The Sun. — London, England, 1831-03-26 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. NO USE OF LORDS, 31.4 Awl 25. The Duke o f GRAF TON presented a petition from ,Suffolk in favour of Reform. Petitions were also presented by the Earl of CARLISLE, trom the seam en o f P oo l e , pray i ng to be relieved from contributions to Greenwich Hospital; and by the Duke of DEVONSHIRE, from Derby, Witham, and Youghal, in fa vour of Reform. Mr. MuNnar and others, from the Commons, broughl; UJ several private Bills. DOWN PETITION. The Marquis of LONDONDER.V believed the House was always disposed to r) tend its indulgence, when any Noble Lord kit an anxiety to explain misrepresentations of anything that was said in that House in the public Journals. Some of the public Journals of this day--he would not say all of thorn--had represented bins to have designated the persons who had signed the petition from Down, which Earl Grey had presentesl. last night, as being the lowest rabble of the. country. He must in toto deny havissg ever used Ruch expressions. What he had said vas, that it was signed by the fewest freeholders. With respect to the signatures of the persons whom the Noble Earl had al luded to, he had net seen the petition, and could not for a moment conceive that those respectable names which the Noble Earl I..sd referred to could hare t'.gned that petition. He trusted their Lordships would consider that he had non- set himself right with the House and the public, which was extremely important at the present time. It would have been most painful to him to have made the assertions attributed to him. Earl GREY was quite sure the House would attend to any statements made by Noble Lords for the purpose of relieving themselves from expressions that might be injuri ous. He was glad the Noble Lord had taken this oppor tunity of disclaiming those expression., for if he did not make use of them, he (Earl Grey), together with those who supplied information to the Presx, had fallen into a most egregious error. He certainly understood the Noble Lord tc say so ; he had repeated it and answered it, and no contradiction was given by the Noble Marqui. re specting it. The Marquis of T QNDONDERRY felt confident he had never used the expression ; if he ltti, he should be e-xceedingly sorry for it. The subject then dropped. Lord WHARNCLIFFE said, their Lordships would recollect that some time ago he had given notice of his intention to move for certain returns relative to the population of different towns and counties, for the purpose of bringing before their Lordships the whole question of Reform. It would be in the recollection of their Lordships that he had postponed bringing fortrard that question sine die. Owing to indisposition he had requested a Noble Friend of his to give notice last ',light of his inten tion to bring forward that motion on Monday next. That had not met with the convenience of some of the Noble Lords in that House, and the matter was postponed till Thursday. He begged to say that that day would be extremely inconvenient to him, and he should therefore bring forward the motion on Monday. The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from e. place in Sussex, praying for a repeal of the elsessed taxes. TITHES. Lord WHARNCLIFFE had to lament a petition on the subject of tithes and tithe 'nodose*, containing a ststerne‘r. which certainly gave him great pain, although the griev ance, as far as regarded the country in gerKral, would be remedied by the Bill brought in by the Noble and Learned Chief Justice. The petition was 'scan the parish of Car eloactan, Junton Heath, in the county of Glamorgan, and the petitioners stated that there had been in the parish mo dos for tithes from veer early times, but that in the reigns of King William and Queen Anne, the then incumbent had filed hie Bill to set it aside, but had failed, and that the bill was dismissed with ;nets. About twenty years ago the then incumbent brad filed his bill in Chancery to set aside the same moslus, but that the hill was dismissed with coats. But the question had again been tried lately, and the incumbent had succeeded. These were matters calculated to make a deep impression on the public mind. and it was high time that some remedy should be applied, and he hoped the Bill of the Noble and Learned Chief Justice would soon come into operation fet' that purpose. 'Lord KING presented a petition. from Barnsley, pray ing for a commutation of tithes, The petitioners stated that they paid tithes to persons who performed no spiritual duties among them, and whom they never saw ; and they mentioned a remarkable instance of a district in which there were twenty-five livings with only two incumbents. The Noble Lord also adverted to a remarkable instance in the diocese of Ely of the accumulation of church livings, one of them of the value of 6,000/ , and church dignities, in the hands of one person. These were curious instances of non-residence and an abuse of patronage; and it had been said that the Chancellor was not altogether exempt from blame ott this last head, as the patronage of one of the living's was in the Crown. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that he was glad of an opportunity to explain how the matter really stood. The right of presentation to the living in question was alternately in the Crown and in the Bishop of the Diocese ; and it happened that, some time before Lord Eldon went not of office, the presentation to the livine had fallen to the Crown, hut the Bishop wrote to Lord Eldon, request ing that he would allow him that turn, in order to present the living to a son-in-law, or same relationot his, and that, consequently, the two next turns would fall to the Crown. Lord Eldon consented. When he (the Lord Chancellor) bad been for three weeks in office, he received a letter, purporting to be from the Bishop, but which appeared to him to be in the writing of one who was in bad health ; and in this letter he was requested to allow that turn of presentation also to the Bishop for some relation of his, and that then the three or the four next presentations would b long to the Crown. But he, considering that if he did this it must be at the ex pence of future Bishops, declined to answer the letter, more particularly as the turn belonged properly to Lord Eldon, who had sacrificed the former turn. Some time after he received soother, stating that the former letter had been written, but had probably miscarried, and stating that the Bishop had a right to claim the presenta tion, and that if no answer was sent, it would be taken that silence gave consent, and that steps would be taken to take possession of the living. He then wrote, in answer, that he had certainly received both the letters, but that the latter put the matter upon a different footing, and he stated that it was Lord Eldon who had to decide on the matter. He wrote to Lord Eldon stating the case, and on their applying to him, it appeared that he had consented to the request. He did not approve of this mode of disposing of the patronage, for by this means the Crown would have the three or four next turns, at the expence of future Bishops of Ely.