The Sun. — London, England, 1831-02-22 00:00:00

included chapelries, in which were two churches, but .of the tithes, two-thirds were appropriated to the Preben- Aary of St. Patrick's. Of the 1,6001., oce thousand pounds was appropriated to the Prebend, so that what re mained was stated even at too high a rate. The other two parishes could not be united by themselves, as Wick low was situated between them. Lord FARNHAM said the Noble Baron was entirely 'misled when he s a id that there was no such parish as the union of Wicklow; and when the Most Rev. Prelate was to make his report he took the very best means in hi• power to ascertain the true value, and, instead of under stating, lie overstated that value. The union of Wick low comprised the Prebendary of Wicklow, consisting of four chapelries, to which no cure of souls wee attached. To this the rectorial tithes were annexed, and the tithes of one of the chapelries went to the support of a vicarage in Down, and the remaining portion of the tithes (e . Wicklow, and those of the other two parishes mentioned, were alone the subjects on which the Most Rev. Prelate had to report, and he took the best method to ascertain the value. This portion of the livings had been held by the Rev. Mr. Daltry for forty years, and during the last fourteen tears, before the vacancy occurred, it had been, under sequestration. The sequestrator was paid by a per centage on the receipts, which hr, therefore, had an inte rest in advancing to the highest sum. There could be no person, therefore, better acquainted with the value of the living than the sequestrator who had held it for fourteen years. It was not necessary, therefore, that the Arch, bishop should employ a surveyor to ascertain the value of the living. Who would be better qualified than the sequestrator? And then was the islost Ilex. Prelate to apply to the parishioners to ascertain the value'.'' They were not the most likely, perhaps, to tell hint the real value. The Most Rev. Prelate had adopted the best anode he could to ascertain the value, by taking it from the return made by the sequestrator, and he had that return in his opinion. Speaking in round numbers, he found that 2,250/, was the sum demanded for the whole of the union, but a composition of 1,6001. was accepted. Of this sum 1,0001. went to the Prebend, and the amount remaining for the Vicarage and the other two parishes tees 600/. The incumbrances on this were, first 10/, per cent. or 601. a year, to the collector; and 100/. a year to each of the four curates—making 460/. a year; so that the remaining profits were no more than 140/. a year. This was the simple state of the facts, and the plain statement of the case completely upset the misrepresentations of the Noble Baron. Certainly no case for censure had been made out against the Most Rev. Prelate. Before he concluded, lie could not help adverting to one circumstance, which, although not bearing directly on the point now under con sideration, had certainly some connection with it. He could not help looking at the present case in connection with the attacks made, both in this country and in Ire land, but particularly in the latter, on the property of the church. There was a system of attack adopted, in the hope to accomplish the subversion in that way of the Church Establishment, since it could not be accomplished in any other way. In this country the attack was carried on by speeches, publications, and libels. But in Ireland there wee a conspiracy to subvert church property by vio lence and intimidation, which, if not effectually checked, would end in the total ruin of the property of the church, boils there and here. That there was such a conspiracy in Ireland, be h,d documents to show. He had affidavits made on oath to that effect ; and if called on to prove his case, he was ready to do so. He believed that all the documents were in the bands of the Irish Go vernment, and the Noble Lord (111elbourne) opposite could set him right if lie was wrong. It related to some circumstances which took place in parishes in Kilkenny and Carlow. In one of these parishes the incumbent had made a composition for his tithes so much to the satisfac tion of the parishioners, that they paid them with the ut most cheerfulness and satisfaction, and without being in arrear, for several years up to the commencement of the last six months, when they were instigated to resist the payment of this very moderate compositioo. One of the most formidable features of this system was, that it was led by Roman Catholic priests. The incumbent of the pa rish of Gray, in the county of Kilkenny, had compound e d with his parishioners for 900/. a year for his tithes for seven years. At the end of that period several of the prin• cipal farmers proposed 7201., and to this he acceded, and the Bishop thought it so far under value that he had a dif ficulty in allowing it. The composition had been paid in the most cheerful manner till lately. Unfortunately a priest, whom he know--for he had been for some time in a situation not far from his residence—came to the parish of Gray ; he was a clever man, a near relation of Dr, Doyle, and promoted by his influence: This Mr. Doyle, at a Sunday meeting, composed of 3,000 persons, ha rangued them on the subject of the Rev. Mr. Black's tithes, and told the lehourers, acct sing to the of which he hail in his hand, that tithes were a great griev • ante, and that if they could get no redress otherwise, they ought to right themselves. At another meeting, in Novem ber last, also on a Sunday, lie addressed an assembly of people respecting the tithes, in the most violent and inflammatory language—called on them to reuse to pay them and told them, that if their cattle should be distrained, they ought to be present at the sale, and see who purchased the cattle, and hunt them out of the parish. Several called out that they would attend, and with sticks too. The deponent said that there were 1,000 persons then present, and that he had no doubt that the object of the priest was to excite the multitude to violence, and a breach of the peace. Then this same Martin Doyle came to a parish in Carlow, in his neighbourhood, where the hssee of the tithes had distrained some cattle. A dinner was given by certain Roman Catholics of the parish to Mr. Doyle, where the subject of tithes was again taken up, and the result was, that a bull-baiting was appointed to be ex hibited at the same place where the cattle were to he sold. The lessee, however, did not venture to proceed with the sale, and the expected riot did not happen. Lord TEYNHAM thought it irregular thus to accuse the Roman Catholic priests, when they had no opportunity to make their defence. Lord FARNHAM proceeded to state other similar out rages in regard to the tithes of the Rev. Thomas Vigor and the Rev. Mr. Barnes in December last. The affidavits stated that the priests excited the multitude to excesses, in order to prevent the collection of the tithes, and that they were also instigated by a half-pay officer of the 4th Dra goons; and they all concurred in the allegation that not a farthing of tithe had been lately collected in that part of the country. A person of the name of Shiel—not the Mr. Spiel generally known—had told an assembled multitude, that if the tithe system remained two years longer, he would pay neither tithe, rent, nor taxes; and the refusal to pay rent would naturally be the next step. Lord MELBOURNE could not go the length of the Noble Lord (Farnham) in supposing that there was a systematic conspiracy against the payment of tithes; but the feelings of irritation and bitterness with which the subject was treated here, and the violence with which it was treated in Ireland, did adammish them all to act with temper, and to remove abuses where they really existed. If the Noble Lord had apprised him befitrehand that he in tended to mention these instances of excess, he would have been better prepared. .These matters had taken place in November and December last, and he had some recollection of having seen the documents. The Earl of WICKLOW said, that among the many improvements at present going on in Ireland—and many they wanted still—the most important was the great change which had taken place in the conduct of the clergy of the Established Church. He believed that there woe not at the present moment, in any country of the world, a inure zealous, moral, or efficient body of religious teachers, and he was satisfied that it was their most earnest endeavour, as well as their greatest pleasure, to promote the well-being and happiness of those entrusted to their care. The Noble Baron (King), who had so long shown his affection fur the Church of England, had, from some recent inquiries, thought it better to transfer his attention to the chore!' of Ireland.