The Sun. — London, England, 1831-08-10 00:00:00

opposite had said, that the greatest disgust prevailed in the county of Kent reepecting.the Reform Bill. Sir C. WETHERELL spoke only in reference to the management of the boroughs of Kent. Mr. HODGES had misunderstood the Member for Boroughbridge. He was sorry that he was not able to deny that the greatest disgust did prevail in Kent (Cheers from the Opposition)—but then the disgust was altogether occasioned by the unnecessary delay of the pro. cress of the Bill. - Sure he was, that if the people of Eng land were again compelled to bring their minds to the consideration of the question of Reform, the present pro position would be rep l aced by republicanism.—(llear.) A MEMBER, whose name we could not learn, said it eves well known that a great jealousy existed between the intiebitants of Chatham and the inhabitants of Rochester; and if the present proposition were acceded to that jea lousy would be much increased. Mr. HUNT begge d to st Ae why he should, on the pieotnt occasion, vote against his Majesty's Ministets. If the present prop o s ition were carried, Rochester and Chatham would c onstitute a Government nomination bo rough ; and, what would be worse, two independent Members would he turned out. He had no objection whatever to giving Chatham one or two Members. As to dividing Rochester and Chatham, nothing could be more ea-y than to accomplish that object by the assistance of the pat ish officers. Mr. CHOKER thought that the fact mentioned by the Hon. Member for Kent was decisive ; namely, that the people of Chatham were so far from wanting a Member to themselves, that they liked the present arrangement. Why? Because they knew they should return both the Alembers. Mr. MILLS observed that every man in Rochester must be convinced that his right of elective franchise was gone if Chatham were united to Rochester. It was a piece of gross and glaring injustice. Lord MILTON maintained that the only question which the Committee had to decide was, not what was best for Rochester, or Chatham, or any other particular place, but what was best for the people of England. It was the rights of the people at large, and not the rights of the inhabitants of Rochester or Chatham that were to be considered. He had been astonished to hear his Right Hon. Friend, the Member for Montgomery, say that the Bill appeared to him to be more like a Bill of dis franchisement than e nfranchisement. That was to con tend that the elective tights of the people of England were held, not for the general, but for particular benefit ; for the benefit of the great community of England. The question was, whether on the banks of the Medway there should be two boroughs of a moderate size subject to influence, or one so large that it would be independent ? Mr. GOULBURN was at a loss to understand how the proposition of the Noble Lord to disfranchise Rochester could be any benefit to the people of England. The Noble Lord who had just spoken bad argued that they should not attend to the rights of particular places; and yet, on the other hand, it was maintained that the elective franchise was a favour and a privilege ; and ought not to be withdrawn without a case of great necessity. But the Noble Lord said he would rather see on the banks of the - Medway one large borough returning two Members, than two boroughs returning one each. Had the Noble Lord forgotten, that on the banks of the Tyne there was by the Bill, one borough returning two Members, and one re turning one ? Had the Noble Lord forgotten North and South Shields ? But when they dealt with the county of Durham they were called upon to act on one principle, and when they dealt with the county of Kent they were rolled upon to act on another principle. Lord MILTON had not forgotten the banks of the Tyne. The population of Newcastle and Gateshead to gether was, however, more than double the population of Chatham and Rochester altogether. Mr. WYNN remarked, that if private rights were not to be preserved, they might at once discuss the right of the fathers of the Noble Lords to their seats elsewhere. Lord MILTON said, that in the present case it was not proposed to take away rights ; it was only proposed that those rights should be exercised in conjunction with others. X'ar. CROKER observed, that what was proposed was what had in former cases been called by the Noble Lord opposite " sluiceing" a borough. • Mr. WYNN asked if it had not been considered a punishment of cerruption to open a borough to the hundred? Mr. DUNCOMBE could not sit still and bear his friend Lord Durham traduced. The plain English of the insinuations thrown out against his Noble Friend was, that he had used his influence in the Cabinet, from inte rested motives, to add a representative to the county of Durham, to the prejudice of other places in England. If that was the English of what bad fallen from the late Chancellor of the Exchequer on the subject, if it were meant to make such an assertion as that, such an asser tion he was ready to meet with a flat and direct contra diction.—(Hear, bear.) If by that cheer it were in tended by a side-wind to confirm the imputation, he would pronounce it a base end wicked calumny.—(Loud cries of " Order, order.") Colonel PEEL called the Hon. Gentleman to order,. and appealed to the Chair whether that was allowable language. The CHAIRMAN was sure the Hon. Member for Ilea ford would be aware, on a moment's reflection, that in the line of argument he had pursued, Le was not quite exer cising a sober discretion. Mr. DUNCOMBE was quite sober and discreet, and in tended what be had said. (Here there were the loudest shouts of " Order ! order ! order !"" Chair, chair ! chair !") Colonel PEEL observed that this was an aggravation of the lion. Gentletnan's original s tatement. Sir R. INGLIS was beginning to address the Com mittee, but Sir H. HARDINGE spoke to order. He did not intend to throw any imputation on the Noble Lord in question ; but if they looked at the comparative state of Newcastle and Gateshead, and Rochester and Chatham, they must feel that there were strong reasons for uniting the two former rather than the two latter ; and—(" Order!") The CHAIRMAN observed that an Hon. Member was addressing the Committee when the Gallant Officer rose to order. The Gallant Ofheer could not go into any discussion. Sir IL HARDINGE said his object was the amicable one of proving to the lion. Member fur Hertford, that he hid no intention to throw any imputation on his Noble Friend ; but that be s eeiscientiously thought that the case of Gateshead was an indefensible one. Sir R. INGLIS spoke to order. The Hon. Member fur Hertford had used the words base calumny ;" upon which the Chairman told the Hon. Member be was sure if he exercised his sober discretion, he would not pursue such a line of remark ; .but the Hon. Member far ger t, ford declared be wise in the exercise of Isis sober discretion; and thereby, instead of Apologising to the Committee or to the Hon. Member against 'whom the observation was directed, virtually repeated his statement.—(Hear, hear.) lie ( Sir R. Inglis) begged to know front the Chairman what was the law of the House under such circumetaocea. The CHAIRMAN said that during the little experieoce which lie had in his present office, be had frequently lis tened with pain to expressions which were certainly not justifiable. It was not only of late, but it was for years that he bad observed the difficult situation of the Member who filled the Chair, when called upon to interfere. It was a very unpleasant task, He was sure, however, that what had fallen from his Hon. Friend the Honourable Member for Hertford, bad escaped from him in the beat and hurry of argument ; and as they all knew his Hon. Friend could not mean to violate the rules and owiees of the House, he was sure he would have no difficulty in ex plaining. Mr. DUNCOMBE declared that nothing should induce him to retract the sentiment which be had uttered, until that which had produced it had been withdrawn. When he put into plain English the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman —when he said that it meant that Lord Dur ham used his influence in the Cabinet to add a representa tive to the county of Durham, to the prejudice of other places in England—he appealed to the Chairman whether that statement lied not been cheered by the other side of the House ? 