The Sun. — London, England, 1824-05-28 00:00:00

t. to the Motion ac it was now framed, inasmuch as it crimi. I;aied the Magistracy.—(Hear I) —It was eliminatory on the „Aiagistracy, but had not been supported by any fact. It was aa,id that there were Magistrates who had such an appetite for • come iunents that they were called the committing Magistrates. But where was this said ; and who were the persons of whom it was said? He (Mr. P.) had never heard of such Magis trates ; but if they facts were really as was alleged, that there were Gentlemen so called, did this furnish matter of charge against them ?—( Hear, hear I)—Were gentlemen to be branded in this manner, because they might be more vigilant, more .active, or more zealous than others ?—(Hear, hear, hear 1) He hoped not ; and therefore so far as they were concerned, he saw no reason for acceding to the motion. Besides, if the Motionwere granted, the Return could not show whether the Magistrates had been right or wrong' in committing. He denied -that the mere number of acquittals, compared with the number of comments, offered any just ground for censure against the Magistrates; or that a return, merely showing such numbers, .would enable the House to judge whether the Magistrates were right or wrong. In proof of this assertion, he would ob serve that on the former occasion the Hon. Member had men tioned-the names of three respectable Magistrates, Mr. Allen, Mr. Dyer, and Mr. Swabey. He (Mr. P.) had therefore sent for :Mr. Dyer, and that Gentleman had abundantly satisfied him that in a great number of cases, wherein acquittals had taken place, he (Mr. Dyer) not only was justified in committing for • trial, but would have abandoned his duty had he not done so ; although the subsequent acquittal might be altogether legal and proper. In one case, which was that of an assault upon a fe- Male, the evidence adduced before 3lr. Dyer was so clear, that he (Mr. Peel) was convinced no Magistrate could forbear com mitting for trial. Yet what had happened afterwards ? The wo man weritbefore the Grand Jury in such a state of intoxica tion that not a word she said could be understood, and still less believed,. and the Grand Jury very properly threw out the Bill. In another case a prosecutor told a very plausible story before the Magistrate, and on the trial he was proved (by wit. reseesproduced by the prisoner) to be unworthy of belief. In these and many other cases it happened ; and in similar cases if would again and again happen that the Magistrate would do no more than his duty in lawfully committing, though the pri soner might afterwards be lawfully acquitted. Sometimes a compromise would take place between the friends of the pri soner and the prosecutor before the trial; and the prisoner would improperly get his discharge, althongli the Magistrate might have performed his duty by committing , the prisoner for trial, and binding the witnesses over to prosecute. Sometimes people who were so bound over were wearied in .attending at -the Sessions- from day to day and losing their time, and they therefore - preferred forfeiting a recognizance Which they knew could never be enforced against them with any effect. In a -eery large class of cases prosecutors relented between the commitment and the trial. Their feelings were warmed by • anger at the time of the commitment, and became cooled thy the time the trial was coming on ; and this occurred very frequently in cases wherein the parties were relatives or .friends and kind feelings or a dread of exposure induced an ithanalc>riment. of the prosecution. In all these cases the corn ,mitments might be very proper on the part of the Magistrates, and yet, by the returns now called for, these, and many other :cases, would appear simply by the commitment and the ac . quittal in each, and would not disclose any of the circumstances by which the conduct of the Magistrates was probably guided, , and by which it might he justified. For these reasons, because the motion was uncalled for by any case of misconduct on the part of the 3lrgistrates ' and because the return which it called • for would give no satisfactory information, he should meet it by a decided negative. Mr. DENMAN admitted the necessity of the distinction - between commitments for trial and commitments in execution. • He thought, however, that the latter called for the utmost jea. • ' lousy of the House, in consequence of the powers which Par . liament was giving every day to the Magistracy. Ile could not see any sound objection to the present Motion, as it called for information only, and did not criminate any one. He ad - :flitted, however , that no arg ument against the Magistracy could' e drawn rom the mere disproportion in number between committals and convictions. Many of the committals were pressed on account of the facility with which expences were allowed to witnesses at the expence sf the county, a subject which called for a very serious inquiry. Sir E. KNATCHBULL denied that any case of misconduct bad been proved against the Magistracy to justify the motion, which in some degree went to criminate them. Mr. 11. SUMNER thought, the fact that Parliament was . annually granting increased powers to Magistrates, was a proof that it was thought they had properly discharged their duties. Mr. CI: RWEN opposed the motion. Lord STANLE Y also thought the motion implied a censure ..upon the Magistracy. Mr. DENMAN explained. Sir CHA 'ILES BURRELL opposed the motion. Mr. DICKINSON said, it was generally the wish of the IViagistrates to avoid commitments for trial if possible. Mr. toe A Rl' opposed the motion; and Mr. Alderman Woon supported it. Mr. Secretary PEEL said, if the Hon. Member would select any one case of misconduct on the part of a stipendiary Ma -gistrate lie air. Peel) would give him every facility for ex amination. Mr. HUME begged to decline this ; as it was not his wish to bring forward charges against particular individuals. The Hon. Member then shortly replied, as to the present motion, which he said he had no objection to withdraw, upon the un --derstanding held out by the Right Hon. Secretary. After a few words from Mr. Dawson, Mr. Alderman Wood, -and Mr. Herne, Mr. Secretary PEEL said he could not allow the motion to be withdrawn ; as he thought it ought to be negatived. