The Sun. — London, England, 1839-06-22 00:00:00

I EVENING EDI rioN IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. Az. HOUSE OF LORDS, JUNE 21. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack it Five o'Clock. Lord W YNVORD presented a petition from the 1 Clergy of the diocese of Canterbury, signed by 57 Clergy ttenagainst the Chit oh Discipline. Bill, as moat destructive or the in'erest; of the Church, and he (Lord Wynforci) thought the petition well deserving of the attention of the Right Rev. Beech. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY need not assure t he Hou se th a t h e had too high a respect for the peti tioners to feel in'the slightest way dissatisfied with them for having petitioned as they had done. rle had a petition of a similar nature to present from five clergymen, and which he now did, but the petitioners must not be offended with hint for entertaining a contrary opi. pion to them. The Right Rev. Prelate then complaint d that b e had been greatly misrepresented by a speaker in anothe r place which he would not name, nor should It " nam e the speaker, though that speaker had t ot hesitated to name him. The misrepresentation It !s in reference to what he was supposed to have 1 1 1 ( 1 . in regard to the clergy upon the subject °' the Church Discipline Bill when it was before he House last Session. Expressions had been attributed to him which he never could have used, and, having alluded to the terms of the accusation, he put it to their Lotd silil'lV recollection whether they could suppose he could a'e used the offensive expressions. He would submit 180 that it was a most inconvenient practice for th e l Members of one House to take notice by ta me of the Members of another in reference Ito !that they did or said in their public capacities. Un 'o,obtedly the clergy were of all others the persons best co mpetent to form an opinion upon the sutject of this Bill. ,Ilte Right Rev. Prelate then presented a petition from ; L u c Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge , against le proposed plan of a Government system of national titleation, and in the principles stated by the petitioners he entirely concurred. The Right Rev. Prelate next Djesented a petition from certain Clergy in the county of eat against the Church Discipline Bill, with the prayer o f Which it was unnecessary for him to state that he did tot agree. JAMAICA BILL. Lord LYNDHURST presented a petition frcm Mr. ' l oge, praying that he might be heard at the bar against t h, preamble, tk.c. of the Jamaica Bill now on their Lord rrups 'table. Lt,rd BROUGHAM presented a petition from certain Nestl India planters and merchants, praying also that th ey might be heard both by Counsel, and by giving evi oenee b y witnesses against the same Bill. , Lord LYNDHURST moved, according to the no'ice he had given, that their Lordships would order that Mr. Hurge should be heard at the bar. 'Lord BR OUG ll AM moved that counsel might be heard 440 for the petitioners whose petition he had just pre tented. He submitted, that if their Lordships granted the PraYer of one::petition they must grant the prayer Zr_ the other, and for his own part he should thank it would rby far the best that all the petitioners should join in l 'ltrructing the same Counsel, and that the same Counsel l aould appear for all, as was the case upon the Municipal Corporation Bill. Lord ELLENBOROUGH wished to ask his Noble l ed Learned Friend opposite if he meant to move that wit nesses should be examined at the bar ? Lord BROUGHAM'S own opinion was, that it was much more a case for argument than for the examination r. any witnesses. h Lord LYNDHURST said that Mr. Burge prayed e might himself be heard ; he was a very learned counsel, 44 1 the other parties might perhaps agree to be heard by °lle Counsel for them all. He would submit that if they Were to be heard by a Counsel, and if Mr. Burge was to be hea r d a l so , th e y could not both be heard at the same cline, n or on the same day. Th e Marquis of NO RM ANBY would snggest that an I ,rrange men t might be made by which Mr. Burge might ga hea r d f or all parties. Lord LYNDHURST said Mr. Burge was heard tainst the previous Bill, as was also Mr. Tal'ourd for ather interests. Lord BROUGHAM said, that if they would follow his 4 dvice they would all employ the same Counsel. The Earl of HARE W 00 D said that he had a petition Which had been agreed to at a meeting o'f merchants and 'P h arnaica planters, held at Willi,'s Rooms, soon after the last alill wa s withdrawn. He (the Noble Earl) was surprised that the present Bill should have been brought forward after that Bill had been withdrawn, because if anybody objected to th e principle of the former Bill in removing power from ti le Colonial Legislature, they would find upon examination t act precisely the same objection applied to the present Bill. F lo therefore presented that petition on behalf of the pro prietors of Jamaica against the whole Bill, and praying to he heard by Counsel at the bar. The Marquis of NORM ANBY said it would be con !Lenient if some decision was come to by the House as to t ae second reading of the Bill previous to hearing Counsel. , Lord BROUGHAM—Suppose we give up Wednesday ` ol * once.—( Laughter.) Lord LYNDURST had no objection to hearing Coon lel on Wednesday and fixing the second reading fur Friday, but he feared there would be few of their Lordships there e ft Wednesday to avail themselves of the statements of Counsel. The Duke of RICHMOND was about to ask the Noble In d Learned Lord ( Brougham) a question relative to post- Dotin g th e Beer Bill, when Lord LYNDHURST said the q u es ti o n before the "ouse had not yet been disposed of. I ,The Marquis of NORM ANB Y would not press his ii° l ,.lon for the second reading of the Bill on Friday, iltere found to be inconvenient. " (4 'd LYNDHURST moved that Counsel be heard at the bar o n Friday next. Lord KENT ON said they could not ex p edi te t he read ,.'l2,c of the Bill after having once fixed it. Ha did not see "Y Counsel might not be heard on the same day as was axed for the second reading. Unless there was some Peculiar advantage to be gained, he did not see why they sho u ld deviate from the usual course. Lord BROUGHAM said the usual course was, that Counsel be heard on the question that the Bill be now read a second time. Ile submitted whether it could not be done in this way. The prayer of Mr. Burge to be heard was on petition, and not by motion. Could they not, then, make it an Order of the Day, that the petition of Mr. Burge be taken into consideration on Thursday next, and then hear him in support of the prayer of the petition ? The Duke of WELLINGTON believed the usual course was, that on the question that the Bill be read a second time Counsel be heard at the bar. Lord ELLEN BOROUGH was not aware that there was any precedent for hearing Counsel on a petition. Lord BROUG HAM said it had been frequently done. It was ultimately agreed that Mr. Burge should be heard on Friday next, and another Counsel for the rest o the petitioners. EDUCATION. Lord E LLENBO ROUG H asked when the Education Bill would be brought on ? Lord BROUGHAM said he would propose that it should he taken on Tuesday. He looked with great anxiety to the Course taken in the other House respecting the Government plan, for though he felt that the fate of that plan by no Means necessarily involved that of his own, yet he was aware that the Government plan did somewhat bear upon that Part of his own system, which was likely to excite the greatest c ontroversy among their Lordships. Earl RIPON—I am afraid you anticipate too speedy a termination of the disputes respecting the Government Plan. Lord BROUGHAM (sarcastically)—l am afraid 1 don't.—( Laughter.) The Marquis of SALISBURY presented a petition from the Town Clerk of Sandwich, praying for compensa tion. Viscount MELBOURNE thought the subject con tained in the petition was a far more proper subject for the other House of Parliament than that House. He would, however, say the determination had not been come to with out the most serious consideration, and he believed that the compensation was sufficient. He had no objection, however, to look again himself into the case. After a few observations from the Marquis of SALIS BURY, the subject dropped. Lord DUNCANNON, in answer to a question put to him by the Marquis of Westmeath the other night, rele vant to the 100,000/. borrowed from the one million loan for the Board of Works in Ireland. stated that that sum was still due, and that repayment was shortly expected. DUBLIN STEAM PACKETS. The Earl of WICKLOW wished to make a few ob servations to the House relative to a subject that he had referred to the other night. He alluded to the agency of the steam packets between Liverpool and Dublin. Captain Chappell, to whom their Lordships would recol lect he had alluded, had written to him as well as Mr. Purcell, to know whether he meant the allusions he had made to have an injurious effect on his character, and re questing if he did not, lie would state so in his place in the House of Lords. He could assure the Gallant Cap tain that he intended in what he said to cast no imputa tion either upon him or Mr. Purcell. The only observa tions he had made with respect to any party were directed against the Admiralty, whom lie considered not to have done their duty in the course they had adop'ed with re ference to this subject. He was so convinced of the in justice of the appointment that had taken place, that un less he heard from the Noble Earl opposite that some ar rangement was made to remove the evils, it was his inten tion in the course of a few days to make a motion oa the subject. The Earl of MINTO agreed with the Noble Ear: that nothirg whatever had been said either by him or himself (Lord Minto) that could impeach the conduct of Captain Chappell. He was merely the superintendent at Liver pool, and ; upon his being applied to, to know if he could get any person to conduct the business, he had stated that nobody could be found who was willing or desirous of taking the e mployment. Regarding the circumstance of there being no competition with Government, he would say that he s hould think it extremely inconvenient to in troduce a variety of Government agents. It had been the