• Ile, however, was clear of blame; but he could not help suspecting that a person making these repeated applications at the expence of his successors, was net in a sufficient state of health and sound ness of mind to enable him, with proper discrimination, to dispose of church livings and prebends, and that he was en-rounded by some persons who abused his patronage. The Duke of NORFOLK presented a petition in favour of the Ministerial plan of Reform, front the county of Cork. Lord KING presented a petition from the county of Devon, in favour of the Ministerial plan of Reform. There was a county petition for a Reform before, but they met a second time, and agreed to this petition, in favour of this specific measure. This did not look like the apathy of which a Noble Lord had spoken the other night. Lord ROLLE said that he could not undertake to sly wlat was the general opinion of the county of Devon, but there were not more than 100 to 200 freeholders at the meeting. _ Lord KlNG—There was no reason for their being very numerous, as they had petitioned for Reform before. His Lordship then presented petitions to the same effect from the corporation of bikers of the town of Dunfermline, and from a place in Yorkshire. The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from a place in Sussex, in favour of the Ministerial plan of Reform. Lord PLUNKETT presented a petition from a place in Ireland, praying for a repeal of the Union. Earl GREY presented a petition from a place in Ire land, complaining of distress, and praying relief ; from certain Roman Catholics of Ireland, praying for the ex tension to them of the elective franchise, in the same man ner as to the Protestants; from Tuam, in Ireland, pray ing that the town might have the election of a representa tive, and in favour of the Ministerial plan of Reform ; and also from the suburbs of Manchester, to the same ef fect. The last petitioners stated that they did not think an y plan of Reform would be sufficient without annual Parliaments and ballot. In this he need not say that he did not agree with the petitioners. All the petitions were laid on the table. Several private Bills were read a second, and some a third time, when the House adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, 131mut 25. A great number of private Bills were forwarded a stage, and others read a third time and passed. Sir GEORGE CLERK presented a petition from the inhabit:int, of Edinburgh against the plan of Reform introduced by Minister'', The Hon. Member .aid the petition was most respectably signed, and worthy the attention of the House. It contained 600 signatures. Mr. HUME denied that the petition now under con aideration deserved anything like the .attention that was claimed for it ; it had but 600 signatures out of the 14.0,000 or 150,000 inhabitants of Edinburgh ; and so far from having been submitted to the discussion of public assemblage, it was got up at a private meeting, where only a few persons attended, and from which the reporter; for the public press were excluded.—(Hear, hear.) The moment business began, it was perceived that two gentlemen were i❑ attendance for the Edinburgh papers, and on its being intimated to them that the meeting was private, they of course ruse to withdraw ; and in an swer to their inquiries, it was stated that the conductors of the meeting and the petition did not desire to have any kart of their proceedings made Oldie. There was no one who had the means of becoming acquainted with the real state 'of public opinion in Scotland could doubt that the present Bill had obtained the approbation of inde pendent men of all classes, and that that counter petition was merely set on foot by the party which had too long ruled Scotland. He begged of the !louse only to contrast the two petitions for and tgainst—the one with 35,000 signatures, the other with only 600. Mr. PP(NGLE said that the meeting in question was ntte not called for the purposes of discussion, and there fore there was no occasion for the presence of reporters. Ile denied that the present petition proceeded from any particular class or party ; there wets: many persons in Edinburgh who favoured a moderate Reform, and there were even amongst the names to that petition those of men who had at all times supported those political views pro fessed by the present Government. Sir GEORGE STAUNTON bore full testimony to the accuracy anti care with which the proceedings of that House were generally reported in the newspapers, it was therefore the more necessary that he should avail himself of the earliest opportunity that presented itself of correct ing a mistake that had arisen with respect to himself, and he hoped the Hn'ane would then indulgently permit him to explain Mt correct what had been imputed to him ; for tlae alUestion of Reform was one, of all others, respecting which it was important that the sentiments of Hon. Members should not be mistaken. In presenting a peti tion on a former night, he had bee❑ reporte I not only to have said that be concurred in the views of the petitioners, but thct he gave to the plan of Parliamentary Reform his entire and unqualified support. What he did say was, that in the first prayer of the petition he agreed ; but not with the second ; and that looking forward to great modi fications of the Lill being effected in the Committee, he should taal:e for the second reading. lie was willing to advait that it contained some admirable provisions, but there were others from which he could ❑ot help dissent ing. He, therefore, voted for the second reading, being at the same time fully resolved to promote modifications in the Committee. Sir G. CLERK presented a petition from the county of Perth, against that part of the plan which proposed con necting that county with another. Mr. HODGES presented petitions from several places in the co-aUty of Kent in favour of the Reform proposed by Ministers, and one from Sandwich against the dis iranchiseinent of non-resident voters. Mr. MARRYATT and Mr. PRICE supported the prayer of the petitions. Mr. lIODGES then presented a petition fron the county of Kent, in favour of the Ministerial plan of Reform. The petition was agreed to at one of the most numerous and respectable county meetings he had ever attended, and that unanimously. Mr. JONES said bhere was one borough belonging to a Noble Lord (Cawdor) who was favour ible to the measure of Reform which, although it contained very few houses, was allowed to retain its elective franchise. Lord JOHN RUSSELL—The framers of the Bill had no intention to favour Lord Cawdor or any other Noble Lord. It was not intended to increase the influence of an) individual, its principle was strictly impartial. . . Mr. GEORGE DAWSON—There was one circum stance in reference to a particular county, that required some explanation, ho alluded to the county of Durham. —( Hear, hear, hear.)—lt had been stated that the Noble Lord who bore that title had been mainly instrumental in drawing up the Bill.—(Hear, hear.)—The conse quence was that Durham, which already sent four Members, was to have six more.—(Bear.),—What he complained of was, that as the principle of the Bill proposed to give the elective franchise to the greatest population and the greatest number of houses, he thought it unfair that Durham should have six new Members. When Lanc.sbire, containing sixteen towns all larger in population and the number of houses than the places in Durham, yet that county had no additional Members assigned to it, it required some explanation why Durham should he so favoured over Lan cashire. Such a system of legislature would never be satisfactory to the country. 11-natured people would say, that ender the name of destroying rotten boroughs the Constitution of the country had been cat up.