The Sun. — London, England, 1834-07-19 00:00:00

• ) COCK, end Lordshipi ntg in the ergo of a DAY•) ,n barque thrill, the Surinam• squall}' from St. , 0 Sports' ince Ed- from WilHaul , RaisbecA, Antelope, ara ; and Alb from Ter, from Lan, from imMon g ArnO, kie, from nt Edit a on the good ail', cl s to g o . 1: ), 10 1, 6 9 O 0 6 6 0 6 O 4 0 O 4 / 0 0 • 6 O :3 0 O 11 O 1 ' ) 0 O 13 ° O 4 0 0 6 6 I; • 6 0 6 0 6,, 0 4 ; ) 1 0 3 110 to 2 4 4 15 5 5 5 i El o 6 5 4 to x 0 51 t/ ° 6 5 1 1 lb toA. - L.A b 0 !10 411'. Los f ncc ded rr ° l , l e custo°,4 .—s. 4 —a. a!' —s. 4tss. 5. " ens 6 6 414' 150. C a. g , Od • Crti • .........•.'°' , ;sr 41 too 18 '47 ) .1 nl 17 2/ 94 1 lk - 11 4 ly . 9 15 11, (1 ; 'a ▪ 1g ▪ 19 4 • ▪ 1 1 ' 4 .° 11 a n 14 ". 19 ° " 19 g ". j7s ' 15 11 F.Eg• to _-=' f. 31 - 7,1 0 9V , o ...--- 4tl. 9 11 , I; , to l' if A 1 / -,--- r~ n rile. iyed• 0 0 I ') 0 0 0 0 I; 0 0 c 6g IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT EarI IIO USE OF LORDS, July 18. and GREY entered th e H ouse s ho rt l y b e f ore five o ' clock, the I t o e w el er h f i ;o s e e t a be t e up e o h. n the Ministerial sid e o f t h e H ouse, upon • The Duke of WELLINGTON presented petitions in f avour of the Established Church. MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS. tkl. nest &w he Earl of K ERRY an d other Members brought up a re rithe House of Commons that their Lordships would at '"orf Lord Cl o n curry to be examined before the Committee the Navigation o f t h e Ri ver Shannon. Agreed to. 4 0 , r. Per:natives and oth ers b roug h t up t h e S tannar i cs C ourt the Boroughs Justices Bill, and several other Bills. ae" tarl G REY presented petitions from Dundee and other against Church Patronage in Scotland. ,C,APITAL PUNISHMENTS ABOLITION BILL. p t , Lord SUFF IELD presented petitions in favour of the Ca e' Punishments Abolition Bill from several parishes in the nlo eut itY of Essex, after which the Noble Lord proceeded to second reading of the Bill. In doing so the el';m°ll the dentered into a minute detail of the non- I ~,,4 eY or capital punishments, and stated t . hat , the It ri ); h 's'ke of crime within the last three years in cases lvf,`" e e aPital punishments were continued, was 44 per cent., i t ' er eas, in eases where capital punishments were withdrawn, v . was tea a-half per cent. The case with respect to con kleti°o3 wain the same ration. In cases where capital punish ibenasts were continued the convictions were 72 per cent., while in viVe e ases where capital punishments were withdrawn, it was c ' 47 per cent. Crime, therefore, had increased in cases ea r e capital punishments were retained, and diminished in t 3" where it had been withdrawn. Under such eircum htledieenehe trusted their Lordships would agree to the second Th Duk e of RICHMOND having presided over the post -o ff department, which this Bill most materially i t ' et ed, wished to say a few words. He entirely agreed that li s n ul d be expedient that capital punishment should be abo , rd, but when he considered the . vast amount of lettes that tfot the4sed t hrough the Post-office daily, he thought they s ou,, h eht fore begin by destroying the capital punishment be- L ett t, Y had agreed upon a secondary punishment.--( Hear.) roa n ettera .passed through the Post-office daily containing tiei,Y millions of money, and the regulations of that let r , tutr eent had no doubt sacrificed the security of the nnv 'ers to the speed in which they were assorted and sent 4-4 far th deliv ery , b ut he thought it was not too much to nlarat they should defer destroying the capital punishment esent, and more particularly as no inquiry had been " rt of Z : in the depament.--( Hear.) He knew th e motives NobleNo Friend, and of those who had on.- ginn e d tete t ill in the other House tyere most humane, trworthy, and deserving of great credit ; but whet would rehenlitits Bill passing t h. e effect upon the manufacturing and commercial interests r ants into a law, it being the practice of me to send up letters from the country containing H ? a nees to meet bills when they should become due fis mtd not stand up as an advocate for capital punishments ; 'Henn e s ontrary, he thought capital punishments ought not to tli e Z,) except in' cases where crime could be prevented, but e thOlineY should be prepared with a secondary punishment o ot t lat that his Noble Friends during the recess, would Ithi eh a ve Much difficulty in finding ont some punishm n (t e ; Tight deter persons from committing these crimes.— t ical" ' e ar.) He believed it was the opinion of every prac bet, offi cer in th e P ost - o ffi ce, t h at cap i tal pun i shment should yr abolish e d until a secondary punishment was substituted. epe,:sco, un t MELBOURNE did n o t mean t o sa y a wor d th e - tee Bill in its then stage ; he only rose to protest against of o°Pinion expressed by the Noble Lord, that no See i r l et i a la ry d patQtate would carry the law into effect, because a B Is ts 3e t l the other House. While the law remained unaltered,. it pr o e, duty of th a t o ffi cer to a d m i n i ster i t ; b y granting the thrrysition, the wh o l e power o f t h e L eg i s l ature would b e ;VI into the hands of any one House of the Legislature. art LORD CHANCELLOR said that he must go still the t i,; t uan his Noble Friend, and protest more strongly against Pere -etr ine, for it would not only throw the power of sus soint'e,g the law into the hands of either House, but ab e'Y into the hands of any one Member of either trhi - e l e ; that was a short-hand way of legislating o i it w as not vet time to have car r i e d i n t o e ff ec t.— statethe There wasno doubt that by Bill s b e i ng l e f t i n no t that that one was, great difficulty was produced, to the Ad m i nistration, but to the Judges. As BeBslehadn .t before s t ate d, i t wou ld b e much better for the R eport, wh i ch might be expected early next nibj e en f ront the Criminal Law Commissioners. The whole would then be brought before the consideration of the discuss, and it would then be in a much more fit state for remlission than the present. He would support the second isi ov of the Bill, upon the understanding that all . its pro- Peoi,fhs"uld be struck out except that which abolished the Pert l e e nt of death for the offence of returning from trans , ft e ° ,. n. r e a dvy words from Lord SUFFIELD in reply, the f or awas a second time, and ordered to be committed pro 1f fr a second time. a . 2'C°NNEL L and others from the Commons brought l eav e t ess age, requesting that Lord Western might have Poi nte ° attend and . give evidence before the Committee ap- Harveva to t/slomblethat inquire into the cause of exclusion of Daniel W. A "I', ' c l* f rom the Bar. informed their mt Lord was not present, the Lord Chancellor own messengers. an answer would be returned them by f ev . t _h r Marquis of C LANRICARDE presented petitions i n of the W estminster Bank Bill. Islottine Puke of NEWCASTLE presented petitions from eh o Pamshire l which were in favour of the Established %,%en, and against the Poor Law Amendment Bill. 4;;;RESPONDE NCE BETWEEN EARL GREY 111) THE LORD LIEU TENANT OF IRELAND. to ,„"411 WH ARNCLIFFE then rose pursuant t o no ti ce , G re , e for a copy of the correspondence between . Earl th e and the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, relative to ro,r-:,oercion Bill.--(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord ad h'i't to the statement he made last night, when he told the ten °4l Viscount that he could not give his assent . to the in tie e e b ° .. Coercion . B . ill, without some further evidence to justify rt• ' l ige of opinion expressed by the Noble Viscount. He fo r ,„, 1111 Y did think the House and the country had a right to call Tor k ,e good ground to justify the noble persons who then Ito sec e i `! the Administration for the important change they pro hill ti , 131 the Bill.--( Hear, hear.) On the production of the col the before the House, the Noble Earl at the head of the taei t i leriertt, a n d t h e Noble and Learned Lord on the wo o l- Iteaee uot h stated th at i t was necessary in its then form for the Ns and preservation of Ireland. O n th e same ground it Ns e r Year recommended to the House of Commons and minted When it came to this House it was cheerfully sub the N tt? and this y ear a f ter several questions had be e n as k e d, ";ere t eul e Earl s t ate d t h at it was the intention of the GoveT- No se ° re-enact it with the omission only of the courtmartial . `th ick h The Noble Lord alluded to the history of the Bill, Whi eh e said, went on well to the 23d of June, previous to itl\r4ble a C°lll MUlliCatiol l had been made, with the consent of the terilberLoird „,,the. _Chancellor of the E . xchequer to the Hon. Duhr ° r That communication led the Member .dab k.i% t In to ask how far the Bill had the consent of the Lord rols a nt for Ireland ?—(Hear.) The Right Hon. Gentle is"a ene "'lent the question was addressed said it had .te ar Ire consent of the Lord Licutenarit.—( Hear, hear, ° nte r 11'4This led to a dispute which he (Lord Wharncliffe) did b torti s h into. So the case stood, and be should say he felt L~f w hen he h ear d t h at t h e N o bl e L ord and the See boblier Ire land m had h ld communion with the Member for hte4nitonll4. jeationll! the case of e Baron Smith, the parti es who had with that Hon. and Learned Gentleman had ht e;i3rePletely over-reached.