A 0 lON Stockton l3 0190 9 0 90 6 0 7990116 8 0 10 4, The fishermen of St. Sauveur, near lionfleur, lately caught Oil that coast an extraordinary fish, with a head which, though having a rather agreeable expression of coun tenance,.somewhat resembles that of a lion, from Its having attached to it a quantity of coarse hair, like the mine of that animal. Frem the shoulders issue strong membraneous flea, and the body terminates in a lona. tail, with a fan shaped tin. Its whale body shines in the sun Eke silver, with beautiful va riations, like the Dorado of the tropical seas. It has been pre served alive, and is to be brought to Paris. VIE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, APPJL P 2, 1842 IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, April 11. . V A Tl RD CHAIAILLOR took his seat on the Wool :smelt - ly before Five o'Clock. - I:CHANT AND FACTORS BILL. Earl RIPON gate notice that he should move the .second reading of this Bill on Thursday next. NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRELAND). Lord BANDON presented a petition from a place in Ireland, against the present system of national educa tion in Ireland. SEVERN NAVIGATION BILL. The Bishop of, GLOUCESTER presented a petition against this Bill. EXCHEQUER BILLS COMMISSION BILL. The Duke of WELLINGTON gave notice that he should move the second reading of this Bill to-morrow. Lord BROUGHAM said he would give the Noble Duke ample notice of any amendment that he might have to propose on the Bill. IRISH AGRICULTURE. _ . The Marquisoia i:ANKICARDE presented a petition 'rom Galway, praying the House to afford protection to [rich agriculture. INCOME TAX. Lotd BROUGHAM presented a petition from the cor poration of writers of Dundee, against this tax, praying that the House would not sanction any Act which did not afford to the petitioners protection and relief. IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT. The NOBLE LORD then presented a petition from the inmates of the Queen's Bench Prison against imprison ment for debt ; and another petition from another class of prisoners against the abolition of an indulgence called is " day rule. ' SEVERN NAVIGATION BILL. Lord REDESDALE presented a petition from the fishermen on the Severn, praying that in the Bill, provi sion might be made to enable their boats to pass the locks and weirs on the Severn. — Lord LYTTELTON presented a petition in favour of the Severn Navigation Bill. Lord SONDES presented several petitions from places in the County of Norfolk, against the proposed alteration in the Corn-laws. The Severn Navigation Bill was read a second time and ordered to be committed on Thursday. THE GREENWICH HOSPITAL SCHOOLS. Lord DUNCANNON gave notice that on Thursday next, he would call the attention of his Noble Friend (Lord Heddington) at the head of the Admiralty, to the state of the Royal Schoels in connexion with Greenwich Hospital. in which the decisions of the two tribunals had diff ,, red, nor could his Noble and Learned Friend point out one instance in which such a thing had occurred. Suppose this measure were passed, the infallible result would be that there might be a Chancellor who had never been in a Court of Equity in his life—would an appeal under such circumstances be satisfactory ? an appeal from a Judge accustomed to equity all his life, high i❑ talent, and sound in judg ment ? The appeal under such circumstances must be most unsatisfactory.--(Hear, hear.) Such were the ob servations he had to make on this measure ; he thought it , :nwise in the extreme, and though he . had heard many strange propositions for amending various laws and cus toms of that House, he must say that he thought the proposition of his Noble and Learned Friend was more extravagant, and more objectionable, than any that had hitherto come under the attention of their Lordships. He moved, therefore, that this Bill be read a second time this day six months. Lord BROUGHAM did not think it necessary on this occasion to add any thing to what he had said in the course of previous discussions on the Bill. But on ' referring to some cases in which there had been a vari ance between the Committee of the Privy Council and the Courts below, he believed it would be found that the judgments of the House of Lords and the Privy Council did not conflict so much as his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord Campbell) supposed. He (Lord Brougham) had once proposed a measure at the end of the session of 1834, which had been referred to by his Noble and Learned Friend. who had stated that that Bill wasfor the purrose of transferring the business of that House to the Judicial Committee. This was not a correct representation. It was not to transfer the appellate jurisdiction at all from that House, but it was for the purpose of enabling that House to avail itself of the help of the Judicial Com mittee auxiliary to the decision of the House. His ob jection to the plan of his Noble and Learned Friend was that it excluded any Judge, unless he were a Peer of Parliament. He should certainly oppose the measure, for he did not think it was at all calculated to improve the Court to which it referred. • Lord CAMPBELL was not in the slightest degree changed in the opinion he had formed, and; in conse quence of which he bad introduced this measure. The evils complained of, he was convinced, could only he remedied in the manner he had proposed. His Noble Friend must have been aware that the clause which he had introduced was solely in order to prevent the multiplication of Judges. But his Noble Friend said that he had brought a charge against the Judicial Committee, who had clone their duty in a most exem plary manner. No ; he did not mean to find any fault with the members of that Committee, personally or in dividually ; but he did say, that as a body, they were not competent to the duties which they had to perform. His Noble and Learned Friend had not been able to show the necessity for two tribunals, or that there would be any disadiantage in coalescing these tribunals. Though he could crush th ese Bills . by a majority, he had not de feated the principle, and he (Lord Campbell) hoped that the measure would at another time meet with a better fate.—(Hear, hear.) It was a well-known anecdote that the best speeches for and against the Prisoner's Counsel Bill were made by his Noble and Learned Friend ; his Noble and Learned Friend had also exerted his powers of eloquence in favour of and against various other Bills which had at last been carried, mainly owing to his efforts; he (Lord Camp bell) hoped that such would he the case at some future time with this measure. He begged to withdraw his motion. After a few words from Lord BROUGHAM, The Duke of WELLINGTON called the attention of the House to the important functions belonging to the office of the Lord Chancellor of this great empire •, besides that of presiding in the Court of Chancery ; and he trusted that in any Bill which should be brought in, in a future Session, there should be a clause to secure that the person selected to sit on the Woolsack in their Lordships' House should be a barrister of at least fifteen years' standing. Lord CAMPBELL said that there was not at present any law to require that the person selected to fill the office of Lord Chancellor should be a barrister at all. For centuries the office had been filled by ecclesiastical individuios, down to the time of Queen Elizabeth, when Sir Thomas Moore was appointed—the first lay Lord Chancellor for several reigns. The Amendment of the Lord Chancellor that the Bill be read a second time this day six months, was carried withouWa division, and the House adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 11. The SPEAKER took the chair. WIGAN ELECTION. Mr. HAWES brought up the Report of the Wigar Election Committee, which declared that Mr. Greenhill was duly elected, that Mr. Cross was not duly elected and that Mr. Charles Standish ought to have been ra• turned. against the tax, but nothitig dotild be more distinctly expressed than his opinion, that if it had been, he tilt have considered it his duty to have resisted the