'When he heard it so cheered, he went on to say that it was a wicked and false insinuation. Ike cared not what penalty he might incur.—(Order.) If that penalty Were imposed upon him for speaking the truth, by that truth he was never th e l es s ready to abide.—(Loud cries of hear, hear, and order, order.) Mr. WYNN presumed that the Hon. Member for Hert ford only intended to ex press himself strongly, ecel that he did not mean to violate the rules of the House as welt as that the rules of gentlemanlyi n t intercourse. Lord ALT HORP observeede,utsea. mustiuld tee all be desir ous that as little personality as intro duced into their proceedings. Wliots theyl e th sib regard o to tho fact, it it were meant to say th a t his Noble Friend had been in fluenced by interested mo tiv es in pia conduct on theeul ject, h e concurred with the Hon. Member f or H ertford in 1 denying the charge in the strongest and most indignant t e rms.—( Hear, hear.) But lie was quite satiated th a t the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite did not intend to ad vance any serious charge of that nature. for He therefore s ubmitted to his lion. Friend, the Member Hertf that lie was not justified in using the expressiu ld ons at he nce ich had fallen from him, and therefore, that he sho say that they were hasty, and not intended to convey what they imported. Mr. DUNCOMBE said, that if the Rio lJt Hon. Geogr.,- man opposite would get up and say that he did not mean it cast any imputation on his Noble Friend, he—(Cries of :‘ Hear, hear, hear—Order, order, order—Chair, chair, ,:hair," which lasted for several minutes) — Sir H. HARDINGE observed, that the question seemed to be whether, when strong language was used, the Chair sherds] be supported in checking it ? Mr. DUNCOMBE repeated, that unless the Right Hon. Gentleman disclaimed any imputation on his Noble Friend, he (Mr. Duncombe) should retain his opinion—(Another loud Insist of " Order, order, order—Chair, chair, chair.") Colonel LINDSAY said, that the Hon. Member seemed determined to act in defiance to the general feeling of the Committee. He did not think that his Right Hon. Friend had uttered any insinuation which he was called upon to explain. Mr. JOHN STANLEY begged to remark, that he believed the Hon. Member fur Hertford put the case hypo thetically. Now, so putting it, was it not competent to him is express his own opinion ? Was it net competent to the lion. Member to express his indignation against all who imputed interested motives against his Noble Friend, "if" they actually imputed such motives ? Sir C. WETHERELL. observed, that all that he heard his Right Hon. Friend say was, that a different rule was acted upon in the county of Durham from that which was acted upon in the county of Kent. Mr. DUNCOMBE said that the silence of the Right lion. Gentleman confirmed the inference which he (Mr. Duncombe) had drawn from his observations.—(Order.) Mr. FRANKLAND LEWIS was sure that the whole affair originated in an entire misapprehension.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The House called on the Hon. Member for Hertford, to act with discretion on the occasion. If, in the heat of his ardour for Reform, the Hon. Gentleman had allowed himself to violate the rules of sober discus sion, he must not permit any punctilious notions of a sup posed honour to prevent him from retracting expressions, the use of which in the debates of that House must dimi nish the public respect, by showing that their delibera tions were not carried on in a proper state of mind ; but were accompanied by a heat and violence which indicated incapacity of judgment. If the Hon. Member really did believe that the Right Hon. Gentleman had asserted a wicked and false calumny, he ought to call upon the Right Hon. Gentleman to state what it was he did say, and to have it taken down ; and if it appeared not to bear such an interpretation, the Chairman was bound to state to the Hon. Member that expressions such as he lad used could not be tolerated. Lord MILTON thought that his Hon. Friend who had just spoken had gone rather beyond the point at issue. When the Right Hon. Gentleman spoke of the difference of the principle which operated upon the banks of the Tyne and the busks of the Medway, he (Lord Milton) did not apprehend that the Right Hon. Gentleman threw out any imputation on Lord Durham of using his influence in the Cabinet for the purpose of promoting his personal interests ; and it did not appear to him (Lord Milton) to be necessary that the Hon. Member for Hertford should infer what was passing in the mind of the Right Hon. Gentleman when he made that remark. If that were so, then it was evident that the expressions of the lion. Member for Hertford were too hastily uttered. Why, therefore, could not the Right Hon. Gentleman repeat what he had said ? Mr. CROKER observed, that the language used by the lion. Member for Hertford was applied to the statement of a former evening. Mr. WYNN contended, that it was contrary to all rule to call upon the Right Hon. Gentleman to explain, except immediately after the words complained of had been ut tered and taken down. On the Right Hon. Gentleman resuming his seat, there were loud calls for Mr. Duncombe and Mr. Western, who rose at the same time. After some contusion, Mr. WESTERN went on to say that he wished to call the attention of the House to the words used by the Hon. Member for Hertford, after he had been called to order. The Hon. Member said, that if the Right lion. Gentle man meant to assert that Lord Durham had used his in fluence improperly, then he met that assertion with a direct contradiction. If, however, the Right Hon. Gen tleman insinuated that the Lord Privy Seal had done so and so, then, putting it hypothetically, he said the insinua tion was what he described it—calumnious. Mr. I'. DUNCOMBE was much obliged to the Hon. Gentleman. The Hon. Member for Radnor had called him to order, but be hoped he knew what was due to the House, as well as what was due to his own person„ — (Hear, hear! order, order ! chair, chair.) Mr. FRANKLAND LEWIS rose to order. We only understood him to say, amidst much confusion, that he threw himself on the House.--(Order,—much confusion.) Mr. T. DUNCOMBE was not to be precluded from knowing what was due to the House and himself, and from defending his own person. lie referred to the re collection of the Committee as to what he had stated.— (Hear, hear.) He had said that if the Right Hon: Gentleman bad imputed to the Noble Lord (the Lord Privy Seal) that he had directly used his influence to give a partial character to the Reform Bill, he would meet that imputation with a direct contradiction ; but if the Right Hon. Gentleman only insinuated, then he said that the insinuation was a gross and unfounded ca lumny.--(Hear, hear, order, order, chair chair, and much tumult.) lie had put it hypothetically, as the only way to make him rett act was, for the Right Hon. Gentleman to get up.—(Chair, chair, and order.) Would the House allow bins to prove—(lncreased calls of chair and order stopped the Hon. Gentleman)—and Lord MILTON rose to order. He did not rise to call his lion. Friend to order—(Hear bear)—but the lion. Gen lemen who called " order, and chair," so loudly, that they would not allow his Hon. Friend to proceed; and he had his eye particularly on the Hon. Member for the borough of Eye.