The Sun. — London, England, 1833-07-24 00:00:00

Lent in etary fo r gainst years. ; he thg ci r.) , ut he V remit C that, if de a del le Lord Went ix hougbt e year. , to the oi l ' ntlernao. d of the lid nother reP a handle , Ltrly effee l view to 10 the Cbar 4 i away! got ,tt,‘ - He st that Ha to Walls g—the •een Cst oitude 01 I should tared to onger. ustice, g: nature . .nts had b as inher l 2 He W y 4 int pro', 4 d under" . . of Cro al tY ro say d not bele: 4 i rather h it weo l of the j suppol o ,4 came to r, r the arlismeo v o ;ht that .d motion ; 'an any °A t mud, Vs') of the Ply roughoo t iv d he first f; I it via* 1 hey coo!, f Parlia for five yg..11 ion as re Mat the nobody therefore iod to I° extend• Member ° country n the flu"; 5 some oubtful ' H e did t there I that eg i ancient P. ular eel ° amen t 8 01 ne xt oee' i was dio liamenk7 of his egOv i iigarY heir pro' i. they had viably 14 4 14 4 of th e c h aracter of a Whig Ministry, i t was per h aps toad as that which the Hon. Gentleman himself pos id in thi s H ouse.—(llear.) The Right Hon. 111 ,. ver tk ealled npon him (Lord J. Russell) to state his opinions to this question, but he owned that he was put to conside ;otie difficulty on account of t h e vagueness o f th e proposi • If it h a d been for any fixed per i och— if i t h a d de ned th at new Parliaments should be called every year, t r y t hree years, o r ever y five yeare, he should have 6 iW ho w to meet, and how to deal with it ; but when L t ,_ t teas req u i re d to give a dec i s i on upon t h e mot i on i n and when no period of duration was named, it e it* , med hardl y f a i r to expect that any man s h ou ld arr ive k conclusive judgment. It was like sending Parliament as expedition with sealed orders, not to be opened until eached a certain latitude and longitude.—(Hear.) The ligmhet Hon. Member for Lambeth bad not stated his pre 10e for any particular period—but at least in this the tit:, fit:ember f or Oldh am (Mr. Cobbett) had excelled , r be avowed plainly that he was for annual Par ts na • - • - (llear, bear.) He (Lord J. Russell) avowed genes plainly that he was as much opposed to annual Parlia aein tue Honourable Member for Oldham could be fav our of them.—(Hear, hear.) He was convinced k et h ti :e3' could not co-exist with the monarchy, ►ti-;°"litlg that annual Parliaments could only pre-• stt et a° , 4 tePublic, he should resist to the u•most any do 13 ' to Introduce them. What had been the sugges lel:: o f other speakers? The Hon. Member for Mary asserted that originally Parliaments were -e l annual. This was an historical mistake, for it was O ° W admitt e d th at a l t h oug h t h ey usua lly e xi s ted only for l obfr ne Y e ar, they h a d b ee n sometimes proroeued and lasted Z* The au th ors o f the Triennial Bill had not so Wfor they declared only that frequent Parliaments t h o llbe for the advantage of the commonwealth. Next, the 0 1 . Member had heaped abuse upon the authors of lid'Ptennial Bill, as the worst Ministers this country Cever known. That was to him (Lord J. Russell) a al e il it h for the first Ministry of George I. consisted of %Nit roost distinguished Whigs of the glorious reign of p ot , t ,.. er° Anne, and the King, on coming to the throne, to* selected them, because they would most conci the' the people whom he was called upon to govern. If, Li tt „ Prfa ter what the Hon. Gentleman had advanced was an k ,Teka truth, it w a s to him (Lord J. R.) an historical 1(4'7. But the Hon. Member had added that he had A rai : 4 4y for his opinion, and his first authority was tith ed Bacon Coxe, a learned man, who had certainly pub up many works, but who was not generally looked Asi,l7 as an authority on such matters ; neither was % ; h it° , a great authority ; and Doctor Smollett, upon A e ; lie had also relied, found fault with the Septennial Vi e t t ,'," What many would think its merit, viz., that it oa ' l ,7e Very Act which maintained the House of Hanover all i tll throne. In fact, his Jacobite stanzas were worth th e . n history p u t t oge ther ; but the present Ministers and Ni l: fri ends were no Jaco bi tes, an d t h ey did no t re gr e t ata t . the Rouse of Hanover had been continued in pos th of the Crown of these realms. His authorities , ti e "ore, were of little weight or value. Next he had °3 Ple tic toed that the Parliament which pasted the Se . ptet?- oso u 'et bail been guilty of a gross abuse of authority in til ll ' 4 ,ing its own existence for three years. No doubt 3.14 4 1 ht be a question, but a question which he (Lord eat t ,,, lt ell) should have decided in their favour : it was an th e „'" t dinary a c t of authority, but it was resorted to for the r t ZPose of maintaining the Protestant succession and t tota'" a rties of the country. But whether the Parlia g,testp.e°,4l4 or could not strictly lengthen its own ex do 1718 to 1721, there was not . the slightest d Itth t that it had full power to fix the period of R. u h - t Roo „ f or future Parliaments. Although the . Right Opi n i plover had not favoured the House with . his Pa t t• ° ° as to the precise number of years for which a s o Ikansent ought to last, lie (Lord John Russell) bad essitation in stating the grounds on which he 14, 8 , 4 that rather a long duration ought to be pre % `". By the constitution of this country, the House of 43 Wons held the public `purse in its bands, and, con eleotly, the power of giving supplies from it ; it had, l o a ,refor e , for a time, the whole power of the kingdom. o,‘ "oat p owe r ha d . the Crown, opposed to that? The n r"Wer of dissolution. If the Crown dissolved a House of Zonanions, one of precisely the same opinions as that dis ,'Zikktd might be returned by the people. When such was Of ease, there remained no further check, and the House Commons remained supreme. The people, ther e f ore , Y r e-electing the same or similar Members, enjoyed, in oi T fit, the supreme direction of the State. This enormous 001 4l r ou g ht to be met by some counterbalance on the pa rt 4eriot:am p, t he Crown. if Parliament were made of three yea r s' it would in fact be only of two years' dura and the Crown would thus be deprived of the power P il l ate elt th.°°'ing the time whewetsa dissolution should take and The dissolution must occur within short periods, Of th e r esult was not the consistent deliberate opinion ° tiler e Peopl e , which in this country, as in every aPpr o 'h,„ °° Aht to be supreme, but the chance of mis t2l -138100 , of error, of delusi, n, and the constitu fr'aps ' Iv " Placed in a state of jeopardy which, per tuilibw.°lll,l leav e it w ith ou t any poise to preserve its rnli n. That was the constitutional reason why the p ow er n ought to be able to counterba l ance t h e i mmense ° f the d emocracy, b y c h oos i ng th e time most con- I ter e -1/ f " a dissolution. If the duration of Parliament Nt, i m* ed at s even or even a t f o ur years, the Crown t ote ; still have that power of choosing ; but, reduce it Il e w Y e ars, and it was deprived of the power altogether. tour speaking in the sense in which every lover of the 14 e1; 41t ion ought t o s p ea k— e very man who wished to lad oh e , he Constitution i n Ki ng , L or d s , and Commons, and 4 ° did not d es i re that one should completely dtstroy the p e et wbehn th e o th ers . Th e Ki ng was a trustee for P e °Pl e LP ie ," - sthe House of Lords was a trustee for the 'etiti tti 7toe Hous e o f C o mmons was the immediate repre- Rave r ° of the people, and they ought to conduct the th e t o , e4let lt of the country in harmony together. It was unit • oe Olt of many years' consideration of the subject, and alter ott "Pinion, from which he had never varied, that the l ion o r ° to triennial Perliaments would be the total destruc tion f ue °lll " mixed C ons titution. With regard to a proposi leveo makin g the duration of Parliament five instead of t tot W ea l's, he admitt e d that there might be some, though ati t —e at, ad vantages in the change. H e spo k e o f i t as an enotil t rac t question —as if h e were a bout to frame a new a dvto t . lit '"; but h e doubted much whether any expected Pentr it l e to be d er i v ed from the change would corn alterael! f° , th e pos i t i ve di sa d van t age o f making the Ron. iw en * He could not omit to mention, that the r ailtep,: ernu er for Oldh a m, who quoted him, had entirely nuss e n7: 4 ted what he really said. He (Lord John Purnai,,Z i r ehenied he took his report from the . daily P„,„ l, licak• h he begged, whether in his speeches or in 11,s 434 erub er ie h -4 ' t hat whenever he quoted him or any other Words r eap Would take the pains first to ascertain the Pers ona r it ra q employed. Having the means of attending tt ater oe „ Y '. the Honourable Member need not adopt the ter 4 , B ' tBll l the daily journals, as if they were the exact dro o °t ett on the occasion. (The Noble Lord here ph e r_Ped his v o i ce, an d i n rather a conversat i ona l tone ex flaued the nature of the misrepresentation : the difference, e st . as we could co ll ec t it, was, th a t i n st e ad of saying et lai n measures were " essential," he had qualified it by ti t PTYing also the word "useful." He apprehended that i„ distinction had escaped those who had given his speech - the d'l • nals ) He had never been an advocate t o y Jour . ti r ,triennial Parliaments, and had always contended that . „ I° ,° an alteration would make the Members dependant 11 , - ; !Pon the settled opinion of the people: that settled O o i ° !