The Sun. — London, England, 1831-08-30 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OP LORDS, AUGUST 29. In pursuance of a Message from the Commons, the Lords ordered a copy of the evidence of Doctors Ru.se! and Brown on the subject of Turton's Divorce to be sent to the Commons, and it was immediately delivered to the Commons' messenger. FRENCH TROOPS IN BELGIUM. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY moved that there be laid on the table an account of the expenses of erecting the fortresses on the frontiers of Belgiumand Holland ; of the proportions in which the expence was borne by the Powers who contributed. In making this motion, he wished to take the opportunity of putting some questions to the Noble Earl opposite, on the subject of the withdraw ing of the French troops from Belgium. The Noble Earl had stated the other night that the French Commander, Marshal Gerard, had received positive orders to withdraw with the French troops from Belgium, as soon as the Dutch troops should be withdrawn within the limits of their own frontiers ; and the Noble Earl added, that he had no doubt but that these orders would be executed, and that the French Government would honourably perform its engagements. But he had since understood that the Noble Earl bad added, in an under tone, which he did not hear, that some portion of the French troops might remain in the Belgian territory. In consequence of an intimation conveyed to him, that the Noble Lord had added something to that effect, he had, after the adjournment of the House, applied to a Noble Baron opposite, and inquired in what sense he was to understand what the Noble Earl had said, and what was the interpretation which the Noble Baron put on the words of the Noble Earl ? By that Noble Baron he was informed, that positive orders had been given to withdraw the French troops from Bel gium. And he had been the more confirmed in the belief that such was the statement of the Noble Earl, from a similar statement having been made by a Noble Lord in the other House, viz., that the whole of the French troops were to be withdrawn from Belgium. With what amaze ment, then, did he afterwards learn that Prince Leopold (for he could not be considered as King of Belgium, since he had not been as yet acknowledged by Ruasia, Prussia, and Austria) had requested that a guard of ten or twelve thousand of the French troops should continue to occupy Belgium after the Dutch troops had withdrawn. He understood that Prince Leopold had requested that a considerable proportion of the infantry of the French army, besides two brigades of cavalry, and eight batteries of cannon, should still remain in possession of the country. The Noble Earl bad spoken on a former occasion of what this country had a right to expect ; and he would now ask the Noble Earl whether this was what the country had a right to expect, after the engagements said to have been come under by the French Government, and the as surances given by the Noble Earl that these engagements would be fairly and honourably performed? For what purpose or with what object could these troops be re tained in Belgium ? Prince Leopold had not as yet been ac. knowledged King of Belgium by Austria, Prussia, or Russia, and he had no right to demand these troops as a body guard. Prince Leopold le Brave had no right to such a guard ; and it was quite clear that the Ministers of this country had been bamboozled—(A laugh)—by this ar rangement. It was perfect perfidy to call on the troops of France alone to occupy Belgium in this manner. If any troops at all were required, the French Government alone ought not to have been called upon to furnish them, but the matter ought to have been referred to the conference; and our Ministers had not done their duty at the confer ence, since they had not bound Prince Leopold down as to what was to be done in an emergency of this kind, which was very likely to have occurred. It ought to have been referred to the conferences here to consider whether in such a case the occupying troops should be Prussian, Russian, or Austrian, or some of our own troops ; for, of all the Powers, France was the last that ought to have been al lowed to furnish troops for this purpose. It was evidently a subterfuge, a pretence, on the part of the French, for the purpose of having the occupation of Belgium continued by their own troops. He repeated, that the matter ought to have been settled by the conferences here, and that some previous arrangement should have been made in case of the occurrence of this emergency. He had on a late oc. casion been complimented by the Noble Baron opposite (Holland) for the great satisfaction which he had expressed at the assurance that the French troops were to be with drawn ; but then, when he expressed that satisfaction, lie understood that all of them were to be withdrawn ; whereas, as it now appeared, the result was totally dif ferent, since so large a body was still to be retained. Be would refer the Noble Baron to what had been the conduct of the Ministry of this country in 1793, during the progress of the then French Revolution, with which the Noble Baron was particularly conversant—he alluded to the Noble Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, or, perhaps, he ought rather to say the Noble Deputy Secre tary of State for Foreign Affiirs, or Principal Secretary, for be understood that it was the Noble Baron who di rected the proceedings of the Noble Lord who ostensibly held that situation. —(Hear, lieu.) If the Noble Baron would please to refer back to a debate which took place in Paris at the period to which he had adverted (the de bate as to the fate of Louis XVI.) he would find that a certain Monsieur Egslite, a friend of the Noble Baron, had said on that occasion: .14 vote pour la snort sans phrase ( L'Abbe Sieyes : Mort, et sans phrase.) So in thb , case his language was : .le vote pour la retraite sans phrese—a real and substantial and not a pretended retreat—A i.etraite sans phrase et sans condition, and then it might be hoped that it would be sans collision. The Noble Baron had cuteplimented him on the satisfac tion which he had expressed, but then that was under the impression that the intended retreat was such as he had described, for that was the only species of retreat with which he would be satisfied.,—(Hear, hear.) But now one word as to the fortresses. In the protocol on their Lordships' table, it was provided that the negotiators for the four Powers--Ilussia, Austria, Prussia, and Great Britain —should meet and determine which of these for tresses were to be destroyed, and that, it woe to be pre sumed, without any interference on the part of the French Government. But now there was reason to fear that the cloven foot of France bad been thrust into the negocia tions, or was to be thrust into them. Now this kind of in terference be deprecated as one of the worst that could be em ployed. The expence of erecting these fortresses had been borne by Holland and the Allied Powers, and France bad nothing to do with it, and it was only on the suppo sition that there was to be no interference on the part of France with respect to the disposal of these fortresses that lie could hope that any good could result front the coo ferences on this subject. Ile dwelt the more on this, as be understood that France had required that six of the fortresses should be demolished, and that two of them should be the fortresseo of Courtray—(A laugh)—and Phillipvilie ; and there was reason to apprehend that the French Government was engaged with Prince Leopold and the Belgian Government in some negwiations isoles, having for their object the demolition of the whole of the fortresses.