—(Cheers and a laugh.) Mr. BURGE said, the Noble Lord had assumed the jurisdiction of the House, and he was extremely glad to ate it fall into such good hands ; but at the same time he could not, out of deference to the Noble Lord, forget what was due to the Committee, to which alone he was respell sible.—( Hear, hear.) What induced him to call " chair, chair !" was, that the language used by the Hon. Member for Hertford,• was repeated and persisted in, after the Chalr, supported by the House, had declared that such language was disorderly ; and he did not think the order of the Committee or the dignity of the House could be maintained sinless the decision of the Chair was enforced. The Hon. Member had committed an offence against the Committee and against the House, and he was bound to set himself right.—(Cheers.) Till the expressions wet e retracted—till he had explained them to the satisfaction of the Committee, restoring the freedom of debate to the House, he could not be allowed to discuss the question of the general merits of the Bill.—(" Order," " Chair," and cheers.) M. CUTLAR FERGUSSON thought that what the lion. Member had stated did not justify him in calling " Chair, chair." It was for the Hon. Member in the chair to determine whether the Hon. Member had given a satisfactory explanation to the House. The lion. Mem ber bad given an explanation of his words, and if that were cot received, it would be the first time in that House that 844 an explanation was not accepted in the sense in which it was givep. The Hon. Member had put the case hypothetically, and if the Hon. and Learned Member did not understand the distinction, it was not the f..e.slt of the lion. Member for Hertford. The Hon. and Learee.ii Member was the only person who did not understand the slistinetion. He would repeat what the lion. Member had stated. He said that if the Right lion. Gentleman asserted that Lord Durliesn had used his issfuence for an improper purpose, he met that assertion with a ?.irect denial ; if he insinuated that, he had de nounced the irseiepetion as a calumny. The insinuation was cheered, and he stro4?d add that if the cheers were meant to support the insinuatioa, they were only a con tieeetion of that system of calumny which was persisted in from day to day against the character of the Noble Lord and against the character of his Majesty's Ministers.— (Cheers, and order, cribs.) Sir H. HARDINGE was satisfied that the Hon. and Learned ,Member, as a peace-maker, had not succeeded, That wail net to be accomplished by insinuations against that side of the house', He said the course pursued this evening was but a part of a gee.eral system. He had him self used words respecting Qateshead quite as strong as his Right lion. Friend. His Right Hon. Friend was the last man to nse etropg words unnecessarily ; and he was surprised the Hon. Member for Hertford had not before found fault with the words; need as to Gateshead, particu larly by himself and the Right Hon. Member for Tam weeth. He knew Gateshead well, and should tae the same expeeseions as he had used before, whenever the sub ject was broached. When the lion. Member for Hertford asked his Right Hun. klriersd, echo had been aggrieved, to take the first step to a reconciliation, lie was asking what was imposalle, lie would ask the Hop Mernbee, there fore, as his Right Hon ; Friend could not make the ad micsion required of him, whether he would make this a question of obstinacy? He put it to the Hon. Member, as a candid maim of honour, whether an admission from him would not be the beet way to get the House out of the difficulty ? A b l e ß o E fren s st offended had the not gl s i a t id l a io s n ii . ig G le en w t o le r m d Gentleman that effect. How then was he to know that lie d was offended? If the Committee were offended, liecoulsay that be list] not intended to say anything unpatliamentary• or uncivil.—(A laugh.) If the assertions were conti nued—if the insinuations Were repeated, he should• know what course to pursue. The Right Hon. Gentleman saw that it was not a question of influence, and he had shown from the, population of Gateshead that such insinuations as had been thrown out were unfounded. The Right Hon. and Gallant Officer had asked why he had not alluded to the subject, when Gateshead was before mentioned ? Hi e answer was, that Gateshead was a proper subject for dis cussion ; and he had not heard any assertion direct against the Lord Privy Seal. To-night, however, on a discussion about Rochester, Gateshead had been brought forward, a s it was said that a different rule of representation had been applied to Durham and to Kent. He translated this—. (Cheers) —and his translation was confirmed by cheers. He put his resolution hypothetically, and hypothetically he would repeat it, if necessary. No influence possessed by the Noble Lord, the Privy Seal, should ever be taken from him for such illiberal insinuations, as long as he had a voice in that House.—(Question—Order.) Mr. C. WYNN—The question was, whether the Hon. Member who bad been called to order was in order or not. The lion. Member proceeded to address the House, amidst much confusion, about the point of order ; but as the House would scarcely listen to the Right Hen. Gentle man, we were prevented from hearing him. Time Right lion. Member contended that the Hon. Member was out of order. . Lord STORMONT wished to put an end to the discus. sion, by calling on the Chairman to declare whether the Hon. Member was out of order or not. He called on the Chairman to state his opinion, and to put an end to the dispute, which was not much conducive to the dignity of the House.—(Loud cries of question and order, and much confusion.) The SPEAKER, who spoke from the floor, and on the Treasury side of the House, said, no Member of the Com mittee concurred more heartily than he did in what fell from the Noble Lord, or was more anxious that this dis cussion should terminate. He expressed this opinion with the greater eagerness, as, from his experience in that House, he could say that lie never found questions of dis order either mitigated or simplified, or brought readier to a conclusion, by being elongated. He was not present in the Committee when the discussion arose ; but since he came down stairs, he had heard sufficient from the gentle men who had discussed the point, to satisfy him that the feeling nourished by en interpretation given to the expres sion was never intended. It he were called upon to de cAe, he could nut say that the expression was offen sive, as the Hon. Member fur Hertford stood. The Right. Hon. Gentleman had made no complaint of the language used ; the offence of disorder, there fore, was against the Committee. Since he had been able to collect the purport of what had been said, the question, whether that were disorderly or offensive which gave rise to the discussion, depended on its being put hypothetically or not. As it was hypothetically put, that negatived the personal offence. Whether the Hon. Mem ber for Hertford had offended the Committee or not by his hypothetical statements, he had in his last speech ex pressed his regret that, entertaining that hypothese, he had been led to give utterance to any expressions which gave offence to the Committee, and thus the hypothese that lie hail was negatived. He repeated that he agreed fully with what fell from the Noble Lord, ai.d which he had set out by stating. If the Hon. Member for Hert ford was aware that he took offence without cause, he should say that the proceeding was disorderly; but when the Hon. Member for Hertford admitted, as he had, that it was not properly. applied, he must deprecate the con tinuation of a discussion which could only lead to exaspe ration ; and if enabled then to get rid of one difficulty, would, if continued, they might depend upon it, lead them into inure difficulties.