—(Hear.) It would appear ag if Ministers wished to destroy Old Sarum and Gatton for the purpose of giving additional Members to Lord Durham.—(Hear, bear.) The way in which this measure. of Reform was managed by the public Press was most disgraceful.—(Hear, hear!) Speeches even in favour of the plan that had no effect in that House were published at great length, whilst those in opposition, however strong the effect they might have, were partly left out. It was pitiful to see such papers as the Times and mbers lending themselves to such a system. The people of En'gland ought, however, to know the juggle that was carrying on.—(Hear.) They were also entitled to an answer to the question he had asked, namely, why . Durham should send six Mem bers, and sixteen places in Lancashire, larger than ally of those in Durham, not send any ? Sir GEORGE WARRENDER must say, in jus tice to his Noble Friend who had introduced the measure, that he had been actuated by no feeling of private interest towards individuals. Ile was decidedly opposed to the measure, but he believed its promoters were perfectly im partial. Mr. C. WOOD was sure his Majesty's Ministers were actuated by no party or selfish motives, and he thought that on the presentation of petitions it was improper to discuss the question of Reform. Sir J. SEBRIGHT deprecated long discussions on the presentation of petitions. Sir M. W. RIDLEY said that the hint thrown out by the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Dawson) could not be correct, for the interest of those places in Durham that were to have representatives was divided between Lord Durham and the Marquis of Londonderry ; and if the one supported the measure, the other was no less determined against it.—(Hear.) Lord STANLEY said, that although population was one, it was not the only ground on which representation was to be given by the Bill. The design of his Majesty's Ministers was to give a fair proportion of representation not to the population alone, but to the interests of the place. . . An HoN. MEMBER observed, that Lord Durham had no interest at South Shields. Three candidates lead already announced themselves there, and not one of them was con nected with the Noble Lard. Lord J. RUSSELL stated that he did not rise for the pur pose of arguing the question, or of answering the imputa tion that had been made by the Hon. Gentleman oppesite, which would net be in that stage of the business very regular, because it would give rise to discussion, and would be going prematurely into a Committee upon the Bill. He could then have offered an answer to the Hon. Gentleman, but on going into Committee upon the Bill, he (the Nob'e Lord) would state fully the grounds on which the particular towns named in the schedules had been se lected, and Members granted to represent their interests. Mr. G. DAWSON observed that when he had stated his Majesty's Ministers had acted unfairly to the county of Durham, lie did not mike it as a personal imputation. It was one of those imputations, however, which rested on facts, the ground of which required to be removed in order to be contradicted. Mr. HUNT had no doubt that the people of England would be highly delighted to hear that the Right Hun. Gentleman (Mr. Daw4on) was so particularly anxious about their welfare and interests.—(Hear.) Lord MORPETH said, that the measure was supported by the universal voice of the nation. Mr. RUT lIVEN wished to call the attention of the House to an observation that appeared in the public Papers that morning, of an expression made use of by the Marquis of Londonderry last night, in the House of Lords. The SPEAKER rose to order. It was utterly impos sible that a breach of privilege of the ether House could be corrected by a breach of privilege being committed in that House. Mr. RUTHVEN, after making several attempts, and being called to order, made some observation s on a peti tion which he had to present in favour of the Reform Bill from the freeholders of the county of Down. Lord CASTLEREAGH observed that the petition was signed by 13,000 freeholders in the county of Down, no doubt highly respectable individuals, but as he had stated before, he was sorry to differ from them upon the subj ect o f R e f orm ; nor did h e cons ider the petition contained all the respectability or the wealth in the county, as he had stated in his letter declining to present the petition. He hoped Honourable Members for Ire land who came forward t o support t hi s measure , would consider. and weigh well the question, because he felt convinced that when the principles of the Bill were thoroughly understood in the Protestant Church of Ireland, and the re.action of it took place, there would be a very ereat change in the opinions that had been expressed. Mr. JONES hoped, that because Hon. Members on his side of the House were opposed to the measures ot his Majesty's Ministers, they were not to be cried down on the occasion of a petition being presented in favour of the Reform Bill, and not permitted to utter their opinions upon the subject. He for one certainly should not sub mit to be so put down, Petition ordered to be brought up. Mr. K. DOUGLAS hoped the Hon. Member whont he saw in his place would now name a time when he should bring forward a subject of vast importance which he had long since given notice of,' and that he would abide by that !hoe, that Hon. Members might he prepared to meet the discussion—he meant the subject of slavery. He for one should certainly have liked that the measure, whatever it might be, had been brought forward by one of his Ma jesty's Ministers. Mr. RITXTON said that his object was to intro luee a resolution that would go to the entire abolition of slavery. He had framed a resolution to that effect, though he hail it not with him at the moment. He certainly concurred with the lion. Member, that it would be most des'rable that his Majesty's Ministers should introduce the measure, and nothing would give him greater satisfaction than to find them come for. ward to do so ; but should they not feel so in clined, he should bring forward his proposition on (as we understood) Tuesday next. SUPPLY—REFORM. Lord ALTHORP moved the order of the day for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of Supply. Sir R. PEEL said that he wished to call the attention of the Noble Lord opposite to a matter of detail respecting the Reform Bill, but which was of great importance. For the purpose of his argument, if argument it 'night be called, he would take it for granted that the principle of the rill was very good ; and taking the principle to be ;right, he was quite sure the Noble Lord would agree with him that the principle should lie justly applied. It was of extreme importance, before going into the Committee, that care should be taken not to make the disfranchisementsfall upon places of larger population than the places intended to have franchises conferred upon them. Returns of population of different boroughs bad been made ; one of those returns was of boroughs going to be disfranchised, as well as those going to have the franchise conferred upon them. The return professed to be a return of the population of each city and borough; but he apprehended that it was not so. It was a return in some cases of the population in the parish in which the borough was situated—in other cases, a return, not of the population of the parish, but of the borough. Now it was clear the House ought to take the population either of the pa rishes or