The Sun. — London, England, 1831-08-19 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. -HOUSE OF LORDS, AUGUST 18. In • tire absence of the LORD Cnatecieuraart, Lord rENTARDEN took his 'seat on the Woolsa'cle at a Quarter iefore Five o'clock. Mr. Gas NE and others freeto the Commons brought up Candle Duties Repeat Bill and two private Bills. Mr. Crafer, from the Treasury, brought up the re turns ordered of the amount of British goods shipped to France within the last three years. Mr. Schnson, from the office of the Chid Secretary for Ireland, brought up the papers connected with the late pro ieco tion of Mr. O'Connell and others, as ordered. Earl GROSVENOR presented a petition from al 'individual, which stated that he les , l been to India and hack since the Reform Bill was introduced, and that he was much surprised on his return to rind it still before the House of Commons. lie prayed that their Lordships would pass it without delay as soon as it came before them. The Noble Earl also presented three peti tions, prayiog for the abolition of nelro slavery. The Bishop of LONDON presented a petition from the waist) of St. Mary's, Paddington, against a clause e New Beer Bill. Earl GREY moved the third reading of the disembo died Militia Bill—which was read accordingly and passed. On the motion of Lord TENTERDEN, the Arbitra tion Bill and the Interpleader Bill were read a second time, and ordered to he committed to-morrow, Viscount STRANG FORD said, he did not wi-t to in. convenience the Noble Earl opposite (Grey) but he felt it would he a great convenience to him; es well as to many of their Lordships, if the Noble E ivt would now give an an swer to a To.stion which he (Lord Strangford) pet to him on a former occasion. He would now repeat it, and begged to ask if the Noble Earl had yet received his Ma jesty's commands respecting the eonslucting of the ceremony cf the Coronation, and whet=her it was yet settled in whet manner the homage of the Peers was to he [Aid to his Majesty. Another question he wished to have answered was, whether the Pecreses were to he deprived of their right to a procession on the occasion ; he hoped not, and that before it was decided upon, the case would re ceive that attention and consideration to which he con sidered it entitled. The Noble Earl (Grey) on a former occasion had found fault with his expression of un seemly curtailments in speaking of this ceremony, but he must say that, in his opinion, the measures of the Government deserved the appellation, for the country would not be put to much expence, and what it had to bear would be made up in the increased activity it would cause in the manufacturing towns. He thought the economy paltry on these grounds,—that it would only save the pockets of the rich, and that the Peers might like it, but the manu facturers could not. Earl GREY said he had not yet received his Majesty's commands on the subject, and must decline answering further. He would, however, merely st rte to their Lord ships that. the ceremony of paying homage to his Majesty would be conducted in the same manner as on the occa sion of the Coronation of George the Third. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY was very glad to have such an assurance from the Noble E trf, and he hoped that he would take into his consideration what had been stated by his Noble Friend behind him (Lord Strangford), with respect to the pro cession of Peeresses. Lord KENYON postponed his motion for the appoint ment of a Committee on the Agricultural Labourers' Bill until Monday. FRAUDULENT DEBTORS. Lord TENTERDEN, referring to the motion which he tad made the other day, for returns of the names, numbers, &c. of debtors confined for debt in the King's Bench and Fleet prisons, observed, that he thought it right to snake an alteration in the motion. He understood that it would be attended with peculiar inconvenience to prisoners recently confined to have their names published at length ; and, therefore, he proposed that the names should he set out at length only of those who had been confined for debt for more than a year, and that as to the rest the initials only should be set out. It was agreed that the returns should be made with this alteration. On the motion of Lord MELBOURNE, the House went into a Committee on the Beer Act Amendments' Bill. The Duke of WELLINGTON asked whether the Noble Lord bad introduced a clause to limit the hours of Felling beer in the houses under this Act. Lord MELBOURNE replied, he thought there was a great difficulty in having their houses closed sooner than they were at pre.ent. In the country he did not see so much objection to the hour being shorter. and a clause might be introduced that they might be closed earlier than those in towns ; but the hour metal, n *A by the Noble Duke, say four o'clock for instance, was much too early, in his (Lord M.'s) opinion, for where were poor men then to get their beer for supper, except they went to public-houses, which would render these new houses, and of course this Act, totally useless? The Duke of WELLINGTON—TiIe object of the Le !lid:lime was to give the poor the advantage of having good anti cheap beer, but without holding out any tempta tion to excess and irregularity. The sale of beer might go on till rather a late hour, but that it ought not to be ch ink at a late hour on the premises. The e xperiment of having this matter properly regula'ed had fare 1, as a matter of police. Lord MELBOURNE suggested, that it was advisable that the matter should remain as it was for another year. Lord TENTERDEN thought that too large a latitude of time was allowed for shutting houses of the kind in the country. The Bishop of LONDON expressed his hope, that at least a clause would be introduced to limit fin titer the time for keeping open these shops on the Sundays. The object of the Legislature was, to give the poor the advantage of good and cheap beer, but without putting temptation in their way, or giving them additional opportunities for in temperate indulgence. Ile also wished to have a clause introduced in order to prevent the playing at skittles at these beer houses. The practice of keeping skittle grounds at these houses was not only injurious to those who frequented them by leading them into excess, but tugs injurious to the owners of adjacent grounds. There were instances in which the existence ,f these skittle-grounds had been found injurious to the letting of the adjacent grounds. The Earl of CARNARVON, referring to the controul given to the constables over these houses, remarked tha' there was not a more inefficient animal in the world than a country parish constable. The old public-houses in the country were intended entirely for the accommodation of travellers, and, therefore, there was little use for keeping houses open there for the sale of beer to be drunk on the premises. But at present there was no other remedy against the drinking of beer at any hour on these premises except the superintendence of these constables under a Magistrate's warrant. But the constable could not tifeetually interfere, considering the odium and the *vengeance to which lie might be exposed, so that pen4ties could not be enforced. In the towns the matter rested on a different principle, and yet it was Very difficult to distinguish between a town and country parish. That difficulty had been experienced in other matters besides the present—it had been found very difficult to settle whether some boroughs in schedule A and in schedule B were