object to appoint only one, and in the selection the Admiralty had no knowledge whatever of Mr. Purcell except the fact of his being a respectable man and a large coach proprietor. Indeed he did not understand the Noble Earl now to say there was any objection personally t o Mr. Purcell. And as to the packets they were held to be exclusively for the conveyance of letters and mails. Whatever might be made from the conveyance of passen gers went towards the maintenance of the packets : and with respect to the parcels they conveyed, why in one year they had only brought two hundred to Liverpool. He had directed inquiry to be made in refei ence to any irregularity, extortion , or went of due attention to the public generally. on the part of Mr. Purcel, dttermined, as he was, that nothing of the sort should be allowed to take place, and no inquiry that had been made had disco vered a ny. The Earl of WICKLOW had not brOught any charge against Mr. Purcell as an improper man in himself; but his charge was that the Government had given him the poi.; er of extortion. He had been appointed in such a manner as that the public generally could not be equally sA - vcd by him ; and the very circumsta - Ace of his being a large coach proprietor showed that he had the means of monopoly in his own hands, as he might refuse to receive or to forward any parcel that was not sent to him by his own coaches. Lord MINTO said Mr. Purcell bed no interest whatever in the sea conveyance of the I.a eels, nor had he any com mission. He had nothing bat his chargts upon the par c,ls that were sent to hire by his own coaches, if they came to him by them ; nevertheless, 1;e could no more venture to refuse to receive a parcel that was sent to him by any body in any way, than he could venture to refuse a parcel from the Admiralty. The Marquis of WESTMEATH rose amidst cries of " Order, order!" when Lord BROUGHAM put an end to farther discussion upon the case, amidst laughter, by exclaiming—" Surely, surely, their Lordships must consider that they had had errnigh of Mr. Peter Purcell." Upon the motion of the Marquis of LANSDOWNE a Bill to make perpetual an Act which had passed for the last two years for the purpose of exempting from the laws of usury bills of exchange, was read a second time ; and, with a view to accommodate. The Duke of WELLINGTON in proposing a clause in Committee to limit the operation of the Bill till per haps the Ist of January, 1812 or 1843, for the purpose of obtaining more information as to the operation of the measure than the House was now in possession of, the 1301 was ordered to be committed on Monday. On the motion of Lord DUNCANNON the Windsor Castle Stables Bill passed thron , h a C .mmittee. ROMAN CATHOLICS. The Eail of WINCHILSE A rose to present the peti tion of which he had given notice, which prayed for the repeal of the Roman Catholic Emancipation Act of 10 Geo. IV, c. 4. If the petition had related to a measure that was agcy in progress of corn ing before their Lordships he should bore abstained f, ern saying anything upon the petition until that measure was before the House, but as it related to a measure that had b reo passed, and was signed by nearly 3,000 respect sable individuals, he could 'not avoid drawing attention to the feelings expressed by the petitioners—feelings, a par ticipation in which he believed was increasing throughout the Protestant society of this country daily against that measure falsely called the Roman Catholic Emancipation Act. He believed that many of those who had in bygone +nes advocated the passing of that measure conscien tiously believed, that by the removal of the disabilities it was intended to remove, peace and tranquillity would base been the result to the country. But, instead of that having proved to be so, be did not belieVe there was an individual in that House or out of it who gave their support to the measure, who could put his hand on his heart and say, that if he had known then what he knew now he would have supported it. Certain he was his expectations had not been disappointed because he had never thought that the equality °frights then asked for would content those who as-tied the Established Church. lie meant no disrespect to the Raman Catholic, but he would say that the Roman Catholic Papists in this country had employed the power which they had obtained in a very different way to what it had been employed by the Roman Catholic Papists in Ireland. If he had a Committee of their Lordships he should be prepared to show most clearly that in the year 1836 there had been re-embodied in a manual issued by the Roman Catholic Hierarchy in Ireland for the direction of the clergy and laity of the Catholics in that country, the most intolerant and persecuting doctrines that ever marked the character of Rome in her most intolerant days. Some of the most obnoxious bulls of that Church were now in full force in Ireland, which were denied at that time to be in force at Rome, and the denial of which he believed induced in my of their Lordships to give their consent to the measure. It was impossible to know that without seeing that so far from the Church of Rome in Ireland being contented with what she had got, she had set forth the whole of her power for the overthrow of the Protestant Church and Pro testant institutions in that country. The Noble Viscount opposite had himself admitted that those mea sures which he was giving his consent to levelled a heavy blow at the Protestantism of the country. He was prepared to contend that the concessions that bad been made from time to time to the Roman Catholic Papists of Ireland, had tended not only to weaken the Protestant Church there, but to shake it to its foundations throughout the empire, for no one could say but that if the Protestant Church was upset in one part of the empire, it must fall universally. He was prepared to contend that those measures of concession were expected to be fol lowed by others, and that the measure which had given rise to the present petition had proceeded from a scheme in Rome, and the ingenuity of man could not devise a scheme so well calculated to promote the power and dominion of that Church, and he was now convinced that the people of this country were at last roused to see the danger to which the civil and religious liberties of the country were destined, unless a bold step were taken. Would to God their Lordships had attended to what they had heard before they had passed this measure, not from the individuals only who now addressed them, but from others. He remembered that he had been called at that time an intolerant bigot, al though he could safely say he was not entitled to be so called, because there was not a greater or a sounder friend to religious liberty than himself in the country. He had hoped that the power conceded to the Church of Rome would have been used with gratitude to this country, and not as a certain party were now usir:g it for the destruction of every thing that belonged to us as Eng lishmen and Protestants. He believed the power con ceded to the Roman Catholics would be exercised ‘:or the destruction of all that was valuable to Protestants, but V, e people would not surrender without a struggle, and the Dissenters to a man would unite with the Members of the Church. England must retrace her steps on this ques tion. The Noble Earl concluded by saying that be wes not prepared to make any motion on the subject, but if the feeling of the country showed itself in the way he ex pected it would, unworthy as he felt himself to be as a leader of a great body of his countrymen, he would as far as he could honestly and fearlestly, advocate in that House the repeal of the Bill. Lord BROUGHAM having been one of those who sup ported the Catholic claims, begged to detain their Lord ships for a very few moments while he answered the appeal of the Noble Earl. The Noble Earl bad asked if those who supported the Catholic claims could lay their hands upon their hearts, and say, that had they known then what they knew now, they would have supported that measure. Reflecting on all the events that had taken place since 1829 he ( Lord Brougham) conscien tiously declared that be would now have adopted precisely the same course which he had taken from the time of his entering public life down to the year 1829, in regard to the Catholic Relief Bill. lie knew that some men were dis appointed because they formed extravagant expectations. If any man had been so sanguine as to suppose that in six or seven years the whole course of a century and a half of misgovernment would be rectified, and the people of Ire land put in the situation they would have been in if these Catholic disabilities had never been enacted—if any man was sanguine and romantic enough to entertain hopes of that sort. he bad no right to complain of being disappointed. Many had supposed that the delay in granting Emancipation would be fatal to the measure : for the longer an act of justice was delayed, the less be nefit did it confer when conceded. If it was true that be gave doubly who gave quickly, it was equally true that he halved and quartered his gift who delayed it till that was extorted with violence which ought to have been conceded as a right. If any evils were now experienced, they were to be attributed, therefore, to the delay in granting the measure, and not to the measure itself. Ile would also add, that Catholic Emancipation itself was never said by any one to be alone sufficient to create a new and better state of things in Ireland. Most of the supporters of the measure had said it was a foundation to build upon, but had never supposed it would cure all the evils, any more than giving fresh air to the lungs merely wood support human life. If their Lordships had nothing but air they wou'.d not live ( Laughter)—and they could not expect to better the con dition of Ireland unless they improved the habits of the Irish people. But he should be misstating h s own opi• nion it he did not, tell their Lordships that his belief was, the evils at present existing in Ireland arose from that habitual factious disposition which had grown tip undo r the old and bad system, and which existed i i the mind of the Orangeman against the Catholic and in the mind of the Catholic against the Orangeman. He did not with to apportion the blame so as to give one party an ounce of it more than another. There was a religious combined with a political feeling in that country—it entered into all the ordinary communiel tions of society, polluted the stream even of domestic in tercourse, and ate, as it were, like a foul ulcer, into the body politic of the State ; it was found to work day and night, both in public and private ; and a long course of firm, paternal, equal, arid impartial administration of the law, as well as an improvement of the law itself, to era dicate the evil, was required to allow the Irish to enjoy that happy state of society that was enjoyed by the people in England. The Earl of WICKL 0 W said the first act of his as legislator was to give his support to the Catholic Relief Bill, and he could lay his hand on his heart and say that all the good he had anticipated from it had been attained. It was easy to say that certain evils had resulted from a measure, although it wan not easy to prove that fact; but it was impossible to tell what might have been the evils if that measure had been resisted.