of the boroughs, and apply that rule indis criminately to both. This could not fail to be an acceptable propositon to both the friends and oppo nents of the measure. He was quite sure that this not having been attended to was unintentional, but still that could by no means diminish the injustice of the thing. He took the case of the borough which he represented, in order to show the injustice of the proposed measure of dis franchisement. The parish in which Tamworth was si tuated contained, according to the returns of 1821, no less than ';,500 inhabitants, whilst the number of inhabitants in that part of the parish comprehended by the borough, did not exceed 3,500, so that if the population of that part of the parish which comprehended the borough and not the population of the parish in which the borough was situated, were taken as the standard, Tamworth would be deprived of the right of sending one Member to Parlia ment. He would now take the case of Caine, in which it appeared by the population returns that the number ,if inhabitants was 5,600. But then it must be considered that the limits of that borough were identical with the limits of the parish in which it was situated, although the number of inhabitants actually residing in the borough did not exceed 3,500. Now if in this instance, the standard taken were the number of inhabitants residing within the borough, as in:the case of Tamworth, it would be evident that Caine, instead of returning two Meir hers, would only be entitled to return one. This being the case, he could see no just ground for depriving Tam worth of one of its Alembers, whilst Caine retained two. He did not intend to move fur any additional returns, but as it was of importance that the principle of the Bill should be impartially applied, he wished the Noble• Lord to procure returns showing the population of each borough, and of the parish in which the borough was situated. In the parish of Bridgewater for instance, the parish was of equal extent to the borough, but only one third of the persons residing in the perish were entitled to vote for Bridgewater. If the population of the parish in this instance were taken as the standard, it would appear that the population of the parish was 4,000, and, therefore, that Bridgewater would he entitled to send two Members If in all cases the principle would apply according to the population of the parish, as he thought it ought to do, he should be able to make out a strong case for the borough lie hail the honour to represent, to send two Members to Par liament. Lord ALTHORP said he had stated to the Hon. Member for Beroughbridge last night, that it was the determination of Ministers to abide by the rule of disfranchising those bo roughs whose population fell short of the number limited in the Bill ; but if a mistake had been made in the population of returns, which might work an injustice, it was not the in tention of his Majesty's Ministers to abide by these returns. Their object was to procure all the information they could, to attend to any suggestions which might be well founded, and if these returns were inaccurate to remedy the defect. Mr. FRANKLAND LEWIS complained of similar defects in the population returns of the borough of Radnor, arid other boroughs in Wales, and he asked the Noble Lord, would there be any objection to lay before the House the answers given by the officers of those boroughs to the questions contained in circulars from the Home-office. Lord JOHN RUSSELL disclaimed all intention of doing any injustice, and expressed his willing ness to lay those returns before the House. If it should turn out that the application of the rule to the parishes, rather than to that of the bo roughs in which those parishes were interested, was more favourable to an extension of the franchise, he thought it ought to be applied, and taking the statement of the Right Hon. Baronet to be accurate, Tamworth would still be entitled to send two Members. Lord STORMONT (we believe) adverted to the return for Scotland, as being probably equally incorrect with those for England. In consequence of that, the Anstruther dis trict of burghs, which contained more than 6,000 people, was to be disfranchised. If they adopted either the popu lation of these burghs, or the number of houses rated at 101., it would be found that they were more numerous than one borough of England, which still returned two Members, and more numerous than eight boroughs of England, that returned one Member each. Lord ENCOMB adverted to the borough of Truro, and said, that if the parishes only of St. Mary and some others were included, the population would be only 2,712 ; but if the parish of St. Clement was included, the whole population would be three times as many as were returned as the population of the borough. According to the re turns of 1821, the population was then 7,000, and be believed it had since increased very much.—(Hear.) He hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman's wishes would be com plied with as to the returns. Mr. G. MOORE observed that there were no returns before the House, as to the cess and rate payers of Ireland. From what he knew, however, of Dublin, he was sure, that, admitting all those to vote who occupied a house at 101. a year rent, would make the suffrage there nearly universal. He hoped that the Government would take steps to place an accurate return on the table. Mr. STANLEY said that there was a paper already laid on the table of the House relative to Dublin, though he believed it had not yet been printed. That was an ab. stract of the return made by the Commissioners for making the new valuations ; and if be recollected rightly, the whole number of houses in Dublin was twenty-two thou sand ; and that seventeen thousand of these were rented at te❑ pounds and upwards. Mr. O'CONNELL confirmed (as we understood) this statement, and suggested that it would save a great deal of trouble to the proposed Committee, or the Privy Coun cil, if they took the limits of the parishes ss the limits of the boroughs. Mr. STANLEY did not approve of the suggestion. Sir CHARLES FORBES said, so many objections were already made to the details of these Reform Bills, that the shorter way would be to withdraw them at once. The oppo.ition was already so formidable, that if ever the Bill went into the Committee—which it never should, if he could help it—it would be there plucked feather from feather, and at length kicked out, bare and worthless. An How. Mxstaxa expressed a hope that correct re turns for Scotland would also be laid before the House ; at present it was not possible to know what would be the effect of the Bill. Sir ROBERT INGLIS recommended that all further proceedings relative to the Reform Bills should be post poned till after the returns were made under the new Census Act. If that were done, the anomalies of the census of 1821 might be got rid of. Lord .JOHN RUSSELL, in reply to the Hon Member f lr Oxford, stated, that the returns under the new Census Act were only now beginning to be taken, and would not 'ie complete before August, and he did not mean to post pone the Bill to such a period. The effect, too, of such a delay, deserved consideratiat. Something had already been said about Malton and its 4,005 inhabitants in 1821, And he wished the House to remember what a temptation it would afford to make false returns, when, by the addi tion of five persona, a borough might-be secured from dis franchisement. With respect to the observations of the Hon. Member for Malmesbury, he admitted that there were some doubts as to the population of certain bo roughs ; and Malmesbury was one, and Buckingham was another • and there were about six in all. Having ad mitted that, he could assure the Hon. Gentleman that he had too much respect for the House of Commons, which had permitted the second reading of the Bill not to make his stand upon that ground, and endeavour to curry the 13i11 to a successful and triumphant conclusion.