petition. Now, Sir, the only two days out of the seven, which her Majesty Government has for the consideration of those measures which are brought forward are Mon day and Friday. These are days supposed to be set apart for the co: venience of her Majesty's Government, but in point of faCt it is fur the convenit nee of the public. It is a matter of perfect indifferer ce, I need scarcely tell the House, in what mode I occupy the eight hours—this is to me a matter of pc rfect indiffe rence. But the two days which are devoted to the business - of the Government are not days set apart for the private convenience of her Majesty's Ministers ; they are days only on which her Majesty's Government can take precedence for their measures. It is well known that upon Tuesday, Wed nesday, and Thursday, other business may be inter posed between the business of the Government, accord in.. to the discretion of individual Members. I know the Members of the House of Commons may, at any time, prolong the proceedings of the House by moving adjournments ; yet still I have that confidence in the disposition of the House of Lords, and in the desire of individual Members to consult the public interest, that I believe no unfair use will be made of this privilege for the purpose of obstructing the pro gress of business in the House. Yet it is quite clear that if petitions may be presented with respect to taxes under the consideration of the House, and if these peti tions may be debated—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition benches)—in that case it would be quite impos sible—to proceed with 66 public business. A most material obstruction might be offered. lam not speak ing of the present time, but you may conceive cases of imminent wars, in which it would be absolutely necessary to raise immediate supplies for the public service—you may conceive such cases as that referred to by Mr. Hat sell ; similar events might again occur, and the public business might be most seriously affected under such circumstances by the presentation of a vast number of petitions. But it is said that we have lately departed from ancient practice, and that Members are now excluded from debating petitions. That restriction, however, is not the consequence of a resolution which would at all times be binding on the House. The resolution that petitions are not to be debated, is not binding, I apprehend, beyond the Session in which it is passed. In cases of Standing Orders, it would, no doubt be competent to the Speaker to interfere at any time, to prevent debates in violation of a Standing Order. But in the case of a mere resolution—the resolution I repeat has no force beyond the existing session. Consequently I apprehend the prevention of debates rests very much on the same footing with the refusal to receive petitions. It it founded on a sense of public convenience, and is fortified by usage. Now, in the one case, I find a usage of one hundred and fifty years, and in the other case I find a usage of five years. The one case rests not upon the Standing Orders, but on what is called a rule founded on practice; while the other regulation, I apprehend, rests upon a different autho rity. slt is certainly in the power of the House to repeal any rule or resolution of the House. I am quite aware of the position in which I stand in the present in stance. Ido not at all deny that I have reason to believe that my opinions upon this subject are not. those which universally prevail. I at once admit that it is very unpopular to oppose the presentation of petitions. It appears to be unpopular. As I said before, I have no personal interest in the matter ; but, at the same time, I know not how a man can properly discharge his duty if he abstain from pressing on this House what he believes to be most consonant, on the whole, with the public interest. I think it my duty to submit my opinions fairly to the House of Commons, and to take their decision upon the subject, and not at once to assume that a practice of 150 years' standing, should be unhesitatingly repealed. 'I must, herefore persevere in resisting this attempt. The House on the last occasion determined that they would not depart from the usual practice, and their refusal to receive petitions against taxes rested precisely on the same footing as the present motion. Finding myself in one case fortified by the usage of 150 years, in another case fortified only by the usage of five, I feel strongly the inconvenience of now establishing a precedent which in times of greater difficulty . might be appealed to for the purpose of embarrassing the public service ; and I must, in compliance with what I feel to be a sense of duty, conttnue to offer my resistance to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman. In doing that Ido not conceal from myself the power which - he and others possess of offering petitions and provoking debate, and that, no doubt, is a power which may subject the House to greater inconvenience than would follow from receiving the petitions.—(Cries of " Hear, hear," from the Oppo sition benches.) But feeling myself right in the objection which I take, must look to ultimate results, leave them to exercise their power. I dailildt consent to give up that which has been the practice of the House for 80 long a period, end I must therefore offer my opposition to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman. Lord HOWICK said he could assure the Right Hon. Baronet that he agreed with him in hit respect for the forms and usages of the House, but he did not think their admiration for those forms and usages—admirable in general, as experience had shown them to .be—ought to be a blind and unreasonable one. He thought they were bound in all cases to see whether the reason upon which the existing practice and usage was founded, still existed, and still applied.—(Hear, hear.) If that reason did exist, if the grounds on which the practice was originally established were not removed, then he be lieved it would generally be found to be the soundest wisdom to adhere to it.—(Hear; hear.) But if circum stances were changed, if the reasons upon which the usage originally rested no longer applied, then he thought they would act much more wisely in making that usage conform to the change of circumstances which had taken place since it was first established.—(Hear, hear.) Now, he thought it was shown most clearly on a former evening, by his two Right Hon. Friends, the Members for Edinburgh and Devonport, that the grounds upon which this practice was originally established no longer existed ; that the change which had taken place in the mode of receiving petitions had removed those grounds; and .that since the new mode had been adopted it was im possible that any conceivable number of petitions could interfere with the progress of public business.—(l,lear.) And here he could not help saying that lie entirely con curred with the Right lion. Baronet in attaching the gr,atest importance to the preservation of the nee and practice of the House, by which the hours of public business on Monday and on Friday were reserved for the business which was under the charge of her Majesty's Government, because, after all, that was the business of the country; and, as the Right Hon. Baronet had truly stated, it was not for the convenience of her Majesty's Government so much as it was for the general advantage of the country, that consideration should be given to those great questions of general policy which the Government might bring under their notice.—(Hear.) It was to him demonstrated beyond all form of doubt, that the reception of those petitions could in no re spect tend to interfere with the rule of speaking oft petitions. On the contrary the maintenance of that rule, as his Right Hon. Friend had cl.early shown, would hare an opposite effect. It was the maintenance of the rule, and not its change, which would prevent the time of the House being taken up. That would be the case, and what they were now debating showed that, it would be so.