°n he believed to be an en'ightened and a wise 0; 1 4 ,: ° , but otherwise, the votes and acts of the House ptel;onbe subject to the evils of misrepresentation, mis . ap • Wariti noon, and false colouring, and there were at no time S oeh ag those who were interested in misrepresentation. 1 0 ,, 0u a House o f C ommons cou ld not co-ex i st w i t h t h e tha t 11 ° 4. In the U n it e d St a t es , i n d ee d, it was p rov id e d Year; 7 0 P r ublio man should hold office for more than four uter i in a republic it was a principle to distrust public That t urn; told Was not the principle of the British Constitu he vim b o ,, a' be was bound to maintain that constitution, In ,„ ao say.,,to resist the change to triennial Parliaments. Nobl e be begged to add, in accordance with his 'Would ne _7) that as to an y p ro po s ition next year, he j Axt year di scuss i t. bad AIE S KENNEDY explained. The Noble Lord All ii l haec:ouuseidd him of having a dopt e d certain opinions lately. "Y in answer was, that ever since the Hon. ariletui2ned Member for Dublin brought forward his nedy) had tLot:t.edtbeina t d h d e re i s n s i t n o or t i k t) e .. T . hro . ne, he (Mr. J.Ken so i kons _ SHEL L could not help thinking that the com et 1,41,76 t of the speech of the Noble Lord was strangely e latin g al/ te With ' nig t h at its conclusion ; for he commenced by Wa s to the motion of the Right Hon. Gentleman by. beio°.'tiaelue for him to . grapple wi t h, and he concluded til ra . 6ut itself a s definre as man could be, by avowing I:;blthe stanch supporter of the Septennial Act. The 413 e Lord had told them that in his opinion short Par , s ti n k were incompatible with the monarchy. Now he overthrown— colieoei__Bl,.artsthe Noble Lord, with all his historical re it . woe ; a l h uon him, could not have forgotten that long Parliament that the monarchy was once (Loud cr ies tio arliaments being the de ' s ‘ tr il u i c e t a i r o? — of 11, ort p an th d e th c a o t, m a ti s tu n . ) d pasted, we had trienni a l P arl i aments from the year 1694. -Ga in to the year 1716, when the Septennial Act was -- -(Cheers.) Dur /Tiede to es'abhah a demo n c g racy all th at t i me no attempt was nation T hr i l oos which Throne, and coun t r y. Th e :re an a d bo h n a t d the no fa t m t i b ly e Whi Was to agitated succeed to thee Cubl the I need !re the that the d ventur g i a laugb)'. [ousel) to; There w light 0( lon. O imente. an retul slightest tendency to subvert the Throne itself.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord was also afraid of a dissolution during times of excitement, and wished elections to take place when the minds of the people were fixed and settled. Did not that argument come welt from the Noble Lord and his colleagues in the Ministry ? Had the Noble Lord so soon forgotten the tenure by which they held their places, and the measure by which the people obtained the Reform Bill ?—(Loud cheers.) Did the Noble Lord mean to say that, on questions of great public interest the in tervention of the people ought to be of no avail ? (Hear, htar.) If such were his meaning now, against the oratory of the Nolile Lord he would put the conduct of his administration—against his words he would array his deeds—(Cheers) —for if he (Mr. Sheil) recollected rightly, the Noble Lord was the same individual who had once deliberately declared it to be his opinion that the whisper of a faction must be unaviling agrint the voice of a nation.—(Gheerr.) He recollected also that the Noble Lord, on bringing forward the question of reform, had declared that he left the duration of Parliaments an open question—(Hear)—but surely if the Noble Lord could then consent to leave it as an open question be could not have considered it, as he now appeared to consider it, as a question filled with danger to the Constitution.—(Hear, hear.) The project of reform which the Noble Lord had introduced into Parliament waQ, in all its leading features, the same with that which Earl Grey had proposed in the year 1793, when he presented the petition from the " Friends of the People." That petition contained a clause praying that the duration of Parliaments might be abridged. The prayer of that petition, which was sanc tioned by Earl Grey, was upon the duration of Parlia ments as vague as the motion of Lis Right Hon. Friend. It did not ca :l either for triennial or quinquennial Parlia ments, and, in alluding to it, E irl Grey said, that he would not discuss the question of their duration ; for until the Parliament itself was reformed he cared not a straw about the length of its existence ; for an unreformed Parlia• went would only be sent back to the patricians who no minated it, and no advantage could be thrived from making them more frequently appoint their nominees. —(Hear.) The case was, however, widely different at present, and this Parliament, this reformed Parliament, would be sent back to a people who had a right to receive from its repre sentatives a large and frequent account of what they had done doting their stewardship.—(Hear, hear.) The re form which the Noble Lord had proposed was founded on theory, and unsustained by precedent ; the reform which his Right Hon. Friend new sought was not a mere theory, but was a system which was founded on the practice of the proudest period of our history, and was sanctioned by the best principles of the constitution.—(Cheers.) It rested upon the Bill of Rights, in which it was declared " that for redress of all grievances, and for the amending, strengthening, and preserving of the laws, Parliaments ought to be holden frequently."—(Cheers.) It rested also on the preamble of the 6th of William and Mary, in which it was recited that " ,frequent and new Parliaments encourage good will between the Sovereign and the people."—(Cheers.) The Noble Lord appeared to think that they would encourage the opposite effect ; in that opinion he contradicted his own illustrious ancestors—in that opinion he stood a strong antithesis to the great Lord Somers.—(Cheers.) Now, he would ask the House, was the declaration of the Bill of Rights, was the pream ble to the 6th of William and Mary true ? " No," says the Noble Lord, " the great men who effected the revolu tion of 1668 were all mistaken ; the Bill of Rights must be set aside, and the Triennial Bill must be considered as an error in legislation."—(Hear, hear.) They had heard, too, of the preamble to the Septennial Act—it recited, first, that elections were conducted with great expense ; next, that they were conducted with great heats and animosities ; and, last of all, it assigned the rebellion which had recently taken place ; and as a remedy for these inconveniences, the enactment of the Sep tennial Act followed. Now, would the Noble Lord deny that the last of these causes was the chief inducement for passing the Septennial Act ? It was alleged to be the case, as he had before stated in the preamble to the Act ; and in the debates upon it that point was fully admitted by the Duke of Devonshire, who introduced it in the House of Lords. Now, he would ask the Noble Lord whether there was now any rebellion in the country to justify the continuance of the Septennial Act ?