—(Hear.) Sir W. RAE complained that Scotland was worse off than England. For there were two sets of returns, which were not only defective, they were inconsistent and COQ tradictory. Sir G. CLERK wished to know whether the Learned Lord had yet any accurate return of the 101. householders in Scotland ? if the principle of allowing them to vote were curried into effect, the representation of all the coun ties in Scotland would pass out of the hands of the landed interest. The LORD ADVOCATE explained that there were already returns on the t.thle, which stated the number of houses paying 101. a year both in cities and the boroughs, and distinguished those in the boroughs front those of other places. An HON. MEMBER complained that these returns were by no me ins in the best shape ; and he must repeat the statement, that the present plan of representation would throw the representation into the hands of the manufac turing towns. The LORD ADVOCATE, in consequence of the time which the Reform Bill for England was likely to occupy in Committee, should be obliged to postpone the second reading of the Reform Bill for Scotland until the 22d of April. Sir ALEX. HOPE could not allow the question to be disposed of without asking whether it was the inten tion of the framers of the Bill that the Scotch Clergy should remain in the same condition they had been, or whether it was proposed that they should mingle the poison of politics with the discharge of their sacred duties, and, abandoning that course which had hitherto proved so eminently conducive to the moral health of the commu nity, become again political partisans. Colonel LINDSAY believed that the people of Scot land generally were averse to the details of the Bill, al. though some Hon. Members had been at such pains to re present them as unanimous on that subject. Mr. HUME denied that the people of Scotland were adverse to the Bill. From the one end of it to the other they had expressed themselves in favour of it ; and after the miserable minority—( Hear, and a laugh)—after the miserable minority, he repeated, on the question of Re form, he believed they could feel little anxiety on the subject. There were, to be sure, a few gentlemen who got returned for Scotch counties. and fancied that they re presented the opinions of all Scotland, who might, from feeling that it would affect their interests, oppose the Bill; but the great mass of the people were in its favour, as the petition from Renfrew, signed in a short time by five thousand persons, sufficiently showed. A MEMBER for a Scotch county denied that the great mass of the respectable portion of the people of Scotland were in favour of this plan of Reform. On the contrary, it was chiefly supported by those who expected to gain from it. A good deal of the agitation about Reform pro ceeded, indeed, from the exertions of the Hon. Member fur Middlesex, to whom he heard that many of the persons who petitioned in favour of Reform applied for instruc tions. And lie was told that the lion. Member, in con veying those instructions, expressly enjoined all applicants to make no objections to the plan of Reform, but would take it as it was, so that there might be no doubt of its success.—(Hear, hear. )—He had heard, indeed, that the lion. Member for Middlesex actually made a tour through the South of Scotland to forward the cause of Reform, and in order to make his progress the more affective, threw petitions for Reform from the windows of the mail-coach. Mr. HUME said the Hon. Member charged him with being the agitator of Scotland.—(Hear, and a laugh.)— He denied that he had done or said anything to induce any part of the people of Scotland to petition in favour of Re form until he received letters, begging him to point out the course fittest to be pursued. He believed that the oppo nents of Reform were mortified at the extent of agree ment which prevailed among all parties on the subject of the Bill. They were pained to find the Member for Waterford, the Member for Preston, the Members for Westminster, and men of all parties and degrees uniting in favour of the Bill, and that seemed to him to be their greatest grievance. He supported the Bill because it was good for the present.—( Hear, and a laugh.) Yes, for the present, because if he found it did not produce all the good he expected, he was certainly not precluded from coming again to ask for more.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) Mr. FERGUSSON bore testimony to the popularity of the Reform question in Scotland ; but he thought that the details of the Bill with respect to the increased power given to the manufacturing class, and the inhabitants of towns, in stifling and overcoming the votes of the agricultural portion of the community in the counties, required very serious consideration. Sir G. 'MURRAY, without denying that a great por tion of the people of Scotland were in favour of Reform, believed the county he had the honour to represent felt very little interest in the question. After repeating the state ments of the Hun. Member for Kircudbright (Mr. Fer gusson), on the defects of the details of the Bill, the Right lion. Gentleman enforced the question of the Hon. Mem ber for Linlithgowshire, (Sir A. Hope,) with respect to the Scotch clergy, and contended, that the result of the change in Scotland would be to compel the landlords to divide their lands into small farms that they might con tinue to exercise an influence over their votes. This, to lie sure, the Member for Middlesex would say, called for the ballot—and the ballot lac was ready to apply to it— but lie apprehended that the promoters of the Bill were not disposed to go so far, and that they would consider well before they produced that state of circumstances which would place the people of Scotland in such a situation. The LORD ADVOCATE, in reply to the questions of the llon. Members said, it was the intention of the framers of the Bill to leave the Scotch Clergy in the same condition as they found them. At the present monsent a Clergyman if he possessed the necessary qualification, could vote for a Member for a county like any other person, and under the Bill he would retain the same power if he had the qualification prescribed by the Bill. The framers of it were not, however, wedded to this part of its provisions and it was in the power of any Member in the Committee to exclude Clergymen from voting if they thought fit. After a few words from Sir GEORGE MunnAx, Sir A. AosiEw, Mr. Ltsossr, and others, Sir M. S. STEWART said that although the second reading of the Scotch Reform Bill was now postponed to a future day, and he must, therefore, defer entering fully upon this must important measure, although he had already repeatedly and in vain endeavoured to catch the Speaker's eye, yet as allusion had been made to the county of Ren frew, and doubts expressed by some lion. Members as to the prevailing opinion in Scotland in respect to this great measure, he was sure the House, impatient as it was to proceed to the other pressing business before it, would permit him to discharge his bounden public duty to the county of Renfrew, in assuring them that there was not only in the county of Renfrew, but throughout the West of Scotland, a strong, decided, and grateful feeling in fa vour of the Reform Bill.