The Sun. — London, England, 1839-02-16 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. ROUSE OF LORDS, FEB. 15. Earl SHAFTESBURY took his seat on the Woolsack, in the absence of the Lord Chancellor, at Five o' Clock. The Earl of RIPON presented a petition from a parish in Lincoln, against the Beer Bill. Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Knares borough, praying for the total repeal of the Corn-laws. The Noble and Learned Lord said that he held also a pe tition in his hand from M. la Fontaine and another barrister in Canada, complaining of the treatment they had received, and which he should present as soon as he saw his Noble Friend in his place, who he understood had accepted the Seals of Office as Secretary for the Colonies. The Noble and Learned Lord said that a Bill had been introduced for the government of Upper and Lower Canada in 1822, which it would be most desirable that the Members of that House should be made acquainted with, and ho understood that there was but one copy of it in the House. He had been frequently asked for it of late. He hoped that means wouid be taken to have their Lordships supplied with it. THE NAVY. Lord COLCHESTER gave notice that on Thursday next he should move for certain other returns to be laid on the table by the Noble Lord at the head of the Admiralty respecting the effective state of the Navy. He should on that occasion take the opportunity of stating his opinion of the numerical state and strength of her Majesty's Navy, that the whole subject might be brought before the House. He begged to state that he was doing this entirely upon his own responsibility, and that, therefore, he had not mentioned the subject to any Ni ble Lord whom he might call a leader upon either side of thr... House. CORN-LAWS. The Marquis c,f BREA DA LBANE presented a peti tion from the Royal Borough of Perth, praying for the repeal of the Corn-laws. The Noble Marquis said this was a subject of very great importance, and he knew there was a cry deep fechng excited respecting the corn trade, and that tee discontent and dissatisfation on that subject were increasing. What greater argument could there be against Inv particular line or policy of law, than that it was cal culated to produce discontent and disgust on the part of a great proportion of the country. No doubt in great public affairs, where the resources were bound up and united toge ther, it was difficult for their Lordships to give an advantage to one, nithout producing some correspon — dent detriment to another ; but he trusted that if their Lordships should feel unable to grant a total repeal cf the Corn-laws, they nould nevet theless take the question into their deliberate conslderatiOn, and examine fu!ly into all its operations. The Noble Marquis presented a petition from a town in Argylealtire, in favour of Church Extension. CANADA. The Duke of WELLINGTON moved that an Address be presented to her Aljesty, that she would be graciously pleased to order Copies of the Correspondence between the Secretary of Siete and Sir F. Head to Le laid on the table. AlsO copies of the despatches of Sir J. Colborne, respecting the establishment of rectories in Upper Canada. Loa' MELBOURNE said that he thought the Noble Duke would feel that it would he extremely inconvenient to produce the whole of the despatches in refe rence to to Sir Francis Head. There was no dis- Position to keep back any part of those despatches, e nich the Noble Duke thought ought to be produced, or e /deli Sir Francis Head thought ought to be brought forward for his justification, or which he might coredsdctr to bear on his conduct, which had been animadverted upon in the report made,by the Noble Earl behind him. Certainly, there was no wish to keep back anything that could be required by that officer for his own justifi cation. With respect to the dispatches of Sir Jelin Colborne respecting the establishment of rectories in Upper Canada they were very voluminous, but there was no objection to produce them. The Duke of WELLING T 0 N said that he believed the only wish was to have increased knowledge upon the state of Upper Canada. With respect to Sir F: Head, he be lieved that that officer considered he had reason to believe from what passed on the subject, that the Noble Viscount had in his hands the means of his justification. Certainly when he (the Noble Duke) saw the correspondence between the Noble Viscount opposite and Sir F. Head he thought it would not be very necessary to move for the production of those papers ; but from what he saw in the Noble Earl's report subsequently, lie did feel that some justifica tion ought to take place. He thought be had seen a note from Sir Francis Head stating that notwithstanding what had passed between him and the Noble Viscount, he did intend to publish the whole, and upon the whole, he (the Noble Duke) thought the whole of the dispatches should be produced. He had no objec tion, however, to let the terms of his motion, stand 't copies or extracts," if the Noble Viscount shorad think that better: The Earl of ABERDEEN thought it was quite impos sible to legislate for the affairs of Canada until these papers were laid or the table, whether any allusion had been made in them to Sir Francis Head ' - .,t• not. The Report of the Noble Earl certainly justif ed Sir F. Head perhaps in requiting their producti,,o_(Hear)—but that might be safely left to Sir Ffa • Head to do for himself. B - lout unle ss t h e He a ;wa n s els ptepare d to take the Report of the N e bl e E that sub; .4-1 as s its sole ground of legislation upon „act, it was quite clear that Sir Francis Head,'s itches—he filling the situation in Upper Canada, and so accessfully carrying on the Government there ; that his re port and his views of the policy to be pursued with respect to that province must be of sufficient importance to be laid be t fore that House. He therefore thought it very convenient that these despatches should be before their Lordships. The Noble Earl had felt it his duty in his report to make Ir 'certain allusions to Sir Francis Head, in his official , enpacity—the Noble Earl was the best judge of that himself, but it was for her Majesty's Government to l consider wheth er these parts of the report should have beet published and laid upon the table of the House. In iconsequence, however, of the most unprecedented and unjustifiable example, of allowing the Noble Earl to make Ia printed report, her Majesty's Government were prevented from dealing with it as it was their duty to their Sovereign to do before presenting it to that House. The 1 Noble Earl took the publication of the Report so much as a matter of course that before her Majesty's Speech was read at the table he asked when it would be laid before the House, as if it was a matter of course that t it should be produced. He (the Earl of Aberdeen) denied 1 that an: , portion of that report should be published as a matter of course, at least until the Govern ment had had an opportunity of forming a decision On the subject. He thought it a most unfortunate prece dent that the Government should have consented to receive a printed report. If persons employed in official capaci ties supposed that their reports or despatches were their I own property, or that they had a right to publish a j single syllable of them without her Majesty's permission, they were much mistaken. They belonged to the Crown and the Crown only, and it was for her Majesty's Ministers, ' on their own responsibility, to produce such and no more of these reports as they thought proper.--(Hear, hear.) The Earl of DURHAM agreed entirely with the doc trine laid down by the Noble Earl, and he cer tainly never did desire to consider any despatches or reports furnished by him in his offieial capa city to her Majesty's Government as his own property. i Let how stood the case with regard to that particular I ratter. That report was delivered by him, and received ' by her Majesty's Ministers; and after a certain time he understood that they were to be produced on the first day of the meeting of Parliament. So much was he impressed with that conviction, that he actually had, at the time he asked the question, a printed copy in his hand, arid he was aware that many thousands, or at least several hundreds, of - copies had been prepared for circulation, after having been laid on the table of the House. It appeared that afterwards, in consequence of some deliberation on the part of her Majesty's Minis ters the presentation of that report was postponed, and it was on that account he had put the question as to when the report was to be produced. He certainly thought he had some right to consider when he had received her Ma jesty's Secretary of State's announcement that the report had been laid before her Majesty, and that she had been gra b !lowly pleased to express her approbation of the manner I in which it had been prepared, and of the comprehensive I views taken of the various questions referred to—he had 1 some reason to consider that the report had arrived at such a stage as that it was -competent to him to consider that his duty had terminated. Her Majesty's Minister having received it and laid it before the Queen, and communicated her gracious approbation of the part he had taken in preparing it, he felt he had a right to consider that that was an official report, which would be laid be fore Parliament, and that his duty would be at an end. That letter he bad received on his return home, and it was i riot till Friday that he made complaint of the publication, raving in the mean time only contributed about half a dozen copies of the Report among his immediate friends. So much for his own conduct, and if the House Iwould permit him, he would now say a few words with re gard to the motion of the Noble Duke. If any Noble Lord had only taken the trouble to read the Report, he would have seen that there was no intention whatever on ' his ( Lord Durham's) part, to make any charge ; against Sir Francis Head, indeed from the obser ivatioas of that Gallant Officer himself, it was clear that I lie founded the necessity for justifying himself, not upon any statement in the Report, but upon marginal annota- I tinny, which were hardly to be considered as a ground, i either of justification or charge. It' any charge was i to be looked for, it must be looked for in the body of the Report itself. He (Lord Durham) disclaimed any notion whatever of making any charge a ga i ns t Si r 1 I Francis Head—he had only stated facts that were preva lent, arid well known in the whole province. With respect to the danger that would arise from the publi cation, he (Lord Durham) was at a loss to know upon what ground any danger could be apprehended—where could it arise ? Surely it could not be supposed that ex pressions of misgovernment in the colonies here would create danger ?