The Sun. — London, England, 1827-03-17 00:00:00

mode of signing the Petition an assumption of supremacy over the diocese of Waterford, which appears extremely improper, which ought not to be allowed, and which did not exist in law. He did not doubt, if the Petition were withdrawn, and the parties were to designate themselves Roman Catholic Clergy in Ireland, that the Petition would be received. The LORD CHANCELLOR was not sorry to have that opportunity of stating, that he was no enemy to re ceiving petitions from any persons, if they chose to address them properly to the Houses of Parliament, and draw them up in such a style as the Members of Parliament should approve of. In the present case it was his duty, as a servant of the Crown of Great Britain, not to allow any man to style himself, in the British Parliament, Bishop of Waterford, except the Protest ant Bishop. It was the principle of our Church, and the prin ciple of our law, that there could be only one Bishop of one place ; and he could only acknowledge the Bishop of our So vereign, and would acknowledge no other. If the respectable person who had signed the petition would designate himself a Roman Catholic Prelate or Bishop in Ireland, he should not object to receiving the petition ; but it was not consistent with his duty to the Constitution, his duty to his country, and his duty to his Sovereign, to allow any Petition to be received there, signed by a person who could not exist in law. The Bishop of NORWICH withdrew the Petition. On the motion of Lord ROLLE, the petition presented by the Bishop of Norwich against the Catholics was then read and laid on the Table. The Earl of DARNLEY could not help lament ing that his Noble Friend (the Earl of Winchelsea) should, on his first political appearance, have shown so much zeal and energy in what he (Lord Darnley) could not but consider a bad cause. He called it a bad cause, because he was perfectly convinced, that if his Noble Friend, and those who thought with him, continued to oppose successfully the just claims of the Catholics, they would succeed in convulsing this great empire to its centre. He could not but regret the strong language which had been used with respect to a man of transcendent genius, who had long advo cated this great cause with distinguished ability, and who, he trusted, would continue to advocate it until it should be finally successful. But he would not refer to living authorities; it should be recollected that Fox, Pitt, Burke and Grattan, the greatest politicians, who had never agreed upon any other question, concurred in supporting the measure which his Noble Friend opposite so warmly deprecated. The ill-omened rejection of this meaeure was undoubtedly calculated to induce the people of Ireland to consider the country to which she was united, ra ther in the light of an enemy than a friend. He trusted that this consummation would not take place ; he trusted that better feelings—feelings more in unison with the Christian charity so eloquently recommended this night by the vene rable Prelate (the Bishop of Norwich) would prevail in that country. He did not absolutely despair, though he confessed he was not very sanguine in his expectations of hearing his Noble Friend opposite argue, at some future period, for the ex pediency of Catholic Emancipation, with as much zeal as he DOW opposed it. As to the number of petitions against the mea sure from the county of Kent, he (Lord Darnley) was not at all surprised that so many had been presented, for nothing could be easier than the way in which they were got up. It was as easy as lying. A paper was drawn up containing the usual common-places about Church, State, and Constitution, with a few allusions, perhaps, to the Pope, the Pretender, Bloody Mary, and Guy Fawkes, and this document was carried about by the Clergyman of the parish, who prevailed upon every body who could write to sign it. In one instance, the Clergy man of the parish (we believe, the parish of Cuxton), charged with a petition of this description, happened to take it, in the first instance, to an honest tenant of his (Lord Darnley's), who occu pied 400 or WO acres of land. The farmer said it might be all very right, but he never signed any thing he did not under stand. " Not sign it !" exclaimed the Clergyman, " why surely you won't suffer the bloody Papists to get power into their hands, and burn Prottatants at the stake again ?" The farmer persisted in his refusal, and was equally impracticable, when the Clergyman wished him to get his wife and children to sign it. The Clergyman was at last obliged to go into some neighbouring brick-yards, and get the petition signed by as many labourers as could write. It was absolutely absurd to attach any importance to Petitions got up in this manner. It bad been, inquired of those who had succeeded in putting an extinguisher on this question, what they meant to do for Ire land ? His Noble Friend opposite answered, that they meant to convert the Catholics to the Protestant religion. If such a selteoae were practicable to any extent, no man could be more desirous than he (Lord D.) was, to see it accomplished, for he bad a had opinion of the tenets of the Roman Catholic Church, though he did not think that the Catholics •ought to be excluded from an equal participation in civil privileges, on ac count of erroneous religious opinions. But to suppose that above five or six millions of Catholics were likely to be con verted to Protestants, was really a most extravagant notion; and if there were really a prospect of effecting their conver sion, then he should contend that this was an additional argument for granting Catholic Emancipation ; for no one could pretend to say, that a persecuted set was more likely to embrace Protestantism, than one which was ad mitted to the common benefits of the Constitution. The Noble Lord adverte d to the language of the Resolutions re cently adopted by the Catholics at Dublin, which was charac terised by great moderation and discretion. They expressed a feeling of regret at the vote which rejected the just claims of seven millions of his Majesty's subjects ; they recommended peace and forbearance, confidence in God and in the justice of their cause. They recommended their Catholic brethren not to give way to despair, but to await the course of events. The in fluence of the Catholic Clergy in the late elections had been complainer! of ; but there had been no proof of any unconstitu tional interference on the part of the Roman Catholic Priests.