—( Hoer, hear ) What would have been the condition of this country if the Government of that day had refused to accede to the unanimous wish of the people of Ireland, and a great proportion of the people of this country ? (No, no, from Lord Wincliiisea.) The majority of be Representatives of the other House of Parliament, Session after Session demanded it, and at last no Government was ale!e to carry on the affairs of the country without conceding the Catholic claims, and if the Emancipation Act had not been carried, the power of the Roman Catholic priesthood would have been greater than it war now. The Earl of LW DEN dffered from both the Noble Lords who had last spoken. The ceuetry now stood in a situation very inferior indeed to that in which it stood before the passimg of the measure. They now fou.id in England and Ireland a large influx of Jesuits for the pur pose of propagating the doctrines of the Roman Catholics. He conceived it was most important, if it had been pos sible, to prevent the evils to which he had referred—the power exercised by the Jesuits through the. country ; it had been the habit to smile at a reference to that power, but he believed that there was an under-current going forward in England, extending largely and widely the Roman Catholic faith, and admitted by the Roman Catholics themselves, to have for its object the advance ment of the temporal influence of that religion. It was rather a curious circumstance that he had iately seen in Dublin, a book entitled " Secreta Morita," of the Jesuits, in which was a passage translated thus:—.." Princesses and Ladies of quality are easily pract'sed upon by their women of the Bed-chamber, therefore we must by all means devote great address to them, wherby we shall knew the secrets of families."_( La u ghter. ) He believed, however, that the Protestants of England were awaiting from the lethargy in t% nich they had been involved ever since the passing of the Catholic Emancipation Bill, No- thing could save this country from the crisis, to which it was fast approaching, of utter ruin—but the acting upon Protestant principles, by which the prosperity of the na• tion had so lung been p:eserved.—( Hear, hear.) The Marquis of WESTMEATH said he did not charge the evil; which had been dilated upon to the Ca tholic Relief Bill, but to the Irish Reform Bill, which had Leen flung into the hands of the democracy of Ireland, when it was really unasked for, by an injudicious Mi nistry. GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY. Lord WENLOCK brought up the Rcport on the Great Western Railway Bill. BANKRUPTS. The LORD CHANCELLOR moved the reccnd reading of the Bill affecting bankrupts, the exact title of which we could not catch ; but the object of which we understood to be, the placing transactions re• spccting advances upon deposit under the same b_►nkrupt law as the common transactions of trading.—Agreed to. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. The LORD CHANCELLOR introduced a Bill for confloing the practice in the Court of Common Pltas to the Sergeants-at-Law (agreeable to usage, the origin of which, even at the time of the Conquest, was declared to be " lost in antiquity"), .except in motion; respecting trials on Circuit ; in which cases the Counsel who had bren engaged at the trials might address the Court , see ing that they were more conversant with the question to be decided than a stranger could be. It was most desir able to co , fine Learned Counsel to particular Courts, for great inconvenience and delay had been occasioned through Counsel, when wanted in one Court, being en gaged in another'.—( Hear, hear ) Lord W YNFORD agreed in the object of the 8.11, which was read a first time. Their Lordships then Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, ✓UNR 21. The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual h•Atr. On the motion of Mr. BA RNA RD, the Deptford Pier Bill was read a third time and passed. REDCAR HARBOUR. Mr. CA YLE Y presented a petition from the ship. owners of Tynemouth, in favour of the R. do Harbour Bill, and also from the mariners of the eastern coast of England in favour of the same Bill. He then moved that the Bill be read a second time. He could not under stand the wounds- of the opposition to this Bill, and would therefore reserve what he had to say until he had heard the observations of other Hon. Mrmtcrs. Mr. ORD protested against bringing forward a private Bit at this late period of the Session, it was in opposition to • the Standing Orders. He would not enter into par ticulars, but on this ground he would move that it be reed a s c )nd time this day three months. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON ccondel the amend ment. It was not proposed to erect this harbour by means of a joint stock company, but was in fact the act of an individual st eking to provide for himself by means of an Act of of Parliament. He hoped the Hon. Member would not persevere in pressing his motion. (Mr. Caylcy sig nified his intention of doing so.) He would then state his objection. It was proposed to establish this harbour on the north-east coast of Yorkshire, and to sul , j !ct all ships passing it to the payment of a toll. It was to extend three miles into the sea, and any ships passing within twenty miles of the harhour was to be liable to toll, wheTher they were laden or unladen, whether they passed it often or not ; and an invidious distinction was attempted to be drawn between British and foreign ships. A Committee of that House had recommended that passing tolls should be put an end to ; and when the Fishguard Harbour Bill was passed two Sessions ago, in which a clause authorising the levying of a p, ssing toil had been inadvertently permitted to rema'n, the President of the Board of Trade had, in the fdlowing, Session, in troduced a public Bill for the repeal of that clause. They had no security for the efficiency of this harbour--there was no subscription list. He hoped that the House would reject this Bill by a large majority, and that the House might not be again annoyed, Session after Session, by the persevering efforts of an individual, to effect his purpose. Sir F. TRENCH rose to order. He believed that ac cording to th." Standing Orders of the House they could not receive a Report upon a Private Bill after the 21st cf June. After a few words from the SPEAKER, Mr. P. 'FI-I OM SON complained of the Bill having been introduced at so la'e a period of the Session. He should most certainly o`.,j ct - to any clause imposing a passing toll; and the House had decided against the principle of such a clause being introduce din any Private Bill. He regretted that the Hen. Member opposite ( Alderman Thompson) bad not been correctly informed with respect to the Fish guard Harbour Bill. Instead of his (Mr. P. Thom son) being able to repeal the Bill, he had been com pelled by the forms of the House to introduce a Pri vate Bill, and had carried it with considerable dif ficulty, and tie parties who had smuggled the Bill through Parliamesit actually obtained compensation.— ( Hear.) He hoped the Hen. Member would withdraw the Bill, or if not, that the House would do summary justice on it by rejecting it. S:r E. CODRINGTON was a member of the Com mittee on Harbours of Refuge, and had heard very important evidence with respect to the necessity of appointing one or more of these harbours on the north-eastern coast of England. The safety of the lives of seamen, and the property of the country, was, in a peculiar manner, the business of the Board of Trade and Admiralty, and he was surprised, therefore, to find the Right Hon. the President of the Bo3rd of Tr,ide oppsing the Bill.— Her.) Why did not the Right lion. Gentleman himself introduce a Bill on the subject ?—( Ilear.) It was his ab s Aute duty to do so, and it was a neglect.of that duty to allow atom. in the_ Alt vopeola_passip_g year after year so vast a number of vessels and valuable lives to he lost on that eoaat... direction were obliged to effect an insurance of 10 per cent. upon their cargoes in consequence of the dangers of the coast. The halfpenny a ton, which it was proposed by the Bill to impose upon shipping, was a very trifling sum in proportion to that charge. It that harbour had existed the Forfarshire steamer would not have been lost. —( Hear, hear.) There existed at present a natural har bour on the spot, in consequence of two reefs of rocks run ning out into the sea; and not long since a foreign ves sel drifted upon the coast, and between these two ledges of rocks found itself saved, how it knew not. He con tended that in a case of this sort, where the lives of sea men, and the property of British merchants was in peril ; it was the imperatise duty of the Government to de ' fray the whole expellees of the construction of the harbour. He was sure when the case was properly represented to the country they would not hesitate to pay for so desirable an object. Th ose who had never been in the perils of the sea knew not what danger was, and that was the reason why many objected to the Bill. He jests at scars that never felt a wound."—( Hear.) If the Government . did not choose to bring in a m easure t h em selves upon this subject they ought to give every facility to private adventurers.