The Sun. — London, England, 1845-02-21 00:00:00

>enwh__ e°° :, tP boiy - 2 1 0 ,,0f his own P ) 1 ri fa r, iiittee of ' he , 16 11 shed W ht li o tb e -( Hear.) _id iu thority. ll ): ' I . the operunt, 0,41 to the la w y o l ?dr( ss frog 0 Igt.s of the 0 6 1 Pontefract h iw ier It IVard) (l i r the office s °f lied tine he, 11 :pd, COM inorilYl' t co d ie hAie ved i e e er at that,ive ry short ti cho re ar with tbe et o But be .‘ O3F c calle 6 , it , were e ics o idene . (ll e !`„ r 'Irel: sitting 1- re • • w ere ,t , 'tries, orn e the Goo Jer tic notion6hl; cor letters of t ' t i ) iie ir pertriitt.iengweio 01 ar.) 11 ,. o vhic il bo i nq uirY 'J itt er d ed, DO P3 ., - LA hen 3 mei o he q uiclie'..l o % I . ins of secl u i l i di h d f r He f lO to ort role Pr1"00 , 00 'stintte h u t _a- he ,od one t bsl 'Atontros e be 0 ;ce shu titi o tbe t : ;) elh I also u hlic„ A r in th e P t b 4 r o t, Barone go dO (Hear.) at tach t yl le odiur ieg oil o tY the ,Oee the Postnil 01:04 ru ling c o rr o f tbe cb i "* ( l rt , the 4 0 sNholF „ L ` Lllll, s giono mad e bo n g, at; ht 4 d s be t •Y f bl o° 11 4 s ho fi nd be he l p,' isfactie n ht ,Ttb e n ight t weee f e d Ile .41 etc • 1;lp heo t hat tbe a fi ~„ grow' 0 as ; 10 4 thol t he?, r, 'wa r p " ) , bcto ti , in °P; n y sr on or • oroup itiOo' I n ot. d o Lmoniti°l) W ere ;I;tt se olet ) :r1 rote w be 00, fttl t., lo de td a bill °I 1 0 01111 / t of t his e j sl ' ll° e _ e 0 1 00 10 1 41 , ; t he h o )rt , 0 . kg I.' t gIV Ito 111q h ? iqus ria- of fr o " c herg,f' ho l , 0.00 1 , 6 0 iv ers to thr , „ 4 was n o ",rp the ilto l if hat itof t fe e „ r ained tic hi them anlY hi , a l °l ol , ' " 3111 d °° o f m otion av e l loio t 0 b i g o° l . o o° l l°., it uc h i th errr so In t wo, oil d the 11 fore t p h,!: 5 0 0 : 0 0. nore ,i v e0w 0 ,01 1 4 , e t. ied etheltk re 0 .elfooo 'Ye hig tO ete to ell lo gar t gOlobt i t his 'l' be yr ir 1 1 ° 5 loco, r a case' a r r it in its i c ,A 4 l ol4 .4/ the l a . • a gl . o noun't s 00 1 ' 0 0 Niaje st / bow th e 0. 0 4 ; all d b ee ow e ,on ,A t. ! , Shol lj*. tptl e filY if the f t or p elocr rt ° tbe-t ; A rt d; •epo tr e 7 a hat e , or , t i l es „po i , V, )137 bs (l l' if: 0 411 1 ers dot saY , be r die t ' be to t urf , b i goo. P - 5c t e 4 ,, as I lPi tbi 4 O r te l a t 61 , s 6 ' n /Lot' no" e ge cable ROI 0 01 J,, his for bO ti , uirY , I, o o o ll' I had a u oso 00 0 gi t tbr e i o bei ti op . 01 0 1 1°11. 0 1d P r i se! erP l° o te ie to li e fo r . $ bet 0 44 gem t he , 4 0 e o n d (0 ~f the 1 / r f ( I t in h i e eSlll -^ °llse % f e e:ll'4l' 13 0." 2 v olt, [OO. , le t )i ,a , in e, e" ° l l 9 ,lio ben ° the 0 ? r o 4 7te t ° pie rie hi: ° co t/ a tt ' Y gi g the g oe i c ,/ "."" gbi j "Or thou . 0 o t °use - I) ,or' t ier v i e 0 11,-• s 5 ife it °- b : r)., t re Eiu r it ro, o o , e* sit t ll VE / ' le at i o n, ' l9li to t he re (1 15 1 6 )s i te - ra eot! tb', )to, e in cool, Coi l , t he rn e op tot, e ,r. ) ,e It `'t he b (I F ri*. r r ie o 3 Is ve fr o , 14. a t se t e • P ateooo, " A° ll f / Og il4l l o f eos gri e rj wl3 lB if D ee it t he C oo l o t CO, _a d e tb r A e „ial gio , bg aC .o.o l,re t, f t to v id 13 , 0 01 11 ho d bilq!o° " Fin s - fur ec re, p e at o) e . f3 o " t he 9 . l 1t th e r. t. he 0 10%4 t the t iot be dow i 001 0 04 w it h d ersit ev, cons. o op. h the oe 00 t notion w ith or or h hi gh eg , el ° r la r - g ni 00 0 Ar s o' .'s Dei cost'e _ Dtr o be L' a id be would ou r ° is° l ot o• - .i tte e o f ,or :0n 31131 0, 0 1° , 4 nut i f . f6c ieP 0. VC. s u m 1 1° pc°, he R i ga O f ° • rd f g ° 1 ( lir) t ho the P liefe,..AlY not b e oo la 1 " - 0 5, „ o ur " 0 0 , 6 0 6 Lezzi lli ra ore w as In „ ,11 for ir) 04 1 ) , gear, he pito 0 io l t 000. ,pp: o r ould be bis ° th e ' sibi u pon `both c' 0 ,,,f0 t ri e t e• f°r E te :7 l6ee' V °ll3 e ; of he It h i !f Place. J o / be e t 9 I) . at bore ref ine a lci 11°1 ' ith i ' l pe 0 law "' O ; Of ° tence• i s e ii,l in the l a c Aist his P. o ie , c i , in itn ,; s itting Oh el )1 tu ber) ' pr 4 o,ll l rd t hat t o ' r ; '1 0 ) fr to b h5( 1 4 . 1 t 0 ,; s bol' roa o ; it a „it.; o r P i „ g v i t o b., of of, no ug ho t, n0 r.„, 1 Tear , t he r e el, c i i o it t° at 1 0,,0 ICJ t I°ll tio t he „ t ti tr: d " r e 't Fledr ar P „f' / w ,Ised late the ~ ; 4 ill TEE SUN, LONDON, FRID y MORNING, FEBRUAR Y 21, 1845. case taught,-r)r)of. Some snorting Loris.—(Hear, hear, and It was time. therefore, it should be known wh "' was the law, finj ti -, e execution of rer , sed. H r.) ,itp:‘or:,,,-; the o•.‘ , tin. Bir R. INGLIS said that although the Speaker had. Mwith. his niur.l attention, endeavoured t.) upen the embers of each side in a fair alternation, his quick aed Impartial eve had net been able to discover whether the gentleman who rose belonged to the Opposition or to the supporters of the Government. Ile had called open the "Im es of gentlemen siring behind the Seeretary cif Stat e, and he found that they supported the motion.— 'sughter.) A Genth , man on the side of the Opposi tion aught the Speaker's eye, and tip. , Ilonse was sur- W ised t o fi n d hi m an a d vocate o f t h e Ri g h t lion. Bara , net. Member hal h ear d t h e e l oquent , peee h of his lien. Frietei the :Sember fo r Pontylraet, and he roahl not help asking. I ltn (Mr. Mil nes y w h, titer he called that hacking his 'bends ?—(Caught. r.) (Mr. Mines sat inimf diatelv .14 the back of Sir James Graham.) The best thelPee Hon favot r of the Ministry, and against M ember on. Member for Finsbury, was that of the Hon. a'!enibe r for Sheffield, in whose speech, except the be !l:tilling and the end, he entir ly concurred.—(Great. tighter ) He could agree with his Right lion. Friend t he Member for Edinburgh, that a Member of Perlis itl'il.ent Was in a position entitling him to exclusion from mesa Privilege of the Secretary of State, which was not Z er dY a statutable right, but a common-law right, con firmed by statute; yet the letters that were opened were l'ut those of the Right Hon. Gentleman himself, ullt letters addressed to him by others, for whose tPriety and regard for the law the Hon. Member could te Llinswer. Would any one contend that, with such an er 7 ll °rily of statute laws as had been shown in this case, Me the practice of 140 years, the law had been violated? Istic thought it would almost be absurd to retry the i 'scn of the Committee by a public tribunal, after the F n Ilse had d e lib erate ly d eterm i ne d that the Committee . 41,1 be sec re t, a nd the Honourable Member for t sbur .Y , who did not make any objection to e constitution of the former Committee, had 40 le „ l ocus stvidi in asking for another inquiry. - wiee were to adopt the Hon. Member's motion, it ellld amount to an impeachment of the late Secret t e o tl llnitiee. It would at the same time involve the etici lls e in a perpetual reiteration of the same inquiry ; p ee ,a,s no doubt the same results would be produced, it eronly tend to keep alive the public excitement on l ease. There was no country in Europe where the f o nctity of letters was so much studied as in England. th e e xemplification of this, an Hon. Member hid given • k il l several illustrations, occurring since the reign of e „,„.. 41 Y He believed, however, that instances of a more -o;lemnt date might be given, and in support of this state belt he would take leave to relate a story which would l' a h'"ablY be familiar to many lion. Members, and he p `Mil therefore content himself by only giving the out which would bring it to the minds of those Hon. e e rnbers who had preeiously heard it.—(Hear, hear.) short time ago one of our Secretaries of State for en e ,: e ign Affairs desired a British Minister at a certain C to insist upon certain terms, but intimating that the n ster was not to press them at the risk of incurring 4 a r eceiv e d betw een t h e t wo P ower s. The S,•cretary State an answer by ordinary post, in n /Itch. the Mi fniste. r stat e d th a t h e h a d ma d e the communication to the o rei gn Power, intimating that, unless he received a ou rable answer within four-and-twenty hours he 1114 demand his passport. The British Minister e wthat hi s l e tt er wou ld be opened at the foreign post ethe' and, in a subsequent c ommunication, he intimated the hours af Governent.. The res on ult was that in less team e ter the m communicati had been dispatched the -illaessenger reached the British Minister consenting to t h! requir e d coneessioils.—(Laughter.) He repeated, f), the sanctity of the Post office r, as no where so .r ti ch obs erva bl e as i n E ng land. Ile admitted that Eng • Cal'night to be the refuge of foreigners ; but he main ned that they were only entitled to protection so long th ey did n o t co nvert this oasis into a volcano itip.n e t'r countries.—(Laughter.) Did any honest. man "'plain that his lectern lied been opener! ?—(Hear.) /4n HON. MEMBER—Yes ; the lion. Member for tn,b ery. eegir 11. INGLIS excepted the Hon. Member for °sb because he did not admit that his let o i ter, had b een o pened. At all events, if they ~4 been opened there was no evidence to prove o :(iear.) Letters addressed to him might have been 7", for which he was not responsible, but he did not Ove that any letter written by the Hon. Member had ti violated. It might be the misfortune of the Hon. eti :lnber, as was the case with others, to have some con ekalents in whom they themselves had no confidence. sQine of these constituents might think proper to oi t r° B B him in a manner which all must deprecate.- 4, 4 4 , 1 % hear.) Any man who held the report of the Se ite,onarnittee in his hand must be satisfied that it th e e iently exculpated the Government in respect to e oa Ilse they h a " made of this power. The law and the eh e s titution of the country permitted them to exercise ep aa P' 3 wer in particular instances, and he thought there k e .sufficient justification for their doing so in the eeogeular case of Mazzini. It was, therefore, not 1-1 0 : 88 LrY for him to support the motion of the th, -- • Member for Finsbury. Nor could he consent to lu eee lti nendment of the Hon. Member for Sheffield, for l,Q,nlel agree with the proposition that a Parliamentary Ik et !'ege exempted an Hon. Member from any charge of y'cular misconduct. He was therefore not prepared lei a `lte either for the motion of the Hon. Member for et ee B ,",rY, or for the amendment which proposed to ex ker,ealetnbers of Parliament, and particularly the Hon. op e - Zusr for Finsbury, from the operation of the power of 1 1 ' 1 g letters now in the hands of the Government. lit e :* BERNAL thought that the Parliamentary pri ne Possessed by the Hon. Member for Finsbury was 114, ted • That privilege was based upon a resolu tion in and sanctioned by Sir H. Walpole and Mr. Pelham. N I St resolution decided that it was a breach of the pri lie:res of Parliament if the letters of any Member of • ti er ; House were detained or opened without the sane ad o f the Secretary of State. If, therefore, the warrant Seer n ot been signed by the Right Hon. Baronet the ue e e tarY for the Home Department, the question -the had nothing to do with the question before be e ' r ,:f eu , se • The character and respectability of a coo self but House was of great importance, not only tl a r:f hut the constituents he represented, and hence he t o , i gnt it was necessary that an inquiry should be made Of th edi cate the Hon. Member for Finsbury in the eyes iv es e British public. His letters had been opened, and it that h s tlPpoled that it was justified by the supposition sa was holding intercourse with persons not only etep e ei e !'kd, but who were contaminated by their previous • 'pe e -, lat i"ns. This was the only justification for the sti ta ' n g of an Hollow-deli, Member' , letters, and the eon thi„,n:eY of the Li on . G e ntleman might take a technical nr gt - :`,!" 