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion - Against it Majority - On our re-admission we found Mr. HUME on his legs, observing that there was something very singular in the conduct of country Gentlemen who were _always against any inquiry into their conduct, and were always an in arms at the bare mention of misconduct in a Country - Magistrate. Ile did not at all envy the Right Hon. Secretary hi:: triumph on the last motion, if so he thought it. He (Mr. 11.) had only, in a general way, called for information, and he now repeated that call. The Hon. Member then n'oved for a return similar to the last, only that it related to Ireland. Mr. Secretary PEEI, said he had not asked the Hon. Gen tleman to withdraw his last motion, as it was perfectly indif ferent to him whether he withdrew it or not. The information he had offered before, he (Mr. P.) now again offered, and he • should be still happy to give it. dr. CURWEN opposed the motion. - Mr. F. PALMER said he hoped the Magistrates in general had no objection to inquiry. He saw no objection to it him self. On the contrary, he should support the. motion. • Mr. Secretary PEEL explained. Mr. DENMAN observed, that his Honourable Friend had been taken by surprise on the last motion ; and he did not think that the triumph of the country Gentlemen on that occa aion did any credit to those whose conduct was likely to be affected by it. He trusted that ultimately it would be ordered that all commitments should annually be laid on the table of that house. Mr. TWIS3 and Sir W. DE CRESFIGNY opposed the motion. Mr. I'. WILSON thought no case whatever had been made out to call for inquiry. Mr. 11011110 USE supported the motion. He did not think • so highly of the Magistrates as did the majority of the lion. Members of that House. He would really prefer seeing a re sponsible stipendiary Magistracy to a Magistracy unpaid and irresponaihle. Mr. MONCK spoke a few words in favour of the motion. Mr. PELII 111 opposed the motion. Mr. II UM Ii replied, observing that all the remarks made by • the Hon. Members against the motion had nothing to do with it e as the present motion referred to the Irish, and not the Eng lish Magistrates. The House then divided, when ther e appeare d, For the Motion - 34 AgaNst - 71 Majority - similar A third Division took place on a motion respecting Scotland—The numbers were, For the Motion - 'Against it Majority PRIVATE, BILLS. On strangers being re-admitted, we fou nd dt9 bmit fo Mr. HUME addressing the House. Ile ha their consideration, a motion respecting, the practic su enow ob r - served with regard to Private Bills. It was most important that the people of this country should be satisfied that measures were net passed in that House, respecting their property, without a due attention to justice. At present the business of Private • Bills was generally a mere business of canvass. — (Rear, hear!)—lt was a business carried on out of doors, by persons who so m e times were not Members of the House; and was as 'different in the Committees up stairs front what it 'was iritte Hous e as cou ld poss ibl y b e imagined. —(Hear, hear !) Every Hon. M em b er .must have b een su bj ecte d to the impor tunities by.which he had suffered from letters written to hint from various persona, solicitors, and others, res iectiia. his vote in private Committees. •Noth . " , could be ' more i improper.— Every ' Member of p i wa itm ' i n this respect ought to be a i Age, and ready to express i • • in dig n ation a : at way letters .ad 'dressed to hint with a view to bi • his conduct upon a ques tion pending his decision. •The request in these letters was, not to hear the evidence, but to .be.sure to be at the Committee at three to vote .in the division as a, p ersona l favour. To 8 81 -73 33 75 - ---42 this he had again and again been exposed. Members were' deputed to do certain duties by the House, and one of these was to hear the evidence on the subject of investigation. In this respect they were in the character of Jurors, and ought to be equally scrupulous. Ile had no hesitation in saying that it was in the power of any Solicitor to a private Bill to defeat the intentions of the house by wasting through delays the at tention of the Committee. The whole system of Fees, Clerks, and Solicitors to Private Bills required reform. These abuses were contrary to the whole spiiit of the House itself, and it was kis opinion, that Committees deputed by the House ought to be guided by the same rules. The Honourable Member then quoted from various parts of Hatsell precedents in support of his argument. On the 12th of June, 1604 the case of a mem ber of the name of Seymour was decided, who was party to a Bill