—no danger could arise from the publication of a truth which was known to every person in the colony. They were facts of which their Lordships were ignorant, but which were well known in the colo nies, and printed in the hundreds and thousands of newspepers that circulated there and in the United States. All . the facts he had detailed to their Lordships could only in his mind be dangerous if they were sup- Pressed in this country, because the colonies were perfectly aware of them. The real danger was, in keeping the People of this country in ignorance of that which was known to every man, woman, and child in the colonies. • No danger could result from the publication of the truth, z ryhoeusvhtaoklee truth, and nothing but the truth. My object, continued the Noble Earl, was to lay before your ie rdships the truth, that you might judge on a -Tate or things in which the connexion between the ki_a.nadas and the Mother Country is put in jeopardy. My i, 9 , p is t was to perpetuate that connexion, and render it . 101 able. And I conceive that I never in my humble Position was enabled to perform a greater service to my c riuittry than inlaying before the House a statement which, if it does nothing more, will . compel your Lordships to direct your attention to the subject. My Lords, before I sit down, I bee', thyaotuwhwaitlelver impression you may have as to my con duct, not suffer any time to elapse, before merely as t,, the e bject into your consideration. It is not outrages, and fewnhoiwel2 , A have taken place, lmt ts othfeourreßberiltliisohn ----- diEp' SIN ? THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY,-EVENING EDITION,-FEBRITARY 16, 1839. subjects—their property, their lives, and every thing which makes existence dear to them—are, they believe, perilled by the present state of things. My Lords, since I last addressed your Lordships, I have received a letter from a gentleman high in authority in Canada, from which I will take the liberty of reading an extract. It is dated the 10th of January, 1839 —" We are all soldiers, and we fear that there will soon be. no bread for want of labourers. If the British Government means to maintain the Canadian colonies something must be done. The country will soon be worth nothing if an amendment does not take place. As to keeping things quiet by a standing army it is all nonsense—it cannot be done for any length of time. Give us a Constitution from the Imperial Parliament and the rebellion will soon be put down." My Lords, I repeat I trust your Lordships will without delay take up this question, and I for one shall not object to your being furnished with every information and every explanation which you can possibly require. The Earl of WICKLOW said he thought the Noble Earl opposite had fallen into the mistake of supposing that the letter from the Secretary for the Colonies, ap proving of his report, rendered it imperative to lay it upon the table of the House. The Earl of DURHAM—interrupting said, all he had done was to appeal to the Noble Viscount at the head of the Government, to lay the report before their Lordships, he having heard that it was not to be produced. The Earl of WICKLOW said it did appear to him, especially from what had fallen from the Noble Earl, to the effect that though the subject was well under stood in Canada, this country was in ignorance about it— that it should be inquired into whether there was not more information than Parliament at present possessed which ought to be furnished by Government, because the report of the Noble Earl was formed only by a five months' resi dence in Canada : whereas another Noble Earl (Gosford) had resided in the colony a considerable time, as likewise had Lord Aylmer, and it was right that Parliament should know their opinions upon the subject. Lord M EL BOURN E.—My Lords, I do not myself see how the Noble Earl ( Durham) could have seri posed it was the intention of Government not to publish his report, but I think that the Noble Earl was very unfortunately in. duced to take that step which be himself acknowledges was the probable cause of the publication of the report in the papers, viz., the communication of copies to his friends —( Hear, hear)—and which rendred it nee, scary that the report should he hid in calenso before Parliament, without any consideration of what might be the consequence.— ( Hear, hear.) The Noble Earl seems to think that the letter he received from the Colonial Office was a letter of license for the publication, whereas it was only an acknowledgement of the reception of the report—( Hear, hear, hear)—and of the attention and labour which the Noble Lord had bestowed upon its composition. —( Hear, hear.) I do not see how any further meaning could be attached to it, or that it could have the effect of prejudging any further communications which it might be necessary to hold with the Noble Earl upon the sulject.— ( Cries of " Hear, hear.") The Noble Earl says the publication of the report was not in the slightest degree dangerous—but that does not effect the present question, which is, whether the Government ought not to have had the power of exercising their dis cretion as to whether the publication was likely to produce such effects or not.—(Hear, hear.) The Government were cut off from exercising that discretion, and very ill results may possibly arise from it.—( Hear, hear.) With regard to what the Noble Earl opposite (Wicklow) has said, undoubtedly all necessary information upon the sub ject shall be laid before your Lordships. The reports made by my Noble Friend (Earl Gosford) during his Administration, have already been laid before Parliament, but if there are any other papers which may be at all ma terial, they shall be furnished. —( Hear, hear.) Lord G LEN ELG said if the Government had the op portunity of considering and deciding if there should be laid before Parliament that report which was not in the power of the Noble Lord, but of those who so decided; he was under the impression that the report might under go the mature consideration of the Government before .it was laid before Parliament. The Government would then be completely unfettered by any after-considerations. An objection had been made to printing that report, but that was no new practice, for he bad known it done in many instances in regard to documents of great public impor tance. He could prove by repeated instances, that reports had been altered in some parts, other parts had been wholly left out, and riot one word of the original had been laid before the House. The same rules must apply in this respect to copies of reports laid before the other House. He could say, however, that no direction had been given at the Colonial Office for that purpose ; the directiens were precisely the same as those given on other occasions. In regard to the motion before the House, respecting the publication of that report, he thought it was necessary the same document should be produced as that originally transmitted. He had objected last session to the production of that dispatch, not because he thought the Government felt personally, if he might say so, for individually could have had no objection,—but he objected because it involved severe animadversions on the cenduct of parties which should have been com municated to them previously, otherwise the case would be that they would see in the Parliament papers, for the first time, severe animadversions on themselves and relatives. He thought it a great misfortune that the case Sir Francis Head required could not be started without the produc tion of those papers ; but he admitted the necessity of their production ; and, as far as it can be done consistently, he should wish for their production. Lord BROUGHAM quite agreed with the last speaker. The publication of this document, however, although a dangerous thing, could not be said to be altogether unpre cedented. It was perfectly true that many similar instances had been known. He bad himself known many. It appeared that the confidential Secretaries of the Secretary of State were sworn, so were the Clerks of that Department. It was not unprecedented that breaches of trust had been committed in certain quarters, not in the offices, but by persons to whom papers bad been officially committed. He (Lord Brougham) had once known an instance of an Irish Bill of a peculiar nature, of which two or three copies had been sent to the Crown office, a copy of which appeared in, he ( Lord B.) thought, a Dublin newspaper. His Noble Friend behind him, perhaps, would recollect the circumstance, a strict inquiry took place into the circum stance, which was a most flagrant breach of trust. those copies were delivered for perusal, and not for publi cation. They endeavoured to discover with whom the crime lay, but all their exertions were vain ; and at the pre sent moment it was matter of suspicion. He (Lord Brougham) had his suspicions on the subject ; but those suspicions, he begged to be understood, did not rest upon any of the officers in the printing department of the Government. Lord ELLENBOROUGH thought that an inquiry ought to be made, as to who was the person who ordered 2,000 copies to be printed. Lord WH A RNCLIFFE considered that it was neces that some inquiry should take place on the subject. The Earl of DURHAM felt called upon to state one or two facts. When he had completed his report, a com munication took place between the Under- Secretary of State (Sir G. Grey) and himself upon the subject, and not with the Noble Lord then at the head of the Colonial office. With him he (Lord Durham) had no communi cation since his return to this country. After his commu nication with Sir G. Grey an arrangement was entered into between that Right Hon. Baronet and his (Lord Durham's) Secretary, for the purpose of having the Re port pristed in a manner that would save expence. The whole arrangement for the printing of that Report was en tered into by his Secretaries and Sir George Grey, and therefore it was not right to say that the Colonial-office had had no communication whatever with him upon the sub ' ject. As there had been some mistake with respect to the letter, he trusted that the Noble Viscount would have no objection to his laying it before the House. Viscount MELBOURNE—Certainly not. The Earl of DURHAM said that the Noble Viscount having no objection, he would lay it upon the table of the House. _ _ _ _ Lord GLENELG said that it was due to Sir George Grey, after what has been stated, that he should make a few observations. He (Lord Glenelg) was perfectly aware of the communication that had taken place between the Noble Lord and Sir G. Grey, and what he had done was entirely with his sanction. Sir George Grey bad acceded to the arrangement for printing the Report with the approbation of himself (Lord Glenelg).ll It was printed by Hansard under the direction of Sir G. Grey, at the request of the Noble Earl, or those connected with him. Lord DURHAM said he should not allude at present to any facts which had been stated by the Noble Lord, but all he wished most distinctly to state was that Sir George Grey did communicate with him several times, upon the necessity of having this Report presented to the Cabinet as early as possible, that it might be printed on the first day on which Parliament met. That in consequence of that arrangements were made for printing all the sheets immediately that they could possibly come from him. And he understood from Sir George Grey that the very utmost despatch would be used for the printing of the Report, in order to have copies of them circulated among Members of the two Houses of Parliament, in number amounting to nearly two thousand copies. That he most distinctly stated. Lord MELBOURNE said it was to get information from the Noble Earl that they were so anxious ; that was what they wanted. But he never understood that Go ♦ernment was so anxious for them for the purpose of lay_ ingit before Parliament. Lcrd DURHAM moved that a copy of his letter accom panying his Report to the Colonial Secretary, and the Colonial Secretary's answer to that letter, be laid on the table.