—( Hear, hear.) Besides, the coun ty petition from Renfrewshire, presented by his lion. Friend the Member for 'Middlesex, and which he under stood had been attended by some of the largest and most respectable proprietors in the county, he had himself presented petitions in favour of the Reform Bill from the ma gistracy and large commercial and manufacturing towns of Greenock and Paisley, consisting of more than '75,000 souls. The great county of Lanark, which be had the ho nour of representing in the last Parliament, had assembled and petitioned in favour of the Reform Bill. The liberal Aligistracy, and vast, and enlightened, and opulent corn. munity of the city of Glasgow, had sent up numerous pe t tions, all in support of the great principles of the Reform Bill.—(Hear, hear.) He thought, therefore, that as far as the West of Scotland was concerned, (and be believed the same feeling was almost universal throughout Scot land), there could be no doubt that the great current of public feeling among high and low, rich and poor, was strong, grateful, and exulting, in favour of the measure; and although he thought some of the details of the Bill would require alteration in the Committee, yet he could not but feel satisfied that the great principle of the mea sure would in its application be just, politic, and beneficial to his country.—( Hear, hear.) Captain WEMYSS said, that the vote he gave the other evening in favour of the Bill, might lead some persons to suppose lie gave it his unqualified support, and he there fore felt bound to say, that he approved of the doing away with the out-voters, and the dependent boroughs, he could not approve of all the details.—(Hear.) No man could say that the representation of Scotland was fit for the growing intelligence of the people--(Hear)—and if they extended the fiepresentation according to the possession of real property, he could not object to it ; but he certainly did feel that the plan of giving the manufacturing and the agricultural classes a power of voting in the way pre scribed by the Bill, would lead to a continual political war fare.—(Hear.) The Hon. Member for Aliddlesex said, there was a universal feeling throughout Scotland in favour of the Bill. He (Captain Wemyss) knew there was a feeling in favour of Reform—(Hear)—but it was a silent feeling as yet ; for the petitions he had hitherto received came from those who were under the influence of others, and which did not embrace the intelligence and respecta bility of all the counties. On his own estate a petition was got up by a master manufacturer in favour of Reform, and he actually forced all his men to go into his office and sign that petition.—(Hear.) This was the way petitions were got up ; but he did not deny that the people were favour able to, and desired R e form—(Hear)—although the re spectable part of the county of Fife, which he repre.ented, were much alarmed by some of the projected details of the Bill now before the House. On the motion being again put that the Speaker do leave the chair, Mr. BURGE rose to ask the Hon. Member for Wey mouth (Mr. Buxton) to postpone his motion on the sub ject of slavery until the papers moved for by the Noble Lord (Chamlos) were before the House. These papers were of importance for a proper consideration of the sub ject, and he hoped that the Government would now state what view they take of the subject. Mr. HERRIES also asked what course Government intended to pursue with reference to the Coal Duties and Canada Trade Bills ? Lord ALTIIORY answered across the table, and in a low tone of ♦oice, so that he was totally inaudible in the Gallery. In reply to a further observation from Mr. lIERRIES, Lord ALTHORP remarked that he was not aware that anybody objected to the taking off the tax on sea-borne coals.--(Hear.) Mr. F. BUXTON, in answer to the question put to him by the Hon. Member for Eye, said that he would certainly bring on the question of Negro Slavery on Tues day next. He should have been happy to have consulted the wishes of the lion. Member, and to have postponed the subject, could he feel sure that in that ease he might not be prevented from submitting it to the consideration of the House before the termination of the present P,ir !lament. . Lord HOWICK stated that it certainly would be more convenient to him if the lion. Member for Weymouth would postpone his motion. With respect to the papers to which the Hon. Member for Eye had alluded, it was difficult to select them from the voluminous mass of docu ments which existed on the subject ; but he could assure the Hon. Gentleman that no avoidable delay should take place in their production. Mr. PURGE and Mr. 11. Twins presled for the produc tion of the papers in question, as absolutely necessary, before the question could be entered into. After a few words in explanation from Lord Flowlcx, the House resoll ed itself into the Committee of Supply. NAVY ESTIMATES, On the motion of Sir JAMES GRAHAM, resolutions were agreed to for granting the sum of 75,110/. for wages to officers, ship-keepers, &c. on hoard vessels in ordinary ; and the sum of 40,3651. 11s. Id. for the expenses of the Admiralty-office. On the resolution for granting the sum of 31,5291. for the expenses of the Navy Pay-office, a short conversation took place, in which Mr. HumE, Sir JOSEPH YORKE, and Mr. P. THOMSON participated, the sum was reduced to 29,9297., and the resolution was agreed to. On theresolution fur granting the sum of 20,276/. for the expenses of the scientific branch, Mr. WARBURTON recommended that vessels, with chronometers, should be sent for the purpose of ascertain ing the exact position of the various headlands, &c. on the face of the globe, in order to give greater security to the operations of commerce. Sir J. YORKE was of opinion that enough was already done on the subject. . _ . . . . . Sir J. GRAHAM stated that four Government sur veys were at present going on in various parts of the world, besides that of the coast of Great Britain. The resolution was agreed to. The next resolution proposed was, that 82,2491. 