relative to certain estates in question between him and the Duke of Somerset, and was required to leave the House in order that he might not vote on the division. It was required by the other party that the Earl of Hertford's of ficers should depart the House, but this was overruled, as they were not directly interested in the decision. This plainly sheaved that the principle of' that House was not to admit in terested persons to vote, and this it was that he thought ought to be extended to private Committees The lion. Gentleman concluded by moving, 44 that it be a Standing Order of the House, that no 31 ember shall vote in a Committee above stairs on any question in which his pecuniary interests are concerned; such as Dock Committees, Canal Committees, Joint Stock Company Committees, Roads and Inclosure Bills ; and that the practice of the Committees above stairs be regulated in the same manner as the decisions of this House, when individual interest is concerned." Mr. Secretary CANNING expressed a doubt as to the ne cessity of making such a standing order. He considered that the object of the proposed ordered had been long established, if not enjoyed in Committees above stairs, and that in every way they were regulated by the same principles as the House itself. He should wish, however, to hear this stated from the Chair. The SPEAKER said; it was clear that all the rules of that House, for the regulation of its conduct, were in full operation in Committees up stairs. Any example relative to the course of the House, in cases where the votes of lion. 31embers might be influenced' by direct personal interest, were just as good f or the Committees up stairs, as for the House. — (i fear !) Mr. Secretary CA NN iNG said, that, after this explanation from the highest authority, there could be little doubt that the Hon. Member's motion was superfluous. It appeared to him impossible to frame a standing, order, so that it should meet every case of personal interest. In contested elections, it was the nice feelings of honour and justice that dictated the course of proceeding. The difficulty was not in the theoretical prin ciple, but in the application of it. If there were any way of en forcing this principle the proposition might be good, but this Resolution left it worse than it was before, because it implied that such a principle did not pervade the conduct of private Committees before. It did not appear to him as any help to cure the existing evils, and, indeed, until some other system were devised, he could not see any other way of proceeding than challenging individual votes. The only way therefore that he could see of disposing of this motion was by moving the pre , vious question, although not with any view of insinuating that evils did not exist which required amendment. Sir W. CRESPIGNY opposed the motion. Mr. STUART WORTLEY opposed the motion. He ' thought with his nigh' Hon. Friend, that the House ought to stand to the ancient principles by which it had been guided. Be was however of opinion, that Hon. Members who attend Committees on Private Bills were bound in honour to hear the evidence on both sides. Mr. P. GRENFELL advised his Hon. Friend to withdraw his motion, and bring it forward in the shape of a Select Com mittee to inquire into the abuses of these Committees up stairs, whose proceedings, in so many instances, were so disgraceful to the character of the House. Ile had before stated and now repeated, that by the facilities offered for delay, he would un dertake, if they would give hint money, to defeat any Bill brought into the House. The utmost evils proceeded from the long speeches of the Gentlemen of the long robe. Learned Counsel would speak for five hours, occupying the • greater part of two days of a Committee. The most enormous abuse arose from this system. Members of Committees might very fairly be called upon by their oaths or honours—they had no personal interest in the question they were about to investi gate, and that they would decide upon an impartial hearing of both sides. Mr. ELLICE suggested that the motion should be with drawn, and brought forward vain early in next, Session. Sir M. W. RIDLEY thought that the best remedy of the evil would be to observe a more strict adherence to the orders of • the House in all its stages connected with private Bills. Lord STANLEY complained of the difficulty of getting Members to attend the Committee to which they were ap pointed. Mr. B. WILBRA HAM thought the matter ought not tube postponed to next Session. Mr. SCARLETT said, that if the rule were enforced that no Member should vote in a Private Ommittee who had not heard the evidence on both sides, the public _would expect the same rule to be applied to all Public Committees. Mr. HITME said, he was willing to withdraw his motion in favour of a Select Committee. Mr. Secretary CANNING said, he should oppose the Motion proposed by the lion. Member. He hoped, however, that this discussion would have a beneficial effect as far as this Session was concerned, which was in fact the only mode of dealing with the question. Mr. HUME thought the sense of the House was in favour of a Select Committee. They could meet, and arrange this Sem , sion what course they would take next. He concluded by moving the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire if any and what regulations were required for the better conduct of the business of Committees on Private Bills, and report the same to the House. After a few words from Mr. S. Wortley, Mr. Secretary Can nig, Mr. Grenfell, and Sir C. Forbes, Mr. Secretary CANNING said, that, as the Hon. Mover and other Gentlemen seemed to be preparetrto do some good in a Committee of this nature this Session, lie should not oppose the motion. The motion was then agreed to, and the Committee nomi rutted. CUSTOMS DUTIES' 1311,14. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the third reading of the Customs Duties' Bill. Mr. D. BROWN regretted that this motion was brought on at ro late an hour of the evening, and moved that the Petition of the County of Mayo, against the repeal of the Linen Boun ties be then read. --- This having been done by the Clerk, Mr. D. BROWN resumed. He begged the particular atten tion of the House to the solemn protestations of the Petitioners against the interference of Parliament in the linen trade of Ire land. He was next under the necessity of calling upon the Clerk to read the two Addresses of both Houses of Parliament to King William 111. of the 9th June, 1693, on the subject of the Woollen Manufactures of Ireland. The CHANCELLOR of the 7':XCIIEQUISR suggested that as the Addresses in question were not on the table the Might Hon. Member should proceed to observe upon those do cuments as though they had been read. Mr. D. BROWN did not wonder the Bight Hon. Gentle man should dislike those Addresses, for they made his case so strong as it was impossible for a just and honourable Parlia ment to withstand. Ile had the Addresses, and with permis sion of the House would read them himself.—(Cries of read.') —The Right lion. Gentleman accordingly proceeded to read the documents in question. 'laving concluded, he went on to contend, that that House could not, without a flagrant breach of faith, pass the Bill now before them, which went to abrogate the rights preserved to the Irish by the Act of King William. He bad pledged himself to oppose this measure in every stage, and he did so most cordially at present. Mr. Alderman WOOD said, he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would yet take into consideration the suggestions he had frequently pressed upon.ltim relative to small coals. Mr. C. H. HuTcHiNsoN caontentled that the most disas trous consequences would follow to the North and West of Ireland from the withdrawal of the Linen Bounties. Lord MILTON said it would be a consolation for the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite to find that the effect of the with drawal of the Linen Bounties would be the increase of the rent of the landowners in those quarters. Sir M. W. RIDLEY deprecated the measure as regarded the Coal Duties. Mr. D. BROWN explained. The House then divided on the third reading of the Bill. Ayes, - - 93 Noes, - 26 Majority Several clauses were then added, and the Bill passed. CLERGY RESIDENCE. On bringing up the Report of the Clergy Residence Bill, Sir JOHN NEWPOAT moved to add a clause to prevent any Clergyman having a living of 401. from taking any other Benefice. Mr. GOULBURN opposed the clause. The Bight Hon. Gentleman's amendment was one of a complicated nature, and could not be carried into effect. He did not wish then to dis cuss the question of Chu rc h pl ura li t i es , b u t would merely say it was a subject which o ug ht to b e t h e o bject of a separate m easure. Mr. PLUNKETT considered pluralities entitled to the con sideration of the House, but it w a s i m p oss ibl e to deal with pluralities in the Clause proposed by his Right Hon. Friend, It would be almost impossible in some cases to ascertain the real value of the first living. When the question of pluralities came fairly before the house he should support it. Mr. HUTCHINS:ON considered the Clergy Residence Bill a mockery, whilst the Clergy of Ireland were allowed to hold ' a plurality of living►s. • . Lord MILTON - opposed the motion. Nr. GRATTAN conceived that the Amendment might be withdrawn upon the promise of the Right HoM - Secretary for Ireland to bring for Ward the subject in proper form. Sir JOHN NEWPORT persisted in his motion. The House divided on the question— For the Clause - . . 38 Against it 75 Majority - _37 The Report was then received, and the Bill ordered to be read a third time to-morrow, BONDED WHEAT. The House went into the Committee on the Warehoused Wheat Bill. Mr. ELLIS said he should bring up a clause to allow (',la than Wheat, now warehoused, to be brought into consumption free of (hay. There were 50,000 quarters of Canadian Wheat in this country, and the question was, whether the owner of the same was entitled to exemption front the duty. Mr. L. FOSTER opposed the clause. Mr. W. -WHITMORE and Mr. CURTEIS also opposed the clause. Mr. HUSKISSON thought the Owners of Canadian Corn in this country had to complain of some hardship. Ile therefore should support the clause. Sir J. NEWPORT concurred in the motion proposed by his flight lion. Friend. Sir .1. WROrrESLEY wished the House to consider whe ther the introduction of the clause would not destroy the good effect of the Bill. Mr. W. HOItTON. opposed the clause. The house divided on bringing up the clause, Ayes - 43 Noes 31 ajority. -26 The clause was consequently agreed to. When strangers were re-admitted, Mr. CURTEIS was pro posing a clause to prevent frauds by the substitution of one kind of flour for another, or of plaster-of-Paris for flour, by giving the Lords of the Treasury power to exclude wheat from being brought in on pretence of being ground for exportation. Mr. 11l:SKISSON had no particular objection