The Sun. — London, England, 1831-10-12 00:00:00

tkVir*Vil ~Y IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. ' HO USE OF LORDS, OCTOBER 11. The Loan CHANCELLOR took his scat on the Woolsack at Ten Minutes before Five o'clock. Lord WHARNCLIFFE presented a petition from three individuals on the Game Laws. Lord RODEN presented a petition from Coleraine, praying that British soldiers in foreign parts might be re lieved from doing homage to the host in Roman Catholic processions. The Earl of CAMPERDOWN presented a petition from Galway relative to the extension of the elective franchise. The Marquis of WESTMEATH presented„a similar petition. The Earl of RADNOR presented a petition in favour of the Reform Bill. Lord LYTTLETON presented a petition from a parish in Worcestershire, in favcur of Reform. Mr. BERNAL, and others from the Commons, brought up the Arms (Ireland) Bill, which, on the motion of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, was read a first time. PRESCRIPTION BILL.—TITHES. Lord KING had two petitions to present on a different subject from that of the Reform Bill. Both petitions were in favour of the Prescription Bill introduced by the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench, but which was likely to be strangled in this Session as it had been in the last. One of the petitions was from the owners and occupiers of lands, to the extent of five thousand acres, in the county of Suffolk ; and they prayed that the Bill might speedily pass, as otherwise they would he continually harassed with suits for tithes, as they had recently been, after an exemp tion for centuries. The petitioners stated, that the lands which they hold had belonged to the Priory of the Isle of Ely, and as such had been exempted from the payment of tithes ; and that they had remained exempt for several centuries, till suits fur tithes were recently commenced against them by the Dean and Chapter of Ely, who were Lords of the Manor, in which law-suits the petitioners had expended five thousand pounds. The Dean and Chap. ter had lately granted a new lease to their own Steward of the Manor, by the terms of which it was taken he was bound to prosecute these suits. The Dean and Chapter had also taken fines from them on the renewal of their rights, as if the Lords had been exempt from the payment of tithes, and had appointed a Vicar of the parish, who, as might be expected, was a non-resident and a pluralist. 'l'hisdisturbance of the ancient order of things then came from the Clergy, who professed to be averse to all changes, and to be desirous that every thing should remain un changed, but who, when their own interests were con cerned, became the arch disturbers.—(Hear.) The other petition was to the same effect, from a place in Ireland. Lord ELLENBOROUGH—He thought it his duty to call the attention of the House to an expression which the Noble Lord had used with respect to the clergy. The Noble Lord had said that they were the arch-disturbers when their own interests were concerned, although under other circumstances they were adverse to all change. But the more that he saw of the conduct of the clergy, the more he was convinced there was the grossest injustice in making such a charge against them. Even they them selves had lately come forward with measures of improve ment and amendment. He knew the abilities and kind ness and excellent disposition of his Noble Friend, but really these constant attacks on the clergy had a tendency to detract from the position which his Noble Friend ought to hold in that House, and very much disparaged him. Lord KING thanked his Noble Friend for the good opinion which he entertained of him in some respects ; but yet he must still say that the complaints in the peti tion from Suffolk were well founded. They had enjoyed the exemption from the payment of tithes for centuries, and now they were disturbed, not by laymen, but by the Dean sod Chapter of Ely. The clergy there were the disturbers of the existing order of things, and if the Pre scription Bill should not pass, the grievance would become intolerable, and the strongest odium would be excited against the clergy generally. The petition from Ireland prayed for a speedy passing of the Bill, as delay was a bonus and a premium on law-suits. Lord SUFFIELD—Being warmly attached to the Church of England, he bad frequently suggested to his Noble Friend (Lord King) to abstain from these attacks on the Clergy and the Church ; but he confessed that what had taken place within these few days had caused some change in his opinion respecting the general body of the Right Rev. Prelates, although his attachment to the Esta blished Church remained as strong as ever. But he felt that he owed some apology to his Noble Friend, kr he thought that the conduct of the Right Rev. Prelaf.s diri gall for some observation_ He certainly flit; not come pre pared to make any such, for he had not been aware of the petitions to be presented by his Noble Friend, nor of the observations which lie intended to make on presentine them. He bad always considered the existence of the Right Rev. Prelates in this House as liable to one objec tion, as they always threw almost the whole weight of their body into the scale of Government.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition benches.) He would presently show how be meant to apply that observation. The Right Rev. Pre lates, in a firm and close phalanx, lent their weight to the Government, and this led him to observe, that the Right Rev. Prelates always did so when the Government was arbitrary and oppressive ; but that the very instant that a liberal Government came into power, and proposed liberal and beneficial measures, the Right Rev. Prelates voted against them. The Earl of CARNARVON rose to order. It was de cidedly disorderly fur any Noble Lord to arraign the con duct and motives of other Lords because they happened t o vote contrary to the opinion and vote of him who made the charge. There would be an end to all freedom of discus. aion and decision if this were to be allowed. The LORD CHANCELLOR—He had been taunted for not taking care to keep order, but he could only give his advice which he would now give, and valeat quantum. To refer to any speech that had been made in the course of a former debate was not strictly according to order, but still it was often done, and overlooked. But to arraign the motives of any Noble Lords in voting as they did, was certainly contrary to all rule and order.—(Hear.) But he did not hear that his Noble Friend imputed any sinister or bad motives to the Right Rev. Prelates in voting as they did, but merely stated the fact, and his opinion that this might prove injurious to the Church Establishment of which he was a firm and stedfast friend. It was in that view that his Noble Friend made observations on the conduct of the Right Rev. Prelates, and neither they nor any Noble Lords were exempt from observation, both here and in another place. The Right Rev. Prelates did not want to be exempted from observation. They courted observation. The Right Rev. Prelates had no doubt acted with the greatest disinterestedness....-(Hear, hear.) Good God ! to impute to the Right Rev. Prelates that they zees' from selfish and interested motives ! No, they had with the utmost disinterestedness acted against the present Government.—(Loud cries of hear, hear.) They thought of tripping up the present Government—(Hear, hear) — they had a right to do so—(Hear) —and it could not be imputed to them that they were actuated by selfish mo tives when they acted against the present Government, and attempted to trip it up, Ltd probably thought they had tripped it up.