The Sun. — London, England, 1842-08-09 00:00:00

!"- THE WINE TRADE. 'We su'ijoin a more full report of what took place in the House of- Commons on Friday, on Mr. Master • resliitioli with respect to the Wine Trade, which .were unable to give on Saturday, in conse cilience!of the lateness of the hour at which the sub ject was brought forward : Me. MASTERMAN then rose to move the reso lution of which he had given notice,'. That it having hOen the Uniform practice, during many years past, u to allOw a drawback to the wine trade for stock in nand upon th e re duction of duties, that this House is (:`,„ ~ o pinion that a drawback should be allowed upon tire. r e d uced d u t y upon P or t w i ne , c onsequent upon t UO 'tariff tobe annexed to the treaty with Portugal, not- Vistanding the transfer of the collection of the whole the Wine duties to the Customs." He considered if-hard th a t i n di v id ua l s concerne d i n the trade sh ou ld nfive stock in hand when the duties are reduced with- Pt' an allowance - for the same. He felt it to be his duty to bring the subject forward from a sense of justice, as, if this resolution were not agreed to, many Persons. in the country, as well as the metropolis, would he considerable losers. A deputation had. Waited upon the Right lion. Gentleman the Chancel -1017 of the Exchequer, but the Right Hon. Gentleman no direct answer to the deputation. He (Mr. Alasterman) was anxious, therefore, to take the -opi nion of P ar li amen t on th e subject. He should sub 'nit a clause to the House, in case the resolution was a greed to. He hoped the House would support his (notion. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by reading e restitution. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said t hat the motion of his Hon. Friend was one of an un usual nature. His Hon. Friend, by his motion, called upon the House to express an opinion upon the - 1 act of duties which were not impose& and conse quently not in operation. It would have been much bette r if his• Hon. Friend had deferred his motion till 3 1 10 1 tim e as th e su bj ec t o f the wine duties came be- ' 1 , 're the House. This was one reason why he must i n i t'llose the motion, but a much stronger one was, that ~,,the motion were agreed to and a drawback allowed, Zner parties would be likely to come forward and t'-"t'in claims with regard to other articles, the duties Which were reduced, and there would be no means ' a venue• against the frauds and impositions on the Celine which would be likely to follow.--(Hear, 7r.) His Hon. Friend had stated that allow tllles had been made in other instances. It was true such had been the fact, but it only proved that ?". 4, 41 at he had stated would take place. With regard to a silk tradea drawback had been allowed on the r.ia( lUction of the duties, but the Government in that „,, had suffered a loss of 1,500,00/. Stock which Na; - 8 . rhot in hand When the reduction took' lace was eed upon the Government, and the consequence v s that a considerable loss was incurred by the re :ll'l,e• There was no guarantee that similar frauds 0 1 ;4 not be committed in the present instance. regard to the timber duties, the parties inte t'ated in them were satisfied with the notice of the ...auction and he did not see any reason why the not ice Should not be also satisfied, to whom due t'''ars had been given. They had received notice two 'ars a of the intention.to reduce the 'duties, and if g i at Nance were made, the benefit would go altogether t h the hands of the wine trade. For these reasons, a n, feeling that the motion of his Hon. Friend was tie of an unusual nature—that it was brought for 11ald at an unseasonable time—because it pledged the t i ° ,,nse to pursue a certain course at some future pe tii'''----belieVing that if a drawback were allowed .on stock of wine in hand, when the duties might be , v ieed, other parties would prefer similar claims if On a reduction was made on other articles, and that Lt drawback were allowed there would be no means , e guarding a ga inst frauds and imposition on the re -1,1,h ,lie, he f e lt b oun d t o o pp o se the motion of his Hon. .iand•—(iiear, hear.) 1 1 " 4 ,°I'd SANDON felt convinced that some course to be adopted that would have the effect of t{ rig the question. It was of great importance to r e , t rade that it should be done, and he thought the °i union of the n' Ho Member was likely to effect it. ti ; AGLIONBY said that hitherto the wine acme 4o h a d b e e n paralysed, and. i t was necessary t h at ev ol rude should be adopted to remedy so great an _,. the considered . the subject to be one upon which b ut , Right Hoe. 1 .-lentleman might express an opinion, ought t° ne had declined doing so, he thought the House rest, adopt some measure to set the question at Sir 1 - 1, the n o ,LrEEL trusted that nothing would induce Po se d a 7 to sanction-the present motion. The pro ties 'Oration in the tariff had exposed all par allowed,"rnpetition, and no drawback had been aerie , If they allowed it in one. case, it should be In all ; but the Hon. Gentleman proposed that i ti 'Y should en t er i nto a p l e d ge t o a ll ow a d raw b ac k ease there should b e a re d uc ti on o f d u tie s . Did k 37 one ever hear of such a proposition ? They th a re to pledge Parliament that it at the end of. y t Year there should be a reduction of the duties on o‘‘ ,e , a drawback upon stock in hand was to be al l'ha"l. This was an extraordinary proposition. 1/ e 're would be the ch ec k nn adulteration and fraud? Ik ei l c l rotested against the principle of allowing a draw co 4 upon wine, while the same principle was not tri, e , ec led to other articles imported from foreign cowl - and he was suprised that his Hon. Friend the calepiher for the " Port" of London, as he had been e d—(Laughter)—should bring the subject for- Ard . , He re r ; T. DUNCOMBE said that the persons who Interested in the trade in wine were under the tle, re sSion 'that a treaty had been concluded between t4 l country and Portugal, but it appeared, from the tr„ a ulent of the Right lion. Baronet, that no such V?' had been concluded. The principle contended 1 11 4 the'gentlemen in the wine trade wasthat which tieeen acted upon to 182.5, and yet no fraud occur ti ,llnder the system as it previously existed. The prin. , 4,1 e therefore sought for here was that which had been • by the predecessors of the present Govern tt-and he thought that seeing that the holders of 1 1 ,;° had suffered from the imposition of five pounds th e being laid on wine by the late Chancellor of •- , xcliequer, they were, he conceived, entitled to a nlira which they made to have this drawback. the whole he thought there was great justice in ti ki aPplication made by the members of the wine \, e 'nu this subject, and he should support the motion. Areas HAWES hoped his Hon. Friend would not tke his motion. lie admitted the justice of the k, l ' a ,sniacle by the wine trade in this case, still, as the ti t r e 'Ple could not be extended to other imported ar- • oh I', he could not assent to the principle being acted their particular case. Iflr• Alderman HUMPHERY thought the Right on th e • Baronet had made out a strong case against i ll ,' /notion of his Hon. Friend'. The application Nt-,,.'"e on the part of the wine trade, in this instance, °ne that must be acted on, if adopted at all, . r espect to the publicans of this country, for they t t% g: holders of wine, would be as much entitled - f qr t he wine merchants to the drawback asked , And if this were to be the case, how, he should 'glad t o know, was the thing to be carried out ? ti, a ',Y roust have agents all over the country to see no fraud was practised, and this would lead to ~etgi'eatest possible inconvenience. Upon the whole t , ( night it was desirable that the motion should l‘ :Ie pressed. MASTERMAN, in reply,• said he had _felt it , 6 duty t o bring the subject under the consideration D t( ,.ne. House, and if the Right Hon. Baronet would , AIZIse to give the subject his consideration he (Mr. D isc would withdraw his motion. t f . R. PEEL .said he could not purchase the con it:,:`oll of the Hon. Gentleman by such a promise. could assure the Hon. Member that no treaty had ,kin. entered into with Portugal in reference to the :,,,Dortation of wine that could have any effect in re to the present application. lie,. REDHEAD YORICE thought that no ground been laid to justify the proposed drawback. ist i L7.!BROTHERTON also felt bound, after the tiVtient of the Right Hon. Baronet, to oppose the —MASTERMAN said, that seeing the sense of lii th.. ,,ntise to be against his proposition, he would 7 , L -44 rilyr . it. motion was then negatived without a division. ARRIAGEs IN HIGH LIFE.