--Agreed to. Lord DUNCANNON stated that with respect to cer tain returns which he had been asked for a night or two ago, the last of those returns were made up in April last, and that the next return would not be made until April next. The Marquis of SALISBURY wished to know whether the returns respecting the turnpike trusts which he had moved for in the course of last Session were ready to be produced? Lord MELBOURNE again rose, and said, be under stood the return called for referred to the Treasurer's ac• counts of Turnpike Trusts; and, secondly, of all charges and mortgages on Turnpike roads. This information was extremely large and voluminous. He did not mean to say anything reflecting - on anybody, but there was a little indisposition to give the necessary information. However, every ' exertion was making, in order to enablo them to make,the return.—Adjourned. CORN-LAWS. Mr. GEORGE PALMER presented a petition from Stockwell, against any repeal of the Corn-laws. An Hos. MEMBER presented a petition from Rutland, to the same effect. Mr. HOWARD presented a petition from Chelms lord, praying for the total abolition of Church-rates. The petitioners also wished to direct the particular attention of the House to the case of Mr. Tho roughgood, who, in consequence of having re fused to pay Church-rates to the amount of ss. 6d., had been incarcerated in prison along with common felons and debtors. CORN-LA` `i. The Marquis of DOURO presented a petition from the Mayor and Corporation of Norwich, praying for animme diate and total abolition of the Corn-laws. Sir DE LAC Y EVANS presented a petition from the Westminster Reform Society to the same effect, and pray ing that evidence might be heard at the bar of that House on the subject. Mr. STRUTT presented a similar petition from Derby, unanimously agreed to at a meeting of the Town Council of that place. The Hon. Member then presented another petition, agreed to at a public meeting, at which the Mayor presided, signed by 2,800 inhabitants—they prayed that evidence might be heard at the bar on the subject; and also that the House would carry out to the fullest extent, both in agriculture and manufactures, the principles of free trade. Sir C. B. VE RE presented five petitions from places in Suffolk in favour of the present system of the Corn-laws. The assessments made upon the property of the individuals who had signed one of the petitions amounted to 35,0001. The number of acres held by those who had signed another of the petitions wes 15,000, and the signatures attached to a third represented property to the amount of 90,000 acres. Sir H. PARNELL presented a petition from the bankers, merchants, and manufacturers of Dundee, against the present system of Corn-laws, and praying that they might be heard by counsel against all the laws affecting free trade in commerce and manufactures. LUNATIC ASYLUM. Mr. B A RNABY presented a petition from Hereford, praying for an inquiry into a house kept by a certain indi vidual for the custody of insane persons, and detailing several instances of mismanagement. The petition was ordered to be printed with the votes. Mr. CHALMERS presented a petition from. Ar broath against the Corn-laws. The petitioners stated that the partial failure of crops during three successive sea sons had entailed great sufferings and privations on the working classes—that in consequence of foreign compe tition their manufacturers were obliged to reduce the wages of their workmen, which scarcely afforded them the necessaries of life ; that in France, Be!gium, the Nether lands, and America manufactures had been established. and even supplying the markets which were formerly ex clusively supplied by that country. The Hon. Member then presented petitions from the Town Canned of Forair; from the incorporated trades of Arboath, and from a parish in Inverness-shire to the same effcct. Mr. CLAY presented a petition from Poplar, in the district of the Tower Hamlets, signed by 1,000 persons. It was a long well-drawn petition, and he would not trouble the House with reading it at length, but cne Para graph was very important ; it stated that Parliament having thi own the humbler classes on their own resources, by enact ing the Poor-laws, would have shown more considera ation if it had commenced by taking off all restrictions on the free importation of corn. Mr. SHAW LE FE VRE presented a petition from Odiham, in the county of Hampshire, for the repeal of the Corn-laws; and another from another place in the same county, to the same effect. Mr. BAINES presented a petition from a place in Yorshire praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws, and of all laws, whether in connection with their own manufac tures or others, which tended to prevent free trade ; also a petition from Horbury, in the same county, to a similar effect. Captain BOLDER() presented a petition from Chip per-it-lam, in Wiltshire, signed by landowners, farmers, and by gentlemen unconnected with agriculture, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Mr. HOUSTON presented a petition from a place, the name of which we could not hear, complaining of the spiritual destitution in Scotland. LIABIIaITY OF INNKEEPERS. Captain PE C H EL L presented a petition, signed by 84 innkeepers in the borough of Brighton, being the entire number in that town. They stated that by the present laws they were bound to receive and entertain all travellers, and all goods belonging to them ; that it had been held that they were bound to make resti tution for all goods which were stolen from their inns, although they had not been given into their custody, or the custody of their servants, or without being aware that such goods were brought into their houses. That however expedient such provisions might be in former times it was unnecessary at the present day, because none but persons of good character could obtain licenses, and that their conduct was open to the inspection of the authorities who had the power of withholding the renewal of the li cense if they conducted themselves improperly—that not withstanding these laws they were subject to much vexa tion and expense in, making remuneration for property said to have been stolen from their houses—and they therefore prayed that the laws imposing such liabilities might be revised, and such relief afforded as to the House might seem meet. The petitioners did not pray for the removal of the entire responsibility, but to be re lieved to the amount of 101. He concurred in the prayer of this petition and hoped the House would take their case into its consideration, and allow the Bill to be brought in of which he bad given notice, in order that they might be placed on the same footing as carriers and the proprietors of stage ceaches. CORN-LAWS. Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL presented petitions from several parishes in the county of Kent, praying the House nut to make any alteration in the Corn-laws. Mr. FLEMING presented three petitions from places in the county of Kent to the same effect. Mr. L A BOUC HERE presented a petition from Taun ton, in favour of a revision of the existing system of Corn laws. The Hon. Gentleman observed, that the first name appended to the petition was that of Sir Thomas Leth bridge, one of the largest proprietors of the county.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Mr. SANDFORD presented a petition from the in habitants of Langport, Somersctshire, in favour of the Corn-laws. Mr. DARB Y presented two petitions, one from Shore ham, signed by 66 persons, and the other from Brighton, signed by 59 persons, in favour of the Corn-laws. Mr. G. W. WOOD presented a petition from Ken dal against the Corn laws. The petitioners stated that the present system only tended to the advantage of foreign manufacturers, and that on every occasion when there was a deficient harvest, the population of the country was plunged into distress ; they therefore prayed to be heard by Counsel at the bar of the House, against a law which deprived them of the necessaries of life, and that the House would pass a Bill for the total repeal of the Corn-laws.--( Hear, hear.) The Honour able Member also stated that the utmost harmony prevailed between the working classes in Kendal and their employers ; and that they had co-operated together with great unan imity and cordiality in getting up this petition.—( Cheers.) Sir E. KNATCHBULL—Are the remarks which the Hon. Member is now making contained in the petition ? ( Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) A Mr. G. W. WOOD—My last remark is not.—(Laugh ter.) The petition was signed by 2,666 inhabitants of that borough, which contained a population of not more than 12,000 souls.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. VILLIERS presented a petition from Preston against the Corn-laws. The petitione:s expressed their alarm at the successful competition of Continental ma nufacturers, which they considered could only be attri buted to the operation of these obnoxious laws. Also one from Lancaster, praying for the total and imme diate repeal of these laws. Also one from the Board of Guardians of the Union of Wolverhampton, praying for their total repeal. Also one from a number of merchants and manufacturers deeply engaged in commerce,who represented thousands of their fellow-subjects, as evinced at public meetings ; and they stated that the Corn-laws were very injurious to their interests, and a grievance to the public, and they prayed that they might be allowed to give evi dence at the bar in support of the allegations contained in their petition. He moved that it be printed with the Votes, and gave notice that on Tuesday next he would move that evidence be taken at the bar, in accordance with the prayer of the petition. Mr. BAIN E S, seeing the Right Hon. Baronet the Pre sident of the Board of Control in his place, wished to ask some questions. In the first place, he wished to know whether there would now be any objection to laying the dispatch of the Bth of August, which regulated the course to be pursued by the servants, civil and military, in India, with respect to the religious services of the Hindoos, on the table of the House ? Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE had not the slightest objec tion to laying that despatch on the table of the House ; and he would take that opportunity of stating that the despatch had been acted upon by the Governor-General, and had given satisfaction. CORN-LAWS. Mr. DENNISTOUN gave notice that, on Monday, he would present a petition from Glasgow, praying for a total repeal of the Corn-laws, signed by 43,000 persons. Lord MORPETH presented a petition from the clothiers of Huddersfield, of the West Riding of York shire, complaining of the grievances they suffered from the operations of the Corn-laws, which tended to raise the price of cloth much higher than that manufactured on the Continent. The petitioners prayed for the establishment of a free trade in corn. The Noble Lord also presented a petition from Yorkshire to the same effect. CHURCH EXTENSION. Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR presented three petitions from places in Scotland, praying for a further endowment for the Church of Scotland. Mr. HUME begged to ask if the Hon. Member meant to persevere in the motion which stood second in the paper,? Sir GEO. SINCLAIR would take every means the forms of the House allowed him to do so. Lord JOHN RUSSELL presented a petition from Struud praying for an alteration in the present system of Corn- laws. Mr. Sergeant JACKSON presented a petition from the county of Galway, Ireland. against the system of National' Education, and praying that no system of education i should be established in that country, but that in which the reading of the Bible was made an essential, so that the children of Protestants might not be deprived,of its benefits. MR. HARVEY'S CASE. The SPEAKER said although this was a day on which, according to the rules of the. House, orders should take precedence ; yet, as the motion of the Honourable Mem ber for Montgomeryshire (Mr. Wynn) was one which ought not to be postponed, perhaps it might properly come on first.—( Hear.) Mr. WYNN then rose and said, in conformity with the notice he had given, he had to submit a motion to the House for a new writ for the borough of Southwark. He hoped the subject would by no means be viewed as a party question, but as a subject in which the House at large was interested, and on which they were bound to come to a decision upon the best possi ble grounds. it had been suggested that a Committee should be moved for , but he did not think that was the proper course, as the opinion of the Committee would not be and as the q uest i on arose upon us Acts of P ar li ament, h e was in enthoehfitovtuhasreeio'House might p roper l y ta k e coeni ctbbliinendecidonngtsotortuhncinttikho flcc o f Hear, hear.) At the same time he felt very great objection to any delay which was not absolutely ne cessary in the decision of this question, because he ob served the lion. Member opposite (Mr. Harvey), and that Hon. Member was in a delicate situation, as, under the Act of Queen Anne, he was exposed to penalties of 5001 each for every vote he gave; and if, on the other hand, he did not vote, the borough of Southwark was pro (auto disfranchised. If there were doubts enter tained, which it was thought a Committee only could remove. he ( Mr. W.) would not press for a decision; but accord ing to his judgment the House would best consult the in terests of the lion. Member's constituency, and indeed of the lion. Member himself, by coming to a prompt decision, and as the subject had been so long mooted, he thought every Member had been able to make up his mind. New, by the Act of Queen Ann, any person who accepts an office of prof, under the Crown, vacates his seat ; and by the Act of King William and Queen Mary, any Member of the fieuse of Commons is prohibited from " directly or indirectly, either by himself or deputy, farming er letting or managing any sums of money, or duties, 01 other advantages granted to their M ijesties by this Act, or which hereafter may be granted by any Act of Parliament." There was also the Act 15th of George 11., directing that any person who shall be a Deputy or Clerk, in any offices therein enumerated, among others, the offices of her Mjesty's principal Secretaries of State or the Commissioners of Hackney Carriages. It ap peared to him (Mr. Wynn), that under these Acts, the lion. Member (Mr. Harvey's) seat had been vacated. The words of the Act were, that any person who may be a Member of this House, who should accept an office of profit under the Crown, should cease to be a Member from that period.—( Hear, hear.) It might be attempted to be answered that this was not an office under the C. own, inasmuch as the Crown did not appoint directly to the office ; but the appointment took place through the Secre tary, lie (Mr. Wynn) contended the appointment was an office under the Crown, notwithstanding the appointment might take place through the Secretary. He might quote a variety of cases in support of this opinion, but he would content himself with mentioning one instance. which was a very frequent occurrence in this House, and which must be in the recollection of every Hon. Member. He meant the appointment to the office of Steward of the Chiltern Hundreds. The Stewards of the Chiltern Hundreds were not appointed directly by the Crown, but they were appointed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Chancellor of the Exchquer. appointed persans to the office of the Stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds, with a salary of 20/. a-year, which salary was never asked for or accepted, and yet it ryes invariably held that the acceptance of the office of Steward of the Chil tern Hundreds vacated the seat in that House. He was aware that there were a variety of offices the acceptance of which did not vacate a seat in that House. Brat there were subjects of a special exemption from the operation of the Act. The office of Secretary to the Treasury, of Secretary to the Admiralty, and of Under- Secretary of State, all these, at the time of the passing of the Act, were in no degree places under the Crown. But they were ;places 'dependent on an individual. The Secretary to the 'Treasury was at that time Secre tary to the Lord High Treasurer ; the Secretary of the Admiralty was at that time the Secretary to the Lord High Admiral ; and the Under- Secretaries to this day are called Under-Secretaries to the Secretary of State; as, for instance, the Under- Secretary to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, and not the Under- Secretary of State. They were in fact Under- Secretaries to in dividuals. It was not necessary to argue this point further, inasmuch as these offices were especially exempted from the operation of the statute of George 11., by which all other clerks, holding offices under the Crown, were rendered incapable of retaining their seats in Parliament. It is true that the Secretary to the Commissioners for managing the affairs of India is not obliged to vacate kis seat in consequence of his appointment. But it has been thought fit to make this the matter of special exemption by Act of Parliament. It has been specialty provided, that the acceptance of this office shall not vacate a seat. It was necessary, therefore, to consider whether the appoint ment proceeded from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, or from whether it pror i seeded from the Commissioners of the Treasury, or in some manner specially directed as in the present case, that the Commissioners of the Treasury should settle and fix the salary. The next ground on which it was proposed that the charge should be defended, was, that no salary had been annexed to the situation by the Crown. But when we looked at the constitution of the office, it was expressly provided that it should be lawful fur the Commissioners of the Treasury to direct such sa lary to be paid, together with any money which might arise from any duty under the care of the party. It seemed, then, there was a duty to be fulfilled by the Commissioners of the Treasury, for they all knew that " it shall be lawful" were words imposing a duty ; and he ap prehended that while -he continued to hold the office, if the Treasury did not fix the salary, it was competent for the Hon. Gentleman to resign. But he believed when power was given under the words referred to, they were bound to exercise their authority. But it might be said by the Hon. Gentleman that he had not received any salary, bet this, in his opinion was not a point of any difficulty, for it was un derstood that the recept of any emolument or profit equally disqualified him, but it must be so decided by the authority of that House. It seemed to him that when Parliament constituted an uffik e, and fixed that a salary should be paid, it was an office with a salary of which the individual had no right to divest himself. It had all the qualities of an office, and there was nothing to prevent the individual, whether he claimed it or not from accepting the Chiltern Hundreds, for the individual who last received the appointment of Steward of the Chiltern Hundreds did afterwards take the salary of 101. for the half-year, which elapsed before Parliament met again, and before the office was bestowed on another person. At all events it secured to him, according to the provisions of the Act, that any person accepting the office must be held to vacate his scat. This certainly was a new office of profit, created since the reign of Queen Anne, and quite un , tenable with a seat in Parliament. (Hear, hear.) If the arguments were to prevail that a person disabled by accepting office from sitting or acting as a Member of the House of Commons, did not vacate his seat if he re signed the office before the meeting of Parliament, any office might be granted to any individual for six months ; provided Parliament was not sitting he might receive six months' salary, and then resign the office immediately before the meeting of Parliament. Besides that, the uniform practice, since the passing the Act of Queen Anne, had been to issue a new writ immediately on parties accepting the Stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds, just the same as if they had accepted an office which, under the se cond, clause of the statute, vacated the seat. If an individual accepted the office of the Chiltern Hun dreds during the recess, although the new writ could not be moved until the meeting of Parliament, although the party had so completely vacated his seat that he would be eligible for any other place in Great Britain, and that had been repeatedly done. He need only refer to the case of Lord Dudley, Is ho vacated his seat during the recess by the acceptance of the office of Steward of the Chiltern Hundreds, and who was afterwards elected Member for Worcestershire. The Honourable Baronet the Mem ber for Cumberland also vacated his seat during the recess, and was afterwards elected for Cumberland. From the time, therefore, of the acceptance of office, the seat was vacated, and the party, to all intents and pur poses, had ceased to be a Member. The Act of William and Mary was simply a prohibitory statute, without any penalty. He did not know that there was any precedent exactly in point; he did not know any case where a Mem• ber had accepted an office, at the same time declaring that he would not accept any salary that was attached to it. He, however, thought that that made no diffe rence. It was the acceptance of the office that vacated the seat. He had acted upon grounds of public duty alone, and even if that s ome d ec i s i on shou ld b e com e to on the case. He had the nHactuatedHouse o should n n o o t agree personalfeeling whatever , ne ither had he a c t e d from any po li t i ca l f e eling, for it was a well ascertained fact that should the House agree with him, the constituents of the Hun. Member were perfectly ready to re-elect him. He would therefore move that a new writ be issued for the borough of Southwark in the room of D. W. Harvey, Esq., who had vacated his seat by the acceptance of the office of Registrar of Hackney Coaches. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that probably the Hon. Member for Southwark would wish to address the House before any other Member stated his sentiments upon the occasion. Mr. W YNN believed the rule of the House was, that a Member should withdraw while there was any discussion going on which affected his seat. Mr. PRYME could state a case exactly in point which occurred in 1833. A writ was then moved for in the room of George Prynie, Esq.. on a ccount of his accepting office. The motion having been moved and seconded, he stated what he bad to say upon the matter and withdrew. The SPEAKER sa id t h e case stated by the Hon. Mem ber was on e exactly in point, thoug h he was not aware of any rule of the House on the subject. Mr. D. W. HARVEY bad not one word to say against the motion. On the contrary, he was quite prepared to second a moti on t h at every g entleman in that House should forthwith go b e f ore h i s constituents.—(A laugh.) He w as one of those w h o t h oug h t t h a t the business would go on much better f or t h e country if gentlemen were obliged to face their constituents rather oftener. He could not, how ever, allow the present opportunity to pass without stating to the House that he did not at all agree with what had fallen from the Right Hon. Gentleman. It was something strange that the Right Hon. Gentleman, with all his un not find on e s i ng l e case where a Member of that equalled kn ow l e d ge o f t h e precedents of that House, could Hetiso had given up six months of his time when other Members were recruiting themselves from the fatigues of the last Session without receiving any salary. It was a most alarming precedent undoubtedly—(A laugh) for if it were once established that the Members of that House were to labour gratuitously, and if it were done by him, he had no doubt that he would incur the di: pleasure of the House, and especially of that portion, which was not a small one, who received large sums of money for cloiag nothing, and many of whom put forward their best plea, that they had never done anything.—(A laugh.) Ho ai sorry that the course be had adopted, which he had done for the purpose of saving trouble to the House, was not acceptable to them. When he submitted his case to the lawyers he found that there was considerable difference of opinion between them ; when he found that the highest law authority in that House entertained considerable doubts upon the subject, he at once yielded, and in order to save trouble to the House, he gave up the office. He was sorry that the Right Hon. Gentleman had argued the case upon such narrow grounds. He had confined himself exclu sively to cold, dry, precedents, not one word of the great constitutional principle of the danger of Members sitting in that House, either expecting reward from the Government or in the actual receipt of money. and of course subser vient to the Government. lam surprised that the Right Hon. Gentleman did not propose to bring in a Bill to put an end to such a system. He admitted that there were many offices that were exempted from the operation of the statute of Anne ; and yet these offices were frequently the subject of expectation, and votes, speeches, and si levee might occasionally be the consequences of such ex pectation. He differed from all the subjects brought for ward by the Hon. Gentleman, and he even ventured to question the Right Hon. Gentleman's law, that this is an office that came within the operation of the Statute of Anne.—( Hear.) It should be recollected tle,t that statute was a highly penal statute, inflicting no les; a penalty than incapacity to sit in Parliament, and then fo: e, like all penal statutes, the most rigid construc tion should be placed upon it. He must contend that there was a considerable difference between an office, the appointment of which was by patent under the royal sign manual, and on which a stamp duty of considerable amount %,aa paid, and another appointment not under sign manual, but under the signature of one of the officers of the Crown, and to which a lesser stamp duty was attached. He would call the attention of Right Hon. Gentleman to a return which had been made to this House twelve months after the paFq,ing of the act in question. This return would be found in the journals of the House : it was ordered that an aceaunt be laid before this House, "An account of all ofliees under the Crown created since 20th of October, 1705." An office granted by the Crown is an office that must bey vacated by the crown ; an office appointed by the s , cretary of State is an office that must be vacated by the Secretary cf State, and by the Secretary of State only; and if :he appointment proceeded from the Croton, by a document bearing the Royal sign -manual, it can only be cancelled by a document of a precisely similar nature. And he should also submit, that it they could anticipate such a proceeding or document, that an instrument from Crown itself could not vitiate or repeal an order cr nyointment made by the Secretary of State. By the Sycretary of State was this appointment made during dis cretion ; and in the exercise of his discretion he could cancel or withdraw it ; but he submitted that it would nut be competent for any other power, regal or political, ex cept the creating power, to cancel that deed. Then it night be said that it was unfitting that any Member of this House should hold an office at the discretion of a pub lie functionary, who might confer it or retract it as the individual might adapt his course to the wishes of Go vernment, and it was, therefore, with strong feelings in his mind, that he did hope the Right Honourable Gentleman would be prepared to put this question upon a broader and upon a higher ground—not indeed that he should be pleased to hear any one propose the ex tension of the principle of disqualification, because, on the . • contrary, he should like to hear a proposal for the extinc tion of all disqualification, but that the payment of a salary out of the public Treasury should vacate the scat of him who occupies it, he being re-eligible if his constituents continue their confidence in him ; and it was well known to the Noble Lord, to whom he was indebted for the of fica, that that was the course which he intended to pursue. He stated from the beginning, that if it appeared to the 11 'else of Commons this was not a disqualifying office, aid that it was competent for him to retain it with out vacating his seat, that it was his intention to have it moved on the first night of the Session that be might accept the Chiltern Hundreds, and go to his constituents on the appointments on the broad and c,,nstitutional ground, that having accepted office, and in curred, as his constituents might think, a political obligation, they should have the opportunity of expressing their opinions on the course he had taken ; and this was tic situation in which every individual in this House ought to be placed by law, who bad any participation whatever in the public funds.—( Hear, hear.) When, therefore, (con tieued Mr. Harvey) the Right Hon. Gentleman assures me that this proceeding has no connexion whatever with politics, or parties, or person, it is a large tax upon my credence—(Laughter)—it is a very large demand upon my crAulity, because first of all when we hear on every side fern the speeches, and see by the papers of the party that there is an universal reaction throughout the country—that the constituencies in every borough are panting for an op portunity to record that change of opinion—that there is net a vacancy which can take place, fo. which:there is not a Conservative candidate prepared to takethe field—( Cheers) —am surprised that the Right Hon. Gentleman, when he considers what princely resources are at the command of that party, and when further he considers that the hum ble individual now addressing the House has not concealed that even the duty of the office, uninviting as it was, and its emolument, was acceptable to him, to turn round ith gravity, and say, though we know the whole country is running mad with Conservatism—that there is not a hustings where a Radical or a Reformer dare show himself with a chance of success—that he should coolly say to me, You may go to the borough of Southwark, where you will be re-elected without trouble, without expense, and without inconvenienee."—( Cheers and laughter.) This is s v t e i r t y u e t n r t u s e , w a s h o r e g fu a l rd ly s a t h p e p r g e e r a a t t e c ot, the e s t i k t n e d n c n i e e s s s , o a f n dt, the y ß e i g o n il; Hon. Gentleman, are quite prepared to reinstate me in my situation without any expense to myself, let who will on the other side, or from the Carlton Club, present himself.— ( Laughter.) I venture to think it is not so divested of personal considerations, because, why is it the Right Hon. Gentleman has been with his vigilance slumbering upon so many occasions of late? There have been some instances which he might have brought under the notice of the House, of a nature much more suspicious than the pre , sent, because the appointment was known—the individual was known—the exact amount of his emoluments wore also known ; and though it may be said discretion implies an -arbitrary exercise of power, I will venture to say that no leader of a party would dare to discharge an individual holding this or a similar office, who did discharge the duties of the office to the satisfaction of those for whom it w as created, and I do not hesitate to say that if I held that office at the present moment, I should give my vote, and express my sentiments with precisely the same freedom as before I held it.