—(Cheers, loud calls of "ques tion," and " divide.") The House then divided, when there appeared— Ayes O - ). Noes l5O Majority -1e,41 On our - re-entering the House we found Sir CHARLES WETHERELL on his legs, objecting, as we understood, to the union between Sandwich and the neighbouring towns. Mr. MARRYATT stated that the allegations in the pe tition the Hon. and Learned Member had referred to were confused—Ramsgate was seven miles from Sandwich, Deal four, and Margate nine. After some farther conversation between Sir C. WE THERELL, Mr. MARRYATT, and Lord ALTHORP, the ques tion was put and carried. Lord ALTHORP, in this stage of the Bill, thought it right to propose that the parish of Christchurch, part of which was actually e ithin the limits of Southwark, should be added to that borough, together with the liberty of the Clink. Mr. CROKER repeated his objections to such unions. Sir C. WETHERELL said that the farce of this Bill ought very properly to be applied to the liberty within which the oldest playhouse in London was situated. —(Sir C. Wetherell was mistaken on this matter of history, for the Globe theatre was not built until 159 k, while there were two playhouses in Moorfields as early as 1576.) Mr. CALVERT said that the proposal of the Noble Lord would be highly acceptable in the district to which it applied. The question was then put and agreed to. The CHAIRMAN now arrived at the sixth clause and its schedule F, and Mr. WYNN proposed that it should be postponed, but the House was generally in favour of proceeding with the Bill. Mr. F. LEWIS referred to the location of part of the parish of Presteigne within the county of Hereford, and proposed that it should be excepted from the operation of this clause, which applied only to the pm incipality of Wales. Mr. KNIGHT urged the same point. Mr. WYNN complained of the wide area the clause went over in order to obtain contributory boroughs in Wales. Colonel WOOD adverted to the fact apparent from re turns on the table, that there were only 120 houses in Radnorshire rated at above 101. a year. The effect of the Bill would therefore be very much to limit the constituency. Lord ALTHORP admitted that the clause required a great deal of consideration, and that some alterations would be necessary ; those Ministers were prepared to make. Mr. WYNN contended, that according to the prece dent set with respect to the English counties, the Welch counties ought to have two Members a-piece, which, how ever, was not the case, with the exception of Glamorgan shire. Either the Welch counties ought to be raised to the level of the English counties, or the English comities reduced to the level of the Welch counties. Lord MILTON thought, that the giving additional Members to some of the larger counties of Wales was well deserving the attention of the Committee. He also hoped that the Government would seriously consider the propriety of separating the borough constituency from the county constituency, which in Wales in particular would have the effect of handing over the Welch counties to a few large landed proprietors. Mr. DIXON said, that though he should support time Reform Bill in all its stages, yet he gave the Ministers no tice that they must not expect to pass the Scotch Refortn Bill very easily, unless they consented to give Scotland more Members than were at present proposed. Lord ALTHORP thought that the county constituency of Wales was more numerous than his Right H'um. Friend seemed to think would be the case under the 10/. qua lification. The CHAIRMAN then read the introductory clause of schedule F ; upon which, On time motion of Lord ALTHORP, the House resumed, and the CHAIRMAN reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again this day. The SrEAKER, having resumed the Chair, alluded to a misunderstanding which had occurred in the Committee. He regretted that the views which he had then explained to the Committee, did not receive that general assent which should leave no doubt upon the minds of Hun. Gentlemen that the explanations made had been completely satisfac tot y, and that all remembrance of what had passed would be obliterated. He was sure that the view which he had taken would not compromise any man, but was consistent with the dignity of the House, and the honour of indi vidual Members, both which he had always studied to maintain.—(Hear, hear.) Lord ALTHORP expressed the unanimous feeling of the House, when he bore testimony to the manner in which the Speaker had always maintained the freedom of debate, and the dignity of time House; at time same time that lie preserved unstained and untarnished the honour of every Mernber—(Hear, hear)-,,anti he had no doubt that his conduct on the occasion referred to had had the stone effect as it had on all similar occasions.—(Dear.) Language had certainly been used cn that occasion which lie (Lord A.) very much regretted to hear ; but as it had since been ex plained that such language had been used only hypotheti cally, and without any intention to give offence, that apo logy appeared to him to be satisfactory, and he trusted it had been so received.—(Hear, hear.) Sir G. MURRAY bore testimony to the impartiality and dignity with which the Speaker had always acted— (Hear, hear)—and he thought that if any thing remained to be regretted, it was that the Speaker had not been pre sent at the commencement of the conversation now referred to. He concurred with time. Noble Lord in believing that the apology which had been given was satisfactory. The House then went into a Cominittee on the Duchess of Kent's Annuity Bill. Mr. BUMF. asked whether, in the event o f the pri,„ cess Victoria's death, the same annuity would be continued to the Duchess of Kent, which was now given avowedly for the education of the Princess? Lord 4LTHORP was understood to say that he thought the Bill was sufficiently expressive upon that point. Mr. HUME again asked whether the same provision would be continued to the Duchess, should the Princess Victoria cease to be presumptive heir to the throne, in con stquence of the King having children ? Lord ALTHORP would take the subject under con ' sideration between that time and the bringing up of the Report. The Report was then ordered to be brought up this day REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COLONIES. The House having resumed, Mr. HUME gave notice that he would, in the course of the debate upon the Ref ,rm Bill, move for the introduc tion of a clause giving representatives to someof the Colonies. The other Orders of the Day having been disposed of, the House adjourned at Half-past One o'clock. HOUSE OF LORDS, Aucusr 9. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at Ten Minutes past Five o'clock. Lerd SELKIRK presented a petition from the West Lothians against the use of molasses by distillers. The Duke of DEVONSHIRE presented several peti tions in favour of Reform; but in consequence of the manner in which they were read by the clerks, it was impossible to catch where they were from. Lord KING presented a petition against tithes. The Earl of HADDINGTON presented a petition from the Senatus Academicus of the University of Edin- burgh, praying to have representatives in Parliament. As a discussion of very great importance stood _ _ for this evening, the Noble Lord observed that it was not his intention to enter into the subject matter 01 the petition, the more proper time for that being on the arrival of the Scotch Reform Bill in that House. He should content himself now with stating what the substance of the petition was. The petitioners, stated that they observed, with great anxiety, the progress of the measure in the other House of Parliament, and hoped that since it was the intention of his Majesty's Ministers greatly to extend the right of voting throughout the country, that their case might be taken into consideration. Lord DUNCAN entirely agreed with his Noble Friend in most of his remarks, but he doubted whether the grant ing of representatives to the Universities of Scotland would be attended with the advantages which his N.ble Friend expected. He felt that this was not the proper time to enter into a discussion on the subject, and therefore he would reserve what he had to say till the ques- tion was regularly before their Lordships. The Duke of RICHMOND brought in a Bill to amend the poor laws. Among other things the Noble Duke said it extended the power of overseers to hire land for the use of the pour, to a greater extent than twenty acres. The Bill was read a first time. BELGIC NEGOCIATIONS. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—He now rose to call the attention of their Lordships to the subj, et of the Belgic negociations. He admitted that there was no indi vidual more inadequate to do justice to the subject, or less entitled to claim their Lordships' attention. His early mi litary occupation and employment abroad had not tended trticularly to make him capable of delivering eloquent orations in that House, anti he had not bees urged forward by the conduct pursued by the Noble Earl (Grey) op posite, towards himself, and the recollection of what was due to the memory of a relative of his who had for some time conducted the foreign policy of this country, he would scarcely have ventured on the task. But the conduct of the Noble Earl opposite to himself, and an anxiety to do justice to the foreign policy of his deceased relative, who had acted along with the Noble and Learned Earl (Eldon) on the cross bench, had induced him to bring the present foreign policy of the country under their . Lordships' consideration, and to institute a comparison between the present and the past. He, therefore, requested their Lordships' indulgence, and hoped that he would be heard with patience, although he could scarcely expect that courtesy from the Noble Earl opposite and his colleagues. When he had felt it his duty to put questions to the Noble Earl on the subject of our foreign policy, the answer which be received was, that he did not understand the matter, and that he had found out a mare's nest. Such language did not become the orator, the Cicero of the day, and that was not a sort of treatment which he ought to receive. He might be assailed by the Noble Earl with his oratory, and by the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack with his sarcasm, and they might he cheered by their friends, so that it was with some feel ing of intimidation th it he pat himself forward on the pre sent occasion. But yet there was that stern stubbornness in his nature that led him to venture on the task, in opposition to all the power that could be brought against bins. When the Noble Earl succeeded to power, he certainly had expected to be able to give him his humble support, however little valued by the Noble Earl, in the conduct of the foreign policy of this country, and he had entertained that ex pectation, because be believed that that policy would be carried on upon the general system established by the treaties of 1811 and 1815—the treaties of Paris and Vienna. But he very soon saw that the Noble Earl ap peared disposed to pursue a different course, and on the 24th of June last he threw off the mask, when he declared that the negociations had been conducted and the treaties framed on an erroneous principle, and that the seeds had then been sown of the existing distractions and changes. When he beard these words of the Noble Earl he could not help conceiving that they evinced both a want of wis dom and a want of taste in the - Noble Earl. It was un wise in the Noble Earl to have uttered these words, since there were some Ministers now associated with the Noble Etrl in Downing-street, who had been parties to these treaties and arrangements, anti who were engaged to carry them into effect. It was unwise, considering that these treaties and arrangements had preserved the peace of Europe for sixteen years, and that peace would have still existed, had it not been for the events of July at Paris—events which the Noble Earl had eulogise d in 'high terms, but as to which he (Lord L.) had expressed an opinion directly the reverse. The declaration of the Noble Earl as to these treaties and arrangements was also in bad taste, considering wish whom he was associated, and he thought that the Noble Viscount (Goderich), the Se cretary for the Colonies, could not have felt very easy in his seat when he heard these words, considering that lie had taken so conspicuous a part in the formation of the treaties. It was true that turnings and changes were now so common that it might not be considered so very sur prising that the Noble Earl and the Noble Viscount should be acting together ; but yet it was strange that when the Noble Viscount heard such vituperation of these treaties, he thould have sat silent without saying a word either one way or the other. So much for the conduct of the Noble Earl towards himself, and for his own opinion of those treaties which had induced him to obtrude on their Lordships' attention on the present occasion. It was natural that, when he heard the words of the Noble Earl, he should be anxious to vindicate the memory of his de ceased relative. The Noble Earl might forget, arid the Noble Viscount might also forget the manner in which his Noble relative had been received on his return to this country after having executed these treaties. But he very well remembered that his Noble relative had been received with acclamations by all parties—by Tories, Whigs, and Canningites—that he had been welcomed by an universal burst of applause by a British House of Commons. He hoped the Noble Earl, when he should have passed his Reform Bill, would be received with similar applause in that House; and if so, he presumed that, after the lapse of sixteen years from that time, if he should so long live, he would not come forward with reproaches against the Noble Earl. Having made these preliminary observations, he now came to the subject of the Belgic negociations, and, in order to place the matter in the clearest possible light, he would class what he had to say under three different heads. In the first place, he would con sissler the early part of the negociations, frosts the com mencement till the period when Lord Ponsoolty sent his famous letter of May or June last to the Belgic Congress. Iu the second place, he would consider the protocol re lative to the demolition of the fortresses, which had been laid on their Lordships' table; and in the third place, he would call th e i r L or d s hi ps ' a tt e ntion to the manifesto of the King of H o ll an d , an d t h e a ctual position of the seve ral parties co nnecte d w i t h these negociations. Fir s t, then, as to th e ear l y per i o d of these negociations, which had lasted eight or ten months, he had to observe that the beautiful system —as it bad been called—of non-inter vention had been held out as the ruling principle on which they were to be conducted : and yet there never was a transaction in which intervention had been carried to a more extraordinary extent, or in which there was so much vacillation and change backwards and forwards, so that the result was that to lain the whole was completely hear, from the Ministerial benches. ) Those who conducted the conference in the first place as sembled in order to settle who should be King of Bel gium, and then something was said about the Duke of Lichtenberg. N o , said France, we cannot allow a sou of Bonaparte to sit on the throne of Belgium, as that would be pregnant with danger to us. Then the Duke of Nemours was mentioned ; but no, said England, lie is too nearly connected with the Crown of France, and his holding the Belgic Crown would he danvroliti to us. g'cr the matter continued, until at last it considered that Prince Leopold would answer the purpose, and make a very proper Sovereign for Belgium. But it was not a little astonishing that Prince Leopold should be chosen as a proper Sovereign for Belgium by those who had pre vented him from becoming King of Greece. The pro position was obviously unacceptable to France ; but still, in consequence of