—(Hear, hear.) Lord ELLENBOROUGH rose to order. The Noble end Learned Lord had risen to give his opinion on a point of ostler, and now he was treating them with a speech from liituaelf. Earl GREY—He hoped the House would allow him to say a few words ott the point of order. He bad often oc casion to advert to the very great inconvenience attending these discussions when they took place, merely on the oc casion of presenting petitions. It appeared to him that his Noble Friend, (Lord Suffield) had rather overstepped the bounds of order ; but without giving any positive opinion on the subject, he put it to the consideration of his Noble Friend whether lie ought to persevere in a course which could be attended with no advaat,ge, and was sure to be very inconvenient. The discussion conl4 lead to no good. Lord SUFFIELD—If he was out of order, he was very sorry for it. Certainly he had not come prepared to make any observations on tke conduct of the Right Reverend Prelates. He had not been aware of the intention of his Noble Friend to present these petitions, nor had he been aware of any observations which he had made on present ing them, but he had felt that he ought to take the oppor tunity of apologising to his Noble Friend. He did not question the motives of the Right Rev. Prelates, though he had thought that he was in perfect order in making some observations on their vote. Their motives were, no doubt, excellent. He bad only observed on the matter of fact, that the Ri g ht R ev. P re l ates h a d, f or the first time, vo ted against the Government, when that Government happened to be a liberal one. H e h a d s t a t e d th e f ac t, without arraigning the motive s of the Right Rev. Prelates; but if he was in any degree out of order, he begged leave to apologise to the House. The Bishop of LONDON was awar e of the inconve nience of entering upon these discussions, on occasion of presenting petitions ; and be was averse to prolongin g this discussion. But there was one expression used by the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack, upon tehich he was anxious to say a few words. lie had himself given neither opinion nor vote on the subject of the important measure lately before the House; but when the Noble and Learned Lord said that the Bishops desired to trip up the Government, he must say that no such thought had ever entered into their minds, The Bishops had no reason to, wish that the present Government should be tripped up, They had no reason to complain of the present Ministers, who had always shown a dispositio❑ to consult the best interests of the Church ; and even the Noble and Learned Lord himself had introduced, or promised a measure. which was of great advantage to the Church. Setting aside the Reform Bill, the Bishops had no reason to com plain of the present Ministers, and as to the vote of the general body of the Bishops on that Bill, whatever might be said as to the wisdom of that vote, the Prelates were clear as to their integrity and sincerity.—(Hear.) The Bishop of LLANDAFF—IIia own frame of mind in regard to this Bill had been very much like that of the Noble Earl (quere Haddington), who had pronounced a splendid eulogium on the late Mr. Canning. He had been most anxious to find reasons which might enable him, consistently with his own sense of duty, to vote for the second reading. That had been the state of his mind. He had been anxious to vote for the second reading, but could not find reasons to enable him to do so. He bad been convinced that the Bill could not pass, and then the motion for the second reading was the only one on which they would have an opportunity of intimating their sincere and conscientious opinion on the measure. As to the im putations insinuated, if not expressed, that they had voted from interested and selfish motives, he regarded them as idle sounds—as mere echoes of the discordant noises with which they had been assailed on their entrance into that House.—( Hear. ) The Bishop of EXETER—The Bishops had not op posed the measure because it was the measure of a liberal Administration, but because in their consciences they could not approve of it ; and they were ready to brave the censure of the mob, even when urged and instigated by those whose duty it was to restrain these ebullitions of the mob—those who ought to uphold and maintain all the in stitutions of the country. And now they were to be told that they always supported an arbitrary Govern ment, but voted against the Government when it acted on free principles, and introduced liberal mea sures. He defied any of the accusers of the Bishops to show a single instance in which they had voted from interested and selfish motives, although they had been outrageously insulted by a person holding the highest station in office ! If he was wrong in being so warm, he trusted that the occasion would be some apology for him. A trumpery petition was presented, and that occasion was taken to hold out that the Clergy, who professed to he averse to all change, where the greatest disturbers of exist ing rights and institutions, and were spoken of with sar casm and insult, as being interested and selfish, and en gaged in a conspiracy against liberty. Earl GREY—This was the most unfounded accusation that he had ever heard brought forward against any Mini sters by any member of the Bench of Bishops.—(Hear.) Whether the attack was personal to himself, or was meant to apply to his Noble and Learned Friend on the Wool sack, he did not know ; but when the Right Reverend Prelate said that they (the Ministry), or some of them, had spoken of the Bench of Bishops with reprobation and sarcasm, he would ask that Right Reverend Prelate whether, in the few words that he had spoken, there was anything like reprobation or sarcasm ? As to the annoy ances that the Right Rev. Prelates might have received from the people, lie and his colleagues had done everything in their power to prevent such annoyances, both as re garded the Right Rev. Prelates and others whose votes were most likely to expose them to such annoyances ; and he asked the Right Reverend Prelate whether he meant to say that he (Earl Grey) had ever done any thing to excite and encourage such annoyances ? The Right Rev. Pre late had said that a person in the highest station in office had insulted end vilified the Church. Now be was in what was generally considered as the highest station in office ; and he asked the Right Rer. Prelate whether he alluded to him or to his Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack ? But to whichever of them the Right Rev. Prelate alluded, sure he was that to neither of them could the accusation be applied with justice or truth.—(Loud cheers.) But, not content with this, the Right Rev. Pre late, with a warmth which little became the garb that be wore, had been so grossly unjust as to accuse them of being exciters and instigators of a mob to vilify and insult the Right Rev. Prelates.