—( Hear. ) Those instances r u ble L ave , Put the parties on their guard.--( Hear.) The o ru should e have given his consent to any coin -0411.e7t,11°,3 W hatever ne w v it r h the Member for Dublin.. On the 45j 3' this Bill was read the second time. On that N'obei_tiothing could be found stronger than the speech of I:4.ess,r3ynd Learned Lord. It was said to be only ... no t t eet V o ut v ? Pas the Bill, but that it woul be i i e nj ewi the oh.o!e L ords, mein clause. He could not copee v change of with a knowledge at that time of the ch therdNye t , l e Lord Lieutenant, could . suffer the Noble Earl x Welrse second reading of the Bill. The wavering of l'emAnist es icY was known ih the House of Commons ; yet r:''ng ens allowed the Noble Earl to propose the second r t ailed ° vs the Bill in this . House. Lord Wharncliffe then 41 8 "e circumstances p rn oh the occurrences in the Corn- N'sed to the resignation of Lord Althorp, and CI.. Or Part uecided opinion, that the change of opinion on t l he E tch Lord Wellesley did not justify the Chancellor ail a 0 tendering his resignation. The Noble ,4"l4ntioos correctly all the proceedings in the House of toie t ue to the resignation of Lord Althorp. The Noble rnin.,. nation t o that when the Noble Lord had expressed his t 4 1 lost ° resign he thought it his duty also to resign, e Nob! according to his own expression, his right arm. lvsffihad e n i- Ord kept his word. The Noble Lord in the other Lo rd h"' ; and that Noble Lord had to prove that he was proper] as ; olding office. He could not see that the Noble I4y e at ified in his resignation. As the Noble Earl had ep.nl4.teoant4iid---what consequence was it whether the Lord t tr0, 124 at t 4cl c hanged his opinion. They all changed their - elati ' re s• The Lord Lieutenant finally carae to a de- Pas s „`"e that •Att f or the Bill as it then stood in the House should ) vit , er onh. , e the preservation of peace in II eland. When the th o tp be explained the Lord Lieutenant concurred hNtetooris\-ebinet, therefore the Noble Lord in the House of ko,;) in wa s not justified in resigning his office.—( Hear, I,lcl snyin adverting to the Noble Earl's speech he could not en raying !,t Made impression on his mind which had not / / 1 1 h ad e e• Ile believed that no First Minister of the I% Zo e d e eve r been so ill- . treate . d.—( Hear, hear, hear, pro or 1.4 b Don the 0 • p t , b1 :17.41 h ad Opposition side of the Hon ' se.) The I t spoken of difficulties thrown in the . way 1t e3 , 4 0t one s mess in that House. He (Lord Wharncliffe) (lif of th Who had thrown unnecessary obstruction in the e Nobl "ith cr eated Earls measures, and he would say that no Cli e _th e e di ated on his side of the House could be compared ,Teulties raised by the Noble Lords themselves.— th li ene, Noble Earl told them, and told them truly, that tehraftohrel)4.blin was not a person to be communicated innni know,. to shi, would not have had any communication with h" a. :e of that sentiment, which the Noble Earl was bt hid t e mule ie.xpressed, a Minister of the Crown did corn tNept:;ii Public(Hear, hear.) He (Lord Wharncliffe) n o ter the ic life the Noble Lord (Althorp), and he tha, No ble respect for him. He knew the cha pWC Lord stood high, and he would add that 11 `t ,3, 0 7 , b1 e `3 equivocal character could have done what \Vi;2, all °l'd had done It was said he (LordAlthorp) , I ° l th e lrs, the person most likely to conduct the bu si_ ch ) t u it s f !! I f ermons. It appeared to him (Lord , ert e i ni "'LE eNoble Lord had adopted one mode Y proved successful. The only mode was con- stant concession. —(Hear, hear, hear.) The Noble Lord conceded every thing in the fear of a motion from the Hon. Member for Dublin.—( Hear, hear.) That was not the way to manage the House of Commons. The Noble Lord should not make concessions. With respect to the Coercion Bill the No ble Lord need not have been afraid of losing the support of the House of Commons. They would have given him all the powers he could wish to preserve the peace and protect public property. If they did not they were not the representatives of the people of England. The way to manage the House of Commons was not to concede day after day to the Hon. Mem ber for Dublin, thereby raising him in the estimation of the discontented in Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) The duty of the Noble Lord and the Government was to say to him—Do your worst. We will not concede anything. We will faithfully discharge our duty, and give no sanction to agitation.— ( Hear, hear.) The Noble Viscount spoke in a tone yesterday which he could not approve, but he should wait for the letter of the Lord Lieutenant, and if satisfied that it furnished ground for the abandonment of the Bill then before the House, he certainly should not oppose the Bill which was to be sub stituted. The Noble Lord proceeded to observe that he was as fully aware of the nature of a private communication as any of their Lordships ; still, at the same time, he contended that the letter which was the subject of his present motion should be laid before the House. With respect to the Coercion Bill itself, he had no apprehension. The Noble Lord then con cluded by putting his motion for the production of certain cor respondence between the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and his Majesty's Government, on the subject of the Bill for the sup pression of disturbances in Ireland. Viscount MELBOURNE said he was free to confess that he would resist the motion of the Noble Baron for the pro duction of the letter in question, on the grounds which had been anticipated by the Noble Baron himself. That letter was a private one, and therefore ought not to be produced. He ( Viscount Melbourne), notwithstanding all that had been urged by the Noble Baronet, could not see that he adduced one admissible reason why the letter in question ought to be produced. He ( Lord Wharpeliffe) had adduced no reason whatever why his Majesty's Government should do in this case what had not been done in any former case—why they should do now what no preceding Government had been called on to do before. The Noble Baron had adduced no reason why his Majesty's Ministers should violate the secrecy and confidence which had been reposed in them. If they did so ; if the motion of the Noble Baron was agreed to, and the letter in question produced, the circumstance would have the effect of preventing all - further confidential corresponce with Ministers. For his own part, he would say, that he considered that nothing could be more for the interests of the Government—nothing could be of greater advantage to Ministers, or show more clearly the propriety of the course they had adopted with regard to the measure in question, than the production of the Lord-Lieutenant's letter. He would not, however, assent any further to what the Noble Baron had said respecting the production of that letter : but he begged to make a few observations in reference to what had fallen from the Noble Baron on other topics. He ( Viscount Melbourne) must admit—which he most willingly did—that the speech of the Noble Baron was a candid speech, and that on the whole it contained a fair and accurate statement of the circumstances which led to the breaking up of the late Admi nistration. He must, however, say, that the Noble Baron had mixed up his statements with reflections and interrogations re specting the Noble Lord who filled the office of the Chancel lor of the Exchequer, which were not merited or justified by the facts of the case. The Noble Baron, while his statements were perfectly fair, drew unfounded inferences from those statements, in so far as his Noble Friend (Lord Althorp) was concerned. It was perfectly true, as stated by the Noble Baron, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer did authorize the Secretary for Ireland to make a communication to the Member for Dublin respecting the views and intentions of Ministers with reference to the renewal of the Coercion Bill. It was true that his ( Viscount Melbourne's) Noble Friend did authorize the Secretary for Ireland to inform the Member for Dublin, that the Bill which his Majesty's Ministers were to bring in this year for the suppression of disturbances in Ireland, would not be the same as the measure which had been introduced last Session of Parliament. But that was the whole extent which the Noble Lord authorized Mr. Lit tleton to go in his communication with Mr. O'Connell. Mr. Littleton, however, went much farther ; in fact, to su c h an extent did he disclose the secrets of the Cabinet, that the Noble Lord, after such disclosures, found it would be im possible to carry the measure as it then stood. His Noble Friend had been blamed for authorizing the Secretary for Ireland to hold any communication whatever with the Mem ber for Dublin ; but the blame was unmerited ; for it would be altogether impossible to carry on the business of the country without occasionally communicating with the Mem ber for Dublin, or with other Members on that Gentle man's side of the House. His ( Viscount Melbourne's) Noble Friend had also been reproached by the Noble Baron with a want of accuracy in having stated in the other House of Parliament, that the Members of the Cabinet were unanimously agreed as to the propriety and necessity of passing the Coercion Bill in the form in which it had been introduced to their Lordship's House by the Noble Earl (Grey) opposite, the fact having since transpired that there was a dissension amongst them as to the propriety of inserting the clauses which are now proposed to be withdrawn. That reproach was unmerited and unjust. It was quite true that when the measure was first brought under the consideration of the Cabinet, there did exist a difference of opinion among the Members as to the propriety of introducing the clauses in question ; but the minority yielded to the majority ; they con curred in the propriety of introducing those clauses, and there fore his Noble Friend was perfectly justified in making the statement which he did—that the Bill was brought in with the unanimous consent of the Cabinet. Under these circum stances it was that the Bill was brought in ; and it was then that the Noble Lord discovered, for the first time, the extent of the communication which the Secretary for Ireland had made to the Member for Dublin.