some concessions made to them on the part of England, Prince Talleyrand and the French Go vernment yielded to his nomination, and so Prince Leo pold was appointed Sovereign of Belgium. But then it was very difficult to get Belgium and Holland to agree upon the terms of their separation. An arrangement was drawn up at the conferences, but the Belgians dis• sented, and then Lord Ponsonby came over to this country and was sent back again to Brussels, in order to propose to the Belgian Congress peremptorily to agree to the ar rangement prepared at the conferences. This arrange ment, to which Holland had agreed, was represented to the Belgians as being irrevocable, and then the famous document which afterwards appeared in the newspapers was addressed in the name of Lord Ponsonby to the Bel gic Congress. With all due respect to his Lordship, there never was a more extraordinary letter than this. It was very likely that the Noble Lord had authority to prey the adoption of the arrangement on the Belgians in the manner he had done. Now he (Lord Londonderry) did not go the same length as to non-intervention to which the Noble Earl opposite went ; but he did say, that it was a most extraordinary thing to give such a document to the world on the authority of a British Ambassador—a docu ment, to which not one member of the conference chose to put his name, and which not one of them would authenticate. At the beginning of the letter there was a most extraordinary excuse for the nature of its contents. It was said to have been written in the greatest haste. What ! a letter on a matter of this importance, written by an Ambassador in the greatest haste, and that haste made an excuse for its contents ! It put one in mind of a com mon conclusion of a school-girl's letter—" Your's in haste." Their Lordships were all perfectly familiar with that letter, otherwise he would point out to them most extraordinary passages in it. The letter went to the Con gress on the authority of the representatives of the Powers engaged in the conferences, otherwise the Congress might ask what right bad he to dictate to them iu this manner. His Lordship was a Commissioner, and he might have communicated verbally with M. Lebeau, or any other proper person, in ter ms like these, and then the persons engaged in the conferences might not be answerable ; but when this document was published to the world, with the name of a British Ambassador, the Administration of the Noble Earl, and the rest who were engaged in the con ferences, became responsible for it. The Noble Marquis then read some passages from Lord Ponsonby's letter, and asked whether there was not intervention here, and inter vention with threats and menaces? But it was needless to take up time in reading extracts of a letter which had been long before the public, and with which all their Lord ships were probably well acquainted. He could not help suspecting that the Noble Lord himself was not the com poser of the letter. He very much doubted whether it had not come out of the Reform shop. He had never read such a public document, and he asked the Noble Earl and his Administration, whether they adopted it ? It was evident that this document had produced a very strong feeling in France, and that the French Government considered it as a serious intervention with their interests. He had seen some continents on it in the French Papers, where it was described as in dicative of a fraudulent and jesuitical policy; and the writer in the paper asked whether the Administration of this country had so soon forgotten their principle of non-inter ference ? He would not, however, dwell longer on that letter. The Noble Lord in whose name it was written had been withdrawn from the scene of the Belgic negotia tions and sent to Naples—a douceur which he hoped would satisfy him for the loss of fame which be had sus tained in the course of his Belgic diplomacy ; and he hoped that his brother, the Bishop of Derry, was also satisfied. This brought him to his second point—namely, the matter of the protocol which had been laid on the table of that Ilouse. That protocol related to the demoli tion of the fortresses on the French and Belgic frontiers, and appeared to have been agreed upon at the conferences on the 17th of April last. Now he should like to know at whose suggestion that assembly took place. Did the four Powers, of their own accord, cause their represen tatives to meet in order to discuss the subject of the demo lition of the fortresses ? Could Belgium have proposed that a meeting should be held in order to discuss that sub ject ? Could Holland have proposed a conference for such an object? Could England have proposed it, whose blood anti treasure had been expended for the erection and maintaining of the fortresses? No; it could have been neither Belgium, nor Holland, nor England, nor any of the other Powers, except France. It was Prince Talley rand, on the part of Fiance, who must have proposed the assembling in conference to consider cf the demolition of these fortresses ; and for the condescension of the four Powers in agreeing to this proposition, Talley rand and the French Government consented that Prince Leopold should be Sovereign of Belgium. The condition of the assent of the French Government to Prince Leo pold's being King of Belgium was that the fortresses, or some of them at least, should rosés. It was clear that this conference took place at the instigation of France. Russia, Prussia and Austria could certainly have no great inclination for the demolition of the fortresses, but then they laboured under considerable difficulties, which pre vented them from giving a decided opposition to the pro posal. Russia was ravaged by a destructive disease, and Austria and Prussia could not play so high a card as that which they bad sometimes played on other occasions, and on that very account the Noble Earl should have shielded and protected them. But how had the Noble Earl acted? Instead of shielding and protecting them, he had yielded to France, and consented to the demolition of some of the fortresses. What was the reason that the result of that conference was not communicated to the French Govern ment at once, and why was the communication delayed till the French Chambers were on the point of meeting ? The object he supposed to be, to give eclat to the speech of the King of the French, on the opening of the Cham bers. The scene was got up in order to make a display of the great influence of the French Government in the affairs of Europe. Accordingly, the matter was introduced in a very vaunting way in the speech of the French King; but how did that agree with the terms of the protocol? There was an essential difference between the words of :he pro tocol and the speech. The protocol said, that the four Powers would enter into a negotiation with the Belgian Government as soon as it should be settled, for the pur pose of selecting such of the fortresses as should be demo lished. Then look at the speech of the King of the French. He never saw anything more like the gasconade of Napoleon. " The fortresses," said the speech, which had been erected on the Belgic frontiers—not to protect Belgium, but to menace France—were to be de molished—all the fortresses." If ever there was a gross misrepresentation, this was one. But, were the four Powers engaged in the conference, to submit to such a misrepresentation as this ? But he suspected, that as the conference had been entered upon at the instigation of the French Government, Prince Talleyrand managed all the debates, and that we were entirely in his hands, for any - political arrangement that might be formed at these con ferences. But this arrangement as to the fortresses was so extraordinary, that it surprised even the conductors of that paper—he meant the Times newspaper—which was so much patronised by the Noble Earl and his Govern ment. It was characterised as a measure of extraordinary and doubtful