—(Hear, hear.) They were going to divide on the motion of his Hon. Friend, the Member for Finsbury, on bringing up a petition ; but supposing his motion was negatived, he could bring up to-morrow another petition and make a similar motion—(Hear)—and every Hon. Member might take the same course, and they might do so as his Right Hon. Friend had shown when the. House went into a Committee of Supply, or upon a mea sure regarding taxation. In every question of proceed ing with the Orders of the Day, and on questions of supply, or taxation every Hon. Member entrusted with a petition might get up and state its substance, the number of per sons who signed it, and the opinions expressed by the petitioners; and he asked any lion. Gentleman who had a short experience of the mode of doing busi ness in the House, whether that practice would not interfere much more with the transaction of public. business, than a change of the old rule The Right Hon. Gentleman said that the receipt of peti tions. would interfere with the imposition of a tax, even in cases where it was most necessary, if allowed to be debated, and that the present rule presses on the same ground, and existed 150 years, but if he (Lord Howick) was not mistaken, no direct and formal resolution of the house on the subject of not receiving petitions referring to taxation showed any rule with respect to the prevent ing of debates. The distinction between them, was, that the one rule of the House was obviously essential to the due conducting of the public business, and the other was not. The rule which prevented debates on the presenting of petitions, which were so numerous that the public business could not be got through, if allowed to be de bated, -would, he believed, be considered necessary by nine-tenths of the House, While the other rule was, in their opinion, unnecessary, and therefore that the one rule ought to be maintained, while the other ought not. But when he found that after having considered the sub ject for two days—after the adjournment of the question from Friday last, for the purpose of enabling the Right . . Hon. Baronet and the Government to determine on the course they might deem it expedient to adopt—when after such a delay he found that the Right Honourable Baronet, with all his experience, and with all his power of stating most forcibly to the House the arguments by which ho had been led to recommend the adoption of any particular course— (Cheers)—when he found that the Right Hon. Baronet had no one reason to allege against the change which had been proposed, except that it was a change—(Cheers) —he (Lord Howick) could have no hesitation whatever as to the vote which he ought to give.—(Cheers.) He felt that the Right lion. Baronet had stated the case to the House temperately anal fairly—(Cheers)--at the same time he regretted exceedingly the course which the Right Hon. Baronet had thought it his duty to adopt: Mr. M. MILNES rose amidst loud cries of " Ques tion, question." The Hon. Gentleman said that it was only by considering questions of privilege as distinct from party questions, that their privileges could be maintained. It had only been by so considering the question of pri vilege, that they had been enabled to come to an adjust me,nt of the question of privilege two years since. If he regarded this question solely as a question of the pri vileges of Parliament, he might vote tbr the proposition of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, did he not anticipate that by acceding to the motion he might run the risk of bringing into disrespect the petitions of the country. He knew that generally speaking questions regarding tax ation passed unanimously—(Loud laughter) —except on particular occasions. —(Continued laughter.) It was not generally considered fair or just to deny qu money when the necessities of the country reired an t, except under peculiar circumstances.—(Clieers laughter.) Now if they received these p eti tionsthey would run the risk of the people of this country getting into the habit of petitioning against taxation.—(Roars of laughter.) There was no doubt but that such a habit might be easily got into—(Continued lasghter)—and case might Well occur in which the House having Unani mously voted a tax, an enormous body of petitions from CHANCERY REFORM.. Lord CAMPBELL, in Moving the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Privy Council Appeals Bill, said that he thought it would be convenient to discuss those Bills which stood for second reading this evening as parts of one measure. The object of the first was to transfer the appellate jurisdiction of the Privy Council to their Lordships' House—that of the second was to create a permanent Judge of Chancery—and of the third, to allow their Lordships to sit upon appeals during the pe riod of the Parliamentary recess. To him it appeared that the greatest inconvenience connected with the present practice of the Court of Chancery arose from the cir cumstance of the Chief Judge being removable with every change of Ministers. The number of appeals had greatly increased since the . augmentation of the Vice-Chancery Courts, and the augmenta tion was going 1 on at a very rapid rate, When the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack decided a ease in the Court of Chancery, if the parties made an appeal to that House he would hear it in a - most fair and dispassionate manner, and he would be ready at any time to reverse his decision. But what was the feeling of the public upon it ? That feeling was described by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, who said it was contrary to analogy, that prevailed in all the lower establishments. This evil would continue unless they separated the functions of the Lord Chancellor sitting in the Court of Chancery and sitting in the House of Lords. This was one of the principal alterations contemplatedin the Bill. In the Irish Ecclesiastical Court, no man could sit to hear appeals if he were a Roman Catholic They could have no uniformity in decisions on the same. subject in England and in Ireland. That House might decide that a Presbyterian mixed marriage seas legal, but it would not be held so in Ireland. This question would soon be argued at their Lordships' bar, and if the marriages were decided to be valid it would subject many persons to transportation. For this evil, he knew no remedy but that which he had the honour of proposing to their Lordships. The very circumstance of the fact of the contrary de cisions between the two tribunals ought, in his (Lord Campbell's) humble opinion, to convince their Lordships that there ought to be only one tribunal. The decisions of the Judicial Committee were merited by good sense and soundness of argument and doctrine, and their de cisions were now quoted quite as much as the judgments of their Lordships, and yet their decisions might be very different. Take the case of the making a rate ; the Churchwardens might make a rate, and a rate-payer appealing, their Lordships might decide' that the Churchwardens were not competent -to the making a rate, • whilst the Judicial Committee might decide that they were competent. In such a ease the parish must most unquestio.iably be placed in a very unpleasant situation. In marriage cases also, the same thing might result ; and he thougt these instances ought to convince their Lordships that there should be only one tribunal ; if there were only one tribunal there would be no fear but that the decisions would be uniform ; and he thought that should induce their Lordships to support the proposition which h 4. had the honour to make to them. Formerly, Parlia ment met twice or thrice a year, and on these occasions the Privy Council used to be summoned to attend to jud . cial business. It was not until the reign of Henry VII. that the Privy. Council assumed to itself the power of deciding - in appeals without the inter position of Parliament. It was in the reign Of Henry • the Eigth, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council; called the Committee of the Star Chamber, assumed to itself a power - entirely indepen dent of Parliament. The reason why the appeals•froM the Channel Islands, Jersey, and Guernsey, were trans ferred to the Privy Council was, that during a .long period under the Tuderi, Parliament was not called together, and the • Privy Council were enabled to exert, independently, an authority which they caultt only hold legitimately under the sanction of. their Lordship. ; and if their Lordships agreed to the mea sure which he proposed they would not introduce any innovation, but only recur to the ancient practice of the Administration, according to the consti tution in this country. The object of his measure was to secure uniformity in the administration of justice. The LORD CHANCELLOR did not know whether he ought to be heard at all upon this subject, as the object of - the Bill was to shut the doors of the Court of Chian-, eery against the . Lord Chancellor. According to the Bill the. Queen would not have the power of placing st the head of the Court the person to whom she con- Lided the Great Seal. His Noble and Learned, Friend ,•-frar him (Lord Cottenham), whose fitness to fill the high office had been the subject of so much eulogy, could not be appointed if this Bill ;vere passed ; and if her Majesty were desirous of placing upon the bench his Noble and Learned Friend ( L - )rti Brougham) whose zeal and assiduity had despatchA long arrelr of suits and appeals, this Bill wo u ld stand in her wey.---(tlear, hear.) Nay, if the Noble and Learned Friend (Lord CampbolP ) : o was desirous of again serving his country in the ca pacity of an Equity Judge, he must again go across the Channel, and take his seat upon the bench which he so lately adorned. He (Lord Campbell) di vided his measure into three Bills. 'IT e first object of that Bill was to abolish the Judicial Committ ee - of the i'rivy Council. It was but nine years since their Lord ;hips passed a Bill for the purpose of extending the jurisdiction of the Privy Council and for the purpose of ell:m ' ing their powers. That Bill was maturely con sidered at the time. It passed, and passed without oppelition either in that House or the other House of Parliament ; and it gave universal satisfaction. Must they then retrace their steps ? Let them mark the his tory of that tribunal.. It disposed of all cases as they, game before it. For the last nine_years 116 appeals had been got rid of. He would mention one circumstance leeisive of the character of that tr:bunal. In every case ,f importance the judgment was a written judgment, lelirered not hastily, but a judgment well considered, a eritten j.y.lg - :nest, to insure its being considered with diligence, attention, and circumspection; and he (the , Lent Chancellor) a ppealed to thos e very r e po r t s t o whi c h the Noble and Learned Lord appealed in confirmation of the diligence and the legal ability and the sound judgment manifested in 1111 decisions of that tribunal. ' This was the Court which this Bill sought to abolish. The tribunal was admirably adapted to the business which it had to perform. There were questions of civil and ecclesiastical law. Judges who had been • enewred in the Ecclesiastical Courts a t ten d e d in the lmurt, and formed part of it, for the pdr pose of deciding the question. Again, there were ques tions of equity. There were Judges of the Equity ;Courts who were members of the tribunal. When ques tions of this kind were discussed, their attendance was required to form part of that Court. Again, there were questions of common law that were agitated and dis cussed, and on those occasions the Judges of the Com mon Law Courts formed part of the Court. Nay more, there were questions of Hindoo law and Mahomedan law. On these occasions there were gentlemen who had been Judges in India, who attended to give their assist ance. Questions of the utmost importance were there discussed and decided. This was the tribunal the Noble Lord sought to abolish. lie was sure their Lordships would not assent to the proposition of his Noble Friend. His Noble Friend said he was not reforming, he was only restoring, and he re ferred- to what wasAhe practice in the reign of King Richard the Second. But the question wasnot what was the practice in the time of Richard the Second, but what was bust to be done now. His Noble Friend proposed that their Lordships should attend all the year round for the purpose of hearing appeals; that was one of his Noble Friends innovations; their attendance, however, was to be voluntary, and thus, while the Noble Lord might be enjoying himself in Scotland. and another Noble Lord was regaling himself at his villa in the South of France—(Langhter)—the Chancellor, who sat on the %Toolmack, would not have the opportunity of ving town. But what would be the id vantage of this? Suppose, now, the Noble Lord who-brought for ward this motion should attend, and another Noble and Learned Lord who sat near him (Brougham) should also attend, the tribunal would consist of the Chancellor and his two Noble and Learned Friends.—(flcar, hear.) But his Noble end Learned Friend complained that there were two tribunals. Why, their jurisdictions were quit* distinct. The House of Lords decided all cases of equity throughout the United Kingdom, and the Judicial Com mittee of the Privy Council decided in cases of equity and common law in the colonies. This law had been in operation now for 200 years, and there was no instance GREAT MARLOW ELECTION. Sir .1". Y. BULLET brought up the Report of the Great Marlow Election Committee, which declared that Sir William Clayton was not duly elected, and that Mr. Wynn Hampden was duly elected, and ought to hare been returned. BELFAST AND CAVEHILL RAILWAY BILL. On the motion of Mr. O'CONNELL, this Bill was read a. second time. NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRELAND). Mr. FITZROY presented a petition from Down against the system or National Education in Ireland, and in. fttiour of that of the Church Education Society. • A petition to the same effect was presented by Mr. E. TENNENT, from the congregation of Christ Church, Belfast. • • Captain HAMILTON prnent-all a petition from Aylcibury against the llog-eart Nuisance in t:ie country. , , THE TARIFF. • Mr. GREENE presented ape - tition from the curriers, leather cutters, and other persons in .Manchfster, against the proposed alteration of the duty on leather. Captain BERKELEY . presented a fetition from Glou cester to the same effect. --- ERGUSSONI• Sir R. F ... presented a pctiticn fro:n the provision traders of L mdonderry against the proposed ititarations in the tariff. Lord F. EOERTON presented a petition from the merchants and traders of Manchester, signed by 24,000 peisons,in.ftiv.our of the financial measures of the Go vernment, and praying the House to adopt them as speediry as possiole.—(clear.) Mr. 2. FBENCH presented a petition from Roscom mon against the Government measures, and stating that since they were proposed the value of property in that country. had fallen 25 per cent.—(Cheers.) An HON. MEMBER presented a petition from Shields, against the export duty upon coal, WAKEYIIILL INCLOSURE. Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from various poor personi residing in the county of Southampton, against the Walieyhitl Inclosure Bill. They stated teat a similar Bill had been brought forward in 1834, which was successfully opposed, but that they had been put to great expense in so doing. He r! presented that the present Bill was got up by the rich farmers and landowners in that neighbourhood, and that it was an encroachment on the rights of the poor, and they prayed the House not to consent to the Bill. • Lord HO WICK presented a petition from a number of the collieries in the county of Darhatn, against the proposed impost 0r 45.. per ton on the exportation of coals. INCOME TAX—RIGHT OF PETITION. Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from an individual residing in Gloucestershire, who stated that his property was subject to hoary mortgage debts, and that the pro posed tel upon incomes , would be his complete ruin. The petitioner said that there was no necessity "for so ravaging a measure—(Hear, hear, and a laugh)— which wouid abridge the comforts of many, and involve others, situated like himself, in entire ruin. —(Hear, hear.) He moved that the petition be laid on the table. The SPEAKER said if it was a petition against the tax it could not be received. Mr. WAKLEY replied that it was not a petition against the tax, but only informing the House that the petitioner and others would be ruined by it.