--On Saturday last the It r"4l a of Lord Walsingliam and Miss Augusta Louisa tilis4ell, eldest daughter of Sir Robert Frankland Rus k: tart., Were solemnised at St. George's Church, .etti Tri„ ver square, in the presence of a select. circle of the us e , of both families. The Hon. and Rev. F. Grey el ated at the ceremony. A dejeuner was given to 44a1l party by Sir Robert and Lady Frankland Rus the at their mansion in Cavendish-square, after which 171,;,, "Vie bride and bridegroom left for the respected ta o - „"et's seat, Chequers. Bucks, for the honey; The marriage of Mr. Evelyn P. Shirley, 11.1. Monaghan, and Miss Lechtnere, the daughter 14 : „'• A- Lechmere, and grand-daughter of Sir An '!at 11 Y, Leeh mere , B art ., was ce lebrated on Thursday last "Ztis,z attended iati le Church, Worcestershire. The fair bride by Miss Louisa Leehtnere, Miss Shirley, etti e 3 ;„ Heywood, and Miss Emma Leehmere, who u Su ted as bridesmaids. The village presented an un • gay scene, from the children of the parochial 4,i• i ° 3 being liberally regaled, and the poor villagers ha a elgitbourhood being bountifully relieved on the tltp occasion, and the church bells rang jovial peal 4ev e i l h 'ut the morning. Sir Anthony Lechmere Par ty , 11 elegant entertainmeShirley,ydd to a large nviiidirig Mr E Sily M.P., and °3 ec:trs 44 ft -- • ' • ghitley,?ifr. - ard - Lady Emily Foley, Hon. Wm. Mr. Dowdeswell, M.P., and Mrs. Dowdeswell, 14i; Lechtnere, Colonel strode, Mrs. Parker, at4 te ' r , `Yilrnot, &c. In the afternoon the happy couple , Ch` 4 o Eatington Park, Warwickshire, The Hon. kti - to ' Upward, M.P., son of the Earl of Carlisle, ter o f th e 11 3 rneneal altar yest. r lay Miss Parke, &ugh karri liaren Parke, of the Court of Exchequer. The brid e a g e was as private' as possible, and the bride and Ito e lf ° °ra went to the Duke .of Sutherland's villa at 4111 ptvn, for the honeymoon. ~,~-- M PERIAIr P A R LIA MENT. .HOUSE OF LORDS, £lnq. S. Their Lordshis met at Four o'Cinelc. Messatte from the Commons brought up a num ber of Bills. The Now'-fonndland Bill was brought up and read a first time. The Eeelesiastic:d Preferments Bill teas read a third time, and passed. MEDICAL CHARITIES (IRELAND) BILL. The Earl of WICKLOW presented a petition from the Grand Jury of the Cou4tany of Druggists, pray ing that medical charities in Ireland should'not he placed` under the control of the Poor-law Commis sioners: The Tobacco Regulations Bill pa;med through Com mittee, , and was ordered to be read a third ti to-morrow. The tour: Courts (Dublin) Bill Ewa s real a time, and passed. _ THE 6iii"YRIGHT OF DESIGNS BIT, f. On the motion of the Earl of RI.PO:`, the Cupp. right of Designs 'Bill was committed, and seviTal amendments having been agreed to, the Report was brought . 'up, and the Bill ordered to be read a third time. BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS BILL. • On the Motion of Lord CAMPBELL; the Bribery at Eleetions.Eill passed through Committee, and was ordered to be read a third time. EAST-INDIA SLAVERY. The Bill for the suppression of the Slave-trade in the East Indies, also passed through Committee. - OUTRAGES Lard F ORTESCUE brought forward his motion for a return of outrages reported to the Irish con stabulary in July last. lie said that the returns .which- he held in his hand had been prepared by Col..M‘Gregor ' a gentleman whose accuracy might be relied on; and they showed that in the present year outrages (of which there had been a rapid and progressive .. decrease during the time that he had the honour to preside over the government of that country) had fearfully increased. Of twelve classes of crime, including homicides,. maiming, shoot ing with intent to kill,. and firing into dwelling houses, the number in the first half of the year 1841,. was no more than 651 ; whereas, of those offences, the number in the last half of 1841 was, 2,449, but in the first half of the present year the number had fearfully increased to 3,551.—(Hear.) This struck him as indicating that there was some change in the manner in which justice was administered.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord then referred to the late trials of Ribbonmen at Armagh, at which, he said, the Judge who presided showed, in his charge to the Jury, the vehemence and earnestness of an advocate rather than the impartiality of a judge. He (Lord . Fortescue) then went into an analysis of the evidence upon the trials, from which he con tended that the chief witness against the prisoners was a professed spy, and, according to his own state ment, not to be believed on his oath. He concluded by moving for the returns. - The Duke of WELLINGTON could not see any ob ection to the returns asked for ; and he y should not haVe thought it necessary to occupy their Lordships' time upon this occasion, but that the Noble Earl had thought proper to draw conclusions from the papers in his (the Earl of For tescue's) hands, in which he could not concur, and which he could not pass over without observation. From former discussions on this subject, it must be in the recollection of their Lordships that • circumstances might occasion a difference in the number of crimes in one period in Ireland as compared with another, without any cause for such being attributable either to the system of Government,. or above all to the sys tem of the. administration of the law adopted' by the heads of judicial authorities in. that country. It was true that more of these atrocious crimes had been com mitted in the first six • months of the year 1842, than in the • corresponding six months of the year 1841, at. least as appeared from the consta bulary returns. It might happen - that the con stabulary .were more active in bringing such offenders to justice at the one period than at the other, and that was a matter not to be overlooked in the consideration of such a question. With respect to the Noble Lord's observations relative to the trial at which. the Chief Justice had presided, he (the Duke of Wellington) would only say, with respect to that diss tinguished individual, that there never was a man more respected or more' distinguished in his profession' than that person. He (the Duke of Welling ton) could hardly believe that that individual could, in his high position, be guilty of the injustice of . acting more like an advocate, than as an impartial judge, in a case tried before him. With respect to what had been said relative to the ad-, mission of a witness who had admitted that he had enticed men to. join the ribbon conspiracy, and that he had been so employed by the Magistrates, lie had to say that the counsel for- the pri soner, who, during the trial, had made a charge to that effect, had withdrawn his charge subsequently. I Nothing could be more base than for the Magistracy to countenance such conduct as that of the witness Hagan. • An inquiry into the matter had been di rected, and if the charges were found tp be true, the parties would be visited with punishment. The Marquis of CLANRICAILDE was happy to hear what had fallen from the Noble Duke on this matter. With respect to what had been said relative to a high judicial functionary in Ireland, if the charge, such as it was reported in the newspapers, were cor rectly given, it would be the greatest misfortune that could befal hat individual's reputation. Tee Earl of WICKLOW said it appeared to him unjust to make those charges on a mere newspaper report, upon which it was evident the Noble Marquis . founded his censure of the distinguished in dividual to whom his observations applied. With respect to what was said relative to the Magis tracy he, (the Earl of Wicklow) knew by experience that the people of Ireland placed - confidence not so. much in the religion of •the Magistrates as in their high character and station. The Earl of GLENGALL said that it could not be doubted that • there had been a great deal of outrage in the last few months. But when he sat on the other side of • the House, on the many occasions on which he had brought the attention of their. Lordships to the state of crime in Ireland, he told them that although there was an apparent tranquillity yet it was delusive, and would not last long, for the seeds of sedition had been sown, and would ere long bring . forth their fruit, as was now the fact. The Noble Earl (Fortescue) had shown that, there was an increase in nos year, as compared with the last. Bit he (Lord Glen gall) would show that there had been a constant , and progressive increase of crime from 1838 . to 1842. (The Noble Lord read returns which he argued made out this statement.) The returns produced from the constabulary did not show the actual amount of crime. As an instance he said that during the election in 1841 there was a riot in Tipperary, at which eight peo ple .were shot, and died of their wounds ; but ' they were carried off, and the wounded were concealed and the dead were buried, so that the police were un able to make any report. This showed how far short of the truth the returns fell. Now as the Noble Earl (Fortescue) took credit to his Government, for having . conciliated the regards of the Irish people (meaning, of course, the Roman Catholics), he would show this by reading a speech delivered at a public Meeting by Dr. M‘Hale, the Titular Bishop of Tutun, soon after the dissolution of the late Govern ment. The Noble Earl then read an extract from the speech referred to, in which the Rev. Doctor re probated the conduct of the Whigs, and expressed his rejoicing in their downfall, in terms which provoked the loud laughter of the House. " They were a peddling despicable Ministry=--they were the pre tended friends of the Irish people, but really the in sidious enemies of the nation and the Catholic reli gion, and the zealous, though secret supporters of that Church, to which Ireland owed all its miseries, &C." • . After a few words from LordFITZGERALD, Earl FORTESCUE replied, and expressed his thanks to the Noble Duke (Wellington), for the courteous man ner in which his motion had been acceded to. THE IRISH MARRIAGE ACT. —.