— They bad undoubtedly a powerful moral influence over their flocks ; they felt their increased moral strength—they knew the justice of their cause—they saw how they were supported in this country, not indeed by numbers, bet by intellect, and every thing that could make a cause respectable. The ultimate suthat cces summer s of that ca use was as certain as cause and effect—as sure aS follows spring ; sooner or later Catholic Emancipation must be granted; and the only question was, whether Parliament would grant it as a boon, or he compelled to concede it under the pros pure of national calamity. The Duke of BUCKINGHAM held in his hand several petitions praying for Catholic Emancipation. The first was from the Roman Catholic inhabitants of the county of Ros common. , He did not mean, in introducing this petition, to fol low the example of the Noble Lord (Winchelsea) ‘by discussing the whole question of the Catholic Claims, nor the example of another Lord, who had occupied a considerable portion of their Lordships' time, by causing several petitions to be read seriatim, .witiela were word for word the same. There were many reasons why 11 onllateral debate of this kind was not one in which the great question of Catholic Emancipation could be conveniently discussed. It wag utterly impossible in a debate like this to settle this great—he was sorry to be obliged to call it—this terrific ques tion. He should not enter into say part of the discussion, except to notice an observation which had faller from the Noble Lord who opened it, who had brought it forward es et charge against the Roman Catholic Clergy, that they exercised a purely spiritual in fluence over their flocks. If the exercise of a purer) , spiritual in fluence over their flocks was a clime, he wished to God tat th e e sa me complaint could be made of our own Clergy. He should b happy to believe that no influence was ever Used by the Protestant Clergy in questions of a political nature, but that their influence over their flocks was purely spiritual. He trusted thee the earliest opportunity would he taken of affording their Lordships the means of coming to a decision on the great question of Catholic Emancipation. He said this, not because he wished for a debate pa this question, but because, in his opinion, nothing could be , elOce mischievous than that the people of Ireland should believe that thei? friends despaired of the cause, and that Parliament had shut its ear . *Oast their claims. He could not at the present moment look forwai7l with hope to the success of the question th e me wasr what had occurred id the ether House of Parliament; but near at hand when this question must be carried, and it would depend upon their Lordships to decide in what spirit it should be carried. The arts of Man might for a time raise barriers against it ; attempts might be made to check Om progress of rea son through the land, but the currenti of knowledge eed intelli gence could not be arrested by the work of human hands. The tide of human reason could not be kept back, but it depended upon man whether the current should take such a course as to fertilize the land, or spread ruin and desolation around. Many rejoiced at the decision of the other House of Parliament, but believed that few men of sound statesman-like opinions participated in their tr i u mph. The decision was a subject o f triumph to those who did not wish Ireland to look to the Imperial Parliareent for union and support. The triumph was felt by those who wishe d Irelas to believe that the Parliament of England was deaf to their c l a ims, end that they could look only to the ravings of seditious demagogues for the re dress of their grievances. By rejecting the claims of the Catholics, Parliament was delivering Ireland into the hands of those demagegues--it was sacrificing Ireland at that altar. A question involving the liberties of seven millions of people could not be put by according to their wishes or caprice. It was vatterly impossible that the present state of things could last. In the same of God theos as the danger was thus imminent, as it pressed so immediately upon them, why pot settle this question in the only way in which it could be settled, by embracing the offers of Ireland, and admitting her to a participation in the benefits of the Consti tution ? Ireland offered us every thing we could require ; she offered us allegiance, she offered us affection, she offered us attach ment. If we rejected her offers, there were many on the alert to tell her that our professions were false and hollow, and that they were the only friends by whose efforts she would be saved. By a seasonable concession to the just claims of Ireland, we might save her from those who were luring her to destruction—we might restore the tranquillity of the country, and secure the allegiance and attachment of seven millions of people. The Bishop of CHESTER could not forbear no ticing an expression of the Noble Duke who had just sat down, which seemed to call for some animadverson from the re presentatives of the Protestant Church. The Noble Duke had stated, that the Noble Earl who presented the petition from the county of Kent, had imputed to the Roman Catholic Priests as a crime the exercise of their spiritual functions. The Noble Duke had entirely mistaken the meaning of the Noble Earl. The Noble Earl had not imputed to the Roman Catholic Priests the exercise of their spiritual functions as a crime ; but he had argued that the tremendous influence of the Catholie Priesthood was a very powerful reason why the Legislature should not entrust power to so many millions who were sub jected to it. The Noble Earl did not say that they were not at liberty to use the legitimate influence which would follow the faithful discharge of their high and sacred functions ; but he argued against the abuse of their sacred trust, and the misappli cation of their influence to political purposes. He (the Bishop of Chester) had no hesitation in expressing his belief, that in the late elections the Roman Catholic Priesthood had taken down polished arms from the armoury of Heaven, and employed them in carnal warfare. Such conduct had never, he believed, been imputed to the Protestant Clergy, except in a single instance, where a Protestant Clergyman had invited his congregation from the pulpit to sign a Petition, and this single instance of miscon duct had met with perhaps a merited rebuke from that House.