in town or country. With re spect to country parishes, this Act had hetn founded in mistake, and therefore the effect was mischievous. The beer houses absorbed all the money that the labourer could spare; and nothing would remedy the evil except prohibit ing the drinking of beer on the premises. Lord MELBOURNE did not concur with the observa tions of the Noble Eirl who spoke last, as to the ineffi c'ency of the parish constable ; and as to the remarks of the Right Rev. Prelate in regard to skittle-playing, Le thought it unadvisahle to enter upon any minute legisla tion in regard to such matters. The Bishop of LONDON thought that the allowing of skittle-grounds on these premises was far from being a • matter of indifference, and therefore lie would move, if he stood alone, a clause to prohibit the keepers of these houses from having skittle-grounds, under a penalty of forty shil lings. • Lord TEN"FERDEN was of opinion t tha t t the power of the constable, as the Act at was too limited, an I therefore he propo p sed se re t l i a I 1 ", which the constables should have the power:( a clause, by at present, under a Magistrate's warraut; and to n enter, as in addition to this he should have the power, without warrant, to enter at all times when the house, were t legally open, and at any time, upon being required to do so by an inhabitant of the vicinity, or on his having reasonable cause to suspect that personns w thi ere remaining there at an improper time, or that mengimproper was going on. If the constable abused this power, it would be at his peril. The Bishop of LONDON banded in his clause against skittles, and the question being put upon it, Lord MELBOURNE suggested that it should be with drawn for the present, to give an opprtunity for further considering the matter. The Duke of WELLINGTON remarked that shittl... grounds were kept at public-houses at present, and that the object of the Legislature was to give the poor cheap and good beer, by putting an end to the monopoly of the 'old public-houses. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE observed that it would he easy to evade a clause of this kind ; for it the landlord of a beer-house should not keep a skittle-ground, his cat truners would be accommodated by the owner of the ground adjoining. The Bishop of LONnON contended that it was no good argument trainst the clause that it Might be evaded ; and he proposed another clause, providing that the beer houses 'iltenhi not be kept open 'for the sale of beer beyond the hour of seven in the evening on Sundays, Good Fridays, and Cl.'ristn:as Days. The Right Rev. Prelate . , however, agreed to withdraw his clauses for the present, in order that they might he further etnsidered. No objection wan openly made to the clause proposed by Lord Tr:NTERDEN, and we therefore presume that it ?cf. , ' adopted. The Bill then pa'sed the Committee, aud was otdercd to be reported on Monday, Turton's Divorce 11111 was ectnmitted. IlepOrt to motion, BURNING LAND IN IRBLAND. The MA!gills of WESTMEATH brought in a Bill for the Ip-tter prevention of the malicious Burning of Lands in Ireland. There were six Acts already in existence to prevent the practice ; but all had been found insufficient. The Bill was read a first time.—Adjourried HOUSrs' OP 1021111101'S, Atrausr 18. The SreAkEli took his seat shortly after Three o'clock Mr. SADLER presented a petition from the inhabitants of a parish in the city or Dublin, signed, among others, by the Lord Me.y'or, praying the House to take into its con sideration the state of Ireland, with a view of establishing a system of poor laws, and describing the distress and misery that pervaded the couttty.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. BAILLIE presented a petition from the merchants, bankers, &c., of Bristol and its vicinity, against the Bill now before the House, for allowing the refining of foreign sugar, which the Hon. Member said would be an indirect means of encouraging the foreign trade. Mr. BURGE supported the prayer of the petition, and said that independent of the relief which the resistance to the ptoposed Bill would afford to the West India colonies, the cause of humanity would also be benefitted, for the Bill was not only an indirect encouragement to the cultivation of foreign sugar, but to the cultivation of it in the foreign colonies by means of slaves. An Hors. MEMBER (whose name we could not learn) condemned the proposed Bill, as actuated by a most heart less policy. Mr. ROBINSON moved an Address to his Majesty, pray ing that there be laid before the House a return. of all officers and appointments in the British dominions, the duties of which are performed by deputy ; stating the names of principals and deputies, the nature of the offices, the dates of the appointments, amount of salaries paid by the public, and of the sums actually received, as far as could be ascertained.—Ordered. Sir R. FERGUSON presented a petition from the merchants of Londonderry, against the proposed duties on wine ; and also a petition from the distillers of London. derry, against the drawback of the duty. Lord HOWICK presented two petitions from the farmers of Northumberland and Ber wick against the use of molasses in. distilleries ; also a petition from ship owners of the port of Newcastle, resident in North Shields, against the duty . on marine insurances, and com plaining of the hardships imposed on them by what were termed the Reciprocity Acts. The Hon. Member also presented a petition from the planters of the island of Mauritius fur a reduction of the duty on sugars.—They were read, and ordered to be printed. Lord HOWICK adverted to a notice of motion given last night by an Honourable and Learned Member oppo site (Mr. Burge) for an address to his Majesty for the production of certain document', relative to the emancipa tion of slaves in the Crown colonies, and entered into a statement to show that it would be exceedingly inconvenient to produce a certain despatch from a Governor of one of the West India Islands: He hoped that under these circum stances the Hon. and Learned Member would have no objection so to word his motion for the address as not to comprehend that document. Mr. BURGE had no objection to the proposition of the Noble Lord, if the document in question were one of a confidential nature; if not, 'the duty he owed to the colonies and to this House compelled .him to put the House in full possession of all the information now in possession of his Majesty's Governmen'. Lord HOWICK could not say it was a confidential despatch, because it was not so marked ; but be was con fident that the Governor who wrote it never contemplated its being laid on the table of this House. Mr. BURGE felt satisfied with the Noble Lord's state ment, and agreed to model his motion as proposed. The motion for the address was then altered and agreed to. Lord MAITLAND presented a petition frona the Ma gistrat s and town council of Dunbar, against the use of molasses in distilleries. Mr. LEFROY presented a petition from the corpora tion of barbers and surgeons in Dublin, against that part of the Reform Bill which affected their privileges. Also a petition from the Roman Catholic Clergy of Galway, in favour of the Galway franchise. Mr. HUNT presented a petition from the Kensington and Hammersmith branch of the National Union ; the petitioners stated that Kensington and Hammer smith contained a population of twenty thousand persons, and they thought themselves entitled to have a representative in