— Lord LYNDHURST laving moved the second read ing of the Irish Marriage Act (which was agreed to), said that it had been suggested that as the subject was before the Court of Queen's Bench in Ireland, it would afterwards come before their Lordships as an appeal from the Court of Error. But he (Lord Lyndhurst) found that the appeal would not come before the House in time to enable - their Lordships to have the assistance of the Judges, and he was obliged to proceed with this Bill. He accordingly moved that it be committed to morrow. • __ . _ _ _ _ . Lord CAMPBELL opposed the course which his Noble and Learned friend proposed. It would cause the greatest confusion not only in Ireland, but in India, and America, and wherever there were Irish sub jects ; for the Bill instead of being a declara tory measure, was an enactment. By thus passing an enacting Act, it would have the effect of an nulling all the marriages entered into before its passing, and declaring the offspring bastards. There was formerly the same doubt about Presbyterian marriages, as now raised about mixed marriages, and how was that doubt temoved P By• a declaratory Act, which delared all those marriages of Presbyterians valid. He could sh►►w their ' Lordships what was the opinion of the Irish Judges on these subjects. lie could show them that there had been, in the course of the last few years, several convictions for bigamy, where the first marriage was a mixed one. In every one of these cases, the Judges held that the mar riages were valid, and the offending parties were now suffering punishment. The Noble and Learned Lord cited a number of cases, in which this had been the de cision. - Judge Moir, in one of these cases, which was tried in 1831, with reference to the validity of those mixed marriageS performed by Presbyterian mini sters, said that he was surprised to hear the question raised. • In 4 similar case (that of Cap tain Laycock Money) who ,was eenyieted of bigamy at the Old Bailey, his plea that his first marriage was n i'- THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY MORNING-, AUGUST 9, 1842. . - vo:d, because he was of the Esiabiished Church utni hi. tkem' to pay 1111.6'. the Bank. To 'effect that (thlect wife a Presbyt e rian, and that they Iver, married by aI a provision would be introduced into the Bill to Presbyterian minister, having been disallowed, Sir the eltect that if - the Commissioner or judge Samuel Romilly presented' a petition froM that persoii, ,Mould find that the assignee retained in his possesion complaining of the conviction ;whereupon the A ttornoy any suns exceeding 200 t, beyond forty.;eight hours, he Generril mul the Solicitor-Generai said, that they had f should either have to pay a s a p ena lty ex cessive interest cAustilted the Irish statutes, and the most eminent Irish on the sum, as was the case under the old bankruptcy civilians upon this case, and - they found there Wps no Act, or be subjeetvd to the forfeiture of his office. Thus doubt, of the validity ,)f the marriage. Ile, therefore, perfect 'sectirity could be obtained against the' faults of contended that th e A c t (R ight to he declaratory. li the official assignee. He would state, during an seemed to him that if they passed this Act, the world experience of twenty-five years before the alteration- in not only occasion much evil, but do the greatest in- the law took place, that not a bankruptcy estate became instice, f thr sitliicet of investigation that the bankrupt wa. r not Lord BROUGHAM said -that it was 'impossible to deny much that had been argued by his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord- Campbell), but that Noble Lord bad overlooked this important consideration, that in thi; eac.,' , there was only a choice of evils: lie agreed thst tie! I 11 ought to be a declaratory Act, hnt thee t!e - y, were now in a. very difficult position, whatever had been the finaner decisions, eight: of the ten Irish Judges had decided that those meninges were illegal. TiMt decisifiti i"Yas given by the Jailges in a Court 0: Error, and after a full hearing of all the arguments for two days. Whereas the eases width hie Noble, and Learned Friend had cited were only nix; pries cases, tried before a single Judge. Cer tainly if it were possible to have the writ of error before the House as a CoUrt of Appeal, and to reverse the judgment of the Irish Court of Queen's Bench (if. they were sere they would reverse it.), then a declaratory Bid would be a proper mode of proceeding. But it was a. MaLiCT of insuperable difficulty to het p the two Houses of Parliament sitting here to await a decision upon n litigated case. There was a great deal of tnischiefan- the present state of things-Lhusbands were leaving their wives, and wives were giving notice to their husbands that they did not consider their meninges valid. But he did not agree with -his Noble and Learned Friend, that. by passing an enacting Act, their Lordships would imply an opinion that but fur such an Act those mar— riages would have been invalid. Even if such were the implication, surely it Would leave the parties in - a. better state than they were now in. At present they had a decision that the marriages were invalid—the Act before the House would pronounce them valid. The LORD CHANCELLOR explained. He denied that the Presbyterians of Ireland would• receive the Bill with consternation. On the contrary, he had received a let ter dated the 31st of July last, from Mr. Montgomery, Mee. derator of the Remonstrant Synod of Ulster, expressing the unanimous wish of the Synod, that the Bill should be passed without delay. The evils were so great, and so' imperatively calling for an immediate remedy, that ho thought it his duty as a Member of the Government to . recommend this Bill, and their Lordships' duty to adopt it. The Marquis of CLANBICARDE was satisfied that the greater part of the Presbyterians of Ireland were most, averse to this Bill, and many of - them would prefer -any postponement to the enactment of such a measure. He was not prepared to argue the question in a legal way, but yet he thought it would not be difficult to frame and pass a declaratory Act. The people of Ire- . land, notwithstanding the late decision, universally re garded those marriages as valid. He hoped, therefore, that at a fiiture time, after the decision of the appeal, if their Lordshipi should decide that the laW was in fit your of the marriages, a declaratory law might be passed without prejudice to this Bill, If that could be done according to law or precedent. The Earl of WICKLOW would have proposed a de claratory Act, but as that was impossible at present it was absolutely necessary to pass this At without delay ; and he, therefore, gave the motion his most cordial . support. Lord CAMPBELL briefly repeated his objections to this Bill, and his opinion that the declaratory Act should even now be passed. The Bill was then ordered to be committed to-morrow, and the House adjourned at Eight o'Clock. Since the 'alteration a great irniiro; ("merit in.d reined. tal:en place Me. W. C.' SCOTT wished that this part of the Bill ,should be 'referred to a Select Committee. He saw -reason why-the,. official assignees should be more that. paid accountants to the estate. '. Mr. B. WOOD concurred-with the Hon. Gentleman who hall just seat down. He was anxioneeoimprove this clause witlemt destroying official. assignees altogether. 110 thought the creditors ought. to ha, e due protection from the eperatioin : of this l w, and for that. purpose he proposed several Verbal :intendment-a in the clause to the effect, that. the money to be paid should be received not by the official aasigeee alone, but by him jointly ith the creditors' assigitee—bus making; the official assignee ac eonniable to the creditors' assignee. The SOLICETOI-Z4IEN ERA L said the reason the oftioial assignees hail worked so well was, that under their management-debts were collected which could not be got in tinder, the old system. The-creditors' assignee could not be got to work so weil as the official. assignee, whom the lion. tentleman oppesite (Mr. B. Wood) pro posed by his amendments to clog in the discharge of his duties. Mr. HARDY thought that the official asaignee ought not to receive any greater sum of money than the amount of the security for the due diseh arge o f his duty. He did not think y there could ha an I oe j eetion to that. Mr. HAWES supported the ekirse in all its integrity; it •\%':ls: well knewn to those acquainted with bankruptcy business that it had worked . Most, of the abuses had arisen frOin the miseenduct of the trade assignee, and if they gave that assignee more to do than he had at present it would be done still` worse. Mr. BECKETT•said the Hon. Member had shown no reasons whatever, why the official assignee should act better than the assignee appointed by the party. No instance of misappropriation. of funds had ever been traced to the private assignees, though they might have been dilatory in attending t o the proceedings. Could the official assignees in all' cases come before the flonse with a-le'an hands ?—(Hear.) There were te variety of other Objection s to this Bill. In the first place, the annual amount of money which passed through the hands of the official assignees in .London was more than 1,000,000 L But he believed that the assets which' passed • yearly through the hands ► the official assignees in the country, amounted more nearly to three millions than two ; and he would ask, was that an amount of money that should be left in the hands of irresponsible men ? The only responsibility that rested upon them was, that they were recommended to the Lord Chancellor, who was responsible for the appointments. • And with all his respect for the present Lord Chancellor's penetration, wisdom, and strength of character, he thought it was not justice to the Noble and Learned Lord that so heavy a responsibility should rest upon him. He would not detain the House longer, but would give his earnest opposition to the wefts sure ; because he .was convinced that the Com mittee did not possess the knowledge necessary to enable them to deal with the subject pro perly. So that if he could ask a favour of his Right Hon. Friend, the Secretary for the Home Depart ment, it would be to put off the Bill for the present session, that Hon. Members might have an opportunity of making themselves acquainted with the subject. He hoped this tnea sure would be put off until next session, in order to have a Committee appointed to examine into the subject. Ile thought that the promoters of this Bill would be disap pointed in its operation. He should certainly endeavour by every means in his power to procure the postponement of this Bill. If he should not succeed in that he would then bring forward a motion to restrict the powers of the Coin missloners. He would now give notice that if he were defeated in that he would ask for leave to introduce a proviso enacting that the Court of Bankruptcy shall an ttally lay before Parliament