—(Hear, hear.) Complaints had frequently been made of the inconvenience attending the line of con duct which he bad lately pursued in occasionally putting questions to Ministers on the subject of our foreign afEtirs. But, whatever might be aaid on that head, it was clear that his labours on that side of the House had net been altogether inefficient, for he understood that the Noble Earl had thought proper to apply ti; the Noble Duke (Wellington) near him far his opinion regaeding these fortresses ; and if the Noble Duke had given lout his advice, and if that advice should be followed, that woulsi satisfy him. But in regard to the period of 1793, he would refer the Noble Baron and the Ministers to a letter craitten by Lord Grenville in answer to one sent him by the French Foreign Secretary, requesting some explaua• tiona. That letter was written in circumstances very similar to the present, and it would be well worth the while for Ministers to refer to it, as affording a good rule for the guidance of their own conduct atthe present moment. o En soutient toujours la violation des traites et des 4iroits de nos Alters, quoiqu'on y propose une negotiation d'autant pina illusoire qu'elle est recul6e, alum quo Per wnation des Pays Bat par les armees Francoises, a l'epoque indeteruni,e, non seule anent de La fin de la guerre, mais eoeore de la conioUation de ce que vous appellez la libertC! des Beiges. " Je cross eependant devolr vous avertir Pry termes tees poslas, en reponse ace que vous ineditez au sujet de tos preparatifs, quo, dans les eirconstanees presentes, jions allow continuer A prendre toutes les mesures que noun jugerons . propos, a note; metre en Etat de defendre la surete, la tranquillise, et les droits de ee . pays, a An qu'O. guarant o r crux de floc ,Allies ' eta mettre un from acs VCELI, d'arnbition et d'aggrandisment dangereui.: en tout tems li n o a ur . e le e reste d e PEurope,mais qui le sot:. devenu bins d'avantage lux ce qu'elles soot soutenu par la prepagation,de i.rmcipes destructeurs de tout ordre social." Such was the letter of Lord Grenville, and he hoped the Noble Earl would attend to it, and pursue a smilar line of conduct. He liaised there wo u ld I,e no truckling in this ca se, as the favourite journal of Ministers had expressed it—(he was sorry that the Noble and Learned Lord, his place)—but he hose. was not then in Brougham , there would bpern_aocitpruiecsk;linagndinttbh tois aggressive arms, ;Levelling and be no yieldingocaL:Fe case-..that t there would democratical course ef the conferences respecting these fortresses, . 1 ; , EID --reet.ona would • be taken from France, and no interference on the part ofl The qu er..ti % o v n e s rc ,Lhen, which he that Power permitted• first, whether, wished to put to the Noble Earl and, se there bad been Loy interference the part of France in' regard to the, demolition of shows f na fo r r e t q r e t r e s e: condly, whether, in consequence Leopold, or for any other reason, a porti on of fr t o h m e French troops WAS to continue to occupy the Belgian territory, in direct contradiction to the engagements of the French Go vernment, and to the assurances of the Noble Earl, who pledged himself that these engagements would be fairly and honourably performed ? He concluded by moving for an account of the expences of erecting and maintaining the fortresses, and the proportions in which they were borne by the several Powers concerned, Earl GREY—Knowing how hopeless it was to dissuade the Noble Eari (Londonderry) from pursuing that incon venient and irregular, and, as it might be, dangerous course, which he had, of late, adopted, he would not ap peal to the Noble Earl's discretion.—(Hear, hear.) But after all the irregular and inconvenient proceedings of the Noble Earl, and all the variety of irregular questions which the Noble Earl had put on the subject of the negociations relative to the affairs of Belgium and Holland, he would submit to the House whether the Noble Earl had been, on any one of these occasions, more irregular than he was at present? In the first place, the Noble Earl had made this motion without any of that courtesy which it was usual to evince on these occasions, and without the slightest notice that he intended to bring forward this motion, or to put any questions on the subject of the demolition of the for tresses, or the withdrawing of the French troops. [Mar quis of LONDONDERRY-4 gave notice of the motion on Fri day.] The Noble Earl said that he gave notice of the motion on Friday ; but if he did, he (Earl Grey) was cer tainly not aware of it, and there was no intimation of it whatever in the paper of Notices and Orders of the Day. He was totally unapprised of the intention of the Nob!e Earl to bring the motion forward on the present occasion. To the motion itself, however, he bad no objection. But he put it to the House, whether it was proper, upon the slightest of all grounds, to be putting questions respecting negociations and proceedings of such vast consequence that peace or war might depend on theirdetermination—whether it was proper, merely on the ground of loose public rumours and statements in the Newspapers, or of the vain imagi nations of suspicious minds—(Hear, hear)—to be thus continually putting questions on matters of such import ance, and on which so much depended ?--(Hear, hear.) It was not his intention to follow the Noble Earl through the variety of topics on which he bad touched, for he would be guilty of a breach of his duty as a Minister of the Crown if he did so. But as to the questions put by the Noble Earl, he had only to refer him to the answers which he had given to the same questions, in substance, when the Noble Earl had put them on former occasions. The Noble Earl had asked when the French troops would retire from the Belgic territory, to which he had answered that it was not for him to say when they would retire,but had said at the same time, that this country had a right to expect that they would retire when the object for which they had entered Belgium should be attained—that object being the repulse of the Dutch troops from the Belgian territory. To this he added, that he relied on the honour of the French Government for the due performance of their undertakings. More than this be could not say. He had stated the fact that intelligence had reached his Majesty's Ministers, that the Marshal commanding the French troops had received orders to withdraw with the troops from the Belgic territory. As to what had been doing or what bad occurred since, he must decline at pre sent saying anything whatever on that head. He did say, as the Noble Earl had intimated, that it had been proposed that a part of the French troops should remain for a time. But whether the French were justified by their engage ments in leaving any portion of their troops in the country after the Dutch had retired, or whether the Ministry of this country had done their duty by requiring proper engagements from the French on this head—or in in sisting on the performance of those engagements when entered into, would be subjects hereafter to be con sidered when their Lordships should have the whole cir cumstances of the case before them. He had already stated what it was that this country had a right to expect, and he added, that he believed that the French Govern ment was dispOsed fairly, and honourably, and faithfully to perform its engagements, and further be could not say. As to the negociations on the subject of the fortresses, he must decline saying a single word on that subject at pre sent. But he might advert to one little circumstance in reference to what the Noble Earl had said respecting the fortresses. When the Noble Marquis spoke so confidently of the fortresses that were to be demolished, he declined mentioning the names of the whole of them; but he bad pronounced the fortresses of Courtray and Phillipville to be two of them. Now it happened that at Courtray there was no fortress.