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) But it seems now there is a different interpretation given to it— ( Ilear)—and I ought to congratulate myself that I have given up the office, because if Honourable Gentlemen opposite should be on this side the House as their eager ad vocates expect, I should like to know the value of my appoint ment when I should be on the other side in constant opposition to them ?—( Cheers.) Am I to understand in that case my appointment would have been very pre carious, and that in the exercise of a sound discretion on the part of the Secretary of State, I should receive a notifi cation that I might retire from my office ?—( Laughter.) Why, this is a species of independence which it is fitting public men should understand.—( Hear, hear.) But I was observing that the Right Honourable Gentleman was rather lax in his vigilance, because he contends that the acceptance of an office which is a disqualification, works as a disqualification even though the salary be fore gone, and I admit there is great weight in what he says, unless by some provision or other it is guarded against. I admit if a Member accepting office after the prorogation of Parliament, holding it for six months, not accepting the salary, but exercising some very enviable patronage, and deriving indirect and inci dental emolument, if he could say just before the assembling of Parliament he had resigned? A great deal of mischief might be done, and still more, if the party could hold his place for any continuance of time, renouncing his salary for the exercise of the patronage belonging to it. In deed it would be an alarming doctrine to that portion of the House which may be called Radical, because if Gentle men of large estates, and of political importance could say, " Oh l I don't mind about emoluments of the Chan c .11or of the Exchequer; I don't care about the salary belonging to either of the Secretaries of State ; five or six thousand pounds will be of little importance to me, but I have cousins, and a large circle of subordinate rela tives. I should like to crowd Spmerset House, and Downing-street, with some few hundreds of them—( Loud laughter and cheers)—and that species of family patronage is acceptable to me." That would be a very dangerous doctrine against which few who have small means would be justified in protesting. But the Right Hon. gentle man has not exercised that vigilance which his situation as guardian of our Parliamentary technicalities might lead one to expect he would exercise.—( Laughter.) On the mo tion of the Hon. and Gallant Colonel ( Sibthorp) opposite, a return was ordered, in which some 39 or 40 Commissions were ennumerated—the names of those who fill them were stated, and the salaries. I will allude to two or three of them, for the purpose of calling the attention of the House to those Members of Parliament who hold ap pointments in these Commissions, but against whose names is the statement that they have foregone, or declined the salary. Now it strikes me that a temporary Commission stealing quietly through the offices of the Government, is scarcely likely to be dragged to notice, except in times of peace, when a military Member is unusually vigi lant.—( Great laughter.) But for that species of Parliamentary interference . : perhaps we should never have had this document on the table at all. There is something peculiarly silent and stealthy about a Commis sion which does not belong to an Act of Parliament, the clauses of which are debated openly in this House. In the County -rates Commission, after enumerating many other offices, there are the names of Thomas Law Hodges, and Charles Shaw Lefevre. Then there is this note under the head of salary allowances, &c.—" The Parlia mentary Commissioners decline to receive a salary,"__ Why, declining to receive a salery implied they might have taken it if they pleased, and I am surprised this never came under the notice of the Right Hon. Gentleman. But, perhaps, as the Commissions are not sufficiently old to find their way into the journals of the House, they are not worth reading.—( Laughter.) So, again I find in the Commission for the regulation of the Irish fisheries—there is a salary attached there which is to be paid when they shall have reported. That is rather an awkward tempta tion to protraction if the amount of their salaries is to be regulated according to the time they may take to draw up their report.—( Laughter. ) Attached to that is the name of C. A. Walker, and there is a note that Mr. Walker from the commencement has declined to re ceive any remuneration. Now, this is all very creditable to these gentlemen ; but if the doctrine be true, as stated by the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, that the acceptance of an office, or the acceptance of a Commissionership, is that which works the evil, I am a little surprised, giving him full credit for the assurance that not the remotest personal feel ing induced him to make this motion, that this Commission sh Add have ire ipect his attention.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Then, as to varie'is Acts of Parliament, and which have passed .his House with disabling clauses. Perhaps the I Right Hen. Gentleman will explain whence it is they have been inserted. Now, for instance, take the Charity Com mission, consisting of eighteen or twenty Commissioners appeinted by the Crown—that is, the Commission, is ap pointed by the Crown, but the parties who are to sustain it are appointed by the Treasury. There is a clause ex pressly inserted, that no Charity Commissioner shall be eli gible to sit in Parliament. So, again, in more recent times with respect to Poor Law Commissioners. They are also appointed by the Treasury, and there is a clause in that Act disqualifying the Commissioners from sitting in Par liament.—( Hear, hear.) But there is this very extraordi nary circumstance belonging to that Act ; that while it de clares the three Chief Commissioners should be disqualified, it (lees not go on to say that all the other officers, such as the Secretary, and so on, connected with the Commission, shall be, and therefore I apprehend it would be competent for the Secretary of the Commission to sit in the House, though he is receiving a salary of 1,2001. a-year at the discretion of the Commissioners who appointed, and who are expressly disqualified.—( Hear.) The same with regard to the officers—the Registrar, and Deputy Registrar of the Bankrupt Court--they also were appointed by the Tee sury, and there was the disabling clause in the statute constituting that Court. Now, if the opinion of the Right Hon. Gentleman be borne out ie law all these clauses were entirely superfluous, because he contends that the appointment to these offices being in the Treasury, and the other great political functionaries, they would he disqualified from sitting in this House. Then I ask the Right I-lon. Gentleman whence it is that those clauses have been inserted, except for the purpose of guarding against that construction which I humble submit would oibernise have been put upon those appointments, viz. that they were not granted by the Crown but were the ap pointments of great officers under the Crown; and that bears the distinction I am endeavouring to impress on the House—not for my own sake, because it has no thing to do with me—the office I held I have resigned, and my successor has been appoint cd,but at the same time I think while we are discussing this subject and our attention is call ed to it, that it is important the law of the case should be defined.—( Hear, hear.) I will not conceal frsun the House that I should have been content to have held that office, but I am one who thinks that it may be said of this [louse, as it is sometimes said •of our Courts of Law, that there is one law for the rich and another for the poor— that there is one law for party men and those who arc powerfully sustained by party men, and that there is an other law for those who hive no such connexions or asso ciations.—( Hear, hear.) I have little doubt that if this office had been conferred on some second or third class gentleman, connected with rank, station, and power, in this House—l don't care on which side, he may have sat, particularly when the Right lion. Gentleman said this motion was unconnected with party feeling, I say if it had been conferred on such an individual , I doubt very much whether this question would have been agitated at all : and if it had been, the thing would have bren passed over lightly; it would have been said, " Is he not responsible? —what Secretary of State dares discharge that man because he acts honestly but speaks disagreeably ? He gives us as much labour as he receives salary, and he is independent of the Government, and the Government is independent of him." Ido net think my place would have been worth the tithe of a farthing if this matter had been submitted to the House as a party question. My experience confirms that opi nion,and I will mention one instance. The Right Hon. Gen tleman was kind enough ten years ago, under the guidance of that same anxiety to protect the purity of this House, to move that no individual Member of this House should be in any way concerned in the business of this House. Unfortunately, though the Right Hon. Gentleman ms-ant nothing personal, that motion had a very serious per sonal application. —( Hear, hear, and laughter.) But when the same question was brought forward some time ago, more or less affecting a gentleman on the other side of the House, nothing was said except in a whisper to me, " How rancorously they acted towards you, and how silent and indifferent they are towards the other."—( Cheers.) It is this impression, and tWs strong conviction on my mind, that leads me to proclaim to the public what I really feel to be the case, that no man can expect justice in this House who happens to be unconnected with any of the great parties in it.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear, hear.") Hon. Members will recollect how the House acted in the case of that Committee. A Committee was also appointed three or four years ago to investigate the most monstrous monopoly that ever existed in any country, and which had pressed with the most tyrannical severity upon myself. A Committee was appointed, and a Report of that Committee was laid before the House ; but nothing was done, and no Hon. Gentle. man has ever asked what is to be done. But another Com mittee has sat since then—a close Committee, which ex cluded the public, and which had come to a resolution ex. pressly excluding them. Why has there not been a Report from that Committee, from which some Hon. Gentlemen retired, era account of its private and exclusive and secret character. Not twenty-four hours after that Committee had terminated its sittings, the gallant individual who was the subject of that inquiry was decorated with orders, and since then he has been clothed with military station in our colonies abroad.