The Sun. — London, England, 1834-05-17 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNAL S: The minority for a repeal of the Septennial Act en Thursday was such, from its respectability both as to numbers and character, that we may pro nounce, without much indiscretion, on the certain success of a similar motion before many sessions shall have elapsed. The stock of arguments of the septennial entlemen were those resorted to by Igied Althorp, who said that he had voted for a nrtailment of the duration of Parliaments while House of Commons was still unreformed, be 'cause so much of that assembly was returned by the oligarchy, and so small a portion by the people, that hie drought it desirable to bring the latter class 4of members more frequently within the grasp of their constituents. But that now, when the whole body is returned by the people, there exists no such necessity. Now just weigh this argument for a little, and see what it amounts to. It is clear, that under the old system, the rotten boroughs, the close boroughs, the close corporations, and the Leviathan-ridden counties—that is, those wherein some one great family, from immense ma gisterial, clerical, and financial patronage, added to the authority which this influence gave them over the freeholders of their own and all the surrounding. districts,—it is clear, we say, that the representa tives of the aforesaid powers were unchangeable, and therefore incorrigible, by any such process as a 4lissolution of Parliament. Slaves they started, and slaves they came home. On the other hand, the representatives of the open counties or towns, in number probably about three-sevenths of the entire House of Commons, being returned, as Lord Al thorp said, by the people, and therefore responsible to the people, but subject to be gradually wrought upon by the corrupt hopes or fears instilled into them by the Treasury, were just that class of mem bers of Parliament who might be considered fit subjects for a new election, that their constituents might have an opportunity of sifting their conduct, re-considering their own choice, and sending the gentlemen again to the House of Commons, or sending them about their business. This therefore is Lord Althorp's reasoning—" Formerly, when the house was partly free, I voted for short Parliaments, with a view not to act upon the oligarch members, who were immutable, but upon those members who did really represent the people, to save them from betraying the people's rights, or to punish them for having done so ; but now, now when the whole House of Commons consists of precisely the same class of men, of men freely elected, but open to the slow dry rot of corrupt influence, the very same class of men in consideration and in respect of whom I always hitherto held short Parliaments to be de sirable, that the representatives might go back to be confronted with and account to the people—l have now discovered that quite a different policy ought to be put in action, that reform—the magical word reform'—has not merely extended the basis of popular election ; increased the number of freely chosen representatives, and thus improved the phy sical machinery of our institutions, but has actually made human nature undergo a metamorphosis, annihi lating all those selfish motives by which men had been heretofore impelled to activity, and tempted to sordid indulgence—quelling at once the appetite for money, and quenching the thirst of ambition—stripping bribery of all its seductions, and purging humanity of all its weaknesses and vices." This, all this, and more, must be attributed by Lord Althorp to the Reform Bill, in its operation, not upon the political institutions of the country, but upon the immediate work of the Creator, the mind of man itself, before we can allow that there is one particle of consis tency, force, common sense, or truth, in his reason for not now applying to the representatives of the people, when they constitute the great bulk of the House of Commons, the same test and the same safeguard which, if the old Parliament had not con tained a certain though limited portion of free mem bers, he admits that it would have been fruitless to apply to it, and which had for its exclusive purpose to keep within, or recall to, the path of their dut: those who had been fairly elected in the unre formed House of Commons, or, failing both, to su persede them by representatives whom the nation had less cause to distrust. So much for the first great argument used by Lord Althorp. His Lord ship next asks, will any man say that the mem bers of the house are not now responsible to their constituents? That, with all deference to Lord Althorp, is not the question. The question is—are they enough so ? Have the constituents hold enough over their representatives to present any moral security that the latter will not sacrifice the interests of those who sent them into parliament, for the sake of some advantage to themselves? We are of opinion—and so was Lord Althorp, not long since—that the responsibility is too weak, because the day of reckoning with the electors is too distant. Is it not obvious, that when a member of parlia . ment has five or six sessions to come and go upon, he may drive a precious bargain with the minister for lucrative offices to relatives or dependants, and thus obtain a rich price for his votes, though not ostensibly in his own person, but more profitably and safely through the medium of friends, without endangering his own seat, or exposing his minis terial patrons to the risk of dealing with a less tractable successor ? But it is likewise said that the crown ought not to be driven into a corner, and forced to dissolve parliament at the very hour when the country is in a ferment of headlong hostility to the King's advisers. We are no friends to the operation of mere momentary impulse in deciding the choice of representatives or the fate of a ministry. Will the advocates for long Parlia ments, however, insist that when the country, or, in other words the general constituency of England, does happen to be thrown into a political ferment, that ferment . must always be unprovoked and un founded ? Is there no such thing as actual misgo vernment ? May not the people be justified in their indignation against the ministers of the crown —and is it no calamity to the nation that when the discontent which inspires it does happen to be no thing more than the true index and measure of the Tongs which it has received, the wrong-doing go vernment should have the power, under a septen nial act, of prolonging for four, five, or six years, as the case may be, the same course of vicious policy which has produced the disaffection, without check or obstacle from any exercise of the national control ? The rabble may be now and then absurdly excited— the nation, we hope and believe, hardly ever ; at least, for any period during which a serious injury could be inflicted on the state through the prevalence of such a disorder. And again—this apprehension of popular violence takes for granted that some - thing like a demand for Annual Parliaments had been put forth by the supporters of Mr. Tenny son's motion. Who dreams of that, save mere un reasoning visionaries ? Few now are advocates, we believe, for a term so short as three years, at this early period, after so great a measure as re form ; and in four years—the length of life which we, with others, have ventured to recommend for Parliament—there is as much opportunity for flux and reflux of the tide of national feeling as could be required by any minister not bent on a disregard of all symptoms of public antipathy, or on perse vering doggedly in a course of provocation and in justice. The truth, however, is, that if there be anything in the objection against