Parliament. They prayed that all per sons who paid rates and taxes should be allowed to vote, and that they might have the protection of the ballot,— Ordered to be printed. The How. MEMBER next presented a petition from John Gilbert, at present confined in the gaol of the Isle of Man, where he bad been incarcerated for eight years, upon a debt of 131. The petitioner prayed for the extension of the Insolvent Debtors' Act to the Isle of Man. Mr. HUNT also presented a petition from Samuel Fletcher, who complained of having, ever since the year 1815, been defrauded of a sum of 1501. due to him on account of drawbacks, and praying an inquiry into his case. Ordered to lie on the table. Mr. LITTLETON presented a petition from a farmer in Staffordshire, named Wakefield, praying that the in surance duty on agricuhural produce might be reduced two-thirds. The Hon. Member supported the prayer of the petition, and stated that if the duty had been lowered last year, neatly all the farmers would have insured their property, and many of the fires which had occurred would not have taken place, for what man who wished to be revenged upon the farmers would set fire to his property if it was known that the loss, instead of falling on the farmer, fell on the insurance company ? After a few observations from Messrs. Whitmore, Ben nett, Robinson, Western, and Hunt, the petition was laid on the table. Sir JOHN SEBRIGHT presented a petition from the land-owners of Bishop's Stortford against the use of molasses in the distillation of spirits. Mr. BYNG presented a petition from St. James's, Westminster, against the Vestry Bill. Mr. O'CONNELL presented petitions from various parts of Ireland, against the grant to the Kildare- street School, and the Sub-letting Act; and also fur the intro duction of poor laws - into Ireland. Mr. WESTERN presented a petition from the land owners of Colchester against the use of molasses in the distillation of spirits; also a similar petition from Saffron Walden. Mr. HUME moved for a copy of the Report of the Commissioners of Legal Enquiry on the claims of Lescene and Eseoffery in 1826 and 1827. He did so for the pur pose of enabling the House, before it sanctioned the pay ment of 16,0001., the sum awarded to those two indivi- I duals for injuries they had received, in consequence of being removed from the island of Jamaica by the Governor, to ascertain whether these persons had been unfairly dealt with. If that were so, he (Mr. Hume) did not see why the people of England should be called upon to pay so large an amount, because ;the-Governor of the colony had dealt harshly with these persons. He felt quite sure the House would never vote so large a sum of money for such a purpose • at least, it would take care, before it did so, to see ;hat Government bad taken all the mea sures to get the money from the party who ought to pay it if it was due, namely, the Governor of the colony, the Duke of Manchester. Mr. HUNT seconded the motion. Lord HOWICK objected to the production of the papers, on the ground that if they were produced more would be required, the production of which would be to tended with a heavy expence, and would lead to no practical result. The Government of this country were pledged, and there fore the money ought to be paid. There was not a case strong enough to warrant the House to call for papers, as o they would,umls ad his object y 5,0001. and so doing,entail on the country an expence 6,0001. N . betweenli was, that having the th pa pers laid upon the table of that H ouse , th e y should bere ferred to a Committee up stairs. The expense of co py ing them would not exceed fifty pounds. Lord HOWICK said, that unless with a view to being printed, there could be no practical end accomplished by the production of these papers. Mr. BURGE contended that •if this case was to be made the subject of disetssioa is that House, it could only be discussed, in fairness to all concerned, upon the produc tion of all the papers and documents on the subject. Dr. LUSHINGTON begged to state the case with re gard to these individuals. It appeared that in October, 1823, being then resident in the island, they were ar rested by order of the novelnment. Upon which they sited out a Writ of Habeas Corpus, claiming to be considered British subjects. The Supreme Cutlet de= cided that they were entitled to be so considered, and they were liberated. A Secret Committee afterwards sat and reported on their conduct, without calling on them for their defence, and they were put on board a ship and carried to St. Domingo, without having an opportunity of moving a second time for a Habeas Corpus. These proceedings were afterwards the subject of inquiry, at the request of the late Mr. Canning, by the Government at home, and the result was that the indi viduals were entitled to redress. Now he (Dr. L.) would state why he opposed the Honourable Member's motion. It appeared that the whole subject had undergone the most complete and ample investig ition, and a decision had been arrived at. This House could not institute a proper ex amination by the production of the report on evidence, but it would be absolutely necessary that all the documents should also be produced, end the House could not then come to any derision in a less period than six or seven weeks. He therefore hoped the motion would not be per severed in. Mr. HUME said his object was not to deprive these indi viduals of compeniation, but on the principle that he op posed any grant without having the most accurate infor mation on the subject. It appeared to him that the House could not possibly agree to so novel a grant, as giving 16,000/. away without the neces sary documents. At the same time, if it were under stood to be against the wish of the House, he would not press his motion. But when the grant came before him, be should take the sense of the House upon it. It ought to be shown that means had been us, d to obtain compensation from the colony by which the individuals were injured, and that those means had failed, before they were called upon to make the grant in question. The Hon. Member then withdrew his motion. FOREIGN TRADE. Mr. ROBINSON rose to make the motion of which he had given notice, for an address to his Majesty for copies of correspondence with the Consul General at. Paris relative to the duties on British vessels in the ports of France, subsequent to the convention of the 26th of Ja nuary, 1830. The subject was certainly highly important to the commercial interests of this country. By the Reciprocity Treaty, as it was called, of the 26th Jan. 1826, made with France, it was stated, that from and after the sth of April of that year ships, goods, wares, and merchandize, should be admitted into the ports of both nations at the same rates of duty. There cer tainly could be nothing fairer, nor more equitable than that treaty. But he wished to call the atten tion of the Heuse to the marked difference in the conduct of France as compared with that of other Powers with whom similar treaties had been contracted. and be would show that the French Government, in the spirit, if not letter, violated it from its commencement. One article in the treaty stated that, with a view to dimi nish the burdens on the navigation of the two countries, his Moat Christian Majesty would reduce the duties in France in proportion to the reduction of these duties in the ports and places of the United Kingdom. This was clearly a reference to a probable reduction of ditties on both sides, but no reference