an account of the total • amount of their receipts and payments, and of the ba lance in hand, distinguishing . the accounts of each (ffifficeiinall nsnee sigon each separate estate. assignee, • and the sums paid and received by eac h 0 ) Sir JAMES GRAHAM. was surprised at the at tempt now made to postpone the Bill. The subject had been discussed a short time since, and the House had expressed a strong opinion that the Bill ought to be pro ceeded with this session. The Lord Chancellor pos sessed strength of mind, but still he could not forget the great opposition which every attempt to reform the Bankruptcy COurts in the country most give rise to. Ile could not forget that in the country there were 740 local Commissioners, all members of the legal profes sion, possessing great power and great influence, and who would naturally be opposed to any alteration.' His Hon. Friend would admit that if there was any person more indisposed to change than another—though he at the same time possessed an intimate knowledge of the subject—that person was Lord Eldon ; yet, what was the opinion of that great man, when lie • first held the Great Seal in 1801 ? Lord Eldon said that the abuse of bankruptcies was a • disgrace to the country, and it would be better to repeat all the statutes, than to suffer them to be applied to such purposes. There was no mercy to the estate. " - As they are frequently con ducted in the country, they are little more than a stock-. in-trade for the Commissioners, the assignees, and the solicitor. Commissions of Bankruptcy were treatei as matters of traffic., and unless the Court held a strong bend over them, particularly tc.; administered in the country, they were as aeoessible to as great a nuiaance as tiny known in the land." That was the opinion of Lied Elden in 1801, and those who differed front it were place culethis law n(;lntsortlipslisc:e:N.,V thatat diss e ntediitinimp or t ant tata'nr change el cha ngeee proceeding take n had been proluctiv rity for extending the cha nge t O the rural districts ; eof no advantage. They had aetho they had had experience of the nature of the change in - the metropolitan districts, an d he conten d e d that that change in principle an d pract i ce was eq ually • applicable to the rural districts. His Honourable Friend had referred to a case which he had formerly cited, and if such a case could not be denied, he thought Parliament was bound to provide a remedy before it separated. He had received a depute lion from the City of London, including three of the Members of-' that emporium of the commerce of the kingdom, and they all expressed themselves satisfied with the me: sire: They acid that the appointment of the official assignee at first was viewed with some suspicion, but that it gradually rose in the public estimation, an d the strong hand of the Chancellor being over them, means were taken to prevent abuses, or r e ctify them. But, notwithstanding some irregularities had occurred in practice, they one and all assured hint that the trading community in the City of London was fixed in favour of the official assignee. Now he (Sir J. Graham) said upon the opinion of Lord Eldon, so strongly given forty years ago—no correction then having been applied—a correction baying been applied in the metropolis, after a ten years' experience, the result of that experience being a general satisfaction and benefit of the community--he said that they would be acting an unworthy part if they refused to apply the remedy which experience had shown to he geed ; and they should be acting., as a Government, an unworthy part, having brought that measure so near to its conclusion, it' they hesitated for a moment to pre ceed with it ; and, though he entertained the strictest • respect for his Honourable. Friend, lie must say that his opinion had not in any degree been shaken, and he telt it. to be his bounden fluty to press the Bill on the consideration of the Committee, and he hoped in the present session of Parliament to be enabled to send the Bill back to the Lords, from whence it came. Mr. B. WOOD believed that very few men in that House were inclined in favour of the present Bankruptcy Law, and their great objectas could be made. The present Bill had be en ba fore the now was to get a law as good House only ton days, and for that reason he hoped the Eight Hon. Gentleman would consent to postpon e the consideration of the Bill till next session. lie thought that they ought to have some greater check than was given by the present Bill. If the Solicitor- Generel did not think that the words he (Mr. Wood) employed were sufficient, he would leave it to him to alter them. With regard to documents, he thought that the trading assignee should sign theta with the official assignee, which would • give greater security. At present there was no protection at all. Ile must, therefore, insist upon the amendment he had proposed. Mr. HARDY could net see what reasonable objection could lie made to the proposition of the Hon. Member for Southwark. He considered the whole of the arguments of the Hon. Member for Lambeth founded upon fallaciona premises. It should be provided that in all . cases where the official assignee, received there ought us larger sum than the nee give a joint receipt for the money. All h e wished ta.omio)ennattirinfdtleieassseicgtnweietytowaheicehornhpeanh3a,(hl yen! was to have a check upon the official assignee, when he received more than the amount of his security. Ile thought that out of justice to the 740 Country Commissioners, the Right Hon. Baronet ought to mention the names of the four persons to whom he had alluded as bevies; acted wrong. Sir J. GRAHAM said th e case had been alluded to in the memorial presented by th e merehanta of London t w o h t i h oh e Lord the e , C n h l a u n i c ss e i l o li n tr i i i n ad l be B3 e 9 n n , c o onaeqnenca of the labours and paying it into the :tient., of which the present Bill had been foutuhea The names of the parties had not been given in the tuem:hrleuil: Mr..MASTERMAN thought the great blot of the present law was the power which it, gave the official: as laldBoeole.urrea ahsasnigdsn;.eeslfofingsteit.atirofcogittllgerailiiii(i; official ss i itigtnoes the power of receiving money, they were to give the rower of giving' an order - t o the party paying the money to pay it into the Bank to the account of the Accountant-General of the Court of Bankruptcy, the evil would be remedied. Mr. AGLIONBY wished to know that white of flue in 1801 e transaction Minded to by the Eight Hon. Baronet ? Ile thought ware creditors, and one was a debtor to • but he knew of a more recent ease, which wa s b e e o ,; the Lord - Chancellor the other day, its a p i4, of , a Commissioners, one sses .Cll l CiWr to the fiat ; and of p b lu el o i e er a e s d fa ti r ie b e a a ck se the ot hers, - threa the estate. " Mr. jERVLS said the case cited by the Hon, Mesa bet for Lambeth most _}lava fleehrFC4 1111IieVn ten t Ireause theN fireOfum.issioners. The Right Hon. Baronet quoted an opinion of Lord Eldon'a in 1801, and said it. w as for those who oPPosed' thiS - Bill to allow that the law had been altered. the few had been altered by the Gth of George IV., :ind fly toes more recent Act of William IV. 'et 4c ...onania sionets were formerly appointed 42a - •' the Lord Chancellor. on the nomination's - if tbe ii,Casore astriking th e . . . docket,-now. they .were nominated by. the Judges. The. periods of,their meetings and their fees were all limited by Act of Parliament. He was afraid from what had fallen from the light Hon. Baronet relative to the strength of the opposition to be apprehended from the seven hundred and forty Commissioners, that theßill had been purposely delayed in the House of Lord,,, and was now forced through the, House of Commons, at this adranced period of the session, for the purpose of endeavourini , to suppress all legitimate opposition. The opponents of the Bill could produce two cases of gross miscondu c t on the part of the official 'assignees, quits equal to those old cases which had been raked up by the Right Ilononurable Baronet and the Honourable Member for Lambeth. Thai sort of misconduct would, however, be rendered impossible by the adoption of the suggestion of the. !ion. Member for London. There t . bored that persons selected for such offices often accepted . them at great pecuniary sacrifice. The object was to se . cure the best assistance, and it could not 1w obtained without an adequate remuneration. Mr. AGLIONBY thought. that efficient lawyers might he found at a lower salary than that proposed in the clause. Mr. M. PHILIPS would compromise his feeling; in .the matter, by suggesting that 1;500/. a year should he given to the Country Commissioner, instead of the amount i.roposed. • . Mr. B. WOOD admitted that the C omm i ss i oner; were a great improvement upon the present law, but he thought i l ia proposed salaries of 2,0001. to the old Commis sioners ~was too large, and he should, therefore. pro pose that-the sum should be 1,80.0/. Sir J. GRAHAM said he should resist the- motion, and he would state in a few words his reasons. By this Act additional duty was imposed on the Com missioners, by the enlarged . circle - in which their busines.t . was to .be performed. That was one ground . why he opposed the motion. II is second reason ivas the reason already stated by the A [ter ney-General, that when those gentlemen were appointed, a hope was distinctly held out to them of promo' ion, both with r espe c t t o t h e i r sa l ar i es an d th e i r s it ua , tions. He knew that many Commissioners held their situations upon that expectation. The alteration in the salary was only 3001. a-year. Mr. B. WOOD said they were not altogether to be bound by verbal understandings between officers and the Govei nment. He (Mr. Wood) proposed that the salary should be increased 3001. a-year, the present ~diary being 1.5001, Mr. AGLIONBY said that the Right Hon. Baronet had made a mistake in stating the increase would only be 301'/. a year, whereas it was 500/. Sir J WILDE thought that the salary proposed was adequate. When it was considered that those who were to till the duties of Commissioners would be withdrawn from their professions, he did not think that 2,000/. was an unreasonable sum for them to receive. He thought. that the increase of duty which devolved upon them fully entitled them to the additional 500/. a year. Those who were to fill the situation of Commissioners should possess considerable learning, which would acquire for them the confidence of the public, and therefore there would be fewer appeals. than if persons who did not pos sess that confidence were selected to fill those situations. However, he was not influenced by the private arrange ments of the Right Hon. Gentleman. The.amendment-was theft withdrawn. PHILIPS then proposed that "1,500/." 