to the bring ing up of this clause,:-but he thought it unnecessary, as he had no doubt the officers were capable of distinguishing flour from plaster-of-Paris. A convesrsati:m followed, in which Sir M. W. Ridley, Sir J. Sebright, Mr. Huskisson, Mr. Ellice, Mr. Gordon, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. b. Forster, and Mr. Glad stone, participated, the clause was brought up. Mr. 1115SKISSON objected to the wording of tho clause, and after a few words from the CaAscELLott of the Excuc u.t7l:u it was withdrawn. The !louse then resumed, the Report was brought up, and ordered to be taken into further consideration on Monday. The Bill to be printed. The Lancaster County Courts' Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Tuesday. The other Orders of the Day were disposed of, and the House adjourned at Two o'CLocx. TREATY BETWEE:,N,GRBAT BRITAIN AND THE NETHERLANDS. (Froth a Brussels Paper.) Bilussu.s, MAT' 23.—The Treaty of London concluded on the 17th of March, which was lately presented to the Second Chamber of the States-General, is accompanied by an explanatory Memorial, showing the Bounds end expe diency of it, the entire substance of which we have already published. The following note was delivered by the English Plenipo tentiaries to those of the Netherlands, on the clay on which the Treaty was signed : "On proceeding to the signature of the Treaty which has been agreed upon, the Plenipotentiaries of his Britannic Ma jesty feel a lively satisfaction in expressing the justice which they do to the spirit of good will and liberality manifested by' their Excellencies the Plenipotentiaries of the Netherlands, and their conviction that both parties are equally disposed to exeeitte sincerely and in good faith the stipulations of the Treaty in the sense in which they have been negociated. " The differences which gave rise to the present discussion are of the nature of those which it is difficult to arrange by formal stipulations. Consisting in a great degree of jealousies and suspicions, and occasioned by the acts of the subaltern agents, they can be terminated only by a frank declaration of the intentioa of the Governments themselves, and by a mutual explanation of the principles which guide them. The dis avowal of ,the measures which had retarded the execution of the Convention of the 13th of August. 1814, will have proved to their Excellencies the Plenipotentiaries of the Netherlands the scrupulous exactness with which England always fulfils its engagements. ‘4 The British Plenipotentiaries recollect with real pleasure the solemn disavowal on the part of the Government of the Netherlands, of every project ne aspire at either political supree macy or exclusive trade in the Indian Archipelago. " They readily acknowledge the prompness of the Plenipoten - tinries of the Netherlands to enter into arrangements calculated to encourage the most complete liberty of commerce between the subject of the two Crowns and their respective dependencies in that part of the world. " The Undersigned are authorized to express the entire ad herence of his Britannic Majesty to the enlightened views of his Majesty the King of the Netherlands. " ppreciating the difficulty of suddenly adapting to a long established exc l us ive system the principles of commercial policy which have just been established, the undersigned have been authorized to igree, that the Molucca islands shall be excepted from the general stipulation of a free trade, as the treaty de scribes it. Th ey h ope , however, that since the necessity of this exception is caused only by the difficulty of abolishing at the present moment the mono* of the spice trade, the effects will be strictly confined to that necessity. " The British Plenipotentiaries consider the term Moluccas as applicable to the whole of the Archipelago which is hounded on the west by Celebeii, on the east by New Guinea, and on the south by Timor; but that those three islands are not included in the the exception, which would have been extended toCeram, did not the situation of that island with respect to the two prin cipal cues for the cultivation of spices, Ambeyna and Banda, require a prohibition of traffic during the whole time that it shall be necessary to maintain the monopoly. " The exchanges of territory which have been judged neces sary, in order to avoid all collision of interests, impose on the Plenipotentiaries of his Britannic Majesty the duty of giving and requiring some infbrmation respecting the subjects and allies of England in the island from which it is going to with draw. " A Treaty concluded with British agents in 1819 with the King of Acheen is incompatible with Art. 3 of the present treaty. The British Plenipotentiaries, therefore, promise that the treaty with Acheen shall be reduced as speedily as possible to the terms of a simple arrangement for the hospitable recep tion of British ships and subjects in the port of Acheen. But eta some of the conditions of this treaty (which have been com municated io the Plenipotentiaries of the Netherlands) will be advantageous to the general interests of Europeans settled in the eastern seas, they confidently hope that the Government of the Netherlands will take measures to place those advantages above all violation, and they likewise express their conviction that no hostile measure towards the King of Ache= will he adopted by the new possessors of Port Marlborough. " It is no less the duty of the British Plenipotentiaries to recommend to the kind