—(Hear.) The Earl of DARNLEY was glad that the motion oF the Noble Baron had been brought forward, as he con sidered it a mere preparation for the more comprehensive and extended inquiry into the state of the whole church of Ireland, which could not be much longer delayed. Lord TEYNHAM defended the Clergymen of both churches, Catholics as well as Prot-stants, from some of the imputations which had been too thoughtlessly cast against them. The Duke of 'NORTHUMBERLAND felt it his duty to say, that the I'rivy Council had -not determined the matter, except upo n very lengthened inquiries; and, hold in the situation lie then held, lie now felt it his duty to say so.— (Ile:ir, hear.)--tie, for one, had not the slightest ot!jection to the productio n of tile papers which the Noble Baron required. Lord KING, in reply, said the Privy Council might have been imposed on us well as others. A memorial would soon be pre,ent,d to them. The motion was then agreed to. TRADE WITH PORTUGAL. ow la t e Lord STRANGFORD said, that as it Nl , at hum - (near eight o'clo ck ) , p erha p s it would e i convenient to the Noble Lords oppos:tc if he postponed his motion. --(Cries of " Go on.") Earl GREY said his Noble Friend, the Secretary for the Colonies, had come down to the House for the express purpose of hearing the speech of tl:e Noble Lord, and they had uo desire to Ltve it postponed. Lord STRANGFORD then proceeded to move for the papers, of which he had given notice, relative to our coin tnercial relations with Portugal. It was not necessary for him to trouble their Lordships with a history of the Me thuen treaty, which gave, as their Lordships knew, cer tain advantages to the manufactures of this co untry on their admission into Portugal, as a return for correspond.. ing advantages given by this country in the admission of the wines of Portugal at a lower scale of duties than the wines of other countries. He did not then intend to dis cuss the policy or impoticy of the treaty. All he wished to show was that, up to a certain period, either party was at liberty to put an end to it when they thought proper ; but that, atter that time, the NS\ er to put an end to the terms of the treaty were limited and circumscribed be cer tain regulations and necessities for notice, which he hoped that the Government of this country had not in the present instance disregarded; because it would he a violation of national faith, a proof of disrespect to sew ancient ally, and of disregard to our re l at i ons w i t h a S tate which did not possess the ability to resist it. Their Lordships were p r ob a bl y not aware t h at t h e attempts to introduce a recip roca l system o f trade were not new in this . country. France had been before selected for an ex pertinent of the same description as that about to he tried. At the close of the brilliant campaigns of Marlborough, too treaties were laid before the louse of Commons---one of peace and the other of commerce—in which it was proposed to take the duties off French wines for two months, so as to break in by a side wind on the Methuen treaty. Although this plan was supported by the great grandfather of the Nettle Lord opposite him (King), and by the ancestor of his Noble Friend near him (Stanhope), and by several other men of eminence in those days, it was decidedly rejected, and thus ended the first attempt to make an inroad on the Methuen treaty ; the opponents of the measure declaring one and all that the preservation of the rents and support of the woollens of England was of much greater importance than the supply of French wines, however agreeable they might prove to the palate. It was a fact well known end established, that France, under whatever form of Government, was a commercial rival of this country, who never could be brought to enter Into treaties of reciprocal advantage which could by any possibility advance the trade or manufactures of Eng land. It had been always so under the Bourbons, and how could they suppose it would he less so now under France, governed as it is at present? Mr. Pitt, in 1787, again attempted to invade the principle of the Methuen treaty, by laying an Equal tax on the wines of Portugal and of France. He (Lord Strangford) con fessed he exercised a great deal of self-denial in refrain ing from reading to their Lordships the admirable speeches delivered net that occasion, by those who contended with so much eloquence that we should not flatter a rival at the expense of an ally. He refrained, however, from this task, although, hosnener feeble the extracts from Fox and Grey would fall from him, compared with the effect pro duced by their delivery, they would supersede all argu ments that could be advanced on the subject; and would merely content himself by observing, that although Mr. Pitt carried this proposition, as he had carried many others, the Methuen treaty was, shortly afterwards, as their Lordships well knew, brought back to its original force. From this until 1810 the Methuen treaty re mained untouched ; and in that year a new treaty was concluded, in a clause of which the Methuen treaty was noticed, and it Was stipulated that the same system of duties should be preserved for fifteen years longer, and that for the sake of avoiding all inconvenience between the parties, notice must he given by either party of their in tention to abandon the terms of that treaty, in order that measure, might be taken for a joint revision of the prin- ciple on which it was founded ; it being understood at the same time, that if any suspension of the provisions of the treaty took place on either side, due notice of the in tention to make such suspension was to be given to the other side ) in order that they may have :time to enter on the stipulates! revision. Now he wished to know, for the satisfaction of the country, whether the Government had given this notice ? because he thought it quite impossible that they could have refrained from doing so with the knowletlee possessed of the prospective nature of the trade which the trerchants of this country carried on with Por tugal, and of the state of distress which they must bring on some, and the state of jeopardy in which they must place all connected with that trade, if its dealings were broken in open without due notice to those engaged in it. He was sure, indeed, that at the moment when the Go vernment of this country was pressing with the utmost strictness on Portugal the treaties she had with England, that the Government would net exhibit the bad faith and the injustice of violating the national faith, and seeking to get rid of treaties equally binding on us ; and lie was also sure, that the Government would not put an end to those treaties, which must totally alienate the effectioas of our ancient ally, without