1 to his sitting in that House. They might • tr e „ 'llat a man that would lend himself to seditious and B ,:uahle designs was not fit foe. a seat in that House. _N o .' s °R., therefore, could be prepared to justify the w ards that had been pursued by the Government to title: the Hon. Gentleman, and he was, therefore, en the to call f or an i n ter If the warrant. for opening ti °n• Member', ). igh t krue, I lan, Baronet the Secretary for the Home De or f io e l , , it would be competent for the lloim.Memb . er bar of lunrY to summon the Post-office authorities to the th e~ o tit Rouse, and, of course, be dealt with according th e ea l :_ature and extent of the offence. As to the law of ber eae ; they were not in a position to discuss that, tfid n Lena m.,tion w ool,: be made upon that point. lie tat„, now wh e ther tti' House of Comm ins would I `)n t e •, 71 atmiwk. •h seam(' of Anne, or whether t.,e ) won, t ee the state of .public opinion in 1845, as ' - ' ll to that of 1745. logee: a large question, itu l ? hoped it would fully discussed at 't Ponied. 11,-was not prepared to say that the • 0 e Co te, n ttee had neglected to perform their duty. ally e mtrary, he felt disposed to think that they kid At ue bieved tee object for which they were appointed. that t h s • e une . time, however, he could not help thinking thee tth ! 'night have communicated to the House whe lietti.: Government had exercised due discretion in eehetileerthis power into force. The report did not prove t t ) e v et . er t n b o c t. Mi l n f isters had exceeded the limits n of Baronet had r eoci guilt of .h_oweyer, the Right Hon. en a an ' illegal act, there was a sufficient re . I .,t)ten io Court of common law ; and the House of 4 11, h Os, therefore, was not the place to seek redress. sttieedePed, therefore, that somebody would move an It e_erabe m e e f e o t e t b e limit the inquiry to the case of the Hon. "er h a , r kinsbury and he believed the Hon. few"Mem t‘,,' a right to demand that inquiry. He did not th e T s ay that the Right lion. Baronet the first Lord bury of i r : e , n sury had a ccuse d th e Hon. Member for Fins nlB42 concerned in the treasonable proceedings a s d ae . _ nut certainly the language which he held last ,itr o , l 7l ,lld the expressions which fell from the Hon. and pr os i g Member tor Bute, were sufficient to justify his ', : Atu t Cufz that the Hon. Member for Finsbury had a ;2. aoti u pand an inquiry. He regretted that the a , for hLearned Member for Bute was not in his 0111444 back always objected to saying anything behind in t ' t he II But still he could not avoid remarking T tetnp etate OlL and Learned Member had been very The H on. _ to the language used the previous evening. e e o ospi pacy 4l :l Learned Member referred to a time when 4° ed. R e as rile, and schemes of murder being con theseoo at, te __lleixed the Hon. Member's name up with . fi Jae ]te nts, and the only conclusion that could be • ti o was. that th e S eer( tary o f S tate sus p ec t e d th a t Fr%e nourable Member for Finsbury was con or th e ,-ake'd' o,..ese treasonable designs.—(Hear, hear.) w o frie n d t his own tranquillity and peace of mind, ;_ioti;lidort;leeorinththoeeth(ei Right Ilon. Gentleman himself, he him not to stifle the investigation, or Lerated bY th charge which had been again and again ti t what would e Ron. Member for Finsbury. If he did - • Wear, h ear he the effect produced out of doors ? . ;_7llF, , __,,`_l e r) The public mind must act upon that e ls e t, eeeen The and character of the House must, in " i _ l , p o l'i' t r e n al oo the respect paid to it out of doors. Were : b , o 0 ; 114 still sa y that of the Right Hon. Gentleman, he which he n o ,, . the most insidious advice which h e ' en u u r i e a d into his ear, the most dangerous counsel b u :ti gation Possibly follow, would be to refuse the y• - --(ti elr n ? vv sought by the lion. Member for Fins theeactual ~e e ficar.) lie would not, indeed, vote for t ; l li n. guu )ri ot' that Hon. Member. In that respect lember for Fin b Ptred th e se s ury and himself had agreed le to 'Line course. What they were pre (Niro Propose 4 bl e wheth was a committee simply to - Memb er or the correspondence of the Honour 41(tieerri % , lint r a h a e i d bo been detained and opened, and, if so, mitten 114 ) an ex , . 11 tY:—(Hear, hear.) He would not fei th e : , n or v‘.old ol d thneation of the composition of the Com cnter into the question of' national ca th:" G " oofetrten,d_in!scroeftion which ought to be ebserveil efforts waoulfirlebee t sti l l i i r b n e i r tt a ,d l, ee lltl a t ti r d 3 % e t btai enlightened ni, ja il eee h e'imen eet t a o nd the ce for the lion. Member who al n he utni. Member to te" e inher ,grieved. He called upon that t4t4tio: finally defe c not to relax in his efforts ; and if ' 1 tha t he would r aced in his attempts to secure inves who we :use th_eecommend him to summon to the bar ter,.....reh arn , e `!: Persons belonging to the Post-of (Bear, with the offence of opening his let . 110 10 ,,,,_ear.) " a4 W lex • said the Hon. Member who had just sat (hewn had made, u,1121, a lucid and clear state ment of hi, arnument, but co,fes.ed that he could not upport the motion of the lion. Member for Finsbury, and his ab!e Ines in fact be considered as having en delis', rt,d in some conjectural motion not vet in existence. In dtealit,g with this question he (Mr. Borth wick) wag not influenced by any Government connexion, as he had never been encumbered by .any Government help.—(Laughter.) There were, he believed, faults on both sides. " Intra nturos peccatur et extra." it .ppeared thfit the pnictice now complained of had ex isted in its present state from the earliest period. He was asked to give ti vote which would have the effect, on the one hand, of fixing on the Committee a charge of ,a,ivenes, and on the other of fixing upon the Right Non. Gentleman a chart which he t.ought even the Hon. Member for Finsbury must be sorry that he had m, de and unwilling to repeat. In his conscience he (Mr. Borthwick) believed that the Government had never opened the Hon. Member's letters; and if ?key had done so, it would be easy to bring the matter to an issue by calling before the House the officers of the Post office. Such being the views which he entertained on the subject, he must be excused from voting for th-: motion before the House. Mr. C. BULLER then rose and addressed the House as follows :—Mr. Speaker, Sir, I think the most sup I fluous sentence I ever heard in this House—and that is saying a great deal—(Laughter)—was the closing sentence of the speech of my Hon. Friend the Member for Weymouth, which was a vehement exhortation to my Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury not to relax in his efforts on this subject. Because I think we may gather from experience that he is not likely to relax when he has a particular object in view, such as that which my Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury now entertains. I must confess that perhaps I may break in a little on the gravity of this debate, when I declare that after the fullest consideration I could give this sub ject, I can hardly look very gravely on the question which is now presented to the House. That there are grave questions connected with this matter there cannot be the slightest doubt. I think that the House has responded to the feeling of the country. That the existence of this power in the hands of the Minister is a matter of grave consideration, no man, I think, will deny. I will put by that subject for the present, as we are not met at all to discuss the policy of the law as it is said at present to exist. On that, Sir, no man entertains a stronger opinion than I do—that a power so worthless is inconsistent with the security of liberty—inconsistent with domestic comfort, and incon sistent with national merality.—(Cheers.) I put by that great question now, as the only question before us is— whether her Majesty's Government have made out a case that they are not chargeable with the invention of a new power—that they have acted according to the pre cedent of their predecessors in exercising this power of opening letters. Admitting that the only ques tion is whether it has been exercised in an honourable or discreditable manner, I must confess, Sir, that until yesterday I felt deeply and very painfully on this subject. I did feel that some, hone put tiun rested on the conduct of her Miajeety's G overn mete with respeci to the use made ..f the letters which had been opened, an 1 of the consequences and results from :his conduct of the Post-office ; and I must confess that the occasion of such conduct I never saw, and I de clare to you iuperfect sincerity that I should have felt just as much horror at finding it proved against those Gentle men with whom lam in the habit of acting. lam glad, Sir, that the answer of the Right Honourable Ba ronet yesterday relieved us from the most pain ful part of the suspicion which was excited ageinst a particular man. Now, the question re solve:, itself into one of opening the letters of my Honourable Friend the Member for Finsbury ; and I must say, Sir, that I think it is a question very well deserving the attention, both of the Hon. Gentleman who has had his letters opened, and of this House. Now the Noble Lord, the Cil.irruan of the Committee, was pleased to say that it was a " prurient" curiosity that would lead one to do this. Now, lam not very curioas—(Laughter)—but I declare that one of the most justifiable cle,sti. Its that ..ne eiaild risk in the world of any man suspected of opening one's letters, would be eteill te say, " Pray, Sir, did you open my letters or not?"—(Laughter.) I don't cline it an idle question. — (Continued tcughter.) I think the man who wishes not to have his letters opened, has a right to have an explanstiien when he finds those letters have been opened. I think the : pnbli have a right to know—and I think the public are deeply interested in this matter. The secrecy of the correspon dence of Members of Parliament is of great importance —first, they are the representatives of the people (and as we represent the people, our correspondence may turn on matters highly important to the public, if you do not guard them, and especially guard their privileges ; there are persons whose confidence and correspondence might be violated by an unscrupulous Government.) As respects this House, this is a very important question. For myself, it doe• not concern me very much—although I cannot go so far as the Hon. Baronet the Member for Oxford, who said, that it did not matter if the Govern ment saw all the letters that he wrote, or that were written to him. I can only say that if my letters were opened by the Government, and they read them, they would be doing more than those to whom they were addressed had ever been able to do —(Laughter.) I trust that the House will not look on this as a mis taken assumption on my part. At any rate, the question of opening letters of Members of Parliament is one well worthy of inquiry by this House. I say that when this simple question was raised—when the justifiable curiosity of the public and the House was excited on this question —I do think everything would have gone right if the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of state for the Home Department had been enabled to give a civil answer to a plain question.—(Laughter.) The question was asked whether he had opened the letters of my Honourable Friend or not ? but the Right Hon Baronet has really a most morbid passion for unpopularity, which he takes the most uejustifiable means to gratify. I thought he had had enough of this—(Continued laughter)—without going out of his way, and that he would think that there Wes no necessity of courting an unnecessary unpopularity. But when that question was asked, instead of simply answering the question, he put himself into an attitude of offended dignity, and with an air like that of Socrates to his judges, assumed a tone of injured innocence, and declared that public duty would not allow him to reveal secrets which no force could extract from him. I don't think, Sir, that he is right there. I think we shall get at the secret, and I think my Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury will get some explanation. The Right lion. Baronet assumed preci-ely tile seine tone and the .ante dignity when he detirial his deteraliaation oil the grounds of public duty no:. to make any statement or answer, and the consequence was, that my Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury stuck to it, and we got the Committee last session, and everything was explained. I must say that, taking the tone which is generally taken on this side of the House, that of a sincere friend to the Government,—(Laughter)—l do Viink the Right Hon. Baronet would have spared him self a great deal of anxiety, and a great deal of trouble, and would have spared this House a great deal of tiine and trouble, if he had done at first what I feel perfectly convinced he will be obliged to do in the end. Well, noe, I am surprised at the Hon. Member for Tamworth, b cause I thought he was more sensible in this matter. I thought he wou!d have taken the matter in dudgeon, and would hive ewe forward. cud said to the Right 11..11. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department— " The eeet'esean has asked a civil question, why d you not Ore him an answer?"—(Great laughter.) But that was not done ; hut, in fact, the Itieht Hole Baronet had rather made the matter worse by his speech Isuesdav night, because he went into a long explanation as to the difficulty in which the Government were placed —of the heavy responsibility to which the Government is subjected—of the dreadful scenes, which occurred in 1842, and of the great nec ssity for the Government using all the power with which they were invested in such emergencies • and he read some dreadful passages from speeches of the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton on that occasion. I happen to recollect that debate, but Ido not recollect that to which the Right Honourable Baronet referred in 1735.—(Laughter.) I do not pro fess to do so.—(Renewed laughter.) I recollect, however, in 184'e when all these dreadful things occurred, that the Right Hon. Baronet used to say—there is a great deal of exaggeration—there is not so much danger as •was anticipated, and that we, Members of Parliament, might go home to our grouse shooting, and our other publis duties—(Laughter)—with perfect safety. He now comes forward and tells us of these dreadful machinations. But what necessity there is for referring to that, to account for the opening of my Hon. Friend's letters, I do not know. The Right Hon. Gentleman said there was one dreadful thing—that of little children running little pins into bits of work.—(Laughter.) That was one passage which the Right Hon. Baronet quoted. It was left to be inferred what all the other dreadful machina tions were. I cannot conceive what right he had for open ing the letters of my Hon. Friend the Member fe rFinsbury in that emergency, unless he could be connected with the dialoolical intention of the little children.—(Laughter.) Therefore the Right Hon. Baronet's speech really has made the charge worse, and I really do not think when he comes soberly to reflect on the matter, that he can help thinking that be has not much assisted the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Home Department in this matter, and that he has not said anything to justify his opening my Hon. Friend's letters. The Right Hon. Gentleman has stated a new difficulty. The Queen was called in. The evidence given before the Committee has been given by Privy Councillors who before they could give that evidence were obliged to go and ask her Majesty for leave to give that evidence. The evidence could not be published without the Queen's leave. Well, now, what was the meaning of the Queen's leave in the case? I take it that if her Majesty's leave were asked, she would consult her responsible advisers, as to whether she might give her leave or not.—(Cheer:.) I take it that when the Right Hon. Baronet went to her, she would ask his ad vice as to what course she should take ; therefore. if the Right lion. Baronet's mouth is hermetically sealed, he would cause her Majesty's to be closed also. — (Laughter.) Her Majesty would feel that the Right Hon. Baronet's popularity was one of the great bulwarks of her throne—(Laughter)—and she would wish him to withhold any explanation on an act like this. I therefore think the difficulty about the Queen's name Might be got over, if the Right Hon. Baronet wished it. I like to bring these things into a practical shape. What has the Right Hon. Baronet got by his silence on this question ? Did that clear the character of the Right Hon. Gentleman in the eyes of the country ? Does everybody say " Oh, from what has passed in the House of Commons, it is perfectly clear that Sir James Graham is not to blame?" Everybody, I think, says exactly the contrary. The Right Hon. Baronet might have stopped the who'e of what has taken place by saying " I never did open the letters." - I do not think that his being, night after night, thus attacked on this subject, can be exceedingly pleasant. He certainly comes off with the worst of it. I don't wish to hurt his feelings, but I gene rally find that he comes off second best when attaAted my lion. Friend. He generally brings the Right Hon. Baronet into the dirt.—(Laughter.) And dirt it is.— (Cheers.) Novo really, as a practical man, I would suggest that the very best course would be to acknow ledge it at once. I must say, that I think some blame rests wiih the Committee in this matter. I think the Committee would have spared us a good deal of trouble if they had satisfied our very just curiosity on this sub ject, and hive given us mot,- evidence. They ought to have told us less about Edward the Second and the Commonwealth, and a little more about opening the letters at the present time. I should be exceedingly glad, theref ,re, if this ma ter could be allowed to end in the alggestion of my Honourable Friend the Member for Montrose. I think the evidence ought to he laid before the House, but, as that has nut b. , en the case, I feel it to he my duty, if no other motion is proposed, to vote with zny Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury ; but if any amendment should be proposed, such as that which has been suggested, I shall be happy to support it.—(Cheers.) Mr. S. 'HERBERT said he did not think that the manner in which this subject had been brought forward, nor the tone which had accompanied it, nor the manner in which that tone had been received, was credit tble to the feelings of that House. He was, however, much gra tified at the alteration which had taken place in the tone of the debate that evening. He alluded particularly to the speech of the Hon. Member for Sheffield, because that speech was not only the speech of an honourable man, but of a generous opponent.—(Cheers.) Although the length to which he went would not meet, perhaps, the support of the majority of that House, yet he thought the spirit in which the lion. Gentleman had addressed the House, considering the position in which the Right lion. Baronet was placed, was creditable to him as an ()ppm oat. The more they got into this debate the more did tl , e motion appear unworthy. Every Hon. Gentle man disagreed with it, and suggested an alteration. But that which surprised him most was, that the proposed modification of the motion was even more objectionable than time motion as it originally stood. It would be re collected that the House had unanimously resolved that the Committee which was appointed last session should be a secret one. No objection could be taken to the composition of the Committee, as five out of the nine gentlemen composing it were political op ponents of the Right Honourable Baronet. Nine gentlemen of high honour were appointed to con duct the inquiry, whose verdict was certainly entitled to the respect of the House.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Dungarvon, and the. Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh, said that there were no lawyers on the Committee—(feeling, he supposed, a little professional susceptibility on the subject)—(Laughter)— who might conduct a searching investigation, and extract information from the witnesses by the moral torture of cross-examieation. Well, but there were lawyers on the Lords' Committee, and he did not hesitate to say, that the report of the Lords' Com mittee was a more full acquittal of the Right Hon. Gentleman than that of the Commons' Committee.— (Hear, hear.) But the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh said that lawyers were excluded by that Hoti,,e, and not by the other, and he said he could not conceive, but the whole object was to exclude the - Honourable Member for Finsbury from the Committee. But in the other House the Noble Lord who brought forward the accusation there had the good taste and sense of decency not to ask to be an accuser and at the same time a judge.— (Cheers.) How did the Com m itt ee se t f or th th e ir verdict? Having all the case before them, having the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel), the Noble Lord, and other per sons who were Members of previous Governmeats be fore them, who held this office, on which the responsibi lity in these matters rested, who made full and unre served revelations to them, those being confirmed by the Right llon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department, who stated that he laid before them every warrant he had ever signed—(Hear)—in eluding that (if such existed) of which he could have no knowledge—of which the House could have no knowledge—issued for the examination of the corre spondence of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, and for this they had only the hare assertion of the Hon. Mem ber himself, who came down to that House and asked for a Committee to prove it—the Committee having the facts stated by all those witnesses before them, came to their determination:—The lion. Gentleman had said that there was a warrant fabricated in the case of Mazzini. The Hon. Baronet stated, on his honour, that such was not the fact. Mr:DUNCOMBE--1 never said that it was fabri cated. Mr. S. HERBERT would be sorry to attribute to the on. Member anything he did not say. He understood the Hon. Gentleman to say so, but perhaps he was mis taken. The Right lion. Baronet had stated that every warrant he had signed had been submitted to the Com mittee—the reasons upon which each had been issued. The Committee, with those facts, told them—what? Why, that the power had never been exercised from per sonal or party motives—(Cheers) —and that in every case it was exercised with an earnest desire to maintain the tranquillity of the country and to promote the ends of justice. Mr. DUNCOMBE—Read the report of the Commons' Committee. Mr. S. HERBERT—The Commons' Committee re ported that there was a difference of opinion with regard to some cases.—(Opposition cheers.) It was easy to judge after the fact. The Committee went on to state that they had no reason to doubt that the Secretary of State was guided by no other motives than an anxious desire to preserve the public peace.—(Hear, hear.) After a full investigation before the Committee, and after their verdict was pronounced in favour of the Right Hon. Baronet, it was hard that their verdict was now sought to be impugned. He did not think the Hon. Gentleman was desirous of investigating the truth. —(" Oh, oh," and cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman seemed to be animated with a feeling of personal animosity, and appeared as if he sought condemnation at all hazards, and not the elucidation of the truth.—(Loud cheers.) He did not say he came forward as an advo cate of the public good, that the exercise of this power was dangerous—thatit was incompatible with the liberty of the subject, and that no political expediency could counterbalance its disadvantages, and the evils at tending its exercise. No. He did not put his motion on any such ground, but asked for a Com mittee to inquire into what there had been already an inquiry upon.—(Hear, hear.) What did they want to know ? Not that the cort4 spondence of private families should not be revealed. There was no evidence wanted upon that. No, but en inquiry was asked as to the conduct of his Right lion. Friend, who was standing at rt disadvantage—who hail his hands tied up, and ex posed to interrogatories, which he was bound not to answer.