'should be substituted far " 1,800/.7 in the seventh line of the clause, as the salary of the country Commissioner. After a few words from Sir T. Wmor, and Mr. .1e ! mostay,-the Committee divided, when there appeared ,For the amendment Against it . • ority Maj against the amendm en t ---65 .• . The clause was then agreed to. .Clause 14, which had been postponed, was then put and agreed to. . . Clause :5 was also agreed to, with one verbal amend . Menu. •ClanseS from 76 - np to 80 were agreed to. - Clause 81 was withdrawn. Clauses from 82 to 89 were agreed to with a few verbal amendments. On clause 90 being put, which gives the Lord Chan cellor the power of allowing the travelling expenses of any of the Commissioners, in case he should think it necessary to send them on a Special Commission, . Mr. AGLIONBY objected to the clause, thinking that the Commissioners ought to pay their own expenses (nit of the large salaries that were to be given them. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL did not think that anything could be more unreasonable than that the Com missioners should not be paid their expenses for travel ling, because they were quite uncertain. The expenses of the Judges were easily calculated, and therefore they paid them theniselyes ; but if there was a special com mission they did not pay them out of their own pockets. Mr. - JERVIS thought that the contingent expenses of the Commissioners should he paid. Sir J. GRAHAM thought it would be hard if, when the Lord Chancellor had power to scud down whom he might consider the best Commissioner, he was compelled to pay his own expenses. • The clause was then ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 91 was agreed to. On clause 92 being proposed, WILDE said he should. object to the clause foto, because he did not understand on what principle of justice it was founded. Sir J. GRAHAM said it was a balanced question, and on the whole it would be advisable to let the clause pass for the present, on the understanding that some other arrangements should be made. The clause was then agreed to. Clauses 93 and 94 were also passed. A supplementary- clause was proposed after clause 94, empowering. the clerks and secretaries of the Lord Chan cellor to receive 2s. 6d. on each certificate and declara tion of insolvency, such sums to be applied to the pur poses of the schedule. It was agreed to without discussion. Mr. BENJAMIN WOOD said that he had a clause to propose, to which he hoped there would be no objection. The clause provided that the official as signee should render an account to the trading assignee of all monies three days before the audit meeting. It also provided that the official assignee should furnish to this trading assignee the account of property in band, and it further provided that the whole charges should be ex amined by the trading assignee, giving the trading as signee liberty to object to any part of those accounts be fore the Commission. Sir T. WILDE objected to the clause, as lie thought it would defeat its own object. It made the one assignee the mere puppet of the other. The clause was founded on an erroneous basis. Ito should therefore Oppose it. Mr.,11. IVOOD said he should not press the clause to a division. 'l'ha clause was therefore negatived. The House resumed, and The CHAIRMAN reported progress.—'The Report was ordered to be received to-morrow (this slay). INCOME-TAX. Major BERESFORD (as we understood) wished to put a question to the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chan cellor of the Exchequer on a subject of much interest to persons in the City. Ile wished to know whether per sons holding securities, and receiving dividends upon those securities, and paid to persons residing in foreign states, would be obliged to deduct three per cent: for the Iticoins-tax ; if so, it would be a serious injustice, not may to the foreigners themselves, but •to the merchants in this country also. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had had several communications on the subject, and the view he took of the case was that the Property-tax would be levied on foreign funds payable in this country, but if the parties resided out of the country and the funds were paid out of the country, then the tax would not be levied upon those funds. was, however, another objection which was insuperable. It would he impossible to get, respectable persons to he• come trade assignees, if they were made the mere pup pets of the official assignees, as it *as proposed to make them under the clause. Sir T. IVILDE would rather the Bill had been post e potted to next session; but he was bound to say that. none off;he ils which had been dwelt. on by his Hon. and Learned Friend, and by the Hon. Member for Leeds ; were essential to this clause, and that moreover the j whole of them might be easily remedied. Under the existing system. when a person was declared a bankrupt, the property was taken possession of by a messenger,. generally a sheriff's who was hired at ss. a i!ay, and who gave no security ; and the choice they had to make was between the messenger and an official assignee giving security. Under the ex isting system, unless it Were desired to carry on the trade,.nr unless an extent from the -Crown were appre hended, there was no assignee appointed until after the second public meeting of creditors. In the, two cases to which he had alluded the messenger was appointed j a provisional assignee. So much for the first step of the proceedings. The official assignee was never alloyed to retain a balance of more than 100/. for each j estate in his hands. He was ,by law compelled to pay j the residue into the Bank of England, to the account of the Accountant-General in Bankruptcy ; and many of j the - Commissioners would not permit him to retain an aggregate, balance, from all the estates, exceeding ' 1,0001., in his hand. if it were desired toTedeetn pro perty under the.system.of officialotssignees, there would be no dfifficulty ; but, under the present system, it could : only be done beforelhe appointment of assignees, calling a general meeting of 'the creditors by advertisement in the Gazelle, who could authorise the petitioning cre ditors to redeem, but then the y could nut raise any money until after the appointment of assignees at the said meeting of creditors ; and even then the power of creditors was limited, wand they were responsible to . the Lord Chancellor for what they might do. The speeches which had been addressed to the Commit tee would lead persons to suppose that the trade assig nees had no control whatever. Why, he was prepared to prove that they had just as much legitimate control J j as they ever had. The trade assignees had at that mo went the exclusive power of deciding when and how the estate should be converted. The-money was locked up in the hands of the Accountant-General until the necessity arose for its application ; whatever money was wanted. could he obtained under the authority of a Gazette . meeting of creditors. When the system was first introduced, it was confined fo London, in order to see whether the experiment Would be successful. The experiment had been successful, and why was not the system then extended to the country ? Was there any reason to suppose that trade assignees in the country were more diligent than trade assignees in London? Were solicitors in the country -more respectable than those in London ? Equally 'respectable, but not more so. He thought the opposition to this clause was founded in mistake. The system, when first in- troduced into London, had been met with great preju dice by the London solicitors, but- he believed that it now gave universal satisfaction. --- Mr. M. PHILIPS said he had no wish to perpetuate the abuses of the present system ; . on the contrary, he was very anxious for a revision of the law ; but he felt it his duty to support the amendment o f the H on . Member for Southwark. He wished to see the trade assignee have a concurrent influence with the official assignee. Mr. B. WOOD said that it was his wish to give an efficient protection to the creditors by the appointment of proper trustees. ire had knowri'an instance. in which a party who had him se lf h a d j u d gn ient hanging over him, had been appointed a trustee ; and the result was that the creditors had been defrauded of one third of the money received from. Ole bankrupt's estate. After a few words from Mr. SCOTT,- - The Committe divided, and the numbers were— For the amendment Against the amendment 52 Majority against the aniendinent... —36 The clause was then ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 50 was agreed to without any discussion. On clause 51 being put, Mr. M. PHILIPS wished to ask whether any com pensation would be granted to official assignees, in case it should be found advisable for them to retire? Sir J. GRAHAM said that the Bill did not contem plate such a case. Parliament could provide for it, whenever it might arise, as they should think fit. ThQ clause was then ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses up to 58 were agreed . to. On clause 58 being proposed, Mr. JERVIS said he wished to know upon what statistics it was proposed that the number of the Com missioners should be confined to ten. Ile did not see, when Manchester alone would giVe occupation to three Commissioners, how ten could perform the duties. Sir J. GRAHAM said that he would frankly tell the Hon. Gentleman why the number ten was proposed. The number of Commissioners -in • London were six, and they performed the duties for -10 miles round London; hut the Lord Chancellor having communicated with those Commissioners, they took upon themselves to di- charge the duties for 100 miles around the metropolis. This • would include Brighton and many other large towns. if six Commissioners were sufficient:for the metropolis, and 100 miles around, and the Com missioners, aften ten years' experience, were content to undertake the additional duty which would be thrown upon them, he thought that ten would be capable of doing the remaining business. Bat if the Hon. Gentle. man did not think that ten would be sufficient, he had no objection that they should be increased to twelve. Mr. JERVIS said, that if persons living at a hundred miles from London, were obliged to come up to the me tropolis to prove small debts, it - was another objection against the Bill, because it was tantamont to a denial of .