taking precautions for the preserve t. on of the property of British subjects, and for allaying the apprehensions of those connected with the commerce of that country. The Noble Lord concluded by declaring that he asked these questions without the slightest inten tion to embarrass the movements or negeciations of the Government. He felt too strongly the difficulties of their present position. Lord GODERICH trusted that he should he able to show that the Government had been guilty of no breach of faith. It was true that we had not given Portugal no tice, and the Noble Lord (Strangford) said that he hoped the Ministers would be able to satisfy him, to satisfy their Lordships, and to satisfy the country, that they had not violated any treaty, and had acted in strict conformity to the treaties that were in existence, and that Portugal had received no cause to complain of our injustice. This was what he meant to attempt. The Noble Lord had stated the treaties by which they were bound ; they were, first, the treaty of Methuen, signed in 1703 ; and, secondly, the treaty of February, 1810, concluded by the Noble Lord himself. The treaty of 1703 had not been quite correctly quoted by the Noble Lord, lie had ingeniously left out that part of the treaty on which the major part of his (Lord Goderich's) case depended. His Lordship here read the first article, and dwelt emphatically on the latter pelt ; which stated, that if there should be any abatement of the advantages given to Portugal by the treaty—that Government should receive—notice? No ; but that " it should be lawful for the Government of Portugal to pro hibit the woollens of England." That was a provision made in the treaty, by which Portugal might right her self, should we r.ot choose to act upon those conditions implied in the treaty. The treaty was a concession mad . e . by Portugal to England under certain conditions , and it England did not observe the conditions, Portugal got back her rights. There was not a word about notice, and the Noble Lord could not argue from that any want of good faith by our not giving notice of our intention to depart from the treaty of Methuen. • He should they pro ceed to show that there was no obligation to give notice imposed on us by the treaty' of 1810. That treaty began in a remarkable way, which the Noble Lord had omitted. The thirty-third article of that treaty contained a re ference to a notice, but it was impossible not to per ceive that the notice there required did not refer to the Methuen treaty, but to the other treaty then con eluded. The second article of that treaty stated, that the high contracting parties would proceed to a revision of all former treaties between Portugal and England, and then the parties proceeded to revise the treaties. His Lordship referred particularly to the 32d and 33d articles, which contained the allusion to the notice, and contended that these articles related only to the treaties then revised and concluded, and not to the Methuen treaty. The treaty was to be perpetual, but the parties were to be allowed to revise it at the end of fifteen years. He contended that unless the Noble Lord could being the treaty of Methuen under the operation of that article, which said that at the expiration of fifteen years the parties should revise the treaty—unless the Noble Lord could show that by that article we were bound to give notice to Portugal of our in tention to equalize the duties on French and Portuguese wines, he could not make out any breach of faith.— ( Hear, hear.) —The whole subject was one which had not been altogether withdrawn front discussion between the Government of this country and that of Portugal. The Noble Lord argued as if the Methuen treaty had been one of unmixed advantage to this country—as if it had ope rated most beneficially, and been the source of reciprocal advantage and of harmony to both countries, and as if Portugal had gone great lengths in making concessions to us, which she had denied to other Powers, and which we were bound to repay. Had the Noble Lord then never heard of the Oporto Wine Company ?—(Hear.)—Was that the first night that his Lordship had heard of its effects? He could not suppose that the Noble Lord h a d heard of that Company for the first time that night, or et the remonstronces made against it by the British Govern ment. It was established, he believed, in 1750, and it was one of the most detestable monopolies which ever de stroyed the commerce of the coun tr y that was afflicted with it, and that ever injured the ti l ade of all the countries connected with it. The Company was established in disre gard c.f the Methuen treaty. The British Government re monstrated, and considered the establishment of that Com puny by the Portuguese Government as done in violation of our rights. It blew up the very foundation on which the Methuen treaty rested. In the year 1757 a strong representation was made to the Portuguese Govern. went against that Company ; it was described as doing mischief to the trade of both countries, and the Govern merit spoke as if th e existence of that Company were in compatible with the Methuen treaty. The treaty' of 1810 was to be revised is 15 years but in 1813, or only three years after Wards, and twelve years before the period fixed for giving notice that we meant to de away with that treaty in 1812, the Secretary of State for Foreig Affairs had thought it necessary to direct a strong remon strance to be made to the Court of Brazils, which repre sented that monopoly as a violation of the treaty of Me thuen, and aka remonstrated against other grievances. He was at that time President of the Board of Trade, and knew that our merchants were so situated as to justify that remonstrance. Ills Lordship then quoted the rentoilstraiwe as addressed by the English Ambassador at the Court of Brazils, which stated that, if the Court of Brazils did not redress the grievances complained of, Great Britain should think herself justified in admitting the wines of other fo reign nations into bet consumption. This threat, his Lordship contended, applied to the wines of France, not to those of Sicily, Spain, or TeneriffZa It was perfectly justi fiable then, he contended, by what was there said, that we should now, it we please, admit the French wines: The Minister who directA that declaration or threa':, to be Made, was Lord Londonderry ; and the Noble Lord, he was sure, would not impute to him any violation of the national The declaration was made too, when the troops o that country (Portugal) united with the trooas of cur coun try, under the command of th e ii l / 4 1 . 0b1e Duke opposite, were planting the standard of victory on the soil of France. The country was entitled to do this. He had stated the natur e of the remonstrance—hehad mentioned the Statesman by whom it was thought necessary, and the circumstances under which it was made; and he had only to add, that the Am bassador who made this declaration sat there—(Hear, hear)—and was the Noble Lord, who now made the charge against the Government for determining to take that step which he had threatened.