—(Hear, hear.) To that he could only reply, that he repelled the imputation with the utmost contempt and indignation. There was not a syllable of truth in it—(Hear, hear)—and be could de scribe it in no other terms than as the foulest calumny. If he could be capable of exciting and instigating a mob, there were no terms of reprobation with which he would nut deserve to bc visited. But he repeated, that there was no truth in the imputation, nor shadow or colour of truth. He denied the charge. He bad done nothing but what he was justified and bound to do in the discharge of his duty in that House. Instead of exciting and encouragiug a mob against the Right Reverend Prelates, and any other Lords who bad voted against the measure, he had exerted all the powers of Government to protect them, however hostile to him their vote might be. That vote they had a right to give if they chose it, and he never meant to question that right. He therefore, called on the Right Rev. Prelate to state the evidence on which he rested so foul an imputation. In all his observations he had shown the greatest respect for the Right Reverend Prelates, and was a firm friend to the Established Church of England ; and lie still respected the Right Rev. Pre lates as a body, notwithstanding the most improper speech and the foul aspersions of the Right Rev. Prelate who spoke last.—(Loud cheering.) The Bishop of EXETER—He was ready, on being thus called upon, to produce the evidence on which he rested his assertions. He wished to premise, however, that he im puted no improper motives to the Noble Earl, however he might disapprove of his language. It might be irregular to refer to what took place on a former debate ; but when thus called upon, he might be allowed to produce his proof. On the first night of the debate on the Reform Bill, the Noble Earl was pleased to call on the Bishops seriously to consider what would be their condition in the estimation of the country in case they voted against the measure. The Noble Earl had put this in such a way as if he meant to induce the Bishops to vote for the measure, from a dread of the odium which they would encounter in case they voted against it. This, whatever might be the Noble Earl's intent, was to call on them by a menace, to vote for the Bill, and it had a tendency to excite the people against the Bench of Bishops. The Noble Earl had called upon them under a threat to vote for the mea sure, and he had assumed the character of a prophet, and called upin them to set their House in order. The Noble Earl did not, indeed, conclude the sentence. That he had left for themselves to do. But, at the same time, the mean ing was clear that destruction to the House was threatened. The Noble Earl had also reminded them that certain im portant questions were under consideration, of which the decision might be favourable or unfavourable as the vote might be. What were these questions, and where were they under consideration ? Was it before the Members of the Government, or was it in Parliament that they were under consideration ? Did the Noble Earl mean that schemes of plunder were in agitation, which might be affected by the conduct of the Bishops ? Whatever was meant, they had not supposed their conduct to be affected by such threats, but bad voted as their conscienees and sense of duty bad dictated. What he said was, that the language of the Noble Earl had a tendency to expose the Bishops to odium in the eyes of the people, and to instigate the people against them ; and this was the echo of what others had suggested, for the very same language was held by the public Journals, which had assailed the I3ishops because. they had done their duty.--- (Hear, hear.) The Bishops, at the time of the Revolu tion, had opposed an arbitrary Government, when they found themselves called upon to act in self-defence. This was the first time since the Revolution that the Bench of Bishops, as a body, opposed a great measure of Govern ment; and yet they were threatened and menaced for hay. ing done so iFs compliance with their own sense of duty. Earl GREY—If any part of his speech on the first night of the debate on the Reform Bill had given offence to the Right Rev. Prelate, he ought to have commented on it 4t - the time, and then he would have answered. But the Right Rev. Prelate's proof corresponded but very little with his assertions, for the Right Rev. Prelate had said, that Ministers had encouraged and instigated the mob to annoy them. The Bishop of EXETER—No, he bad not used such an expression. He did not recollect that he had said so. Earl GREY—Ht i certainly did understand that the Right Rev. Prelate had said, that the Ministers, or some of tlieni, had encouraged and excited a mob against them. But certainly thp. Right Rev. Prelate did say, that they had assailed the Bishops in the language of outrage and insult, and how did he- make out this by proof? The Right Rev. Prelate had said, that he had on the first day of the debate on the Reform Bill addressed them in a tone of menace. He bad certainly addressed them in a tone of warning, but not of menace. He had put it to them as he had put it to other Noble Lords, to consider the conse quences of opposing a measure, upon the passing of which the public mind was so much bent, not meaning to ca 'l on them to surrender their consciences, or to vote ally other wise than as their sense of duty prescribed. Ile did put it to the Right Reverend Bench to look at the state of the country carefully, and to consider well before they decided how they should vot e; b u t t hi s h e b a d d one , no t i n the insult language of and outrage, but in terms of the greatest respect, and as a decided friend of the Church. He abso lutely could not acnceive what, the Right Rev. Prelate meant when he said that he had addressed t h em i n the language of insult. He had put it to them whether they ought not to vote for a great measure of Reform ; and had expressed his joy at the circumstance that sonic of themselves had appreciated the times, and had introduced measures of Reform and amendment. If the Right Rev. Prelate had taken his objection at the time, he would the❑ have answered and explained ; but instead t.f that, the Right Rev. Prelate had said nothing at the time, but came down afterwards with a general charge, which was nothing better than a calumnious aspersion, for which there was not the slightest foundation in anything that he (Earl Grey) had ever said or done. The Duke of WELLINGTON—The whole of this dis cussion had arisen on the question whether a petition against the payment of tithes should be laid on the table ; and the Clergy were censured by a Noble Lord, because they asked for that which was justly due to them. Ano ther Noble Lord had assailed the Bishops, because they who had always voted for an arbitrary Government, had now voted against a liberal one. He called on the Noble Lord to say what he meant by an arbitrary Government. He had been at the head of the late Government ; but he denied that that was an arbitrary Government, and he wished the Noble Lord to state on what fact he rested his charge that the Government was arbitary ? As to the charge against the Bishops, there was not a question for the last ten months in which they had decided against the Government, till the question as to the measure of Reform had come to a division a few nights ago; and yet they were accused of voting against a liberal Government, be cause on that one occasion they had thought proper to judge for themselves. If they had opposed the Govern ment, it was of course because they thought it their duty to do so. Nothing could be more unfair than to take every occasion, even on presenting petitions, to throw out these charges against so respectable a body of men as the Bench of Bishops and the Clergy in general. The Duke of NEWCASTLE asked whether those who had voted against the Bill were to have protection for their lives and their property ? He himself had been assailed by a mob, and had applied at the office of the Home De partment for protection, but found no one of authority at the office. He thought it the duty of the head of the Department to take care that some one high i❑ office should he always in attendance. He had then applied at the head police office, and there had received proper pro tection. Bat in reality there was at present no Govern ment, or rather they were under the government of the mob. He had heard of collections of persons who had done him and others much mischief, but he only men tioned the circumstance for the general good. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—He was not much inclined to trouble the House with anything personal to himself; but as the subject had been started, he would mention what had happened to himself. The police I stationed about the Houses of Parliament did not extend further up than George•street. As he was coming down Parliament -street, at Whitehall, a mob assailed him, and a strong fellow gave him a violent blow on the arm, and he and others at tempted to pull him out of his cabriolet ; and if they had succeeded, he believed they would have murdered him ; but the cabriolet was driven on, and he escaped. He thought that the persons and the property of those who voted against the Bill ought to be more effectually protected. All the windows of his house, which had been spared by the mob on a former night, had been broken by a mob last night. He was in different, however, about that, but unless their persons were more effectually protected, Noble Lords would carry arms in their pockets to protect themselves ; and if lives were lost, the Government who did not protect them would be answerable. For his part, he would protect himself, if he should not be protected by Government. He hoped Ministers would take inure precautions ; for, if the police bad been extended up Parliament-street, to White hall, he would not have suffered ander the affliction of a dastardly mob, Lord MELBOURNE—It had been the endeavour of Ministers to afford every practical protection to person and property, and they had had particularly in view the pro tection of the persons and property of those who were most likely to be obnoxious to the people. He deeply la mented the agitation which prevailed, and was very sorry that the Noble Marquis and others had suffered by it, and he had directed a strong body of police to be ready to af ford protection wherever it was wanted. But their Lord ships must be aware, that when very great bodies of people had assembled and separated, there was generally a rabble left behind who were inclined to do mischief. But it was impossible for Ministers to guard every house in town. He was sorry that the Noble Duke did not find any prin cipal officer in attendance when he called at the Office of the Home Department ; but every arrangement had been made by Government to afford protection, and the Noble Duke had only to apply at the head police office to get the requisite protection, and he had in fact found it. But outrages on persons were still worse than outrages on property, and he was truly sorry for the violence which had been offered to the Noble Marquis. But here again the observation applied, that it was impossible for Govern ment, at such times, to afford complete and efficient pro tection to all, but orders had been given to afford as much protection as possible ; and the orders had been given in the spirit of attending particularly to the protection of those who were most obnoxious to the populace. But Government could not prevent all outrage, and he deeply lamented the one to which the Noble Marquis had bees ex posed. He would be one of the last in the world to en courage such proceedings, and had used every means in his power to prevent them. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—He gave the fullest credit to the Noble Lord for everything that he had said ; but what he complained of was, that the police force had not been extended up the whole length of Par liament-street : and he suggested that they should still be extended from the entrance of the House to Whitehall. Lord WARNCLIFFE gave great credit to the people for the peaceable manner in which they had conducted them selves, which, he owned, had caused him some surprise, considering the great excitement which was kept up by the Press of the Metropolis. The people had not dune anything to disgrace themselves. Indeed he was surprised at their peaceable behaviour. If there were no persons employing means to excite the people to treat their Lord ships with disrespect, he believed that they would not have been disposed to do that in consequence of the discussion in which their Lordships had been engaged, but would rather think that their Lordships had done their duty, and had given their votes out of a desire to do justice and pro tect the liberties of the people. The object of their Lord ships was to do justice, and the inhabitants of the town would repent of the excesses they had committed in the first heat of their disappointment. Lord ELLENBOROUGH did not expect any disturb ance, and was not surprised that none had taken place. He did not attribute the excitement of the people to their Lordships' decision, but to the labours of the Press. If the Ministers permitted the Press to go on exciting the people to crime, it was impossible that crimes should not be committed. He had no doubt that the Government would preserve the peace of the town ; an 4 had no doubt that under the present circumstances, the Ministers would do their duty, which was required of them, both from their official character, and as men of honour. Petition laid on the table. Mr. BERNAL and others, from the Commons, brought up the Appropriation Act, which was read a first time. The Earl of CARNAKVON and Lord PLUNKETT pre sented petitions from parishes in Galway, praying for the elective franchise. The LORD CHANCELLOR presented a petition, signed by between six and seven thousand persons, from Bradford, Yorkshire, praying for Parliamentary Reform, and that their Lordships would pass the Reform Bill. SELECT VESTRIES' BILL. Viscount MELBOURNE moved the second reading of the Select Vestries' Bill. The Duke of WELLINGTON inquired what was the object of the Bill' _ . Viscount MELBOURNE stated, that it was intended to correct the abuses which had grown up in the select vestries of the metropolis, and of many large towns. The Bill had been drawn up with great care and solici tude, and was the result of the labours of a Select Com mittee of the House of Connuons. He believed that with respect to select vestries, the great body of the people found themselves aggrieved by them, and were anxious to get rid of them. At common law every rate-payer had a right to be a vestry-man, and to vote at all the proceedings of the vestry ; but as towns had increased in numbers and wealth, it had bi en found necessary, particularly in large p irishes, to introduce some limitation to that right. Many local Acts for this purpose had been passed, and in general a close system of vestries now prevailed in a great part of the parishes of the metropolis. A great deal of discontent existed on this account among the parishioners in many places, and even the members of the select vestries them selves said that the system required amendment. The Bill had been introduced with a view to give these parties relief, and as both parties desired it, to take away the cause of discontent, it seemed to be a wise