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord at once saw, as he ( Viscount Melbourne) had already stated that that communication most not only embarrass the Gove: nment, but render it impossible for him to carry the measure through the other House of Parliament, and therefore it was that his Noble Friend came to the resolution of tendering to his Majesty his resignation of office. He (Viscount Melbourne) was ready to admit that the Noble Lord had acted under a too vivid susceptibility of feeling in thus resigning office. The Noble Earl late at the head cf his Majesty's Government, finding the Noble Lord determined to resign, also came to the determination of tendering his resig nation, an event which they must all deplore, and which had led to so many diffi cu lti es , an d so much embarrassment in the councils of his Majesty. It would be in the remembrance of their Lordships that the Noble Lord ( Althorp) had stated that the difficulty which he apprehended in conducting the Bill through the other House of Parliament arose from the clauses which were now proposed to be withdrawn. The with drawal of those clauses, therefore, having removed the difficulty, the causes which led to the resignation of the Noble Lord no longer existed, and he could therefore resume office without any compromise of his consistency. There had been great talk among certain Noble Lords about delicacy of feeling with regard to the acceptance of office on the part of his Noble Friend, as it was his resignation • that led to that of the Noble Earl late at the head of the Government. He (Vis count Melbourne) would ask those Noble Lords who *ere pleased to talk in this way, whether it was not the Noble Lord's duty to accept office, when called to it at such a crisis as the present, both by his Sovereign and his country.-- ( Hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches, mingled with faint cheers from the Opposition.) The Noble Baron had said that the character of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, for tunately for himself, was good; and that his good character had, in the present case, stood him in stead.—( Hear, hear.) With the eulogium which the Noble Baron thus • pro nounced on the character of his ( Viscount Melbourne's) Noble Friend, he need not say that he cordially con curred.—(Hear, hear.) Hi s (L ord Althorp ' s) character was undoubtedly unimpeachable ; and it was his good cha racter that led him to respond to the call of his Sove reign and his country, at the present crisis. With regard to the Bill, he ( Viscount Melbourne) must admit that it was be set with great difficulties. He would confess that he never knew a government placed in greater difficulties with regard to any measure. However, after the most mature deliberation, he and his colleagues thought that the course they had adopted was the most respectful towards their Lordships which they could have chosen. They thought it most respectful to their Lordships to abandon the Bill, as it previously stood ; be cause, had they proceeded to the third reading, Noble Lords opposite would have been sure to ask whether they (the Mi nisters) meant to carry it ? and they must have answered " No." (Hear, hear, from the Ministerial side of the House.) Noble Lords, in that case, would have complained, and justly, of a want of respect to them, in asking them to concur in the third reading of the Bill,which they either could not, or did not mean to carry through the other House of Parliament. His Majesty's Government were placed in this situation of difficulty and embarrassment, in consequence of circumstances having occurred to prevent them acting in reference to the measure in the manner first proposed. With respect to the production of the letter from the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland to the Noble Earl late at the head of his Majesty's Government, for which the Noble Baron had moved, he (Viscount Melbourne) begged to assure the Noble Baron that, in point of fact, it could not be produced. It was a private letter ; and supposing the motion of the Noble Baron to be carried, his object would not be accomplished ; for it was not in any of the public offices ; and if every one was ap plied to for it, the answer of the several persons in those offices would be," It is not here." It could not be produced without the consent of the individual who wrote it; and he ( Viscount Melbourne) knew that the Noble Marquis (the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland) would never so far be guilty of a dereliction of his duty to his Sovereign and his country, as to agree to the production of it.--( Hear, hear.) There must be the greatest confidence between Government and its servants, in the communications which passed between them as to certain measures ; and it would be impossible for an Administration to carry on the business of the country if private correspondence was given up. He was aware that there were precedents for the production of pri vate correspondence ; but these occurred in troublous times, when men's minds wer e heated ; and h e was persuaded that their Lordships had no wish in this case, to follow those doubt ful precedents. It was the law and custom in criminal cases to force the production of private letters ; but their Lordships need not be told that the circumstances of the case be fore them were altogether different. The Noble Baron had not made out a proper case, and therefore he ( Viscount Mel bourne) would oppose his motion. Lord ELLENB °ROUGH said the statements con tained in the speech which the Noble Viscount had just addressed to their Lordships were utterly irreconcilea'ole with the statements which he had formerly made on the sub ject. The Noble Viscount now stated that the differences which previously existed in the Cabinet on the subject of the Coercion Bill, were healed at the time the Chancellor of the Exchequer made a statement to that effect in the other House. He (Lord E.) thought there was a discrepancy between this statement and tint which the Noble Viscount formerly made. The Noble Viscount had also stated that, on a certain occasion last month, the Secretary for Ireland had communicated to Mr. O'Connell the contents of a letter which had been re ceived by a Member of the Government from the Lord Lieu tenant of that country. It was impossible that the contents of the letter in question could have been divulged at the time referred to; for that would have been on the 10th of June, which was the day before the letter was written.._..( Laughter.) These discrepancies must be corrected. The circumstances, taken altogether, showed that sane person must have been in communication with the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. After the speech which the Noble Marquis (Lansdowne) had made last night, he (Lord Ellenborough) did not think that there existed groands for demanding the production of the letter in question. The speech of the Noble Viscount, how- CN cr, had induced him to change his opinion ; but as lie ( Vis count Melbourne) had stated that the document was not to be found in any of the public offices, he did not mean to press the motion of his Noble Friend. Still he thought, that as this letter was made the ground for the new measure about to be brought forward, they (their Lordships) had as good a right to the production of a letter as they had to that of the 18th of April, which was the ground of the former measure. But as the letter was not to be got at, he would not, as he had just stated, press the motion of his Noble Friend, as far as lie (Lord Ellenborough) was personally concerned; but, in common fairness, it ought to be produced. Earl GREY said—With regard to the speech which the Noble Earl (Wicklow) opposite made last night, lie must say that it was generally correct in its statement of facts. But the Noble Earl had made comments on those statements which were altogether unwarranted. The Noble Earl said that he (Earl Grey) had complained of having been betrayed by a Member of the Government. The Noble Earl added, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was the individual who had done so. He (Earl Grey) had not made use of such language. He accused no one—he blamed nobody. He did not complain of being- ill-treated by anybody, for no one desired to treat him ill ; but he had stated that a communication had been addressed to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland without his permission, and also that the Secretary for that country had communicated with the Member for Dublin, on matters which ought never to have been known but by the Members of the Cabinet ; and that if he (Earl Grey) had known of the circumstances before hand, he would have prevented such communications as far as possible. While he said this, he wished that no conclusions unfavourable to anybody should be drawn from it,—because he was satisfied those communications were made with the best intentions.