---(Lord Strangford asked the date of the remonstrance, and was answered, 1813.) It was then stated that if the monopoly were not abated, the Government would take strong steps. He had laboured to show that there was no foundation for the charge of the Noble Lord, who had imputed to the Government a viola tion of the national faith. In conclusion, the Noble Vis count stated, that he had no objection to make to the mo tion of the Noble Lord, except to the last part, which re lated to the instructions sent to the Commander of his Majesty's ships at Lisbon. It was unusual to grant such papers, and that part of the Noble Lord's motion, there fore, lie must oppose. There was another part of it— that relating to the information given to British nier. I chants—which he would not oppose ; hut the return to it would be nil, for it was plain that the Government, • when it was about to make financial changes, could not give warning to any of the parties who might be interested, ti.l the changes were brought forward in a regular wry. Lord ELLENBOROUGH had looked at the treaty, and did not agree with the interpretation put upon it by I.is Noble Friend who spoke last. He thought his other Noble Friend had not been fairly dealt with, and that it was not possible to doubt that the Methuen treaty was included in the treaty of 1810. If the Methuen treaty were a part of the treaty of 1810, he could not doubt that a notice was required. He was unwilling to enter into the commercial part of the question, but he could not avoid saying a few words. The advantage, if any, from the change must lie considerable. Portugal might resolve to prohibit our woollens—arid though the consumption of Portugal was not great—not amounting, be be lieved, to more than 300,0001 —yet, in the present state of our manufactures, and particularly in the present state of our woollen manufacture, he did not think it wise to cast that away. It was admitted that the whole benefit gained to the revenue by the pro posed change in the duty on wines was only 240,0001. , but it was clear that no Cape wine could be imported under the new duty, by which, as we understood the Noble Lord, 112,750/. would be lost. His Lordship ob jected also to the policy of increasing the duties on Portu guguese wines, the consumption of which was decreasing. It showed by the effects of the reduction of the duty in 1825, of 89 per cent. on all wines, by which the con sumption of French wines was increased 90 per cent., while the consumption of other wines was increased only 424 per cent., that there was no chance of any increase of the consumption of Portuguese wines by the increase of duty. He observed that the consumption of wine generally had fallen off last year four hundred gallons. He admitted that some additional revenue might be got from the duty on French wines ; but he contended,. on the whole, that the advantages of the alteration would not answer the ex pectations of its author. In conclusion, the Noble Lord said, that the alteration therefore would be made without any object, while it violated the treaty ; and if it was in•• cuinbent on States to preserve treaties concluded between equal powers, it was much more incumbent on strong Powers to preserve inviolate their faith with weak Powers. The LORD CHANCELLOR was called upon as a lawyer to interpret the treaties on the laws of nations, and their Lordships were called on to put on the garb of lawyers, or, at least, as lawyers to examine these treaties; and it was because he could not find the shadow of a shade of a violation of those treaties that he had given his sup port to his Noble Friend, and, for one, was a willing party to propose a new arrangement to Parliament. Asa ques tion of notice and strict form had come before their Lord ships, he must remind them that they were then discuss ing, for the second time, the supposed budget of the Chan cellor of the Exchequer—they were acting on rumours of what was not then proposed, and it would be better and more consistent with the usual course of proceedings to wait till the subject was brought regularly belore them by justice, they Bill. If they came to examine the question of they must inquire into h o w n otice was to be given, and what was to he consider e d d ue notice; though, for his part, he denied altogether th e n ece s s ity of giving notice, the article which spoke of notice being vague and indeter minate. He must apologize to his Noble Friend the late Secretary of State (Lord Goderich) for taking up the parts of the argument which he had so ably treated ; but perhaps his Noble Friend had been so much occu pied with the commercial part of the question, that some of the legal part had escaped his attention. He would next direct himself to the economical and commercial part of the subject ; and asked what was the essence of the Methuen treaty ? Net that England should, at all times, give an advantage to the wines of Portugal —not that England should not make the wines of Portugal pay as high a duty as those of France ; but that, so long as we thought fit to give an advantage to tie wines of Portugal, so long should our woollens be admitted into Portugal ; and that, so soon as England should thick proper to alter this unalterable treaty (which, however, it was provided should be alterable) so soon were we to stiffer the penalty of losing the market fur our woollens in Portugal. But then there was the 26th Article of the Treaty, which they were told by the Noble Earl, nobody but the Noble Lord could construe.—(llear, and laughter.)—Now, if any lawyer, or any body wearing the garb of a lawyer—or even a layman—had, in the presence of his late venerable and Learned Friend (the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench), propounded so monstrous a proposition, as that no Member of Parliament was to understand a ex cept the Member who had brought it in ; or that no-. body could understand a treaty, except the High Con tracting Parties that were bound by it ; or the Plenipo tentiaries that had concocted it ; or the Ambassadors Extraordinary, or the Envoys Extraordinary, or the Secretaries of Legation, or the Clerks of Legation who had signed it—he could figure to himself the utter in dignation wherewith that Learned and distinguished Person would have heard that proposition. But if his departed friend could be made aware that a pro position so strange, so monstrous, had been advanced by his own seed—in his own House, of which he was so distinguished an ornament—in the great Court of Appeal—the highest Court of the realm, in which the Noble Members sat as Judges—in which the advancer of the doctrine was himself a Judge—be could not paint in his mind anything like the indignation of the late Lord Ellenborough, since never could he suppose circumstances under which the Noble Lord could be induced to believe in the possibility of such a consummation.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.)—Tlterefore he begged once and again to protest against the doctrine. That the Noble Lord (Strangford) was the true person to go to, to construe that treaty, he did not repudiate ; but he paused before he could accede to it. His only exception was—not to say' lie (Lord Strangford) was not the person, but simply to object to his monopoly in the construing of this article. He (Lord B.) claimed his fair share of it as a lawyer and a Member of the House, just as strongly and as pertina ciously as if his name had been signed at the bottom of the treaty beside that of his Noble Friend.—(Hear.) —Now , in the first five-and-twenty articles there was a great change effected in the relations of the two countries, and a regular code of laws laid down, which extended over a vast surface of our commercial concerns. The twenty• sixth had reference to all fotmer treaties, declaring what it was advisable to suppress, and what it was proper to yi:1 1 ednid(ile,ronsrottatungmteenasgne Portuguese.—(Hear, g v ei a : l rt:l t ai l an t the Noble N a soliadb,el,egohfL. ref continue. And now, what was the force of the expres• (p 4 page—namely, e ;a — n i (Strangford) d: ) 1 But still he was not altogether ignorant of it, and there fore, when the Noble Lord took a word out of that side, and put it into the other—i n t o th e E ng li s h ( a w ord, of the omission of which he had complained).