course. He hoped their Lordships would allow the Bill to be read a second time, and referred to a Committee, to see that all its provisions were proper. Lord SKELMERSDALE would not object to the se cond reading, if it were to be understood that the Bill should go to a Committee up stairs. The Duke of WELLINGTON objected to the Bill that it would make a great alteration not in the general law, but in many particular laws. The Bill was optional, too—at least parishes might have it or not, as they liked, and he objected to introducing such a Bill at a time when every parish in London was in a state of excitement. He wished the Bill confined to such parishes as bad no Local Act, or that Mr. Sturges Bourne's Act should be ex tended to all parishes. Viscount MELBOURNE explained. Lord KING admitted that at present the excitement in London was considerable, but it would be much greater if the Bill were thrown out. The Bill was demanded by a great body of people, who were much discontented with parish management ; and the only way to allay this ex citement was to pass the Bill. It was not necessary to send the Bill to a Committee up stairs; nothing would be gained by that ; and if their Lordships meant to benefit the people, they ought to pass the Bill with speed. It had been proposed that two-thirds of the rate-payers should decide the question whether the Bill should be ap plied to any particular parish ; but for two-thirds three fifths had been substituted, which would prevent any thing being done against the wishes of the majority. The Bishop of LONDON said some measure like this Bill was necessary, in order to place the parishes on the same footing with the Government of the country in which the people had to elect their representatives. A great number of parishes, governed by local acts, were in a state of discontent, and certainly great inconvenience would re sult if this Bill were not entertained. At the same time their Lordships ought not to pass the Bill without getting some information from the different parishes, which would be affected by its provisions. He admitted that there was a great desire for the Bill to pass, but substantial justice ought not to be sacrificed to speed. The Bill ought to be properly considered in a Committee, for some of its provi sions, he believed, would require modification. Lord DELAWARRE said a few words, after which the Bill was read a second time, and referred to a Corn • roittee up stairs. Lord KING presented a petition from the rate-payers of St. Pancras in favour of the Bill. SCOTCH LAW. The LORD CHANCELLOR moved the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Scotch Court of Session Bill, with a view to postpone it till Thursday. Lord WYNFORD was understood to say that no other judgment than the one he had recommended their Lord ships to give could have been given. The LORD CHANCELLOR was surprised that his Noble Friend should feel that this Bill at all affected his professional character, which he thought was not likely to be hurt by it unless he was going to practice at the Scotch bar. He believed that the English law, not the Scotch law, had been the chief practice of his Noble Friend, and he did not know that he was looking to the Scotch Courts. He did not wish to enter into the discussion, as the Bill was not his Bill. He had received it from his Noble Friend, and only introduced it in his official character. Lord WYNFORD said the judgment he had recom mended their Lordships to adopt was the only one which, in the circumstances, could be adopted. Lord ELLENBOROUGH objected to the whole course of the proceeding. He did not think it was necessary to bring in a Bill to correct an error of that House. He ob jected to having recourse to the assistance of the other House for such a purpose. It was most expedient to bring in the House of Commons to correct the judicial proceed ings of their Lordships. There was no foundation for this Bill—no petition—no document on which they were called upon to reconsider their judgment. If it were right to proceed by a Bill, they ought, at least, not to go to work hastily. They ought to take time to consider it properly. Ile objected to the whole motion on principle ; for if their Lordships' judgments could be thus set aside, there would he no security whatever for property. He desired to see their Lordships' judicial proceedings conducted with the greatest care and caution. The LORD CHANCELLOR explained that the Bill was necessary, because without it there could be no re hearing, and it was not very expedient to reverse a judgment without a re-hearing. The thing was not done lightly. It was not, however, for him to state the grounds of the proceeding, but his Noble Friend who held the Great Seal when the circumstance occurred. He did not wish then to enter into the discussion, as the subject would he discussed on Thursday. Lord ELLENBOROUGH thought it would be proper to refer it to a Committee of Privileges. Lord WYNFORD complained that he had not seen the papers on which this proceeding had been founded. The Noble and Learned I_ ord entered into a history of the case ; and contended, that as there was a question of fact at issue, be could do nothing but refer it to a Jury, which he had done, though he had not said one word about a Jury of merchants. The judgment he affirmed was right, and the only one which their Lordships could have adopted. He objected to calling in the other House of Parliament to correct a clerical error of that House, when every Court of the kingdom had the power to correct its own clerical errors. The LORD CHANCELLOR again represented that it was not his case, but that of the Chief Baron, and he did not wish to enter into it in his absence. The order was then read, and postponed till Thursday. EMBANKMENTS (IRELAND) BILL. The Duke of LEINSTEB moved the second reading of this Bill. Lord CARBERY objected to the Bill as interfering with private property. The LORD CHANCELLOR expressed a wish that the Bill might be postponed for this Session. He had already been sitting as Counsel and as Judge for a twelvemonth, with hardly a day's interval, and he could not go on sit ting beyond the present week. As it was, he must again sit in the Court of Chancery on the 2d of November, by which, with other arrangements, he should not have more than ten days to spare for the recruiting of himself with the fresh country air. The further consideration of the Bill was then postponed till to.morrow (this (lay.) Their Lordships then adjourned at Half-past Seven. HOUSE OF COMMONS, OCTOBER 11. Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from St. Mary lebone and St. Pancras, praying the House to adopt some measures to prevent the inhuman practice of bull-bait ing. The Hon. Member stated that Mr. Martin's Act fur preventing cruelty to animals embraced all cattle but bulls ; it ran thus—" ox, cow, heifer, steer, and other cattle," and it had been held that bull► did not come within each of those denominations. It was the object of the petitioners to include bulls in that humane Act, and for that purpose they prayed the interposition of that House. The petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. ENVART presented a petition from the Mayor, Bailiffs, and Burgesses of Liverpool, against the General Registration Bill. The petitioners were of opinion that that Bill would create great expence and much litigation. The Hon. Member could not concur in the fears of the petitioners, but the petition was entitled to consideration as coming from a highly respectable quarter. Mr. O'CONNELL said that so far from the General Registration Bill creating expense or litigation, it would prevent both if persons only took a proper degree of caution. Sir E. SUGDEN had strong fears that dangers would attend the Bill. When the proper time arrived he would state why in his opinion be thought the evils resulting from the Bill would more than counterbalance the benefits. After a few words from Mr. HUNT and Mr. CRAMPTON, Mr. O'CONNELL said, that no civilized country on earth but what had a general registration except England ; in France such had been the effects of it, that property had been raised in value five or six years' purchase by it. Sir E. SUGDEN made a few observations relative to the expense of the Law Commission. Mr. CAMPBELL thought that that Commission could be very advantageously suspended for the present. As to the General Registry Bill, the objections to it were produced from ignoraxce and misrepresentation; The Corporation of Liverpool would have no cause for com plaint, because leases of the nature of theirs would be ex empted front its operation.--(Hear, hear.) He would now give notice that be should not proceed with the Bill any further this session, but he would bring it for ward again i mme di ately on the commencetnent of the next session. Mr. D. W. HARVEY spoke in favour of the Bill. After a few observations from Mr. EWA RT, Sir E. SUGOEN, and Mr. CAMPBELL, the petition was laid on the table. Mr. PELHANI presented a petition from Louth, in Lincolnshire, praying the House to take into consideration the state of Ireland. Mr. Crampton, Mr. Lefroy, Mr. Croker, and Sir Edward Sugden presented petitions relative to the Gal way franchise. Mr. ROBINSON took an opportunity of explaining the reason which induced him to give his vote last night in favour of the motion of the Noble Lord opposite. It was supposed that all the parties who gave their votes in favour of that motion gave their unqualified vote of confidence in favour of the Government ; he begged to say that he gave his vote solely on the question of Reform, and in order that the House might act with consistency, and not recede from their own acts. He was opposed to Ministers "port other queetiotis, but be gave hie support to them upon the subject of Reform, because he believed it to be essential to the welfare of the country. Mr. BI.AKENEY addressed the House, urging the necessity of carrying the Reform Bill into effect. Mr. HUNT presented a petition from Joseph Wimple, complaining of having been beaten with bludgeons by the police, while passing quietly over Westminster-bridge. The Hon. Member himself bore testimony to the blood thirsty conduct of the police on Westminster-bridge, where this man was beaten; and as he had last night instituted a comparison between the conduct of the police towards the mob that accompanied him, and the mob that accom panied the Lord Chancellor, which last he declared was paid, while he was attended voluntarily. Mr. LAMB protested against the presentation of such petitions. They could do no good, and might do harm ; there was no intention to screen any policeman who acted improperly, or with unnecessary violence; and if, instead of coming to that House, which was not a tribunal to refer cases of common assault, he had contented himself with applying to the Commissioners, he was quite sine that every facility would be afforded to an inquiry, and if the man were discovered, he would be punished. He did not deny the innocence of the petitioner ; but he contended that the part of an innocent man having suffered in this tumult, should be a warning to the Hon. Member how he collected mobs. If he were correctly informed, the Hon. Gentleman was attended by a mob of 1,000 persons ; and this at night ; they were pursuing their way over West minster•bridge, with the intention of besetting the House where the Commons were then sitting. The police had just dispersed one mob that had assembled in Palace-yard, and in stopping these persons, he considered the police had acted with the most perfect propriety ; and had they neglected to do so, they would have shamefully abandoned their duty. Sir R. INGLIS bore testimony to the good conduct and forbearance of the police, and thought the House was not a proper tribunal for a case of common assault. Colonel TRENCH also offered his testimony to the firm ness, resolution, and temper of the new police. Ile was glad to hear the opinions expressed by the Right Hon. Gentleman, and hoped he would illustrate these opinions by pr►.ctice in his official situation. He understood that it was intended by a large body of men to go in procession to the King on Wednesday. If such processions were legal, it certainly was extremely objectionable; and if the people were now suffered to assemble in great and organized multitudes to shout for the King, these assemblies might hereafter meet for a very different purpcae. Sir R PEEL hoped the House would not encourage the presentation of such trumpery petitions. Sir G. WARRENDER bore testimony to the efficiency and general good conduct of the police. Mr. HUME inquired whether the Right Hon. Baronet intended to persevere in the inquiry which had last session been suggested, as to the relative expenses of the old and new police establishments. Sir R. PEEL should have no objection to such an in quiry, in order that the public might be satisfied that no improper expenditure was encouraged. Mr: MABERL Y concurred in what had fallen from the Right Honourable Baronet relative to the pre sentation of such petitions as that under discussion, and he hoped the Hon. Member for Preston would shew more courtesy to the House in such matters than he was accustomed to do. Mr. HUNT explained, and presented a petition from some individuals in Birmingham, relative to the sentence passed upon Mr. Taylor for blasphemy. Sir JAMES MACDONALD brought up the report of the Committee of the affairs of the East India Company. RIOTS AT DERBY. Mr. RICE TREVOR wished to know from the Noble Lord opposite (Althorp) whether any official intelli gence had reached the Government relative to the present state of the riots going on at Derby, and whether any effectual means had been adopted to prevent their con tinuance. Lord ALTIIORP was sorry to say that official intelli gence had reached Government of great riots going on at Derby, to prevent the continuance of which every step had been taken which could be thought of. On the motion of Lord ALTHORP, the Appropriation Act was read a third time and passed. On the motion of Mr. S. RICE the City of London Fresh Water Act was read a third time, and passed. POOR LAWS. Mr. SADLER then rose to move for the introduction of a measure to better the condition of the poor of this country. He should defer his observations upon the mea sure which he intended to bring forward with respect to the manufacturing interest. The Government of former times had put down the disturbancos among the sailors, but had immediately afterwards removed the cause of those disturbances. In the same manner the Government had recently put down the disturbances among the work ing classes. It now remained for them to make out the other part of the parallel, and to remedy the evils from which the people were suff-ring. In both these cases he was sure that the disturbances had arisen from the existence of almost insufferable evils. The Hon. Member then adverted to the state of prosperity in which the people of this country had formerly lived upon the produce of their