• justice. it would not be worth their while to come such a great distance to prove small debts. Mr. M. PHIMPS said that Such was the increase of business in Manchester, that if there were not two fixed Commissioners he did net believe the business would be performed. On the motion of Sir J. GRAHAM, it was proposed to amend the clause by substituting the number 12 for 10. Mr. JERVIS said he would divide the House on the question. It was evident that the Bill had been brought into the House in such a state that the Right lion. B. ronet did not himself know how many persons would be necessary to work the Bill he- proposed. He did not know whether the Bill was to be worked by a Central Board or by Circuits. 11 thought it was too bad to bring for Ward such a Bill as the present at so lute a period of the session, as it did not give Members an opportunity of consulting their constituents on the subject, and especially, when it im peached the honesty of certain individuals. Sir JAMES GRAHAM did not impeach the honesty of any person. Mr. ;JERVIS thought the responsibility of the altera tions proposed in the measure by the Right Hon. Gen tleman should not rest upon - him ; he would not be re sponsible for the insertion of the wards ten, twelve, twenty, or two hundred. He believed the Bill was no thing but a job, and it had been brought forward at the present late period of the session in order that it should not incur formidable opposition. Sir .JAMES GRAHAM said, that as to the Bill being a job, be was willing to leave the decision of that question to the country at large. lle believed the country would not accuse the present Govern ment with being guilty of jobbing for countenancing the present Bill. The Government had determined to support the insolvency Bill : that Bill, as well as the present imposed fresh duties, and he was afraid, there nwe that 10 might not be sufficient, and, therefore, it was that he proposed to insert not less than 1.2 Commissioners. 3L•. Al. PHILIPS was sure the objects of the measure Could not be worked by the present number of Conunis sioners ; but he thought they might try if ten were not sufficient before twelve were appointed. • • Sir JAMES GRAHAM proposed to insert the words " nut exceeding twelve," but he could assure the lion. Member that an attempt would .be made with ten to see how the measure would work, , Mr. JERVIS observed that, as to the Insolvency Bill he did not believe it would pass this session, Dis claiming again being-any party to the Bill, he would not divide after the explanation of the Right Ron. Baronet. The clause, as amended, was ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 59 was agreed to without any amendment. Clauses 60 and 61 were agreed to, with a few verbal amendments. Clauses to 63 were agreed to, with a few verbal amendments, On ohms. 64, which defines the power of the Commis toners, being read, Sir T. WILDE objected to it as going much tro far, Lind giving to one Commissioner the power which had hitheyto alwvs been vested in three. Attu• n few words from the ATTORNEY and Simla- Tou-GENERALs, strangers were ordered to withdraw. The Committee divided, when there appeared— For the clause . 59 Against Majority for the clause The olause was then agreed to. Clauses 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 74, 71, and 72, were agreed to without discussion, BOROUGHS INCORPORATION BILL. On the Order of the flay for bringing up the Report on this Bill being read, Mr. WILLIAMS presented 41 petition from Bolton, signed by eight individuals, stating that their corpora. tion was at present not legally constituted, and praying .. for no interference to legalise it. Sir J. GRAHAM regretted that such a petition had been presented as that just laid on the table of the House. Notwithstanding that petition, however, lie thought it his duty to propose the report of the Bill, and lie should make in the second clause the alterations suggested ',,, v his Ron. and Learned Friend, the Attorney-t? enera l , which he was happy to say had 'met with tk. e approba tion of almost all the parties eoncerned,---4llear.) Mr. AGLIONBY could not allow this opportunity to ptvs without tendering his that „ ;s to the Right Hon. Baronet for the course which lie had punned with re gard to this Bill ; and he coneratidated all parties on the happy consummation which, the had effected. Right Hon. Gentleman Dr. BOWRING 0130 begged to congratulate the . Right Hon. Bar:,net, and all parties concerned, upon the • passing of tLis Bill which he had no doubt would effect much goat). Sit' CILARLES DOUGLAS rose to state, as he had been instructed to do, that the people of Birmingham were riot ut all satisfied with the charter. .The Report was then received. The alterations in the 2d clause proposed by Sir J. (raham were agreed to. Sir .1. GRAHAM moved the suspension of the Stand ing Orders, that the Bill might be read a third time at once. Mr. M. PR 1 LIPg seconded the motion. The Bill was then ordered to be engrossed, and the third reading was appointed for to-night. COVENTRY BOUNDARY BILL. Mr. GREENE brought up the Report of the Com mittee on this Bill, which was received, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time. BOROUGHS INCORPORATION BILL. This Bill was now read a third time and passed. IVAR IN INDIA. Lord PALMERSTON rose to put a question to the Right Hon. Baronet opposite, relative to a matter which involved the honour of the country and affected the in terests of a large portion of our empire in India. The last mail from India brought conflicting accounts with regard to the orders said to have been issued by the Go vernor-General with respect to the British troops west of the Indus. One report said that he had issued order, for the immediate retreat of those troops, and another that he had given different orders, which had been interpreted as an order for withdrawal. The question he wished to put to the Right Honourable Baronet was, whether any order for the withdrawal of the British troops from the country west of the Indus, had or had not been issued by the Governor-General of India : and he did hope that the Right lion. Baronet would be able to state that there was not the slightest foundation for such a report. Sir R. PEEL said it had always been his wish to give as much information to that House with reference either to diplomatic affairs or to military operations, as he could give ; at the same time it had been his deter mination to withhold any information which might pre judice the public interests. The House must recollect that any answer he gave might be conveyed to India within the period of six or seven Weeks ; it was there fore of the utmost importance that he should maintain a, reserve which should prevent prejudice to our arms. At this moment Candahar and Jellalabad were the scene of military operations. The death of Shah Soojah had placed this country in a new position, with respect to that treaty which had been concluded , by Lord Auckland ; and the relation in which we stood in consequence of Shah Soojali's . death, was now the subject of a diplomatic c ommunication. lle, therefore, must decline answering the question of the Noble Lord, as to the ord ers w hich had been given. He would state the facts. 'At this moment the British forces occupied Candahar, and, he believed, jellalabad ; and he did not of their immediate retreat apprelii n 1 any probability was all the informati on front these situations. That was the ' which he could, consistently with his sense of public had said give. ' He duty, consent to that- the British I• On clause 73 being proposed, Mr. MARK PHILIPS opposed the allowance pro pcized to be made to the Commissioners, lie thought ' 1,8001. a.year far too high a salary. The present _London Commissiontri ha:II,NOL; it was proposed to increase their salary to 4,i)noi Ile objected to that increase. The liiishc 1 - 10. a. Baronet had told them that the cost of liv ini was to 1).1 greatly diminished by the operation of the tariff: Ile hoped the Bight lion. Baronet would not show the want of coutidenoe in . his own prophecy, which he manifested 4 timposing such a salary for these Com missicAlWO as I,Boa a-year. Mr, A( LIONBY thought that the travelling expenses under the new Bill might be ver,y heavy. If the locality in which the Commissioner was fixed .was very extensive, the expense would be enormous. Great inconvenience f Might arise from requirtng persons to come to the Corn. missiop D 11. I ,otn. a considerable distance. l'he AT . 