—( Hear.) With regard to the accuracy of dates he would not be answerable ; but he would be an swerable for the fact, that until the 20th of June he was not aware of any difference of opinion in the Cabinet on the subject of the Coercion Bill, except with respect to the courtmartial clauses. As to the propriety or necessity of re taining these clauses, there did exist a difference of opinion in the Cabinet, and therefore it was that the Bill was introduced without them. On the 19th of June, he (Earl Grey) had in structed the Attorney-General to draw out the Bill in such a way as Ethould there be as little room for discussion as possible, except 'with regard to the courtmartial clauses. This was a plain statement of the facts of the case. As he had before stated, he had determined some time since to resign the situ ation he held in the Councils of his Majesty, as he felt himself unable to sustain the burdens of office ; and the circumstances which had occurred in reference to this Bill only hastened the accomplishment of this d e t erm i nat i on. With regard to what had been said by his Noble Friend (Lord Althorp) in the other House, he (Earl Grey) begged to say, that he felt the importance of his character to any administration, and that when the Ministry was to be re -constructed he pressed on his Noble Friend to retract the reso l ut i on he had formed to retire from office, and to respond to the call of his Sovereign and his country to continue in it. It was in compliance with this call, and because he (Earl Grey) told him how anxiously he wished it, that the Noble Lord did yield, and again submitted to encounter the cares of office. No man was ever placed in greater difficulties than the Noble Lord. He ( Earl Grey) knew that the vulgar representation was that his Noble Friend was desirous of holding office. That was the obloquy which public men had often to encounter. He (Earl Grey) told his Noble Friend that, at the present crisis, called to it as he was both by Sovereign and his country, it was his duty to remain in office, howe ver great the personal inconvenience and risk to himself; and th at h e ought not to regard any misrepresentation that might be made of his mo tives. He came to the determination to follow my advice, and that determination was strengthened and confirmed by the ad dress of the House of Commons. He (Earl Grey) trusted that the Ministry, as re-constructed, would continue united together, and would carry on the Government on the same principles as formerly. With respect to the motion of the Noble Baron, it was not necessary that he (Earl Grey) should . say much, as t h e N o b le Baron ( Ellenborough) had admitted that th e i r L or d sh i ps had no r i ght to demand the production of the letter. It was a private letter ; and he (Earl Grey) would not give it up to any one, without the consent of the Noble Marquis who wrote it. His Noble Friend (Viscount Melbourne) had stated truly, that to give up the letter would be a violation of secrecy and confi dence, and that no Government could be carried on if such a violation of confidence were to be made. It had been stated that the present measure bad been grouneed on this letter. All he should say on this part of the subject was, that he still retained the opinion he had formerly expressed, that the clauses which it was proposed to withdraw ought to be retained.— (Immense cheering from the Opposition benches.) Still he would vote for the measure about to be produced ; and he thought it would be the more becoming course, both to the House and to the Sovereign, to see what the measures of the Government were to be, before Noble Lords endeavoured to embarrass them. That Government had been framed under great difficulties ; and if Noble Lords were dissatisfied with it, the best, and most manly course would be at once t o move an address to hi s M a j es ty, p ra yi ng hi m t o dismiss his present Ministers from his Councils. The House, he repeated, had no right t o ca ll f or th e p ro d uc ti on o f the letter in question. Private correspondence ought ever to be held sacred. The Earl of WICKLOW said that there was a great con trast between the speech o f th e N o bl e Earl who had just spoken, and that of the Noble and Learned Lord on the wool sack, which their Lordships had heard last night. The Noble Earl still adhered to his former opinions. The LORD CHANCELLOR wished to conclude the debate, as the letter for the production of which the Noble Baron moved was not to be found in any of the public offices. They had therefore no more right to that letter than to any species of private property. He need not say th en that he did not rise to prolong the discussion on that subject., but to protest against the charge, the alleged charg e , o f inconsis tency which the Noble Earl ( Wicklow) had preferred against him in reference to the Bill. The Noble Earl might, if he liked, anticipate that he (the Lord Chancellor) would support the Bill when it was brought up from the other House ; but what was the inconsistency of doing so, when they were told that it was not in consequence of the Lord Lieutenant's letter that the Government thought proper to omit those clauses ? Where was the inconsistency, when they Were told by the Noble E ar l l a t e ly a t th e h ea d o f his Majesty's Government, in a speech distinguished for candour, man liness, and propriety—in a speech which, he would say, was worthy of the Noble Earl himself, and that he was sure was the loftiest eulogy which could be passed up on i t b y any human being--( Hear, hear)—a speech dictated by the most honourable and most disinterested feelings—( Hear, hear)--and by a pure desire for the service of his country, and sincere good will to that Administration of which he lately formed the brightest ornament—( Cheers)—when they were told, by that Noble Earl, that it was not in consequence of the Lord Lieutenant's letter that the clauses were given up, but on account of the disclosures afterwards made, to which reference had been made last night by the Noble President of the Council, and which rendered it hopeless that those clauses should be carried through the other House of Parliament.— (Hear, hear.) The Noble Earl himself, while he said that those clauses were the most important part of the Bill—a length to which he (the Lord Chancellor) never went, though he admitted that they were an important part of it—while he (Earl Grey) admitted that there was a degree of inconsist ency in exempting those who created the disturbances in towns from the operation of the Bill, while it pressed so heavily on those guilty of cou n t r y di s t ur b ances , nevertheless admitted, and admitted candidly and honourably, that in the difficult cir cumstances under which the Government was placed, he would have taken the same course as that adopted by the Noble Viscount.—( Hear, hear. ) The Duke of BUCKINGHAM then said, that as far as he could comprehend the meaning of the Noble and Learned Lord on the woolsack, it was this—that the change in the intentions of the Government was owing to the confidence placed by the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland in Mr. O'Con nell, because, in consequence of that confidence, it became evident that they should have failed in getting those clauses through the other House. If that were the case, he could not but repeat the question put on the previous night, by a Noble Friend of his, namely—if Mr. Littleton was still Secretary for. Ireland? Lord MELBOURNE—Yes. Lord WHARNCLIFFE then replied, and said that it was impossible for him to persist in his motion, after the speech made by the Noble Lord opposite. He disclaimed having made the motion with the intention, or for the purpose, of en barrassing th e G overnment . S o f ar was that from being the case, that he felt that they had a great difficulty to contend with, and nothing but a sense of duty could have induced him to make the motion. In the circumstances he begged leave to withdraw it. The motion was then withdraWn. The House adjourned at a quarter-past eight o'clock. HOUSE_ OF COJIIMONS, July 18. The SPEAKER took the Chair at twenty minutes past five o'clock. A Message from the Lords announced that their Lordships had agreed to the Welland Navigation Bill, and other private Bills. Upon the motion of Mr. BUCKINGHAM, a return was ordered of the number, with the names and descriptions of all packet vessels that had been lost since the Packet Establish ment was transposed to the Admiralty, with the circumstances attending the same. Mr. GRO TE presented a petition from a person named J: Stockdale in favour of the Bill for the Abolition of Impri sonment for Debt. The Hon. Member also moved an address to his Majesty, to request that there might be laid before the House a copy of the commitments upon the Criminal Laws. Mr. WILBRAHAM presented a petition from the town of Northwick, in support of the Established Church. Mr. F. PALMER presented a petition from the town of .... / ..