short Parliaments, because of the scanty opportunity to cool down the popular feeling before an e l ec ti on , it wou ld go to the extension of the life of a seven years' Parliament to ten years, as well as that o f f our years to seven ; for it might so happen that the nation would entertain some strong dislike of the govern ment, and owing to some unlooked for cause in the sixth or even the seventh year of the exist ing Parliament, so as to force a . new el ec ti on in the teeth of that adverse spirit ; but we have not yet heard any man bold enough to suggest an act for enabling the Crown, on such a ground as that, to substitute a decennial bill for th . e present duration of parliament. Mr. Stanley did injustice to the arguments for the repeal of the septennial act, when he assumed that the triennial bill was described as the " constitutional" term assigned to British parliaments. Such a view of the question would have been miserably feelble ; for, doubtless, two-and-twenty years is not, under any circum stances, a pattern era for the legislature to be guided by ; yet was the time, however brief, dur ing which triennial parliaments existed, no frivo lous portion of our annals. The reigns of Wil liam 111. and Anne present no very contemptible or odious specimen of British history in the arts of war or peace, in martial, political, or literary glory ; and the parliaments of those periods acted as a constant and salutary check on the extravagance of ministers and on the power of the Crown. The debate altogether was far from edifying, except for the extraordinary inequality between the amount of the reasoning employed on the opposite sides of the question.—Tines. The Whigs have, at least, earned the praise of 1 consistency in opposing the restoration of Trien nial Parliaments. As to the authors of the act whereby a Parliament elected for three years pro longed its own existence to seven, the consistency of the Whig party in this point of view extends over a period of nearly a century and a half. 'There have been, indeed, certain intervals during that time when some of the leaders of the party were so far inconsistent as to take exceptions to Septennial Parliaments, and even to vote for the shortening of their duration. But then it should be borne in mind that all such backslidings into po pular virtue occurred when they were out of office. Mr. Tennyson did not make allowance for the dif ference of position between a patriot in place and out of it, when he quoted Lord Grey's words against Lord Grey's ministry, touching the incompleteness of any plan of reform which was not connected with a shortening of the duration of Parliaments. The chief argument relied upon by the Whig mi nisters and their satellites at present against the repeal of the Septennial Act is that the Reform Bill has rendered it unnecessary. But what was Lord Grey's opinion when an opposition member of the House of Commons ? It was, as Mr. Tennyson stated, to the effect, that without a reform in Par liament there would be no use in shortening its du ration ; but whenever reform took place, the life of Parliament ought to be limited to three years. The opinion of Lord Grey was, no doubt, founded on the supposition, which is as good at the present day as it was forty years ago, that no practical good could result from sending members back to nomina tion boroughs every three years. If they were sent back every year they would still have been indepen dent of the people. But Lord Grey did think that much practical good would be derived from compelling the representatives of the people to re turn and give to their constituents an account of their stewardship at intervals of three years, when ever a real representation succeeded to the fiction of a virtual one. Therefore Lord Grey cannot now oppose triennial Parliaments, except on the ground that no real reform has taken place, and that the Reform Bill was all a juggle—a thing which " kept the word of promise to the ear, and broke it to the hope." It is related of George 111. that, having asked a newly-appointed Attorney-General whether he had ever yet been in Parliament, he shrewdly re marked, upon his answering in the negative," lam glad of it, for you will not then have to eat your words." But if the venerable monarch had happened to have had Lord Althorp for a Chancellor of the Exche quer, who could conceive the mental torture he would have undergone upon finding that so high a functionary of the Crown had to eat his words so often? The country has heretofore seen that he ate his word npon the assessed taxes, the malt tax, the practice of military flogging, and some other ques questions in reference to which his opinions in office are directly opposed to his votes when in opposition. So it is with regard to the Septennial Act. "It is true," he says, " I have several times voted—l do not know that I have spoken, but I have several times voted —for shortening the duration of parliaments ; but this was during the unreformed parliament." Any person, then, who says that his lordship ate his words in reference to this question, says that which, on his lordship's showing, is not literally true. He takes the distinction " I only voted for shortening the duration of parliaments, I do not know that I' spoke." This is no doubt a material distinction. Be sides, though he did vote for short parliaments, it. was only in an unreformed House of Commons. Good again. The meaning is that he voted for short ening the duration of parliaments ; when there was' no earthly chance of its being carried, and when, if it had been carried, it could serve no earthly pur pose. What did it matter how often the member, of Gatton and Old Sarum, and the whole constel lation of close boroughs, went through the mockery of an election ? But it does matter a good deal whether the members of populous constituencies arc to give triennial accounts of their conduct to those who elect them, or whether they shall have six years to practice all sorts of servility to the Minister of the Crown, reserving one year to en deavour to make their peace with the people, and to verify the sarcastic observation of a celebrated writer, that a " death-bed repentance seldom amounts to restitution." We have reason to be lieve there is not a small number of members of the present House of Commons who got into Parlia ment during the reform struggle by making magni ficent promises, and who dread nothing so much as being obliged to face their constituents. They have reason. The recent discomfitures of Whig candidates, wherever they have shown themselves, prove that their fears are not imaginary. Therefore they say it is necessary to have Parliaments of seven years' standing, that they may learn the Par liamentary forms ! Why that senator must in deed be an egregious dunce who could not learn enough of " Hatsell" in a month to serve him for at least three years. Who is the colossus of form and precedent in the House of Com mons? Is it not Mr. C. W. Wynn? Though a walking index of the journals above the ordinary stature of mankind, is he not in all that relates to mind and legislation a mere pigmy ? The country wants men of honest and real talent, not pedantic red-tape formalists, to conduct its affairs in parlia ment. The country is more likely to procure such men by shortening the duration of parliaments than by allowing the representatives to be for a long term of every parliament comparatively independent of public opinion. In a triennial parliament such an outrage would never have been committed on the constitution as voting the Central Bashaw Bill, even with the reservation of cutting it down in com mittee. The minister who could have dared to pro pose it would have found no smiling and obsequious majority ready to share with him the " glory" of the measure. He would have reason to rue the day that he ever threw the mantle of his high office over the vile features of this Malthusian job. It is consistent enough that Mr. Stanley should fly to Sir Robert Walpole for weapons to defend long parlia ments. To defend corrupt influence, nothing can be so appropriate as the name and authority of the great master of parliamentary corruption.