was made to any probable increase of duty. It appeared when the treaty was promulgated in France on the Bth Feb., 1826, a fortnight after it was concluded in London, that it was accompanied by an ordinance of the French Government, to which this Government was not a party, for raising the duty on French tonnage, and also on the tonnage of vessels belonging to Britain. The effect was, that the vessels of England were subjected in the ports of France, 'to a rate of duty infinitely greater than the duty payable in the British ports on French ships. The French Government were remonstrated with upon the subject, but the only answer was—that they had adhered to the letter of the treaty. This he (Mr. Robinson) did not deny, but lie would show, that in spirit it had been violated. The treaty was evidently with the view of diminishing the duties ; what excuse, therefore, could the French Government have for raising the duty on tonnage on British ships ? Looking at the state of commerce in this country, it was impossible to incteise the rate of tonnage, and, consequently, French ships only could have the advantage of the low rate of duty. Now one article of the treaty was, that French goods imported into this country should pay the same duty as if imported in British bottoms ; heliegged the Noble Lord opposite to look at the difference between the commerce of the two kingdoms. The French enjoyed all the benefit of the treaty, while they excluded England from it. The House would probably believe him when he stated that British vessels of 110 toms burthen, entering a French port, paid tonnage duties to the amount of 20/., besides several other charges and dues, which would certainly amount to a considerable sum, while French vessels did not pay more than one-tenth of that amount. If, however, such was the case, and he pledged himself to the fact, he would ask the House whether there was any reciprocity in a treaty of that kind. If the treaty was ever so unwise, parties were bound by it, but he considered the French Go vernment by their ordinance had annulled the treaty itself, and that view was likewise taken of it by men more conversant with the subject than himself. He consi dered such a state of things cou'd not go on for five years longer, without some remonstrance on the part of this country to France. He was well aware that at all times it was exceedingly impolitic, and wou ld begreatly so at the present moment, for him to make use of language against France of an irritating' nature. He begged to be understood as doing no such thing, but he thought, if a remonstrance were made in an amicable spirit, it would be received by the Government of France with a sincere desire to look into the whole transaction, with a view to give this country redress, and he protested against this country's going on year after year satisfying itself with stating the facts to the French Government, and being continually put off by evasive and delusive arguments. No man could doubt, who would give himself the trouble of looking into the matter, that this country was net enjoying that benefit by this treaty which Mr. Canning and Mr. Huskiison intended it should have. If he was assured by his Majesty's Government that they had looked into the matter with a sincere desire to do justice to the commerce and shipping of this country, he certainly should not be disposed to press his motion. Previous to entering into the Reciprocity Treaty, French vessels returning to the ports of France never paid any tonnage duty, and he was credibly informed ports of Great Britain, then large tonnage was paid when they came from it.—(Hear.) He was not actuated by any jealousy against the French Government in making his present statements, but be considered the House ought to take care to protect its own interests.—(Hear.) The French Government had never acceded one point to us without an equivalent, and he wished he could say as much of his own country. He felt tie more anxious to ascertain the sentitnents of Government on this question, when be found the Noble Lord pursuing the same course of what was called liberality, but which he begged to designate folly. He saw no objection that could by pos sibility be urged to his motion, but he would repeat that if the Noble Lord stated his Majesty's Government had the subject under their consideration, he should nut press his motion. Lord PALMERSTON said e nothing could be fairer than the motion of the Hon. Member, and the manner in which he had put it. He had stated that if information were given him that the matter was under the discussion of Ministers, anti if an explanation would now be inconve nient, he would not, lest it should embarrass Government , press his motion. Now lie would beg leave to state that the matter bad engaged the notice of Governtnent, that a cor respondencebetween England and France had been instituted in reference to it, and was still going on ; that, there fore, in his opinion, it was inconvenient, and might be preju dicial to the satisfactory determination of that correspondence , if they were now called on to produce it. He, therefore, without entering into the case, would beg the Hon. Mem ber to withdraw his motion. He would not stand up to argue that the French had correctly understood and acted up bon4 fide to the stipulations of the convention, but it was from no disinclination to give full information, nor from inattention on the part of Government to the interests concerned in this question, that he would recommend the withdrawal of the motion. Mr. ROBINSON withdrew his motion accordingly, and stated that it would be extremely wrong in Go vernment to make any further concession to the French pending this correspondence. Mr. HUNT said that he would take that oppor tunity of putting to the Vice-President a, question in reference to three large seizures of French silk manu factures which had been made in the city. He understood, however, that it was generally the case that some compromise took place; but the parties in this in stance were quite competent to meet the full fines, and he wished to know what proceedings had been instituted against them. Mr. P. THOMPSON would assure the Hon. Member, that the penalty to the utmost of the law would in this in stance be imposed. - The Marquis of CHANDOS would take that oppottu- nity of asking whether it was the intention of his Ma jesty's Government to disarm the Irish yeomanry ? Lord ALTHORP said that measures for regulating the Irish yeomanry were under the consideration of Govern ment, and when they were considered fit to be brought before the House they would be proposed; but pending the consideration of these, it would be impossible to give a direct answer to the question put by the Noble Marquis. Mr. SADLER, on the suggestion of Mr. O'Connell, postponed his motion respecting the Irish peasantry till Monday, the 29th inst. Lori ALTHORP engaged that on that day it should take precedence of all Government business Mr. COURTENAY asked when the wine duties would be brought before the House ? Lord ALTHORP stated that he should bring that sub ject forward on Monday next. AFFAIRS OF BELGIUM. Sir R. VYVYAN, after remarking that the Noble Chancellor of the Exchequer could accuse him of no discourtesy in at length bringing his motion forward, pro ceeded to deny that he had any wish to embarrass the Government, and to observe, that questions respecting Belgium had already been discussed in that House, and sufficient evidence afforded, even by the answers of