- , ' .••• , ~ , .., i / ," , ' .•.•• THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, .TULY 19, 1834. Abingdon, signed by all the magistrates and brewers against the Beer Act Amendment Bill. Mr. Sergeant SPANKIE presented a petition from St. George, Bloomsbury, in support of the Church. The LORD ADVOCATE presented petitions from Bre chin and Kirkcudbright, in favour of the Bankruptcy Bill. Col. WOOD presented a petition from Derby, praying for the establishment of a national church. The petitioners argued that religion was not like other articles of commerce where the supply was regulated by the demand.—( Hear, and a laugh.) Mr. CA YLEY presented petitions from places in York, very numerously signed, complaining of agricultural distress. Mr. B A INE S supported the prayer of the petition. Mr. W., ELLIS presented a petition, most numerously signed, by beer-retailers in Leicester, against the Beer Act Amendment Bill. ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSION. Mr. HUME wished to put a . question to the Noble Lord upon the report of the Ecclesiastical Commission, and to know when that report would be laid before the House. -When he put the same question a few days since, he was told the re port was presented to the House of Lords. Lord ALTHORP said he hail. no objection to the report being laid before the House, but the Hon. Member was mis taken in supposing that it had been presented to the House of Lords. Mr. RICE TREVOR presented petitions from Breck nock and other places in Wales, in support of the Church. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. Mr. D. RONA YEN wished fto know from the Secretary of Ireland whether it was the intention of the Government to lay the Report of the Commissioners upon Municipal Corpora tions before the House this session. Mr. LITTLETON said, that as soon as the report was made it would be laid before the House, but he did not expect that the report would be laid before his Majesty before No vember next. Mr. C. BULL ER wished to know whether Government was prepared to give an assurance to the House that it was their intention to bring forward early next session a measure founded upon it. Lord ALTHORP said it was the intention of Government, as soon as the report was before the House, to take into con sideration the state of municipal corporations ; and he con sidered that it would be their duty to bring forward a measure founded upon that report next session.—( Hear, hear.) DIVISIONS OF THE HOUSE. L -srd EBRINGTON, in rising to bring forward his mo tion for rescinding the report of the Committee upon the mode of taking the divisions of the House, said that he had come prepared to state his objections to the plan which had been tried for the first time last night. He hoped however to be relieved from the necessity of doing so, as he understood that the Hon. Member for St. Albans, as well as his Hon. Friend the Member for Bridport, who was in some degree the author of the. plan, would accede to his motion. This would save him the necessity of going into any details. He should not be deterred from doing his duty in consequence of the obloquy that might be thrown on him and others on this subject relative to the votes they might give in that House. When the proper opportunity arrived he should be prepared to state his opinions without fear of any obloquy that might arise from any quarter.—( Hear.) In bringing forward a motion for saving the time of that House, he thought he should be committing a great error in taking up any length of their time, as it would but afford an additional illustration of the disadvantages of the proposition. He concluded by moving his resolution. The SPEAKER having inquired who seconded the motion, Mr. WARBURTON rose and said he begged to second the resolution—(" Hear, hear, hear I") If the result of the measure was to be judged by;its success last night, it would have attained by no means the success that it merited. But there was a difference between the plan and the manner of its execution. He (Mr. W.) felt like an enraged musician who had prepared a splendid piece of music to be performed by a first-rate musician, when there had been nothing but the, merest catgut-scrapers.—(Loud cheering, and laughter.) The success of the plan depended upon two things—first, the velocity with which the names were called out, and, secondly, the velocity with which the names were taken down. Owing to various obstructions, which he would not now more particu larly allude to, there was no expedition in either part of the plan, whether in the execution of the first part of the plan—the calling the names, the obstruction was owing to any want of readiness on the part of any of his Ho nourable Friends around him he would not now say, but they had had a second trial this morning.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Th e comm i ttee up sta i rs had predicted that as many as one hundred names could be taken down in five minutes. This morning he (Mr. W.) had calculated that it t oo k fi ve m i nutes an d a half to take down 100 names, and that was not bad for a2d rehearsal. He begged to assure his Hon. Friend on his left that he did not mean to call him a cat cut scraper. On the contrary he believed him to be a perfect Paganini. He (Mr. W. ) believed that his Hon. Friend would be enabled, if the writer kept pace with him, to call out 100 names in three minutes; but the writer had not the flying fingers necessary on such an occasion. From this second rehearsal, should the Committee choose to submit the plan to another trial, he (Mr. W.) did not anticipate such unfa vourable results. He was perfectly willing, not however for the reasons stated by the Noble Lord, to assent to the propo sition that had just been submitted to the House. Mr. WARD would feel it to be his duty to agree to the mo tion for the present Session, but lie was quite sure that next Session it must come under discussion, and then be fully con sidered._( No, no, arid cheers). He most distinctly under took that it should.-4 Cheers). The House had already pledged itself, and afforded its public sanction to a plan for giving publicity to its divisions. Mr. HUME had felt rather disappointed in the statement of his Hon. Friend (Mr. Warburton), because he really thought that his lion. Friend's expression of cat-gut scraper was intended to apply to him, and that he intended to repre sent himself as the Paganini. If he had been the party to have been c haracterized as the performer, he should certainly have considered himself entitled to a rehearsal, before judgment had been pronounced upon his performance. The fact was, that yesterday was the rehearsal, and he had to state to the House, that there were no clerks prepared to take down the names in the manner in which they ought. He pro ceeded in the manner directed by the Chairman, in calling the names, and when he had got to the tenth he was called back by the clerk, who said he had not then got down the se cond name. When he had gone on over 20 or 30 names, he was again called back by the writer, who was a long way behind, and so the thing went on. He would not therefore, say there was a failure in the plan, because the failure rested 111 the assistance with which they had been supplied. The Right Hon. M emsfaber for T amwort h m i g h t Cont i nue to demon stratehissatiction as h e now had been doing, but he u tell that Right H o n. M em b er the t i me would come when t h e music would b e on t h e R i ght Hon. Gentleman's other d side. He thought he had a right t o a pp ea l to t h e lcoci Noble Lord opposite, that the plan proposed now was not in reality different to the one proposed by himself_ Ought there not, therefore to be a room built to the eastward where they now were, that would contain as many as the lobby, that the plan might be properly carried into execution ? Hon. Mem bers might laugh, but he could assure them that they were never more deceived, if they supposed the plan would notbe gone on with. He would, however, take the liberty of putting it to the Noble Lord at the head of his Majesty's Government whether there ought not to be a new House of Commons at once built, properly calculated for the accommodation of the Members.—( Immense cheering.) It was unjust to Honourable Members to condemn them to be in the pestilential air of the present House for ten or twelve flours a-day. The Noble Lord who had brought forward this motion was increasing in number of years as well as himself— (Laughter)—and was not now so able to bear night-work as he had been, any more than himself.—( Laughter.) What he had said was quite correct, and he was quite sure the Noble Lord must be sensible of it.---( Repeated laugh ter.) If the noble Lord would come forward with a motion for the building of a new House, lie would in an instant have at least three-fourths of the number of the members of the House to support him.—(Hear, hear.) An expenditure of the sum of 25,0001., or 30,000/., in building a house capable of properly accommodating the Members, would not be worth a consideration.