—Herald. The Chamber of Commerce of Lyons pro poses very shortly in that town a public exhibition of every species of silk goods of foreign manufacture. The object of this exhibition is to benefit Lyons, by enabling the manufacturers to study the mode of ma nufacture, patterns, &c., compare the prices, and other wise appreciate the state of the silk trade abroad. THE CONSPIRACY.—•" Canaletti, Prout, Stanfield, and others," says the Athenceurn, " have made us intimate with every coign of vantage,' of the Sea-Cybele,' from the fine old barbaric pomp of the ducal palace to the last grace and perfection of Palladio. As to the Piazza San Marco, the Rialto, and the Bridge of Sighs, they are familiar as Regent street ; as to gondolas and guitars, and the masquings of Carnival-time, there is not a point concerning such like pleasant subject, upon which a well-informed home-dweller could not give, rather than receive in formation. - So be it ; Venice is the chosen home for romance and imagination, and under the hand of a master, the subject is so far from being exhausted, that there is yet room for much to be sung and told about this place of enchantment and mystery. The Conspiracy' is alive with exciting incident, whether occurring in the secret chambers of the conspirators, in the dungeons of the Inquisition, in the veiled gon dolas, in the palaces of St. Mark's-square, or the moonlit lagunes, or the wild shores of the Adriatic." IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, May 16. , . Their lordships met to-day, pursuant to adjournment, at four o'clock. The bills on the table were forwarded a stage. The Earl of RADNOR presented petitions from parishes in Kent, praying for relief to the agriculturists. Lord WYNFORD presented a petition from a place the name of which we could not catch, against the Beer Bill. The Duke of GLOUCESTER presente& petitions from Segrave, and parishes in Devonshire and Yorkshire, against the admission of Dissenters to the Universities. The Escheats and Forfeitures Bill was read a third time and passed, as was also the Court of Chancery Bill. WARWICK BOROUGH BILL. Their lordships then proceeded with the further exami nation of witnesses on this bill till ten minutes past six. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE laid on the table cer tain papers relative to the state of the Canadas. The Earl of ROSEBERRY postponed the second read ing of the Roman Catholic Marriages Bill until Tuesday the 27th inst. He also begged to state that the select committee on Scotch Entails had made great progress in their proceedings, and he had been requested to apply to their lordships to have the bill reprinted for the use of the committee. The bill was ordered to be reprinted. The Marquis of DOWNSHIRE rose to present a peti tion of which he had given notice, from the clergy of the diocese of Armagh, &c., when The LORD CHANCELLOR interrupted him, by stating it was understood the examination of witnesses should go on until about six o'clock, or a little after, and as the petition of the noble marquis might create some conversation he would suggest whether it would not be unnecessary to keep counsel and witnesses waiting, and to adjourn the further proceedings until Thursday next. About 35 witnesses had already been examined, and there might be still 100 or more to be examined ; a bill was also coming up from the House of Commons, which might pass and receive the royal assent, and would probably expedite the proceedings. He wished that such a course should be adopted as would afford the parties interested the fullest opportunity of putting forward all the facts of their case by strictly legal evidence. There was, how ever, this difficulty, that it was probable the proceedings would be almost endless unless their lordships were put in possession, in distinct terms, of the points which the learned counsel wished to prove. (Hear, hear.) It was not unusual, or unprecedented, to leave an opening for petitioners to a bill or against it (Hear), and he thought it would be better to have the case distinctly stated first by counsel, as was done in the case of the late Queen. This was the result of considerable attention which he had paid to this case, and so far from being disadvantageous, it would be greatly advantageous to the parties, and also to their lordships who would be no longer kept in the dark upon the points which it was intended by the counsel to make. The Earl of RADNOR concurred in the observations that had fallen from the noble lord. He had had no more in terest in the bill than any of their lordships, and he regretted the absence of his noble friend (Lord Durham), who had just left the house, in consequence of an accident to one of his family. He thought it would be a great convenience to know what counsel intended to prove, if such a course were not contrary to the rules of the house, and, therefore, he suested whether it would not be better to require Mr. Ifarrison, on Thursday, to begin opening with what he intended to prove. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he had made a mis take on the matter. He had thought that his noble friend (Radnor) had undertaken the conduct of the bill; but now he remembered that it was another noble friend of his. However, as it seemed to meet the wishes of the noble lords upon both sides of the house, he would, without another word, move that it be an instruction to the counsel for the bill that, upon the next day of meeting, they should shortly open the case they propose to prove before the house, but that to be without prejudice to the rules of the house, and to give no right to a summing up. The Duke of WELLINGTON suggested that the mo tion had better be postponed till the close of the evenin, when some communication might be had with the noble earl (Durham). The LORD CHANCELLOR said that would be the better course, and he would write a note to his noble friend. The Marquis of DOWNSHIRE presented a petition from the clergy of Armagh, and other places, complaining that they were unable to pay the interest upon the money they had borrowed for the purpose of building glebehouses under the Irish Church Bill, and praying that the present incumbents should be allowed to get free by a payment of only one quarter of it, in conse quence of their distressed state. The Earl of WICKLOW said that had it been neces sary he should, with the utmost pleasure, have seconded the motion of his noble friend. He could not, however, allow the present opportunity to pass without recalling to their lordships' attention the deplorable situation in which the Irish clergy were placed, and to declare for himself that the relief which they sought was much more mode rate than either their necessities required or he had ex pected. They only asked that further time might. be afforded to them for paying the instalments which had be come due on these loans ; and under all the circumstances he hoped their lordships would not deny a request that was in every point of view so reasonable and creditable to the petitioners who had put it forward. If precedent were required to justify them in relieving . the Irish clergy from these payments, the act of last session would furnish that precedent. By that act similar payments were remitted, and he thought the case which these petitioners made out was just as strong as that upon which the