—(A loud laugh.) The Duke of WELLINGTON—The fact was so; there was no fortress at Courtray.—(A laugh.) But as to himself, he had been the officer employed by his late Majesty to superintend the erecting and maintaining of these fortresses on the part of this country, and he had continued in the discherge of that duty up to the present moment. It was, therefore, the duty of the Noble Earl, as the head Minister of his present Majesty's Government, to apply to him as the officer entrusted with the super intendence of these fortresses, and to call upon him for such information as he could give on the subject; and it was his (the Duke of Wellington's) duty to wait on the Noble Earl and give all the information in his power. He had accordingly attended on the Noble Earl, and had given all the information that he could. But it was not altogether for the sake of giving this explanation that he had obtruded himself on the attention of the House at this time. Ile was anxious to say a few words on some other .topics that had been touched upon—particularly that of the occupation of the Belgic territory by the French army. He was bound to believe that the King of France intended to do his duty--(Hear)—he was bound to believe so, as he was not only upon terms of friendship, but he might say, in alliance with our own Sovereign. But it had been said, that King Leopold bad requested the King of France to leave a part of the French army in Belgium—he called him King Leopold because he was King of Belgium, and ought to be called so in this House, because he had been recognised as such by this country. —(Marquis LONDONDERRY-He was King of Bel gium in this House.) Certainly, he was to be considered as King of Belgium in this House, and ought here to be talked of as such. But if King Leopold had called upon the King of France to leave a part of the French army in Belgium, that was no good ground for leaving them there, nor would the King of France be justified in com - plying with the request.—(Hear, bear.) He could not look on so large a portion of the French troops left in pos session of Belgium in any other light than as the advanced guard of the French army—(Hear, hear)—and he could not consider the withdrawing of the main body of the Feench troops from the Belgic territory, when so large a portion was left behind, as a fair performance of his en gagements on the part of the King of France. He did not know, however, what was intended to be done on this b e ad ; but if a body of French troops should be left in Belgium, he would say that it was not consis'ent with the engagement oldie King of France, nor with any principle of the law of nations, and he could consider it in no other light than as an attempt to place the Belgian Sovereign under subjectiou to the Crown of France.—(Hear, bear, hear.) He could not say whether the Noble Earl and his col leagues had anything to do with the choice made of Leo pold to be Sovereign of Belgium, but be believed that ha might say with confidence that it had never been intended that he should, as Sovereign of Bel gium, be dependant on France.—(Hear, hear, hear.) King Leopold was an elected Sovereign—elected by the people of Belgium, and why should he require French -troops or foreign troops to remain within the limits of the Belgic territory ? It could not be for the exclusion of the Dutch, for the Dutch troops had retired, and Belgium was secure against their i',2turn by the intervention of the Lvc Powers. What, then, unlit: he want foreign troops for exce,,t to protect him against any rerxtion on the part of his own subjects, or against a revolt of his own troops? There did not appear at present to be any ground for anlj.ing fur the aid of foreign troops to protect him against either of these contingencies. but suppose King Leopold were in danya- from either of the causes which be had men tioned, still the principle of non-interference opposed the employment of any foreign traaps, and was it not interfea fence to call in the aid of the foreign troops against his own revolted subjects or troops ? He had stated, on a former oeeaalop, that considering the disposition of the people of Belgium, it would be improper to compel them o place themselves again anader the sway of the King of the lalatherlands, or to force any of that House of Orange back upon .t.;:em, in opposition to their own inclinations. But one thing was 4ear, that if .force of arms were to be i 2mployed at all to impo - s. - . overeign on the Belgians, that force r)ught to be exerted not in fr.,your of Leopold, but in favour of the King of the Netherlands, g some other branch of the I-louse of Orange. But the syaten; of in terference was altogether wrong, although particular eir ctlmatances might make 02.-:240nal exceptions. For in stance those might be cases in witieL the occupation of a ,country by foreign troops might be justified, 2:0 ip the case of France, in which an army of occupation had remaicaad for aanae time after the last wee. P.ot there the occupation was by the zanies of eight Powers, and not by the army of any one Power; a . a.d care was taken that the Powers more immediately bordering on France should have no troop. in ,111 4. country. There were no Spanish troops, no Sar dinian troops, and no Netherland troops in the army of by the French troo p s , troops, oiceaupipeastib7tlheeft Austrianin France. Then came the occupation of had protested. and afterwards of Spain He ß e ,aun n s o t t both of wh ich . this country remonstrances made by this country against the occupation speak particularly as to the of Naples by the Austrians i but he might refer to the correspondence on the subject of the occupation of Spain by the French troops, and there it would be found tht this country had strongly remonstrated against it, and had intimated to the King of Spain, that if the occupation of the country by the French should be continued much longer, the British Ambassador would be withdrawn from Madrid. Then came the occupation of Portugal by our own troops in 1827, and it was well known that that .oc cupation ceased immediately when the occasion of it had ceased. He mentioned these things in order to call to the recollection of the parties concerned what had been the principles acted upon by this country and other Powers on recent occasions similar to the present. It might have been justifiable in the King of France to send French troops to Belgium at the request of the Belgian Sovereign, in order to repulse the Dutch from the country. But the moment the Dutch troops retired, the French troops ought to remain in the country no longer.