— The influence of the Priesthood in Ireland was a very powerful reason why the Catholics ought not to be entrusted with political power. Ireland was the most unenlightened country in Europe ; and political power in the hands of a body of artful and designing men—though he did not mean to include the whole Catholic Priesthood in that description—might be employed to the worst of purposes. This brought to his recollection a remark of the Noble Earl (Darnley) which called equally for animadversion. — That Noble Earl had thought fit to speak in discouraging, if not contemptuous, terms of the efforts to diffuse the light of the Gospel among the unenlightened population of Ireland. He thought he saw the finger of God in the recent conversion of so many of the Catholics of Ireland, and woe be to those who should presume to lift up their hands and voices in vain and im potent attempts to stern the flood of light that was bursting over the country ! If these efforts were continued in a spirit of gentleness, wisdom, and zeal, they would bring down the blessing of the Almighty, and the good work would go on to its consummation. - Ile could not sit with patience, and hear a Member of the Protestant Church speak contemptuously of these efforts. Day by day, the tide of reformation seemed to be rolling on—gradually, indeed, as was to be at first expected—with sure and certain progress. He could not avoid expressing his indig nation, or rather his pity, at the language which had been used in the other House of Parliament. He could not but lift up the voice of e xpostulatioP, if not of reprobation, at those who desig nated the attempt to convert the Catholics of Ireland as a cru sade. A crusade, indeed, in its true sense, was not in itself re prehensible; its object was to plant the standard of the Cross in regions of darkneis. But the term had been applied in a dispa raging and reproachful sense. Was it a crusade which Luther undertook? Were those who. embarked with him in that glo rious enterprise crusaders, in the sense in which it was meant to stigmatize the humane and charitable attempts which were now making by a man not less distinguished by his piety than conspi cuous for his rank? Ile begged their Lordships' pardon for hav ing thus trespassed upon their attention, but the observations which had been made this night really seemed to him to call for some animadversion. The Earl of DARNLEY said the Learned Pre late had noticed an observation of his, for the purpose of misrepre senting it. He put it to the House, whether he had said any thing of which a good Protestant need he ashamed. He had stated that he should be extremely glad to see the whole population of Ireland converted to the Protestant faith, but ne was not so sanguine as some others were on this subject ; and he maintained, that if there were a prospect of their conversion, it would furnish an additional argument for Catholic Emancipation, inasmuch as a persecuted sect was less likely to be converted, than one admitted to equal civil rights and privileges. The Bishop of CHESTER maintained that the Noble Earl had treated the attempt to convert the Catholics" of Ireland as a visionary scheme. Lord CLIFDEN thought that a great portion of the population of Ireland would have long since embraced Pro testantism, had it not been for the existence of the Penal Code. The Duke -of BUCKINGHAM then presented petitions, praying for Catholic Emancipation, from the Counties of Roscommon, Westmeath, Armagh, and from the town and neighbourhood of Kinsale. The petitions were laid on the table. The Marquis of LANSDOWN presented similar petitions from the Catholic Inhabitants of Lowth, and of Man chester and Salford ; also from Protestant Inhabitants of King's County, Wexford, and the town of Warrington. Lord RODEN presented a petition from the County of Tyrone, signed by 22,000 persons, against any further concessions to the Roman Catholics. He could not but lament that the question of Catholic Emancipation still continued to divide the opinions of his Majesty's Government ; that it should be thrown as the apple of discord among the people of Ireland, to produce still more animosity and irritation. The system pursued by the Government of Ireland was childish in the extremt was cal culated to increase and p e rpetuate the discord whi e ; i ch distracted that country; it had drawn down the disgust of the Protestants and the contempt of the Roman Catholics. He was aware that this was strong language; but he felt strongly on this subject, and his experience as a resident in Ireland entitled him to use it. The time was near at hand when his Majesty's Government would be forced to take some part or other ; and to decide whether they would maintain that Protestant Constitution which their ances tors had lived and died to support, or sanction a Popish Domi nion, and a Popish Supremacy. It was impossible for things to remain in Ireland as they were ; but it was, in his opinion, equally impossible, consistently with the safety of the Constitution, to suffer Roman Catholics to legislate for a Protestant Church. —lt had been openly stated by the Roman Catholics, in their Association at Dublin, that they looked upon their admission to the two Houses of Parliament only as the first step towards the acquisition of further power. He denied that the Catholics of Ireland were persecuted ; and if tyranny existed in that country, it was the tyranny of the Ro man Catholic Priesthood over the minds