the Noble Lords opposite to the inquiries made by Noble and Right Hon. Friends of his, to lead him to form a conclu sive opinion upon the system of policy pursued by his Ma jesty's Ministers, and to forbid him to expect any mere information than he already possessed. Ile persisted in bringing forward his motion, however, because it would give many that opportunity of expressing their feelings and opinions, and delivering their sentiments upon these matters, which it might not otherwise be their fortune to obtain. The discussion he was about to introduce was not, he contended, premature, because war had actually commenced. He would, in what he had to offer upon the subject, wish to confine himself, as nearly as might be, to the actual object for their consideration ; he would not, accordingly, touch upon the Portuguese question, though he was extremely anxious it should be brought before the House ; but at the same time, as he regarded the Belgian question as the key of the great problem of peace or war in Europe, he felt it would be necessary to daviate a little from the strict line, and allude to the general aspect of the other European Governments as connected with the affairs of Belgium. In entering upon this question, he was willing to suppose that the King of the Netherlands had contented that one part of his dominions should be separated from the other upon certain consi derations—that the Belgian provinces should be separated from Holland. He would also suppose Leopold King of Belgium elected by a large majority ; and, it the principle of election be admitted in Europe, fairly and honourably elected Sovereign of this new kingdom. Now the House, knowing these facts, and the public being informed of them, had a right to expect that tranquillity would have been the result. But, on the contrary, this enthronement had positively been the signal of war to Europe.—(Hear.) The object proclaimed by the Government bad been to preserve peace. With this view, it had been stated, was their every act ; but by the King of the Netherlands this enthronement had been considered an infraction of the ex isting treaty, and a j ust ground for war, and therefore had he ordered his troops to march into Belgium. He had to remind the Mouse that he had already, for various reasons, on several occasions, postponed his motion. On Friday week he had been informed that the armistice between the Dutch and Belgians had been broken ; anti on the evening of that day he asked the Noble Chancellor of the Exche quer if he had received any official information to that effect? The Noble Lord, in answering in the affirmative, requested him to postpone his motion, because an Ambas sador had been despatched, and he had reason to expect that peace would be restored. He consented, giving notice for the Tuesday following. On that day he again post poned his motion, at the entreaty of the Noble Lord, be cause the King of the Netherlands had consented to treat. He gave notice for Thursday last, when he was fully deter mined to persevere in his motion. But he was again asked to postpone it for another reason. namely, that the French Government had given a solemn assurance that the French troops would withdraw as soon as the Dutch troops had re-passed their frontiers. On this question it was the House was now called upon to de bate. It was a question on which the honour of Eng land was interested—on which it was, in fact, deeply pledged. He need not add, that after the explanation —after the positive assurance of the Noble Lord opposite, the honour of his Majesty's Ministers stood pledged.— (Hear, hear.) And now, notwithstanding this solemn assurance on the part of the French Government to the Minister of this country, it appeared that France had de terinined to maintain 30,000 men as an army of observa tion in Belgium, to remain there—so the demi-official report of that evening stated—encamped at Niville until the Dutch had disbanded half their army, and paid all the expenses of the war.—(Cheers front the Opposition.) On Thursday last the Noble Lord opposite had declared that the French troops were to withdraw as soon as the Dutch had retired beyond their position ; and to-day it was stated, and no doubt they would hear it defended, that 30,000 men were to remain in occupation of Belgium. This was a question which influenced and affected the honour of all the great contracting Powers, and which showed that this country—or at least the Minister who had represented it—had, during these negociations, been only proceeding from one difficulty to another ; and had been, he feared, ultimately deceived. France, it would appear, was an armed party before which it was expected all the Great Powers of Europe would quail.—(Hear, hear.) The question respecting the letter of the King of the Netherlands had been already so fully disposed of that he did not apprehend any advantage could arise from his now touching on it. It bad been proved the King of the Netherlands gave due notice of his intention to re commence hostilities, and that there was not the shadow of a reason to be advanced on the part of those who, in Parliament and elsewhere, had accused his Majesty of treachery. The question on which the King of the Ne therlands had taken up his ground in these negociations, is that which had already been discussed in that House to a certain extent—the question of the Protocols. Time question of the Protocols was tha t on which his Majesty took his stand. Taking the Protocols then as a basis whereon . to fix their judgment, it w ould appear, first, that the King of time Netherlands had done every thing to keep the peace, not only in having foregone his just appeal to the Great Powers with whom be was in alliance, but even in aban doning his sovereignty over the revolted provinces, on the understanding that the interests of Holland were not to be forfeited, and that he was to receive an indemnity for the loss of his family possessions. Up to this point, then, more existedm od e a r ate great th a w n a 'ntthe of c o ( n i o u t o h t i o n f g icioisulAdiabjeesftayi.rer Thereor in formation upon this subject, but he expected that his Noble Friend would at least be able to give as much as would vindicate the character of this country. After various Pons theonlay hadcoogsbreeens o se f nt to Brussels Belgium was understand to that it would be compelled to accede. letterg‘A'i.ivtehn negociations, aP to or w o a t s c a oL l also which dispatched to the Regent, and he (Sir R. Vyvyan) wished to know whether it had been de livered? If the Noble Lord did not enter into that part of the case, it would be fair to infer that the letter in question was not delivered. So far, however, from ac ceding to the terms of the Protocol, the Belgians pro ceeded to elect a Sovereign, and the Prince of Saxe Co burg took the sovereignty in direct opposition to all the eighteen articles of the Protocol. Ministers, too, had sent off the Prince to Belgium with full know ledge that the Belgians had not acceded to the tirma before demanded of them. This transaction was of a most serious character ; it would be matter of history, and, probably, matter of charge against the Government of this country. He thought that he had said enough to show that the King of the Netherlands was fully justified in the steps he had taken—that he had been most unfairly treated—that he had been most unreasonably asked to ac cede to proposals made to him—and that, in defiance of all delicacy, Ministers had allowed Prince Leopold to quit Great Britain. The King of the Netherlands might have acted boldly if not rashly in opposing himself to the con ference ; but he had acted with due regard to the honour of that nation, whose destinies were committed to his charge.