industry, and contrasted it with their present state of poverty and distress. His opinion of their poverty and distress was not the result of any vague reports, but of the careful examination of the report of the Com mittee upon the poor laws. Yet, notwithstanding all this distress, it was expected that the people would be quiet and contented, though under similar circumstances such an expectation would not be formed of every other class of educated and cultviated men. He denied that this dis tress was to be attributed to a redundant population. In the earlier portion of the period occupied by the last war, the marriages in Suffolk, Sussex, Wilts, Dorset, Bedford, and Buckingham, amounted to thirty-nine thousand three hundred and fifteen, while in the latter period, though our commercial industry was then at its highest point of acti vity, the number, so far from having increased, was actually diminished, for the amount only equalled 37,327. The same result was shown by a comparison of the two first years of that period with the two last years of the same period. What became then of the theory, that the distress among the labouring classes proceeded from theformation of these matrimonial connections in too great numbers among the lower orders? Even, however, if that theory were true, did it follow that matrimony was to be strongly discou raged among that class of people? Those who contended for such a course of conduct must be prepared for the con sequences, which would he the formation of connections that would equally add to the numbers of the people, but in a less moral way. He begged, however, distinctly to deny, that the agricultural labourers were redundant ; and lie could quote in support of his opinion that of Mr. M'Adam, who, in his evidence before the Committee on this subject, said they were sometimes redundant in winter titne, but in the summer months, and especially in the harvest time, there was not a sufficient quantity of work men. The fact was attested, too, by the regular influx of tens of thousands of the Irish labourers, for whom at that period sufficient labour was always found. He had in his possession a calculation showing that the Irish male adult labourers thus employed equalled in number the male adult labourers of four or five of our agricultural counties. How then could the agricultural population be called re dundant? The evil must proceed from some other cause. The truth was, that the labouring population was not re dundant, but was unequally diffused, and that in winter the labourers seemed to be too numerous, while in summer and autumn they were too few. The same observation of redundancy was never applied to the horses of the far mer, or even the horses and dogs of the sportsman, nor was it applied to any other class of men; and he was prepared to maintain that it was most unjust to apply the observation to the agricultural labourers, for though in winter they might appear to be occasionally unemployed, they were in fact as necessary to the state as was daily bread to the people. He traced much of the evil to the practice of what he would call the engrossment of farms, which had the effect of depriving the labouring population of that comfort and independence which they had before enjoyed. It was a maxim of one of the oldest and best writers on this subject, that as people increased they should live more closely, and cultivate their lands more closely ; but the modern plan seemed to be the reverse of this, for they lived wider apart, and cultivated more carelessly. The mode in which the Enclosure Act had been carried into eff,ct was almost one of the most crying grievances of which the people had to complain. Those enclosures, by taking away the poor man's common rights, gave him no opportunity of assisting to maintain himself by keeping at a cheap rate a cow or a pig, and a check was thus given to emulative industry, by preventing him from making the first advances from a state of poverty to one of inde pendence. It might be said that these common rights were only rights of sufference; but that was the case with most rights affecting land, for if they were traced back to their origin, tie; rights of Lords of Manors, as well as the copy holders on them, would be found to have arisen in the first instance from mutual sufferance. What was the lan guage of Locke upon the subject of these enclosures ? " That those who hold an entire county seize neverthe less upon the grounds and the cott age • r i g h ts o f t h e poo r man;" ex pressions which pretty strongly declared his opinion of these enclosures. In the same manner, Sir Anthony Fitzherbert, one of our earliest and best wri ters on the law and agriculture. said that if enclosures were to take place, the poor man ought to have allot : =ate for his cottage as well as the rich man for his ,(0r.,,1t ,:a.... , - - to t domain ;so that the rich should not be ab Lord" .‘ c In the same sp o s, and overwhelm the poor. observed, that great care ought to be tak o t e ° ,,, poor should sustain no injury from the effec d t . r_ 0 ,, , P 0 6 closures ; and the Chancellor who succeede .1 3, T 00 ~. I , the same subject, that these rules of caution lia:',,. r, . observed, and that thence had ariaen the , 1 : .i 0; ' a country. That able, excellent, virtuous man—Sir John Sinclair --adopted the il f . v eiple; and, as the Chairman of a Committee °, P; o ; t sures, recognised the rights of the poor; ° Bill ct l # mittee reported, that if a general Inclosure , d ~;, ii passed, every possible attention must be fetter`, t rights, and the poor would then have been 3 l' ov bi, 4l } of enjoying, as heretofore, several advantages 0 0. 1 , , / f i an Act would otherwise deprive them. .. I , vt. :i Blackstone, alluding to the want of atteactgore4 a, rights of the poor exhibited in these I°, i c 14. , called it with great truth, ~ a fatal rural po _ b , ii ' were the opinions of those various eminent atea i w v ; c had referred to ; and, supported and strengtber:o4l, i that tpc,, h ic i he thought he was justified in saying , these rights had led to many of the evils roli.whte,, poor were now suffering. Another evil of orb t oet , a plained was the diminution of the habitation. : lit t , ., I enlightened si; i, and he established this point by reference e t°_,,, f 'o : I and present number of the residences for the 11; , i folk.. He would not have adverted to this distsoe; 1 ject, if he had not thought that a remedy 0 4 0 , i plicable to the grievance. The effect of ot f ' tile r , s poor together was to introduce a syst em ° gie I immorality. A main cause of the prevailin!, of it ? , t the poor was the abolition of small farms , 8 , h a he ! I common. What then was the remedy winf,. l. but!, I suggest? It was not tentative or experinteuTtlie It', i tical and practicable. He did not thesuggetthiy 1 and sinews of the empire should be seat t° ta d I or to the Pole—he did not even recoo b a t r the poor should be located on the tva ttes oold a number of comfortable cottage' 5 01 , I' constructed, which might be let for Os. ° I. To . 1 and would return a fair interest of ul t)ne n Y t ‘le.