character, even by that bantling which the Noble Earl and hie colleagues had created. It was said by that paper, that if the great Powers of Europe had meant to light a torch in order to kindle a general war in Europe, they could not have taken a more infallible course to effect that object than by this proposal to demolish the fortresses. The French had no right to make this a condition of the settlement of the affairs of Belgium ; nor ought a mea sure to have been mentioned in the French King's speech as a clap-trip, to gain the applause of the Parisian popu lace. A lecture had been reed to the Noble Earl and his Administration by the conductors of this enlightened and excellently written paper. The Noble Earl had on a former occasion, read an extract from a letter of a Noble Friend of his (Lord John Russell), to show the incompatibility of an union between Holland and Belgium, and the impossi bility that such an union should be lasting. He (Lord Londonderry) would now read an extract of a letter of a Noble Friend of his (Lord Clancarty), who could not attend the House on this evening, but who had been concerned with his late brother in forming the arrangements and treaties of ISI4-15. The Noble Marquis then read an extract of a letter from the Earl of Clancarty, stating the conduct of the Allied Powers towards Holland was a total violation of the laws of nations—deny ing the right of Belgium to have Luxemburg, Limburg, and Maestricht--and also denying the right of the Allies to dismantle the fortresses on the frontiers, without the con sent of Holland, by whose money they had been built. Th e letter also ridiculed the Dow nin g -street conferenc e. The ° the policy of demolishing th ese fortresses. Noble Marquis, in continu ation, be gg ed leave to say one word naore Did dpectthie conference at London consult an y military man ? Was the Noble Duke— t i re illustrious n warrior who bad sanctioned the erection of these fortresses —consulted ? Was he sent for, or was his opinion asked ? W as the whole question of the frontiers determined by the eentletneti assembled at Downing•oreet, without askinfr the opinion of one military man? There was no military man in the Cabinet ; so that these fortresses were to be razed, which had been erected at the expence of British blood and British treasure, and the whole frontier laid open, without one military man having been called upon for his opinion. Did the Noble Duke—even the Pos t " mater General, who was, he believed, the only individua l in the Cabinet who was a military man—did he give anY, opinion on the subject ? If he remembered the scene valour he had witnessed, and the feats of gallantry b e had shared, he could but have seen with sorrow and re gret those fortresses given up, which it had cost England O much to establish. And for what purpose were they give ° up? Only to put all the interests of other countries at the mercy of France, There was no other Power which had on interest in dismantling them. If Belgium had been too Wen t ' to defend them, she might have applied for assistance ; 110, she done so ? He believed not ; and no application h a° , been made either by Belgium or Holland. Having dispos ed of the question as far as these fortresses were concerned, he would make a few observations respecting the Belgian negociation and the manifesto of the King of Holland. llt appeared that the conference, after it proceeded to cone!' der the question of separation between Holland and Bel gium, by the 11th and 12th protocols, it decided upon some positive arrangements, and declared unanimously that these resolutions and arrangements were irrevocable. The 19th protocol confirmed these arrangements, and declared even more strongly that they should be considered irrevell cable. The Noble Marquis quoted the protocol at solve length, to shew that the conference had decided that they' had unanimously agreed to these bases. They came t° this resolution in the llth and 12th protocols, and before the end of the month they came to another unalterable de: cision. What happened, then, to bring this abo ut.' Placed in a disagreeable situation, the King of flollana,. acceded to the conditions, and gave his entire consent to the 11th and 12th protocols, and to the determination U the conference as confirmed by the 19th protocol. Wl' land, then, acquiesced in these arrangements, and nothing was more plain than the course we then had to pursue' As mediating Powers, who had established a basis of Ile gociations, we had nothing to do but go straight forward' If we could not do the, we ought to have washed one hands of it. At least it was not to be expected we should support the rebellious party, and force the consenting party to agree to new conditions. Was there justice in that proceeding ? Could the Noble Earl justify that? W 0 this the course his Majesty's Government thought lice, nourable and proper? Belgium was obstinate a nd would yield nothing; but Holland, which did yield to the terms of the conference, was forced to comply wi ti l nsw articles and new arrangements made in favou r Belgium by Commissoners sent by France, who came t° London after Lord Ponsonby was recalled to London . This took place after the conference had stated that the arrangements load been unanimously agreed to and P oi' tively adopted. There was then a necessity for making the King of Holland acquainted with the new concessionn demandeci of her, and it was requisite to send semebodYt to the Hague. He rejoiced that this message was 0° confided to a British Ambassador. The arraneeme nlj were of as unfair a character as possible, and his Noble Friend, Baron Weissenburg, was sent to wheedle, el and cajole the King of Holland into giving his assent, anj persuade him to abandon what he had before afire to, and to induce him to depart from the eighteen 10' s '; urinary articles. It was very natural, that when t° King of Holland received this new communication , L , b ' e should be very indignant, and it was very natural tha t should resolve not to adopt it. The Noble Marquis tile j, t referred to the manifesto published by the King of WI land, to show that the King of Holland was indignant °, being required to change his views after having firs t his consent to the 1 Ith and 12th protocols, which We declared to be irrevocable. The King closed his Onto? festo by declaring that he preferred an appeal to arms complying with these new new demands.—(Hear, So much for the justice of the case. It was said O r Holland was to blame for breaking the armistice' but Holland had defended herself.—(Hear.) The Noll Marquis then referred to the speech of the Pu t ‘ Minister of Foreign Affairs to the States- General , as it i proof that Holland was justified in her proceedings, lot oath taken by the King of Belgium precluded the Ring t Holland from accepting the conditions. Never, sai d Noble M ot (pis, was there an independent Power so treat and ground down ; and the Noble Earl was called on answer the charge of having treated the King of Hollan ouroldest and best ally, in a moat unjust and unfair rts °l ner. He wished to ask the Noble Earl what was our pr sent situation ? There was a nominal King and a nod kingdom, but not one point had been adjusted. ference had made King Leopold, and could no in that unsettlel state.