—(Hear.) He thought that if the inquiries which had been institu ted during the present session were properly followed up, the great expense of elections would in future be dimi nished ; and as to the heats which elections generated, he thought that they were likely to operate more prejudi• cially upon the Members of a long Parliament than upon the Members of a short one; for if it were true that elections produced excitement among the people, then Parliament must also partake of that excitement, being the representative of the people. The feelings of the people, might, however, soon pass away; but the Mem ber of Parliament was likely to continue still a partisan. Hence a great evil might arise from the Parliament think ing one way whilst the people were thinking another ; and out of that another evil might arise greater than a contest between the people and the King—he meant a contest between the people and the Parliament.—(Cheers.) He therefore contended that if new and frequent Parlia ments were necessary to control the Ministers, new elec tions were necessary for the people to control the Parlia ments. He agreed with the ' , Wale Lord that the power of the House of Commons was now great, and that it had been doubled by the passing of the Reform Bill ; but did it follow that because it was great it was to be of long du ration? The Noble Lord said—"lts power is great, it must therefore last seven years." He (Mr. Slieil) said—" Its power is great, therefore let it be short-lived."—(Great cheering.) The Noble Lord said, " The trust is vast," and he (Mr. Shell) "Let the trustee, then, go the more frequently to the cestui que trust, and let him the more speedily pass his accounts."—(Cheers.) It had been said, " Let us give this Reformed Parliament a trial before we venture to prefer a charge on its constitution." He main tained that it had bad a trial, and that it had done enough to warrant a judgment. They were not to judge merely by the number of days it was in duration, but by the number and magnitude of its proceedings. If was a com mon observation, that men sere now better able to form an opinion on the merits of men and measures than they could have been formerly in a much longer space of time, so rapid and crowded was the course of events—so multi plied the number of experiences which enabled them to arrive at a sound conclusion. Let them judge that House by this test—what had they done this session ? Had they not run through the whole cyclopmdia of legislation, be ginning with their Coercion Bill, and their East and West India Bills, and their Bank Charter, and their Church Bill, and their Local Courts Bill, not to say anything of their other important measures, each of which would have hitherto occupied the attention of Parliament one session? Were not these legislative achievements in themselves enough to warrant their going before their constituents to obtain their verdict on their usefulness? In fact, their whole career was one of portentous velocity—a kind of 30-statute speed on a rail-road of legislation ; and was it not right that the people who enabled them to thus out strip their predecessors in haste, if not in usefulness, should be also permitted to avail themselves of the improved ma chinery of time and economy ? He called, therefore, upon the House to do its duty to the country by adopting the present motion. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman sat down amid loud cheery. Lord HOWICK expected nothing but embarrassment in discussing so intricate a subject. The question was one of fearful importance—(A laugh)—but he thought the objections were not of consequence. Mr. EWING observed that there was a sort of restless and irritable feeling in the public mind which prevented the deliberate consideration of the subject at the present moment. General PALMER said that no Member of the House could feel more strongly, or acknowledge with more sin cerity, than himself, the obligation of the country to his Majesty's Ministers, for their great measure of reform. But it was obvious, at the time the struggle fur that mea sure was going on, that the true essence and real value of it was the recognition that reform was not revolution; that it was within the Constitution; that time could not sanctify wrong ; and that it was consistent with the powers of the Legislature to rectify abuse, and restore the right, although the right had been long lost sight of. It was this healing and saving principle in the Constitution that made the Reform Bill valuable; that °trained for it many of its supporters in that House, and the general voice of the people without. It was, nevertheless, seen that the details of the Bill were far from being perfect, acd putting its opponents out of the question, it had not sa tisfied its friends ; being considered by some too demo cratic, and by others too aristocratic, and there was still the same honest diffetence of opinion. It was, there fore, clear, that the measure was defective, and, to speak the truth, it was a mass of expedients, uncon fleeted in themselves and u nsupported by any gener-1 principle. The true principle on which representation ought to be founded, and which, as he had stated on the Reform Bill, must eventually be adopted, was contribu tion ; for without repeating his arguments, he must repeat his assertion, that every contributor to the taxes, how• ever humble his station, ought to have a vote in the elec tion of the person intrusted with the serious and impor tant duty of imposing burdens on his fellow -subjects; and not only should he have a vote, but be enabled to give that vote according to the dictates of his own understand ing, uninfluenced by favour, and unassailed by corruption. To effect that object he had voted for the ballot, although in justice to its opponents he admitted the honest preju. dices of real reformers against it, and that the majority of its friends considered the ballot an evil only to be re sorted to as the remedy fur a greater evil, but for which it was not the true remedy. The true remedy for the evil, which, in his humble opinion, could Got wait for the ballot and triennial Parliaments to cure it, was a total change in the system of taxation—by the repeal of all taxes affecting all articles used or consumed by the productive industry of the country, and substituting in their place a tax on pro. perty alone—for in this case property alone would be entitled to a vote in the elections of Members to that House, and industry being thus relieved from the burdens that oppressed l►e , would no longer seek to interfere in them ; but so long as that House persisted, and most unwisely, as he thought, in the pre sent system of revenue, the voice of industry must be heard, and heard she would and ought to be, uninfluenced by favour, and undeterred by fear. For these reasons, and to compel the Government to a property tax, which, in relieving the labouring classes from taxation, would be the only honest means of preventing universal suffrage, he had voted for the ballot, and must now vote for the present question; but holding as he did in his hand, and he keyed it to be in the hands of every Hon. Member, a recent publication of Mr. Heathfield's, whose previous works on the subject had fully convinced his mind that it was not only just, practicable, and easy to relieve the nation from the burden of the public debt without de stroying any of the great interests of the country, but that property of every description, by the adoption of Mr. Heathfield's plan, would be greatly benefited, and indus try entirely relieved, be most humbly, but earnestly, appealed to the aristocracy, comprising the great majority in that House, who, notwithstanding all the fears and predictions of the consequences of the Reform Bill by its opponents in the late Parliament, were still the repre sentatives of the people, that, in justice to their mutual interests—which hung upon each other, and must stand or fall together—they would read Mr. Heathfield's publication ; which, in his humble judgment, contained more truth and information as to the real cause and only remedy fur the evils of the country than all that bad yet been said upon the subject ; and