—he was entitled to offer an opinion. Now he thought the admis sion of that word aided him. He did not object to the Portuguese interpolation—(A laugh) —for what followed? According to the natural and ordinary functions of that word, it was opposed to what had preceded-it. And ad mitting that this poiats at the Methuen treaty, as it hat been explained, what had they to read from that ? (The Noble Lord then read the article which declared that the Portuguese wines should continue to be received at an ad vantage in England, and our woollens to be introduced into Portugal, and that the whole system respecting these articles should remain unaltered for the present.) Well, then, the argument simply wan, that so long as we choose to take the Portuguese wines, so long might we continue to have a market for our woollens; but that if we chose to give up their Wines, or whenever we did do so. it should be on the penalty of forfeiting the introduction of our woollens into 'Portugal. The alterableness, it would be observed, was provided for by the Methuen treaty, since it positively declared, that if we abandoned the wines, we should forfeit the introduction of our woollens. And what then did the twenty-sixth article say? That this arrangement should remain unaltered, or, in other words, that, for the present, the whole Methuen treaty shotalti remain unaltered. And was it, he asked, no part of that treaty that we might, if we pleased, increase the tax upon Portugusese wines upon the penalty of thereby losing the market for our woollens. Yet the Noble Lord supported the opinion that the treaty was ineilterable—an opinion which no one dreamt of advancing in 1703, or afterwards, until he produced the thirty-third article in 1810. This article was to the effect, that the Poi tuguese were to have fifteen years' notice of an altera tion in the arrangement (though all that was said at first was " for the present") ; and, moreover, that there should be no alteration without due notice. Now, put the case as if it were not a treaty signed for the high contracting parties by their Ministers Plenipotentiary, Ambassadors, or Envoys Extraordinary, with all the solemnities belonging to a treaty—but simply as an ordinary proceeding in their Lordship' every-day life—a contract of the landlord with his tenant ; and then let them see how any man would re ceive his tenant, or how he (Lord B. ) representing the steward of one of their Lordships, would receive him, if he came and said that he (the steward) was a faithless man, because, having given him his land at a rate of, say 1001. a year, to be held from day to day, the rent to remain unaltered for the present—how would he receive that tenant if he c ime twenty-one years after to accuse him of a breach of faith for having altered his rent ? He might represent that twenty-one years was a long " for the present ;" but still the tenant, not content with this, claimed fifteen years' notice. But was this the bargain ? When the declaration was, the arrangement should be unaltered for the present, they construed it into a period of 15 years, although they were enabled by the terms of the treaty itself to abandon the Portuguese wines whenever they fancied, simply on the penalty of losing their market for woollens. Ile really was ashamed to delay their Lordships so long upon a question so obvious. The Noble Lord who introduced this matter had earnestly declared that the bias of his mind was not in the least to create embarrassment to the Government. His Noble Friend said he would not embarrass the Government, and he did not break his promise. —( Laughter. ) It was a customary thing for Noble Lords and Hon. Gentlemen to make such professions and promises, when they were at the same time mind, d to do the Government all the mischief in their power, and to occasion them all possible embarrassment— (Laughter)—but his Noble Friend had been as good as his word—(Laughter)—or indeed he had been a great deal better—(Lauglrer)—for he did not say or do anything to embarrass the Government in the least.—(Hear, and laughter.)—He believed that his Noble Friend, although using a customary phrase, was perfectly sincere in the declaration it embodied ; anti even if he originally had the intention of wandering from this pledge, his natural good faith overcame him, and he rigidly adhered to it, so that lie did consequently sit down without embarrass• in;; the Government in the slightest degree.—(Hear, and laughter.)—He would now himself make a promise, that, like the other to which he alluded, was as often broken as made. He would net trouble their Lordships with many words.—(Laughter.)—Having sat there since ten o'clock that morning, he was something in the sane predicament with his Noble Friend. If he wished to break his promise he was hardly capable of doing so.— (Hear, and laughter.)—He could not, however, pass over what had been said by the Noble Lord (Ellenborough), touching economy, and our commercial interests, and this without any notice. First, however, let him remark, that the other Noble Lord had advised the maintenance of old arrangements as well as a matter of policy as for the com mercial advantages. And in advocating these principles himself, his Noble Friend had quoted the great authorities of Mr. Fox, anti (as we understood) the Noble Lord at the bead of the Government ; and speaking of the greater effect of their splendid oratory as measured with his own, compered it to that produced upon the Rhodiana, by the oration of Demosthenes, when read by his great rival.— [The Noble Lord then proceeded to quote from the follow ing passage as nearly as his memory enabled him. We mention this because his Lordship changed the expressions in several instances.]—(Eschines.) " Rogatua a Rhodiis legisse fertur orationem illam egregiam, quam in Ctesi phontem contra Demosthenem dixerat : qua perlecta peti turn eat ab eo postridie, ut legeret illam etiam, qua erat contra a Demosthene pro Ctesiphonte edits : quam cum suavissima, et maxima voce legisset, admirantibus omni bus. Quanto inquit magis admirareinini, si audis setis ipsum." Now this was as much as to say, or else it was in nowise intelligible—you are all thunder struck by my great exhibition; but what would it have been if you had heard Demosthenes himself—si au dissetis ipstun? But he (Lord Brougham) by no means acknowledged the parallel. He was neither en wrapt in a trance of wonder or lost in a ravishment of ad miration—(Hear, and laughter.)—he had neither been thunderstruck at the original oration nor overwhelmed by the quotation. With Fox and the Noble Lord he did not feel himself strong to grapple ; but he most assuredly did feel himself strong to grapple with the edition of them he had heard that night.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) He too, however, had authorities, and could adduce on this occasion the testimony of Dr. Smith and Mr. Pitt—the toaster and the pupil. He sheltered himself under these, to escape other authorities. Dr. Smith quoted the Me thuen treaty as an instance to shake the revereneteof such treaties. He takes it as one of the worst of the class, and as such puts it into his book. And Mr. Pitt, in 1786 (who, in this matter, although not in others, was the pupil of Dr. Smith), brought in a measure to repeal the Me thuen treaty, and put the wines of France and Portugal upon a similar footing. He lost it after a manful struggle, as had happened in other excellent measures before and since in both Houses of Parliament, where statesmen had suffered themselves to be easily, too easily, foiled by the clamour of mercantile speculators.