The Sun. — London, England, 1836-03-23 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. Commons to support it. The country gentlemen,both Conservative and Whig, express themselves to be in the highest degree repugnant to the principles by which the future payments of tithe are to be regulated according to this " conciliatory" measure, which they say is open to many of the objections urged against the ex isting law of tithe, while the clergy are not a bit better pleased with it. It is probable after all, as we said when Lord John Russell first stated the nature of his bill, in asking for leave to bring it in, that the equit able rule which was recommended. by the late Admi nistration, and by their adversaries sneered at and re jected, will yet become the corner-stone of the policy about to be preferred by the Legislature.—Times. The House of Commons have done well—the Go vernment have done well in agreeing to the motion of Mr. Buxton last night for a Committee to enquire into the working of the apprenticeship system in the Colo nies. Indeed our only surprise is that the Government should have held back, as they appear evidently to have done, to the very last moment, before they signi fied their intention of acceding to a proposition which it was impossible that they could have resisted upon . anything like a feasible pretext. If such an idea had ever crossed their minds as that of refusing the Com mittee, they ought to bless their stars for the good luck of having abandoned that. intention before the over whelming facts contained in Mr. Buxton's eloquent statement had put them to rout and to shame. As it is, the appointment of the Committee will go forth to the West Indies as a proof of the determination of this country not to be trifled with. We have no ob jection that the Home Government should treat the Colonies and the Colonial Assemblies with all possible respect ; but then it must be a respect consistent with the determination—ay, and with the expression of the determination to see justice done and contracts ful filled ,in their straightforward and honest mean ing, The planters,: be it remembered, have our twen,ty nAlions of ,money.in their pockets. One part ofthe contract. has, therefore, been performed. It is time that they should perform theirs. •From the facts enu merated in Mr. Buxton's speech, it is clear that the planters are willing enough to . postpone the complete abolition of slavery, if the people and Legislature of England will allow them to do so. We are, there fore, disposed to consider the appointment of this Committee as an important manifestation, declaring to the Colonies, and to the world at large, that there must be no delay, no trickery, no juggling in the case ; but a plain, straightforward, bona fide discharge of obligations which cannot be violated without trampling upon the plainest principles of integrity, to say nothing of the other principles involved in the question. Amongst the number of gratifying facts disclosed in the speed; of Mr. Buxton, and repeated by many of the speakers who followed that gentleman in the debate, there are none more gratifying than those which refer to the conduct , of the abused and misrepresented , blacks. Instead of violence and bloodshed, their conduct has exhibited nothing but patience-and industry. The in ference, from the whole history of this great transac tion, of the abolition law, is faNfourable not only to the character of human nature, but to the cause of freedom as a practical experiment. It is now manifest that the danger of knocking off chains and discontinuing atro cities is not so great as the prudence of statesmen had supposed. It is Manifest that the great difficulty at tending such important changes consists not so much in preparing slaves for freedom as in preparing tyrants . for moderation and humanity. We do not wish to speak more severely, nor to criticise more minutely than the circumstances of the case require, but we cannot help observing that the Government appears to us to have put the saddle on the wrong horse, when they directed all their efforts to take security from the blacks (by the intervention of apprenticeship) that they wouldliot abuse their new-found rights, but for got to take security from the planters, who had be come demoralized 'under the same system of slavery, that they would respect the rights of their fel low men, and keep their own engagements inviolate. The declaration of the Marquis of Sligo—that.if the measure should fail, it would owe its failure to the mis conduct, not of the blacks, but of the planters, borne out as it has been,63i the events which have taken place, cannot - fail to be attended with the most im tie,.te.....ieewpape----i-n-e---Tai'af-snbeeik of emancipation in our Colonies may now be considered as certain. That success will be the death-blow of slavery all over the world. It will find its way into the Floridas and the Carolinas—into the hottest corner of the hottest hell of slavery ; and the mighty truth will bring forth its • proper fruits, iu spite of all that the sordid and malig nant passions of men can do to prevent its influence.— Morning Herald. We' have no doubt of the sincerity of the indispo lion which prevented Lord John Russell from pro ceeding on Monday night with the Tithe Commuta tion Bill. We have no doubt his Lordship was very ill of .a consciousness that the public had discovered this Tithe Bill to be absurd where it was not unjust, and unjust where it was not absurd. Even the Papers which the Government is pleased to pa tronize, in return for the kindness which they generally show to Government measures, found they could no longer differ with the public opi rrion upon this Bill ; and on the very day fixed for the decision of its fate in the House of Commons they deemed it expedient to pour forth their conviction of its total erroneousness. We give credit to these public instructors for the correctness of their judgment at last, but we cannot extend our congratulations to the quickness of their perceptidn. Every argument which, on Monday, the 21st o f M arc h, it h as occurred to them to put forth against the Tithe Bill, was sue gested in the Morning Herald of the 29th of Febura;y —exactly three weeks before. We have adverted to the same subject on more than one occasion since, and we cannot but feel pleased that, after so much longer consideration upbn the question, the Ministerial Jour nals have come to the same, or very nearly the same conclusions that we did, after our first perusal of the Bill. Under all the circumstances of the case, Lord John Russell was certainly right not to press forward the Bill on Monday night ; but we think that he or his colleagues were as certainly wrong in speaking of the Bill as it was