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. A. WHITE would oppose the Bill because he thought its object ought to be carried into effect at the expense of the country. Mr. CHAPMAN opposed the Bill, because he thought the measure it was intended to support was visionary. He thought they would form a bad precedent if they placed tolls on ships. If this harbour was constructed there would be f,,r more danger than at present. If the Gallant Admiral were on that coast he would keep to sea, and never at tempt the harbour. It was a mere speculative, visionary scheme, and no one but the engineer and his Gallant Friend wished for it. Sir G. STRICKLAND would give his humble support to the Bill. He was astonished at the opposition given to it by the Hon. Member for Whitby, as he had been a member of the Committee on harbours of refuge, and well remembered the harrowing description given by the lion. Member of the dreadful sufferings and loss of life which happened on the north-eastern coast. He was not inte rested in the matter, as it was situated a hundred miles from his residence ; but when he stated that on that hundred miles of coast there had been within the last twelve years no less than 7SO shipwrecks, Han. Gentlemen would think some place of refuge was neces sary. Redcar was a proper place for such a harbour, and no doubt would be the means of saving many lives. He objected to the principle of a passing toll when any other means were ay/dibble. Let the Government appoint their own engineers; let them establish a series of harbours of refuge and he would oppose all passing tolls in future. Sir F. TRENCH—There is no doubt a passing toll was necessary on that coast, but Redcar was not the proper place, for it ought to be at Scarborough—(Laughter— and ought to be made at Government expense lie had the authority of eminent engineers for saying Scarborough was the proper place, and that it could be made at a very small expense. Mr. CRE SS WEL L would not have said a word upon this subject had it not been for the attack made by the Gallant Admiral upon the shipping interest. He said they were careless of human life because they opposed this Bill. Now he supposed the Gallant Admiral would give them credit for selfishness—yet he said they paid 10 pen; cent. insurance, because of the dangers of the coast. Now would not their interest lead them to sup pert such a harbour, if it was a good one, for the purpose of having the rate of insurance lowered. He (Mr. C.) was a native of Northumberland, and had been brought up in the neighb o urhood of the coast. He had had the misfortune to see many wrecks, but he was satis fied that out of twenty wrecks that took place on the coast of Durham and Northumberland, not one would be saved by the herb air. The lion. Gentleman opposite ought to establish this point, that those wrecks he had mentioned would not have taken place had the harbour been there. Coasting vessels, light in ballast, and caught by an east wind, would be driven 100 miles to the southward, and would never be able to work round the point so as to reach this harbour.—(Hear, hear, hear ) Then with respect to the proprietary of the harbour. No case had been made out for calling on the shipowners, to defray the expense of this harbour. It was said this harbour ought to be erected on the ground of humanity, but he would ask why should they gratify their humanity at the expense of theshipowners?—( Hear, her. ) Admiral ADA NI had taken the greatest pains to inves tigate this matter and he Lai done so will a person, than whom no one was more capable of forming an opinion on this subject—be alluded to Captain Beaufort —( Hear, hear.) The conclusion he had come to was, that there was no ',lace on the cost more appropriate for a harbour of refuge than Redca-.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. L A NIBTON was opposed to the principle of in troducing a system of general taxation into a Private Bill, and therefore should vote against it. Mr. HUME thought it was very bad economy to allow our ships and sailors to be wrecked for want of proper harbours, and he was sure any reasonable and well digested plan would be received with the greatest readiness by the House.—( Hear, hear.) He would go further, and say that there were many measures of great public utility that the Government might have brought forward connected with our naval establishments, but which they had not done. It was useless grants of mosey he had always opposed, but he I was convinced there could not be a more judicious 9 )- plication of the public funds than to the protection of life and propeqy. The whole of the coast ought to he examined. Whilst he should vote against the Redcar Harbour Bill, he shcu'd he ready to support any measure which could remedy the evil. Mr. CA YLEY s.aid the [ion. Member for Whitby had represented this as a visionary scheme, but there was ample evidence to show that Redcar Harbour was the best point on the coast for a harbour of refuge. He trusted that some good would arise out of this discus sion. Life and property were interested in the question, and it was the duty of the Government to come forward to :So; d them protection. Sir S. L LTS Id I NGTON said, if this were a question whe h-r harbours of refuLe were necessary or not, or whe ther Redear wz.s a proper place for the erection of such a harbour, he would not have troubled the House with any ob servations. But that was nut the question. The question was, whether they would impose a tax on the shipping interest, for the purpose of creczing a harbour at Redcar, when that interest had rot expressed any opinion in favour of such harbour. This was a private Bill, for the purpose of promoting a private interest, and imposing a passing toll on the shipping of the country. There were no persons more astute in discovering their in terests than the shipowners of this country—there were no persons more anxious for the preservation of human life, and if they believed it would be for ther benefit and advantage tl pay this toll, no doubt the ship owners would have given their consent. If the inquiry was made amongst the whole body of shipowners in Lon don, they would not find half a d, z.m in favour of this Bill. Mr. INGHAM expressed his earnest hope that the Government would accede to the suggestions of the Gal lant Officer opposite and the Hon. Member for Kilkenny, and take some step to inquire into the subject.—( Hear.) Mr. BELL opposed the Bill. Sir C. LEMON said, if the principle was adopted that the public money should be laid cut in harbours of refuge there ought to be some inquiry, Mr. O'CONNELL said he con - ilered these refuge harbours necesiry : the question was how the expense should be repaid? He certainly objected to passing tolls: but he thought the question might fairly be considered in Committee. Mr. HUME sad it must not be imagined that those who voted against the Bill were opposed to harbours of refuge. The House divided, and the numbers wer. For the Bill 32 Against it Majority against the Bill The Sidmoutli Improvement and Market Bill was read a third time, and passed. The Norwich Improvemen: all was read a third time, and passed. LONDON CITY POLICE. On the motion of Mr: - - Ft7X MA ULE, the London City Police Bill was read a third time. Oa the question that this Bill do pass, Mr. FOX M AUL E sail that he had several Clauses to propose which lie wished to introduce into the Bill ; he would therefore move that they be read at the table a first and a second time, and that. they should be referred to the Select Committee, to whom the Metropolitan Police Bill had been referred, in order that they might report tbcrecn. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE thought this a most extraordinary mode of proceeding; one day the Bill was stated to be a Private Bill, and another day it was represented as a public Bill. This Bill had been now read a third time, he had not objected to the third reading - , because he did not object to the Bill as it at present stood —but he did object to every one of the clauses which were now proposed to be brought up. He should like to have the opinion of the Chair, for the purpose of knowing whether it was possible when a Bill was read a third time, for it to be referred to a Select Committee in order to have clauses introduced. Mr. FOX MAULE said that the only object they had in view was to refer the clauses to a Select Committee. Mr. T. DU N COM B E considered that the clauses were most objectionable. The Government and the City of London were Loth ashamed of them, and they wished to smuggle them in before the Cimmittee. If he under stood the Bill rightly it would h .ve the effect of entirely altering the law upon this subject, in fact he might desig nate it to be a pattern Bill for a rural police. It isas necessary therefore that the House should look to its clauses with great jealousy. He should object to their being referred to a Select Committee, because if the clauses were good for anything they ought to be discussed in public. It was his intention, it the clauses were persevered in, to divide the House upon every one of them. Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought that those who had attended the discussion the other night would consider the course now pursued by the Honourable Member to be rather , xtraordinary. The plan now proposed to he adopted with respect to these clauses, was in consequence of a desire on the part of the Govern ment to yield with readiness to the suggestions of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. Mr. T. DUNCOMIIE begged to explain. He objected to the clauses in the Metropolitan Police Bill the other night, and having done su fur his own constituents, he wished to do by others as he would be done by, and there fore he objected to there being added to the City Police Bill. Mr. GOULBURN was certainly one of those who o t ss I d peps r of course hio T noeu Temple-bar, nshs them. ps takenl occasionet Buto b a t r hh , t and ete,agcn; ore ti there ,dt t h i nbn e roc r icton e ohng f u o evl r led e upnpnic h eoa e nclt thought that the law ought to bp the same on both b w enue gas ofsi the clauses et i bho s y p re e o attention ws incon venientea ly course t o o f o a adopted riders and send them to a Select Committee; he objected to that course on a Public Bill, and he did it the more on a private one. He thought the only way of getting out of the difficulty was to discuss the _clauses as they were brought up to the table. Mr. F. MAUL E said when the Metropolitan Police Bill was first introduced, it included the City ; that part of it was struck out, and these clauses wcr: forgot City_ Pollee Bill, till sortie Mdillbets - aarggirsteitr the fact in the committee on the Metropolitan Police Bill. The fact was, that the clauses, with the exception of one or two, were now actually the law of the land, and the City Authorities were bound to take notice of them. Mr. WILLIAMS said the citizens of London had been treated in a most unfair and unjust manner by the Govern ment, and be should offer every opposition in his power to the introduction of those clauses which were perfectly at variance with the understanding that took place between the Government and the citizens of London regarding this Bill. The city of London bad enjoyed the right of managing their own police and protecting their own property for more than 700 years. They were satisfied, unreformed as the Corporation was, to continue the protection of the property in the hands of tl:e Corporation. After the changes which had taken place, how did the question now stand ? Why, that the very provision introduced in the ori ginal Metropolitan Police Bill was to be introduced into the City of London Police Bill. He therefore thought the citizens of London bad been dealt with most unfairly, and that they ought to be put in possession of the alterations made in the Bill. Lord JOHN RUSSELL agreed in the suggestion of his lion. Friend ( Mr. F. Maule) that it would Le better that the clauses should be introduced into the Me tropolitan Police Bill, when the House would have an op portunity of discussing them. Sir R. PEEL said it would be better to adhere to es. tablished usage on the third reading of Bills. What ought to be the law of a considerable part of the metropo lis ought to be. the law of the City of London. The best course, in his opinion, would be to withdraw the present Bill, and to bring all the clauses approved of into the Metropolitan Police Bill, on the understanding that no ob struction should be thrown in the way of the progress of the Bill up to the present stage. Captain WO Od, we believe, was for the recommital. Mr. FOX MAULE objected to the course proposed bythe Right 1i0n.13 ironet the Member for Tamworth, be cause it would re-open the discussion on the City Police Bill. He should propose first, a clause giving the Secre tary of State, power on emergency, to enable:the metropo litan police to act in the City, or the City police in the metropolitan districts, the object of which was merely to provide for casual disturbances. After a few observations from Mr. GOULBURN and Sir M. WOOD, which were inaudible in the gallery, Mr. WAKL EY hoped that the Government would ac ct o e p d p e o s t i o t e t . h e Two o w u o r s u e lation of the police of t he metropolis, one was a Private Bill, I s l u s g w g e e r s e te b d e f b o y r e t t h h e e ß u i gohutscHf for r n . t h ß e a r r e o g n u e and the other a public one. Now, looking at these Bills, he could not hut observe that there was no uniformity in their statements. He wished to know, therefore, from her Majesty's Ministers, which Bill they would recom mend to the consideration of the House, end the adoption of the public. If the clause now proposed were introduced, Hon. Members would not see them in truth till the Bill had passed, and he would ask whether that was fair either to the House or the public. If the clauses in the Metropolitan Police Bill were just, he would ask why they should not be adopted in the City, preserv ing to them some of the privileges they were desirous of keeping, but taking care that the preservation of those privileges did not interfere with the establishment of an efficient police. Tire other Bill had gone through Com mittee certainly, but he knew that there were other clauses to be proposed, they could rot know what it might be until it was passed. For the sake of uniformity then would it not be better to postpone the present Bill till that time. He thought the proposition of the Right lion. Baronet a very fair one. The clauses might then be received, and the question that the Bill do pass be postponed till the other Bill was at the same advanced staae- Mr. and he h a d a pocketful of celraeuswesa,ssoonmee F. MAULE had not the slightest objection to pur sue the course proposed. Mr. LEADER said there was great confusion in these of them. The prooapinotd.sedrrahmendments were not Bills, and on looking at them one could not tell what to did not understand. The 7th clause printed, Commissioner from holding a seat in that others to oppose ; but be to up ei wanted to know the ineanin c g olfa o uw f sie t li h ci a hn t l ein t g there was a hidden meaning in it.— (No ,Now no.) It was very easy to say so, but he believed that it was aimed at an Hon. Member of that House ; and un less good reasons were shown for the necessity of that KINNON said the clause in question was a per mrht cpti e h e l r a a aeoc k lii l e .us y se a ceni s a n e s e d‘ k tiv w e theh d i no thought hi t t o o h N iu V r b eeg l clause being retained, he would give it every opposition in his power. feci‘tiar.nol‘mPaly—it was unprecedented. No person was ever before debarred from sitting in that House. by a clause in a private Bill. Two principles were ad opte d upon that point. One was when the p erson was a ppointed and heldc Executive his place under the influence of th Govern ment ; the other , where the p erson re p r esented the p lace in which his appointment was. The Commissionership in question was not in the a p pointment of the Treasu r y or the Government , but of the Cit y of Lond on. They mi g ht carry , and the then m ight bring in a Bill to exclude the principleßecorder. a little further —carry it out to its full ex- t They might introduce a clause disqualifyng any person a Commissioner of the city police from being a member for the City of London, but he thought they could not extend that disquacation to the country at large. Mr. G REENE then rote to address the House, but was interrupted by The SPEAKER, who said, the question before the House was as to clauses to be introduced into the Bill; ‘vbereas, Lion. Members were: discussing clauses already in the body of the Bill.—( Hear.) _ Mr. FOX 11AULE said he would:postpone the 8.1 till Wednesday next, so that the other Bill might come before the House in the same stage as this was. Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in reply to a question by Mr. Hume, said, that the clauses might be brought up and added to the Bill, and then any amendments could be considered. Ou the motion of Mr. WILSON PATTEN, 11IeIlin's Divorce Bill was read a second time. Oa the motion - of the same lion. Member, Hodson's Est to Bill was read a third time and passed. On the motion of Mr. F. PALMER, the Reading Cor poration Estate Bill was read a second time. A Message from the Lord.; brought up certain Bills. HULL DOCK BILL. Mr. GREENE gave notice that on the third reading of the Hull Dock Bill he should move certain amend ments. PERSIAN MISSION.—OUTRAGE ON SIR F. MAITLAND, AT BUSIIIRE. Mr. M‘KI NN ON, seeing the Noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in his place, wished to ask him a question relating to the Persian Mission. In her Majesty's speech at the opening of the Session it had been stated that our Envoy to the Court of the Shah of Persia had been withdrawn. Since the❑ Sir John M'Nicl had returned to this country, and had been here some time. It appeared that the Secretary and the other offices of the embassy had retired to a town in Turkey, about eleven days' journey, as a courier would travel, from Teheran. Those ofEccrs who had been sent out for the purpose of instructing the Persians in the art of war had retired to Bagdad. This was a most extraordinary state of affairs. It had Inen stated that diffcrenccs existed between this country and the Court of Persia, and that we had refused to receive an Envoy %%horn the Shdh had sent to this country—( Cries of " Order !" " Question !") —it was necessary that the House should be acquainted with these circumstances. A sum of 12 0001. per annum wr•:as allowed by the East India Company to pay the ex penses of the diplomatic mission to Persa, and _tills allow ante, although made by the East India Company, he considered to he under the controul of the House.—(Caries ut " Order, order.") The question he wished to ask was, In what manner the sum of 12,000/. per atlnura was at present expended; and if the members composing that embassy still continued to receive their salaries? Lord PALNIERSTON said the lion. Gentleman hail introduced his question by rather a longexordium, he would set him right us to one or two of his facts. Every one knew that when differences arose between different Courts, it was frequently the case that missions were withdrawn. This did not put an end to all communications between the two countries—it was a temporary state of suspension of amicable relations short of en absolute rupture. That was the present state of our re!ations with Persia. Sir John M•Niel had obtained leave of absence before the interruption had taken place in our relations with Persia, :nd he was at present home on that leave. Ile had had an audience on his arrival in this country, not on the con clusion of his mission, but as all Ministers have who return leave. All the other officers of the mission had been withdrawn on account of our differences with the Shah, but it had been deemed advisable, instead of permitting them to return home, to order them to return to Erzeroum, in order that they might be at hand to receive any communi cation the Persian Government might be desirous of making. On the other band, the Persian Government h .d sent an Ambassador to this country, and although he had been informed before he left Persia that he would not be re ceived until the differences were adjusted—that Ambas sador had thought it his duty to proceed to this country in his private capacity, and although he had not been publicly