—(Hear, hear.) The motion was then put and agreed to. DUCHESS OF KENT'S ANNUITY. Earl GREY moved the second reading of the Duchess of Kent's Annuity Bill. He was not aware that it was incumbent on him to say any thing on the subject of this Bill, except merely to state its provisions. It was an ad ditional grant of an annuity of 10,000/. to the Duchess of Kent, who, considering her situation, had, he must say, been but scantily provided for. Of this sum 4,0001. a year was for the Duchess herself, and 6,0001. was to be allowed for the maintenance and education of the Prin cess Victoria ; and as the annuity was made to depend on the lives of the parties, it was provided that in case of the death of the Duchess while the Princess was alive, 4,000/. of the annuity was to cease ; and, in case the Princess should die, leaving the Duchess alive, then 6,0001. of the annuity was to cease. Comparing this with what had been done on former occasions, it could not be considered as any thing approaching to an extravagant allowance. The Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed to-morrow. On the motion of the Marquis of WESTMEATH, the Irish Lands' Burning Bill was read a third time, and passed. Lord ELLENBOROUGH gave notice that on Thurs day he would present a petition from certain ship-owners. Earl GREY, in the absence, through indisposition, of the Noble Secretary for the Colonies, moved the second reading of the Canadian Justice Administration Bill. The Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Thursday. BEER BILL. The Bishop of LONDON stated he had petitions to presen on the subject of the Beer Bill, and thought it imperative on him to take the opportunity of saying something in an swer to certain calumnies which had been published against him and certain of the Clergy and Magistrates of this country. They had been stigmatised as being always bent on exerting all their power and influence to abridge and re strict the innocent amusements of the people. With re spect to himself, perhaps, it was not worth his while to make any answer to such a calumny. But as for the Ma gistrates and the Clergy, no class of men was better ac quainted with the habits of the poor, or more competent to judge what was good for them ; and it was preposterous to say that those wished to curtail the comforts of the poor who had been the most active in promoting the institution of saving banks, and every thing by which the comforts of the poor could be really augmented. But they did wish to diminish the temptations which were thrown in the way of the poor to induce them to spend in drinking and gambling the scanty earnings, which it would be much More for their comfort to expend in support of their fami lies. The Magistrates and Clergy did not wish to abridge the innocent amusements of the people ; but they did wish to save them from temptation to vice and immorality. It had been said that he himself was adverse to the system which enabled the poor to supply themselves with good and cheap beer. This was a calumny, for he had only proposed that the people should not be supplied at the beer houses with gambling materials, and that the shops should be shut at seven o'clock on the evenings of Sunday, and certain other days—all which was perfectly compatible with the system of supplying the poor with good and cheap beer. When the baker was compelled to shut his shop at one o'clock on Sunday, and the butcher at ten in the morning, he saw no reason why the keepers of these beer-houses should not be compelled to shut at seven in the evening. As to the Clergy, par ticularly, they were placed in rather a difficult situation in these cases. If they remained silent, they were repre sented as careless and remiss in the execution of their duty; and if they spoke out against practices which they honestly believed to have a tendency to produce vice and immorality, then they were represented as meddlers and hypocrites. He really did not know what the Clergy had done to give any one a right to say that they a lid one thing when they meant another. It had been said of him self that he was always ready to set himself against the vices of the poor, but suffered the vices of the rich to pass unheeded. That accusation was groundless as far as he was concerned; for he had exposed himself to ridicule and censure for his opposition to the vices of the great. But, from whatever quarter this abuse and calumny came, be would not be deterred either by ridicule or censure from speaking and acting, when he considered it a part of his professional duty to speak or act. He concluded by pre senting a petition from the Clergy of Salisbury, praying that the Beer Act might he so modified as not to furnish temptations to vice and immorality. His Lordship also presented a petition from the London Association, for pre• venting the profanation of the Lord's Day, praying that the beer shops might be shut at an early hour on Sunday. Lord HOLLAND presented a petition from an indivi dual of the name of Evans Jones, of the county of Mid dlesex, praying that the effects of the Beer Act might be inquired into before any material alterations were made in it. His Lordship also presented a petition from William Benbow, of London, to the same effect. The LORD CHANCELLOR presented a petition from William Washington, of Middlesex, praying that the beer houses should be placed on the same footing as the other shops. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition from the parochial Clergy of a place of which we did not hear the name, praying that the Beer Act might be so modified as to afford as little temptation as possible to vice and im morality. All these petitions were laid on the table. Lord MELBOURNE stated that he had been induced to abandon the idea of introducing a clause to determine the hours at which the beer-shops should be closed in the towns and in the country. He allowed it would be an advantage they should be closed at different hours, but he found it impossible to make the distinction between what should be properly considered the town and what country. He then moved that the report upon the Beer Bill b e brought up. The Marquis of SALISBURY gave notice that lie would, on the third reading, move a clause which should have the effect of conferring on the Bench of Magistrates the right of deciding upon the validity of the sureties which were offered upon the part of proprietors of the beer-shops. The LORD CHANCELLOR, after declaring his con viction of the importance of the question before their Lord ships, proceeded to say that it was necessarily exposed to one sort of a mistake—namely, that of confounding the Beer Bill of last year with the measure by which the price of beer was reduced. The question decidedly was ex posed to this source of error—that the two measures which referred to it were likely to be confounded; and that it wes not easy to distinguish how much of the licentious ness, which was stated to have of late appeared in an in. creased degree, had arisen from the beer-shops, and how much from lowering the price of beer. He thought that, in justice to the Noble Duke, the Right Hon. Gentleman Mr. Calcraft, the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Goulburn, and the other Honourable persons concerned, this distinction ought to be made, and that he considered all the mischief stated to have occurred arose not simply from the Beer Bill, but from the reduction in the price of the liquor. One of the great evils too, which existed at present, he contended, was the distinction which existed between the old ale-houses and the beer-shops. In the one a man might have either his glass of beer or his glass of gin, or he might have his beer first and his gin after— and this last was what people generally preferred ; he spoke practically on the subj-ct.