and paternal protection of the Govern ment of the Netherlands, the natives, and colonists subject to the ancient English factory of Bencolen. " This appeal is the more necessary, as at a period so late as 18113, conventions were made with the native chiefs, in conse quence of which the situation of the natives has experienced essential ameliorations. The compulsory system for the culti vation and supply of pepper has been abolished; encourage ment has been given to the cultivation of rice ; the relations between the agricultural class and the chiefs of the districts have been regulated ; the property of the soil has been ad judged to the latter ; and an end has been put to all inter ference in the details of the internal administration, by re moving from the advanced stations the EuroNan residents, and putting in their place native officers—the object of all which measures was to favour the interests of the inhabitants. " In recommending these interests to the care of the Go vernment of the Netherlands, the undersigned request the Plenipotentiaries of his Majesty the King of the Netherlands to assure their Government that the British Authorities will on their side show particular attention to the inhabitants of Ma lacca and the other possessions of the Netherlands ceded to Great Britain. " In conclusion, the Plenipotentiaries of his Britannic ',Ma jesty congratulate their Excellencies the Plenipotentiaries of the Netherlands on the happy issue of their conferences. They are convinced that by me ans of the arrangement which has just been concluded, the commerce of the two nations will, pros per, and that the Allies will be able to preserve no less entire in Asia than in Europe, the friendship which has so long sub sisted between them. " Now that an end has been put to the disputes which for two centuries have occasionally produced irritation, there can no longer be any rivalry in the East between the Belgiannatioonfslibbetriatlfoprolicy which they v have the e the more solid establishment of Englishti day a and s is _ those principles lemnly recognized in the face of the universe.—The Under signed being," &c. [We shall give, in another Number, the Note of the Pleni potentiaries of the Netherlands, in answer to the above.] PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS. UOtli) OF COMMONS. Jovis, 27" die Maii, 1824. Roans—Buckingham and Towcester—Further time granted for making the Report. Commercial, and Teddington and Eveshatn—Bills reported, to be ingrossed. CITY OF LONDON—Orphans' Fund, Thames Navigation, and Coal Exchange Debts Bills—Petition of Original Bond holders, against, referred to the Committees on the Bills. CaNaL—Bristol and Taunton Bills reported, to be in llu moE—Southwark grossed. I at r no YEMENI' —Brompton-square COMPANY—Leeds Oil Gas LOCAL TAXATION-1)1,11)NR CUSTOMS (Coals and Linens) Bills read a 3d time. NEWFOUNDLAND FISHERIES f and passed. ASSESSED TAXES LAND REVENUE SALE OF STOCK ELSW COALS Dial; ELLE RI ES (Scotland)—Bill reported, to be read a third time on Monday. LANCASTER COUNTY COURTS ) Bills read a second EAST INDIA GOODS time, and corn- COCOA NUTS, &c. n itted. Co snit NATION LAWS REPEAL I Pills read a first time, to he SUPERANNUATION Ft) ND 5 read a second time on Mon day, and to be printed. GRAN J a i; RY PRESENT MEN TS —Bill read a first time, to be read a second time this day. BEER DUTIES BlLL—Petitions from Farnham and Taunton, against, to lie on the table. SILK MAN UFACTI; RE It S WAGES—Petition of Operative Silk Weavers of London, &e., against, to lie on the table—Bill read a second time, and committed. HIDES AND SKIN bi BlLL—Petitions from Butchers of Lewes, in favour ; and from Tanners, &c. of Eye, and Stowmar ket, against, to lie on the table. INst; RANCE BlLL—Petitions of Royal Exchange Assurance Corporation, and of Persons engaged in Insur ance on Ships and Goods at sea, against ; and of Merchants, &c. of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, in favour ; to lie on the table. LEATHER TAX—Petitions of Tanners of Waterford, and In habitants of Little Kimble and Stoke Alandevillo, for the re- peal thereof, to lie on the table. DI ST IL LE lIY LAWS—Petitioil from Aberdeenshire, for a free intercourse i❑ home-made Spirits throughout the United Kingdom, to lie on the table. BilvrEtt TnADE (Ireland) , Billy ordered to be brought in. SLAUGHTERING 1-10I7SES 3 SURVEY AND VALUATION OF ink:LAND—Report brought up ; to lie on the table, and to be printed. 'lhe following Resolutions read : " 1. That it is expedient, from a consideration of the evi dence taken before the Committee, that the Trigonometrical Survey of Ireland should be forthwith vigorously carried into effect. " 2. , That the Chairman be directed to move the House, That an humble Address be presented to his Majesty, that the poard of Ordnance should take adequate measures for early and active proceedings towards the Trigonometrical Survey of Ireland ; assuring his Majesty, that this House will make good the expences of the same.' ORDIMS 'OF THE DAY FOR THIS DAY. 1. Marine Insurance Bill—Second Reading. 2. Register Office Bill—Second Reading. 3. Llnd Tax Redemption Bill—Second Reading. 4. saving Banks Bill—Further Consideration of Report. 5. Transportation of Offenders Bill—Second Reading. 6. New-street (Mary-le.hone) Bill—Committee. 7. Roman Catholic Marriages Bill—Committee. H. Law Expences (Ireland) Bill—Second Reading. 9. Exchequer Court Fees Investment Bill—Committee. 10. Newfoundland Judicature Bill—Second Reading. 