—(Hear, hear, bear.) He begged here to add, that even by the editors of the newspapers supposed to speak the sentiments of the liberal party in France, t theic it was now admitted that the K in g of the Nether lands had been guilty of n o want of faith—of no breach of the armistice ; and the Constitutionne/ last re ceived proceedfrom Paris, is, wasorg inai decided a u uponseoff o udestroyed this then found interferencepo ty the Ie necessary, F ' of i v ea it ? u i t e h l d e s Five Powers. The bala n ce of power, as settled in the Th reaty of Revolution easntpdhianlial, 1815 5 d it wasbeen were, to establish a new code of nations. This measure had been effected at the Congress of Vienna, and one of the mistakes then made was, the ill-judg e d junction of Holland and Belgium. Those two countries had always e ntertained a mutual jealousy, and it seemed contra)) , to the policy of England to allow the union of a great ma nufacturing with a great maritime power. However, the union was made, and the annexation was guaranteed by all the Five Powers, and upon this point the Honourable Baronet read the 67th Article of the General Act of Con gress, giving the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg to Hol land ; and the 2d and 11th Articles of the Gerinanie Confederation, which related to the annexation of the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg to Holland and Belgium.— The question then was, whether the new Sovereign of Belgium was not bound to maintain Luxemburg as parr of the Belgic kingdom ; while, on the other hand, it had been given to the King of the Netherlands in 1815, and guaranteed to him not only by the Five Powers, but by the Germanic Confederation? The King of the Ne ther!ands protested against the injustice with which he was treated, and one of the charges against the British Government was, that they had neglected to pay attention to the guarantee of the Duchy of Luxemburg. If it were said that it had been the intention of the King of the Netherlands to sell Luxemburg, it would be no an swer to that charge ; and it would still remain a question whether Luxemburg was henceforward to be considered part of the Germanic Confederation. It was little less than idle to talk of the neutrality of so small a State as Belgium ; it must, in fact, fall under the controul arid pro tection of France; and if Luxemburg were no longer a Member of the Germanic Confederation, it would of ne cessity cease to be part of Germany. This was not a mere question of I . mits and boundaries, but of serious State policy, as regarded the balance of power in Europe. When the revolution or rebellion broke out in Brussels, it was said that the King of the Netherlands was a tyrant as regarded civil liberty, and a bigot in relation to religious toleration.—(Hear, hear, from Mr. O'Connell.) He could well understand that cheer from the Hon. Member for Kerry. The mask was now torn from the faces of many in Europe who bad hitherto walked in disguise.—(Cheers.) What had occurred in B-lgium, ere long might happen elsewhere.—(Hear, hear.) The real cause of the rev-e -lution in Fiance, in July last, was now well known; those causes were, in fact, the same which had afterwards ope rated in Belgium ; and if the spirit were not checked, it might he soon found in full power nearer home.—(Much cheering from the Opposition Benches.) It was fit that the subject should no longer be blinked ; it was high time to speak out, since danger was at hand ; for while the centre of revolution was in Paris, the right wing was in Brussels, and the left wing might, ere lone, be in Dublin.—(Much cheering.) The system was the same in Belgium and in Ireland—on the one the cry was against the College of Louvain ; and on the other, against the Kildare-street Society.---(Cheers.) He trusted, however, that although there were Roman Catholics in the House of Commons, they had not that u:tramontane spirit which actuated the Jesuits of France. From thence the Hon. Baronet went into a detail of facts already published, con nected with the edicts for education published by the King of the Netherlands in 1825, which were brought before the States-General in 1926, in connection with the ques tion of religion. A concordat was entered into in 1927 ; and in 182 S, efforts were made to get up petitions, and to decry the measures of the Government as bigotted and ty rannical. The consequence was, that in three years, not withstanding all the concessions of the King of the Nether lands, a revolution broke out. With reference to civil policy, it might be said, that the King had refused to concede the Trial by Jury; but the fact was, that the question having b en three time, broughtbefore the Chamber at Bruesels, it was three times rejected by increasing majorities. Ire what he was about next to say, he might possibly offend the prejudices of some, but he was convinced that one of the consequences of the late revolution in France would sooner or later be war.—(Hear, hear, bear.) At the same time, when he sew that on the one si-le there had been an attempt to establish a despotism, and on the other a liberal feeling, though too much exaggee rated, he could not say that he regretted the expulsion of CharleS X., of France, more than lie regretted the abdica tion of James II ,of England. Though all the evils and inconveniences that might result were before him, and al though the shock given to European thrones bad vibrated even in this country, he could not say that he was sorry the event had occurred. But the revolution (or, as his tory would term it, the rebellion) of Brussels stood upon very different grounds. On the question of interposition by this country in the internal affairs of other States, he might remark, that so far from non-interference b the rule, and interference the exception, interference seemed to have been the rule, and non-interference the exception. The whole system of Europe, during the last thousand years, had been a system of interference; and he illus trated this position, by references to the history of the Duchy of Modena, and of the Papal territories , . He con tended that there was a spirit of propagandism from one end of Europe to the other, and that it was high time for the different Cabinets to interfere. What he called upon the British Government to attend to principally was this —that they should tint exhibit any fear of the power at present existing in France. He hoped, now Ministers tnund that the French troops were not to he withdrawn from Belgium, and that the honour and dignity of the British empire was called in question, that they would not yield to circumstances. Let them not plunge and flounder on from one difficulty to another, under the hope that every new embarrassment would be the last : let them not resort to trick after trick, arid bend and succumb at last to the great power, which constantly kept in view the propagation of its own doctrines. Let the Cabinet remember, that there was a power in France behind the throne, and for the honour of England and the peace of Europe, let them give the most determined resistance to such tortuous policy. While, on the one hand, Mi nisters avoided giving the slightest cause of exasperation to the revolutionary patty in France, they ought, on the other hand, to take care that they did not surrender the power they still possessed. Bullies would always become greater bullies when they found their insolent assumption successful ; and it became not only the British Government, but the British Parliament, to oppose itself firmly to the braggadocios of Europe. On one point he hoped the Noble Lord (Palmerston) would not refuse in formation : he wished to know whether Ministers were at last undeceived with regard to the intentions of the French in attacking Belgium.