° o ll t itecnhooetwtetisa,..e.egscetus,rTbihtiyylee means auontlnidsi.eoafi‘nianeiesiibaeslrmi parishes. ta a nd l Igard e u 9/ 11— c i s of i d 1 poor to cultivate the unproductive head 3 00 ° 0 0 ~ fields. He would also give the poor the ¢d to Pr 2l to e I . i these advantages might be obtained viith °3 ' h i l * P c Ot ° 7 A i I tried upon a small scale by the f ev a Tna th hnPe e c r er:o; : fP:Pro'llei:; t: :lnf r :t e dil ll ' Members for Oxford. The effect bad be t h il peo rota t " ' 1 poor rates wherever the expet imeot bad " 1 „" 0 1 1' 1 ,1: saw no reason why the poor should not h ' . ; - e efite u - o ,' aitfb (: ,:in p e.airoger a evaru d pyepw e l dlnpaii l eoitt i fnli u tios:tc s ir tp b reo a lidaug n ngh ( b i htryi rights of tt o u hot ofe p e o xipa n nerpheo p papu l lbt o ye iir t .ot s tany o n, f ;tiHs g i :b r euo o a tr u i h:bot,d,yhped:eorttsoe cibe re i, t ,ti, j II e r berj iyi ojoi , :bs: o,e e i re: 04 , :si ; , p m a i r g i h sh t e , s b . e s l u f p h e e ri w nt e e r n e ded ask e e i d th b e y r w b h y at t : e 3e ' i tbst tilt o ' l der o f ule p er / parish, by the overseers of the poor, or hi j 5 O OCe; 'ot , great objection to the plan would be th at r 'i z litt o re i t 1 vaded upon by every Turnpike Bill, and n)r i bitik soh llo portant and beneficial object he did Oa d le , i 'o. ,s would take the proposition into its seriousrooo4: o l u e l a d ve be t c o a t i carried into ex ec ution uil tca :ol , f r ths ~P , , , facility. It would regenerate the poor , 4t ettl c , :. .;;'" kindly feeling between them and their A rl b. , l ll . ' el' ~, effect. „ (ov er, / Mr. CRIPPS agreed with the Hon' P. , or,' agricultural labourers of this country we te ,l ll.t al he i,', ant if none but Englishmen were e mplor t a l oe ''' i Lord ALTHORP said, that as the 11° ' 3. 0 1 01 Aldborough complained of the inattentioa or lti , t h a is nx sp ie e t e y e , h t , o li h e e ( ar Lo w r h d a A t I h t i l l s 4 p,_ : )l .t d reiso r" n oi l ,l ' w d g i a t p s h s a u r g t r r e o ea f the Hon. Gentleman that be m ms p osir i°r A twdehtHi Ilixuiilooettirnuenlti tin: during and ni the e d n Id: therefore r . e th r 0 rtßeh uet begged cause leave a : , —( Hear.) He was already aware of the u' S t , 0 1 1 agricultural labourers, and therefore his 3 0 ,, ie ) a rf l ' s i ,)I much to hear these distresses detailed as ap r°,: o - edr i) , ke p i e y mp, see it best depressedwt Rol tt. seaai hutsn h stßi mnEehtn. , R i st c E at oi aa h , ttnngrf:hpas‘uieept‘tlgfsenhv, the remedy Hun. I 0 b G e e , n t t o leut prov ,:,.; ; 'to e . d roo r ri, with e a Gane fi sn t tbl habitation and a small pie ce c' n;' : V them.—(Hear.) He (Lord Althorp) 11 0 °, ° ,;; the , elietodsied; d-i : 0 1 t ) t i ''''' ? first sight it was obvious that that was A - 0% 0. ' i t i h y in a g le ; gi b s u la t ti i v t e wa en s asctitlilnaeacitu,eosrtiosnhawallidetil,teer_.:„(lt 00tfiv Ifc ) to attentioneebnrytis ig i . yioitntmod his ipcaselhißn subjects dul e lob n , ju t aeb upon hc thatotnl m n e e. gciLegislature'connected d. could l e. vi fere 0 7 , ijo ao A nf c, dt t h e o t e country condition Parliament.oafn the opportunity pi l p 3 io u , or t autyure h ni n e iittyp orl would alfait l eeds , r g : it c o : goi(ilfgoortio fl t i the e vils, b!, the 001,1,: House, as the Hon. Gentleman had so tu l , i . - atil°',,, hienvyiaej,,hao risen,nudl ,i tnio, practicability etretoforoep pnoost o e f f a tr i h t t siel further roovc motion,i e , a i p a y :r ile ' t f rov otr j : ut I ° that the House should accede to it. h , sg t Mr. SLANEY did not believe that the 04,c,'• labourers throughout the country were i l l i d (RP; avid degraded state which his Hon. Friend 11- 0 11,,' realel() tsi,•tanttely. of t h l e n la s b o o m u e rer p s ar ; tst,miti nidnouattihteedrisYttliphgekt.vdlrf paratively well off. The difference betwee at'? pgiiafiawaaT t )t ) erl:npr f ,:etil lewdi‘d,pscsr:fiel ei the 4:::hibitrrrat)punih..eptruirolioleee n atat:SEßodit: nd o itehrd:libsßi r tl..otffts t oetri ihTt h i..Thoattse,bg e scoliteteok r eech northern st ilialeanydd were oern thoseegi in that hn t a l t i menysueoacurht 6hie4ii.rgn:o[l::::::;:ii great as if they were two distinct races of - ip Pio r, tl than in the former counties. By the returu'ir,oo in Sussex ; in Bedford 6s. 2d. ; in Iduckiog i tose,a' in Cumberland 2s. Id. ; and in Shrorab ir m e ari 4 ,, ' ~ re h spaauotdt e uchstoiiv r nooupee.bg e gaennyndy a esnib( da s nictyoidv , buott;ffolie i tntoeotii n fiilhdtumroni (nheiae ls l rniaeetroGtbrlnsn , af s , ‘tept s r i. ‘ porit s r oi t esiythvb% ' aero l d , i for leordt t u oi. e. :or: ovi with u t lot i t is..l..ooo ° l3ig t `" ,,,ioerl lo P v _7l li g ,.evi ' l 1 1 - :le (ie . trt , tilro,ot.,), flu e e fed d l ip!vocre, ,A, , b i o,_o l ','', ~ , ~ 1 ' iu the southern counties to the abuses °I . 1 1 ,:1)t c , ally to the due administration of those 1 0 70,e c ' o , , , of the labourers. Although he did not et r ir oi ll ,! the views of the Hon. Member for Al/ °.j the country. „ t to opposition to the introduction of the Bill . , v roo", ', ; 1 tages and gardens for the labourers; bu t .. „ 4 , - . U] r ip l ii, brought forward the subject ; but be sli o ep t , l i, , y, ses A s l i r o . n ß of oß P l a N ri S ia o m N en e t. egre l t t te thatso bs ll p ti p ': : ::.:ar: generally ao , one engrossing question took up the tim e bob Parliament, er64 rliament, to the exclusion of every o ther,' 0 00 i i i its claims upon the consideration of th e ,' he At 6 I Whether a man were or were t, under the to r c beth, entitled to parochial relief, it .va° n A ° ;d r Il :, that, in a country like England, able-b°",,eatelle/r, to work should be without the weans of %her o , fi',. Mr. D. W. HARVEY contended tbattb-, too t o i l " r i , otot feelinghi f fieei‘ t i l is i p L red.ffou p teps o t rlitoerirnroyfgur.l front t u t:, : o s hut hNitvcetahhs Government,et humblerilep calculated oorerc t i o Classesslasone c sd v y e f r y : or se ii ey 6 et p e 0 ro to ," , I e : e t : 1 )i i HUNT likewise entered into a Etdo°f°ls,, / 1 , ,1 1 / :, contend against. d ne" t ce°' t Sir THOMAS BARING concurr° f,, , 10" t a t views of the Hon. Member for Aldboroug 0 ," 0 10 ° ) i t in strong terms the callection of large e t° o 4tie fe lt i fi ll i ittgas under pretext of procuring orreliel the v not be in the power of the Government O O4 to afford. Its t° 1 11. ' 1 Mr. WEYLAND expressed hi s tha° w rd 1 Member for Aldborough for bringing fl i c t a be l 'he :‘t the e 1 sure ; and argued that it was the JOY ° ,o,arP - ,ro?, I to endeavour to restore to the poor agrt°' the rou tages of which he had been deprivA 11 t tv°, ( ti ,a l I manufactures. He hoped that Governuten,,id sP , 0 t0. , . h I period of repose which the prorogati° . I II'), of turning the matter in their minds. fact ipp . 0 1, t r felt M a r t . se A ei T ng T N t V he o H o a D as e e x o p f re c ss , e , d mi t i b la e p a s at t i ! e tpi p i e li iie r ,/ a functions in inquiring into the state of lo is according to the statements made by 1-I° % r rit °' t o r rented a scene of pauperism, misery , " 0 ,. patible with the existence of the Slaw.. , be I'V e, i', s Sir C. WETHERELL complitnenTt the I v , o r tier for Aldborough on his active and ratel7of t t favour of the poor and industrious OP' iie re' : I ,unity. id be dit ion of the farmer, they would not I'l l ''' . : I. anyMarr.tiPficAiaGlEmTeadnesn. iedutrhilaetssthtie,elymcoorti"itoopvrt :l i t : I ' l tion of the labouring classes. t ilt Mr. SADLER replied and ... be tter , tion Le o a f ve th w e • a, i r a , WEST INDIES. ,0 o t ot I cc' Mr. BURGE withdrew them otion that 1 f i g yes notice for this night, n,t supposig. oo , f t ' f the present bring it to any useful discussibe re po dt e r Colonel TRENCH, in bringing opetoopei aismgoiuvreinngtopboorirug in a Bill to t Committee for the improvement of th e 1