—(Hear, hear.) That. Prince was placed in a most unfortunate situation could not contemplate the present state of this alarm. Would the Noble Earl maintain this sta, by force ? Would he allow France to reduce obedience, and subject that willing Power, whi gociations Belgium hail lent an unwilling ea! Was that justice ? He had a few words mo the last part of that drama. King Leopold, wio that the King of Holland was going to invad , applied immediately to France, and France • sent 50,000 men into Belgium. Was that a fu! of France ? Was there such haste that a coo could not be first made to the Noble Earl ? at his fiat be waited for because the emerges great ? Why, Belgium load 4,000,000 Holland load only 2,000,000. Good God ! the King not wait—why wan such brew used ? He called on the Noble Earl to say w; ference thought of this? But at present Free 50,000 men into Belgium, and that was out sition. Were the days of Charles the Second and were we to be again united with France ruin Holland, not, as then, from pecuniary o because it was for the interest, and done undo ence of France? There wes not one of ouo since the peace of Westphalia who had not look( great policy of this country as consisting in ma; integrity and independence of Holland. Now load got into Belgium, would the Noble Et! out ? The Perier Ministers might be turned row. and might be succeeded by the War would the Noble Earl then rely upon their might, but certainly be (the Marquis of would nut. This country was placed in the gre pardy by allowing France even temporarily to occuPY glum. Ile suppos e d th e question was under discuss in the conference at London, awl the conference migh t . that the French troops should retire, but would they ' ply ? That tie King of Holland would consent t° arrangements thus sought to be imposed on hint bet not .believe, liar did he think it right that that I‘l° ° l should have such conditions imposed on him. I l j e j thus, he looped, made out a case why their Lon should consent to grant the papers for which lie owl move, and by which he should be able to substantiate e the facts, which he load now only stated from docn ° l to which all Europe had access. He hoped that b e t said nothing to induce their Lordships to believe eb ; did not desire peace ; he did; but he declared sole, that he would net tide it on in the unsatisfactory sp a s of truckling and yielding and bowing to I' raliel order to avoid the contingency of war.—(lleare v He load fortunately heard lois Illustrious Friend (the of Wellington) say that England, though not di`p°'it war, was as capable, as willing to enter intoo our honour and her interests demanded it.—(Heart That, too, was his opinion, and God forbid that the lish should tide it on at the will of France merelY tl l O war. We ought to take up a bolder tone, al" I Pt ussia, and Austria would also then take a Whist which they could not while we were so humble. was the state of France formerly and now? With Aig i in the possession of Greece, in the possession o f of Lisbon, perhaps iu possession of the Portug ue ! t e h in possession of the fortresses of Belgium, and w l d l thousand men interfering between that country an land—with France in such a situation, the Noble P a t ceived himself if he hoped to controul her by suh r ` i i il He charged the Noble Earl here—(A laugh ing produced thi s s t a t e o f things, and he felt On' or spectable part of the public would require so ve to these statements. If his motion placed th e , h Earl in an unpl easan t situation, be had himself tan for it, and would have avoided it had he given bin' to the questions he had asked a few days before) Noble Marqui s concluded by moving an horra bl _at to his Majesty, fox copies, or extracts of all tbe Pciroi luting to the negotiations on Belgium and 1 1° ,0 1 far as the same could now be produced, witho ut the public. Earl GREY felt all the responsibility of the r i tions to which the Noble Earl load referred (i. ) `be• used throughout the speech the English titl e of 'ref quis of Londonderry—Earl Vane—and consta nt U, to him as the Noble Earl.) He felt the hee'lY o nes responsibility of these trensactimes, aad that resPtios he should be prepared to meet at the prope r t ier from that he should certainly not flinch. Bu t e n' oee responsibility he would not take on bini,oo.l degree, that of the long speech of the N0b1e,,.„( for that he florist himself be wholly respon silne o i i hear.) lie should be very sorry had he b een A i s is in his duty as a Minister, or in courtesy aS that House, as to have given an 'nipper 3,1180 Noble Lord ; but provoked us he t o fight toear i ar oa ry t) , — wa iit n i i t t a h te t Put , t o him, with 41I 'wer .• "I e k 7':".;nti:44''''t4:Th i. .., ':lCW: t :Liat')}o3:l:4 . 4''°e7e:ttll°'e':"-14::(:'4' ( t '6::ert:'s:i11::r-ti ll hi li ll44(eetill4i.rl°l)l‘eit'llstnein-nstt a YTlvrd'ivilE's4Y i 'll,°:a r eirl t ea'Ol-.b''acttfaarin'ia ‘l 'll3(tlitilv.atnie i riti()‘l'safrih , ‘ a )tr'fl(tltthielis4li ary t 10,eitei,:sei,nilgseaorf.)pc pv,titl Atel):l4i 1 if ,roo u till ititlt,,ti t ,ttodel. Ilttt,iiiiatt,rrvll, sti4iitgoe?titthiioot tit avoid Idtttsaahlo h tieettuehle.o a irivtriteef d ,tuntsitrdikieet)ewouiega t sioute o eaprn,lst,l l ,,, ital'ue question; Pae(, ) a nd Gertnat _ uated from wo u l d ent of h ave this o (4 . 4 War to exe 'uer, hear.) E th at , ' " to wait ; h., "liberate ea the anxious hope I hli tl i ed to addre clit t i 4t " 9 , they w r oc " of what th e ql n t g Situation, Wo li t i j ri .el itY and dii 4 ' Place th, "MI Y Placed • con, Riit in I wow, ' the intere t e , it "; not join wi (lb 'es in which thtsti) hear.) H whi abl e Earl thi ba r d l l he i d„ , la tout )tkt / Knew what l'''lohi his own 4, „e Lords appe 40t T i e fi rst place, *hi in i ng adheres I ke e ; 't Professed oltai, on I to yi - and re-a waltretfi-renee 0 Le a ~ 'is prinei 1.41.t,1 With re 'll gil lnl and b'r 4i i l b e e ex , e , " - P 1 pi4r e ti O rie t t e , rieprieet.lifseho ; .: l: ne l 4e:, 7 us t( i ) l i s n ' t ( e '''Ur t s "'d acted, ke tit e ei 't. - !rtd i t I) (Ike t' l ' (I k e 't-iy had t hat . The Not. 14,. getieral cot 4 '11 4 '7 of hostiiii a , (4 unit ed %Id e , wit t hat h„,'''''• Of " Proceede wm• w a ' t' t '''ee i °Lishig: i BUo e :e N o ble ill:st:‘bt in ryitelaslate'(g o linintscilt justice. would ing sett I,e Alin iltitnat, .)untry a peace. Earl h t txplaine before `he Nc conduc •inal se a ditre ;ion ex folla of the u le Friel never chi he hi on e oft The ti, h . R. ith a p 4 11 p r, 44 ' 1 he cert ~ a t 44 t ltat l ve of all °e 1 eation t sot (i ! Lail no ant L a PPro ve o f 144) t l') h t hong ht„ 6ichwi , a not Yll4,,i't attempt tpsltisbeo!:charged AI" tN Lin g , at ay ,s e inption.- th k4 r l that i t I , ,, k l ll.4 , 4 C 4 a e t , tte nt a l p tlltit ) ti t lle :rdes,, et of Hullo ‘l , ; and I h e " Ja e , 'e PaB eL,"arY re Lie h o Pea„ f 'll 4 th e tun e 111 ' At ' 4 4 • tn e " 4 .14 d t I tt , r vio (11 0 to it , th e t , - w. , th 'eN te ,"el , G o y a Vtt ," lint ti, h4V e W Il t;, 't 'e x r su ch a a l l 1 , 4 tep r v e u uld not w :entati on l i t4 eo ,f t . e aIT t4 O t hat ti 4 tie r 11, 41 P4 4td he i tt ; 110 kcitiratle":44 Itated 4 4 1 . 1 , a nd been tial'tory, th at th ti4 a ght th ey w ti) 4 anti ha t thl ti lactO rV 41: 1 0 ~t ll th? () P , 111 of tact matt ( ki t t ''kt , h o. th e 1 , , til e '4 eY tit t ,: l ', h e i (It 114 I ` ) r ento "o atgq~l'altl tot, f o ",; 14, sad, then (4, 4s'd .`tral t tel g k vohl er • _ ~p t ar W a , IVOlktio'a% that L ' O lll4l theat reli. t , T4 llo pt tp nu a ~..- ,_. :41 ~ The col Ate, p. lo t leave 1, kheLt,,A ' at illw.trio to ll l e I),, k v ` tiou ; andt/t polinly, ar,e, ings tvithou•Oluj)' and i tate o f t hilig i Itud , 411 th e " e Rolland ° kik,"e Wa„, tile to all . e, %tate to d o . ar.--(Hear., 14,,d'oeuts vd ° th e 1%1 ore to sa, 1 1 ti •hen he lier bta,i44tima." ade Belgic It t , tl hoped Le immediate, Wouldid t a k t • • eedi 4 trl tl e , 1 ot proc ,00 % A le , oninuniest)lltrev, " he v and could 0f tidi 1 01 beir envy %rag .1)411)°° th people, ve v ntl ;) t he ul co u d 4ti, le cuu athless 10 ', I l ls i\ n, it present rif4ll v hat the o r, "4.(l.°"'e I ranee had ', f l'"4,11 see tl fully cx d returningi, l'lli n lAid I ein or tai let t i' of ti motives, Y ri , l 't , I " the c der the iv! 0,,,,i,e.0tigi iur State 5r t.t• I `cued I; ut oked upon # 0 6 ,, u sessi Laintaining ,i, lellae,,ln frt AV the Fre i ! t °ll 4 1,"" of 'sari get 0 ',l. h i .' h a d, d out to- 0 '''' N Alt 31inktry,if i'ttuh," nev muds? ; ,:), h g th at Londondei ;ift,rele,,, e was (.. 15 greatest/1;i t,,, !iiite. (I „.;. H