—( Cheers.) At least 200 Members had asked him lately to bring forward this subject again before the House, but he had declined to do so until after he could have an intimation that it would meet with the approbation of his Majesty's Government. It was really too bad that there should not be a commodious and convenient House of Commons, and that they should be obliged to put up with the present House, in which they were under the necessity of shuffling through with the business just in any way they could. There was scarcely a vestry room, and certainly not a room belonging to any public com pany that was not more commodious and convenient for those wholiad to mee t t h ere t h an was t h e House of Commons. Sir R. PEEL had objected to the present mode of taking dvisions as lie did not think the public would be satisfied with it, and its tendency would be to multiply divisions. Whenever there was any difference of opinion, the minority would press for a division, the only object of which would be to waste time. Lord ALTHORP was quite satisfied, from the experiment already tried, that it was utterly impossible that the mode suggested by the Hon. Member for Middlesex could be acted upon with advantage. The Hon. Member was of opinion, that the attempt was made under unfavourable circumstances ; but he (Lord Althorp) could not agree with him. He admitted there was one unfavourable circumstance, which was, that of the clerk who was employed to take down the names not being in the habit of fast writing. But, on the other hand, it should be remembered, that in one of the divisions, there were not more than 106 members in the House, which afforded very great facilities. If the plan was not found to succeed, when the division consisted of so small 'a number, what would be their situation in taking some of the larger divisions, in which 300 or 400 members would have to be counted, and their names taken down.—( Hear, hear.) With respect to the sug gestion to build an additional lobby or a new house, that ques tion had been already before the House, and he then said no thing from which it could be inferred that his Majesty's Go vernment was disposed to forward such a proposition., Unless, therefore, a large majority of the House desired the change, he thou g ht t h at t h e Mi n i stry oug ht no t to s uppo r t it. He entertained considerable doubts whether the building of an ad ditional lobby would lead to a saving of time. The time con sumed in taking divisions had been already considerably di minished by the late arrangement, under which the minority went into the lobby, while the majority remained in the House. If they had an additional lobby, the majority would have to quit the House as well as the minority, and this would be pro ductive of a further loss of time.—( Hear, hear ) Colonel EVANS regretted that the Noble Lord did not accede to the proposal of the Honourable Member for Middlesex.—( Hear.) As to the loss of time, that was stated to 'arise from taking down the names of Members, lie thought that the proposed plan would be a saving of time. But the important question was, were the Members of that House to be responsible to their constituents, and how were they to be responsible if the votes which Members gave were not authenticated ? It was said thatt half a minute had been lost upon the last occasion, but let the House recollect how many minutes, hours, and days had been lost upon much less important matters.—( Hear, hear.) Lord EBRINGTON remarked on the total failure of the experiment that was made last night. Mr. HUME—Give it another trial.—(No, no.) He had a great mind to divide now.—( Hear, hear.) Lord EBRINGTON was quite ready to admit the respon sibility of the representative, and the propriety of his votes being known ; but the question was whether the publicity ob tained at present was not sufficient for all practical purposes ? Constituents had the means of knowing, under the existing sys tem, what the votes of their representatives-were on any great occasion..---( Hear.) One of the first duties unquestionably was to take care that they did not throw any unnecessary ob stacles in the way of public business. • Lord EBRINGTON replied. The motion was then agreed to. IRISH COERCION BILL. Lord ALT HORP said he had now to bring under the con sideration of the House the propriety of renewing in part the Bill for the Suppression of Local Disturbances in Ireland, which had been passed during the last session. It was neces sary shortly to state the grounds upon which it was proposed to the House to renew those parts of the Bill which it was the intention of the Government to renew, and lie should also give some reasons—though he did not think that to the House of Commons it would be very necessary to go great lengths to give reasons—( Hear, hear)—for not calling for more extensive powers than were called for by the present Bill.---( Cheers.) The state of Ireland last year, as it was brought under the consideration of the House, was such, that outrages of the most grievous description existed. in different parts of that country. Under these circum stances the Government' felt that they could not be answerable for the peace of the country, unless they were invested with powers beyond the ordinary powers of the Constitution to suppress those outrages. Many of those gentlemen who were opposed to the Bill when it was introduced, admitted that outrages existed of such a nature as to require extended powers. That Bill having been passed, almost immediately afterwards the provisions of its enactments were applied to the county of Kilkenny. This was one of those counties in which it appeared, when the question was under discussion in the House, outrages were most frequent. The effect in Kilkenny of applying the provisions of the Bill to that county has been, that whereas the number of outrages from the beginning of the month of April, 1832, to the be ginning of April, 1833, were 1,590 • and from the beginning of April, 1833, t o th e b eg i nn i ng Of April, 1834, they were only 331.—( Hear, hear.) This is the statement of the effect which the application of the Bill to the disturbed districts in Ireland produced, as ascertained by the experience of last session. ?a Some time elapsed after this before the provisions of the Bill were tried in any other part of Ireland. On the 14th of April, 1834 (one twelvemonth after the Bill had passed), it was applied to some parts of the King's county. On the sth of May, 1834, it was applied to some parts of the county of Westmeath ; and on the 9th of June, 1834, it was extended to some parts of the county of Galway. Such, then, has been the result of the application of the principle recognized by Parliament in the course of last session,—the principle that in cases where outrages existed it was right to apply those powers to prevent their extension and continuance. We have had the experience of last year, and we find that the application of the pTovisions of the measure has been attended with the most beneficial consequences. There are also three other districts in Ireland to which the provisions of this Bill have been lately applied ; and it is a question for the House, whether it would be desirable to let the present Act expire, or whether Hon. Gentlemen will not rather think themselves called on in protection of the peaceable interests in Ireland to renew the Bill.—( Cheers.) The proposition I have to make is, that we re-enact those parts of the Bill which refer to the proclaimed districts, with the addition of two clauses of the Bill for the protection of witnesses, and to prevent signals for the collection of tumultuous assemblies.— ( Hear, hear.) The powers which the Bill will place at the disposal of his Majesty's Government will be these :—The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland will have the power to proclaim such districts as are disturbed ; and after such proclamation of a district, all assemblies will be unlawful assemblies, unless held with the leave of the Lord Lieutenant of the county, the Sheriff of the county, or the chief Magistrates. The Bill will prevent persons from being out of their houses, in proclaimed districts, from sunset till sunrise, unless on a lawful occasion. Lists of the inmates arc to be placed in the hands of the chief constable, and those lists are also to be attached to the doors of the houses. Power is to be given to require persons to show themselves, being called on at night to do so. It is to be a misdemeanour for persons to have arms in their pos session, except lawfully, in proclaimed districts. In addition to these enactments, the bill will contain the clauses to which I have before alluded, for the protection of witnesses ; and the making of signals with a view to the collection of tumultuous assemblies, is to be deemed a misdemeanour. I am aware that such a measure as this is a measure going far beyond what the constitution of the country ought to allow ; and I will add, that it most certainly ought not to be passed unless the case be one in which the necessity is admitted and appa rent.