exemption to which he alluded was founded. The Board of First Fruits had the power of making loans for two distinct purposes, namely, to parishes for building churches, and to the clergy for erecting glebehouses. These loans were to be repaid in the manner his noble friend had stated. By the act of last year parishes were exempted from the repayment of the sums lent to them; and as the principle applicable to the grants made to parishes applied with equal force to the loans received by the clergy for building glebehouses, he could not understand how, consistently with justice, they could continue the payments in the one case while they remitted them in the other. Just let them for a moment consider what the situation was in which the Irish clergy were placed. They entered upon their livings under the impression that their incomes would be certain ; that their rights would be as much protected as the rights of other persons ; but what had been the result? Why, that, in stead of _ receiving that to which they were entitled, they could get nothing, absolutely nothing, and were suffering the most unmerited distress. The measure now pending in another place would have the effect of causing a still greater diminution in their incomes. That measure would occasion a reduction of from fifteen to twenty per cent. in the revenue of each living, in addition to which, the act of the last session imposed upon the clergy several other burdens that were grievously felt by them. It was quite impossible for them to pay the instalments on these loans. The heavy expense which they incurred by endeavouring to collect their incomes was a circumstance which among others ought not to be forgotten; and if noble lords would be at the trouble to consult the returns which had been laid be fore the other House of Parliament on this subject, they would be convinced not only that the clergy of Ireland had much to complain of, but that it would be merely an act of justice to relieve them from this particular incum brance. He, therefore, hoped that their lordships would give a favourable consideration to the prayer of the peti tioners, and the ground on which his present appeal was founded was that they would have an opportunity of insert ing a clause in the Tithe Bill to effect that which was re quired of them, as that bill had not yet got into committee. 'lbis was, consequently, the proper time for adding such a clause, and surely it was only just that something should be done for these petitioners. In alluding to this bill he was, bound to admit that it had his humble commendation. lie did not speak of the details of this measure, but only of its general principle. It was the best and most rational mea sure which his Majesty's Government had brought forward; but even that acknowledgment was not saying much in its favour. He would, however, go a little further, and fully acknowledge that this bill undoubtedly did contain some really wholesome provisions, and it was not therefore with out considerable anxiety and alarm that he viewed the de lay which it had experienced in its progress. But he trusted that his Majesty's Government would not allow the bill to be spoiled in the committee; that they would not hearken to the dictation of faction ; and, above all, that they would not abandon a measure which was likely to pro duce so much good in Ireland. He would not detain the house any longer, but, in conclusion, he begged to repeat the hope which he had already expressed, that the prayer of the petition would receive the attention of their lordships. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE assured the noble earl . that the Government would not abandon the bill. The delay which had been given to its progress was not attri butable to them, but to circumstances, and, had it been practicable to urge it forward with greater speed, steps for that purpose would have been taken. Lord PLUNKET was understood to say that the prayer of the petition should have his support. The Bishop of DERRY thought that the petitioners were entitled to that for which they asked. Nothing could possibly be more reasonable than the indulgence they solicited, and when the situation in which they were placed was considered, surely the justice of giving an affirmative answer to their prayer must be obvious to every one of their lordships. He rejoiced to find that the Irish clergy had had the good taste to place their petition in the hands of a noble lord to whom they were so much indebted for the services which he had rendered to them, and, as they were suffering the most aggravated distress, it was to be hoped that their lordships would grant to them the trifling boon for which they asked. After a few observations from the Marquis of DOWN SHIRE, which were not heard in the gallery, the petition was ordered to lie on the table. _ MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS. The Warwick Witnesses' Indemnity Bill, the Liverpool Witnesses' Indemnity Bill, the Dublin General Cemetery Bill, and several private bills, were brought upirtim the Commons by Mr. BERNAL, Mr. O'Cornizza., and others. The Earl of CAMPERDOWN presented petitions from various parts of Scotland, praying for an alteration of the law with respect to church patronage in Scotland. After a few words from the Earl of HADDINGT ON, the petition was laid on the table. Earl FI TZWIL L I AM presented petit ions from the Wes leyan inahodists of Macclesfield, and from several other places in - Yorkshire. The noble earl also presented peti tions froin Dunfermline, and another place in Scotland, against the corn laws. The Marquis of BUTE presented petitions :.n h say for the better observance of the Sabbath. The Archbishop of YORK presented a similar petition from a parish in Yorkshire. The Duke of HAMILTON presented a petition from the handloom weavers of Renfrewshire for a regulation of wages ; also a similar petition from the vicinity of Glas gow ; also a petition from Lanarkshire, respecting church patronage in Scotland ; also a petition from Renfrewshire against the bill for regulating the appointment of ministers in the church of Scotland. WARWICK BOROUGH. The Earl of RADNOR said that their lordships had ordered Samuel Dingley and Wm. Oram, witnesses sum moned on the Warwick Borough Bill, to attend that day. He understood that they were not present, and should therefore move that they be taken into custody. Mr. BUTT, jun., the Deputy Sergeant-at. Mace, stated that he had served the order for attendance at the resi dences of Dingle) , and Oram. The LORD CHANCELLOR then directed that the two witnesses should be called. On their not answering, The Earl of RADNOR moved that warrants be issued to take the witnesses into custody. . . . The LORD CHANCELLOR recommended that the execution of the warrants be suspended until Wednesday, that the witnesses might be in custody for as short a time as possible. The motion was then put and agreed to nemine dissen tiente. The - LORD CHANCELLOR said that he should move that it be an instruction to counsel to state shortly the facts to which they intended to call other witnesses without going into an examination of what had already been given. His lordship then said that he had a petition to present from 2,290 persons in Aberdeen, similar to that he had presented a few evenings since from Glasgow, respecting the church establishment in Scotland. He had, on former occasions, given his opinion on the subject. It was, therefore, unne cessary for him to go into the question. He was of opinion that all the grievances of the dissenters, that was, all those of which they so justly complained, should be removed. It gave him great pleasure that a relation of his, holding a high office in the Court of Chancery, had introduced into the other