and bodies of the Ro man Catholic population. He trusted that that tyranny would be at , length overthrown by the influence of the glorious refor mation which was now going on in Ireland—a reformation which had, indeed, been designated as the vilest chimera that ever entered the mind of man, but which he (Lord R.) consider ed the work of God, and the effect of the preaching of his unadulterated word. It had been said, that the refusal of the Catholic Claims would drive Ireland into rebellion ; he believed no such thing; but much as he should lament' such an event, h e wo uld rather risk it than admit Roman Catholics to legis late for a Protestant Government. If he were asked whe ther he was .satisfied with the present state of things in Ire land ?he should answer—No ; because the Government of that country was, in effect, no Government, and its measures were caicnlated to aggravate instead of allaying the evils under which that country laboured. He had supported the mea sure, which had been somewhere called the Algerine Act, the object of which was to put down Seditious Associations. The effect of that measure, however, had been to put down Associa tions in Leland calculated to protect the laws and government of the country, while the Catholic Association was still exist ing in all its mischief, and pouring its venom ever all parts of the country. No real attempt had been made to put it down ; the Government was either intimidated or infatuated. They had heard, indeed, of a prosecution against an individual for language used by him in the Convention. Mr. Shiel had been prosecuted or persecuted, while his prosecutor had presumed to use language in mother place, much more likely to promote discord in Ireland. —The existence of the Catholic Association in Ireland was an in delible disgrace to the government of the country. The Bishop, of' NORWICH said the Noble Lord complained of his having asserted that the people of Ireland were persecuted. He had said so, and he said it agLn, and the Noble L give him leave to tell him what his idea of persecu tionHe had been taught in early life, by men of far gre ater ability the Noble Lord, that every disqualification, even re °r w woulda s t h . a than the striction, every inconvenience even to which an individual was exposed on account of his religious opinions, was in its degree persecution. —(Hear, hear.)—This being his opinion, the Noble Lord could not complain of his considering the Roman Catholics of Ireland as the most persecuted people on the face of the globe, The Earl of CARNARVON maintained that the persecution of the Roman Catholics in Ireland did not differ in spirit from the persecution of the Greeks by the Turks. He had beard with astonishment the declaration of the Noble Lord (Roden) that he would rather . see an actual rebellion in Ireland than consent to the adoption of conciliatory measures. He was satisfied that if Parliament persisted in rejecting the just claims of the Catholics, they would repent of the course they had taken, and resistance might come when it was too late not only to conciliate, but to save the country. Lord CLIFDEN observed, that great changes had taken place in the Roman Catholic religion. This was a fact which he should take an opportunity of proving to the satisfaction of the House on some future occasion. The Earl of DARNLEY presented petitions from several Parishes in the County of Meath, and from the County of Drogheda, praying for Catholic Emancipation. Lord MOUNTCASHEL presented a petition from a Parish in Londonderry, against any further concessions to the Catholics. The Duke of LEINSTER presented a petition from Kildare, praying for Catholic Emancipation. The Army and Marine Mutiny Bills went through a Com mittee, and were reported. The House adjourned at Eight o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 16. Lord CLIVE presented a petition from Wood bridge Market, against any alteration in the Corn Laws. Mr. BELL moved for a Return of the number of Game Licences issued during the last year. The Hon. Member presented a petition from Northumberland, against any alteration in the Cern Laws. Sir H. PARNELL presented a petition frOm Carlow, against the Importation of Flour. Sir T. ACLAND presented a petition from South Molton, praying Protection for the Landed Interests. POPISH INROADS. Sir B. MARTIN presented a petition from Ply mouth, praying that our happy Constitution may not be exposed to Popish Inroads. Sir W. ROWLEY presented a petition from a person, whose name we could not learn, complaining of having been subjected to various punishments, in consequence of brawl ing in a church-yard in Suffolk, and praying for a Repeal of the Law. Sir T. GOOCH said that nothing could be more riciculous than the Law. It subjected the offender to having his ears cut off, if he had any, and if not, to be branded with a rod hot iron. Mr. V. FITZGERALD presented a petition from the Catholic Inhabitants of Kilkenny, and another parish in the county of Clare, praying for Catholic Emancipation. The petitions were read and ordered to be printed. Lord MILTON presented two petitions—one from the Merchants and other Inhabitants of Halifax in Yorkshire, in opposition to the Corn Laws—the second, from the Manufac turers of the town of Bingley, in the same county, against the Exportation of Machinery. He was bound to say, that in this opinion he differed from the petitioners, and in presenting the petitions he was only the organ of the petitioners sentiments, without concurring in them. After a few words from Mr. DUGDALE, Mr. HUME expressed his regret that such preju dices as these existed in the minds of the manufacturers of th►s country against a free communication with other countries in the export of machinery. He hoped, before the close of the Session, some measure would be introduced for the free export of machinery. After a few words from Mr. CALCRAFT and Mr. LITTLE TON, the petition was ordered to be printed. COUNTY OF WATERFORD ELECTION. Mr. S. RICE presented a petition from certain Freeholders of the county of Waterford, tesante to the Marquis of Waterford, complaining of the base calumnies