—(Loud cheers.) Thus upon this occasion it chanced that the interests of the pub lic—of the landowners—of the consumers of the country, were sacrificed to the clamour of the Portugal merchants. (Cheers.) But greater than these authorities, and even Plato anti Socrates thrown into the scale, lie haul the au. thorities of truth anti reason, and on these he would take his stand,—(Cheers.) Look at the difference between that day anti the present. What was the temptation to she Methuen treaty ? Was it not the notion that the Brazil gold came over to Portugal, and that only through Portu gal could we get our share of it ; and, therefore, all sa crifices were to he made, to enable us, by the sale of our woollens, to draw some portion of this gold from Portugal. Now, to make this attack on the Government to-night, all the exploded doctrines of the olden times were revived —not, however, for the purpose of embarrassing the Go vernment, for, God wot, little able to stand would be that Government, which was embarrassed by the hostile array of such doctrines—the pick anti choice of the exploded errors of the worst school of policy. In 1703 these ar guments were weak and ludicrous enough, Heaven knew ; but to have them again dragged forward to the light of dal in 1831, was literally astounding. " Trim the balance whereby you can bring here the Brazil gold, which you can get alone from Portugal, and without which you can do nothing. Get the gold--never mind trade—never mind employment— never mind commerce— go to Portugal—get the Br az il go ld at any sacr ifi ce — Portugal is the only place from whence you can get this gold, and the only way in which you can get it thence, is by carrying this treaty. Conclude it, therefore, at all sa rifices—at that of common sense amongst the rest—and let your woollens be sent forth to extract this Brazil gold from Portugal." This was the argument advanced in all the contemporary histories and annals, and combated, as he had stated, by Dr. Smith. Grossly inconsistent —flagi tiously inconsistent with the interests of the State, and the dictates of common sense, were the doctrines on which the treaty was supported in that day—what must they be in 1831 ? Unfortunate, most unfortunate were the men who had to maintain these doctrines in that day ; how much more unhappy and unfortunate were the men who had to maintain the same in this day—when the labourers were called upon to make bricks without straw—when Brazil no lunger belonged to Portugal—when we go out at once to Brazil, and being our woollens and get the gold from thence.—(Hear.) Miserable, he repeated, were the men who, in 1703, had to maintain these arguments, but infi nitely more miserable were they, who, in 1831, had the same to do, when events and changes had cut every inch of ground from under their feet.—(Hear.) Next, as to the equalization of the wine duties, the Noble Lord (Ellenbo rough) said, " Look well to this matter ; are you not aware that the consumption of French w.nes was increasing, and what might not be expected if you were still more to lower the duties ?" He did not know if the Noble Lord (Ellen borough) had agreed with his Noble Friend in nut wkshing to embarrass the Government, but certainly, if he had made himself a party to the promise, he had most faith fully kept his word.-- - -(Cheers.) Perhaps, like his Noble Friend, the Noble Lord might riot have been able, had he been willing—there certainly was some confusion in his own camp—amongst his own array of arguments, and, indubitably, all that he had done was to give Go s ernment the most complete support; for if he were to select one favourite—one pet feet—if his Noble Friends on the Treasury benches, who had formerly been Chan cellors of the Exchequer, and who now, to meet premanne discussions of the budget, were compAled to cast a retro spective glance upon their labours in the other HQUSP, and endeavour to revive their financial lore were to do so—it was impossible, when a tax was to be taken off, to select a stronger fact in favour of further reduction th an t h e fact, that a preceding reduction of duty had been foil:me e t by an increased co nsumption.—(Cheers. )—ln these cases it had always been the rule to draw their arguments for the future from the experience of the past. That many persons preferre 1 port at press nt could not be denied, but he could not help thinking rhea; ness had more to do with this thsn predilection, for undeniable it was, that the French wines were at once more palatable and more wholesome.—( Hear, hear, )--Bat in all this the Noble Lord (Strangfiird) suspected there lays something of a political nature lui king below—that they wanted (to use the Noble Lord's own words), to curry favour or to co ix the French Government, and turn our backs upon the faithful Government of Portugal ; arid yet, let it be re membered, that in 181.1, 1812, and 1813, this faith ful Government was the first to break faith with `us, and this, if we had so pleased it, to release us fi one our engagements Now, as to France, lie certainly con sidered that Governments ought to act openly, honour ably, and sincerely, and avow manfully the principle on which they proceeded ; but here, looking to this charge, that they were paying particular court to France, he saw nothing whereon to fix the slightest blame. If they pro ceeded upon the true principle in the measure—if they promoted the comfort and happiness of the people and the interests of trade and commerce—if there were no breach of treaty, no error of judgment, no fault of policy—if, in improving our domestic regulations, the measure was as favourable to trade as the interests of the community, he confessed he had not the Spartan virtue to reject it, merely because it happend to have amongst the rest the fatal, the terrible, the never sufficiently to he reprobated tendency of consolidating the good understanding which prevailed, and, thank God, it did prevail between France and this country. —(Cheers.) He wanted no argument but that furnished by the Noble Lord, to confirm him in his approbation of the measure, and to render his position impregnable. The Methuen treaty was entirely apolitical one, created and de fined by mercantile politicians. Much had been said about the change of things in France, since the period of that treaty, and of the two times. The Bourbon time had been highly lauded in contradistinction to those of regene rated France ; but in the Bourbon times, so far as regarded good feeling and amicable disposition to this country, he must take leave to differ widely from the Noble Lords.— Those times might have been better fur France, which was now labouring under the curse of regenetation. They might have been more glorious for France, in the dread season of warfare—including Blenheim and Melplaquet, and a throng of other foreign triumphs. The French na tion might have cast away the brightest jewel of their crown ; they might have won a mighty name, and an il lustrious character, by the labours of a series of ages, only to forfeit it with their lost Princes. They might have. in banishing their mild Monarchs, blindly deprived themselves of triumphant leaders of the people in war, and wise, and intelligent, and beneficent rulers in peace ; but he humbly ventured to submit, that the conduct of the Bourbons iu respect of the Methuen treaty and in the American war (he would go no lower down), proved, that whatever France and Europe might have lost by the expulsion of the Bourbons, that at least England had lost nothing by the substitution of one branch of the House of Bourbon for another; or the substitution of a legitimate for an ab solute Monarchy.—(Cheers.) In conclusion, he repeated the assertion, that there would he no stain left on the ho nour of the country by the proposed alterations. The Duke of WELLINGTON said, one would cer tainly imagine, by the opinions of the Noble and Learned Lord, that the Government had intended no breach of faith, and also from the Noble and Learned Lord's speech at the satne time, that Government really was embarrassed by his Noble Friend's motion. For no lawyer ever took more pains than the Noble and Learned Lord to prove to their Lordships that his construction of the treaty was correct. He would do the justice to the Government of believing that their intention was not to commit a breach of faith ; his opinion was, that they had neglected to ad vert to the treaty, as they had to many other things, in their anxiety to bring on questions at an early period.