to which he entreated the attention of every Hon. Member, in the firm belief that, under all the circumstances of the country at the present moment, arising out of the long want of reform in Parliament and the reform that was come at last, nothing short of the adoption of Mr. Heathfield's plan could save the Constitution. Adverting to the cir cumstances which had caused the present Government to decline in popularity, he (General Palmer) observed that nothing had been so unfortunate as the appointment of a Right Hon. Baronet to the situation of Secretary at War. Accustomed to that Right Hon. Baronet's ultra-radical speeches, the people naturally expected extensive measures of reform from his Majesty's Government after the Right Hon. Boronet had joined them. But what was the result? The Right Hon. Baronet, on taking office, forgot not only his own principles, but even those of the Whigs ; and in the case of the Bath election—(Hear, and a laugh). In justice to himself, he begged shortly to state the circum stances of that election. Mr. Secretary STANLEY spoke to order. When his Right Hon. Friend the late Secretary at War was in that House, and when notice was given of a motion respecting an alleged unconstitutional interference in the election at Bath, his Right Hon. Friend declared himself ready to meet any charge which might be brought on that sub ject. An Hon. Gentleman opposite, who had presented a petition complaining of the circumstances, was, he (Mr. Stanley) believed, satisfied that there was no foundation for the charge; end after his Right Hob. Friend had de clared his readiness to meet the charge, it was withdrawn. Under these circumstances, he put it to the Gallant Gene ral, whether his Right Hun. Friend, not being now in the House, and the subject of the Bath election being quite irrelevant to the question under discussion, it would not be more in conformity with what he was sure would be the Gallant General's deliberate determination on such a subject, not to proceed.—(Hear.) General PALMER, after what had fallen from the Right Hon. Gentleman, certainly would not proceed, although, if he were to go on, he thought he could show that the case in question was one so irrelevant to the subject under discussion as the Right Hon. Gentleman supposed. There was another very important question on which he wished to say a few words; he alluded to the measure respecting the Irish Church.—(No, No.) Mr. ROBINSON observed that the Noble Lord objected to vote, on the ground that he did not feel called upon at present to give an opinion on the subject, but that he might do so hereafter. Now, he begged to ask the Noble Lord, if the motion were rejected that night, whether the rejection would not have a most baneful effect, with respect to his Majesty's Government, on the constitution of another Parliament The Noble Paymaster of the Eaters opposed the motion on another ground. That Noble Lord opposed it on the ground that its adoption would be tan tamount to a subversion of the constitution. He (Mr. Robinson) had never heard a speech in . that House, so contrary to all the previously expressed opinions of the speaker, as the speech that night delivered by the Noble Paymaster of the Forces. Did the Noble Lord recollect, that when it was urged by the enemies of the reform measure that it was an innovation on the constitution, he and his colleagues had maintained that it was a restora tion of the constitution, and not an innovation upon it? So it was with respect to triennial Parliaments. Their adoption would be a restoration of the constitu tion, and not an innovation upon it. All that the Hon. Mover of the proposition contended for was, that the House should pronounce an opinion that septennial Par liaments were too long ; leaving the question of the pre ferable duration to be afterwards determined. In the present state of the country, when he believed that there was no set of men prepared to take the reins of Govern ment if his Majesty's present Ministers were to quit office, he was sorry to see them pursue a course of conduct which, coupled with the declaration made by the Noble Paymaster of the Forces, he was sure would greatly depre ciate them in the eyes of the country. He had not heard a single sound objection to shortening the duration of Par liament.. As to the term to which they ought to be limited, he was for making it three years, because that was a restoration of the Constitution, and, therefore, less liable perhaps to objection than any other term. But let not the House, let not his Majesty's Ministers deceive themselves. The opinion of the country on the proceed ing.; of that night would be, not that the question was whether Parliaments should be triennial or of any other diminished length, but that the course pursued by th e Noble Lord, coupled with the speech of the Noble Pay master of the Forces, was a declaration by his Majesty's Government in favour of Septennial Parliaments. Lord JOHN RUSSELL explained. Ile did not be lieve that he had ever used the words " tantamount to the subversion of the constitution." What he had said was, that if triennial Parliaments were established by law, they would, in his opinion, be found incompatible with the maintenance of our mixed constitution. He had made n 9 declaration is favour of septennial Parliienents. His opinion upon the abstract question was, that five would be a better term than seven ; but as by the present law the duration of Parliament was seven years, and as there did not appear to be any great wish to diminish the term to five, or any great benefit to be expected from such a step, lie saw no reason for making the change. Mr. GASKELL contended that it was a matter of in difference at the present moment, whether, at the time the Septennial Act was passed, it, was a justifiable measure. No doubt they were better judges of the question at that time than the people of the present day could be. The question was, whether the Septennial Act worked well now ? The Hon. Mover and his friends had made out no case that it did not do so. As to some of the evils com plained of in the present constitution of Parliament, he feared they were out of the reach of legislative enactment ; but whatever those evils might be, he believed they would be increa-ed, to a tenfold degree, in triennial Parliaments. The House would do well, therefore, to pause before they touched a system which combided what could be WM bined of good, and excluded what could be excluded of evil. It was especially expedient to pause at a moment like the present, when there were so many omens of the consequences to be apprehended from great and precipitate change*. If such measures as that now proposed were to he pressed upon them, be trusted to God they would be met by firmness and wisdom. They had surely hail enough of encroachment on the constitution ; and if they surrendered the Septennial Act, they would abandon the only remaining barrier against the uncontrolled fists of democracy. Col. EVANS entered into a compari-on of the measures pursued by triennial, and the meatuses put sued by septen nial Parliaments, and maintained that the former had b , en much more advantageous to the country. The arguments of the Noble Paymaster of the Forces were as much in fa your of Parliaments for ten or twenty years as for septen nial Parliaments. And yet that Noble Lord had staol he should feel less difficulty in acceding to the proposition of the Hon. Member for Oldhatn, for annual Par.iarnents , than in according to the proposition of his Hun. Friend. Mr. lIAWKINS expresse d hi s sur prise at the declara tion.of.the N o bl e L or d, t h a t it w o uld be better to postpon e the decision of the question until the next session ; and maintained that the present was the moment at wh ich it ought to be d e t erm i ne d. He entirely dissented fro m the opinions of the Noble Paymaster of the Forces; for he thought that the carrying of the Reform But had rendered the present proposition more than ever necessary. Hon. Members complained of the practice of requiring pledger. What measure could be more likely to increase the demand for pledges than the continuance of septennial Parliaments? If constituents had little confidence in their representatives, what measure could he more likely to increase that confidence than to shorten the duration of Parliaments? One word re specting the term to which it was advisable the du ration of a Parliament should be restricted. He would say at once, three years. He was an advocate for tri ennial Parliaments, not because they were formerly in conformity to the law, but because he thought, that, upon the whole, they would be the most bene ficial for the public.