—(Laughter.) The petition was then laid on the table. Lord NEWRY presented a petition from Northampton against the reduction of the duty on foreign manufac tured boots and shoes. Sir R. BULKELEY presented a petition from Bath, against the proposed tariff. Lord JOCELYN presented a petition from Norfolk, against the proposed alteration of the timber duties. Mr. MURPHY presented a petition from Cork, signed by 13 ,500 against the parochial t; •L . in Ireland, called Minis ters ' Money. P ETITIONS AGAINST THE INCOME TAX. The Order of the Day for the adjourned Debate on receiving g a petition was then read, and on the question being put that the petition be brought up; Sir R. PEEL rose and said—Sir, I cannot acqtdesce n the motion that this petition be brought up, because I believe that the country generally is adverse to the pro posal.—(Hear.) I do not mean to say that a great number of petitions might not be presented adverse to the financial measure which I have proposed, but they might also be presented at any time adverse to the im position of any impost. At the .same time my objec tion to the motion of the Honourable Gentleman is not grounded on an apprehension that the country generally will declare itself unfavourable to the mea sures which I have tf•ought it my duty to propose. My Objection to the motion is founded upon the obliga tion which I think public consideration requires —to sup port that which has been the usage of the House for the last 150 years. lam quite aware that the usage is con sistent with the ,nding Orders of the House. It is a usage or rule almost universally adhered to—l believe, I might say, universally ad:toted to, for the period which I have mentioned, viz. 150 years. Sir, I am influenced not by a reference to present convenience, but I am influenced by consideration that the business of the country would be injured, were it permitted that obstructions might be offered to any tax necessary for the public service. And it was the same apprehension which influenced the House in maintaining this order. In 1808 this question was discussed, but in that year, as on the former occasion, the question was not so much whether or no the practice should be departed from, but whether or no the petition which was the subject of consideration was directed against the tax then under consideration of the House. I think in 1808 the petition was directed against the Order in Council, and those who contended most strenuously for the presen tation of the petition contended that the rule of the House or the usage of the House did not apply to that case. Mr. Tierney, w ho was then in opposition, and a high autho rity, expressly said—" If I thought that this was a peti tion directed against a tax, I should most decidedly vote for the mution ; becaus..) I believe that the presentation of petitions against taxes necessary fur supplying the year ought to be prevented, as every person then would try to shift the burthen from his own shoulders, and the consequence would be such an obstruction to the public business as would be most injurious." This was the opinion of Mr. Tierney. He contended that the petition 'was not the people of Engleni might be presented against it. The consequence would be that the decision of the House on subjects of taxtution would be brought into disrespect — (Loud cheers from the Opposition)—and a notion would get abroad that this House did riot fairly represent th, opinions of the people.—(lmmense cheering from the Opposition benches.) He (Mr. Milnes) could not help thinking that the Hon. Member for Finsbury had some notion of the kind in his head when he brought forward the present motion, and that his object was not only to annoy the Government for the time being, but to render the people discontented with the constitution of the House. He, therefore, called upon all Menibers who were satisfied with the constitution of the House, to consider iF it would be wise to abandon whathad so long been the constitution of the House.—(Cheering.) He did not care much for the prescription of 150 years, if there was a good opportunity for repealing that pre scription. But after ten years, if a Government evow edly popular, which had never raised the question, nor remedied this great and glaring abuse—after all these op portunities had been missed, now 'when a tax was imposed that he believed would lead to fewer petitions from the people of England —that was confessed to be the most equal that was ever proposed—(Laughter)—he thought it strange that they should choose this particular time and moment for the repeal of a prescription of 150 years. He hoped they would not look at this as a party question. Mr. HENRY BERKELEY said he was loathe to trespass upon the House, but felt it his imperative duty to do so. He held in his hand a requisition, signed by nearly a thousand of his constituents—(Hear) —and he was aware that a similar one had been presented to his Hon. Colleague—entreating them to do that which the people were precluded from doing, raising their voices against the odious income tax.—(Hear.) It was not for him to say what would be the course of his Hon. Col league, but for himself he felt it to be his duty to speak the voice of his constituents on this occasion. He agreed with them when they expressed their utter disapproba tion of the proposed tax—(Hear, hear)—and their dis gust at the chicaner4 which had kept the people in ig norance of it until it was too late to petition.—(Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances, he felt it to be his duty to express the opinions of his constituents, when they could not, and he should vote with his Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury. He looked upon the right.of petition as one of the most valuable privileges the people had, and particularly when the purses of the people were so heavily assailed, by a heavy and unpre cedented impost in time of peace, did he think that right should be maintained.—(Hear.) Lord F. EGERTON thought it would be impossible to conduct the proceedings of any Government, if they were to depart in any sensible degree from the rule, whether established by resolution or otherwise, against the discussion of petitions. But he could not do otherwise than concur in the reasons for throwing open as widely as poesible the doors of this House to the petitions of the people, as far as the necessities of the Go vernment and the Legislature would permit. He confessed he should vote on the question with much greater readiness if he could see any likelihood, under the sanction of the Speaker, that the practice of this House, with regard to the presentation of petitions and the restriction of debate, could be evinced by some more formal proceeding than had yet been been taken. The question being simply one whether this petition should be presented or not, he could not, with whatever reluctance he might differ with his Right Hon. Friend, but vote with the Hon. Member opposite.—(Hear.