—(Laughter.) He meant, he spoke from the result of his observation—and this led him to remark, that the lower class of persons generally - eeferred commencing with the heavier and weaker liquor, and ending the evening'a excess, as be would call it, or the evening's enjoyment, as they would style it, with the lighter, and stronger, and more noxious beverage. He denied that if you doubled the number of houses Of entertainment, you would double the number of drinkers. For the number of pgracr-.4 740 required the simple and innocent refreshment of a glans of beer, or wholesome ale, would not be increased, and the only danger which could arise would be in the c ise of their having, as in the old houses, free excess to the stimulus of ardent spirits. He highly approved, howeygr, of those previsions of the ancient regulations which gave the Magistrates the power o f d ec iding, not only who should be the persons to have the licence, but where the licence should be. He consi dered that these b eer s (f h er o ed it to be a thing highly itary places. Magistrates, in former instances, took care that guch places of refreshment should be in towns—in places, at least, where they were in conspectu populi, when they were within the guard of the public. Men engaged in criminal intentions and pur- suits, were much more likely to resort to houses in solitary places than to houses in towns. Every provision, therefore, of the Bill before their Lordships, which tended to do away with the great evil of those new houses being in solitary places, where the Magisterial controul would have for merly prevented places of entertainment from being, should be made. He stated this, while at the same time he felt he was convinced of the extreme, the insuperable difficulty of the remedy. Many things were recom mended to prevent this spread of licentiousness which at first view appeared feasible, and even easy. It was pro posed to shut up these beer shops on Sundays, Christmas day, Good Friday, and other like days, at a particular hour. This appeared at first sight a simple and easy legislation. Yet it was, in fact, a question of great delicacy, and encompassed with difficulties most formidable, as well for weight as number. First, it tended to throw these houses into a perfectly distinct class from the old houses— and there was already a distinction of the utmost im portance, because in the one you could get either beer or ardent spirits, whereas in the other you could have the weaker liquor, beer—but now, in addition to this, it was proposed that the one set of houses should be shut at seven o'clock in the winter, and nine in the summer—whereas the old houses might be open from before seven in summer until past twelve ; and from nine in winter until past twelve ; they might, in fact, be open at all hours of the day and night. Thus, they would give, in addition to the advantages of being able to gratify their customers with any beverage they pleased, beer or ale, or wine, or ardent spirits ; they would give the old houses a monopoly in respect of time. The man who was at the beer-house should leave it at seven o'clock ; but who was to prevent him from proceeding to the old ale-house, which was always open, always ready to receive him—" patet atri janua ditis"—on Sabbath-day ; and Christmas-days, and Gocd Fridays—at all times of the year—at all hours of the twenty-four—at all days of the week, these houses were open. Now, this distinction he most strenuously objected to ; because his great object was to put down the use of ardent spirits, and to encourage the use of beer. He was most intensely anxious to promote this object ; for, from the experience he had in the House of Commons upon Police Committees, in the investigations into the causes of crime in the metropolis, he was convinced that the most cruel evils did arise from the consumption of ardent spirits in the haunts of the lower orders in the metropolis and the other great towns of the kingdom. If he had the power, as strongly as he had the disposition, be would decidedly put down the consumption of ardent spirits in this kingdom. If he could see his way to a prohibition of the use of ardent spirits, he would pursue it. All his principles of free trade, and in favour of unfettered industry, he would throw overboard, if he thought he could thereby ensure the vessel's being safely moored in the desired port. He said he would fling aside all his principles of unfettered industry and free trade, if he were sure that he could by any force of legislative enactment prohibit the use of ardent spirits by the lower classes in this country. But he knew this could 'tat be done, and in despair he gave up the speculation he had entertained. He found that not without an invidious and tyrannical, and, therefore, in this free country impracticable distinc tion between the two great classes in this country—the rich and the poor—he could not see his way. Impressed then with this conviction, that he could not prevent the use of ardent spirits, the next best thing he felt that he could do, was to discourage, as far as in him lay, the con sumption of it. And here, incidentally, he begged to re mark, that he lamented exceedingly the reduction in the duty on spirits, as it was clear, from the fact of the revenue having scarcely suffered, although the duty had been re duced by one half, that the consumption must have been encreased enormously—even allowing for a quantity of contraband spirits now paying duty. As the object then should be, as far as possible, to discourage the consump tion of spirits, instead of raising any distinction to the prejudice of the new beer shops, their object should be to level the distinction ; instead of holding forth a tempta tion to men to go to the old houses, they should bold forth every inducement to men to cleave to the new beer shops and abandon the old houses. He stated these things as his wishes and opinions, and concurred with the Right Rev. Prelate (the Bishop of London) in neglecting and despising the charge of cant and hypocrisy which might be pre ferred against him for the conduct he thought proper to pursue. The result of his experience in this world, and in public affairs, was, that men of little principle were prone to make attacks upon those who had principles, and that these charges of cant and hypocrisy did most fre quently come from persons who did not pretend to prin ciples themselves, and had not even that reverence which most men entertained for those who professed, and had the virtue to act upon principles, since they themselves gloried in their want of principle. He bad been led to observe this ever since he had come into the other House ; he therefore despised any charge of cant which might be brught against him, as so justly did the Right Rev. Pre late. There was nobody less obnoxious than the Right Rev. Prelate to the charge of canting, or drawing a dis tinction between the poor and the rich, for he had actually earned the ill-will of many by the boldness with which he bad denounced the vices of the richer and higher classes in the pulpit and in his works—in season and out of sea son, as was his duty—and as he had dune in the same voice of sacred authority wherewith he had protested against the sins of the poor. He felt the same difficulty respecting another thing, which bore in the same direc tion—the prohibition of gambling. They might pass a clause to prevent the playing of skittles in beer-shops; but of what avail would this be ? The man might go and play at a gin-shop ;or at least, drink at the ale-house, and play where he pleased. His wish, however, was, to put both the beer. shops and the ale-shops equally and en tirely under the controul of the Magistrates, the police, and the law. As long as there were three or four gaming houses open in St. James's-street, he (Lord Brougham) said now, as in a place leas sacred, as the Right Rev. Prelate had done in the pulpit—he said it was idle to legislate against, exclusively, the vices of the lower classes. As long as these g ambling-houses (over the threshold of which he did not mean to say that any of their Lordships were capable of crossing, but which were decidedly fre quented by people of the same class, and moving is the same society), lay open night and day, that men might there embarrass themselves, ruin their wives and families and dependants, and, in short, place themselves in a situa tion which renders them fit only for Botany Bay, to which they would not go, or else to get out of this world altogether and enter the next, where he hoped they bad too much religion to hurry themselves ; he said, as long as these things were, their Lordships ought to tie most cau tious before they prevented, by legislative enactment, the poor man from playing a game of skittles either at the old ale-house or the new beer shop. Ile was most anxious to have all gambling put dawn. It was a crime by the law of the land. He had known convictions against a man because gambling had been practised in his house.