received, yet he had had one or two private interviews with 1:m as a private individual. Now to the question that had happened in this case, which happened in all similar cases, the mission was not at an end. Sir John M'Niel, like all Ministers who were home on leave, was sulject to a deduc tion being made of half his salary, all those who vvtro on duty were in the receipt of their regular sAlaries, which was the case with the other officers attached to the mission. Mr. AI AC LE AN understood, Ohm, th it we were not at war with Persia. He wished to ask the Noble Lord if any reparation had been made by the Shah for his attack on the messengers of Sir J. INPNieI. He would likewise take that opportunity of asking if her Majesty's Government were satisfied with the explanations of C , )unt Nesselrode as to the conduct of Count Sirnonviteh and another hessian officer at Cabool. He would also ask if any accounts had reached this country of an outrage which had b en perpe trated on Sir Frederick Maitland and the crew of the Wellesley, off Bushire. He had seen an account which had been sent home by an individual on board the Wellesley, which stated that when Admiral Mait land wished to land at Bushire, he was told by the authorities, that he would not be allowed to land at the usual state place of landing, but must land at the Custom House Quay; this he refused to do, and in conse quence had been fired on by the soldiers; that several of his men had received bullets in their hats and several parts of their clothes ; that they returned the fire and killed two or three of the individuals who had been engaged in the perpetration of the outrage; he would ask if he had re ceived any despatches from the Wellesley relative to this outrage. Lord PALMERSTON said, in reply to the first ques tion, that, as yet, no sufficient reparation had been ma de b y the Shah of Persia. With respect to the explanation of the Russian Government he must refer the Hon. Gentleman to the papers on the table of the House, which contained the correspondence which had taken place relative to that ex planation. We were certainly not at war with Persia, though our relations with that power were interrupted. He had received an -recount of the outrage on Sir P. Maitland, and the circumstances were not exactly as had been stated, there was no difficulty in landing, and after wit. ` 4 G rj o e krnit t gn tjodts-niral, had had ith amicaEle relations to the embarkation. It had been required that he a.") sco o ut:l embark from the Custom House instead of from the usual state place of embarkation in front of the Governor's residence. Sir F. Maitland or, being informed that ' this was an insult he ought not to submit to, refused to embark at the place pointed out, and took the proper pre cautions to enforce his desires : the boats of the Welles'ey were brought opposite the place, shots were exchanged, and he succeded in embarkir ' , from the usual place. The Resident of the East India Company had returned with him to the Island of Carrack ; after that a communication had been opened by the Governor of Bushire, with Sir F. Maitland, expressive of his regret for what occurred ; and when the last accounts were received, Sir F. Mait land was going back to Bushire to receive explanations on the subject. Sir S. CANNING was understood to ask if the ne gocia tions were still going on between the Noble Lord and the Persian Ambassador in this country. Lord PALMERSTON said he had had an interview with that personage the other day, and perhaps he might see him again before his departure from this country. Mr. M•KINNON moved for a return of the manner in which the sum allowed by the East India Company for the expenses of diplomatic missions had been expended. MINISTERS MONEY—IRELAND. Mr. S. O'BRIEN asked when it was intended to bring forward the Ministers Money Ireland Bill. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he thought it would be better to postpone that measure until the valuation had taken placa undr the Poor Law OUTRAGE AT PORTENDIQUE. Sir S. LUSHINGTON wished to know what had been done relative to the negociation with the French Government as to the attack made by the French on the property of the British merchants at Portendique, on the coast of Africa. Lord PA LMER ST 0 N had referred the documents to the Judge Advocate, and had received his report two days since, so that there had been no opportunity to apply to the French Government on tho subject. BANK OF IRELAND. In answer to a question from Mr. HUME, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated that he would on an early day bring forward his measure on that subject, so as to give the Hon. Gentleman an op portunity of bringing forward his motion ; he had thought it his duty, in consequence of the notice the Hon. Gentle man had given to write to the Bank of Ireland on the subject, in order that they might be prepared to defend their interests : he expected some Gentlemen connected with that establishment in London in the course of a few days, and then he should be able to fix a day for bringing the subject forward. SHANNON NAVIGATION. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the Irish Canal Company, against the Bill for the improvement of the River Shannon, which Bill would deprive-them of their righTs without adequate compensation, paying to be heard by Counsel against it. • On the motion tor granting the petition, The CHANCELLOR. or the EXCHEQUER said, that as the petition was merely egainst certain clauses of the Bill, he apprehended they could not be heard by counsel against the whole Bill ; he did not wish to prevent their being heard by counsel, but he apprehended some other mode must be adopted. Mr. O'CONNELL said the petitioners objected to the second clause, which was the principal one in the Bill. COMMERCIAL TREATY WITH NAPLES. In reply to L?rd S ANDON, Mr. P. THOMSON said, tnat the negociations were pending with the Court of Naples, with a view to do away with the Sulphur monopoly in Sicily, and he hoped they would end in a general commercial treaty which would be for the advantage of both countries. CUSTOMS. In reply to Lord G. SO MERS ET, Mr. P. THOMSON said !:e should not be able to in troduce any Biil on the subject of the Customs this Session. vice and diminishing crime, as the advocates of solitary confinement had anticipated—that was particularly the case in the United States. He opposed the Bill, but he gave the Noble Lord credit for the best intentions. Mr. DARBY seconded the amendment of his Hon. Friend, on the ground chiefly that there was no evidence to show that the system was practicable in the country. Lord J. RUSSELL explained. He stated that the separate system had been alroady examined and approved of by the highest authorities.—and he assured the Hon. Gentleman that the powers to be invested in authorit'o; under the Bill, which they so strongly objected to, had been as much reduced as would be compatible with its efficient administration. Lord DUNG '‘NNON fully concurred in all that his lion. Friend ( Mr. Pakington) had stated of the inhu. mat-11v of the separate system of depriving the prisoners of ax and exercise, and impairing the powers of both mind and body. It appeared to him that the third clause of the Rill was mantfestly unjust in its provisions. It was an extremely dangerous power to give to any body of men to confine a prisoner for an unlimited period in solitary confinement, and it might lead to the most lamentable results. lie was unwilling to adopt any course which would put an end to the further progress of the measure ; but his oljcet.ons to its provisions were so strong and so numerous, that he should certainly support the amend ment of his lion. Friend. _ _ Mr. MILES rose an - midst loud criei of " Divide." He thought the Noble Lord was entitled to the greatest credit for the introduction of the present m easure.—( Hear.) It was calculated to bring into effect prospectively a good system of secondary punishments. It appeared to him that there was no system which had been productive of so salntary an effect in reclaiming prisoners as that of solitary confinement. He condemned it, however, when carried to too great an extent, it seriously affected the health and faculties of the prisoners.—( Hear, hear, hear.) The Honourable Member who had moved the amendment could not have read the Reports of the Commissioners, on the system pursued in the United States.—( Hear, hear.) Tne system of discipline at present pursued in the gaols of that country was exceedingly lax, and he believed that many parties were in the habit of commit ting offences upon the chance of being sent into gaol and living there comfortably. The whole Bill being permissive, he hoped and trusted it would speedily be carried into operation. His Hon. Friend would, he believed, best consult the feeling of the House by withdrawing his oppo sition to the measure. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw and the Clouse divided : For the third reading For the amendment Majority The Bill was then read a third time. Sevenl clauses were brought up, and after goin through Committee were added to the Bill by way o riders. On the motion that the Bill do pass, Lord TEIGNMOUTII rose to move the omission o the 14th clause. He did not know, after the recent division, that he would divide upon the motion—he was very certain that it could never become port of an Act of Parliament—it was sure never to pass the other branch of the Legislature, or he would have opposed it in every stage. He complained of the conduct of Gentlemen on the oiler side with respect to the clause—they heard all that was said from the Conservative side of the House upon it, but being unable answer the arguments they trusted in numbers. The clause was introuced not to remedy a grievance, but to set up a most dangerous pre cedent. He spoke with authority upon this subject, as he had, since last discussion, sent queries to the chaplains of the gaols of all largetownsandthey had most obligingly answered him, from all their letters (the Noble Lord read extracts from several) it appeared that it was a very rare circum stance for any one Catholic out of a thousand to ask for the attendance of a priest. The effect of the clause would be to extract money from the Protestant Church of Eng land fur the purpose of endowing another system of re ligious instruction. It was, in fact, another appropriation clause upon a small scale. The Noble Lord concluded by stating that he should not divide the House, but content himself with stating that he believed the country was becoming more and more alive to the subject.