—( Hear, and cheers.) I say, then, that there is a great feeling of prejudice and injustice in some of their proceedings.—( Hear.) It may be asked, with these strong sentiments in my mind, why did I not at once resign-my seat, and take my chance of re-election ? I will tell you why. If I had retained my office, and va cated my scat and gone to my constituents, some gentle man might have stood forward and said, " I know I have no chance in this borough : all I ask is that 50 or 100 electors should give their votes to me." And I should have found it nailed on the hustings, and placarded all over the Borough, that all the votes given for Mr. Harvey were thrown away. " He may have 3,000 or 4006 votes, and I may have but 100; but I shall present a petition against his return, on the ground that he has accepted a disqualifying office. I shall go before a Committee, and take my chance that that Commit. tee may declare that he is disqualified"—that the man with with 3,000 votes is not duly qualified to represent the Borough, while he who has been scouted out of it may take his seat I—( Loud cheers.) It was impossible I should have so treated my constituents, and thrown them into hands which I knew of all things was most abhorrent to them. It is, therefore, allow me to say, of grave importance that these matters should be set at rest ; and although, as I have said before, I have no personal feeling on the subject, and I would as soon a writ were issued for the borough to-night as not, because I know upon whom I rely, and the manner in which I shall be protected, yet, at the same time, as the subject requires consideration and ought to receive it, and if the Right Hon. the Attorney-General chooses to move that Presi dents be searched, and that a report be made from a Com mittee on the subject, to that Ido not object. I neither assent nor dissent from it. But if the case be gone into at all, let it be gone into in the fair spirit of inquiry. Let it not be said that by some technical word this particular case has been guarded against, but let us come to the resolution that any one who accepts any public office, paid for out of the public revenue, shall vacate his seat, and be compelled to go to his constituents. At all events, I do ask the House not to come to a division until they have further information before them, unless they come to a unanimous decision, because the Right Hon. Baronet has intimated, that taking part in the deliberations of the House exposes parties to penalties. ' This is a grave matter, although I don't apprehend that such is the fact, even if the Right Hon. Gentleman's law be right, because I am not sitting here while I hold an office.—( Hear.) At the same time this intimation may readily be seized on, and may bring about inconvenience, which I am quite sure the Right Hon. Baronet is anxious to avoid to any one in this House.—( Hear.) Unless, therefore, the House comes to an unanimous resolution on the subject, I hope a Committee of Privileges will be appointed, and report fully upon it. Then recollect you are to inquire not whe ther the circumstances which lam placed in is a disqualifi cation, but whether the office itself is so disqualifying for the reasons I have already stated. I have stated that I took the opinion of eminent counsel, and on precisely the same cese, word for.. word, as that submitted to the other legal gentlemen; and this is the opinion of that gentleman which I am sure those of the legal profession will recog nise as no mean authority—l mean Mr. Rogers, who has written a book on the law of elections, which has been very acceptable in the eyes of those who are Judges of its me rits. This gentleman has stated his opinion in these words : " I am of opinion that although the Registrar of Metropo litan Public Carriages may be and is a new office, yet that it is not under the Crown within the provisions of the Sta. tutes of Anne, so as to render Mr. Harvey incapable of sitting and acting as a Member of the House of Commons, on ncapable of being elected a Member in case of a disso lution, and having come to this conclusion upon the ope ration of Section xxv. I am still more strongly of opinion that he is not the holder of any office under the 25th Sec- tion, which vacates his scat in - Parliament." This opinion it will be observed, is rather remarkable, most unusual as coming from a lawyer, for its clearness— ( Laughter)—its freedom from ambiguity ; but it may be asked if I have such confidence in this opinion of Mr. Rogers, why I do not act upon it. I will inform the House of my reason for not acting upon this opinion : willing to make myself perfectly secure, and having made up my mind in the event of my retaining the office to resign my seat and appeal again to my constitu ents, I put this further case to Mr. Rogers—whether he would advise a candidate not successful at the poll to present a petition against m y return on th e groun d o f my holding an office which disqualified me from sitting in Parliament, for I felt that although many thousand electors might record their suffrages in my favour, and although my opponent might poll a very small number, yet if a case came before this House, bearing in mind as I do what took place night after night on the appointment of Election Committees during the last Session, how the benches were crowded, with what shouts of rejoicing every favourable name was received—(Tre mendous cheering)—and with what shrinking of dread the announcement of an unfavourable name was accom panied,l I own I did no t f ee l d es i rous o f ex posing myself to the chance of thi s cont i ngency . M r . Rogersg. o h es ad o on to say, in reference t o thi s quest i on , th a t although he law of the htex pressed an opi n i on , per h aps too c l ear ly, a case, yet he wa s by no means prepared to say to that, if tcon sulted by tl:e opp os i ng candidate, Lau he s hould not of "Hear, otadvise him to give notice of di s qualification—( d cries hear")--and take his chance of a C om mittee (Cheers and laughter)—more especially as this might be done at l had to expect from that no great expense. I knew whati vo site to me, and whose great body which is arrayed ,- m ischief and in -• great power consists in prornotin " prevent ing good. I knew that they would come down in a more compact body—as oneman—on that occasion. I cannot forget either how many Hon. G en tlemen on this side of the Harvey' last Session, would stop and s ay to me, ~ Goo House, as they passedd God, e l it cannot possibly L e true, what we hit ave heard. Do you know it is reported that i s the intention of th e Laughter) Ministers not to place your name on . , the " Committee of . the ['ensign List. I really cannot believe it "—(Laughter) I found that many of these gentlemen who had hirdexypertessed their commiseration to me, Were among the thus of those who, when my case came on, voted to pre (I YAW') t' vent my going on that Committee.—(Cheers An — "be ter. ) flaying stated so much, I leave my' ea se in ol f hands of the House, being quite prepared to egain in the lk,nds of my constituents. trust mys - The Honourable Gentleman then left the Hou le arah ist loud clie , rs. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL would, in a yr try fe w d words, put the House in possession of the advice be 11 3 found it necessary to give upon the present question. _,..13°; fore proceeding with his observations he would se ty notwithstanding the sneers and powerful sarcasm )1 . t ae Honourable Gentleman who had just retired, the eas e would not be viewed or decided upon any party grow stilt."'" ( Cheers.) For the character and honour of the Ho ase, it was necesttry and most important that the case s tbould be temperately and calmly discussed. There was no .dotibt but that there was a difference of opinion heiweenthe,couti sel to which the Hon. Gentleman had referred hss case. The first question which arose was whether the of is e His cepted by the lion. Member was a disqualifying one. 111 opinion was that it was a disqualifying office. T b ap . pointment was not, it was true, from the Crown,. but it held during the pleasure of an officer who himself held office during the pleasure of the Crown. Then epic was urged that because the Hon. Member took n se lar „Y that therefore he was not disqualified, but in his opts to that made no difference. Tlivre was a salary atta abet' the office, and if the Hon. Member were refused it. b e e (the Attorney-General) had no doubt the C c ort e` Queen's Bench would grant a mandamus upon the ,Rei ° ,_ t * Another question arose upon this part of the case. Te e in it Honourable Member had not given up his salsrY unconditionally—had he done so unconditionally he might have been bound by it ; he was not so now , and t! ter efore the salary still belonged to the office. These v rere his opinions upon these points—others he knew he' .cl. other opinions upon them, and the House had to dccid .e. l ue 41st Geo. 111. made two closes of cases which di sq Uftlifi ed from a seat in that House. One prevented a. Metnlier from sitting and voting, otherwise they were liable to a. penalty Another class were those who accepted office Una tediatell and directly from the Crown—the seats of suer/ becam e vacant from the mere fact of such appointment. It was expressly enacted under those circumstances that the seat should Gecome vacated, and that a new writ shot ild issue' Now although the office which was held: by Mr ' Harvey was an office under the Crown, :so as to be included in the 170 enactment of 6th Anne, h e •must say from that it was not an office held directly and immed iatelY the Crown, because he was not appointed by t he C rcirb " but by the Secretary of State. As far as he 'the Attor ney- General) was aware this point had t ;ever bee n decided before, and such being the case, it w, a prope r question for the consideration of a Select .Ccmn littee : th Under all the circumstances, therefore, he wottl(i suggest that a Select Committee should be appointed, off w hich e Right Hon. Gentleman who had brought for ward the motion, and the Right Hon. Baronet, the nhamber for Tamworth, if he would take the duty upon hime .if, should be Members. He would therefore conclude by a oving tha t a Select Committee for the purpose of inquirit g into the appointment of Mr. Harvey as Registrar of Hackney' carriages be appointed, and that that Committee s hould be directed to report whether or not Mr. Harvey, by the acceptance of that office, had vacated his seat for tue borough of Southwark. Sir ROBERT PEEL said his advice, or rather his opin:on—because he did not presume to give bis advice-- his opinion was decidedly in favour of grantii tg- the RN' position bObre the House—( Hear, hear)—and' that being so, he should not say a word to prejudice the question in any way. Ho was hound to say, in justice t his H o % Friend near him, that he had intimated to him, that if an y other person proposed a Committee he sho, l id at one e accede to it. If it .should be the opinion of • the Ho use that a Committee should he provided, when it seemed to be, as this was a very grave matter, it would ti le prematu re to come to a discussion upon it at present.