10s. should be granted to his Majesty's yar Is at home. Mr. HUME observed, that seven dock-yards were more than it was necessary to maintain. Sir J. GRAHAM said the late Administration was dis posed to reduce the number, and that the present Govern ment concurred in that disposition. Mr. HUME complained that twenty clerks were main tained at Chatham, at an expence of 4,1001. a year—that thirty-one were maintained at Portsmouth, at an expense of 6,426/. a year, and that thirty clerks were maintained at Plymouth, at 5,950!. a year. Now this expenditure he considered too great, and begged to call the attention of the first Lord of the Admiralty to it. But bad as the system was in the dock-yards at home, in the dock-yards abroad it was still worse. In private yards two clerks were found sufficient when there were three or four hundred workmen, whereas, in foreign dock-yards, there were .21,000/. paid to clerks, when the whole expence for workmen was only 38,000!. Sir J. GRAHAM admitted that the expenditure was great, but thought it wrong to attempt at present any sweeping change. Sir B. MARTIN confirmed the statement of the Right Hon. Baronet, and said it was a common complaint, that there was not a sufficient number of clerks to get through the business in proper time. The vote was then agreed to. On the motion of Sir J. GRAHAM, a vote of 603,000/. was agreed to, for the pay o f 32,000 men, for one year, at 295. per month. The Right Hon. Baronet stated that this sum was 35. per month less than was taken last year fur the same purpose. UNAUTHORISED APPLICATION OF SUPPLIES. On the question that the Chairman leave the chair, Sir BYAM MARTIN said he wished to call the atten tion of the Committee to a mutter involving the credit of the King's service. He did not intend to trouble the House for a long time on the subject, but he thought the matter was of sufficient importance to call on him to bring it under their consideration. It had been publicly asserted, and the assertion had been studiously put abroad, that the late Board of Admiralty, and himself among the number, had made an improper use of the public money. A more slanderous falsehood had never been uttered. He now called on the Right Hon. Baronet, the Firit Lord of the Admiralty, to state whether, in the late Board of Admi ralty, the Navy Pay-office, or the Victualling Board, one shilling, or even one farthing, had ever been applied other wise than for the public service ? He called upon the Right Hon. Baronet to state, with that frankness and can. dour which always distinguished him, his opinion on this subject, formed as that opinion was upon an examination made by the Right Hon. Baronet himself. He was sure that a feeling of regard for the credit of the King's service and for the honour of the individuals concerned, some of whom now served under the Right Hon. Baronet, would induce him to give an explicit answer to the question, and to say whether they bad ever improperly expended the public money. It was a matter of importance to all the parties concerned, and he asked not only for himself, but for the late Chief Lord of the Admiralty, and for all the person+ connected with all the Naval departments, from the highest officer down to the meanest messenger or ser vant in them, whether by any one of these persons, any one single farthing of public money had ever been expended except in the public service ? Sir J. GRAHAM did not hesitate at once to answer the question. The Hon. Baronet asked whether he (Sir J. Graham) was of opinion, after the investigation of the subject that had been carried on under his direction, ' whether in the Admiralty, the Navy Board, of which the Hon. Baronet was at the head, and the Victualling Office, any portion of the money voted by that House for the public service had been applied to other uses ? He an swered at once, that decidedly no money had been so ap propriated by the members of the different departments referred to. The Hon. Baronet then went a step further, and asked hint whether ke thought any of the public money had been improperly expended by these Boards ? With that frankness and candour for which the Hon. Baronet had the kindness to give him credit, he would state—he was bound to state—his real opinion, which was, that he did think an improper use had been made'of the money, inasmuch as some of the sums voted by that House, to be applied to particular purposes, bad been applied to purposes of an entirely different kind. He thought that such an application of the public money opened a door to great abuses, and that if great abuses had not been com mitted, at least, the system was liable to produce them. He, having discovered this practice, had thought it his duty to bring the matter under the notice of that House. He did not mean to inculpate any one. He repeated, that these moneys had not been applied to the use of any one individual, that he bad not accused any one of malversa tion, but of misappropriation of these moneys, proceed ing from an error of judgment—(Hear, hear, hear).— and from the usages of ancient practices, which had long continued unchecked, but which became daily more and more dangerous, from the excess to which these applica tions might be carried. Certainly, without any pretence for saying there bad been any malversation, there had been an extensive misappropriation of the public money ; he had, therefore, thought it his duty to put a check upon the practice at present, and to take ample precaution against its recurrence.—(Hear, hear.) If he bad not decidly en' tertained the opinion he had just expressed, it would have been hardly possible that be, in his situation, could have, hot to answer the Hon. Baronet in his situation, who was still one of his colleaeues iu the Navy Department, and who was at this moment still holding the office of Comptroller of the Navy. Sir B. MARTIN admitted fully the truth of what had b.en stated by the Right Hon. Baronet, as to the exPe n T diture of the public money on objects for which it had no t specifically as ab b n e a e dd n it)lezeanit tt ee pe uras et v (t) o imc te e d hoa ; f, b , t u il t )(ei h sg e e rb o v v ei i tc s ,,e h i wished oo r t k o eae o p b l osenrgonat i t in h e a t p ta ti number of men than had been voted. It illia)daalforebateite:enf the practice to take the sums stated in the estimate a ' g „ r u o , s ,. s ti s o t , in a o n t , h , i s it np oo ra m i. l t d o b f e G ap r i:l n i , e , a il b le l , e to all the purpose' the Navy Department. That :practice had received thel of Welbore Ellis ; and he would ven o t f ur F e ox ;o of sa rs Y' r(ltritl3ll; ' and'o what they might, the practic e must still continue , s o le 1 - that House voted su c h am pl e sums as w ould be e ' ° ';, to meet all exigencies. He had proofs in his he establish the tr u th o f hi s o pi n i on on that point, hot would not trouble the House with them at that mouter's, He repeated, that though a different practice might ben, adopt e d, it cou ld not l ong cont i nue . Th e House r ei g, t make the Approp r i a ti on A c t one d ay , an d a gale then e t tnicht blow it into atoms. Ile would only add, that pal had been done by the late First Lord of the Adtrsiralt)'' been done by all preceding First Lords of the Man ° ' whether Whig or Tory. • nt Sir J. GRAIIAM th oug ht thi s was no t a conve rlie d opportunity for discussio n u p on th e measures he had adl te with reference to this subject—(llear, bear) —and it hardly decorous for him to enter into the discussion tv., the Gallant Admiral, who certainly had pro luced the h a d thority of great names, but who in his statemen t . omitted one most important feature of the case, °li h e ' that with respect to this subject there bad been a en ni P f change of the law in the year 1798, when a new 11 $ 1° 4 :, the Appropriation Act was adopted, so that all the Pe:" ( i. tice and all the authorities of previous Lords of the 7 0,t miralty went for nothing.—(Hear.) He did admi t, t t with respect t o t h e re p a i r o f s hi ps an estimate was still P 0 an estimate, and might fail in being correct ; but h e c° it tended, that when, through particular circumstances', did fail in correctness, it was due t o th e Commons of 1 ; t41 ,7) sod that there should he no c o n cea l men t—( Hear, —that nothing should be kept back, but that, foresee tb;i4 the necessity of making a heavier charge than before, t yt necessity should be frankly and truly stat e d. They s ' t i fa t make the hest of the matter, but he repeated, ose it was due to the Commons of England to let them " p d the exact appropriation of the money they had vo ted' a ye that hail not been the practice for the last four or 0, years. Ile haul before mentioned the unauthorised Oro diture of public money at Weovil, and at other pla cel4 :tt, he would now t eier to two other cases of the same s- 0 , that he had recently discovered. The first of these n i . the erection of the mills at Deptford, which w ere e?'" ; nected with the manufactures going on in the visas all tn e d yards there. The erection of these mills was conate ° 4 ., ' s s in 1826, and was finished in 1827, and the coat; eo 76,2371. The whole sum voted by Parliament for t ", o s, buildings was B,oool.