— The law then ought to be put in force against all houses fairly, as well against those frequented by one class as by another. lie wished, as he said before, to have these beer shops and the old houses placed upon an equal foot ing ; but he acknowledged there were great difficulties likewise in the way of this. In fact difficulties beset him in front and on both sides,—nowhere except in the rear he might retreat, but he could not advance. This amended Bill proposed that the beer shops should be shut at seven o'clock on Sundays and Christmas-days, and certain other days; but the fact was, that in the Church of England the performance of divine service on the days which succeeded Christmas-day was not regarded as de manding ceremonious observance. This was, in fact, a regular and legitimate distinction between the Puritans and our Church. And he knew that, acting upon this principle and this distinction, an Archbishop of Canterbury (not the l a st, but the Most Rev. Prelate before the last)—he stated this upon the authority of the late Dr. Parr, who had been present on some of these occasions at Lambeth Palace —the Most Rev. Prelate never suffered a Christmas evening to pass over without playing a rubber of whist, although he was not particularly attached to the game. In fact it was a regular and legitimate distinction between the Puritans and the Church of England, and was first made in the seventeenth century. He would next beg to call their Lordships' attention to another point. How could they, in common justice, shut up the beer-shops, without shutting up all the inns or ale-houses, for in the eye of the law they were no more than ale-houses; and if they did shut up all these ale-houses, how were their Lordships to travel on Sundays or Christmas-days, or Good Fridays, or any day after seven o'clock ? 'Would not their Lordship be prevented from undertaking any after seven exercise of pleasure, any journey of summer —would refreshment in winter, or nine in sumer—would they not p ause before they restricted themselves fro m the means of travel iipg tinder these circumstances? From London to York there was no plac.a except an ale-house at Which they could obtain either a feed of oats for their horses ; or for themselves. Besides, they should consider that ail travellers would be placed under the same circumstances. He felt, accordingly, that their Lordships could not con sent to draw an invidious distinction between the classes; and feeling this, he observed that the difficulties in the Way of putting down the gin-shops were insuperable ; lie had already explained the difficulties which applied to the Collateral consideration of gambling. 4t first he had looked upon the question as one to be settled with comparative ease ; but it was only after having frasised clause after clause—after having grappled with the difficulties after having come to close quarters with them—that he found they were too many for him. Therefore was it that he had now recourse to their Lordships. Lord WYNFORD said the Noble and Learned Lord had fallen into some mistakes, in which he was sure he (Lord B.) would he obliged to him for setting him right. In the first place, he concurred with the Male Secretary (Lord Melbourne,) as to the expediency of not attempting the clause which he (Lord W.) had originally recom mended, and which would have appointed different hours for the closing of beer shops in towns and in the country. In reply to the Noble and Learned Lord, he had to lament that to put the new beer shops and the old houses upon the same level would require a great number of additional clauses to the Bill before their Lordships. I n the public houses, all the evils of which the Noble and Learned Lord complained were guarded against—first, by the discretionary power of the Magistrates, who were sure to select proper persons, and next by various provisions of the statute law. When the Noble and Learned Lord stated that any man might enter a public-house after nine o'clock, or after twelve o'clock, he was mistaken, because by the 9th Geo. IV. c. GO, it was provided that the Ala gistrates of each district should have the power of deter mining the hour at which all public houses in that district should be closed. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that by saying twelve o'clock, he meant any hour later than that at which it was ordered the beer shops should be closed. Lord WYNFORD said it rested absolutely with the Magistrates to prescribe the time in each district; and as to gambling, any man permitting it in his house might be prosecuted ; it was expressly guarded against by a clause in the Statute. And moreover, the Noble Lord was mis taken as to the provision in the Bill now before them—it was simply to prevent the lower classes from playing at skittles in those places for money, by which they might leave destitute their wives and families, not to prevent them from playing altogether, which God forbid they should legislate against any more than they would against the playing of cricket by a higher class. Again, as to the case of travelling, which the Noble and Learned Lord put forth with his usual pleasantry—he was again mis taken. It was expressly provided by the law, that travel- lers should be accommodated at all hours and under all circumstances. The exception existed invariably in their favour, and would, of course, even in the case of levelling all distinctions between the two classes of persons, con tinue to exist. He was informed that although the beer houses were not licensed to sell gin, a great deal of gi❑ was drank in them It undoubtedly was a measure which required great consideration. The LORD CHANCELLOR, in explanation, observed his whole argument was against making any distinction between the old and the new houses. The Marquis of SALISBURY thought if the beer houses were put precisely on the same footing as the pub lic-houses, there ‘yould be no longer any reason for com plaint. _ _ The Earl of lIARROWBY, as various opinions had been expressed on the measure, and as there was no im mediate cause for pressing it forwards, suggested the expe diency of postponing the reception of the report. Viscount MELBOURNE observed the terms of the license to the beer-house were almost similar to those of the license of the public-house. Any violation of those terms was, in either case, disorderly conduct. lie had no ob jection whatever to the postponement of the reception of the report. The report was, consequently (as we understood), post poned to Tuesday the 6th of September.