11. New Churches Bill—Committee. 13. Parochial Stipends (Scotland) Bill—Committee. 13. Impounding Distresses (Ireland) Bill—Further considera tion of Report. LI. Tenants Relief (Ireland) Bill—Further consideration of Report. 15. Clergy Resi?.ence (Ireland) Bill—Report. 16. Silk Manufacturers Wages Bill—Committee. 17. Juries (Scotland) Bill—Third Reading. 111. New South Wales Bill—Report. 19. - Beer Duties Bill—Third Reading. 20. Charities Inquiry Bill—Report. 21. County Gaols Bill—Further consideration of Report. 22. Salt Duties Regulation Acts—Report!thereupon. 23. Butlerage and Prisagc Act—Report thereupon. 24. Cocoa Nuts, &e. Bill—Committee. 25. Grand Jury Presentments Bill—Second Reading. - - NOTICE OF MOTION FOR THIS DAY. Goulburn—Pill to indemnify certain Magistrates for proceedings against persons using unlawful weights in Ireland. NOTICES GIVEN YESTERDAY. Monday, 111tH/ 31 1. Mr. Brownlow—To present Petition relating to the Roman Catholic Association in Dublin. 2. Mr. Spring Rice—Address on the subject of a new ralua tion of Ireland. Wednesday, June 2. Mr. Brougham—To present Petition from House of Keys, Isle of Mann. Tuesday, June 15. Sir Matthew Ridley—The expalieney of a revision and conso. lidation of the Statutes. PRICE. OII STOCKS THIS D 1. Y AT ONE 0 . 414.0 CK• Bank Stock 3 per Cent. Red. 'ls if 4i South ,ea Stock 3 per Cent. Cons. ... 944 i 4i Old Annuities 3i per Cent. lOOiM New Ditto Old 10410 1 Ex. Bills, £1000...33 13 2 6 4 per Cent. {Assented looa,} Ditto 5OO New lo7ii Ditto Small Bank Long Ann. — Bank toe Act. Imp. 3 per Cents. ' — India tier Arct. India Stock ............ 296 i 296 Cons. for July 95334 PRICES OF FOREIGN FUNDS, AT ONE O'CLOCK. Austrian lids, 5 per cent. 96 Prussian, 5 per cent. Scrip Ditto New Milian, lids, 6 per ct.... 80 79i 11 ussian , New, 5 per ct. ... 96 Colombian lids. 6 per ct. 85.0 Spanish 1821, sper ct. .---Scrip ig pin. Danish, 5 per cent. Greek Scrip Mexican Scrip 43i pm. Equitable Loan ili Neapolitan, 5 per cent. ... --Irish Ditto Peruvian Scrip ......... Portuguese Bonds Scrip Manchester Ditto French Rentes ----- Scrip MAILS. ARRIVED. I Holland 1 Flanders 0 Hamburgh 0 Frencli. Dor -1 Guernsey and Jersey 1 Lisbon 1 Gotten burgh 1 America. N BRIDGE TO-MORROW, j Evening, 2 minutes after 3. VOREIGN H 1011 WATER AT LONDO Nlorning, 33 minuttes after 2. Tffl SUN. SOLEII QUIS DICERE FALSUM AUDISAT ? LONDON, FRIDAY, MAY 28, 1224. We have seen in different papers an accoun of a Commissioner having arrived by the las Lisbon packet, to arrange the difference exis ing between Portugal and the Brazils. We beg to assure our Readers and the Public, that no such person has arrived in this country. The King of PORTUGAL has authorised his Repre. sentative here to negociate with the Brazilian Commissioner, Gen. BItANT, for a " reconci dice between the two countries. We are also assured that this important arranzemvnt is under he friendly auspices of GREAT BRITAIN and AUSTRIA, who are jointly represented, on this occasion s by M. de NEwMANN, Charge d'Affairel Of AUSTRIA. We have the best authority, and feel great plea sure in informing our readers, that the Revenue has so much improved, from the sth day of April last, that the surplus (it is not doubted) will, to the sth day of July next, not only cover the amount of Taxes reduced by Government, but amount to 200,0001. above the sum received in the corresponding quarter of last year. We take the subjoined additional extracts from the Elate, ruceived yesterday by Express, hut at too late an hour to admit of our insertio?, the whole of the important intelligence contained in it. We, however, enumerated the additional documents which We now submit to our Readers. It is most remarkable that neither the Istladrid nor the Paris accounts furnish 1.13 with a siagular . particular of ►chat passed at Lisbon between tlie 6th and the 10th instant,—a circutnitance which induces us to believe that the events of the inter vening three or four days will be found, w h.e,l they are known, to reflect no little lustre on the influence of Great Britain in the measures which hare resulted in the preservation of the Portu guese Monarchy. We know that accounts were received in Paris some days since from Lisbon to the Bth instant ; and as the Spanish Ambas sador at the Court of Portugal must have traus' nutted to his Government all the particulars of the recent movement, as %yell as the intelligence which was published in the Madrid Gazelle, it is evident that some very powerful motive must exist, which has led the Cabinets both of Paris and Madrid to observe profound silence on the interesting occurences of the 7th, Bth, 9th, and 10th inst. ( From the Etnile of Wednesday.) The Supplement of the Lisbon Gazette of the 11th contain!) the following Note : " Although the fidelity of the Portuguese army to its august Sovereign is universally known, we feel pleasure in publishing. on this occasion, the following protestations which the militari corps of this capital have addressed to the King our Lor d. They furnish the Monarch, the nation, and the whole w orld, with a new and solemn testimony of the sincere and loyal feel ings of the army." (Here follow the protestations of the 12th re g iment of Co valry, the 16th, 23d, and 24th regiments of Infantry, and the 7th regiment of Chassesirs.) The Minister of War has published the following order :-- " His Majesty's pleasure is, that all officers who, in conse quence of the arbitrary acts which have just occurred, have ' been separated from the