—(Hear, hear.) The other cv, tens that of the M e dic a l H os pit a l a t Ch a th a m, whit That likewise cotnmenesd in 1826 and finished in 1827. A f o r erection cost 61,6591., and only 7,0001. had been vnt e ". o o it.—(lleac, heir.) He was prepared at the proper °to, to go into the discussion of this subject upon all the e a t, connected with it ; and when he did so—he was sure ttiat; if that House was not lost to all sense of what was d n tt their own dignity—he was sure they would take ca re n ot such practices as those to which he had referred shou ld be repeated.—(Hear, hear.) f the Sir G. CLERK said it hail always been the wish 0), Lords of the Admiralty so to frame the estimates tha t it ire should not be likely to exceed the sums that niV" la wanted. It was impossible to check the expend iture fot , the manner supposed by the Right lion. Baronet,.oo., after it bad been ordered, the details of that exPe P 4 d A l t el' never came again under the notice of the Board of .''' . ;i o ; ralty, nor had they till very lately the means of k ne oet how the money had been expended. Ships Wer e rally three years on a foreign station; they were the7, ett p tiered home, and others were sent out to relieve t a l' 4 o Between the time of the home ships getting out an ships on the foreign station coming home, a double re' pence of wages arose, and as the number of ships til e '" lieved was not the same in every year, it became ° r oo k' sable always to be aware of the exact amount that ve no t be required for that branch of the service. Ile t eas fo r a little astonished when he heard the Hon. Member r ite Middlesex and the Queen's County express their a ur !, of at the discovery that the money voted for the pure l n r e t as timber should have been applied to the payment of Ws p lisf That application took place in 1827, and under Pe c o ter circumstances. The expenses of that year were g t g et than had been anticipated. A number of men we re , in ships to the Tagus ; anti as it was impossible t° the coasts of Kent and Sussex unprotected, nunll'ited men were employed, and the amount of money r ec l o tV for wages was greater than had been anticipated. VP„„ pe r , year 1829, the rate of wages bail been fixed at 2 / - month. The amount too was increased by the le", flo e time our squadron was obliged to remain abroad. Tb3 oth e not the amount of wages of particular men, but it Sy f t he average. In the year 1829, however, on account of deficiency of the sum voted for wages in the preceding . e far the Government were cotnpelled to apply to the fi• a vote, calculated at 2/. 12s. per month. He tied Clerk) then stated that on a former occasion ciency of wages was made up from the surplus, a tla°' from the sale of stores. The r e c e nt surprise of tu j e fre a/ Members was ther e f o r e not eas ily t o b e aecounte ° "f th e What was th e resu lt o f th e i ncrease o f th e e stimat e ,: ail' wages for 1829? Why, thi s ; th a t i n th a t year ference between the estimate and the e xpendit ur i er e amounted to twenty-five pounds. In 1827 thereoooi, 33,000 employed, and the wages amounted to 1 9 d tY, more than the awn voted for them. The aggregate C. excess of the expenditure over the estimate in that and two following years, owing to the peculiar e ircutp,: ig 1 1 ' ( he had stated, amounted to 404,000/. ; but, ( 10r1 v esr k l ', same period, the money expended in timber Iv° at I' m 1,000 th ,000/. less than had been voted. So thatlrblia end e country lost nothing through the system t e m A d ' the Right Hon. Baronet objected. Besides thi s l oe:, miralty had nothing to do with the payment ° 4. • e which were under the immediate contreul 0f t"e Board. With respect to the direction of the e%Peripoaty upon public works connected with the Victualli n goon e i t he believed it would be found that, having surP lu t : Ob l e e d, in their bands, they expended that money on asmen•ePtio°• the Admiralty and that House had successively B'°_ After any works had received the sanction o f tbr opr rally and of Parliament, it was left to the partieto oec' o f patment to which they related to carry them e ,tiol )e y Lion, and on that department depended the- 0 0g t ic h how soon the works were to be finished, or it° - a s n ) . t re . were to be delayed. The Government, anxinuel" JO' be as possible to keep down the annual expendit ur . 6 olo!• o re that no works which were not absolutely necessa r y " t her e{ f o r pressed forward ; and some public works hadiitarefoa gone on slowly, in order that the eXnel l ' iroa ld o re the particular year might be kept down. I t seed ern' quently be consistent with good economy to pr h °, oove d ,,, rapidly with these works; but the wish of t t i o ala i e vith ment, he load before stated, restrained the 00 e pirtment from proceeding with them eery raP tp t respect to the works at Weovil, he would jus t ° ', e ,auo lora circumstance. When it was stated to the ; : e •i it be ,he the new buildings required at that place fro h e re' nished with the money that would be obt ai t - ipgs sale of the materials of the old and useless burl t' o n be p authority was given for the department top gated these works. The whol e o f the exen diture w hen O f necessary was 50,000!. ; and the old b u ildingst_ t erT ha d produced nearly that sum. He found th a bat etn l io to 80,000/. had been paid for the dwarf wall: tand been paid since the Right Hon. Baronet lou t w ielte f claim used cffiee. the S m ur e e t l i y t , of if consistency,theßightheought Hon. Barone have rep to pay the money which had been expended ° t : Paea tal l t he C dertaken without authority of Parliament . ! a rt' He was prepared to admit, that that eau t !: t he fi e f: in' Right lion. Baronet wished to introduce tin jo so"; _ad• tnent with which he was connected, tnig lit 'n o ard ° tha t stances, be beneficial. As far as the late . 00°,04 miralty was concerned, he could assur e tn.o otept a er ubl io nothing was more desired than that the st, el b t he P per should be instituted into the manner in vib ie ;dee fo re 13 for money had been expended. He should o ld sonal obligation to any lion. Member whoa 0 561 papers that would lead to a full inquiry' of t he Laird ALTHORP suggested that the t i h wu; u bject rtun ity which had been fixed for entering sider that sufficient.—(Hear.) o C f iv n i i l a L k i i s n t g . s his extphleanHaitiino.nß, pareornheatrshuatphdoebna..tdo_:lsej:::to:lneeloaro:tintoe: his ds that bhrao‘ T uing h gl e itb C uep H en : r i ena l s iS no l rin i r k oe N dw,.i t t he w n a l s ef o t / 1 1 )11S odd titi °ll do adjourn until Monday. fP e or F TII louse at't dy ea Lord ADJOURNMEN T AI,'I RPmov moved t o b t o b Mr. e p ree l :p i le ' Ed soanid the oat subject there woasf auvetrotrwbo„ sod I. Itp 4, e(1 Purp, se lewd 7 ll air, 'er n wo AI, 14 Prop )s It era, ' l on(l4.ly.