—Adjourned. HO USE OF COMMONS, Auatisr 29. MR. AND MRS. DEACLE. Colonel EVANS moved the printing of the petition on this subject that was presented by him last week. Lord ALTHORP objected to the printing, on the ground that if that was done the other party might think it right to present a petition, the printing of which would be asked for, and the consequence of which would be that that House would be called on to carry on a paper war between the parties. Sir T. BARING did not object to the printing of the petition ; but as he had been charged, as a magistrate, with tampering with the witness Barnes, he begged to say that he had the positive testimony of Mr. Long to contradict that statement. Mr. O'CONNELL thought that the petition having been printed in the public Papers, there was no necessity for this motion. Mr. ROBINSON concurred with the last speaker. Colonel EVANS then consented to withdraw the petition. Lord STANLEY presented a petition from the brewers and maltsters of Warrington against the use of molasses. LIVERPOOL ELECTION. Lord STANLEY presented a petition from Liverpool, praying the House to give directions to issue a new writ for that borough. Mr. EWART supported the prayer of the petition. Mr. BENETT did not see how they could entertain the prayer of the petition, as it was very well known that it was an understanding of the House that this writ should, go down to Liverpool till his (Mr. Benett's) motion I I was disposed of. Mr. WILKS thought that in keeping hack this writ, they were not only punishing the borough of Liverpool, but the whole country; besides which, an election, since the one complained of, had taken place, and at the latter one no suspicion of bribery or illegal conduct had arisen. An HON. MEMBER said that they had the testimony of the present single Member for Liverpool bow onerous it was for him to have upon his own shoulders all the Par liamentary business of that important town. He was the more convinced of the injudiciousness of withholding the writ from Liverpool, when he remembered what had taken place with respect to Retford, the inquiry in which case had cost the country an immense deal of money. Mr. WASON--If the writ for Liverpool were moved, should resist the issue of it, as the bribery there was more extensive and established than in any place the corruption of which had been hitherto exposed. Mr. E. DENISON complained of the manner in which the writ had been indefinitely delayed by the promised motion of the Hon. Member for Wilts, which, owing to the Reform Bill, could not come on on Thursday. Sir G. CLERK contended that the question was one g of iv s e o n in a t y lchpo th im ito rt n an T ce b , u t r h ,, a d t ay ev . eri T the Reform hatineasur ß e il ought would l tin crease the constituency of Liverpool by 17,000 new votes, and bribery in future would therefore be impossible. Mr. O'CONNELL observed, that the Hon. Member for Wilts would take upon himself a heavy responsibility if he delayed the Reform Bill on Thursday by his motion. The Scotch Reform Bill would next have to be discussed, and that would be followed (as Ireland was always post. poned to the last) by the Irish Reform Bill. He was glad to see that the Scotch Members were pressing forward their own reform, and were so anxious to purify the Scotch representation. Mr. EWART said, that as so many new voters would be given to Liverpool by the Reform Bill, it was, perhaps, needless to delay the issue of the writ longer. After a few words from Lord STANLEY, the petition was read and,laid upon the table, and ordered to be primed. Mr. VERNON gave notice (as we collected) that he would move for the issue of the writ to Liverpool on Thursday. BEER BILL. Sir R. INGLIS presented a petition from certain Clergy and Magistrates (we did not catch the name of the place) against the Beer Bill. It was laid upon the table after a few words from Mr. STRICKLAND, Mr. A. TREVOR, and Mr. HUME. GAME LAWS. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from a person of the name of Harris, and two others, who had been convicted of poaching in Staffordshire, on the prosecution of Mr. Littleton, complaining that Mr. Keene, the attorney employed, wa s a l so th e Under Sheriff, and had assisted in striking th e J ur y. Th e p e titioners were sentenced to eighteen months' imprisonment and bard labour. Mr. LITTLETON said that Mr. Keene waa bia family !olicitor, and that he bad, perhaps, been incautious in this instance, relying upon the known high respectability of his character. The men had been taken armed, after a most violent and bloody struggle, and they might have been in dicted under Lord Ellenborough's Act, which would have risked their lives. Mr. O'CONNELL also presented a petition from James Shaw, convicted in Staffordshire, of an offence under the game laws, complaining that his attorney had been turned out of the room by the Magistrates, and that one of them had offered a large bribe to a witness. This was accom panied by a petition from Thomas Jones, complaining oc the mode in which Special Juries were struck, and of the impossibility of changing the venue in an action against a Magistrate. He had recovered only one shilling when be brought an action for turning him nut of the- room, al though the Judge bad certified and had e4presttati en epi~ nion that he ought to have had 2001. Mr. LITTLETON bad never yet heard any complaint that justice had not been done in that case. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from certain in habitants of the Union of Ragheen , in Queen's county, complaining of the manner in which churches were built and rebuilt in Ireland, at the cost of the Roman Catholics; Sir J. NEWPORT contended, that the whole system required change, and that the building of churches was made a mere jot) in Ireland. Mr. HUME said that the tithes and the mode of their exaction were the most crying evils in every part of Irelat They had occasioned so much mischief and oppse a . that resolutions were come to in that country to restsSts i ; payment of them ; and he was sure that in asyerylittij time it would be found that nothing but the bayonet oco'is compel the Irish Roman Catholics to pay what ce rtai" must be admitted to be to them a very grievous imposts, Mr. STANLEY had introduced a Bill connected stn't thew subjects in the last Session of Parliament. 13°, the Hsn. and Learned Member for Kerry then said tbl the amendments proposed by that measure were so smal l it , to be really worth nothing, and that some parts of i t we' ) positive insults to the Roman Catholics.—(Hear, Now he (Mr. Stanley) thought, on the contrary, that t"" Bill would effect considerable improvements in the 11°' and would peeve highly beneficial to the Roman Catholic'. But he met with so much opposition from Hon. Gentl e ' men whom he would have expected to have given hi ° their support, that he was unable to carry the mea' re upon the dissolution ; and since the meeting of the P re sent Parliament there had been no time to introduce its. Mr. T. LEFROY deprecated tho manner in sclu ch some gentlemen were in the habit of referring to the fairs of Ireland. The first breach, which that 1 - 1 0 t would consent to, of that article in the Act of Union "/ which the rights of the Established Church in Ireland We ° declared and guaranteed, would be a leading measusel the dissolution of the Union between Great Britain 01 Ireland. Mr. O'CONNELL said that the argument of the 11°P and Learned Member for the Irish University, that alteration of the rights and powers of the Establish ; Church as settled by the Act of Union was a dissolution ° the Union, would prove that the Union had been alreadf dissolved. For, since the passing of that Act, three veral statutes have been enacted, altering indeed, but creasing the powers of the Protestant Church. By on e° those statutes Catholics were excluded from voting at s'e; tries, and allowed only to attend them and remonstrate protest against the decisions of the Protestants. what was the result of this exclusive system ? The veal of the parish of St. Andrew in Dublin voted a salary 400/. a year out of the parish funds to one of the curate But a spirited individual refused to pay his portion of the assessment, and determined to