—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman, the . Member for Edid burgh, and the Hon. Member for Liskeard, in particular said, that a civil question had been asked, and that the Right Hon. Baronet ought to • reply to it. Why, it seemed to him, that baseness, meanness, and falseness were in-inuated in such lan guage.—(Cheers.) If the Right Honourable Baronet were once to answer such a question, where was it to . stop?—(lieur, hear.) Hone was answered, nine others might get up and ask the same question, and where was the secrecy then ?—(Hear, hear.) If it was considered that this power and the odium which attached to it ought to be done away with, that was a plain and in telligible proposition which was easily understood, and upon it he would give no opinion. Most ingenious ar guments had been its, d on both sides of the question, and the arguinkntation which might be used upon it seined to him inexhaustible. But that was a different question from the pour personal question, from the poor personal caw now before the House.—(Cheers.) With regard to what had fallen from the Noble Lord the liember for Newark (Lord J. Manners), it seemed to him (Mr. S. Herbert) that the Noble Lord had misun derstood the Right lion. Baronet at the head of the Government, in supposing that .he made it a ques tion of confidence or no confidence.—(Hear, hear.) The Government had disposed of that, when they consented to send the matter to a Committee. The Government did not ask for confidence, all they wanted was fair nlay.—(Cheers.) After the question of guilty or not guilty had-been put to the Committee, and after they gave their verdict of not guilty, it was unfair and ungenerous to rip up the subject anew—(Cheers) — nut for the purpose of bringing public opinion to bear on the question, as to whether this power should exist or not, but for the purpose of exciting public odium against the Right Hon. Baronet—(Cheers) —not for the public advantage, but to gratify some personal spite. It was a safe opportunity to strike at a man who bad his hands tied—it was a courageous and chivalrous pro ceeding!—(Loud cheers.) If they believed the gentle men who sat on the Committee—if they believed them honest men, and that they honestly discharged their duties, he asked them to stand by them.—(Hear, hear.) If they did not, then let them appoint another Committee. But there was no question raised as to the honesty of the Committee. The whole object was to expose the Right Hon. Baronet to unpopularity— to have public opinion inflamed—to ask questions which could not be answered —to excite public odium against a person who could not defend himself.—(Clieers.) He was confident the House would not be a party to such proceedings,— (Hear, hear.) The House would be ready to discuss the questien as to the expediency or not of retaining or quashing this power ; but, after the Committee had given their verdict of not guilty on the question pro posed to them, that House, he was sure, wouldinot lead itself to an invidious—cowardly he was going to say — but he would say, to an invidious and personal persecu tion.—(Loud. cheers.) Lord HOWICK said he acknowledged, with the House, that the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, was an exceedingly powerful and able one, and proved that he would be a valuable accession to the Parlia , . - nent of which he lately became a Member. — (Hear.) But able as that speech was, he did not think it ought to irduce the House to pass by altogether, with out further inquiry, the subject submitted to their notice. His Rig t lion. Friend the Member for Edinburgh ex pressed opinion that, though he objected to the mo tion as it stood, there was ample ground for an in quiry, limited strictly to the opening of the letters of his • Honourable Friend, the Member for Finsbury. 'Throughout the, debate so much concurrence had been expressed on that opinion, not only on that, but on the other sit - to of the House, that he thought it was expe dient tb at the question should be narrowed to that point.; and th , !refore it was that he shared in the opinion of the Right Hon. Gentleman, and he should take the liberty of submitting an amendment to the House, the object of which would be to narrow the inquiry to that point, He took this course very much on the grounds that 'had been put forward by his Right Hon. Friend. The 'motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, though desiy;nedly or not, inflicted some degree of blame on the Corarnittee. Now, for his own part, he must confess, that he found it difficult to find any cause for that blcule. He thought that the Committee had acted most -honourably and most fairl-- that it had. in the strictest men se of the word, done its duty, and performed the task allotted to it by the House. He agreed with his Rigid Hon. Friend that there was no necessity to have any further information upon this point. He joined in condemning the practice, as it had existed for the last two hundred years, of Secretaries of State opening let ters e ithout sufficient cause being shown. He agreed with those who esserted that the Secretary of State should have the power of opening letters where it was supposed that they related to the safety of the State, but he ob jected to the practice of ,resealing letters in order that the parties should be ignorant that their correspondence was kno vn to the Government.—(Hear, hear.) He thought such a system partook greatly of the character of treachery and deeeit.—(Hear, hear.) He did not im pute those qualities to any particular Government. He believed that latterly almost every Government hod adopted such a coursz. But let them say what they would, they would never induce the moral sense of the country to permit the exercise of a power of so extensive a description. Whatever advantages might arise from it they could never compensate for the stain that was cast upon the country by the adop tion of such a course. He was prepared to condemn the continuance of this practice, and he hoped that be• fore the session was brought to a close his Hon Friend the Member for Finsbury would follow out the work he had so well begun, and by resolutions of that House stigmatise and put an end to that which ought to be got rid of.—(Hear, hear.) No Act of Parliament was ne cessary on the subject. There was nothing in the stn• tute that recognised the propriety of forging seals or al tering postmarks.—(Hear, hear.) There was nothing in the statute that approved of that, and if a resolution of that House was passed against it, there would be no danger of a repetition of that practice. There was a question, however, that had not been reported upon by the Committee of last year—a question of serious and vital importance, and one that required further inquiry. Ris Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury distinctly stated that letters directed to him had been opened at the Post-office—(Beer, hear)—and his Hon. Friend had also stated that he was prepared to make that assertion good if the House would only give him an opporiamity doing so.—(Hear.) Upon that fact, whether it was true or not, the Committee of last year had not reported. Now, that surely was a point that required to be eluci dated, and one that ought not to be allowed to rest in mystery. If it was true that the letters that had been addressed to his Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury had been opened, in his judgment there had been a great abuse of official power, and of the resolutions of the House. Nothing could jestify the opening of letters addressed to his Hon. Friend. It had been admitted by the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, that although they claimed the power, it was one that ought to be ex • ercised with the greatest reserve and delicacy, and the use of which was only justified where the safety of the State was at stake. Was there anything—was any Hon. Member prepared to state that there was any thing—of so serious a nature in the correspondence of hie Hon. Friend? The proceedings in many respects of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, both in and out of that House, were very far from meeting with his approbation—(Hear, hear)—but he could never for one moment suppose that he was one 'who would countenance insurrection or violence.—(Hear, hear.) But then it was said that it was not letters written by the lion. Member for Finsbury, but those that had been written to him that had been opened. That circum stance, in his opinion, made no difference in the circum stances of the case, because if those letters were calcu lated to throw light upon treasonable views, her Majesty's Government must have supposed--knowing what they did of the Hon. Member for Finsbury—that imme diately upon his receiving them he would have made them known to her Majesty's Government. If those letters had been opened the facts of that opening cast an imputation upon his Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury, which he had a right to have removed.—(Hear, hear.) The gravity of the case had been greatly enhanced by the facts that they were the letters of a Member of Parlia ment that had been opened. It was said that there was no breach of privilege in this case, because there was a warrant. Now, he (Lord Howick) fearlessly asserted that there was a breach of privilege, even if there was a warrant, unless the Secretary of State showed sufficient reason for the issuing of that warrant.—(Hear, hear.) If there was no necessity for such a warrant, then there was clearly a breach of privilege—(Heer, hear) — for in his opinion all parties ought to have the opportu nity of bringing their grievances before Members Par liament,without subjecting them to the prying eye of the Secretary of State.—(Hear, hear.) It was necessary that Members should have the opportunity of communicating with e others their views of the state of public affairs with out control. ThiS was in his opinion as necessary as the liberty of speech itself—(Hear, hear)—and it was in his opinion a dangerous doctrine to say that Ministers should have the power of looking into the letters with impunity of their political opponents. Were they to exercise this power in mystery and secrecy, and to be the judges of when they were to be at liberty to look into the letters of their political oppo nents ?—(Hear, hear.) If he thought a Committee necessary, at the beginning of this debate, he thought so still more since he had heard the speech of the Hon. Member for Bute. The House was not so full now as it was then, but he would appeal to the Hon. Gentlemen who heard that speech, whether that Hon. and Learned Gentleman did not lay down the doctrine, that it was ne - cessary to look into the letters of Members of Parliament if they happened to have what was considered dangerous correspondence. He had laid down this doctrine in a manner which, if it received the consent of that House, would be liable to the gravest and most dangerous abuses. He trusted the House would not open the door to such great abuses. He thought it very possible, if this rule were adopted, that any gentleman who called for a reform of the public institutions, and who might attempt to excite public opinion against the Government of the day, might become the object of suspicion to that Government. He thought he remembered a time when the letters of the Right Hon. Baronet the Home Secretary himself, under such a system, might have been in considerable danger.—(Great cheering and laughter.) At least, he remembered, in those days when he (Lord Howick) was much younger than he was at present, and more eager in politics, that he thought the Right Hon. Baronet—as, for instance, in his famous speech about the "birds of prey"—.did direct popular feeling, rather than public reason, against the Government of that day, more strongly than was either prudent or creditable.— (Loud cheering and laughter.) He was sure that the Right Hon. Baronet's present colleague, who was at that time Secretary of State, would not have exercised that power, but he thought had there been a Minister who would have done so, in 1830, when the country was getting into a serious state of disturbance, the correspondence of the Right Hon. Baronet would have been well worth an occasional inspection.