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL begged to call the attention of the Noble Lord and the House to what had occurred in the early part of the session, when, the ques tion was brought before the House, when •it was stated by the Speaker:the more formal way of Proceed ing would be to move that the resolution of 1839 be re scinded. In laying, down that mode of proceeding, he believed the Speaker was acting according to the forms of the House; and he (Lord ,L Russell) lied no doubt that in conformity with reason such ought to be the form of the mo tion; because if any other course was adopted, they would have a resolution standing on the Journals of that House to which they would be acting contrary, not, having rescinded it. On, this motion, the question being put, there appeared Ayes 50, Noes 237. He would now allude to the objections stated by the Right Hon. Gen tleman, and he begged to say a few words on the ques tion himself. Th© Hon. Gentleman had asked why the late Government had not proposed this reception of petitions ? But it was because he had agreed with the conduct of the late Government that he gave his support to the reception of this petition. -What had been the practice of their ancestors ? He did not, like the Hon. Gentleman who spoke last, hold himself indifferent to the practice of 150 years, nor was it without great reflection and strong argument that he should be ready to overturn so long a practice. The practice used to be to throw the doors of the House open to petitions, to let them be receifedc the substance of them stated,, and to let other Members debate them. When the grounds of the petition were fairly before the House, if it were necessary that the time of the House should be .oecupied with the dis cussion of those petitions, they were debated. . But it had been said that on one particular subject, the en actment dl' twses, this extreme liberty was incon venient. Bet what lied they said ? Had they concurred with their Masters in this question of the discussion of petitiona ? By no means. They had found the practice would Iced to serieus inconvenience, and therefore put a stop to it, .an,4 made other rale* with respect to the preBentatush oft .titiom, resolving that Al:us hers presenting petitions should coniiii• thcmsQlres t o :he subject of them, and also preved other Members from speaking . on them. - Should they depart from the rule in this respect and keep it up only for the sake or restriction, - and should they insist on the wisdom of their ancesttstee only when that wisdom would lead to the restriction of the . presentation of petitions ? He could not take that one-sided view. of the question. The Hon. Member said it had been usual to vote taxes unanimously. He believed very few Chancellors of the 'Exchequer would be disposed to agree with hint in that opinion. The House would recollect that there was nothing in the, forms of the How to prevent petitions being presented against taxes, which had been already in existence. If - they voted the income tax this year, any number of petitions might be presented next year against it, This was an inconsistency. He hoped - the House would admit this petition, as well as every other otte preperly worded.. Mr. S. WORTLEY said that he was sfiegirOne of saying a few words on the subject under discussion, inasmuch as he was one of those who had supported the opposition of his Right Hon. Friend the First Lord of the Treasury, on a former evening, to the proposal of the Honourable Member for Finsbury. He wished to remind the House that the question as ft eeemed to him before the House was not precisely the Sante as that on which they had to decide on the former oc casion. The Hon. Member for Finsbury had moved the other evening that the practice of the House should be discontinued which forbad the reception of the petition against a tax under the consideration of the House. Now he (Mr. S. Wortley) so far concurred with his Right Honourable Friend, that he did not feel prepared to vote for the discontinuance of a practice which had been established so many years. He thought that that was a reasonable objection to the former motion of the Hon. Member fur Finsbury, because he could conceive cases of pressing emergency, in which It would be desirable to enforce the practice which had been so long in existence of not receiving peti tions against a tax under the consideration of the House. But, at the same time, now that they were called upon to receive a petition against an income tax, he owned that he doubted whether they would be justified in enforeing the rule in that particular instance. They had been told by his Right Hon. Friend at the head of the Government that the income tax was to be made part of a series of measures ; and he (Mr., S. Wortley) thought it could. scarcely be called a tax imposed merely for. the service of the pre sent year. He did not think that the remarks of Mr. Hatsell applied to such a case as the present, and it was but just that a penal regulation should be as limited as possible in the construction put upon it by the House. Looking to the particular case before them, and looking also to the practice which had prevailed in this very session, he did not feel that lie would be juss tified in opposing the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. He .beliered that it appeared in the Appendix to the Votes for that day, that a petition had been pre sented against the poll tax, which was, more strictly than the income tax, a tax far the service of the year. The Right Honourable Baronet made -a distinction the other night, which was perfectly valid, when he said that this usage should he applied to cases where it was proposed to raise supplies for the year, and not to cases in which it was proposed to raise them for commercial purposes. On the whole he felt himself bound to vote against. the Right Hon. Baronet on the present occasion. Sir J. GRAHAM , said he could not understand the distinction which had been drawn by his Right Honourable Friend the Member fur the West Riding of Yorkshire, but it was quite clear that he intended to vote against • what had been the usage of the House for 150 years. He (Sir James Graham) would not trouble the House with any declara tion of his sincere respect for the general right of the subject to petition; but on the other hand he could na conceal from himself the vast importance of respecting a usage which bore date from the period of the Revolution, when the rights and liberties of the people of this coun try had been so nobly vindicated and so recently trium phant. For 150 years, upon grounds which were clearly intelligible, this usage. had been uninter rupted. It was quite true that it was accompa nied with right of speech, but all the constitutional authorities agreed in stating, that had the practice been to receive petitions it would be impossible for the ser vants of the Crown to ca p r t rz u t i h a r r o_ug a h u . d tha it t li w o a t s ise th a e ny u r s r u a a x l be of un unpopular.—(He a r, h ea r.) He, fateßill Tax xmi Billsh t b toe (Sir James Graham) could not therefore confine his view to the narrow circumstances of the present moment—(Hear, hear, hear)—but as a serv ant of the Crown, it was .his duty to consider what would be the effect of the first 'departure from the established usage.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He found the invaluable and inalienable right of the people to present petitions restricted in the peculiar case of the progress of a Tax Bill through Parliament. If this House departed from the ancient and established usage of Parliament, which restricted the tight of the presentation of petitions during the progress of a Tax Bill, supposing, •in any future Parliament, • the more ancient p rac ti ce s h ou ld be broken through, and the modern usage resumed of presenting petitions against Tax Bill s , he then felt that the - power of the Crown, in cases of great emergency: on which th e f a t e o f this country might was gone—the power of the Crown surrendered as u p t i t a . depend, the present servants of her Majesty. That re incur ; sponsibility w hich he for ono was not prepared and Viking the most dispassionate question, without reference to present cit:ett viewm s ° t f a n e t : l s e but to what he believed to be the hiteessst ''f Liecountry .t d i and the prerogative of the Crown, be considered consistent with his muse a duty—of the weig ht tillwi r e tuipzi, ii,n ; l ro4erl. f. ,:, ie o i' s r Iseao s :eut - - e inv rla d igsac , taset l , v iiharneit l (i s'' the. for ' nie ll fr n iiat e m y itil sufficient t, or e ti l'inion of •Ishat%of th, *tell ) •L'ng:isl beri h s f ied 111 ilasi 'it Engin th e v g ra n d , Peopl e tves of I ;di of Egg ih "hiaco m give thousa Ity, Probab I 'Pay t h e _ : i4 ace ' o x u l tal „,•ii ' and ffl s it 1 , t t h e 4 'l (1 litre :t - emdd no C r' into 5 ' ,.., it s tY had c ( 14„ e • kro ne; t i k4l : ll ,, a:t a "it : l t t:llll :\ vh ' e l a re t ] % . , r , ' "r was Illti,'', i li•italii iissu,, 4 e;3' sill It _ % •ated ht s*ll morons ', 7 r e 1. 