'OHNEY-GENERAL said that no inconve nience whatever arose from the Commissioners remain ing in the centre of the London district. With respect to the sniftries of the Commissioners it should be remem• • forces were in possession cf Candahar and ;le and that he did not apprehend their immediate reteeitt front these situations,—(ll*ar, hear.) \VRIT. Mr. LEFROY said, that (Inderstandin the Chairman and the Members of the Ipswich Election eomMittee case not intend to offer any opposition to :he issuing of the writ, he thought he should best diseharge hi.s owi, duty, and consult the convenionce of the House, by from occupying their time in making any observaticnr. upon the evidence laid on the table of the HOuSe. Neither ' would lie be tempted by the noticeof the Bill given by the lion. Member for Finsbury to make any ebservations, but he thought there was no support in the evidenro to that Bill. lie felt confident that the Hon. Mentheo would Lot persevere in that. Bill, because if he refiem-d for a moment he would find that ht. %you d not only he disfranchising the parsons named in the' Bill, but ha would prevent the issuing of the writ for Ipswich. lie also felt that he would experience 'Considerable diffionity in persisting in that Bill, when the other members of ihat Committee had deelared that they would not oPP O ' , e , the issue of the wrir. He wind(' do no more than move the issue of the writ ; and he hoped that those lion. . Members who who were cledidates for the b(wough, would be subject to as little imputations', an Nume not with as uutnrnished honour, and With as independent and unblemished integrity as the lion. G4ittemen 0)6 had. lost their seats.— (Cheers.) ile would reserve to himsel' anything he had to observe upon the Bi:1 of the Hon. 6,,-- tku.n. Ile concluded by moving the issui ng of the a; rit. Mr. STUART seconded the mot i on . Mr. I'. M. STEWART said there was - a little misap prehension on the part of the lion. Member. He (Mr., Stewart) certainly did say that be should not or.pose the issue of the writ, but in' (lid not say that kiehottla not support the Bill of the li on . M em b er for Fir, by. Mr. LEFROY said, he understood that the Govern ment would not oppose the issue of -the writ, therefore he did not expect he could support a Bill wt ieh have that effect. Mr. DUNCOMBE said, that the Government had expressed a hope that he would not persevere in his Bill, es he ,had no case to Test: it upon. Now. he (Mr. Duncombe), would - refer,. the House _to whet had taken place within the last seven yeare. Re found that. no less than. seven' petitions had been presented_ In 1835; there was one against..Mr.' F. Kelly , and On' that. Mr; Bott Cool; Wes teperted 011ie- of bribery, and :had'abseatidedi* In 1837 petitiou ate, nreSerued against the return of his Ilan. Friend* Mr. TutfAi. Iu • 1839 his Ito Friend Mr. Milner , tii!teceit eeeiguedr— (llear) and it Thonets Cochrane was reCurreeh— (Hear.) Then came 1841, when- Mr. It. Waeou unit 'Mr. Rennie were unseated on account 'cif' lirdivry : and last came the electimeat which Lod Desart and Ylr. G left stone Were returned. They were unseated one account of b r ibery he thei r agents, but without their iteignisance.. If the Hon. 6i:title:nen feel taken the-tremble to read the evidence, he would 'find that - the same in, lividnals had been engaged in briber, in all those e. eine to which lie (Mr. ,Duncombe) had referred.—epear, beer.) It appeared by the evidenee tleit bribes add b een ei vea tot the following. persons :—To Anhui: Bott. Coot, to Henry G. Bristo, and that the wife of 'another v o t er h a d received 10s.--(" hear. hear," from the Ministerial tide of the House.) Ile supposed they wished it was 101.— (Cheers.) It appeared that Amos Goodeldld was pro mised money to pay his rail roa d expenses —(" Hear, bear," from the Ministerial side of the Ibuise.) Ile thought that Cook, having been found guilty of bribery in 1835, and again in . 1842, was a person. who)» the: Iloase ought to visit with reprobation. Wbat could he• more jest Mr. Wason and Mr. Rennie, acid. again Mr.. Gladstone and Lord Desart, had been incapacitated from `sitting in Parliament in consequence of acts ef bribery committed by their agents ; and yet. Those* iti dlviduals who were guilty of the. eriwe were allowed to go unpunished and uneensured by the House. He considered it was ft great anomaly such was permitted to be the case, (Inc i n di v id ua l h a d, received 3N. for the loss of time, though 2s. was tFtP usual pay, and .lohn Downing hail received an indemnity for his security of 25/. ; Thomas Bowman had received etie or playing- in the band, and a person named Pack h a d received es. 6d. because he would out vote. S of those were old offenders, and upon their evidence, Mr.. Wason and Mr. Rennie had been unseated. - William ; ,Brown was an old offender. He hail reeeiied 4/. los. rise travelling expenses, and he was the principal evidence by whom Lord l)esart and Mr. Gladstone verve, unseated, and it was partly upon *his evit'onee that Mr. Wason and Mr. Rennie were • unsea'ded nr IS-11. The number against whom be meek bits motion was 21, and he thought they ought be .1-amea eitated for voting for the borough of Ipswich/ B i e, it there were any other persons who ought to incapa citated for voting, and if he were allowed r e b r i ng i ts 3 Bill for that purpose, he had no objeetioe th a t mi te r s should be added. The question then w ou ld th e house consent to the issuing of the write,e n d would th ee allow those persons to make a repetitlett of the eorrnit • practices of Which they were guilty ; le th e course e e the next week ? There Was the ca s e of Stiorehart, which was a precedent tier whir he now moved. Tleee ease occurre d in 1777, and.. in that borough ex isted a society for the purpose of saint , the votes to the highest bieder, which was l 'alted the Christian Club (Laughter) —so called 'from the benevolent and eiutritable view s which they' enter teined,_l(taeghter.) The 'Clnb consisted of sixty-eight Members, and previous to the election, five of them were formed into a Committee tee transact the, business, and though they never voted themselves they applied to the. Others to vote,. which was done by meens of a vertu; sigaal. The consequence was that a Bill was brought in to incapacitate those sixty-eight individual S who a e r e named, and they were incapacitated finr ever from vi /tine for Members of Pediment. The. ease of East It Nord was enother precedent With regard to which a ?Al weey i brought in In 1828, to incapacitate sixteen duals from Noting who were reported ..guilty bribery. The Bin passed the House of Collin ems, but it was thrown out in the Rouse et' LOrds ; but [ass oily mentioned it to prove the opinion' the House of Commons held on the subject. The R:ght lion. Batons, Ititaselt; when the Iron. Member for Montgomery bretugh a his tote ion forward te the effect that the A Verney- General should prosecute those persons who weeet guilty ,if bribery, when Mr. Wason and Mr. Rennie. were no sieteWaid, duet; it was a dangerous doctrirte that those who received bribee,should be intleuntifi&!. It was trite he said that the aces of some indiviOnals oueitt. not be sufficient to disfranchise the borough, bat in the present ease, he did not' ask to haeo the toraugh disfranchised. He on) wished th at t h e , guilty persons should be disfranehiSed, which would his a sufficient example. On another occitsion, in consequence of a question put by him (Mr. Duncombe) to the Rigit lion. Baronet, be stated that he believed the worst eat, es of corruption had occurred in 'the Irrge towns, and xe wished that those eases should he taken up by theiltem and made an example of. Now, here; was the borer of Ipswich, which had been twice reported to the 11 epee in the ,course of one - session,. as having been guilty of corrupt practices, and - it afforded, in his tutinion, a fair opportunity to the Rouseeto take the sttliect into its consideration,--(Hear, hear.) Ile thought it mettle impossible the Right lloo.Boionet, could agree ,to the issuing of the writ, afe'er what he had stated, awl, what had taken place it, the borough of Ipswielt. Wlt t sv* the language, Sir Thomas Cochrane to the eletteitre the ,_ ee r""II"P:of Ipswich, ilia letter he addressed to th eta , on ti!4 st of September, 1841? The Hon. Gentlettiaa. the, read the letter 'of Sir Thomas Cochrane at ;rests length, which slated sereral facts connected with his standing for the borough of Ipswich, and that he be lieved it was necessary for a person to go down to tiitt borough with 1,500/. lie had been asked to p a y money after the election ; and perhaps the same demaod would be maele with regard to the last election. Any one who read the letters must come to the eontlu sion that it was impossible for any person to think that any party could behave more properly than Sir Thomas Cochrane had done ; but what was the inferenee to he drawn from that letter ? Why that nothing short of 1.500/. would answer the purpose of the Conseevat,h e e of Ipswich. The question was, bad the borough become more pure since then ? His lion. Friend had said it had. Now he (Mr. Buncombe) asserted that it had not ; and for the proof of that he would refer to the fact that four Members had lost their seats for that place in consequence of bribery and corruption. lie took the Report that had been made by the Committee to he u fair and true one, and the effect of that Report was that the electors had been bribed. It. wag net matter - whether that bribery was 30s. or :iO/,—(!fear. hear.) It' the House woubl allow him to bring in this Bill for; the purpose of referring the subject to a Select Cot' inittee ' he had no hesitatio n i n fi x i ng any i n di videtal named with that with which he charged them, le e knew it would be said that there would not he stifi',ei teu time to consider the Bill properly, and pass it, durin g th e , present session ; but alt that tie asked was, chat the: ' Rouse should not issue the writ till the Bill heti pas,se e t, What would be the inconvenience of not issuing the wait. • till next session ? In Southampton he had heard cern. plaints of there being no Members, but that was net be cause no writ had been issued, but became the races had taken place, and there was no ??embers' plate.