—(Hcar, hear-) It would be much better to seaich the precede] its, and. to permit the discussion to come on perfectly atbd unree n,- dic.xlly after those precedents had been seat ched. rike should not say a word about notices, but he thought u might assure the Houre that there was not a pe sty feel in g on the side of the House on which he was. Mr. WYNN certainly had great pleasure agreeilg to the appointment of the Committee, and he should ab stain from making any observations on some ret aar ks tha' had been made in reference to him in the ab Berke° of the lion. Member who had made those remarks. Appointment of the Committee agreed to, !Abe Lord J. RUSSELL did not know whether Wu — ad the wish of the House that the Committee should he n, a , 11/ ,i e now, or that the nomination should stand over tio House met again ? e the Mr. HU:VIE thought it would be better 'so ha v e t Committtee named at once, but we did not colle ct t it was named. REGISTRATION OF ELECTORS' BILIJ. On the motion of the ATTORNEY.- GENERAL, the Beg" a tration of Electors' Bill was read a secOnd time, and or dere to A be comitted. short m conversation took place across Ple table he t t ee ib i . l the Honourable and Learned Gentleman and Colonel Poe thorp, but from the confusion which then exited in House, we could not distinctly hear what transpired . REGISTERS OF BIRTHS, &c., ad b i g Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved the name re of the Registers of Births, &c. Bill. offer a Mr. CRESSWELL said he did not wisb tobe • word against the Bill. Having had the best ree,r ta ra ble fore them they could procure, there was very cvnsiu e be assurance afforded that all the registries R 'ere to But made by persons who had cognizance of the sultject. he would take the opportunity of saying a wer"..o specting the working of the General Registr aj did Bill. The registrar who registered births and deaths A ° o not procure the names from his own pers ona l kncro l :7 of the facts, but obtained them f rom t h e parents n' ies patties, or the owners of th e h ouses i n w hi c h the Pe,ri-b lived, which might be sent to him in writing, an. entered them. It was clear that the registrar wag ',,, -b o st to constant imposition from such a system, and tihe m - -- serious inconvenience Might arise therefrom, In ' l ,:n chester and other populous places it had airead.Y ;i e s e found that f or th e purpose of cheating there had beali a , entries sent i n , an d t h ere had been one or two pre se t - be Cons in conse quence. H e h oped, therefore, t h a t all that means possibl e wou ld b e ta k en to counteract an y evil might arise J. this resect. bee n LordRUSSELL said, that where there ha d ; o . known to be any imposition practised, he had directed P;00 secutions in th ose cases. He hardly knew how the tOL':, could be entirely guarded against ; but with th at el i , " every precaution possible should be taken be The Bill was read a second time, and ordered to ' committed. Mr. HALVES F roseF_ IR t N o l A m T e v I e O t N h e s BILL. eee nd Affirm-ti Bill. aon He hoped his motion would meet with the ti general approbation of the House. The Bill was f° ie abolition of oatha, and the substitution of a declaration, reading of the by persons who had conscientious 1 The Fr ill° scrup lee. a kerSe pie had been acted upon in several cases. The wn • a the Moravianthis le s, the Separatists, had met with the, duleen ; and there were a great naany u w b o e Wereindividualsperhaps who belonged to no particular sect, members of the Church, or, perhaps, 111 ,, hts tt bars the of less favoured institutions ; and they a sked, ' ero. same indulgence might be extended to le, oo on n c might here state the progress of legislat•%d this subect, and the House would see that there n' ture , been a steady • • inclination, on theofthe Legas- s - part t rr o h g c rant the indulgence to persons of conscientious serlhlraend s first Act passed on the subject was in the 1 3t " to 14th of Charles 11. The effect of that enactment ` os ao pui i i;sh most severely all parties who refused to ta ke w bo oat He had the penalties extended not only to thos o e. aer s refused to take an oath, but to those who persuaded ttas not to take one; and the penalty of transportation " even enforced. By the Ist of William and t h at Act greater latitude of toleration was allowed. By t re - larsl the Quakers were allowed to give testimony en tion; but still their testimony was not admitted in c ." O bola cases, nor were they allowed to sit on Juries, o r A , and offices of emolument. The ith and Bth of Wi",t o urea Mary, stated the peculiar hardships the Quakers l a v og led under from those penalties ; the penalties were rep e l to altogether, and a greater degreedegree of that sect for a limited time. The Ist of Geo. Ma de t ibed indulgences perpetual. The Bth of Geo. L pres s Fr icre d new forms of declaration, but those forms were eon objectionable. By the 22d Geo. 11. many doubter remedied; and in this state the law remained for svio 's eighty years. By the 9th of Geo. IV. the Me r o ple were acknowledged by Parliament as a class of Piodel entitled to this indulgence ; and by that s tatute the ado gence t o Q ua k ers and Moravians of mak in g an affir e i i as a declarati o n w as made legal in all cases , civil as sceAries criminal; but nevertheless, the disability to sit 0 1 4 the or to hold places of emolument, was continued. vos, 3d and 4th of Will. IV. the Quakers and 1% 100 t ber , 0 were put en the same footing, as to their rights , de d 5-- persons, and the indulgence was still further eXtencvloeers that all persons who could say they had been 01. 113 Y were to be entitled to the indulgence and benefits c latal . , h is Quakers. In the last Session a Bill was brought ill % r e Hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge. At that time a ' the i secession took place from the original boa of Quakersoded had become completely divided. Those who had , eees of from the original body had been disallowed the privilutd to that body ; but by this Statute all the benefits intenne'coa, be conferred on the Quakers were extended to the 5 to ers as well as conferred upon those who had contiti.tice,isia, be of the original sect. The whole tendency ef 1 . b ias on tion on the subject had been to relax the restrictioe this subjest., and he ( Mr. Hawes) trusted the Hay eesscien willing still further to relieve the scruples of the cen ta vo, tious. In the House of Lords an objection had been o f a n that such a Bill would tend to weaken the obligationvor it oath. But it would in fact have just the contrary e ffect: : on ly enabled conscientious men to take the oath in tn r ly it form in whic tey consid e public generally red it bindine', a t hat was for the interest of the that vor ae an d c onscientious men should not be placed in a less s ituation in this respect than those who were regardA been the obligation of an oath.--( Hear.) Again, it h a " o f any objected that such a Bill would place it in the power from pk , rson, from an improper motive, to claim exemptioa an oath. But that objection was obviated by t his jto S . vision, that to claim the objection a person must ge eee Court of Justice, and there demand it deliberatelY , t he gistering his name, with the officers appointed to tak e o , it oaths of allegiance, andpaying the required fe e. top ' t he was highly improbable that an y p erson indiff e rent t Ely owe sanction of an oath would t a k e a ll th es e steps. hardship had been inflict e d upon man y whichconscientions end ex deserving men by the p resen t sta t e o f the law , am ong eluded them frem a great number of offices--- 811 others, those of executor and administrator--an airing places of emolument under the Crown—bY re r en' an oath to b e t a k en. W ere no t these persoA-and it titled to the consideration of the House ? ""di s aele was his sole object to relieve them from the e on vantages whi c h th e i r consc i en tious scruples en tailed ty them. lie need not say that upon this s ub j ect no 1:1117, feeling could be entertained ; and, without saYing. o f thing m ore , h e wou ld simply move the seco nd reading the Bill. must GOULBURN said the Hon. Men.ber hiob aware that there was a great part of tire "ne tr Y o w rt ea. felt strong objection to a measure, th e real pun ) which was that every individual who chose to Pay' 33' HOUSE OF CO - 111MONS. FEE. 15 - - The SPEAKER took the chair at a few minutes before Four o'Clock. Mr. Joyce, from the Board of Trade, presented returns of the price of grain. Mr. D. BROWN presented a petition from Mayo pray ing for leave to bring in a Bill to improve the navigation of the River Moy.—Referred to the Private Bill Com mittee. HILL COOLIES. Mr. BAINES belied Co ask the Right Hon. Baronet whether the order sent from this country by the Directors of the East India Company, regarding the transportation of Hill Coolies, had been received in Calcutta—whether it had been promulgated, and whether a termination had been put to that trade? Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE had much pleasure in stating that the dispatch had been received ; that it had been acted upon, and that on the 29th December last, a law had passed the Legislative Council of d India, putting a final end to the exportation of Hill Coolie a. Mr. GIL LON moved for a return of the duty on Rail ways and steam carriages for the years 1837, 1838, and 1839.—Ordered. Mr. BA RNA BY gave notice that on Thursday the 21st of February, he should move for a Select Committee to inquire how a house, kept by Mr. John Gillon for the re ception of insane persons was conducted. BEER LAWS. Mr PACKING TON gave notice, for the Noble Lord, t he Member for South Lancashire, that it was his intention on Thursday the 28th of Feb. to move for leave to bring in a Bill to alter and amend the law relating to the sale of Beer. The Hon. Member also gave notice of his intention on Monday the 25th of February, to move for leave to bring in a Bill to enable the Justices of Counties, at Quarter Ses sions to appoint a Clerk of the Peace. TITHES (IRELAND.) Mr. D. BROWN gave notice that, on the Ist of March, he would move to abolish the Commutation of Tithes in Ireland. ? rQ u'n Lot .-oor Sti t Parno Da 5 a n it Th e & a t .) ,, c u r