1 ,_ iriad " h *h en the lii sup, ne had in, ( 4 4.ls ed that k i "rh an , 4 4 ° " 8 ; he 1 , lir seoSt 00,011 4 ,7 q t axa . , jo , 1 cos; w 04,1 ;ti o ttlat with 1, 1 0 ' e n was t • he i , reat rains ....tie ee , e ant' fiespotis, ttaxatiot ' Right H. e t i iablecl to ° l' ie from tl T a i t , e source th er a the arti , 1 1 ;ofi et was $4 . ofitt ' v as not .3 the mere 4d - per ;.,,estimated 1 4(1 . he t m . , ,it t i ,.. r , tri,, ," e w,. Th„ " 'I the (if ,•-• aVerage 03. ~. pr o fi t :es lee P vs _ s 9 as wel 4 7'1 on the t ','" taxation `'' .4. l' a j, ' q rti _, w re, ti (ril t o an ext. 1 s ere . fl would t li ted t ' u s vier. 4 8 t h e eanimi i ti P e et to the ,4.ruport ant k. ,e Weak, he 'vas gra te] 11; 1 4 1° ' lir. l a 'Nal 1 1011. I 4 'AI, but . , ~r (. ~,,_: . GAL' R e ate with r il ls met and I s..od .. t it i i ,,k• . .• 'kat ;+"! nd , • (ii la • am ) a ; . '''••iir R. pi:, 41 _ 11 1r. G . K I„"ught he h ho w t hey IN 1111' ''.l''',t ie 7:t4.11 'I tt i lliti 7: hit l t 1, , 11111'' 'lti'' : th'''''de l a - 3'. . '‘''t'ta i n i e3l:3's t cn : e' :e.at t hl' h.°('-en'-:ee'"ewl,•'el•:etett:,°lalenouweitn°rol's(frnrhtsnl'Gnitthed'ep'atireeal ''' Idii h rot u 'svo a ltcanh.h. e on.dvif p ,h'tPera2 . :t'.lll' IA heecssar Ili, , tr ekUruit.' th' e "ra . of E ~ , ,,,,1 1 1. .tessitic V t ''' ) , , ns on th. the extra; I tt i k i Gorerow 11,,, 14 1.1...i5tr • ii - Totics 1 3r ~,,,,,, , . la It" 1 n the v k ) .., 1 )' after itp,,;' °urabic t.e , when to ‘‘" k med of 11 1)11.1a.r, ti il, Asd to the i tn shandonn N'i'vd, the h e llr elY he tea /4 1.1 brand'( ~.v . 4, s epithe v i'lliarity by ; " per cent. . i'-( Hear, hr.; '' . , L iss into t I•h, mss hear. '', Year, i ' Vl i eet n t, (~., 3 re k,.. eatilti r ' G tl ie trtain, 'No , t imber ; 11 el .ti tiii. a• en ~kite„'t rani ' , 1,.. ; 1 0n pr "tr t•:1 In. 4 0 palates • 1 nt . t lit. ty sael li, .4 , s "d 1110 t t r;; 3a tesele, i v‘ , 'ected k 'ta t ' ''uld no l i 4 pliortun t o ° , t4 Baron 1.4 `l,rn the th e larliam I l i, eitsta7,. ' : s 7 ; e161:14'6k1:1,41t°t1 4 1:611 11 ''llell' ; i- d. ftt'i a l'i:41'')° 11 t r:l'Illie h °4 4 .('(1"nlirl: t e ire-itte'e t :cu°I'lu h e 'rrilr o l e :telet1‘ i te ow n 111.4,,,_ • di,,r le • F. ~ vr . d a b ' r ' a. 1111 rrp l i .s. a tt .e, , i !i rt 02. not ftet : I, e tariff e.f i d . i ~,,a_ rasnufat o „,!Perfectl. '` ef " b . !ii.l, " I tirti. ~appe , `lti ' e n Up 1 hole SOm t h "'e comet li ate advant t ' i, every d; : '"rd, ::_ i d, the Al - •ie of tt• a,, .., e 1.• v " , "' more dt f ti ,_wectio n a . 0. " 1 111 „I„ r i (lei "at t h , 1),.,,„_ t e i tv 'Posais e quid (I now ealt „ jow l had gins 0... p with tleman intended to proceed with the ,' ment ha i t in! ,V "Priet which would leaf to di- • sion, he (L i siv3 t i l e e hi : m i i . II forr Sir R. PEEL said, that as the Hon. • . t he ti „;$ a a ,, ors tire of his • . tV PXt ram intention to propose ~.i . B . • -e eer* a c latt"'s 3/...,1) woula e 0 , , th,, , ing, to-morrow.ri.Co', Il e et a be st ,N RILL. , Id , goo. o pi ri , , Rt. 41 f P REGISTRAII'' ,„„k the Rig n c. d i t °ere,' BErtNA L Nts,•l:UushsTediNtoYlini3olviLli'it.he tifillitiit lii3Oe7;..:ollof.ri: Mr. RIGBY WASON wisheiii t ° ",", al e DeP 3 '" D ~ip 0,4 or wa , ,In 'N . 'it an , Bill on i" s /t on ,t" p1i0rf.....4 At t d h e e d S t e , c ) r i e , t;? b • o nf i •: e t g a t i s e t rfoart i,t,lrr - I ad g.iif.eon ta l e 0, -, ,c ,. , ., the subject aline weeks since, an d it 0, 4 , itss to OP' j f , oh.ich lieu"? The Right Hon. Gentleman I s oi l taut itte t bp, ri t v, ..,:e•Ll people of the country should have Wine ' i lly,; 0 •If rite Cit.:, provisions of the Bill. l'ast ''. ' fu t . 3' wer. Tariff. the Poor-law Gmtinuance 11,11, ar %"' ehought4 1 0.• , by " 1 e (nn be quite time enough to lay I) that t Sir J, GRAHAM said that when the Ince,fi: c010 i •:0 ,,, ,, , (~ tip : tax el, thing 13ill should have matte t he progress. o v nig o p t 5 Y NT ) , el. • ar. M. —(A laugh.)of C" fp tient. t , NESE 0 oftI0J? ,, , 14 i t 1 CAPTURES IN THE CHI attend - o ff••• • ".ite,, ,an Mr. BLEW ITT wished tel draw the si. , o ,e. v i 0 I , J_ s nu ld had rccently, ~ I s vernment to a circumstance which vv. Norris 'ci"re., ', Vtire 05, the Chinei.e seas. It appeared that o. S___ en „g, s l in iali 't , toi, e e , real the Registratso 1., reify Commissioner for Hong Kon,,,Y ai and as Str W. Norris was at that tin.te.at i" ti e. "...Se in v o l 4 , , , t 4 t rter of was sent to Penang. On her arrival there, Sir 7,401,,V A, theft-I,olnel Malacca. The ship Frietu:s had been capt_uerental:t_,l4t°h°frii4 , i ,, .,: . i t t e ,.l ,, la k e •n n l Y a, r 1,, .. t s at ., ' • had get off for 01 \ 0,000 not arrive there until Sir W. Norristwou......lo_, that . a.._ left for Singapore, and the Friends was nt after. 0 He t Mr. Blevritt) hoped the Government _ e 2°.•:.raett::•/ 1, ... , Neth ht„ i n ., ) . additional Admiralty Commissioners for th (Trn,i.js ~ i ~ , e, w INCOMI TAX—ADJOURNED Dbof', ~ . 4 1 4 1 , tu d Dr. BOW RING moved the Order of the Day iv - A ,/ i h l s Years ,t, game the Adjourned Debate. i % y,: i k t lernen The Order of the Thy having been read. beta u t I/ v t , t,,, pro attention of the House to a few observations , v sigi'..l A• • * n'Ption Dr. BOWRING said that he would venture i 0 e o l, 9 1 % tl, ' Z' • , i lly s i ' F ':: the he felt bound. to vote against the proposal of the o fy t k. • 1 u i . k.... v . ~...0 iii., els Baronet he (Dr. Bowring) would not consent 'fo/ . tha,„„ were ' resolutions o f the Noble Lord, the Member for If s ; 0 , / 4,,,,,,,,,, piey knew 1 John Russell) without some qualification. It 4 ' b ig e l \ . rhos or the the privilege of M. mbers of that House, and on t _„ e rer, r 1 , ,, . ,eat oti , , le it was his f Dr. Bowring 's) privilege, to gather ow:,01 0 0 t„ , ~, ",.* cl tion in the progress of delta:es from the concestiol;i64 f j t ‘, ,, .auned the t made en both sides of the House to thew. great P re polfr k , ki3ti to 'a which they had been faithful through good lis..Yl'l V., "thng do evil report on all occasions. He confessed h e d i e .. ,,,. , ''i pi "f it Kith no small gratification, the declaration fron ri O s 'r,,J,,,f 4, . arheel eal Lord, the Alember for London, that he though t tlc:. ( r. is , tliv l'or come in which a legacy a duty might be conscnicni7etl :• ( Itt f . ..., ;elite ' teal property. The Noble Lord had been "lot OA ' ‘-;,tfi,,,, it Bowring) confessed that he felt great other side, for his declarations on this s ubiee t i. oo , "If - hay, .eit p a i, io,etiheardrgthyt, to o h n e ad so N ma o uw b ca l l e ,v a l w . s o i r itth d , s ,t, a l y ,s, that the mode e h n e nj af t : t u t : , x e aw h gl t ii s . id a ,hn t ru' i o fi r f if i a ,0 1 e' ,.0 14 ,,,e7 „.:0 0,14 : 1 ':? r1;1 ; 'i t , 'Co'.e 1 1,., lii ...,,,,„ ..ttr e t i tit: '• ' a r proposition of the burden of taxation upon r e fill A„, t ion if prof- ~, os t p .5.„,„...,,irig ,s. 'ork, 4 1% 1 : W. . -.) whit ,f that respcinsibility. He should, therefore, VOL, lesitation, give his vote against the motion of the L '- Gentleman. Lord J. MANNERS said, that the Eight Hon. Bari:" - .net hurl appealed to the House to vote in a ccordant! with the principles of theßevolution, soon after which al* :elle had been established. Those Hon. Gentlemen win' esteemed Resolutions in general might vote !eight Hon. Baronet, but for his own parthe must sav dist if the value of the rule was to be estimeed according t a ci the value of the Revolution it was very Hui?, worth indee;;' Captain HAMILTON rose amidst loud cries of " ide, divide." He said he would not detain the House 'lisp Any length of time. On the last occasion he stated; general grounds of his opposing the =Akin of "e.e Friend the Member for Finsbury, and e'''. it appeared to him from the state of the I . l° o l that he was going to be in a minority, he wouli Be t e! , with the that account change his opinion on the subject. ' - ' w e a ould now cOrne to the question before the House' itte , :o the petition; and whoze petition was it ? It ii a` petition of the lawyers and gentlemen of Fin sin ' He allowed their petition was entitled to. the c onside r s:, don of the House, but he would again repeat that it not to be considered as the petition of the people ge ce e e rally—(Cries of " Question," and " Oh, oh") —but et the unproductive classes; and, therefore, he would lee consent that the rule of the Hou se should be denotb from.