—( Cheers.) Still less ought it to be passed for any long period. I propose to renew the act, therefore, only till the first of August in next year. I admit that it is well worthy the consideration of Parliament, whether some permanent alteration in the law ought not to take place, to prevent the re currence, if possible, of such outrages as have compelled his Majesty's Government to come down to this House to ask for extraordinary powers. That is a question, however, of such great difficulty, and involving so much serious consideration, that I think it impossible any gentleman can conceive we could entertain it at this period of the session. It may be taken into consideration before another session ; but at this time what is wished is present protection against the outrages to which the peaceful part of the population of Ireland are subject. I do not think it necessary for me to take up time by going into details that are lying on the table of the House, because I do not expect to find it urged that in the present state of" Ireland it would be safe to allow this act to expire, as far as the proposed provisions of this act go. Ido not believe that any gentleman acquainted with that country would say that the effect would be otherwise than most disastrous in those parts which are now under proclamation.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear I") To let the act expire then, would be most disastrous, I say, to those districts proclaimed ; but I am also afraid that we cannot calculate it may not be necessary to apply the Bill to other parts of the country.—(Hear, hear.) On these grounds I shall submit to the House the proposition with which I shall have the honour to conclude. I now consider it necessary to allude shortly to the grounds on which I do not propose to renew the whole of the act of last session ; and the first ground that I shall state is one which I am sure will be considered a sufficient argument in this House. I will say then, that if his Majesty's Government are prepared to be re sponsible for the government of Ireland, without demanding powers beyond those they now call for, I cannot suppose any individual will contend that additional powers ought to be forced on us.—( Cheers.) I cannot think it necessary for me to say more on that part of the subject. But it is necessary, I admit, to state to the House why it is that his Majesty's Go vernment are not prepared to bring forward their proposition in a different form from the present.--( Hear, hear.) I need not tell Honourable Gentlemen that in the papers laid on the table of the House, it appears that the recom mendation of the Irish Government in April last was for the renewal of this act without the omission of the parts to which I have alluded. Up to the latter end of June, I think to the 23d of June, his Majesty's Ministers had no reason to believe —nor any portion of his Majesty's Ministers—that they would feel themselves bound to object to the renewal of any part, except the courtmartial clauses, of the Act of last year ; but at that time, in consequence of a communication of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, in answer to a communication made to him by my Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Littleton), Its -has been before explained by him, a different view was entertained. The ground on which my Right Hon. Friend made that com munication, I believe, was this. Though there had been con siderable agitation during the winter, a long cessation—a ces sation of several weeks—occurred, during which no such agi tation had taken place. To that fact the papers laid on the table of the House, in justification of the renewal of those por tions of the Act which I propose to renew, bear ample testi mony. Under these circumstances, my Hon. Friend applied to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, to ask him whether he continued of opinion that such parts of the Act as related to public meetings were necessary. The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, in a confidential letter to the Noble Lord at the head of his Majesty's Government (Earl Grey), stated, that if it should be for the convenience of the progress of business—if it should be for the convenience of the Government in this country—he should be prepared to go on without the additi onal powers. On these grounds, as the House is aware, I thought that if the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, under any cir cumstances, was prepared to go on without such powers, it was not proper that such powers should be called for.—(cheers.) As I stated on a former occasion, this letter was liable to be interpreted according to the opinions of individuals. The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland having stated that the grounds on which he was ready to undertake the Government without the powers were with a view to the convenience of the Government at home, it did not necessarily follow that the Noble Lord had altogether changed the opinions he formerly held on this subject. It can hardly be necessary for me to go further into this part of the question ; of what took place—of the consequences of these circumstances, the House is well aware.—(Hear, hear.) The question comes before us again ; and after what has transpired, I think there is no Gentleman in this House, whatever his opinions may be, who can believe it possible that any Government, I care not of whom composed, could hope to pass through this House a bill for the renewal of the clauses relating to public meetings in Ireland ?—( Cheers.) The question, then, for those Members of his Majesty's Government to consider, who had the misfortune to differ on this point with their colleagues, was, whether it was right and prudent to propose such a mea sure as would certainly have been rejeCted by this House? or whether it was not their duty to alter it to the extent of adopt ing only those parts of the bill which I now propose to renew for the protection of the peaceably disposed against the per petrators of outrages ? But suppose it should be found that myself, and those who agree with me, are mistaken as to the necessity of the clauses being renewed—if we find that when those clauses have expired, an occasion of necessity should arise, as we before proved Qurselvcs ready in a case of necessity to support such clauses, we shall again be ready to give them the same support. This is not a question of a difference of prin ciples. Because, as my Right Hon. and Noble Friends say, they would not propose this or any other measures going beyond the limits of the Constitution, unless they were con vinced that a case of extreme necessity was made t_ . 5o I repeat, if the case of necessity should again aris:, n i shall be ready to concur in the renewal of the clauses. Tne question is now one as to whether, at the present time,, the necessity exists for these clauses or not ? And when I find the British Government ready to go en without the clauses, when also I see nothing in thug pagers to justify us in renewing them, I am borne to the cAneleoion that the case of necessity is not made out. I know it tnay be said as regards the deficiency of proof, that the reason why proof is not forthcoming is because outrages have been prevented by the act being in force, and I am not prepared to say that such an argument may not be well founded, but I should be sorry to act on it, because I do not see any limit to its operation.—( Cheers.) In conclusion, I have only to declare that these arc the grounds on which I have taken the liberty of submitting a statement to the House of the course proposed by his Majesty's Government— ( Cheering.) The Noble Lord then shoved for leave to bring in a Bill to renew and amend an Act for the suppression of local disturbances in Ireland. The SPEAKER having put the question, Mr. LEFR 0 Y said that allusion had been made to a con fidential communication from the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland addressed to Earl Grey, yet a bill had been brought in of a totally different ch arac t er .—( H ear , h ear. ) He desired to know on what ground it was that a majority of the Govern.. ment, who had pledged themselves to a more extended bill than the one now proposed as necessary to the peace of. Ire land and the security of property, had changed their minds and ventured to recommend the present measure.---( Cheers from the Opposition.) He further desired to know the date of the letter written to Lord Wellesley, and who wrote that letter? —(Loud cries of " Hear.") The evidence on which the re newal of the act was called for, represented the condition of Ireland to be more aggravated as regarded crime and outrage than it was when the powers given by the existing act were called for.—( Cries of " No, no," and " hear.") He admit ted there was an improvement in the parts to which the measure had been applied, but he spoke generally. He feared the motives of his Majesty's Government might be misinterpreted ; it might be imputed to them that they changed their opinions, not with a view to the interests o f I re l an d , b ut to escape a 'diffi culty. It was of the utmost consequence that a Government should not lose the confidence of the country. He spoke not of the confidence of a party—of those who ran about the town getting names.—( Cheers from the Opposition.) He spoke of the confidence of the independent portion of the nation.— (Laughter.) He doubted whether another change which had taken place on a great occasion—he alluded to that on which the Roman Catholic measure was introduced—had not been productive of injurious consequences; but the administration of the Duke of Wellington was at that time in the plentitude of its power, and it could not be suspected that any of the members of that Government changed their opinions with a view to secure their continuance in office.