—(Hear, hear.) Four years might, perhaps, not he too long ; and, on the other hand, in the present state of public opinion, he should entertain no apprehensions if the terns were limited to two years; nay, he should not dread a revolution even if it were limited to one year. But on a view of all the circumstances of the case, he thought the term of three years was the best that could be adopted. He was indeed surprised at the arguments that short Parliaments were inimical to the true interests of the kingdom, when the great stalking horse of those who opposed them was, that we had them practically already.—(Cheers.) Supposing, for argument sake, that a Parliament never sat for more than three years, would the result be the same as if it sat by law during that period ? It would be totally different. They would, at least, lose the advantage which might otherwise be counted, of superseding the necessity of pledges.—(Hear, hear.) There would be another dif ference. Under the present system, the Crown always appeared against the people. The time for a dissolution was never chosen so as to favour the people, but so as to be convenient and agreeable to the Crown.—(Hear.) Whenever Ministers thought they bad got the people at a disadvantage, then came a dissolution.—(Hear, hear.) When, he would ask, was the Parliament ever dissolved because it suited the convenience of the people ?--(Cheers.) He should certainly give the motion his support, as being, next to the parent, the most urgent of all reforms that could be brought under the consideration of that House. --(Cheers.) Lord SANDON considered that the supporters of the motion were bound to show some particular reason for viewing, at the present time, with greater jealousy the conduct of that House. Was it when a greater weight had been given to the popular feeling, that such an in creased jealousy and distrust was to be indulged in?— (Cheers.) According to his view, they would better discharge their parts as wise men, in seeing the effect of the great change they had already effected, than in pro posing fresh alterations. What was it that had brought that House into so much discredit with the country ? Simply, that they wasted their time—(Cheers) —exerted their energies to no good end. —(Hear, hear.) Instead of attending to practical legislation—(Hear, hear)—they bad squandered hours on hours in debating about abstract principles.—(Loud cheers.) He had told his constituents on the busting!, that after adjusting the machine they should note its operations, and not try new experiments on its construction.—(Hear, hear.) He had promised them not to embark in new experiments, but attend honestly and sincerely to the consideration of great prac tical questions, and the promotion of great practical im provements and that promise he would not depart from.---(Cheers.) Dr. LUSHINGTON said, that the first two or three years of its existence, every Pat liament furnished instances of the greatest and most degrading corruption ; and, by way of demonstrating the baseness of its Members, he would only ask the House to look at their conduct during the period he referred to, and see how, in the latter part of the session the very slaves of Ministets could turn them selves into givers of notices for constitutional reforms, and for a time desert the Treasury benches. To put the present question in a right point of view, he would ask if anyl man would, without chick, and without control, confide, even to the chosen friend of his bosom, the com fort, respectability, and substance of his fiddly for such a period as seven years?—(Hear, hear.) If, then, they would not do it in private life, why should they be re quired to do it in public, where so many interests were wrapped up? He could not deny the awkwardness of the time at which the motion was brought forward ; .but lie had at least the choice of two evils, and he should select the lesser by voting with the Right Hon. Member for Lambeth, because be believed his proposition had the sanction of all past experience. He cared not what they called it, either in theory or in practice; but what he should ever maintain was, that the people of this country were entitled to the blessings and protection of the best constitution which human wisdom could devise.—(Hear.) Mr. STANLEY said, that he thought it indisputable that Members should be guarded, not indeed against the settled convictions and opinions of their constituents, but against prejudices and excitement which might possibly exist in their minds at the times of the short dissolutions of Parliament. He, therefore, opposed this motion, and in doing so he could nut bat observe upon the science and skill which had been displayed by the Right Hun. Mover, in having so exactly suited the terms of it to what he might anticipate would hit the temper of his constituents. —(Hear.) And he gave the Hon. Gentleman full credit for higher views in moving it, than the mere desire to gain popular applause.—(Hear.) He (Mr. Stanley) did not know whether his Right Hun. Friend was one of those who anticipated a spetdy dissolution, hut his motion was at least one which was likely to facililate his own affairs with his constituents.—(A laugh.) But to come to the question now under discussion, he thought, looking at the great experiments already made upon the constitu tion by the recent introduction of reform, forced upon the Legislature by the position of public affairs, that if the measure now proposed was one which would have the effect of adding another to those great experiments with a view to the same results, he should then have sup ported this motion. He had, however, stated on the hust ings to his constituents, that the measure of reform then on foot was one extended in its objects, because it was then looked upon as a final measure, and not with a view to the after introduction of the ballot and triennial Parliaments ; and he then stated what was, as he believed, his unalterable opi nion. Much had been said by the advocates of the proposed measure as to its being one which was universally desired by the people, but he did not see that they were called upon to infer that the question was one on which the public mind was alive. On the mere low ground of gaining the applause of the people he did not see in what way this change was desirable or desired. Look at the number of petitions presented on this subject, and compare them with those presented on any of the great ques tions, and the relative importance to the public of the present subject would immediately be seen. On the subject of slavery the number of signatures to petitions (the Right Hon. Gentle man did not know the number of the petitions) was 1,400,000, while the number of petitions in favour of triennial Parlia ments was, up to the 16th of July, only 19. On the ground of popularity, therefore, what was there to show that this ques tion was one which was looked upon as important ? There were, however, other grounds on which the measure might be urged or disputed, apart from that of its popularity with the nation, for this last was one which could not with propriety be entertained, as it allowed the power of the Legislature to be monopolized by one branch of the State. The real question before them was, whether at the present time it was necessary for the interests of the State that the proceedings of the Mem bers of this branch of the Legislature should be placed under the more immediate control of the people— whether at this time the people were so weak and the Crown so overbearing and powerful that it became expedient to throw an additions: weight into the scale to restore the balance to the C: - .ustitution ?