—(Cheers.) They need not be afraid that the people of England would not support them in a war, which had for object the maintenance of the honour of the country: he hoped for peace, 1)111 the way to preserve peace was to Le prepared for war—pejor est Bello timor ipse Belli--the fear of war sometimes produced worse consequences than actual hostilities. He 'misted that the ultra party in France was doing its utmost to induce France to make war upon England, and that an alliance at this moment with France, in order to compel the King of Holland to accept terms, would be most disgraceful to Great Britain. The result would be, that in the middle of the struggle, she would be obliged to abandon the ally . she had chosen. His object in introducing this subject was to give Ministers an opportunity of explaining their conduct. They had been guilty of many changes of policy, but after having gone through four acts of the play, they need not fear the denouement of the fifth. He hoped that the House would give him credit for a desire to place the country on its proper footing, and to afford some comfort to those who were heart-broken at the humiliation already suffered. However inconvenient it might be to Ministers, he apprehended that he had not brought the question forward at a time when it would be inconvenient to the nation to have it discussed. He moved for copies of all protocols and other papers relating to the conferences regarding Belgium, which could be laid upon the table without prejudice to the public service.—(Cheers.) Lord ELLIOT seconded the motion, and expressed his intention of giving a succinct statement of the various points of the transactions, as far as, from his residence in Belgium, he had been able to trace them. At the time when the kingdom of the Netherlands was created, that is, in the yeir 1814, Belgium, it would be recollected, was in the occupation of the English, Ptussian, and Austrian troops ; and it was determined at the Congress of Vienna, that the country should be annexed to Holland, so as to form an independent State, capable of maintaining its place among the European Powers. Holland was by no means desirous of that annexation ; and she was called upon to make considerable sacrifices in order to carry the decision of the Congress into effect. She was obliged to give up, in consideration of that addition to her territory, the colonies of the Cape, Demerara, and Berhice. The. people of Holland had no inclination for that union, but ' when the kingdom of the Netherlands was determined on, their just and benevolent Monarch turned his attention to the revision of the fundamental law ; and he (Lord Elliot) believed that in the whole course of the dominions of shit excellent Sovereign, the provisions of that law were in no instance infringed, and no instance could be alleged in which any individual, however guilty, was punished with out the sentence of a Court of Justice. Even De Pott h er, and the others associated with him, were not punished until condemned by a lawful tribun tl, ant that too con sisting of Belgian, not Dutch Judges.—(Cheers.) Had not he (Lord Elliot) a right, therefore, to protest against the use of such language as had been indulged in by some more Be g that n soldiers o t our gentlemen, speaking of the Kin g of the Netherlands? Was that Monarch to be calle d a tyrant?—(Hear.) He never had a guard for the p rotection of his own person. The composition o o f f a s li t i a s nd a i n r g army; resembledand d the army were nearly in the proportion of two to one to the Dutch. He (Lord Elliot) believed that no countr y in Euro p e was in a more rapid progress of improvement, or in the en joyment of greater prosperity than Bdgium, from the, time of the union with Holland to the commencement of the revolution.—(Hear.) The Congress of Vienna, in forming that union, dec'ared that its object was not oely to preserve the balance of power in Europe, but to pro mete the prosperity and to maintain the independeece of the Belgi or people themselves, arid so. far the intention o fi !. the Congress was realized.--(Hear.) The insurrection which had since taken place was, it could not be denied, an act of treason—(Hear, hear)—and if the King had succeeded in putting it down, his right to punish the ringleaders would never have been disputed.—(bletr , hear.) But as the treason was successful, of course it was not called by that name.—(Hear.) The other Powers of Europa interposed, and by their interference a separa tion was agreed to. He gave the conference of Lon don full credit for their desire to preserve peace, and he thought that so far they could not well have dole otherwise, under the circumstances, than they had done. , Their first step was to procure a suspension of hos tilities; and the Belgian Congress protested against that suspension being considered an armistice, and denied the right of tilt other Powcre to prevent any country from vindicating itself by arena. .lie beliet i ed that after that hostilith s were commenced two or itita: time. by the Belgians, notwithstanding the protest of i,lO King of the Netherlands. In the mean time negotiations proceeded, and on the 13th of January the conference issued a declartnitni, which they said was irrevocable.- - * (He then read a protocol, in which the declaration of the 13th J ii y was prenounced to be irrevocaVe, and the conditions named in it were steed to be those on which alone the independence of Belgium would be recognised.) —He believed that on the 10th of May the conference declared, that it by the Ist of June the Belgian Congress should not have agreed to the conditions of separation ;is arranged by the conference of London, the rezociation would be broken off, Lord Pons.inby would leave Brussels, and measures would be taken by the other Powers to pre- serve peace —meaning, he supposed, such measures as the i King of the French, in the naive of the conference, had sinca , resorted to In the mean time, the Dutch Envoy complained of the del iy in the execution of the cleerees of the conference; , an d on th e 7th of June he was informed that other wag& trent: were under consideration. What then must have been the astonishment ef the King of Holland, when on the 25th of June he received articles—the s one, indeed, in number (eighteen) as those which had before been deter mined, but totally different in many other respects? Against those last articles the Minister of the King of Holland 11:, turally protested. lie published an able and complet e analysis of them, and exposed their inconsistency with those which had been before agreed to, and this unwarrantable violation of the rights of the Hou s e of Nassau. Was its ', then, with the consent of the other Pow.rs that King Leopold signed a Constitution, the provisions of which in volved questions which had been considered to be already settled ? In his address the eighteen articles were n thoseluded to, but he expressed his i nt e ntion of retainin g places of which the Belgians then had possession, not withstanding the claims of the King of H oll a nd ; nd a h that the intention of some of those p lans was the snliject of pending negotiations...