—(Cries of " Divide, divide.") bu L ti o l r a d vig A v N o t t ) e o d N w • it w lr o t ul he d sion, he wished to say that ;:e would also now : ( L., tgainst the motion of the Hon. M e mber. After the e : . 1 117 ,1 , ulaili ot lri l t e y ng on de t t h a e in t. h ri e n l e l r o oc_ u 7.:: rience which they had of die inconven;.•nce that arose t Hon. Gentlemen being allowed to spec; is on petitionse°o ,•ould not vote for the present motion till he had sinn the security that the _departure from the rule in present instance would not be attended with lar inconvenience, and lead to the same resuit. .sher The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQT- 1}33 " I , 4 ioni aierely to observe upon one point, of the (rtn - tee , before them. If the House assented to the present Poole they would be placed in 41 most inconvenient ad a ordinary position. If Hon. Gentlemen wished t'e co t practice of 150 years' standing, it was perfectly co- 13 yos to propose a resolution for the purpose of doing SO . e el course had been taken on Thursday las t ' i yett the House had decided that it would not depart ee the practice of 150 years--(Hear)—and let'eeitr• looking. at the Journals of the House, he fo to "'de to ane week after that decision, a motion 1111 ' re eice receive a petition, not only contrary to tlicP-eeare which had been adopted for a hundred and etti thnt but in direct opposition to the resolution by iihrds I:''r practice had been confirmed only on Thursdaliasl4 fel that reason alone, if there were no other, he 5h1 e , 0 , 1 14 4 hound to vote against the motion of the Hon. for Finsbury. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE had no hesitation 1 Q itt 'daring it to be his intention to do every tbeessn" his power to break down, if possible, the un eee t he tutional barrier which had been interposed het ° , 0 . 3 ).' people and their inalienable right — (Lo ud cde ,s the right of petitioning the - House against teentew (Loud cheers.) He was surprised, after havill , ';, e o : to the adjournment in order to give Hon. Genl%l,lo,e! polite time to prepare themselves, that they she - tp` come down Ive,th no better arguments than t' L eain" practice had subsisted for 150 years.—(Chee rs. ? , terruptedly, the Right 'Hon. Baronet said. /L e t til l e D.) had attempted to prove to the House that practice had not been uninterrupted, and he WaL:,, repeating that the practice had very f re quentlY e 7 i L e en!i i ' terrupted.—(Hear, hear.) But admitting, for an b - ' I " - , te e • sake, that the practice had been uninterrue, itere/ no length of time could sanction injustice.—(Lounce And it was injustice to refuse to rece i ;o l l petitions of the people, on questions eeeo their pecuniary interests.—(Hear, and loud But suppose the Right Hon. Baronet to succeed, jecting this petition to-day, how much further , c s i c hte ,- 0 ) . be advanced ?—(Cheers.) To-morrow he wnu l eee rill' e fight the same battle over agaite—(Continued fern'i The bold and proper measure to pursue would I•1se Right Hon. Gentleman to come down to the 11° e ll iale. eh e propose the Standing Order to reject the Pe t ' t b - ert e he did not do so lie would have to fight e a - Ke - it . day after day. The Right Hon Gentleman .i0i 1 .,/ of was popular. He had taunted them (the Oncatel . " - m a. asking where was their explosion? Why, theYP t eel c o t to receipt the petitions of the peopie , ,,, 49 ; e tl i bound them hand and foot, and ti t ie why they did not move. They had gag gen e ebePiet asked why they did not speak.—( l 4 o3 ' e i st. ''' The Right Hon. Gentleman would be be at ttt°DV' •tf W (Mr. T. Duncombe) would persevere day e el. t een' te e petitions were sent to him, in pres enting„e e ll° the House, and would leave to the majority 011;,, Tsetse the resccms bility of rejecting- the petitions of t —(Loud cheers.) lie would persevere inht" er l rs . ) t he sense of the House - on this subject.—(Loti d e aa d Strangers were then ordered to with drto " House divided, when the nutnbers were- - 0 .,1 For the motion ........................... 13 Against the motion ....................... Majority against receiving the petition 1 The announcement of the result was hailed ;• and continued cheers by the Opposition ben eb t he THE TARIFF. th° Mr. DUFF gave notice that he should nic'veilf, words " horned cattle" be omitted from thtete lr e en. 0 .• IMPORTATION OF FOREIGN oia n Sir H. DOUGLAS gave notice that /id vi e vres morrow move for retrns end of F of Janu y 5. 1 8 oreig Wood e ll . home ar 0 1 . NATIONAL DEBT. .•elit' Mr. WALLACE gave notitie that he w oniti W bo t s • make a motion respecting the National o' 4 the precise nature, of it . ivas we could not lo ri ios 6 ' the noise which prevailed et the time in th e : 0.0 RECEPTION 01' PET.ITIOL'I he "` The' Hon. IV..COWPEH. gave Ileac° ' e e. to-MorroW present a petition .on Sir C. NAPIER wished to knowfronl timer, as the Right Hon. Baronet was 3 11° : - .i l erA'llen f to the main queStion, the ether evening,aoP; paw would have been allowed to follow him. j , thr' bee he felt interested in the question. • The SPEAKER said he stated the ether je the Right Hon. Gentleman was perfectlY , in speaking to the main question before thell7,i'oe':!e in fact, the original question was included in,' it w debate. If any other Hon. Member had ort''' e- ,ty e would have hail an equal right so to do. the , Mr. BROTHER TON wished to know ~' c oo' . ~ have stood if the motion had been for the at s J ( '; twi House instead of the adjournment of the debate that " 6' r The SPEAKER said he apprehended that 11 tinet question. At the same fume, if an 11°,;ey u-ged the importance of the subject as a rex-4 0 00 0 g e - k• re should not adjourn, the Hon. Gentlenvol bt to srAilr e would have been imyossible to den . y hitn the riX WAS O „ After a few words from Mr. RIGBY k itt inaudible. tele- o l e Sir ROBERT PEEL said he did not a s te r question of adjearnment, but he did wish tf t Y le •:5;o;• to question. He could not have done so had `f the, e ati f f,e.• him that it would be an evasion of a rule feesel'ieelb'',o as the Speaker told him it was not lie felt e t, ise o l ot to proceed. Upon the day on which Lord t 05_0 0 # sigbation of the Govornment, the moti°%o4lP -- e House do now adjotnna," and Lord North ium" speak upon that queetion. ht o°P ' Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought the fi- •- i •g o stiofi,l. I 0 1 ,1 man was in, order in speaking upon the nia,', o l ( 7 l grA b _ b i,it "` e ' In answer to a question from Mr. RIGP A des " b 01 .4 yhei Sir R. I'EEL said there were s everal aeon timed thin be peculiarly affected by the. tariff. At P re. o rdo e coffee were subject to a duty of 9•1. It 045 should be subject to a duty of Bd. instead. l ee THE TARIFF. 0 4 the ve cecti • Lord JOHN RUSSELL had understd 10 ,. that ort ea to Baronet, at the head of the-Governmen t, , amen re' in g, that it was his intention to lay t,eßoseill ye t o the table this evening. He (Lord Joji n . f f 0 00 1 ° he T r y ask whether it was probable that the I°l bat tt - 41)1 session of Hon. Nlembers this evening ? ; i ed t bor or- Sir ROBERT PEEL had certainly 13 . 1. ° ° ';eit e e tr u should be laid on the table that evcning,oottse. to to Di that he might be enabled to perform hi',lr ee A ble into that before the Homo separated he shut"' aid bed amended Tariff on time table. () tie° ' (c) iio, Lord JOHN RUSSELL hoped due ° do , or e b jec' bcfsrc the Tariff was taken into consideraccouo be tee et Sir ROBERT PEEL thought there eeion oa for considering the Tariff before any cns cw '' • FILL, fist " 0 3 could came on.—( A laugh.) G oo e e a t e v COLO ;N JAL PA SSEN as r. LABOiCHERE wished td l e einge s ' 'likely the second reading of the Colonial a s y come on? Sept 6%1°1 Mr. GLADSTONE could not at l'r e second reeling. r