—(Hear.) He (Mr. S.) thought that that Constitution had been so much and so materially affected by the measure of the last session that it would be better for them to wait and see its workings before they allowed so material an additional alteration—before they threw this other weight into the scale in addition to the present inequality. The Right Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to observe upon the arguments which had been adduced as to the specific duration of the Par. I unents, as well as to individual observations on the general question. The Hon. Member for Tipperary had actually urged it as an argument ill favour of short Parliaments, that the one which effected the destruction of the monarchy two centuries back was, in fact, a long Parliament,—that it was a long Parliament and not a short one which then opposed the Crown. He was surprised that any Hon. Member, conversant with the history of his country, could have fallen into the error of ad vancing such an argument—such a positive quibble in words— as the one which the Hon. Member had there adduced. With respect to the observations made by his Hon. Friend (Mr. Ten. nyson, as we understood) they appeared to him (Mr. S.) to apply as well to annual as to triennial Parliaments. He also had said t hat the Representatives, as trustees, ought to come up and give an account of their stewardship to their constituents as frequently as the measure now proposed would oblige them to do, but he (Mr. Stanley) maintained that it was an essential part of the constitution that those trustees should be trusted to act according to their judgment and to the dictates of their conscience. His Hon. and Learned Friend (Dr. Lushington) had said that it was not improbable that the reformed Parlia ment might follow the example of their predecessors, and leave the House with empty benches, neglecting the public duty until just that time when they feared to do so any longer ; but he (Mr.. ei.e Stanley) aetuall rather thought that his Hon. and Learned Friend could not complain either of the want of attendance of this Parliament or of the quantity of business on their hands —(A laugh) —when it appeared that for the present day there before them y ; were 26 notices of the motions for discussion, and that there disposed of Learned by the House.—(Hear, hear.) Nor did he think 56 Bills on different subjects to be settled, and that there had been any Parliament who had paid more atten tion to the arguments brought forward upon the questions Erien a d t le c a o s u t li h t e c cl o i m d p n la o i t n. s — up ( p A ose lau t g h i lt .) his ln H f o a n c . t, ai h ni e (Mr. Stanley) would rather be inclined to say that the public business had, on the whole, been impeded by the too great quart. tity brought before the House, and he did not think that this part of the argument for the measure supported the supposi tion that Members ought to be sent sooner to their constituents, as though they neglected their duty.—;Hear.) The Right Hon. Secretary then proceeded to remark upon the observations of the Hon. Member for Tipperary. The Hon. Member bad quoted the preamble to the Septennial Act, but had omitted to include that part which said that the cause of the passing of the Act was the excitements caused by the frequent elections under the old system. He strongly urged that the House should wait the result of the operation of the Reform Bill, to see whether the people had or had not sufficient control over their Repre sentatives, before they consented to the proposed measure. The real question was one of principle, and not one of as to how many years the duration was to be limited, for, as the Hon. Member for Oldham had said, whether that number were fixed at three, or at four, or at five, the arguments as to the principle would be the same, and the same arguments which would pro cure the first limitation would apply to each succeeding, short ening with the addition of arguments of degree. In conclu sion, he felt himself bound to support this amendment. He did not mean to say that he thought seven the best number to which to limit the duration ; and although he would have voted altogether against the motion, yet he thought his Noble Friend had exercised a sound judgment in moving the previous question. He repeated, that he did not think that the number seven was the best, and it would, therefore, be in the same proportion that he opposed this motioa that he would support the amendment. Mr. O'CONNELL supported the motion. Major BEAUCLERK said that the present Parliament had greatly disappointed the wishes of the people. They had passed a severe coercive measure against the people of Ireland, but they had omitted to retrench expenses, or to remove the pres sure of taxation. It was necessary, therefore, to have trien nial Parliaments, in order to have an effectual check by the people on their representatives. In as far as that might be the result of the present motion, it had his cordial support. He had never heard any debate where all the argument and all the eloquence were so completely on one side of the question. In fact, there had been nothing which could call for a reply been said against the motion. It proved that a bad cause could not command a convincing advocate. This was peculiarly shown in the speech of the Right Hon. the Secretary for the Colonies, who had made decidedly the worst speech that he had heard for a long time. Indeed the Right Hon. Gentleman must be convinced himself that his speech was a dead failure. He (Major Beauclerk) really pitied the Right Hon. Gentleman, for throughout the whole of his speech he scarcely got one cheer, except from an Hon. Member who sat near him. He hoped that this would be a warning to the Right Hon. Gentle-. man, and bring him back to a right course.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) The motion was one which greatly interested the people, and he was sure they would at length have their rights. Mr. GISBORNE said that he came down to that House with the intention of opposing the motion of the Right Hon. Gen. tleman, but he owned that he had been almost talked out of that intention by the speeches that had been delivered in sup port of it, and also by the sentiments of some of those who opposed it. If, however, he should oppose the motion, it was not from any concurrence in those high-flown monarchical principles which had been urged against it, but from his con viction that its rejection (as we understood) would be for the good of the people and the convenience of the House.—(Hear.) Sir R. FERGUSON stated that, in voting in favour of the Right Hon. Gentleman's motion, he should do so from a prin ciple of consistency, and not from a belief that it could in this session be attended with any practical result. He looked upon it as brought forward for the sake of a popularity which he had no doubt would be ephemeral. Mr. TENNYSON, in reply, disclaimed any desire to gain popularity by this motion. The objection, however, came badly from those who made it, for it was an admission that the question was a popular one with the nation. It was objected that his motion was vague, in not stating the term to which he intended the duration of Parliament should be limited. He had made it so for the purpose of avoid ing the objections of some who might agree as to the principle that the duration of Parliaments ought to be shortened, but who might feel themselves justified in op posing his motion on account of the term he might have fixed. He had fairly stated his own opinion, that a recur rence to triennial Parliaments would be best for the country, but he was anxious to hear the sentiments of the representa tives of the people before he fixed any particular period. In this he differed widely from the course pursued by the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stanley), who had not waited to hear the sentiments of the people or their representatives, but had beforehand pledged himself—(and yet the Right Hon. Gentle man ridiculed the notion of pledges)—and not himself, but all his colleagues.—(Cries of " Where ?") He had before him a published report of one of the Right Hon. Gentleman's speeches to his constituents in Cheshire, and if there was any thing in that report which did not fairly represent what he said, the Right Hon. Gentleman had now an opportunity of skisavowing it, and of setting himself right for the speech had gone forth to the world.