—(A laugh.) That, however, could not be the ease with Ipswich. Time question for the House to consider was whether they would not stultify their proceedings ie they issued the writ in the face of the Report of the Committee; but it' they were determined not to pay atten tion to the Reports of a Committee, then they would he. justified in issuing, the writ. It; however, such a Ter p was to be pursued, he thought the sooner- such a jut. , diction was taken from the House. the better.—(H ear,. hear.) Ile had read through the evidence before, the: Committee, and he thought the Report .illy- sustaie,e,l b y the evidence. Ile would not go through the evidem m; a ll h e ., proposed to do was what had been don' , before% 'P it'd that was where parties had been guilty of briher - i, n o t to , allow the writ to go down in order to .-onow those., parties to be guilty el' bribery tiVe e • in six : months.—(dear, hear.) The lionortrable m ete ., her concluded by moving for leave to bring in a Bin: to incapacitate Arthur Butt Cook, Henry Gelf aut Charles Steward, John Downing, Arti(i s G oo d ehit William Brown, Richard Bishop, John Cockle, Rob er r ; Hines, William Fuller, Henry Graves, William Blyt William George Cole, Edward 'Franks, William Fre a t e; Robert Pack, - Joseph Barrett Warren, Robert Wi clam iN l i ! ,: e no t t . f , ,:ll l l .:? t t : i i,ri tt it n bneu u les!. to sigxetreavrte, elections lit,einonrlillasi s atn( l i t e o ,,ne vi tt An fe tt ni i r i i , i, and litlia, o hi end for preventing bribery and eorrupe nn e e 4, 7e_ o re f r?s,.: ll l p rirr s t.. w el i ati c lsu h it, , ssA i countyti‘ctiv:tjil;seeseherrol.t)hixeie tohfeSussex, h E m 1 : : 1 11 1 d . ( gone through; the 3entleman ha and after doing. so, he had come to t.* T ditleree;. v‘eittheltriseisopnectt: ‘ t \ o - hat lie did. Ito It 1 . 1 many of them w e er i .e v e: ' ;Z e l ' ea e nt9 : agge 'vet tor a Bill a Committee e h t : h o o i l s i ° ll i ng : o l lliA t a r i l t e o : l l . i s lib li t' ; o l ::: h r l' t 4l , ' l s i 'l i t t l l l i t :o N : hw a tv - t ever, made a most impartial seleeaitin ; he had not ire ould, hciw'cver, eluded a single yellow voter ; and such being the ease, he HOUSE OP COMMONS, Aug. 8 The SPEAKER, took the Chair at Twelve o'Cloek. Captain ATOURT presented a petition in favour of the County Courts Bill. Mr. C. O'BRIEN presented a petition from the Chamber of Commerce of Limerick, praying. that some steps might be taken for the better havigation of the River Shannon. WINE TRADE. Mr.. M. • GIBSON, in the absence of the Hon. Member for Swansea; presented a petition from Swansea, praying that drawback might bo, allowed on foreign wines in stock. NEWFOUNDLAND BILL. Lord STANLEY moved the third reading of this Bill. Mr. P. HOWARD, pursuant to 'notice, rose to move that the Bill be read a third time, this day three months. He renewed his objections . to the Bill, which he urged on a former occasion. Would they (the GoVernment) take the same course with respect to this Bill, if it ap plied to this 'country ? Many Hon. Gentlemen had op posed the Bill of 1832, which enlarged the franchise — he meant the Reform- Act of England. Though .thev then opposed that A c t, no Hon. Gentleman had moved . since fur its repeal. If they acted in this way towards their own country, why, in the name of honour and generosity, did they act otherwise to an unprotected colony. The two main principles of the Bill he objected to. One was' the qualification. This princinle was also objected to by his late Majesty, who thought that if Scotland needed no qualification, Newfoundland must need none. But even this evil was nothing to that of the 6th clause in the Bill, which abolished the House of Assembly. The colony at present was in a highly moral eondition. there being many schools and benevolent institutions in St. .Tolin's. This island, in case of war, would always be an important point of defence If they lessened the li berties of the subject, would they offer any inducement to the English settlyr or the Anglo-Saxon to emigrate to that island ? Would he leave the land of his fathers to live undur another system of laws less free than his owe? No ; history had always contradicted such a principle. He trusted, therefore, that the House would not de prive this rising colony of its constitution. lie trusted the House would reflect before it poisoned the future loyalty of tha people of that colony. Resting his opposition principally against the sixth clause of this Bill, he would certainly take the sense of the Howie upon the third reading of the Bill. The Bill had been brought in at a late period of the session, but the oppo sition to it lied been conducted on the strict and lair principle of debate. The arguments on one side had been met by arguments on the other ; and whatever might be the result of his motion, he would say that the opposition had been fair and honest. The Hon. Gen tleman concluded by. moving that the Bill be read a third time this duty three months. Mr. BARING WALL seconded the motion. Strangers were ordered to withdraw and the House divided, when the numbers were— ..._._ , For the third reading 55 Against it , 12 Majority for the third reading... -- 43 The Bill was then read a third time and pasyd. COUNTY COURTS (SALARIES AND EX- PENSES) BILL. On the Order of the. Day for the Report on this Bill being brought up, Sir R. INGLIS expressed a wish that the Bill should not be proceeded with this session; if it were he should oppose it. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he should postpone it then for the present. Captain I!ECIIELL complained of the late period in the sessi9n at which this Bill was brought forward, and contended that •it was impossible to consider the 150 clauses in this fill in the short time which now remained to them. Ile wished t. ask the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if. it was the serious intention of the Government to proceed with the Bill this session ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCIIEQUER recom mended the Hon. Member to apply to the Minister who had the charge of the Bill. Mr. PHILIPS then gave notice, that when the Mi nister who had charge of the Bill should enter the House, he should put the question to him, whether it was the serious intention of the Government to proceed with the Bill this session. NOTTINGHAM ELECTION. Mr. Walter took the oaths and his seat for Notting ham. The Hon. Member was conducted to the table by Sir R. 1 1. Inglis'. BANKRUPTCY LAW AMENDMENT BILL The House resolved itself into Committee on this Bill. On the 49th clause, for appointing official assignees in the.conntry, being proposed, Mr. M. PHILIPS wished to know of the Attorney- General, if it were intended to pass this clause, what re muneration the assignees were to receive, and how they were to be appointed, with security to the public? The ATTORNEY -GENERAL said, that in an swering the question of the Honourable Gen tleman opposite, he. should direct himself, first, to the system of the assignees ; and, seeondly, to the mode of their remuneration. When it was proposed by Lord Brougham to introduce official assignees into the courts in London, he (the Attorney-General) had considerable doubts as to the result of such a measure, but, upon mature consideration, he ascertained that the system was by no means so objectionable as it appeared at first sight. The following short statement would show in what manner that Bill worked. In 180 estates under the new system of proceeding by fiats, the I proportion of debts collected, a.s compared with good debts, was 72 per cent. In eighteen estates taken at random, tinder the old commission, the proportion of debts was only 38 per cent. The advantage of the present system would also appear from this : Of the number of debts not exceeding 11., the amount stated was 0 ,288/., and the stun actually collected was 2,175/. ; of debts above 1/. and under 21. the amount stated was 1,3991., and the stun collected 1,0791 ; or debts above 2/. and tinder 5/. the amount stated was ' 1,9291.. and the sum collected 1,508/. ; and of debts above 51, and under 10/. the amount stated was 1,1391., and the sum collected 845/. ; making a total of 7,3481. stated, and 5,607/. collected, being not less than 77 per cent. The scale of remuneration to assignees 5 per cent, for sums under - 1001.; 2. per'eent. for sums under 2001. and so on diminishing in proportion ;the Bankruptcy Court having power to make such regulations from time to time as to render the scale of remuneration suited to the labour and circumstances of particular cases. Under those circumstances the extending of the jurisdiction of the official assignees from within 40 m il es roun d L on d,, n to every part of the . kingdom was a great boon. Sir T. WILDE had no hesitation in giving his decided support to this Bill, but the most important alteration that formerly took place in the bankruptcy laws related to t h e appointment of official assignees. As to rumune, ration, the course hitherto pursued had had the effect of giving not excessive but limited remuneration. If it was required to get respeatahle persons who could give security to be assignees, remuneration proportioned to the services renderel by those persons must be allowed , otherwise respectable persons could nut be obtained. Those persons frequently held large sums of Money in their hands, which it was of importance to prevent thpir *Mining in their possession, and to compel - ~_ / - > - 2 41 rl the weir was l ow t of ths die ing ler- 1 0. les Ist i ,d• of 0' t he ow ~ 1 . a !1