— ( Hear, hear, and laughter.) He did not doubt that in former years, the supporters of Catholic emancipation and of reform were considered not less dangerous than those who now sup ported the People's Charter. No doubt the men who sup ported the measures that had since been adopted with such in finite advantage to the country, and now met with such general assent—he had no doubt that had those principles then pre vailed, at the Post-office their letters would have been opened. Why this was actually the case at the time of the American war, when the correspondence of the leaders of the Opposition in that House was never safe. Let them look at the letters of Burke, recently published, and they would see frequent re ferences by the Marquis of Rockingham, Lord North. a nd others, to their having something of im portance to communicate, but that knowing the state of the Post-office they must defer it till they had a safer op portunity. And that which had existed might exist again. lie objected to the principle that the letters of Members of Parliament might be inspected ; and so far from thinking that the letters of persons who had come under the censure of the law ought to be opened, he thought the letters of those persons t o o u n g a h t t e particularly afterto b th e ey p r a ci a t to. e c ted out. o Hoe f ought s u oo li , t i f t h o t s h e e y u nfor -con sidered they had been unjustly treated, ought of all others to have the clearest right to have their letters r es p ect e d. He thought Majesty'sMinistersand one callingight have fo r and reprehension of the House ; but it d id not follow, because he had confidence in them as men of honou r, that all future Ali mtbheee n serious guilty notice of a grave nitters would be the same. It was a co nstitutional p rinci p le error he r 0f judgment, that Parliament ought not to place that extreme confidence in any men holding the reins of power —they ought not to give into any hands a power so liable to abuse. Even on the slightest suspicion of such abuse t he interference of Par liament was absolutely necessary to the due exercise of a con trol over the Executive Government, and ought to be inquired into in a searching manner. Though he did not wish to make this subject a subject of attack on those no must say that it was a. that w in office, yet h e subject of inquiry t they ought n o t to pass by. They ought in this re s p ect to act on the old and wise maxim, to take things in time, and stop the beginnings of evil ; let them arrest the mischievous principle in the outset; let them mark their opinion of the subject by appointing a Committee to inquire into what the facts were. Let them by that step mark their opinion that the letters of Members of Parliament ought not thus to be opened. The amendment he was now about to place in the hands of the Speaker was this : —" That it having been alleged by an Hon. Member of that House, in his place, that. letters addressed to him have been detained at the Post-office, and opened before they were de iisvered, a Select Committee be appointed to inquire if the alle gation is tree, and if so, en what authority, or on what grounds such detention and such opening at the Post-office of such letters were sanctioned." the House would observe that in this amendment he did not assume the truth of the allegation, nor in any way censure the Committee of last year, and he hoped and trusted that this amendment would not be objected to by the House. Mr. WORTLEY explained. The SPEAKER having put the original question and the amendment, Lord Salloox and Mr. D'lsaaru rose together, but there was a general call from both sides of the House for Air. D'lsraeli. Mr. D'ISRAELI said he rose to second the amendment of the Noble Lord opposite, because its intention was first shadowed forth by the Noble Lord below him, and received, he believed, the sympathy of the House. That amendment con siderably narrowed the question which they were now for the second night debating; but that question had before been nar rowed to limits much smaller by the Right Hon. Gentleman who last addressed the House from the Treasury benches. That Right Hon. Gentleman had narrowed the question to a personal view between the Hon. Member for Finsbury and the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State. If that, indeed, were the real state of the case, he, for one, should regret ever having interfered with it ; he was sure he was only speaking the sentiments of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Member for Hull when he was expressing these feelings. But if this were true—and he was as little inclined to credit it as some other assertions which were equally mon strous and equally current — i t was only an additional illustra tion of a great truth that many historians had celebrated, that from slight and personal causes great public benefits have sometimes been derived, or great principles vindicated. The Honourable Member for Sheffield, who addressed the House early in the evening, had disclaimed all intention of touching what he seemed to think ought sot to form any material part of this discussion. lie knew not whether the Hon. Gentleman was right in the position he had assumed, but what he could not forget was, that her Majesty's Government had proved themselves to be of the contrary opinion by the Right Hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister him self, in his complete and elaborate defence ;--complete, • he meant, so far as it touched upon each division of the subject ; both in its legal character and personal interest, he had par ticularly argued this question on both these grounds. The Right Honourable Baronet had indeed vindicated h i mse lf, b ecause be had acted in pursuance of a statute. And the Prime Minister bad upbraided the House with its inconsistencies, because it impugned the Government of the country when they were defended and vindicated by nititnte they themselves had passed. He thought, therefore, that it was utterly out of the question for Osem to pass over the legal question. He had always had the utmost respect for Westminster Hall, and made one in the smallest minority in that House that ever divided in support of the supremacy of the Courts of Common-law. But he thought it was a novel and somewhat dangerous opinion which was broached by the Honourab'e Member for Sheffield, that a point of constitutional law was not a point of discussion in that House. How would the question of ge neral warrants ever have been decided, if a friend of the Go vernment had then risen in his place and said that this was not a question with which the representatives of the people ought to interfere? The only difference between this case and that of general warrants s as, that the exercise of a remarkable power by the Secretary of State rested on a positive statute, and the only fault found with the Minister was, that he continued to exercise that power when the statute was not only become obsolete but had altogether ceased.—(Hear, and cheers. ) No person could contend that this power had been con ferred by the statute. The Right Hon. Gentleman said he acted in pursuance of the statute, but he did not put his finger on the statute ; and the Right Hon. Baronet the First Minister of the Crown had told the House that Parliament had created the power which the Government had exercised, but the Right Hon. Gentleman did not put his finger on the statute. The statute of Anne had been alluded to repeatedly, but no member of the Government had said where it bore upon the present case. The Secret Committee had evinced its anxiety to go into antiquarian research and historical dissertation ; had they consulted other information, which lay nearer their nose, instead of musty records in the Rolls-office, they might have settled the question for ever. The words in the statute were only an echo of the sentence to be found in the prelimi nary proclamations of the Crown. They never found any allu sion, until the reign of Anne, that any practice of the kind at present under discussion existed, or the means where by the right use of such a search was guaran teed. And for good reasons, no one versed in the common law would pretend that it had any foundation in common law—the interference of a Minister of State, on such a subject, and under such circumstances, was far too highly political, and could only be justified on great political grounds, which would amply justify it.—(Hear, hear. ) But in the Parliament of Anne, when the first Act was passed respecting the Post-office, how was the Parliament constituted? Not of men as innoeent as the men constituting this Assembly—they were not men like his Hon. Friend the Member for hull, who, like himself ( Mr. D'lsraeli) and many others, were ignorant of the practice pursued at the present day, until accidentally revealed ; but the men who formed the Parliament of that day were the descendants of Hampden and of Elliott—they were the sons of men who, only fifty years before exercised the sovereign power in England—men versed in the traditions of the assembly in which they sat, made acquainted with all the secret practices of the Govern ment, and therefore an Aet of Parliament was passed, pro viding that no letter passing through the Post-office should be tampered with, except by the Secretary of State. It was to prevent the interference of eonnexions with their correspondence, and to make one man of station alone responsible for such acts. But that did not make the Secretary of State sufficiently ans werable to the injured individual. The Secretary of State kept back the letters on his own responsibility. The colleague of the Hon. Member for Finsbury ( Mr. Wakley) asked what was meant by the responsibility of Ministers? He said it WAS a phantom and a shadow, which no one could understand. There certainly was some force in the remark of the Hon. Member. He thought the political responsibility of Ministets was a mere farce. Ministerial responsibility to the majority of men—his own creation—offered no guarantee to society ; but the responsi bility of Ministers, under these circumstances, to this House is a precise, complete, and perfect responsibility which the laws of England recognise. In the case of general warrants the House of Commons supports the Minister in his issue of them. What occurs ? Under the Act for the regulation of the press in the reign of Charles IL, the Minister issued a general warrant, though that Act was unheard of before the time of Bolingbroke. In 1763, general warrants were issued. The House of Commons vindicated the Minister. The case was brought before the Courts of Westminster Hall (the case of Leach was familiar to every lawyer), a verdict was given for the plaintiff, and what did the House of Commons do? Why, they supported Ministers. But they met next day and unanimously voted that general warrants were illegal. This case clearly showed the responsibility of Ministers, and the case was analogous to the present. The action parallel in this case to that. The House of Commons now qualified its former opinion as regarded the legality as well as every other part of the question. ,He stopped one moment to consider what was the really interesting portion of the case as it had been put by the Right Honourable Secretary at War. Before he approached it he would clear the ground of all other questions into which the House had entered so largely He was not present, but he understood the Government had amply vindicated itself with regard to the Italian exiles. To him, he confessed, that was not surprising. He knew enough of the Noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs to know that, however active he might be in the duties of office, he was a nobleman of the most generous impulse, and he felt persuaded that if, under present circumstances, he had erred at all, he would have erred on the side of indul gence and lenity. If the Noble Lord had exercised his discretion, if he had communicated the, information which it was alleged had brought about this catastrophe—even if what occurred could be attributed to that information ; he would not have presumed to scrutinise the conduct of Ministers in such a position, and under such circumstances with severity. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department, that great master of analytical narrative, who placed before the House with painful perspicuity what would have been the consequences if the letter to M. Mazzini had not been intercepted. Every event that might have occurred was mapped before them with a precision which was almost prophetic. How the letter was sent and received in the almost solitary island of the Mediterranean, the expedition of twenty unarmed men, the invasion of Ca labria, the insurrection of the North of Italy, the Austrians crossing the Appenines, the French crossing the Alps,—all these were detailed with surprising minuteness and accuracy. The danger of a general war was also insisted upon in forcible language. These things, he repeated, were related with painful accuracy. Therefore, he would disembarrass them from the circumstances in which he believed the Government were really not to blame ; and which, even if the statement of the Hon. Member for Finsbury had been correct, they should not rashly give a decision on the merits ; and having fully considered the legal part of ,the question introduced by the Right Hon. Baro net the First Lord of the Treasury, he came now to the poli tical considerations which formed the second part of his speech. The Right Hon. Gentleman would pardon him for saying that on that occasion he displayed unusual warmth. He knew that under these circumstances it did not follow that the Right Hon. Gentleman really felt—(Great laughter.) The Right Hon. Gentleman was a great man, and held a great position, and should not lose his temper; but in a popu lar assembly it was sometimes necessary to have the appear ance of acting the choleric gentleman.—( Hear.) He knew occasions when the Right Honourable Gentleman struck the red box very emphatically, when his cause was not the best.—(Renewed laughter.) He believed that some times the younger Members were frightened at the heat of the Minister, but he (Mr. D'lsraeli) had as often assured them that there was not the least need for alarm. It was not so serious a case—the Prime Minister was not going to eat them. (Continued laughter.) He would cool presently ; they knew not what the Right Hon. Gentleman would do ; but it generally came to a call upon them to rescind their votes.—( Great laughter.) The Right Hon. Gentleman hav ing divided his defence of the Government under two heads — having argued with great detail upon the report, and having proved that they were wrong on this consideration, but not trusting too much to the positien which he had chosen to occupy, took refuge in the consideration of high political topics. It was but lately they had been somewhat surprised by the speech of an Honourable Member ( Mr. J. S. Wortley ). He would not say that the present debate would be brought to a close, but most certainly he doubted whether the amendment of the Noble Lord would have been produced, but for that s t p h e em ech tt f at th i e n I R 64 ig 2 ht th H e o c n ou . n G tr e y nte w l a m s i an n — gr a e f a t t er da h ng e h er a , d a a n s d su t r h e a d t the responsibility devolved on Government of quelling that danger. After his quotation of that evidence, which at the time was not received with all the credit which it had lately received. After the Right Hon Gentleman had, in fact, more than intimated that it was possibible even for a Member of Parliament to be concerned in a conspiracy and in rebellion, it seemed to him impossible that the question could be left otherwise than as it was.—( Hear, hear.) His Hon. Friend the Member for Hull ( Sir J. Hanmer) had spoken with candour, yet with a becoming deference to the character of the gentle men composing the Secret Committee, of the report furnished to the House on that subject. He (Mr. D'lsraeli) knew that his Hon. Friend and many other gentlemen had, before entering the House, entertained an intention, if not of supporting, certainly with a very great bias in favour of the Committee. But certainly after the distinct asser tion of the Honourable Member for Finsbury that this was not a question of private feeling or of personal vengeance . —and the assertion had a sort of authenticity attached to it— he was justified in taunting a Minister of State, who opened his letters, with practices which he rightly described as dis graceful to himself and his constituents.—( Cheers.) He was animated with the same feelings as other gentlemen, and he did own that, in this instance, he was not opposed to examina tion and inquiry. --( Hear, hear.) He himself could not be supposed to have any hostile feeling to the Right Hon. Baro net, whose honour he had found unquestioned, and from whom he had received nothing but courtesy—(lronical cheers, conti nued for some time, mingled with cries of " Oh, oh")—and whatever the imputation—(Cheers of derision interrupted the sentence). He spoke the feeling of all gentlemen who had business transactions with him.—(Cries of " No, no," and ironical cheers from all parts of the House.) He (Mr. D'lsraeli) was sorry that these expressions —expressions per fectly sincere—should create emotions in the House of such a eharacter.—( Oh, oh.) It was quite impossible that under the circumstances, and with the novel features the accusation had assumed, it could be passed over in silence. The cir cumstances of that accusation were different from those under which the Honourable Member for Finsbury had first addressed the House and called for an inquiry. At that time the House entertained no idea, and he believed that such did not exist in the Hon. Member's own breast, that his letters had been opened. The Hon. Member for Bute (Mr. J. Wortley) was mistaken in advancing the opinion he had that night. He had no means of appealing to the heart—if su c h existed—for some persons doubted whether Members of Par 6tment had hearts—(Laughter)--but when he laid down the principle that there was no difference betwen the representa tive and his constituency, such a position was neither con stitutional nor legal. It was opposed to all practice, and to the spirit of the House, and most odious and obnoxious to the feelings of the country.—( Great cheering.) He agreed with the Hon. Member for Sheffield (Mr. Ward) that this was one of the most delicate powers which could be exercised by the Government. A Member of Parliament might be conidered as a sort of political father confessor ; and it was much better that information upon any or every subject of complaint, should be conveyed to the representative, than trust to the surveil lant* of the Secretary of State for the prevention of that ne cessity.—( Cheers.) They were going to give an independent vote without heeding what side of the House they usually sup ported. That was no question of party. They could not un derstand the feelings of the Members of the Secret Committee —they consisted of gentlemen whom all respected; but :the instructions of the House did not animate them to do more than the report exhibited. What had in this case happened to one Minister might happen to another.— (Cries of " Hear, hear.") Here were they in what ' he might call the third year of a Walpolian Administration, and was it to be said, that one of themselves—a Member of that House—should be made an example of? It seemed as if the Government had said, " This is a happy chance, let us take advantage of it." The Hon. Gentleman had made a distinct accusation. He had asserted, and they must suppose the Hen. Member believed that his letters had been opened. He (Mr. D'lsraeli) did not hesitate to say . that they (the Go vernment) might open all his letters, provided they ph: the Noble Lord, and which he intended to second, t answered them.-(Laughter.) The amendment with the first Govern ment would allow, was not of the same character.ect. , motion of the Hon. Memberi on the same subj H e o nstituents of an Hon. not think that because one of the e dition, that therefore Member should be suspected e s f en s t e ative should be opened. the correspondence with his re . py! ear, hear.") He did not —(Sir R. Peel, ironically— n ed by the R ig ht Hon. Baronet; for understand the sarcasm it 'd that, notwithstanding a friend of the for he had heard stai Baronet's was engaged in Despard's plot, he Right Hon. communicated with him.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) He undersd that friend held office in the Administration.— ( Great cheering.) He therefore thought that the Right rinr c;r d te i s j y y - lion. Baronet might have reserved his sarcasm.—(Cheers.) And he would add that, when taunted while speaking a short time ago, he had no intention of making any unseen attack upon the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State. But he had made no attack upon the Government—he had said nothing that was disrespectful of the Government—(Oh, oh)—but he felt himself compelled to admit, for the fact was arteniable, that the letters ot the Hon. Member for Finsbury had been opened by her Majesty's Government. and the reason for so d iing had not been inquired into.—( Hear, hear.) This was not merely the battle of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, but the battle of every Member of that House, and every sub ject of her Majesty was as deeply interested in it as Members df this House were—( Hear, hear)—and the Government may rely upon it, that whatever the decision of the House might be to-night, the public would look with a jealous eye upon their proceedings, and oppose every attempt to violate the public rights.—( Hear, hear.) Lord SANDON rose amidst loud cries of " Divide, divide." He said he had merely risen for the purpose of reminding the House that the Committee had not made their report upon the question as it affected the Hon. Member for Finsbury. but is oh-di•Ace to the order of the House, and to the decision of that tribunal they left it without any reference to him ( Mr. Duncombe). The House should bear in mind that when first the Honourable Member for Finsbury introduced this subject to the House he made some allusion to his own letters, and yet he declined to offer any evidence to the Committee upon that part of the subject.—(Hear, hear.) The Committee, however, in their report, had endeavoured to discover what number of warrants had been issued for the last twenty-two years by the different Pi ime Ministers during that period, and the result of their investigation was already before the House in the paragraph they had already heard read, and which was to this effect.—( Here the Noble Lord read the paragraph, and concluded by expressing a hope that the House would not consent to re-investigate this question by coming to another vote upon it. ) Mr. ROEBUCK would be sorry that the House should come to a vote upon this question until he had expressed his sentiments upon it, and therefore he now stood up to do so. In speaking upon this question he begged to be understood as se parating from it any consideration of a personal nature, and approaching it only upon public grounds. When firsfithis question was submitted to the House by the Hon. Member for Finsbury, the Hon. Baronet ( Sir J. Graham) said, in answer to it, that he stood upon the responsibility of his station, and would not answer the question. The Right lion. Baronet, the First Lord of the Treasury, was the next Member of her Majesty's Government to give an opinion upon the question (and that Hon. Baronet was an exceedingly correct barometer of the temperature of public opinion)—( Laughter )—and the Hon. Baronet said he was obliged to take up a position different from that of his colleague, and that he would meet the public feeling, and therefore appointed a Select Committee in order to allay the public excitement. Why had that been done? Because the suspicion of the public had been excited against the Go vernment, inasmuch as it was generally believed that the pre sent Government had exercised this power for the first time. The Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) then said, " Give us a Committse, and the whole truth shall be elicited."