corps to which they belong, shall g 9 immediately and resume their appointments. His Majesty Will make known, by further arrangements, what it shall appear t. ° him the merits of all who have the honour to be attached to his service demand. _ _ " On board the Windsor Castle, May 10, 1024." Another order of the same day is thus conceived : " The good of his Majesty's service, and the confitle,„ which officers composing the army o ug ht t o inspire, requite immediate dismissal of all those who, by their affirmations to certain secret clubs and societies, and their attachment to prim' ciples contrary to the system which happily governs us, are an object of scandal to the public, and were i n part cause . of d l6 unhappy events which have just passed. " In consequence, the King, our Lord, ordains that his 31i nister of War shall hnmediately propose seven General Officer s ' to inquire and search out those officers who are affiliated t° secret societies, and whom other circumstances may render tto" worthy of confidence." To-day (the I Ith) the Marquis of Palmella has notified Ili following to Don .Joachim Pedro Lopez : " The King orders me to reprimand you very severely r ° the subject of the formal disobedience of which you have bee guilty in the execution of the orders which you received from or , in writing, relative to editing of the Lisbon Gazette, by ine er ` ing in the Gazette of the Ist inst. not only your own obserel: tions, but even official documents, without waiting for th e. ' being transmitted from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in coo: tempt of your formal instructions. His Majesty enjoins yo' to conform scrupulously to them, failing which you will be it''' . mediately dismissed from your employment of head of the S ° ' cretary of State's office." The Etoile says that a Supplement to the Madrid GazetM ° the 20th contains the Decree of Amnesty. The Etoile ti°*;, not give it at length, hut mentions twelve exceptions, as r j most remarkable provisions, The exceptions are as follows: 1. The principal authors of the military revolt of Las Cabe' zas, time Isle of Leon, Corunna, Saragossa, Oviedo, and Bar° . lona, where the Constitution of Cadiz was proclaimed before tb s royal decree of the 7th of March. 2. The principal authors of the conspiracy at Madrid, at tr, beginning of March, 1820, for the purpose of .wresting tli King the above-mentioned decree. 3. The military Chiefs who took part in the revolt of 0000 i• and particularly Lieutenant-Gen. Henry O'Donnel, Count Abisbal. 11 0 4. The principal authors of the measure which compelle d , he Majesty to establish the Provisional Junta mentioned in decree of the 9th March, and the individuals who composed it, 5. Those who made similar propositions in secret societie s, who still adhere to these unions since the abolition of the reY ° ' lutionary regime. 6. Those who, during the Constitutional regime, signed it authorized the dethronement of the King, the suspension of lOs authority, or the nomination of a Regency, or that his Majesti t and the Princes of his family should be brought in judgmeo, before the Cortes, or any other tribunal; and finally, the Judg e ' who dictated decrees for that object. 7. The writers who have attached the Catholic religion. t 8. The Judges who condemned General Elio and Lieute aan Giorffieu. of 9. "" - -eins of the C V' id the BishoP V' J. The assassins of the Canon . innesa an_ 'kb, and of the prisoners at. Granada and Corunna. 10. The Chiefs of the Guerillas who have taken arms i nce the entry of the French army. 11. The European Spaniards who signed the convention wig chided at Mexico between the Viceroy O'Donoju and Aug st Iturbide. 12. The Deputies of the Cortes, who, on the 12th of J 10 1 e 1 ; 1823, voted the dethronement of the King, and the es tabli , ' w , went of a Itegency ; the Regents who were a pp o i n t e d, and t General commanding the troops who conducted his .tilt testy Cadiz. , c, A special article concerns the individuals who, being E-'%c' t d ' e ci ed from the benefit of the amnesty in on e res p ec t, a re ineln is in it by capitulations • granted by the French Generals. only permitted to such individuals to reside in Spain, on c o c• dition of their appearing before the tribunals, to be tried cording to law. CHAMBER OF PEERS. BULLETIN OF THE 0 4 . r II OF MAY. twjit The Order of the D a y was t h e di scuss i o n of the project 0 , for the reduction of the routes. Before the opening of the u.oli cussion, the Mi n i s t er o f Finance roe to give some explaa nt %l. uon a note f urn i s h e d to t h e C omm i ss i on , w hich seemed to 0 , dicate, on the part of the body of bankers, their intention to c l) , sent to modify the contract signed by them, so as to leave to holders of in scr ipti o n s o f th e least value, and amounting ali v e forty millions of rentes, the enjoyment of their rentes at e ye per cent. until the 22d of flared, 1829. In the sequel of t h is explanations, the Minister read a letter from Messrs. Flue, Baring, and Rothschild, whose object it was to forroa'l& disavow the note of which he had been speaking , and froi which it results that the proposition contained in this note vir, be definitively much more profitable to the bankers than to tS, c annuitants. This letter also gave information of f our of to articles of the contract signed by the bankers. ti 4 The Duke of Levis, lieperter of the Commissi o n , and t A9tiiega Itochei 20 1 ::,11 oi . 51 txth a ' 4 . 10, P app ba to , this t . „„;,