—(Cries of " Read, read.") Tile Right Honourable Gontleman here read the passage, which was to the effect, that if any Member should bring for ward any mot ion for diminishing the duration of Parliament, or of extending the franchise beyond the terms of the Reform Bill, or for vote by ballot, they (the Ministers) stood pledged, as individuals and as members of Go vernment, to give a decided opposition—(Cheers)—and the Right Hon. Gentleman talked of Members being pledged What was this but a solemn pledge—and a pledge, too, not to attend to what might be the opinions of the people on this sub. ject ? What did the Right Hon. Gentleman mean by object ing to pledges? He (Mr. Tennyson) had never given any pledge, and he was not the less confidently trusted by his con stituents, and was not the less opposed to some of the Right Hon. Gentleman's principles, for he believed that the more lie differed from those principles the better he should stand with the public. The Right Hon. Gentleman then said, that as many Members had come in who had not heard the commence ment of the discussion, he wished for their information to state the terms of his motion. It was simply for leave to bring in a Bill to shorten the duration of Parliaments, leaving it to future discussion to decide the term to which they should be shorter.iti. All that his motion would pledge Hon. Members to, would be an assent to the principle that it was expedient that the dura tion of Parliaments should be shortened. In conclusion, the Right Hon. Gentleman disclaimed any personal feeling agains the Right Hon. Secretary for the Colonies. The gallery was then cleared, and the House divided, whet there appeared— For the motion Against it 164 213 Majority On our return to the gallery we found The SPEAKER calling over the list of those whose mo tions stood for that day, several of whom did not appear. The China Trade Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Friday next. The Stage Carriage Act Amendment Bill went through Committee.—Report ordered to be received to-morrow. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at half-past one. FROM THE LONDON GAZETTE. OFFICE OF ORDNANCE, JULY 19. Royal Regiment of Artillery—Second Captain H. Pester to be Adjutant, vice Saunders, who resigns the Adjutancy only. Dec. 28, 1832. Second Lieut. C. Cheetham to be First Lieutenant, vice Mallock, resigned, July 16. WHITEHALL, JuLy 18. The Lord Chancellor has appointed Thomas Conway Robins, or' Wells, in the county of Somerset, Gent., to be a Master Ex traordinary in the High Court of Chancery. JULY 22.—The Lord Chancellor also has appointed William Leach Buckley, of Ashton-under-Lyne, in the county of Lan caster, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. Commission Ly the Lord Lieutenant of the North Riding o: the County of York, H. Van Straubenzee, Esq., to be Deputy-Lieutenant, July 12. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Durham. Durham Militia—G. Allan, Gent., to be Lieutenant, July 12 Commissions by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Somerset. Taunton Corps of Yeomanry Cavalry—J. Bunter, Esq., to be Captain ; P. H. Rodher, Gent., to be Lieutenant, June 29. Commissions by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Wor. cester. T. E. Winnington, Esq., to be Deputy-Lieutenant, July 9.0. Worcestershire Yeomanry Cavalry. J. H. Galton, Gent., to be Lieutenant, vice Cutler, resigned ; R. Hemming, Gent., to be ditto, vice llolyoake, promoted J. Simcox, Gent., to be Ensign, vice Molliott, resigned ; G Sheward, Gent., to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice Stephenson, dc• ceased, July BANKRUPTCY SUPERSEDED. WILLIAM and JOHN TERRY, hardwaremen, Bath BANKRUPTS. JARED TERRETT HUNT, bone-merchant, Princes. street, Lambeth, July 27, at one, and Sept. 3, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Bugby, Leather-lane. JOHN HART, tailor, Liverpool, Aug. 10 and Sept. 3, at twelve, at the Clarendon-rooms, Liverpool. Adlington, Gre gory, and Faulkner, London; Frodsham, Liverpool. GEORGE EDWARD CLARK, linen-draper, Bath, July 27 and Sept. 3, at ten, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Parker, St. Paul's Church-yard. FREDERICK POUT, attorney-at.law, Surrey-street, Strand, July 'X, at one, and Aug. 30, at twelve, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Constable and Kirk, Symond's Inn. WILLIAM BROWN, cattle-dealer, Wilmington, Kent, Aug. 3, at twelve, and Sept. 3, at eleven, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Kirkman and Rutherford, Cannon-street, London. HENRY LEGH, butcher, Shrewsbury, Aug. 5 and Sept. 3, at eleven, at the Temporary Shire Hall, Shrewsbury. Black. stock and Bunce, Sergeant's Inn, London; Watson, Shrews bury. _ _ _ JOSEPH BRECKNELL, miler, Blackbrook-park, Mon. mouthshire, July 31 and Sept. 3, at eleven, at the Crown Inn, Worcester. White and Whitmore, Bedford-row, London ; Houldsworth and Finch, Worcester. HENRY HALL, grocer, Doncaster, Yorkshire, July 9.9 and Sept. 3, at twelve, at the Guildhall, Doncaster. Rodgers, Devonshire-square, London; Rodgers and Son, Sheffield. JOHN JONES and GRIFFITH JONES, cattle-dealers. Tywyn, Llandegwning, Carnarvonshire, Aug. 2, at the White Hall, Pwllheli, Carnarvonshire. Williams, Pwllheli; Hyde, Ely-place, London. DIVIDENDS. W. Perachon, baker, Whitechapel-road, Sept. 5, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy—J. Biddle, oilman, London-road, Aug. 15, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy—J. Woo liar, grocer, Newbury, Aug. 15, at ten, at the Court of Bankruptcy --J. Forbes, wine -merchant, Mark-lane, Aug. 15, at half.pas t twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy—R. Reed, merchant, Lothbury, Aug. 14, at ten, at the Court of Bankrupts y—J. Ni. chols and T. Walker, ironmongers, Skinner street, Aug. 14, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy—J. Vize, stationer, Craw. tord.street, Bryanston-square, Aug. 4, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy—E. W. Falk, chocolate-manufacturer, Vine street, Minories, Aug. 14, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy .—T. S. Barnes, warehouseman, Cheapside, Aug. 14, at two, at the Court of Bankruptcy—J. Bumpus, bookseller, Aug. 15, at ten, at the Court of Bankruptcy—G. Swire, bookseller, Norfolk-street, Strand, Aug. 13, at one, at the Court of Bank. ruptcy—J. Walton and Co., factors, Bread-street, Cheapside, Aug. 13, at two, at the Court of Bankruptcy—J. Wilday, hotel.keeper, Birmingham, Aug. 16, at four, at Radenhurst's Royal Hotel, Birmingham—B. Marshall, Woollen-manufac turer, Selbridge Abbey, Kildare, Ireland, Aug. 14, at two, at the Clarendon rooms, Liverpool—J. Singleton, chymist, Rugeley, Staffordshire, Aug. 20, at three, at the Talbot Inn, Rugeley— It. F. Hindle, innkeeper, Boroughbridge, Yorkshire, Aug. 15, at twelve, at the Greyhound Hotel, Boroughbridge—J. Hollingsworth, printer, Southsea, Hampshire, Aug. 15, at one, at the Fountain Inn, Portsmouth—C. Keet, grocer, Ryde, Isle of Wight, Aug. 15, at ore, at the Fountain Inn, Portsmouth— W. Earle, victualler, Birmingham, Aug. 16, at twelve, at Ra denhurst's New Royas Hotel, Birmingham—J. and R. J. Matchitt, grocers, Derby, Aug. 14, at twelve, at the Bell Inn, Derby—C. R. Butter, apothecary, Bruton, Somersetshire, Aug. 19, at one, at the Blue Ball Inn, Bruton—J. Baker and W. Harper, calico printers, Over Darwen, Lancashire, Aug 27, at eleven, at the Star Inn, Manchester—J. Baker, calico printer, Over Darwen, Lancashire, Aug. 2i, at eleven, at the Star Inn, Manchester—NV. Harper, calico-printer, Manches ter, Aug. 26, at eleven, at the Star Inn, Manchester. CERTIFICATES—Auc. IS. J. Baker and W. Harper, calico-printers, Over Darwen, Lancashire—G. Frasi, sen., engineer, Goswell-street, Clerken. well—lt. B. Sidford, baker, Wilton, Wiltshire—F. Hoad and J. Wadey, bricklayers, Prospect-place, St. George's-fields—S. Almosnino, feather-dealer, Bevis Marks—A. Mellor, clothier, Blackmoor, Yorkshire. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. T. Betts and Co., carriers, London—W. Atkinson and Co., dyers, Cheethem Vale, Lancashire—F. Hutchison and W. Lush, Epsom salts manufacturers, Felling, Durham—J. Mul holland and C. H. Turner, Liverpool—H. Kenway, jun., and P. Kenway, jun , porter dealers, Birmingham—H. J. Dover and W. J. Lawrence, attorneys, South-square, Gray's Inn—J. Wright and W. Lindley, iron.dealers, Sheffield—R. Bennett and R. Newman, mercers, Worcester—J. and G. Proctor, snuff manufacturers, Fleet.street—J. Webster and E. M. Crockett, joiners, Manchester—B. Blackford and W. Hicks, saddlers, Gloucester—J. B. Plowman and E. N. Wells, grocers, Wells, Somersetshire—W. Dobson and Co., horn combmakers—l'. Gibson and J. Stutter, butchers, Portman-market. MARKET INTELLIGENCE. LONDON MARKETS. (From the " London New Price Current" of yesterday.) SUGAR.