— He agreed with the Noble and Learned Lord, that the Nlethuen treaty was revocable under the penalty he had stated. In this the words bore him out; but when they came to the 26th article, they found the words alluded equally to political and commercial treaties as requiring revision. Then it was that new stipulations were made as to the article in the Methuen treaty, by which Portugal wines were taken into this country at an advantage, and our woollens introduced into Portugal; and it was agreed that this arrangement should, for the present, remain un altered. But now what did the thirty-third article ? It decidedly mails a new stipulation respecting wines and woollens. The Noble Duke then read the thirty-third article of the last treaty, and maintained that it placed the two countries in precise!) , the satne relation as the Methuen treaty had done. It had never been asserted that his Noble Friend who had brought the subject under the consideration of the House was the sole judge of the meaning of the treaty ; all that had been contended was, that as he had been the negotiator of the treaty, he was no bad ;edge of its mean ing. And what did his Noble Friend say? That the 33d article was inserted in order to satisfy the Portuguese Government that the treaty should not be put an end to until it had been fairly reviewed. It had been allowed on the other side, that there was some doubt if notice ought not to have been given of the determination of the Eng lish Government to put an end to the treaty. Why, then, had not that notice been given ? It was said that the re solution to admit the wines of France at a reduced duty was taken not to punish Portugal for any breach of faith, but as a measure of finance. It also came before their Lordships as a great question of political economy. He could not follow the Noble Lord opposite through his cal culations. His Noble Friend did not dispute that the measure might effect some increase of the revenue, What he said was, that the loss of the Cape wines deducted from that benefit would render it not worth any trouble. The loss on the Spanish and on the Rhenish wines was also to be considered. As a financial measure, therefore, there was nothing in it very desirable. But not to dwell upon that, how did it stand as a commercial measure, and as a measure of political economy ? Let their Lordships consider the measure as connected with Spain. The exports from this country to the whole of the Peninsula were greater in amount than t hose to any other country in Europe, without exception. The exports from this country to the whole of the Penin sula amounted to a fifth of her exports to all the various parts of Europe. And now this rising commerce was to be risked —for what? Fur an increase to the revenue of at most 100,000/. We were about to sacrifice the trade with the Peninsula, which was worth annually ii,000,000/. to the trade with France, which is worth only 525,000/. or a twelfth of that amount. There was another view of the question, which, he confessed, ap peared to him to be the most important of any; he meant the political view. He had frequently heard the Noble Lord opposite maintain, that this country could not value the friendship of Portugal, and a free admission into the Tagus, too highly. In reference to Irelend especially, he remembered that a Noble Baron opposite had expressed himself most strongly with regard to the advantage of maintaining our friendly relations with Portugal. Unfor tunately the great measure which he had had the honour to propose to their Lordships three veers ago hid not an swered so as to produce, he would not say all the advan tages which he expected from it, but all the advantages which the warmest friends of that measure expected from it. The agitation of that question was over ; but, to we a vulgar expression, a new hare had been started, anti it might be long before it would be run down. He wanted to know whether during that period the ftiendship 01 Portugal, and our amicable reception in the Tagus, would not be as valuable as during the existence of that agitation which was terminated three years ago? If so, let their Lordships turn their attention to the wording of the treaty with Portugal ; let them listen to his Noble Friend', statement of the importance attached in Portugal to the wine trade with this country. He would not discuss the question with any reference to c onsiderations connected with the Portuguese Royal Family—with Don Miguel or Donna Maria. He would not attempt to embarrass his Majesty's Government by any such allusions. But leaving those considerations entirely out of the question, he main tained that under existing circumstances the friendship of Portugal and our reception in the Tagus were of the utmost importance ; and that if we exchanged these ad vantages for an increase in the revenue of 100,000/. we should make a gross political blunder. Lord KING ridiculed the mourning which he had no doubt would take place over the Methuen treaty; which, if not absolutely dead, was evidently in articula mortis. It would be followed to the grave by a funeral cortege, computed of the shipping, the colonial, and the other interests, who would all lament tie good old abuses. 1 , Methuen treaty was nearly over ; and port and prej° 4 were almost done for. Earl STAN HOPE disclaimed all wish to t em b a rrl his 3lejesty's Government. No such e mbarrassme nt be apprehended fry m the House at large. Such wag t. base servility of Parliament, that it was always fi' ul : ready to support his Majesty's Governmen t, of wh,l ever it might he composed. The Noble Earl p roceed defend tGR he Meth aid the uen treaty. N at r , m t l i d i e ts iE:,rdlislpiaodsittoailteetio eofneilbleirb,r; servility of Parliament his Majesty's Government, of whom soe ver it ni g h i composed. The moment which the Noble Eit r chosen for this remark was rather an odd one, ndten months had elased since the decision of Par liarnen placed the Noble Duke where he now was , an d had r,;10; hint (Eell Grey) to his present situation. to; Duke charged his Majesty's Government with aTgliree° in peliey. He (Lord Grey) was one of those wh" o with the Noble Duke that it was highly desirable to malttt taro friendly relations with Portugal. But why w: eo present proceeding to preclude this? Ile g ! ° :e r ol conceived that Portugal would sustain much i n J uri tl the relinquishment of the treaty. The addition to), duty o n port wine was so small, that he doubte d if it ;1, materially affect the consumption in this country.. bio trade with Portugal had, for some time, been din -141 , 1 " o t in coils. quence of the vex visa's conduct of the cerY a rt Gimp my, the existence of which was a breach of the ~N e V e l mu e nh t y l t ! hterearttylawa relations of so rn n f i , e ,oi r to, i l: ie,, tr e he an ef d l politics ar c c.orse between the two countries. He was not I'rl pop' with documents to show the effect of the new regniioi if they should be adopted ; but he believed that the ihi Duke and the Noble Lord were mistaken is supposi'gret they would reduce the advantages of our trade wi th , e weal so low. In his opinion the revenue woul d l e ' creased by them considerably for the two next Yea r '' t er much more thet ceforth. He was persuaded that would open a great advantage to the general Counnercoe,cr the country. But the Noble Duke said that "'°, risking not only our commerce with our ancient all”d. our commerce with the whole Peninsula. 