house a bill for the better registration of births, marriages, and deaths, which, if carried, would remove many causes of complaint existing at present. He was a friend to the established church, and would support all their due privileges; but he was also a friend to the claims that had been urged in many of the petitions presented to their lordships. There might be a difference of opinion as to what were abuses or grievances, but whenever anything could be shown to be an abuse beyond doubt, no one would be a more warm supporter of the removal of it than himself. The petition was then laid on the table. PL URALITIE S—N ON- RESIDENCE. The LORD CHANCELLOR then stated that he had two bills to lay on their lordships' table, which it would be unnecessary for him to describe at any length. He had brought them forward with the full concurrence of his col leagues, and he trusted that they would be acceptable to their lordships. The one was to prevent pluralities, and the other to put a stop to non-residence. These bills struck at two of the greatest abuses in the church esta blishment. They had been constantly subjects of com plaint, and had been a source of continued weakness to the church. The holding pluralities had been a ground of objection for the last two hundred years ; at any rate, since the time of the Commonwealth, and the time had arrived when it must be removed. The abuses he had alluded to were now ripe for the sickle, and ready to be cut down. They had been handles to the enemies of the church, and they ought no longer to be allowed to lessen the usefulness of the establishment, or impair its foundations. The evils of non-residence and pluralities could be done. (Hear, hear, hear.) In large towns the were not originally a part of the church, and the catholic church, from which our church sprung, knew nothing of them. Non-residence was a constant source of disunion between the clergyman and his parishioners, and the ex istence of it was a snare for the one and a cause of dissatis faction to the other. The title for dispensation for non-resi dence was not given to the clergyman in consequence of peculiar duties, but merely because he happened to be chaplain to a peer, or a judge, or the attorney-general, or a member of the royal family, or any of the great officers of state. At present a duke was allowed to have six chap lains ; that was, he was allowed to give six titles to non residence. He (the Lord Chancellor) also believed that the holder of the office which he had the honour to fill also had the same number of chaplains. He did not know whether their lordships were benefitted by having so many chaplains ; but he knew the non-residence, which was the cousequence, was the cause of great evil. At present there was hardly a single person who could get two livings who could not get a dispensation for non-residence. He intended to get rid of this evil by a short and consistent and uniform remedy for both the evils he had alluded to. With regard to non-residence, he should propose that no person should be relieved from residence. He intended that this should not be confined merely to the inferior clergy, but to others ; but of course it would not interfere with the legislative functions of any of their lordships. His object was, indeed, to prevent a clergyman aban doning his church and parishioners. He should, there fore, propose that all persons holding a cure of souls, whether Rector or Vicar, should be bound to reside within the bounds of his parish, except during two months of the year, under a penalty, for the first offence, of forfeiting triple the yearly value of the livings ; and for a second of fence, forfeiture. Of course there would be an exceptoin in case of sickness or attending the sick bed of a near rela tive. With regard to pluralities, it was his intention to lay the axe at the root of the evil. He intended to pro pose that no person should be allowed to hold two livings, provided neither of them was under the annual valise of 200/. a year. There would be only the exception when one living was under the value of 2001. and when the in cumbent of it was presented to an adjoining parish of not more than the annual value of 1001. ; but in no case must the parish churches be more than five miles apart. The principle he went upon was, that if the parish was large enough to maintain a curate it was sufficient to maintain a resident incumbent. He would not trespass longer on their lordships' attention, but move that the bills be read a first time. Lord BEXLEY said that he would not at present go into the subject, ; but would reserve his observations until the second reading. He wished to correct an error fallen into by the noble and learned lord as to pluralities. If the noble and learned lord would take the trouble to in quire, he would find that pluralities existed to a much greater extent previous to the Reformation than they did afterwards, and instanced the case of Cardinal Wolsey, who was at the same time Archbishop of York, Bishop of Win chester, Bishop of Munster, and Lord Chancellor. The Marquis of BUTE was glad that the government had taken up the subject, and expressed his regret that the bill brought forward by the Archbishop of Canterbury two years ago on the subject of non-residence had been rejected by the other house. The Earl of RADNOR was glad to see some steps taken with respect to this measure by the government. He hoped the bills would be considered, as they were in the other house, as measures that did not go far enough. He was happy to see that government had taken up the question, and he hoped that its provision would be extended further. If so the more willingly would he support it. Lord WYNFORD would not give any serious opposi tion to the first reading of the bills. However, he could not help stating it as his firm conviction that if they were allowed to be passed into law they would place the church ,of. England infinitely beneath all the other sects of the country..__ The - bills were then read a first time. _ _ WARWICK BOROUGH BILL. On the motion of the Earl of RADNOR, William Tra vers, the younger, was ordered to attend the bar of the house on Thursday night. The LORD CHANCELLOR ordered counsel to be called in, and informed them that on Thursday next they would be heard as to the facts about which they wished to hear further evidence, but that they would not be per mitted to comment on the evidence which had been already adduced. _ _ Several bills were then forwarded a stage. The house then, at a quarter to eight o clock, adjourned to Thursday next at half-past three o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 16. The SPEAKER resumed the chair at twenty-five mi nutes past five o'clock. A message from the Lords announced that their Lord ships had agreed to the Wortley and Stanningfield Roads Bill, the Grand Junction Railway Bill, and other bills. Returns from the Commissioners of Dover Harbour were laid upon the table. On the motion of Sir RONALD FERGUSON, the Warwick Witnesses Indemnity Bill was read a third time. and passed. Air. B. HANDLEY brought up the report of the com mittee on the Welland Navigation Company's Bill. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. Lord ALTHORP moved that the house at its rising do a djourn to Wednesday next. The SPEAKER having put the question, AFFAIRS OF THE PENINSULA. Sir R. R. VYVYAN said he should take the present opportunity of calling the attention of the house, and of the noble lord opposite, to a matter of very considerable importance. It had been generally said that a treaty had been entered into by the representatives of three powers, and the noble lord opposite (Lord Palmerston) on the part of the British government, containing certain stipulations of great importance to the foreign commerce of this country. It was said that that treaty also contained stipula tions by which an interference on the part of Spain in the affairs of Portugal was to be admitted. It was also stated that by this treaty Don Miguc was to give up his claims to he crown of Portugal, and Don Carlos his claims to the crown of Spain. It had also been said, and it was well known, that a Spanish general ( Rodil) had crossed the Portuguese frontier, and had driven Don Carlos before him. He (Sir R. V.) understood that at Lisbon the ratification of that treaty had been delayed, that it had been returned by the British minister at Lisbon as un favourable to British interests. He thought that the time had arrived when it was the duty of that house to call on the Foreign Office, in order to ascertain if Great Britain had thus eompromised her own interest, or had acted in a manner so little in accordance with those old stipulations to which she had formerly adhered. He did not mean to allude to the politics of Spain or Portu , gal, but would merely confine himself to three questions. He begged to ask the noble lord, first, whether that treaty had been entered into by France, England, Spain, and Portugal, having for its object the settlement of the affairs of the Peninsula by force of arms ? (Hear hear. ) Secondly, whether the ratification of this treaty had been delayed at Lisbon, or whether there had been a refusal to ratify it ? And, thirdly, whether the noble lord (Pal merston) had been officially informed of the fact of Gene ral Rodil having passed the frontier of Portugul, and hav ing driven Don Carlos before him, and whether the mini stry of this country approved of such conduct? Lord PALMERSTON said, that in answering the questions of the hon. baronet, he would not follow him into a discussion upon the various reports which the hon. baronet stated that he had heard. ( Hear, hear, hear. ) With regard to one of his ( Sir R. Vyvyan's) questions, he (Lord P.) had great satisfaction in being able to state that a treaty relative to the affairs of the Peninsula, had been signed by the Plenipotentiaries of England, France, he himself h a e s ar fa . )r as he stated this with gr a e n a d t P s a ° t. r i g c a t H a e n a d r , was concerned, with pride. With regard to the treaty, he could not state what were the contents of it, or what was the nature of its provisions. A . s soon, however, as it was ratified, it would be laid upon the table of that house, and then the house and the hon. baronet would have an opportunity of knowing what that treaty contained. He could relieve the anxiety of the hon. baronet respecting the dangers which he con .ceived to exist of this treaty being ratified. The ratifi cation of three of the powers had already arrived in London, and the ratification of the government of Por tugal had only been delayed in consequence of some forms which were necessary for the completion of the ratification. Its approaching arrival was however announced, and in a few days the vessel containing it might be expected to reach our shores. With regard to the last question, General Rodil had entered the territories, but his operations were confined to dislodging Don Carlos from the frontiers. Some of the fortified towns of Portugal had, however, taken advantage of his presence spontaneously to declare in favour of Donna Maria. He should not go into the details of the treaty, which would be laid before the house in due course. Mr. A. BARING said that, probably, the noble lord, after the holidays, would be ready to produce the treaty, and, therefore, it would be unfair to enter into the discussion of the question just now. (Hear, hear. ) But the noble lord's view of neutrality seemed to be different from that which any other person could en tertain of neutrality. General Rodil went into Portugal professedl y to drive before him the Pretender (for that was hi s p r oper name), and yet, according to the noble lord, his presence had induced some towns to declare in favour of Donna Maria. It was rath er a s i ngu l ar s p ec i es of neutrality which the noble lord had spoken of. (Hear.) Did the noble lord forget that there was interference on the part of va rious foreign powers in Portugal ? Lord PALINIERSTON replied, that when he spoke of neutrality he did not lay any stress on the circum stance mentioned, but merely s t a t e d th e fact. As to the interference alluded to by the hon. member, there had been no inconsiderable interference on the other side. ( Hear t hear. ) Mr. BARING Was not aware of any interference on the other side. No doubt the noble lord spoke from official information, which, perhaps, he would i m p ar t t o th e h ouse . Lord PALMERSTON replied that the hon. member's state of ignorance appeared so enviable that he did not wish to disturb it. (Laughter and cheers.) ASSIZES. Mr. WOOD wished to ask when it was the intention of his Majesty's government to change the assizes at Lan caster, as he understood such - a change was contemplated? Mr. P. THOMSON replied that at present he was unable to give any information on the subject. PORT OF LONDON DUTY. Mr. G. F. YOUNG wished to ask the right hon. the Vice-President of the Board.of Trade, when it was his intention to bring in the bill for the reduction of the Port of London Duties ? Mr. P. THOMSON said it was not till yesterday he had received the draft of the bill from the solicitor in Lon don. The delay therefore did not originate in the slightest degree in his office, and he hoped immediately after the holidays to be able to bring in the bill. Sir 11. PEEL said that if the noble lord (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) could give him an answer to the question he was about to put he should ferl obliged to him, and he thought it would also tend greatly to the con venience of the house. The noble lord, he understood, did not intend to make any progress with the English Tithe Commutation bill, while the Poor Laws' Amendment bill was before the house. He thought that that was a wisepro position, so that the attention of the house might bedirected to the measure. Also, no doubt, the noble lord might find it difficult to devote his attention to both subjects at once. But the question he wished to put was, whether the noble lord had a confident expectation that he would be able to get through some measure during the present session, connected with the commutation of tithes? Lord ALT HORP, in answer to the right hon. baronet, begged to state that he did feel a most confident expecta tion that he should be able, as far as he himself was con cerned, to get the decision of the house upon the question. Lord EBRINGTON presented a petition against the Beer Bill, from a parish in Devonshire. Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented a petition to the same effect. AMENDED BEER BILL. Sir E. KNATCHBULL, in rising to move the second reading of the Beer Act Amendment Bill, said that the information he was continually receiving from all quarters, convinced him of the necessity of some alteration of the laws as they at present existed relative to the sale of beer. (Hear, hear.) The bill he had introduced had for its object not to infringe on the enjoyments of the public, but to increase them. (Hear. ) His greatest wish was, that the people should enjoy to the full extent every comfort that was allowed them under the act of parliament ; he wished that they should have every indulgence, but the object of the bill was to prevent an abuse of that indulgence. (Hear, hear.) Great difficulties had attended the introduction of clauses into the bill which could not be considered as having the effect of restraining the comforts of the people ; but he ventured to hope that the clauses he intended to propose would be productive of the greatest good. He doubted the policy of allowing the consumption of beer upon the premises. He would observe that, in this bill, he took no notice of the hours to which public-houses should remain open. He would not trouble the house further, but would simply move the second reading of the bill. Mr. F. PALMER would not say that the enactments of this bill were not called for, but they should inquire, first, into the causes that had made them to be called for. His objection to the bill was simply this, — that it, in its first clause, annihilated a bill to which he might be excused for expressing some partiality. The bill, he could state, had been a great relief and comfort to the labouring classes. But there had been, what he would call, a combination amongst his brother ma gistrates to put an end to this bill. (Hear, hear. ) to ss. a this bill, connected with the landed intere st know the time the Retail Beer Bill will pass into a law, and tha consequence ill n (Bear, i required hea r .) noH b e, that less eobjectedbarleyth asix securities, will rise paying 101. rates per year each, and disqualifying brewers, quarter.inasmue vh . ' as t distillers, and other persons of that description, which he conceived to be a very great hardship. The hon. member concluded by moving that the bill be read a second time that day six months. Mr. WARBURTON seconded the amendment. He 6y consulted . itn es o s f e s b e n beer, ih r less ethe magistrates than labouring o u complained of the manner i n w hi c h t h e ev i dence had been taken upon which the bill was f oun d ed. Circulars had been sent round to th e mag i strates and parish o ffi cers, and out ri n l3 were classes, th eir emagistrates,awm were irne a tni oon i t in any of consumers w mayor, 3 magistrates' cl er k s , 3 po li ce officers, Bte. The complained of the badness of the beer sold in these houses, and recommended home-brewed beer, although they ad mitted that the home brewer could not compete with the public brewer. In fact, all the arguments used were inconsistent, and cut the throats of each other. One clause in the proposed bill required that any one set ting up a beershop should have a permissive certificate from six 10/. ratepayers in the parish. But it appeared that 6,600 parishes, about one-half of the parishes of the kingdom, did not contain more than 300 inhabitants each. He talked of the small country parishes, and he would ask, deducting the parson, the magistrate, and a 'squire or two, how many of these were ratepayers ? Why, many parishes would not muster more than six. The present bill was calculated to extinguish beerhouses in such parishes. Of course he excluded the large and town parishes, such as Marylebone. Another clause equally objectionable was, that beer should not be taken more than one hundred yards from the premises to be drunk in house or shed, or in the open air. Now he thought that a most oppressive provi sion. He conceived that the object of the legislature was to allow beer to be sold freely and of good quality. Now, was it not a consequence desired that the house selling beer should be frequented? Upon the principle on which the new bill was advocated it ought to extend to all public houses, but the bill interfered only with the beerhouses. The amendment having been Put, Lord HOWICK concurred with hon. members in thinking that the breaking up of the old monopoly, in order to give to the country a full supply of good beer, was a most desirable act, but he could not help thinking.with the: hon. baronet ( Sir E. Knatchbull) that there were many countervailing advantages. He had on a previous occa sion taken the liberty of stating that he did not agree in ti, attributing to the Beer Act all the, evils which soul ' thought ()tight to be assigned to it, forhe thought many them were much deeper teated, (Hear.) Still, wher 41 the evidence pointed out that there 4ere afeat evils attri butable to the present state of the law with rb:7pet sale of beer, he thought it would be most unwise not to turn their attention to the subject. The hon. member for Reading (Mr. F. Palmer) had said that all the mis chief arose from the strange perverseness of the unpaid magistrates, and that the object of those gentlemen was to -give the beerhouses rope enough iii Order that, th% hang themselves. He was astonished to hear iite asser tions. The fault was in the state of the law. 11 1 contended that some more immediate mod e 6 proceeding than that gradual improvement the honourable member for Reading wished for was neces the rosy. He thotight the objections taken bd honottrable member flu. Briduti:t to certificates ha d much weight. If they *ere tb b any . person wish ing to open a beer house to produce a certificate i gn ed by six occupiers of 101. houses residing in the pariTh; P9o 7 '.‘lt restriction would prevent a great - number of parishes front having a beer house at all. What lie would recommend was this, that the licenses should be granted as at presen t but that the majority, consisting of two-thirds, in vestry, complaint being made, should have the power of causing the house improperly conducted to be closed. He kn e w . might that that would be giving the power, as in the other case, to the principal inhabitants ; but there was this difference in the working. Many a man would refuse to grant a li cense who would equally refuse to take btie away but upon just grounds. It was also well known that persons.r loosely signed certificates that he should regard a 04 ' ficate rather as a proof that a person wishing to open a beershop had six friends who were 10/. householders than that he was fit to k eep a b eer -h ouse . H e s h ou ld suW nt the bill. tem , i i r iud E..C pe O ra D te ß d l wNe6llT in o l l\ a r rg t e ho tx u , g w h u t ., th b a u t t t ‘ li v to say that in agricultural districts it amendment. 31r. HEATHCOTE would support the second reading of the bill, but would not pledge himself to all its provisions. He decidedly thought that to put a Stop to a full and free supply of beer would be to injure greatly the agricultural interes`. Since the present law had been in operation the consumption of barley and malt had increased twel ft h% The hon. member for Reading had talked much oi . tr • - ,, - comforts enjoyed by the poor under the present law. -- had said that the poor man in the beer-house found a blazing fire, while he left at home a cheerless cold hearth' That might be very well for the man (Hear), but what became of the wife and children ? (Hear.) He denied that that was a system contributing to the comfort or hap piness of the poor which induced the man to leave his home. The object of beneficent legislation was not to promote , aespunresed iertstsoYosd. sues a system, but to clothe the home itself of the pour : man with comfort. ( Cheers.) Then the hon. inembe , r for Read.ng had talked about the magistrates giving th • Leer-houses rope enough, so that they might hang there- , selves. He ti, ught 'he hcn. member had taken ITV, , 1 enough and fairly strangled his own argument . ( A laugh. ) Tnen the hon. member for Bridport had objected to inter fering with the law on the ground that the present law fa voured home production and good beer ; but surely it was rather inconsistent in the hon. member so to argue, as 11 6 5 . wished to introduce molasses into the making of beer , 1. (A laugh.) H thought the bill had worked well in large towns, but that in agricultural districts the law required alteration. Lord EBRINGTON should cordially support the second ! reading of the bill. In doing so, however, he did not at all mean to say that some of the details would not requir. alteration. Mr. STRICKLAND yielded to no one in a desire to check immorality ; but he could not consent, at