—( Hear.) Well, the Committe had been appointed, and made their in quiry ' • and what was the result of their proceeding?—( Hear. ) He (Mr. R.) did not impugn the honour of that Committee ; but this he would say, and he would pledge everything he held dear to support it, that the report had not given satisfaction to the public.—( Hear.) The Committee had two questions before it —one was as to the state of the law, and the other as to the power of the Government. One of these affected the foreign policy of the country, and the other the private question in re spect to the Hon. Member for Finsbury himself.—( Hear.) What did the Committee do? They gave no opinion respect ing the Hon. Member for Finsbury, but altogether passed over his case.— (Hear, hear.) Did the Right. Lion. Baronet think that the public were satisfied with the report on that part of the case upon which they did express an opinion ?—( Hear, hear.) If so, why did he make that extraordinary explanation on Tuesday night, that the Chief Secretary fur Foreign Affairs received a communication from the Austrian Ambassador, and thereupon he applied to the Home Secretary to send an order to the Post-office, and accordingly the warrant was issued which led to certain information being communicated to the Austrian Ambassador? But the Right Hon. Gentleman made this extraordinary additional explanation, that the Foreign Secretary, Lord Aberdeen, exercising that great discretion entrusted to him, made the communication to Austria—a private communication and, having destroyed it, he was not now able to trust his memory so as to inform the House, to which he was responsible, what the nature of the communication was. —( Hear, hear.) That was an as tounding explanation.—( Hear, hear.) It was supplemental to the report of the Committee which had been appointed to in vestigate this great question of foreign policy, affecting the most important interests of this countrv.—( Hear.) The Noble Lord (Lord Sandon) whose duty, as a Member of that Com mittee, it had been to carry out the inquiry, and to make the report so as to appease the anxiety and to satisfy the just cu riosity of the nation, thought proper just now to characterize toe desire of Members of that House to obtain a full inquiry for the satisfaction of the House, and of their constituents, a " prurieritcuriosity."—( Hear. ) He (Mr. R,) asked what right had the Noble Lord to use that phrase ?—( Cheers, and cries ot "Oh ! oh I) The phrase was unjustifiable—( Hear) —and he (Mr. Roebuck)—for one was impelled with indignation to repel the imputation of " prurient curiosity."—( Cheers. ) The Hon. Member for Finsbury had made a direct and distinct appeal to the Committee. Now, he (Mr. Roebuck) regretted the tone and temper in which that Hon. Member made his state ment, and he thought that great injustice had been done to the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir James Graham), for he believed that the exercise of this odious power was well intended to maintain the peace of Europe.--( Hear, hear.) But that was far from sufficient. They wanted to know how that discre tionary power had been employed, that the House might know whether it was necessary to legislate upon the subject.—( Hear, hear.) He regretted the languag,e used by the Hon. Member for Finsbury and Liskeard, for he thought it better not to bring personal hostility into the discussion of so grave a ques tion. The Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir James Graham) was not to blame for the exercise of this power, but the Ministry— and if the power was improper, the Ministry was not to blame for its existence.—( Ministerial cheers.) He (Mr. Roebuck ) might say, that he had in 1837 and 1838, the same cause of complaint as the Hon. Member for Finsbury had now made.— (.' Hear, hear," and a laugh.) The Hon. Member for Finsbury said his letters were opened. The Noble Lord said lie had read all the warrants, but he did not say whether they applied to the Hon. Member for Finsbury. That Gentleman did not know whe ther his letters Here opened under the authority of a warrant, or without it. He would assume that there was a warrant, and that the Right Hon. Secretary issued it upon his own respon sibility. \t hat was that responsibility? Was it to this. House ?—( Hear, hear.) The Right lion. Gentleman said that it was on his own responsibility. 'What ? Was the re sponsibility to himself ? which was no responsibility.— ( Cheers.) —The Right Hon. Baronet was responsible to some body, and that responsibility was due to that House. 'fhe Right Hon. Baronet said he was excluded from giving the House the information which was demanded of him. Now, from that oath he had been relieved by her Majesty, to enable him to give evidence on the Secret Committee. But still he refused to give the information, and the Right Hon. Baronet at the Head of the Government excused his Hon. Colleague, on the plea that it would be disclosing the secrets of his office. This was employing the name and attributes of the Sovereign in a way altogether improper, but there was no no doubt whatever but that the Right Hon. Baronet was per sonally responsible. The Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Treasury was exercising the highest functions of his office when he was refusing the information the House required. Suppose, however, they had exercised a power to which they hart no right. One of the greatest causes of alarm out of doors was what had been stated in another place by the very highest legal authority. That this power was not conferred in the way in which it was supposed to be by Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite. " The power," said the Right Hon. Baronet, " has been conferred upon me of opening any letters which I may think fit, upon my own responsibility, and that power is re cognised by the Act of Anne, and again by the Act of Victoria." Well, the Right Hon. Baronet said he had full power to open whatever letters he thought fit, upon his own responsibility. Now he denied this in Coto. The statement bore il legality upon the face of it ; and when his Honourable and Learned Friend opposite, the Solicitor-General, was called upon for his opinion upon it, he had no doubt he would agree with him in what he now stated. But there had not only boon exercised an illegal power, but the use of a power which was not granted by law. In the 40th section of the Act of Anne, there were these words:—" That no letters should be opened after the same shall have been delivered into the General Post-office, before the delivery thereof, without the express warrant in writing of one of her Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State shall have been obtained." Now the mean ing of thts was, that the warrant of the Secretary of State should be a sufficient authority to enable one ot the servants of the Post-office to open letters without incurring blame or pu nishment. The authority was only implied to open letters, and if the Right Hon. Gentleman would just give his warrant to any one man at the Post-office, to open any one letter of the Honourable Member for Finsbury, and would afterwards lay the warrant upon the table in that House, they would take the case to the Court of Queen's Bench, and try the legality of the warrant. If the Right Hon. Baronet would only do that, he had no doubt that the Hon. Member would bring an action in twenty-four hours after the warrant was en the table. The Government were bound not only by law, but by prudence, to answer the question that had been put to them. Now, he wanted the House for a moment to consider the consequences of the declaration made the other evening by the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government. lie entered into a most elaborate description of the circumstances in which the country was placed in 1842. Now, he did not know ' what was the real intention of the Right Honourable Baronet, but the feeling existed in his mind that he wanted to show that England was in a dangerous state at the time. That there had been exercised every power which the Constitution gave them to protect and secure the peace of the country. The House would remember that the Right Finn. Baronet had before told them that amongst their powers, was that of opening letters; and, further, the asser tion prevously made by the Hon. Member for Finsbury, that his letters had been opened. The natural inference was, that the Government had thought it a precautionary step to procure order and peace to open the letters of the Hon. Member for Finsbury.—( Hear, hear.) Now, if that were so, he asked, would it not be prudent if the Right Hon. Baronet would follow the dictates of honour and respect the feelings of the people, by coming forward, and admitting the act, declare that they had found nothing to criminate the Hon. Member for Finsbury? If they had done this, they might easily have said that they had pursued the same steps as their own im mediate predecessors ; and this they had done upon the deep feeling of responsibility which attached to their office.— (Hear, hear.) Suppose that had been the answer of the Right Hon. Baronet, why, they would have had the public with them. They would have made this a useful instead of a dan gerous power, and the people would have been satisfied. The_e Right Hon. Gentleman had already made two concessions. H believed that he would have to make a third, and that they would at last, hear from him the statement w hich it. wou l d have been wise to have made in the first instance —(Cheers.) He would be obliged to say, " We thought . thwisasneescseesnstairayl at to the time ; we did it under the notion that jtthat the power the peace of the community, if you th nei k , on the other hand has not been rightly exercised, ; taken away, state your with —if you think that it ought tsoaybseo_ opinion." " That would have . op . been.a.af eankhewahyadandoeadltungbt this question. To refer to his ow , if he had inquired of the Noble Lord the Member for t he City to 111 r. of London whether or not he had opened his letters - would have replied distinctly to the question ; Papineau, and had there been in them anything wrong he w ou ld not b e where he was at that moment. As far as he himself was con eerner I, tie cared very litfle whether hi s l et t ers h a d b een n ot. But that was not the feeling of the Hon. Gen tleman the Member for Finsbury. It was not the feeling of the people of this great country.—(Hear, hear.) They said, and said truly, that, although the exercise of the diseretion of the Foreign Secretary might not necessarily lead to any evil, yet there might come a time when there should be a Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs who might not be discreet, and who might give information to foreign nations which would issue in the most disastrous consequences.—( Hear.) If he (Mr. R. ) knew anything of the feelings of his countrymen, there was nothing which would strike them with a feeling of greater humiliation and shame than that the powers of their Govern ment should he employed for the base purposes of despotism in any part of the world.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet might rest assured, that if he wished the power vested in him to he continued at all, he must make his declaration quickly; but if he knew anything of the feelings of his coun trymen. the tower would not last much longer, but would be done away with even after the declaration of the Right Hon. Gentleman that he hail done what had been laid at his door. Mr. COLLETT moved the adjournment of the debate. Mr. C. BULLER explained. The motion for the adjournment elicited loud cries o " Divide, divide." . _, On the question of adjournment being pot,) Sir R. PEEL said he deeply regretted that it should be considered necessary again to adjourn the debate on this subject.—( Hear. hear.) He thought that, unless there were some absolute necessity for adjournment, justice to wards her Majesty's Government ought to induce the House to continue the discussion that night, for the purpose of having an opinion pronounced on the subject.