11 o I , he vol' not knew. Our communication with the Sparu,'", t ie? was direct. The Noble Lord said, that if the ve treaty stood alone, there could b e n o d o ubt that we° oil be warranted in doing what we had done. The i t t l ' e s ' n s therefore, was, whether by the treaty of 1810 s uch t ee teration was made in the Methuen treaty as deprivep the right which by that Methuen treaty we e njoye" Methuen treats , remained unseteed by the su b96 „is e e treaty, to which the Nob e Lord referred, and We re i t 68 all the rights under it which we had before. 11°t Aseb e been qualified by that treaty would be best discus'''. Bt the measure came in a proper shape before then' , v e it had been said that the best expounder of a tretY a the maker. That observation had been fully eq °s l ' f his Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack. aOS maker was the best expounder, it must he recollecteo,oo there was a maker also on the part of Portugal. it alf be requisite to have the Portuguese expounder, 1°1;k exposition might perhaps be as good as that of the o{4 Viscount. But what would he the effect if both ° I a re happened to differ? What it would have been 3r6 tt el pretty clearly when the dispute arose about the t cseo Wine Company, time support of which he bad to r e P te as a breach of faith. Tee Noble Lord then sta ted 'OW!: Portuguese Minister that he had intended to lia" t ieit' duced a clause for putting an end to it, but saw id ° was opposed by people of great influence so violent; the. he had no such clause specifically introduced ; the Noble Viscount proceeded to argue that the ',,hic) guese Government were bound by a atipulati o t , l a 2` he had not dared to propose. The answer g' he was ashamed of British diplomacy when he e a- se' that an agreement implied consent and knowledg e tA that when the N o bl e L or d a d m itt e d th a t such 3 a u nt had been omitted, he thereby admitted that it Wl s hs t the treaty—that e had toll the Noble Viscount what Wine Company could not be abolished. This W 3s aisr i negociation to be applauded, and yet this was tbe „ model of diplomacy who now told their LordshiP: ofooß the honour of the country was touched by its pre se°- 00 ' of proceeding. Front the very first, the vexatione too'. of the Oporto Company had been complained of; had, in our pr e s en t remons tr a nces on that su b J ec t ere ‘ right and jnstice on our side. As to the genera l PEI , g°` the subject, it would be best discussed when it can'', rally before them. In the meantime, be would we had a strict right to do what we were d° 44 10 1 5 . there was little doubt but it might be done w ithou t lo pe c to io t . he i T n o ter t e b s r t e s e o o f f t t h h e es c e ou in n o t t r i y o , n e s ter ha p: i ml n i t o ic o al b r c° , • V e ctiO iter rs f as the et Viscount i)tsia persisted,ic. 0 : i I II : : aitytn: complying si e Aole G ( a t ut e thrF r , ei s :H g th, ii v i,pou e sn n s relative e:amna .(its fe h tehT t te o aa Ngk t ue h onot i : s it let h O p.eo 1 0 p i fotui tau Viscount himself could hardly help feeling the inl if r i s ca ll' of t it ORD lamented that oet ever have been said by the Noble Earl or any on e ,.„ e 100 0 he felt ashamed at the manner in which British °III3 had suffered in his hands. He had nothing to d° o l treaty of 1810. It was not correct to say tha t b_, e hi ce 4 dared to propose to get a specific article intru-s 01' abrogate the Methuen treaty. He had tried , , b , u j or not get it effected. Notwithstanding what h is Learned Friend on the Woolsack had said respecog speaking in Feist/ of the Bourbons, he had said 11° 3 Os' favour of their policy, which, on the contrary , ha hip'! most reprehension. The acquaintance betwe eli e eed and his Noble and Learned Friend had conat°,e.:ieg years ago, when they were brother secretaries, a' g hy gether like Helena and Hermione—(A loud laufc'roof this same Court of Lisbon. He had been less Ai, '0 than his fellow-labourer, whom he remenober`-t days of his youth and innocence —(A he recollected certain illustrations of West Indi a „. in 1806, and beard the subsequent opinion s of Cy and Learned Friend, he did not despair , ic t-e ef another twenty-five years, of hearing, in 1 85 V '- „ g or alteration of views as to West India slavery an well as respecting our relations with Portugal. Le- 00 The LORD CHANCELLOR declared that b' aware that he had ever changed his views eit West India slavery or West India sugar. g o d • The three first motions were put and carrion other was negatived without a division. Adjourned at Half-past Eleven o'clock. 1 41 , 110 USE OF COMMONS, FE,OO- Ce"' CARLOW ELECTION. ors o r' Mr. PORTMAN brought up the report a1,,,,11011 mittee on this election, which declared Lord peg' the sitting Member, duly elected, but that tb e tio go' against his return was neither frivolous nor 0 13 or WIGAN ELECTION. t be ,t,er Mr. R. PALMER brought up the re port 0 '„ Oty mittee on this election, which declared the sitti* ' duly elected. WEXFORD ELECTION. MrCLIVE brought up the report of the " ••-d v le .- i this election, declaring Mr. Wigram, the sitti n Y not duly elected, but that Sir Charles Deeritig elected. tte d The Clerk of the Crown was ordered c° tl House to-morrow to amend the return. t ol The Sheriffs of London presented a pctitiot; v to , Lord Mayor, Aldermen, arid Common GO" for an alteration in the bankupt laws. 1 1 t it i ; f ro l ' The prayer of the petition r , was supported "'‘tiorl) Wood arid Waithman, Mr. S. Smith, 31 '. n te , l' i titi' and Mr. O'Connell.—lt was ordered to be P rl l,r r, Alderman THOMPSON presented a s ial : )e tit ic plA m fro the merchants, &c. of Loudon. Th id e r ' o he ro' more than 1,500 signatures. He was _ o Lord on Vie Woolsarde was about to introdoe.tiop on the subject, as it would afford great ba tisfA'' 5 country. for - Several petitions were presented praying 'P' fast. 00 0 , 0 , ,,, 111 4 ,,, r, Mr. SHAW resented a petition from lki r 'doel l ' b t l'ikl of Dublin, praying the House to . I ) t° e - Nt put a sto h (Great laughter.) „ pl iti'lr'' ' a) ,' 4l j The Hoe. AlEmnErt presented a nother ripiir:loo., ,iqic 260 1 i r n . j r:tri M t r i O er O , D sta p te r d es Mr. J. Smith, of Dublin, praying that th w , 1,9 0 " 0 ' k s' l te r :iament might be held alternately in Dublin a no oo ,,, , o per b *l Wiltshire, for a Reform in Pai l li Th t• 1.1',,,e,i911 the ° I ;Z l )'' two Members to that House, the franchise Wa of f t , 'il elusive hands of six burgesses, the creat ureg , e sa ° i i . t ; l : Earl, who thus appointed whom he pAeneas" to t ' l ion 4 1 :` ` The HON. MEMBER also prrsented petition° po la t ci lii k .nr, effect from Stockport, which t'eclared that a i5)„, 4 ,, ~ t ~,,, 1,, not less than 9M,000 . inPenn pelsons in tlae jus ~„r, tif „ no representatives in that House • and fr° °l l ,,iba" - ith f of :, q ft f t(il e ,ll,,,, r ,oaeid e str, t bt i . faience tti.rait.atuori Palmer) r(a t i:o l tti l lepi c icon, five other places in Lancashire, for the vote ,' ri , 0 1 ; ro ti' p` 4 Mr. H. PALMER could not let the Pe tit i l :hon t oor i , to tli t li ' l te:atetdtiaiot,i)geahtition frorn ,- oei,.-orr, i,,,t, lull measure of. ~t hi won (I il Mr. J. WOOD entertained, in enni On CO 44 ro be ct honest reformer in the empire, the most r li doct for the Earl of Radnor, whose holitical cv litliNe'leorutit)::(l',o)l: af . f li" , ec t o )i g rt i ifnuehmi county hou'otite,eni'fitiapnb),:,:d°, dr o( R s ' i o l ue l ..:I,rlif',gliutmiael(rr" t n mu : d a ' d .t ie, teti r n iP a ' e °"e i el rie: jsil i rbel!el ii,:ef:°:::ltirr:",.:li.ol-- -. : ; : fi s ot l i 1 I r v- 4 :4 ll h b 'e 1 : - 1 3 ii,j'eoccfberp,p), ~ i ll ii tti.lll 'hug ':7,4,,,