try the question at his 01 cost. The case was tried first before . the Recorder , 5 ° . , afterwards in the Court of King's Bench, where it decided that the vote of the vestry was illegal. But tlw was not all : the gentleman who defeated the vestry halo pay his own heavy cost out of his own pocket, and t vestry threw upon the parish their own costs (2000'; that is, the costs incurred in defending the illegal Nat'l' of the vestry itself against the parishioners. Nor Op they stop there. They bad this year voted salaries, amour ing to 300/. a year, to two additional Curates, notwitk standing the decision obtained against them last Year the Court of King's Bench ; and when the Catholic rishioners remonstrated, they told them to make Wel appeal if they liked. They knew the protection vi bic they had in their power to throw the expences of the 0 1 ) ; peal upon the appellants, and the costs of the defence uP° the parish at large. Mr. CRAISIPTON regretted that his Hon. Friend ( dle r Member for Kerry) sh o uld b e induced to make hastY,l exaggerated statement s ag a in s t th e Established Chore Ireland, especially as such statements had a very danger c it tendency in the pr e s en t s t a t e o f that country. On u t occasion he (Mr. C.) was a ble to correct the staten te ; respecting the Vestry of St. Andrew's. The case .ce , this :—Two curates hail been appointed, and their serf' were necessary on account of the extent of the par'', J But the salary which they received from the Rector 1 r quite inadequate, and therefore, under an old Act of p i ts liament, the majority of the parishioners had a right give them additional remuneration. Mr. O'CONNELL—The majority of the Protest' s, parishioners only. Mr. CRAMPTON—The case mentioned by the g ° ' s ; Gentleman was never brought before the Court of Bench, and he (Mr. C.) did not hesitate to say, th st thought the Recorder h a d excee d e d his power in th e " e' A cision which he made against the Vestry. ~ ft Mr. J. GRATTAN was a parishioner of St. Andre and could undertake to correct the statements of the I ° o 'Solicitor-General for Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) He et c assure the House, that the statement of the Hon. 51 e ou ", for Kerry was perfectly accurate, and that there 1 4 found upon the parish books of St. Andrew's many q ° o o of the vestry that were decided to be wholly illegal. . $ 1 (Mr. Grattan) had resisted an assessment, and h a le s acted under the advice of eminent Counsel, he o bliged g s Clergy to abandon the advantages which the vestry ail illegally given them.—(Hear, bear.) The Diesel s throughout Ireland complained as much as the Cat° of the operation of the vestry laws. iri T i r A . le li m lCE bers, re o m f i t n h d e e a d rra r n b g e e. H e o n u t s w e, hi a e n h d ha e d sp b ee ee ia n ll a y g:i l to, that he should have an opportunity of voting some the Irish estimates, which were very pressing. 1 : 4 Mr. O'CONNELL, in moving that the petition , printed, explained that he just now perceived that t,, Sp case which he had mentioned respecting the parish of,,A) Andrew had been (as the Irish Solicitor-General stawe decided by the Recorder, and not by the Court of Bench. What had caused an errroneous impression 0 1 ) 1 ° 0 , his mind to thst extent was that the appellant wa s c . " O pellet to obtain a mandamus from the Court of P ° o Bench to compel the vestry to allow him to inspec t d parish books. But how did that alter the case, or els any colour favourable to the vestry? Of the 2001. c'es with which, as he had said, the parish was saddled, 15 0 1 were incurred in supporting the illegal and unjust ref 1 0 , of the vestry to allow a parishioner to inspect the bon THE CORONATION. The SPEAKER had received his Majesty's comsn' - s to inform the House that his Majesty had been pleas?" ad order that a gallery should be prepared in the Milled Westminster for the accommodation of the M e mbel l ts the House of Commons at the ceremony of the Corn s tion, which is appointed to take place on the Bth of r appointed e e apnd m arpdLALys ( b ii,oonrii e rtnrnerto r . dtot,t.i impossible ipiAduorirnu:n: l si nai t ir3Trobkreil f gdcl u llEkeeecif r srooo t tf: h hniaßtß e orfnrec r pypprot appeared to his Majesty that it w' re be inconvenient for the House to take any part in the be ot nse. t it ceedings upon that occasion. ethliedwiri t exe creietipopl :Members Lh v iie e bt d , etb esly t , l er i 3o a s iftcuoNjofvaesmte Westminster, I:a : its : it : nes t :out Committeeuerwvrse.eoyuiSurveyor oon s l t i r subject of the accommodation that it might seem n,`",s/ his e ied in s a o n indistinct ing. wr e a su t p o p p o e s , ei t b ,,b i o ill , to say that an estimate should be laid upon the tsb7 e , ( s morrow, and that the attendance of the Members in 1 ' ce , minster Abbey would not occasion any additional e%P eli ss l. l , Mr. Alderman WOOD h a d hoped that Ministers "',Ol have allowed him to proceed with the second read i i i 'si the Bill, which stood first upon the orders of the days meant to send it to a Committee up stairs. ss tc Mr. WILKS said that the Hon. Alderman oug' have some period fixed for the discussion of the Bill. ol d Mr. BERNAL said, th a t if hi s H on . F r i e nd suPP - s ol that he could carry th e Bill su b s il en ti o , as it were , without discussion, he was greatly mist a k e n. Man) . 'e' Members were determined to give it their decided '',P de e sition, and he could assure the Hon. and Worthy it' A te man that the Bill would neither be sent up stairs as s w r ii p ter of course, or be carried at two o'clock in the m oral , Mr. IRVING said that the great body of those li , fleeted with the steam-vessels were opposed to the 13,:05, Mr. LITTLETON postponed the Wages' Bill t oil day, the 12th of September> IRISH ESTIMATES. The question being put upon the order of the dal going into Committee upon the Irish Estimates. ssi' Mr. Alderman WOOD rose to reply to the observat, made by . his Hon. Friend (Mr. Bernal.) the Mr. RICE rose to order. The question befocete House did not relate to the Worthy Alderman's Bill, bn the Irish Estimates. ss O l i Mr. Alderman WOOD had a right to Fees s"" s or on them, in order that it might not have to be di se taa at two o'clock in the Morning. But he should not at'eps as he wished to avoid harrassing his Majesty'sGovernt" Jai He begged to ask, however, whether or not they in ter' to support the Bill ? ti e Mr. P. THOMSON was not prepared to answer question until the Bill came on for discussion. la se Mr. ROBINSON wished to ask whether Dl' ll iso o were apprised, as be was, both from Portugal and, et well-informed persons in this country, that the trr were not contented with obtaining satisfaction r aggressions of the,Portuguese Government, 'set Ives.: eivat' vouring to obtain, by treaty, certain Commercial tages inconsistent with the'interests of this country The reply of Lord .Arafroar was wholly i n audib l , e ') l Mr. RICE then moved for a grant of 5,50 0 /. t°,"sSl' the expences of the Royal Dublin Society, for the Year Mr. LEADER W . ished to make some observations )011 the reduction made in the grant to that Society., 0 01 had been a member of it for twenty-nine years , P e j c e cor bear testimony to the important advantages it l' z ' slo si ferred upon the arts and manufactures of Ireland. consequence of the reduction of the grant, its T e3 lo; e promoting the improvement of the arts were great l y ni ,s l, Malted ; and 'already the lectures in several deP' rt i ss i° had been necessarily abolished. If the reduction w`„stl' be continued from year to year, the institution roust' e tually, be shut up. Mr. O'CONNELL wished to !mow, bad the socicti