—The demand for Muscovades last week was ge neral and extensive; the estimated purchases were above 4,000 hhds. and trs., and the prices were Is. per cwt. higher; the brown descriptions were particularly inquired after, and few parcels offered under Ms. This day at public sale 135 hhds, of new Barbadoes Sugar were taken off freely at about Is. ad vance, low middling yellow 555., and fine yellow realized 595. Gd. per cwt. ; the Sugar Market is brisk and considerable business has been done; the total sales this day are estimated at 1,000 hhds. and trs. The stock of West India Sugar is now 36,495 hhds. and trs., being 6,305 more than last year. The stock of Mauritius 126,256 bags, being 69,349 more than last year. The delivery of West India is 2,930 hhds. and trs., being 490 less than last year. The delivery of Mauritius is 5,90 S bags, being 2,943 less than the corresponding week of 1K12.. lit the Refined Market there was great firmness last week, rather large purchases of fine Crashed were reported at 31s. 6d., the holders now demand .325. and 325. 6d. ; there are also renewed inquiries for low Lumps, but there are very few on sale, the Grocers also purchased middling and fine goods more freely for the home consumption, and generally the Market pricei were higher, with an improving demand. This day the quan tity of Refined Sugar at Market is very small; prices remain firm. MAURITIUS SUGAR.—The sales of Mauritius last week were confined to about 1,000 bags, the whole sold with brisk ness Is. per cwt. higher. EAST INDIA SUGAR.—East India Sugars are generally 6d. to ls. per cwt. higher, Bengals have been sold at the advance of Is., Siam at the improvement of 6d. to Is. Fer cwt. To-day there have been more inquiries for Bengal. FOREIGN SUGAR—There have been extensive transac. tions in Foreign Sugar, the sales are chiefly in cargoes afloat (on the coast), one cargo deliverable in London 325., the buyer paying all the charges, another cargo at the same rate; parcels of yellow 255. 6d., deliverable at Antwerp ; brown Bahias at 205., white at 255. ; white Pernams 255. a 255. 6d., establishing a rise in price of 6d. a Is. per cwt. All Foreign Sugars con tinue to-day in great demand, particularly yellow Ilavannali, for which higher prices are asked, and but few parcels offering MOLASSES.—MoIasses have been in general request at an advancing currency. REFINERIES USING FOREIGN SUGAR.—This ques tion is still pressed upon the English Ministers, and the Re- fillers flatter themselves the case is so universally approved of that they will succeed in obtaining the consent of Parliament to the measure, even in the present session. Average price of Sugar 11. Ss. 1 %d. per cwt. COFFEE.—The transactions in Foreign and East India Coffee last week amounted to nearly 5,000 bags, all at advanc ing prices. The chief sales were in Brazil at 5Ss. a 60s. for good ord., and fine ord. at 635. ; St. Domingo at 625., and after wards 645. was paid for good ord. ; Havannah, good ord. 645, a 055., fine fine ord. 675.. a 705., low good ord. 60s. ; parcels of Ceylon tits. 6d. a 645., fine green 675. ; good ord. Sumatra 555. rid. The British Plantation descriptions sold at full market prices, good to fine ord. Jamaica 935. a 98s. This day Coffee coati. nues very firm, higher prices are asked, except for Sumatra, but have not been complied with; of this description some parcels have changed hands at 6d. to Is. advance. COCOA.—There continues to be a good demand for Cocoa, particularly for British Plantation for the home consumption ; mid. sold at 655. a 68. ; fine, 70s. - a 7.25., which is an advance of 25.; Brazil firm at 255, and 255. 6d. RUM, BRANDY, AND HOLLANDS.—The sales of Ruin were not extensive, but the late advance in prices has been fully maintained ; proof Leewards nominally is. 11 a 2s. ; Dominica, fine flavour, 9 over, sold at 2s. 2d. Brandy is dull, on account of a small decline in prices in France. In Geneva there is no alteration. This day some large parcels of Lee wards Rum, 5 to 6 over proof, have been done at 2s. Id. TA LLO W.—The Tallow Market is very steady. SILK. —The Silk Market is steady, good and fine still main tain their prices. TURPENTINE.-1,500 barrels new in this week, taken by a drawer at 12s. Spirits have declined Is., are of heavy sale. OlLS.—Oils stationary in price, and a fair demand, except for Rape Oil, which is a shade lower. In Linseed some sales of fine Seed have been made at 48s. per quarter, and some new Rapeseed at 241. per last. TEA.—The Market is steady. Boheas continue at the ad. vance last quoted. COTTON.—There is again a general advance of ad. to id. per lb. on Cotton. The sales last week were above 10,000 bags, nearly 2,000 Bengals fild. to 71d. for good fair quality ; and about 8,000 Surats, very ord. to very good 6d. and 71c1., Madras very mid, to fair 61d. a 7i d., good Boweds Rid. RlCE.—Rice is in demand at rather higher prices. FRUIT.—The only sales of Fruit are some of the inferior descriptions of Valentia Raisins at 325. a 3.35. SPICES.—There is no alteration in Spices. Pepper and Pimento are firm at the late prices. In Pepper, some large parcels of Black have been sold at rather better prices, buyers freely taking that refused by them last week. In other Spices we have nothing of importance to notice. e p S o A r t r : LT PE T r S R R E I t . p — e t ' r r e h e o r f e t h a e r e c very p a f n e y w , s last Sa o f e Saltpetre reh :,een more request, but at prices which holders are unwio. ling to accept. INDIGO. —Indigo, since the Company's Sale, has been i moderate request, and several parcels bought in lots hay, been taken by speculation of Sale's prices, and 2d. per lb. ad. vance ; but as yet the export houses are doing very little ; there is, however, an expectation that orders from Russia for a considerable quantity must arrive in the course of next week. COCIIINEAL is much inquired for,parcels eagerlybought up. LAC DYE has been more quiet the last few days, chiefly in consequence of the holders asking considerably higher prices ; there are large buyers at last week's prices. SAFFLOWER continues in very brisk demand, hoth for home use and exportation, with advancing prices. DYEWOODS generally are exceedingly dull, and the deli. veries fall off considerably. WOOL—The late public sales consisted of about 4,000 bales New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land Wool, which went off briskly at advanced prices over formed sales ; about 200 bags Cape of Good Hope, which fetched also high prices, considering the quality was of ordinary kind ; about 600 bags Spanish and German also fetched good prices, and the Market generally is higher than it has been for some ears. The prices of English Wool have advanced fully in proportion to Foreign, and no appearance of any decline du. ring the present year. COUNrRy CORN MARKETS DURING THE WEEK. 1 Wheat. Barley. Oats. Bean.; Per Quarter. 40E tOll iainshorough Grantham Jrimsby lorncastle Lincoln ipi 'shy _ _ ;tam 9. to 8. 44 58 8. to 8. 24 33 R. to e. 8. to B. 13 18 34 38 40 17 25 37 30 14 22 25 40 14 19 28 : 38 16 20 35 39 16 18 32 :!! 21 23 33 12 18 23 :36 53 67 42 58 44 56 44 60 46 52 47 59 46 66 36 41 N 3il 20 24 24 21) 22 24 30 30 22 26 NORWICH. July 20. Wheat (per qr.) 445. 575. Qs. I Beans (per qr.) 3 T` . . Barley 20s. 265. 2Ss. Pease, 28s. 3_, kl 445. )ats 20s. 245. 265. Flour, fiinqr YV t.... 6. 1 ,4 I bt , sl/ IL 1 • JUIY Wheat, white.„—...— 579. to 639. F. to —9. red 48s. to 600 —s. to —s Barley, Malting -2 .6 s to 325 . Grinding.. 225. to Oats Beans 31s to Ms. wow Old —s. to Grey 30s. to 3-{s.Pease 30s. to 304. ---- 10 A NCHLSII..It, July 20, --------- Wheat, per 7010. Ss. Pd. ui Os. Od. Red 32 0 f? 0 39 Barley, per 6(JIb 5 0 5 (3 Oat_ 7 s. 9,. to A s , 3 Beans, per Imperial quarto' -• Pease, White, per Imperial bushel Asir, per 6 . Imperial bushels ) 2 . 0 5:1 Flour, per Sack of 28010. 40 0 4ti 0