that were sent abroad to the detriment of themselves and their clergy. They added that it was not true, as stated, that they went to the Mar quis of Waterford, with tears in their eyes, to entreat his pardon, alleging that in voting against their landlord they obeyed the threats of their clergy. Mr. GEORGE DAWSON said that these peti tioners complained that he misrepresented them. He did say that 475 of the Marquis of Waterford's tenants came into his Lord ship's hall with tears in their eyes, praying forgiveness for having voted against Lord George Beresford, and that they were in fluenced by their priests. This assertion was not contradicted by the. potialonoro. who: were only 26. • Mr. S. RICE observed that the petition was op posed to the Hon. Member's former statement. Mr. HENRY GRATTAN contended that much greater threats were held out by the Protestant Clergy than the Catholic, in the county of Westmeath and other places. Mr. CALCRAFT said, the Catholic Clergy need not take any further trouble to contradict the affidavits produced by the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department, as they were, as far as authority could go, already contradicted by the Attorney-General for Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) The petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. FITZGIBBON presented a petition from Croom, in Limerick, for Catholic Emancipation.—Laid on the tab)e. Colonel DAVIES gave notice that he would, on Tuesday next, propose a mode of taking the poll at elections for cities and towns. Mr. H. GRATTAN presented a petition from the Hibernian Assurance Company, praying fof a reduction of the Duty on Assurance Policies.—T o be printed. SHIPPING INTEREST. Mr. SYKES presented a petition from the Ship owners of Hull, praying for an alteration in the Navigation Laws. The petition was signed by 200 p ersons ; an d th e y we re not only great in numbe rs but in wealth, or rather had been wealthy. They collectively were owners of shipping to the amount of 80,000 tons. But their property was now diminished in an alarming degree. He was in favour of a free trade, but he was of opinion, that trade ought to be f ree i n o th er res p ec t s , before it was free to foreign shipping. DENBIGH ELECTION. Mr. SON present e d a p e tition from F. R. West, E psq.,AiNrel:ting to the petition presented against his election for the above borough, but as it was a petition of considerable ca lli n g the attention of the House to its prayer on importance, he proposed (in order to give time for considering the matter), Monday next. wYNNE could not see how the petition could be receive& inasmuch as the petitioner asked that his name might be substituted for that of Mr. Ablett, there having been a double return for Denbigh, and the subject being now under the consideration of a Committee. The SPEAKER said that so much of the petition as required the substitution of one name for another, could not be received. As to other 'natters, if it contained any, it could be received. I After a long desultory conversation, the petition was withdrawn. Mr. BIRCH presented a petition from the Ope rative Sawyers of Nottingham, against the use of Machinery.— Laid on the table. Mr. HUME presented a petition from a Commit tee of the working class of Blackburn, to which he begged to call the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, praying that the proposed grant of 9,0001. to the Duke of Clarence might not be made. The petition also prayed for a reduction of taxation, by which alone they could hope to be relieved from their diffi culties and distresses.—Laid on the table. Mr. HUME moved for a Copy of the Address transmitted to this country from the Council of Upper Canada, and of Lord Bathurst's Answer thereto, respecting the clearing reserved lands.—Ordered. Mr. BERNAL presented a petition from the Council of Assembly of Montserrat, describing the low condition of that colony, in consequence of the heavy imposts to which it was subjected, and particularly by the 44 per cent. duty, and the high war duty of 275. per cent. on sngar.—Laid on the table. The petition was then brought up, read, and ordered to be printed. Lo Mi e lle A rs S of f ß l el E fas it t, E pryng AaGiH presented a petition from the Miller s for a protecting duty on Fo reign Flour to be imported into this country.—To he printed. Mr. ALEX. DAWSON, in presenting a petition from a large body of Freeholders of the County of Louth, praying for a removal of the disabilities under which the Roman Catholics laboured, took that opportunity of shortly expressing his opinion on that important question for which the petitioners sought. The petition, he said, was signed by more than 4,000 freeholders. — Such a petition, he conceived, was deserving the attention of the House in a greater degree than those petitions which came from interested ecclesiastical bodies. Without the just claims of the Ca -1 dailies were granted, be was sure it was idle to expect tranquillity in Ireland. The Hon. Member then brought up the petition, which was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that the House, on rising, should adjourn to Monday. PROVISION FOR THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF CLARENCE. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that the House resolve itself into a Committee on the Bill, to enable his Majesty to make further provision fur their Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess of Clarence. Mr. J. MARTIN, before the Speaker left the Chair, had a question to put to the Right Hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), the answer to which might pos sibly induce him and his friends not to oppose this Bill. In the Session of 1825, a Bill was introduced into the House for granting 6,0001. a year to the young Prince of Cumberland, for his maintenance and education. This Bill met with consi derable opposition, and the House would, perhaps, recollect that a clause was afterwards inserted in the Bill, that it was highly expedient his Royal Highness should be educated in this country, and the payment of the 6,0001. a year was only granted in case he should be so educated. The object that he (the Hon. Mem ber) had in rising to propose the questions which he was about to put was, in order that he might govern himself as to the steps which he should take in the present Bill. Now he wished to know whether or not the 6,0001. a year had been paid ? whether or no his Royal Highness, the young Prince, had resided in this country ? and if he had not, from what period his Majesty had directed the money to be paid, and what were the sums paid un der the sanction of that Act? If it should appear that his Royal Highness had had the 6,0001. a year paid to him, and if it should appear that he had never been in this country, then he (Mr. J. Martin) had no hesitation in declaring, that the House had been deluded in the passing of that Bill. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER —I am extremely happy in the prospect of having the support of the Hon. Gentleman who has put the questions to me, with re spect to the present Bill before the House, from the answer which I have it in my power to give.—(Hear.)—l have to state, that in point of fact, of the annuity of 6,0001. granted to his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland, not one farthing has ever been paid.—(Cheers). Mr. J. MARTIN said, that the allowance to his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland was 18,0001., and from the list he perceived, that in January, 1825, there was an item of 21,0001. charged to his Royal Highness. This, he thought, re quired some explanation. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the sum named by the Hon. Gentleman had accrued ; but, in fact, it never was paid. His Majesty had never thought fit to oblige the young Prince to reside in this country hither to, and consequently the allowance granted was never required. On the question being put, that the House resolve itself into a Committee, Mr. HUME thought it was too much to come and ask for 9,000/. a year in addition to the large sum which his Royal Highness already received. Mr. MABERLY did not think it was just, nor right, to bring forward the distresses of the people in a question of the present description. He was as desirous as his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hume), or any Gentleman in that House, to have them removed. His Hon. Friend had certainly a right to ex press his opinion on the subject, but he should not bring forward those topics which, in his (Mr. M.'s) judgment, had nothing bearing upon the question before the House. Mr. TENNYSON thought that the Royal Family in this country should be in some degree dependant on Parliament for their income. He was desirous of seeing them live in the splendour befitting a great country like this. There were cases in which the Ministers had neglected their duties in not providing for members of the Royal Family. The ease of the Duke of Sussex, was one in which the Ministers of the time had neglected their duty in not providing him with better funds to maintain his exalted rank and station as a King's son. It was a well-known fact that his Royal Highness married h lady of high rank early in life, when he was about the age of 21, and that his late Majesty was not advised by the Ministers to make a suitable provision for him until his Royal Highness was 30 years old. He was na turally involved in vast expences, had a settlement to make on the lady to whom he was united, and the consequence was, that he was much involved in debt. When he received the 18,000/. a-year, he very generously appropriated half that sum to the discharge of the debts which he had been compelled to contract early in life, and the fund thus established would in the course of a few years be ample to pay off every six pence which was owing. When his Royal Highness married, he did,not even receive the usual allowance which was , granted to other members of the - Royal Family. When , it, was considered that his Royal Highness was a subscriber to almost every bene volent institution in the country, it could not fail to be a matter of surprise how be was enabled, with so very limited an income, to contribute so extensively to those establishments for which this country was so famous. With respect to the grant under dis cussion, it had his entire concurrence. Mr. PENDAR YES was inclined to consider that the grant was both untimely and prejudicial, when the table was loaded with petitions complaining of distress and taxation. Mr. W. SMITH could not give a silent vote on the question before the House. The sum of 9,000/., he was ready to admit, if divided among the people of this country, was a mere pittance not worth a consideration, but the grant was pro posed at a time when distress prevailed to such a degree, that the country would be apt to infer there was no desire of retrench ment. Under the present distressed circumstances of the country, it was incumbent upon the House to be as prudent and econo mical in the expenditure of the public money as was possible. Mr. LEYCESTER considered the grant no more than a proper tribute of respect, and public approbation of his Royal Highness's conduct, for he (Mr. L.) was not one of those who entertained that absurd and demoralising doctrine, that character and conduct should not be at all taken into considera tion on such occasions. Mr. MONCK thought that if the Hon. Member who had spoken last, had succeeded in proving any thing, he had proved too much, for if the Duke of Clarence was entitled to this 9,000/. on the grounds urged by the Hon. Gentleman, a fortiori, 90,000/. a-year would be a more adequate provision. But he (Mr. Monck) considered this whole proposition unrea sonable and unfounded. Mr. CALCRAFT—With respect to the present grant, he (Mr. Calcraft) had already expressed his opinion upon it, and he saw no reason to alter the sentiments then avowed.