—( Hear.) Mr. FOX MAULE did not mean to discuss the ques tion again, because it had already been debated on four cifferent occasions, and opportunities had been given to discuss it in the fullest manner.—(Hear, hear.) But on this occasion, when the fullest notice had been given, scarcely one of the leaders of 'are other side of the House were in attendance to discuss what the Noble Lord considered to be of so much importance; and therefore he was bound to infer that they were absent on the conviction that this clause was so reasonable in itself that they did not feel justified in opposing it.—(Hear.) Mr. PRYME supported the clause. If there was one class more than another that needed instruction, it was the inmates of prisons, in order that they might be induced to pursue a better line of conduct. He was convinced that much good might be done in prisons by the administration of religious counsel to the inmates, according to the prin ciples in which they had been educated.—( Hear.) Mr. LANGDALE had introduced this clause with no feeling of hostility to the Church. He had never done anything in his capacity of a Legislator which had a direct tendency to injure the Church ; and what he had not done directly, he would not do indirectly. He considered it but reasonable that those who were called upon to attend pri soners should receive some remuneration for their services. Lord TEIGNM OUT H explained that lie did not in tend to cast any reflection on the Hon. Member opposite. On the contrary, he was convinced that he had acted from conscientious motives, and had he (Lord Teignmouth) been a Roman Catholic, he should have pursued precisely the same course.—( Hear.) Mr. ESTCOURT objected to the appointment of chaplains being regulated by the number of prisoners. I it were necessary to have a chaplain for fifty prisoners, 1 might be necessary to have a chaplain for every other de. seription of persons in the gaol. He did not think any Member of the House would advocate such an altera'ion in the kw, and therefore must protest against the introduc tion of the principle. Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL said if there was any danger to the Established Church, in the plan now about to be adopted, it already existed in Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) The fact was that the whole of the opposition raised against the proposed plan was part of that "no Popery" cry which Hon. Members had evoked for their own purposes, and which they would probably in the end find too strong for themselves.—(Hear, hear.) The absence of the leaders on the other side was rather re markable, if the proposal was so dangerous; but he sup posed they were trusting to the force of prejudice in another place.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. A. YATES said that there were not above four or five prisons in England to which the regulation would be applicable. The Inspector of the Goal at Liverpool reported that he could see no evil from the establishment of these Chaplains, provided they did not interfere with the discipline of the goal, and after all it was left to the dis cretion of the Magistrates to decide _whether a case was made out for their appointment. Mr. O'CONNELL had to make an apology to the Noble Lord for not speaking on this subject. He had pro mised to do so, but he knew there was no offence which the House would sooner pat dun than not making a speech. —( A laugh.) . The clause was then agreed to, and the Bill was read a third time and passed. Mr. FOX MAULE moved that the House at its rising do adjourn to Monday.—Arced to. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. Mr. FOX MAULS moved the reading of the Order of the Day for the House resolving itself into Committee on the Metropolitan Police Courts Bill. Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD objected to this course. He understood that the Copyright Bill was to have pre cedence. Mr. FOX MAULE said that if he would look at the notice given by the Noble Lord, he would see that he had given notice that the order of precedence should he, first the Prisons Bill, then the Metropolitan Police Courts Bill, and then the Copyright Bili. Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD had certainly read the notice, hut he had understood from the Noble Lord that the Copyright BM wee to have precedence. Mr. FOX MAULE said there must have been some misunderstanding on this subject, as he had understood directly the contrary. The House would not be detained a moment by the Committee, and then the Copyright Bill could be proceeded with. Sir R. INGLIS agreed with the Hon. Member for Reading, and hoped he would be allowed precedence. After a few words from Colonel SIBTHO RP and the SOLICITOR-GENERAL , Major WOOD said he should certainly oppose the vote, because this money vote was to carry into effect certain clauses of which he disapproved, and against which he had a petition to present. The Hon. Member then proceeded I to read a petition against the rural police. Mr. HUME apprehended that the Member was under a mistake, this Bill was not for a rural police. Sir R. INGLIS apprehended his Hon. Friend could not present a petition against one Bill while another was under discussion. Sir EDWARD KN ATC H BULL said he might read it as part of his speech. Mr. W ARLEY said that although it might be consi dered matter of form in that House to vote away money, the people considered it matter of extortion. Although he admitted there were some good provisions in the Bill there were many bad ones of which he disapproved, and which he should oppose. He objected to the salaries of the Ma gistrates, which were too large, and he could see no reason for increasing the salaries of the Commissioners of Police. It should not be proposed to increase the salary of the Commissioners to 1,2001 a year each. When their salary was appointed at 8001. each, the interest of money was 3 per cent. ; now it was 5 1 per cent., and really he thought that with our enormous debt, and in such a dis• tressed state of the country, the House ought to proceed on a principle of the strictest economy. He really thought the House was more reckless of expense than the Ministry. When it was proposed, the other night, that 70,000/. should be allowed for the building of stables at Windsor, he moved an amendment of 50,0001., and not one Member on either Bide seconded him. But two Members of the opposition gave the proposition their highest approbation. The Go vernment would not be so extravagant if the House would insist upon economy. He would not vote for the resolution unless it were distinctly understood that the House should not be pledged to the 1.200/. salaries. Mr. B A RING assured the Hun. Gentleman that all that was wanted was, that the Committee should be al lowed to introduce a cleuse proposing a salary, and then the House might reject or confirm it. After a long discussion, which turned mainly upon the question, whether or not the House would be pledged to the increased salaries if the Committee were entered into, and in which the interesting point was that the Hon. Members seemed mutually unable to make themselves un derstand each other, the House went into Committee. 11Ir. FOX INI AU LE then proposed that a salary of not more than 1,200/. should be allowed to each of the Police Commissioners. -105 - 7M - r - . - WA KLEY hoped tinol.tant a proposition would not be discussed until they had a full House. would oppose t'le proposition. Mr. M . KIN NON hoped the House would allow 1,20074; considering the services the Commissioners had perforaiNt to the public. Mr. HUME said that the resolutions only enable tfig - Government to introduce a clause, and when it was traduced then was the time to object to it. This wa s `" , only an initiatory p , oceoding. Mr. T. DUNGOMBE wished to understand on what Bill they were going into Committee, for aught he knew they were going into a Committee on the Irish Tithe Bill.—( Laughter.) Mr. F. M A ULE said they were not going in'o a Com mittee on a Bill at all, they were going into Committee upon a resolution. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE could not understand what they were about, he never witnessed such a system of legisla ture in his life. Mr. GODSON rose to order ; he wished to know from the Chair whether they were discussing a Bill or a resolution. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the object of the present proceeding was to enable the House to discuss the very proposition the Honourable Member for Finsbury, was anxious to bring forward. Mr. WAK LE Y, notwithstanding all that had been stated, could not but think that they were in Committee of Supply, and being of that opinion he should move that the sum should be 800/. in ste id of 1,2001 , and he would divide the House upon it if lie could find any person to second his motion.—( Hear hear, and cries of " Divide.") lion. Members might cry " Hear, hear, and divide," but he would tell them that after five years' experience he had invariably found that ul ol any proposition to economize the money of the pcop e that H)use was always most unwilling to entertain it. What sum of money had they given to obtain their pres en t efficient Ines ? Why, 800/. a year ; and he could not see why they should give au addition of 400/. a year to these Gentlemen. The House must be aware that there was was great national distress at the present moment, and he feared ere long they would be plunged into the grea'est difficulties. —( Hear, hear ) On these grounds he should move an amendment that the sum be reduced to 8001. a year. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE supported the motion of his objected Hon. Friend and Colleague. Ile object, to voting the ' money of the people unnecessarily, and that he believed was (notwithstanding the observa ions of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer) the only object of his Hon. Friend's amendment. If he (Mr. Duncombe) came down there to oppose the Copyright or any other Bill, he would do it independently and openly, and would not arrive five minutes too late for the Hastings coach.