the end of three or four years, having induced 13,000 persons to embark their little all in a trade, to turn round and dr stroy that trade. If the legislature had done wrong in passing the present law, it would do worse so injuriouslY , 0 repeal it. For his part he was so much an enemy, ,°, drunk-nness of every description , whether by wine, spint. or beer, that he could not see the necessity of havi n l fern ented liquors for the labouring population in any pa:_r of England; but still he would not leave it to the wir of six poor paxistooners to decide whether it was oe sirab'e or not a beershop should be opened. The pro posed legislation on that point was certainly as strange. as ever he heard of ; but, if possible, the remedy suFt, Bested by an hon. member who spoke before him, s:: o d to that the granting of the certificate should be 5...,‘ the vestry instead of to the six parishioners was 11 ,',` stranger. It amounted, in point of fact, to a proposal w,, individuals, WO intrust the power to the identically same . . under another name. He considered the bill objeceneoniis. able likewise as an attempt to restrain the system of li c __ ing on terms, in reality, much more objectionable hal those imposed under the measure which it was introducen'_ to amend. He regretted to find that the bill proposed °_ alteration with respect to the hours at which beershops were to be closed. In waging war with the bee rshops they were, in fact, shooting at the small and insigrliflea n game, while the destructive monsters were allowed t° flourish unmolested. In his mind it. would be much better for the house in the first instance to restrict pl aces w here that destructive, and to him it seemed nauseous, beverage , gin (A lau(,*h) was sold, and 'then to turn their attention to the beershops. The hon. baronet concluded by repeat ing his intention of supporting the amendment. Major HANDLEY opposed the motion for the second reading of the bill, on the ground that it would be ex ceedingl harsh towards the parties whose property was at stake , 1 " after the alterations which the beer laws had underpin • but two or three years ago, any further alterations shalt' now take place. Lord SANDON was very much surprised to hear it .a -s:t rp serted, as it had been in the course o f the debate, tol. beer-shops had not increased to near the extent alle,gri, It so occurred that he held in his hand a petitioni i. 13 ' 3 ' over originated at a public meeting held in L i verpoo .e ~; f which a gentleman intimately acrainted with the n m r.' , a j ost , of the beer laws had presided. t that rneetillig that beer the speakers bore testimony to the fact, not only , nthat the con shops had increased to a frightful e xtent, . ental to the sequence of such increase was highly detrim neral d a very once labouring classes of the community ; on at once wish was was expressed that the legislature would had been terfere to abate the nuisance. As the subject .. 0 the ut° already sufficiently debated he would not take up __ most cor of the house longer than to say that he gave his dial support to the bill. ( expressed • t heari n g Mr. BUCKINGHAM his surprise a .... _ tel . it urged in that house as an argument against the bd . ! e n .. l ; st discussion that an increased number of beershops ga l e ~,, u ed comfort to the labouring population. It certainly afF t i o n a very low degree of morality on the part of that pol),,re7it to that a labourer could not enjoy com f or t unless he t hot be beershops fur drink, and that a similar result mi g h takin g of attained by his sending out for his liquor, and Par The h o n• it in company with his wife and family. (Hear ' ) his co rdial member concluded by stating he intended to g i support to the second reading of the bill. . - , I fed in solve An How. MEMBER thought the bill, i 0 1 %— n ' si i iig s ystem , , respects, and especially as regarded the lie e a - ie ' b measure. would prove a highly advantageous and doll . ; e his sup port Mr. PLUMPTRE was quite ready to P l ' t who' to the measure introduced by his hon. colleague' to in' the house and the country were, in his opinion, much.Ho debted for bringing the subject under considerationt. _ bill would not say it might not be possible to improve !i e s , it j i in committee, but as far as its principle went—ai,'"hoot its principle alone the house had now to deal—he 1.. ration it would prove a very advantageous and important alter 111 the existing system. (Hear.) c o tal ,e Lord G. SOMERSET said it had been his fete - der part in the discussion of the bill to amend which that un consideration was introduced, as also to have been a n ieLl ',: ber of the select committee of last year, and from the 3- 0 quaintance which those chance circumstances had gi ve o him as regarded the bearings of the bill then in force, le did not hesitate to say that its evils were mainly attributa .s.. to a want of sufficient attention on the part of then our t 0 ' tracy to its clauses. He was, however, bound in ea evidence say that the impression left on his mind by the ethe pow taken before the committee of last year was thvaicd by those vested in the magistrates were not acewZah alone could means of carrying them into operation .f" jaai those means was render them effective. The Prir'itclriust be evident nothing an efficient police, without which it alluded was not so much felt, partcular want to which he al parishes it had operated,)) but in many of the agrictultiir altogether the success of the b a way to preclude all 1 of the measure was concerned ho As far as the P - rinciP cable to it, and thought the 11 00 : was altogether favour was well deserving the bes' baronet who introduced it to th e (Hear, hear.) With regard thanks of that house. ht it 'ht be sible to sag' details of the bill he thong mg pus . stan ce, s He was of opinion, for in a gest some alteration • . _ . certificate 10,, that it would be advisable to render a , s wine , beer was not drunk on the premise I_l, I beershop where ~., cessary. (Hear.) 11 would however, enter ii,-,, He . not, . stage , . ( 1 , the details of the present bill on the present 0 , , ivi o!., would conclude by simply repeating his intentiown It o pa .;,, it his support, and his hoPe that it might be alloy` e u K, through the second readin g . (H ear. ) STI IIC- After a few words in explanation from Mr. LAND, ho f tbOs e v. .. Mr. B. COLBORNE said he had been one 0 . . ewi la assisted in the discussion of the existing act for the .. _ : 4 7 0 0; tion of beershops, and although at the time of I t ', o l , u id tt ) he expected beneficial results from it, he Ns:!s e.... u , he ar; /_. admit it had altogether disappointed him.. (El a .-1 ,, t wo ' Game Bill passe. lo wer In fact, the Beer Bill and the , eto demoralise the t i o n• three sessions ago, had done mor within his recollee - orders of society than any measures _ al o el e , He was therefore favourably disposed towards , 7, 40 ., I me efficient retorm in the operaliacra sure promising se even had d the measure under con'' f el the beer laws, and a uld e '-e features than it had he wo . t he tion less attractive ... i t bound to give it his cordial support. Not only , s tirs • • of the landowners and magistracy that the ab le to opinion laws were bad, and required revision, but he wa' art ici' state, without fear of contradiction, that it \ca.' p_ort pated in by the farmers, and, what was of more w'f , : e st ante, by their wives and families. (Hear. ) TO sun of a remedy for the evil was, however, the difficulty tho amid all the plans proposed he knew of none bettel,. o 0 that beer should in no case 'be -drunk on the p rein which it was sold, ou Lord ALTHORP r o s e to express his intention of ri ,g; porting the second reading of the bill. (Hear , bear') f i