— If we were to have a monarchial Government, we must of ne cessity support the members of the monarchy in a state of suitable dignity, and the present grant, instead of being unreasonable, appeared to him (Mr. Calcraft) the most moderate that his Ma jesty's Ministers could, under the circumstances, have proposed. Mr. MONCK explained. The Right Hon. W. C PLUNKET'r could not conceive, that when his Royal Highness was placed in the situa tion of Heir Presumptive, he would not be subjected to increased expenditure, and require an enlarged allowance to meet that ex penditure, and he (Mr. Plunkett) was sure that there was no man in the country, however humble his condition, or however he might feel the pressure of the times, whO would not support the necessary dignity, and keep up the fair establishment of con t the branches of the Royal Family as cheerf ull y as they would ri bute to any other public disbursement. Sir T. ACLAND would vote for the present mea sure, because he conceived that the Ministers would not have done their duty to the Crown, and that House would not do its duty to his Royal Highness, nor enable his Royal Highness to do his duty to the country, if a reasonable supply were not afforded him to meet the necessary expenditure of his station. Mr. BEAUMONT objected to the breathless haste with which this vote was carried through the House in the pre sent distressed circumstances of the country. Mr. Alderman WOOD objected to the grant, as an unnecessary tax upon the lower orders of the people, on whom all the expenses of the Government ultimately fell. The Worthy Alderman was proceeding to make other observations, but he became quite inaudible in the Gallery from the loud cries of " Question" in the House. Finding himself thus interrupted, he turned towards that p art of the House from which the cry principally proceeded, and said, " You shall have the question whenever you like, but not till I please."----(Loud roars of laughter. ) --He a dded, that he would not be placed in the situation which they had heard of lately—he would not he put down by clamour, nor would he suffer the supporters of this m easure, like the agri cultural interest, to have it all their own way.—(Hear, hear.)— He had never interrupted any man in tha t House, nor would he suffer himself to be interrupted.—(Hear, hear.)----He opposed this grant, because there were thousands of poor men who would have to pay for it, and because every pot of beer or every glass of gin they might otherwise drink would go to contribute towards this increased allowance to the Royal Duke. Mr. Alderman C. SMITH denied the position of Mr. Alderman Wood, that the money would come out of the pockets of the lower orders ; and supported the grant as both mo derate and necessary. Sir R. HERON felt it to be his duty to those who sent him there to oppose this grant, which seemed to him unneces sary, improvident, and extravagant.—(Hear, hear.) The House then divided on the question, whether the Speaker should leave the Chair, when the numbers appeared to be— Ayes, 99 ; Noes, 15 ; Majority, 84. The House then went into a Committee. Mr. W. SMITH did not object to the sum pro posed, but to the principle on which the measure was founded. If any thing ought to be granted, the sum now proposed was rea sonable enough. The Bill then went through the Committee, the House re sumed, and the Report was ordered to be brought up on Monday next. WIDOWS' PENSIONS. On the motion of Mr. CROKER, the House went into a Committee on the Widows' Pension Bill, and the Report was ordered to be brought up on Monday next. SCOTCH CREDITORS. - The Scotch Creditor's Bill went through a Committee, the House resumed, and the Report was ordered to be brought up on Wednesday next. POSTPONEMENT OF BUSINESS. On the question that the Second Reading of the Irish Public Works' Bill be postponed until Monday, Mr. HUME begged to be informed why public measures were put off in this unaccountable manner? The effect would be to occasion so great a pressure hereafter, that the busi ness must be done negligently and very late at night. There seemed to be a complete dissolution of all the functions of Govern ment, from some cause or other. Perhaps the inferior Members of the Cabinet were waiting until a new Prime Minister was ap pointed.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. HERRIES could speak as to the measure the postponement of which he had proposed, but no further. It was a Bill that related to Ireland, and he had been particularly re quested to defer it for a few days, in order to ascertain whether it would not be fit to introduce some alterations. Mr. Alderman WOOD was quite ready to sit and discuss public business until twelve o'clock, at least ; and he saw no reason why it should not be brought on in the regular course. The postponement was then ordered. ANNUAL DUTIES. Mr. HERRIES proposed the second reading of the Annual Duties Bill. Mr. W. WHITMORE was willing to postpone such remarks as he had to make upon the measure until it was committed, provided that stage were entered upon at a sufficiently early hour. The Bill was then read a second time, and the Committee upon • it fixed for Tuesday. STIPENDIARY MAGISTRACY IN IRELAND. Mr. VILLIERS STUART called the attention of the House to the appointment of a Stipendiary Magistrate at the village of Kilmacthomas in the county of Waterford, under the provisions of the Constabulary Act. The facts were within a narrow compass, but the question was one of general import ance ; it was not a Waterford or an Irish question only, but it touched the rights and interests of the whole empire, and the sta bility of the Constitution itself. In March, 1826, the late Go vernor of Waterford called upon the Magistracy to take into con sideration certain outrages at Kilmacthomas. Opinions were divided, and the Magistrates separated into two parties, although both agreed that the disturbances arose out of the spirit generated by the eve of a General Election. On the 3d of April, the first intimation was given of the intention of the Irish Government to appoint a resident Stipendiary Magistrate. A Meeting was held, and it was there carried by a small majority, approving of such a step ; but the dissenting Magistrates sigaed a Protest, declaring that it was unnecessary, on account of the peaceful character of the County, on which it was inflicting a heavy burden. Very soon e which by that tthheey High the w e subject