—( Shouts of laugh ter.) Motives,,however, had been and would be assigned for the changes of opinions they now witnessed—the desire of ob taining power and place—the wish to prop up a tottering ad ministration had been assigned. He, however, did not ven ture on such charges; he would not take so ungenerous a course.--( Hear. ) Mr. O'CONNELL—He would only implore the House for one moment to consider the wretched state of Ireland. They had just heard the representative of the Protestant Clergy of Ireland, the representative of a Protestant University in Ire land, strenuously urging his complaints ; and was it that the liberties of his countrymen had been taken away ? was it that their constitution had been violated was it that they were to be enslaved ? Oh no : it was because they had too much of liberty ; it was because they had not been enslaved enough. That country which, besides supporting its own clergy, paid millions for the support of the Protestant Church in Ireland, and those whom the I [on. and Learned Gentleman represented, were the very individuals who fed and fattened on the produce of the spoil.—( Cheers.) He never felt indignation yet equal to the indignation which he felt now at seeing the Hon. and Learned Gentleman presuming to come forward to slander the people of Ireland.--(Loud cheers, and cries of " Order.") Lord STORMONT rose to order. He said it appeared to him that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was about to use language which was contrary to the rules of that House. Mr. O'CONNELL said the Noble Lord appeared to be invested with the spirit of prophecy. The complaint was not that he was disorderly, but that he was about to be so ; the fact was, the Noble Lord was himself disorderly, in antici pating and interrupting him.—( Hear, hear.) He was ex pressing what he trusted was honest indignation that any man, representing such a class as the Protestant clergy of Ireland, should express his regret that there was not tyranny enough. Was it not sufficient to excite indignation, to hear the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, who was a Doctor of Civil Law, and a Doctor of Common Law—( Cheers)—he need not go to Oxford, where ,there were such select doings, and where • they exercised so much discretion in giving degrees—he was dubbed Doctor already ?—( Laughter.) Was it not enough to excite his indignation, to hear that Hon. and Learned Gentleman call on his Majesty Ministers—for what? Why, to limit the Constitution. Every man stood on the Constitu tion of his country, as he stood on his innocence. He who would make a case against it, must be prepared with proof. The course of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was false in theory, and bad in feeling. He (Mr. O'Connell) threw him self on the House, and begged them to consider the case of his unfortunate country—its centuries of confusion, discord, and discontent—its centuries of blood—and all to maintain a Church over a people, with which the people held no sym pathy. He regretted that the Noble Lord had not brought forward this measure quite in She spirit in which he (Mr. O'Connell) thought he ought. But he would not now renew any portion of the controversy which the mea sure occasioned last year. He was content to let the past be buried in oblivion, and to look to the future. (Hear, hear.) He saw a new Cabinet before him, and he hoped and trusted, though the present was not a very decided step, that he might take it as an indicative of an intention to do something for the amelioration of Ireland—he hoped and trusted he might consider it a symptom of better days approaching. The very party who sent the Hon. and Learned Gentleman here, were those who had an interest in the perpe tration of the old abuses. All the instruments of the Govern ment were composed of the same materials. Even the princi pal law adviser of the Crown. if he were here, would no doubt second, with extraordinary zeal, the views of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, whatever the anxiety of that Hon. and Learned Gentleman to abridge the liberties of the Irish people. They had had some promising changes of Government, but the system was bad. All the official personages in Ireland had belonged to the ancient party, whence it followed that these who were at the head of affairs here is ere kept in the dark-- they were strangers to the feeling really existing in Ireland ; they had, in fact, been practically led, and practically misled. It was evident that the measure of last year had not been suc cessful in putting down prwdial disturbances, whilst it was equally evident that special commissions and insurrection acts had, when tried, been found fully sufficient tor the purpose. Of the success of commissions they had the authority of Chief Justice Bushe as to their efficacy for putting down disturbances in the Queen's County. The Coercion Bill failed of pro ducing this effect ; and why had it failed? Because it was ueconstitutional.—( Cheers.) When the disturbances in Ire land were spoken of, why were they not considered in re ference to the circumstances which- created them ? ( Hear, hear, and cheers.) Was there no predisposing cause ?—( Hear.) Was it to be supposed—was it to be be lieved, that the Irish loved outrage for its own sake ; that they were so insane as to rush wantonly into mischief that preyed most injurious in its consequences to 'themselves? Before a Government proceeded to coerce, should it not first endeavour to ascertain what it was which produced the state of society which rendered coercion necessary ? Should it not endeavour , to remove those causes, endeavour to stimulate the trade of the country, add to its industry, and ameliorate its institutions? Was it not by premises of some such improvement—of some such measures, encouragement, and amelioration, that Government obtained the votes of many Members in passing this measure in a former session? and with this expec tation did these Members justify their votes. Nov, he should ask, what had been done towards the fulfilment of those pro mises ? Absolutely nothing :on the contrary, the instruments of evil were continued in power in Ireland, and the disgust of the people was aggravated,—they felt it doubly galling that those instruments were continued by a Government which had held out so many promises.--( Hear, hear.) Who were those who called out for this Bill ? The holders of private pro perty ; and their acts seem to render such a call necessary. The Earl of Limerick turned off his land seventy poor fa milies in the depth of winter. To such as him the Act would be useful.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Fifty or sixty of these were helpless females witnout shelter, or a morsel of food, and they would have been compelled to endure the inclemency of the season, had there not been an unused chapel in the neighbourhood, to which they were com pelled to resort for shelter. This statement had appeared in the public newspapers, with the name of a Catholic clergyman attached to it. Such conduct as that was calculated to create matter which would call for a Coercion Bill. The Earl of Westmeath, who possessed a small property in Ireland, made similar clearings out. But of course they had the right: "the law allows it." Mr. Young and Lord Mount Sandford (as we understood the Hon. and Learned Gentleman) had, in the county of Roscommon, availed themselves of the fifteen per cent. on the tithes ; but had they allowed it to their tenants? Not they, truly. He admitted that with the control of private property the Govern ment could not interfere, nor did he propose that it should ; but then, it should not encourage harsh landlords, by invest ing them with office--( Hear, hear)—it should not make lieu tenants, sheriffs, and magistrates, of those whose cruelty around the people, until it drove them into madness. If Ire land were prosperous, and at the same time tu r bulent, then there would be ground for such harsh proceedings ; but it was well known that Ireland, rich in all her natural resources, and equal in productiveness to the maintenance of three times her present population, increased as it had been, was, not withstandingi all these advantages, in a state of unparale led distress. The measure proposed by the Noble Lord went to the extent of stifling the voice of petition in the disturbed districts. Lord ALTH OR P made some o bservations across the table. which we did not catch. Mr. O'CONNELL continued —The Noble Lord mistook him, if he thought it was his intention to oppose the measure. Such was not his intention ; and he would shortly state why ; but he would first ask why it should be necessary to prevent public meetings in those districts where prwdial outrages ex isted? Why not, as was the practice under similar circum stances in England, be satisfie m d with having a not i ce o f t h e intended meeting- given to two agistrat es ? Nay, he would not o bject, in disturbed distri c t s , to have the purpose of the meeting distinctly stated. No one was more anxious than lie to give effect to any law which had for its object the putting down of prwdial excesses ; but the persons guilty of these were not of the cla ss w h o frequented public meetings. The persons guilty of prmdial outrage were of the very lowest classes of the community. They were generally composed of farm -servants and labourers, and their victims were gene- cr. Os. Ss. 10s. Si 20s od