—(Hear, hear, hear.) Under such circumstances, it was doubtful that th e King of Behan(' could restrain the irritated fee l ' hies of his people, who saw that their country ol' ' dealt with by the other Powers, he would not say uniustV' but at least harshly.— ( Hear, hear.) From the day tb3t their troops crossed the Belgian frontier, they were Kill the whole of the interest of the public debt of Belgium ; o n in consequence of the unsettled state of the question h e ' tween them and that country, their business was inte r rupted, and they were subjected to the expences of a La i l :. army, and to o th er heavy burthens. Notwithstanding a'r i this, when the conference expressed its disapprobation O',. the renewal of hostilities, and desired him to withdraw hi e' troops from Belgium, although he thought h imself justii 4 in the course which Le had alopted, and ahhough lie lit been in every instant!e successful, he consented to recrooi; the frontiers, not wishing to incur the responsibility ' brieging on a general war in Europe. But the conferen ce ,: in the mean time, employed a French army, or allowed:, to lie employed, for the purpose of enforcing aeoi e 'd Holland those coercive meosures with which it b' threated Belgium—(Hear)—and of defending a populate ti l I of four millions agaiiist two millions and a half. ' l ,, thought that the House Ind a right to know what P i l this country had taken in those priiceedings ; and a s 10, Leopold was new settled on the throne of Belghoo - ' 4 J his election and recognition were perfect and c omple te r; political transactions , he thought that the lion. Bir eti ti j had a right to call for any paper s r e latin g to it, ''ry that their production would not interfere with 3 1 , pending or future negotiation s . The feelin g of sorre and indignation wh'cli had be e n excited in Holi'd by the treatment which that country had experieoe 1, at the hands of the peat Powers was very n i°c mitigated by the sympathy which had been expressed. p r _i wards them in this country; and he thought that a s' n ' lar manifestation on the part of that House would ten d strengthen the hands of his Majesty's Ministers, 0, would enaide them to take a higher ground in their fleg, ciations with other Powers, to render due support to t,te ancient ally of t'iis country—(Hear, hear) — an d tog t,o up the tempo' ring policy which hitherto they h ad h o d (perhaps) compelled to adopt. For those reasons be WI, second tire motion of the Right Hon. Ilaronet.-4 11e° 50 . 0, Lord PALMERSTON, in rising to exp lain his rea,ti for declining to support the present motion, was boavo do justice to the temperate, fair, and moderate mon ner oi which the Hon. Baronet by whom it was introduced', .11 the Noble Lord who seconded it, had stated their il e o of the subject to which the papers called for related- t ip, Hon. Baronet stated, his motive in making the t,,d was to give his Majesty's Government an opportuority explaining the course which they had pursued il t ol transactions to which the motion referred. The l'f Lord said, that as the election of King Leopold was a Of plete political transaction, there could 1:e no ree' eli t yl withh riding papers rid ding to proceedings up to _ ,, period, as their production could have no effect ;II pending negotiations. But he (Lord Palmerston) ''' r ) a ~,, ry different opinion ; and he, therefore, ¶ S.3' 01 going to avail himself of the opportunity which the of tion of the Hon. Baronet afforded him. Notwithstso ty the statement of the Noble Lord, he would say, thatod object of the negotiations with which the doeumeo ts i i c onnected was by no means a complete P e: 4 transaction.—( Hear, hear, hear.) The purpo 4 j which the Government of this country bad l ' ' into the negoci at ion was not the electi oo s , a Sovereign for the people of Belgium, but the n re l e tlii tion of tire peace of Europe.—(Heir, hear.) lin t ' fi l e purpose was finally attained and peace established , ti' le d uetion of the papers called for could not reason°, expected. He should, therefore, be obliged to to' b i a shott speech in reply to the Hon. Meyer, and to ° I 9 perfect silence upon the various topics which th e „,, Baronet and the Noble Lord had introduced. Ile ‘ v ,'"ipt r th it the House would not think it necessary for i t i r e e follow them through their examination of the ki, ments determined on at Vienna in 181 de or th eirl y/ of the King of Holland's conduct fbr the last fiftceodii Neither could he go into an ( xplanation of the COn f fi i . , the Government of this country for the last eight,' ll'j months. Whatever might be the efftct which tif o lvi Baronet expected to I,e produced by his charge ag' t i nd I , present M nistry for their conduct towards the cof fi Holland, and for their gewiral management o f the ' t t: affairs of this country, he (Lord Palmerston)int° sle2 the lion. Baronet the advantage of tha t impres,Trof (lid not feel himself at liberty to eater int ) the d'' nig, to which the Hon. Baronet was desirou s to leath.-'oor, h e ar.) If he was obliged to decline a discu"l°oo, past conduct of the Government in those transae o n or , l e ss would the Home expect him to follow the DI ..."( into his anticipations of their future policy e hear.) Whether Belgium was or was n ot 0 00 1 Luxembourg. and whether or not the possessio n n . 0: bourg would connect Belgium with the German ic i deration—were questions which he would n ot th Clot in that House, and he was sure the House would ' 4 . , e entering open them. He thought that th e con o , hail of late been followed regarding negociatino ° % t o SI his Majesty's Government were still engaged, '' to t ' riance, not only with the usages of Parliament' ) net the principles of the Constitution.--(Hear, be 3r ,'„ re , view of the Constitution, he apprehended that t? of war and peace was one of the prerogatives of t ' e el' and that therefore the discretion of condue,it4 i tions was vested in the King --(Hear, heari the e' f t , therefore, as that Home placed confidence in A sible a lvisers of the Crown, it was bound net to of their hands the management of negociatiors t, l eo . the question of war or peace, by summoningt` r oe/ were, to the bar to ;answer for their conduct?: eel negotiations still pending.—(Hear, hear • e been asserted that one of the consequences) , f ti' l i ti V? Bill now in progress through a Committee w'". n ~ w i the Crown would be shorn of its prerogon'1:;011 (Lord Palmerston) thought that nothing th . a t , a°,l attempted by the representatives of Bir-tnioglice, 9 chester could strike mere at the royal prerollitt_weefi course followed by the II in. Baronet, the ti ' OO , I , f the Anti-Beformers, who, during negoc ia . ~, tily greatest importance, not only to this c 0 04 Europe, would not wait until these Wer e e ee ls ot conclusion, but insisted that the Giyvernrnenctio pi close all that they had hitherto dune in tes l " t in eaot' all that they were doing—and all that theY_ to !VI and called on them t o con-emit with liimalbee ',,,,, they should pursue.—(Cheers.) Under ba je. i ,i stances, and for the considerations wh ich he, to p i he objected to the motion, and we s boun d O i tel into the discussion. he c'` ta Mr. O'CONNELL said, that althoug i lie ch i le main silent in the present ditcussien, a'',...,01, distiuctly alluded to by the lion. Baronet I.