ue She riffb ej e em- afterwards, a letter was received from t he Ri g ht H onourable Gentleman opposite (Mr. Goulburn), announcing that the ap pointment had been actually made. On the 12th April, a C oun ty M ee ting was held, and Resolutions, strongly disapproving such a bodied, o ed se f werecourse, Waterford. aged r presented re An A to n ; intimation mhd the Lord oottrdwu Memorial, t in Lieutenant, hn given, should be taken into immediate consideration. Seven months hav ing elapsed, and no answer being returned, the county naturally felt indignant at the disrespect with which it was treated ; and despairing of Justice from so motley a body as the Government of Ireland—(hear, hear,)—a public meeting, under the authority of t the High Sheriff, was held on the 14th Nov., when the petition to Parliament with which he (Mr. V. Stuart) was entrusted had been agreed to. Such were the brief facts, and the House would not f a il to recollect that the meeting of the 3d April, which took place at Dungarvon, was on the eve of a general election in a county which it was known was to be contested. At such a time, when it be came the Irish Government to close its ears to all party represen tations, it had thought fit, listening to the representations of one party and deaf to the remonstrances of the ether, to make the appointment of a stipendiary Magistrate, as a mere mock ery of and satire upon the administration of justice. The ob ject seemed to be, to counterbalance the popular feeling at Kilmacthomas. Had robberies, murders, the burning of houses, and villages, the midnight seizure of arms, been com mitted in that district ? No : and the House would hear with surprise and indignation, that at the moment chosen by the Irish Government, the County had been free from every thing that could be fairly called disturbance. On the approach of a General Election, no doubt there was a certain degree of excitement , some foolish old women, not certainly as wise and prudent as the Right Honourable Secretary for Ireland, had fur -nished children with a few faggots for bonfires, and drums, and the abomination of penny trumpets were in request among the younger inhabitants ; but only in two instances had the peace of the district been at all more seriously disturbed, than by these juvenile processioners. Even those two instances were deemed of too trifling a nature to need further inquiry, and the calendar af forded the most irrefragable testimony of the general tranquillity of the county. No doubt the Right Honourable Secretary would contrast the state of the county of Waterford at such a time, with the calm and quiet of the Archiepiscopal borough of Ar magh, which had the good fortune to have him for its Representa tive. But such unanimity could not be expected in all parts of Ire land, and if the Right Hon. Gentleman himself had never stood on the popular interest, the Lord Lieutenant, before he was exalted to the Peerage, had had some experience of the violence of party &d -ing during a general election. It could not be said, that such an appointment was necessary from the want of resident magis trates, for within four or lye miles of Kilmacthomas, there were as many Justices of the Peace, ready at all times to discharge the duties imposed upon them by the Commission. As matters now stood, the county W 8.3 called upon to pay 8001 . a-year for an individual to reside among the m, whose interest it was, for the sakeof House keepingin his place, to produce disturbance. —ln order to put the ion of the necessary information upon this subject, he moved for copies of Memorials presented to the Lord Lieutenant from the county of Waterford. Mr. POWER seconded the motion in a very few words. Mr. GOULBU Pt NT observed, that, whatever com plaints had been made against those who had, at different times, administered the Government of Ireland, this was the first time that a Lord Lieutenant of Ireland had been blamed for adopt ing the measures which be was authorized to take by an Act of the Legislature. The Lord Lieutenant was bound to do every thing in his power for the preservation of the peace, and this was all that he had done in the present instance. He positively denied that the appointment of the Stipendiary Magistrate, of which the Honourable Member had complained, took place on account of any personal regards ; and the Honourable Member could hardly refuse to a cknowledge that he himself had always been received by the Lord Lieutenant with every mark of respect and kindness. But it was well known to all, that, during the late election, the County of Waterford was in a state of the highest excitation, and that the effects were not confined, as the Hon. Member seemed disposed to persuade the House, to the beating of drums, and the blowing of penny trumpets. It was known that parties of 20 or 30 persons were often on the eve of coming into actual conflict, and that a magistrate could not execute the simple process of a distress for rent without calling out the police of the county. As for the expence to the county, he had only to say, that it was much better to pay seven hundred pounds a-year to an active Resident Magistrate, than to pay much larger sums as compensations for losses and damages which might otherwise occur. It must be obvious, that this mode of precaution and pre vention was the most humane course that could be adopted with respect to the people themselves. This was the conduct which the Irish Executive Government had pursued, and in that conduct that Government was, to say the least of it, fully justified. Mr. H. GRATTAN contended, that the appoint ments made, and the orders sent by the Government, were most unconstitutional. continuation,been highly said, t that the proceedings The SPEAKER remarked , that the observation House. Nr c . e H. GRATTAN, of the Govern m was irregular, as there was no q uestion about a Bill befor e the .:n n nt had unconstitu tional ; for they had es tablished a Police with watch-words and challenges, resembling an armed force ; and such a s y s tem, if per severed in, would pr ove the destruction of Ireland. Mr. LOTT ( Member for Homton) was surprised