—( Much laughter.) After a few words from Mr. WARBURTON, Mr. II LTM E said he had been a Member of the Com mittee on the Metropolitan Police, and it was distinctly understood that if their duties increased the salary would be increased.—( Hear, hear.) He had never heard more s itisfactory evidence of the efficient manner in which the duties of these important effices were discharged by Col. R)wan and Mr. Mayne,—( Hear, hear.) If the Howe took that into consideration it would not consider I 2001. too much. Ile believed that no public men in London, not even the Coroners—( A laugh)—had their time more completely devotel to the performance of their duties. Stran g ers were then ordered to withdraw, but no divi sion took place ; and on our return to the gallery we found that the resolution had been agreed to. The next resolution was that a sum not exceeding 2d. in the pound on all the additional rental assessed in places that might hereafter become parts of the Metropolitaii police district be granted fur defraying the expenses of the police force. Mr. HUME objected to any increase being made in the amount granted for defraying the expense of the police force. Mr. S. O'BRIEN thought charges of that natu - e should not be placed upon the Consolidated Fund. Ho had some old Constitutional notions, which were epposed to grants of money being made, which did not come under the notice of Parliament. Mr. F. M AUL E then moved a vote of 20,0001. for the payment of the Horse Patrol and of the Thames Police. This added nothing to the annual charge, as it was a mere transfer from one fund to another. Mr. HUME doubted the policy of the transfer of this sum to the Consolidated Fund. It ought to be an annual vote, because the House ought to have an opportunity of reviewing the conduct of the police force. He submitted that this was a new charge, and it was also a new way of adding to the standing force of the country. By putting the charge upon the Consolidated Fund they were taking away the only opportunity of discussing the whole affairs of the police. He supported the police force when it was very unpopular, especially in Middlesex, but lie con sidered it important, and he supported the Right Ho nourable Member for Tamworth even at the expense of a little unpopularity, still he thought there ought to be an annual opportunity for the House to make obser vations upon the force. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought it was a matter of consideration whether Parliament should not reserve to itself the power alluded to by the Hon. Member ; but would it not be better to allow the vote to pass e and have the discussion on the further progress of the Bill ? Mr. GOULB URN asked why they should make a separate charge for separate forces, when all were to be under one head ? Mr. WILLIAMS said there was a great degree of prejudice in the public mind against the police force.— (No, no.) There was. He considered that placing the grant for the force upon an annual vote, would tend to do away with that prejudice very materially. Mr. HUME moved to leave out the words " From the Consolidated Fund." Mr. BERN AL said it could not he paid unless out of the Consolidated Fund. They must be paid out of some source, and no other had been mentioned. Mr. HUM E then proposed to postpone it, until they could understand the matter.—(Laughter.) After some further conversation, the resolution was agreed to. Mr. F. MAU'LE said he should postpone the other resolution, and move that the Chairman report progress. The House then resumed. COPYRIGHT BILL. Mr. Ser g eant TALFOURD moved the Order of the Day, for the House going into Committee on the Copy right Bill. Mr. F. BARING wished to proceed with the Com mittee of Supply. Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD said the agreement of the Noble Lcrd (Russell) was that if the Copyright Bill lasted till half-past nine, the Committee of Supply should then come on. He complained of a breach of faith in anot her order having been moved beforehis Hear, hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER suggested that a vote should be taken in Committee of Supply, and that then the Copyright Bill should pro ceed, or that it should proceed now, and the vote be taken afterwards. Mr. HUME objected to any money being voted after 12 o'clock. After some further conversation, the House resolved selfinto a COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY. Mr. F. BARING moved that 70,0001. be granted for civil contingences for the year 1839-40. Mr. HUME objected that the items for clothing to the Gentlemen at Arms (wc believe), and for the silver trum pets to the Life Guards, should be in the Civil List. Colonel SIBTHO RP had observed an item of 2,2241. for reimbursing the Captain of the Hastings for the enter tainment of the Earl of Durham and his suite on their pusslge out to Canada. He should like to have an account of the whole of those expenses. He thought her Majesty's Ministers ought to be mulcted of their salaries until the expenses of that mission had been paid. Mr. GOULBURN was of opinion that the discussion on the Miscellaneous Estimates was always most unsatis factory. Each Gentleman started his hare, and before it was killed some one else started another. The Hon. Member for Kenny had started the first h are , and he. A should prorose that they hunted that down first. He to o inquireed t he lynottoe the or th p e P r (2 le x t p v e o n f s e g s ra o n f ti n ti g ' e a c C h e m r i t s ; h i A ) d n e ° r l) s M ,neliester—he was of opinion that as the granting such charter was for the benefit of the inhab . tants of Blanches ter, ttey ought to be at the expense of the necessary pre liminary inquiries. Lord 110 WICK said that if the maintenance of good order in large towns was considered a subject of cational importance, they could not object to the expense of insti tuting those preliminary inquiries, without which it would be impossible for the Privy Council to determine whether charters should be granted or not. Mr. HUME said that these expenses should be paid in the same manner as the expenses of watching or paving large towns. The Noble Lord's justification. of this item was by no means satisfactory. After a few words from Lord SANDON, Lord DU NG ANN 0 N said he was taken by surprise at finding the House in a Committee of Supply. He came down for the purpose of supporting the Bill of the Hon. Member for Reading—(Laughter)—he meant the Copy right Bill. After a few observations from Mr. C. BARING, Lord SANPON, and Lord HowicK, Sir T. FR EEMA NTLE opposed the public being called upon to make any payments on this matter. Mr BROTH ERTON thought the opposition did not come with a very good grace against this grant. He did not begrudge any money that had been paid to Commis siones, bee,use he considered them to have done a great deal of good. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL did not expect that the Hort. Member for Kilkenny would have persevered in his opposition to the vote. These were not the expenses , of the Commissioners at Manchester, but expenses incurred by order of the Privy Council, without which they could not have discharged their duty. The Privy Council could not ascertain whether these charters cught or ought not to be granted, until they had obtained information on the subject, and that could be done much more easily by sending Commissioners down to Manchester, than sum moning a host of witre;ses before them. They certainly could not ask the parties seeking the charters to defray these expenses, and all would admit the importance of cenferring charters upon such towns as Manchester, Bi rm i n gham, Shefli Id, and Balton. The expenses wer e admitted to be fairly acd properlyincurred, and he hoped there would he no further objection to the vote. Mr. GOULBURN did not quite agree with the views of the lion. and Learned Gentlemen. There were two parties before the Privy Council,. the one seeking f or , an d t h e er opposing, the gr . ant ot the charter. H e thought the expense of obta inin g it should be defrayed by the former party.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. WIL LI A NIS had a decided objection to this vote. He thought the country should not be taxed in order to confer charters upon these towns. They sought the charters thata' d s v h e o r u y ld pay the xpenses incurred.. He Manchester and elsewhere for that put pose. He was f a themselves, u nderstood tisfied they were all too wealthy and too independent to large sums had been subgcribed at allow the public to be taxed for their benefit. He should move that this item of 9501 1 be disallowed. NATIONAL EDUCATION. Lord JOHN RUSSELL gave notice that he should move for the grant next Monday. Si: R. PE EL begged leave to ask the Noble Lord whether he proposed to take the vote for the grant at the earliest possible period, next Monday. It wou ld be im• possible then to move an instruction. He would give the Noble Lord notice that it was highly probable the sense of the House would be taken on the vote. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he would move that the House should go into a Committee of Supply before any thing else should be done on Monday, and then he should move for the grant. Sir R. PEEL desired it to be understood that he did not object to the vote on the grounds of education ( Hear, hear)—but there would be no other way to oppose the vote. He only objected to one of the objects of the gratit.—(llear, hear.) PRISONS BILL. Mr PAKINGTON moved that the Bill which now stood for the third reading should be read that day three months. He objected to the 14th clause, and principally to the 2d and 3d clauses, which urged the scperate system. He thought the time was not yet come for forcing such an expensive and cruel change in the o.isc'pline of prisons of this country, particularly since, notwithstanding the state ments from the Penitentiary in Philadelphia, and from Glasgow, which the Noble Lord relied upon, it was a fact that :he system had not been so effectual in suppressing THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, JUNE 22 1639. EVEN INO El) I TION. a - ,i f 1 A t