—( Cheers.) This was quite clear—that it was absolutely necessary that this matter should be :disposed of before any other business was proceeded with ; and that business which must necessarily be postponed, if the adjournment took place, was business of the utmost importance to the commercial and general interests of the country. The Hon. Gentleman who had now moved the adjournment, is, I believe, the same Hon. Member who moved ition the first night of the debate. Mr. Mr. COLLETT—No. Sir R. PEEL—Of this he was sure, that if the Hon. Gen tleman wished to speak he would be listened to with great at tention. It was now only twelve o'clock. If the debate were postponed, it must necessarily take the precedence of other business to-morrow. This would lead to the postponement of the motion of the Hon. Member f , r Manchester en the sugar duties until Monday, and the Noble Lord's motion must also again be postponed. Looking to the great public interests concerned, he thought it was the duty of the House to make some sacrifice of its convenience.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. COLLETT regretted that he could not fall into the views of the Right Hon. Baronet. The House met at four o'clock, and he had for several hours been endeavouring to catch the eye of the Speaker.—(Laughter.) It was impossible to gain attention at so late an hour; and he must therefore persist in his motion of adjournment. Lord J. RUSSELL said he rose merely to say that he had expected, after the speech of the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, some Member connected with the Government—pro- bably the Solicitor-Seneral—would have risen to reply to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, and that the debate would have gone on to a division. He thought it was impossible to deny that an adjournment would cause great public inconvenience. He should certainly give his vote against the adjournment. Mr. IIL EWI TT expressed his gratitude to the Hon. Mem ber for Finsbury for having brought this subject forward. He declared that the practice of opening letters was totally contrary to law, inconsistent with the British Constitution, and a viola- , tion of the rights of property. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said be had risen to address the House when the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath re sensed his seat, but he did not succeed in catching the Speaker's eye. He had remained in the House during the whole debate, and he was necessarily very fatigued. He, however, felt it his duty to address the House on this subject, notwithstanding the lateness of the hour. He trusted the debate would be proceeded with. Mr. BROT HERTON—I would advise my Hon. Friend not to divide if you are determined to finish.—( Laughter.) Mr. AGLIoNBY suggested that the debate should be ad journed to Wednesday next.—( Cries of" No, no, no.") Sir R. PEEL did not think it was just to her Majesty's Mi nisters to postpone the decision on this question for several days. " I say at once," said the Right Hon. Baronet, " in the present position of the debate, that I certainly will bring on no public business until the division of the House has been taken on this question."—(Loud cheers. ) Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when there appeared— For the adjournment Against it Majority against the adjournment ...... --240 On our admission to the gallery, we found The SOLICITOR-GENERAL on his legs addressing the' House. He trusted that the decision that had been come to, had convinced the House that they ought to proceed with the de bate.—( Cries of " No, no," and "Go on.") lie thought this course scarcely fair, if it was the intention to adjourn the debate.—( Cries of ‘. Adjourn," and " Go on," amidst which the Solicitor-General sat down. ) After a few observations from Mr. BOUVERIE respecting the appointment of the Committee in the House of Lords, Mr. S. HERBERT explained that the Committee in the, House of Lords was moved for by Lord Radnor himself. Mr. BOUVERIE said that Lord Radnor moved for the Committee, but it was the Government who appointed the Committee, and excluded Lord Radnor's name from it. Mr. BRIGHT was sorry that the House did not divide that night, but, under the circumstances, he would put it to the House whether it would not be inconsistent to continue tile de bate. He should, therefore, again more the adjournment of the House. Sir ROBERT PEEL thought the House had sufficiently marked its opinion that it was an unreasonable adjournment, but as of course the Government would wish to take a division. when it did occur, in a full House, and as it was evident that at least a hundred Members had left, he would consent to adjourn the debate till this day. (An immediate rush of Members from the House took place on the announcement of the Right lion. Baronet.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, he thought the Right Hon. Gentleman had exercised a sound discretion, but thought that great inconvenience was caused by these repeated adjourn ments, when in two or three hours the question might have been decided. Mr. BROTHERTON denied that any blame could attach to him, as whenever there was a disposition to come to a ter mination that evening he never interfered, but it was evident that the debate could not be closed, unless.the House had sat till five or six o'clock. After a few words from Mr. WILLIAMS, Sir R. PEEL said he hoped a vigorous attempt would be made by the Noble Lord to prevent another adjournment of the present debate. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said, before a vigorous attempt was made to put down the system of adjournment, he hoped the Right Honourable Baronet would have justice on his side, before this vigorous attempt was made to stifle dis cussion in that House. It was totally impossible they could conclude the debate thus. The subject was now out of his hands and in those of the Noble Lord, and the ques tion might be called a personal one between himself and the Government, which knew. as well as lie did, that they had opened his letters. Nothing could be more tyrannical than their refusing him any justification, and he would not allow any public business to go on till some satisfaction was given to the House and the public. The Government might have adjourned the debate to some evening when it would net have been inconvenient to them, but the Right Ho nourable Baronet knew that public opinion was beginning to hear against them on this question, and the public would not see injustice done to any man, even though it were to so humble an individual as he himself was. But did they think the matter should stop there? No; cer tainly not. He was determined to clear his character from the imputations thrown upon it by the Hon. Members for Bute and Pontefract, and indirectly by the Right Hon. Baronet' himself, by associating his name with the violent ou'breaks in the year 1,542.. He would maintain that it was a base and mean act to open letters, which in their place they dare not avow to have done. Mr. S. WORTLEY assured the 'lon. Gentleman, in the most positive and solemn manner, that he had never accused him of giving the slightest encouragement to those disturbances —so far from it, he verily believed, that if the letters of the Hon. Gentleman had been opened, they would hare been found to contain exhortations against such violence. Mr. DUNCOMBE must say, that he had understood the Hon. Gentleman to state to the House, that he (Mr. Dun combe) had been in correspondence with those evil-disposed persons who attempted with hand grenades to burn the town of Sheffield. Mr. S. WORTLEY assured the Hon. Member that he had never used such language. Mr. BRIGHT put a question to Sir Robert Peel as to the business of the House. Sir R. PEEL, after saying that he would on a future occa sion explain some phrases which the Hon. Member (Mr. Duncombe) had misrepresented, said that regarding the busi ness of the House he could not make any other arrangements than had been made, from the circumstance which had occurred. The debate was then adjourned. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at a Quarter-past One. BLACKWALL RAIL WA Y COM- PANY. The sixteenth half-yearly General Meeting of the Proprietors in the Blackwell Railway was held yes terday, at the London Tavern, Biihopsgate-street, Mr. J. N. Daniel, Chairman of the Board of Directors , in the chair. The report stated that the receipts for the past half year had amounted to 30,433/. 18s. 9d. ; and the total expenditure, including interest on debentures, had been 24,7061. 10s. 5d., which,lwith the last half-year's balance, of 1,7301. ss. 6d., left at the disposal of the Directors the sum of 7,4571. 13s. 10d., from which they recorn ,nended the payment of a dividend of 3s. per share, amounting to 7,3001. Notwithstanding an increase of 510.139 in the numbers carried, and of 3,231/. ss. 10d. in the receipts, there had been a decrease in the actual working expenses of the rail way, although the sum of 659/. Os. 7d. had been e ns pended in deepening the well at the Minories. Pursuant to a resolution passed at the last half-yearly meet ing, the Directors had turned their attention to the practicability of relieving the concern from a portion of the dead weight in the shape of interest by the issue of new shares. Several plane for effecting this object had been carefully considered, but the Dim etors had come to the conclusion that none of them offered sufficient inducements to secure their being curried out with advantage to the Company. The redue ti.m in the rate of interest on the debentures now taking place would, however, probably effect the object in view. The CHAIRMAN said, that while expressing, his satis faction at the improvement was only state of the affairs oF the 818 Railway, he was only sorry that it bad not been vre4ter; but he hoped that at every successive half yearly meeting the Directors would be enabled to say that it was at least progressive. There was only one subj , et mentioned in the report to which he would direct the attention of the Proprie tors—he meant the proposition to relieve the 'Company from dead weight in the shape of interest„ 'Company that at present pressed so heavily upon them. The pla* proposed was ta issue new shares. That proposition had bees carefully considered by the Board of Directors, and they were of opinion that it would militate against i st ing interest=, and prove injurious t o the future pros pects of the shareholders. The Proprietors were aware that two of the Directors went out at that time; in con sequence of other avocations they could not spare the time necessary for the proper discharge of the duties imposed upon them by that Company, and they requested not to stand again for their office. Dr. Bowring and Mr. Fellers had kindly consented to form part of the Direc tion, and he was sure that it was not necessary for him to say one word on the seal or interest exhibited by either of those gentlemen. Dr. BOWRING said that he, before that day, brought the subject which had been referred to by the Chairman before the Proprietors, and, if honoured with a seat, he should certainly press the subject upon the Board. They were all aware that that concern was struggling under difficulties. They were aware that it was mortgaged to the extent of 61. a share—in fact pledged to the full market value. It was with a view to reduce the enormous interest consequent upon their debts that he pressed this matter upon them ; and be hoped it would meet with due attention. Mr. MANGLES, M.P., remarked that Dr. Bowring had founded his arguments upon a fallacy most injurious to themselves, and which he said he would be sorry to ace go forth to the public. He had stated that the railway was mortgaged up to the full value, but the fact was not so.—(Hear, hear.) After some further discussion the report was adopted, The dividend recommended in the report having be en duly declared, the Directors and one auditor were elected. A vote of thanks to the Chairman and the Directors followed, and the GROSS SUPERSTITION.—There is a merchant in th. city, in the full possession of his intellect, who actually Ileums t ut the income-tam will last only three years longer.—Puneh,