spoken of ,when the postponementof its consideration in Committee was announced. It is very possible that Lord Howick knows nothing whatever of the provisions of the Bill—perhaps he has never read it. It is not in his department ; nor is it a very inviting or entertaining study-for those whom it does not immedi ately concern Bid. if he had not read it, the Noble Lord was very rash in stating that there was great mis apprehension abroad as to the main provisions of the Bill ; and if he had read it, there was in the observa tion rather strong evidence of the want of understand ing on the part of the Noble Lord himself, and want of fair and reasonable deference for the understanding of others. It appears that an Hon. Baronet who moved the Address at the opening of the Session re peated (no doubt, according to his instructions) the same remark, or one of the same description—namely, that there were many errors abroad regarding the operation of the clauses of the Bill. Now these state ments, whether correct or not, might have been at least plausible, if the Bill were as yet only known through the description of the Minister, when moving for leave to bring it in. But the original Bill has been five or six weeks before the public, and, even as " amended by the Committee," it has been more than half that time in the hands of all those who chose to seek for it. It is something too much of Lord Howick or Sir J. Wrottesley to stand up in the House of Commons and tell the people of England, who complain of a mea sure, that they greatly misapprehend the main provisions of a document which for three weeks past they have been anxiously examining. We do not mean to charge the Bill with excessive dearness, or with the unmistakeable character' of its language,--quite the contrary. As at first pre pared, it was exceedingly difficult to be understood ; and though much improved in this respect in its "se cond edition," it is still fa r from remarkable for in telligibleness. But, he this as it may, we venture to a ffi r m that it has been studied by intellects as astute as ever studied a Bill of the kind ; and if it be not com prehended, it is because it is not comprehensible: Does Lord Howick mean to say that men of th e hi g h est eminence, woo hove devoted their lives to the study of statutes, and who have taken so active and praise worthy a part with regard to this Bill, have. been all the time under a total misapprehension as to its It becomes our duty to call the immediate attention of his Majesty's Government, of Parliament, and the country, to a statement which has appeared in a Frank fort Paper of the 16th inst., to the following effect : " ST. PETERSBIIRGH, MARCH 2.—By the Emperor's Orders, a quarantine establishment is to be formed at the Sulinsky mouth of the Danube. It is to be in two parts — One for pratiques, and the other for suspicious vessels and goods : the first in the island of Leti, the second in the island of Georgiewsk. No goods are to be purified in the establishment, but they are to be forwarded to the Quaran tine Establishment at Odessa, or that at Ismael: It will serve as a place of refuge for ships which are compelled by storms in the strong current of the Danube to touch at Sulinsky, to take in provisions, or to undergo repairs. Merchants, the clerks, and other travellers, will be received into it who, after the expiration of their quarantine, wish to go by land to Ismael—a permission granted likewise to the crews of ships that may be wrecked in the vicinity of these islands." Ever since the celebrated cordon sanitaire which was collected at the foot of the Pyrenees, under the pretext of preventing the plague of Barcelona from entering France, was converted by a simple ordonnance into an invading army, and marched into Spain for the purpose of putting down the Constitution of 1820, the quarantine system has become an engine in the hands of the despotic powers, to which they have resort whenever they have any political design to conceal. Thus, in the settlement of Wallachia and Moldavia, which was effected under the arrangements enacted by the treaty of Adrianople, Russia took good care that those provinces should remain under her Sovereign control, though they are nominally subject to the Porte. How was this done ? A quarantine esta blishment was formed on the northern bank' of the Danube, and the regulation and control of thiS esta blishment were vested in the hands of the:-Russian Consul-General at Bucharest. The persons who were appointed to carry his orders into effect are pA police officers„ but military men, clothed in Russian uniforins; -and armed in the usual manner. Thus, in fact, under.the appearance of a quarantine system, which at a distance sounds very innocently, there may be seen, on the Wallachian shore of the river, well-organized troops of Russian soldiers, who owe allegiance only to the Autocrat. For some time a question has been in dis cussion between Russia, Austria, and Great Britain, as to the -right- Claimed by the former power to levy tolls upon merchant vessels passing into the Black Sea from the Danube, cr vice versa. This alleged right is founded upon the. treaty of Adrianople, by which the whole Delta of the river was - ceded by. the Porte to Russia. Treaties previously existing between Austr:a and Turkey provided that Austrian vessels should freely navigate the Danube, and under these treaties, Nhich that of Adrianople could notikpeal, as Austria was-no party to it, exemption was claimed from the tolls demanded by the Russian authorities. The gene ral treaty of Vienna, to which Russia was a party, expressly stipulates that the navigation of all the prin cipal European ricers should be free, and that no cus toms or other imposts higher than those then established should be levied at the embouchures, or any other part of these. great canals. No tolls of any kind were a that period exacted at any of tilt mouths of the Danube ; consequently the British Government has claimed the right -for his -.:1 1 4-ajesty'L sAects to pass up and down .the.Danubc without paying. any impost wliat evr to the Russian Authorities. It would appear that'the Russian Cabinet.has.found its positions un- tenable upon this' point ; that the tolls cannot be levied according to the law of nations ; and therefore it is that they, have suggested the adoption of the ; quarantine system, to get out- of the legal difficulty, but still to preserve their usurpation. An 'impost-not. payable as a customs'-duty is to be changed into. a va,rantine cbargc. But the new device goes. much further than this. The opening of the Danube to the free navigation of- the subjects of every State would seriously affect the commerce of Odessa. That corn peree _most be protected at all events; hence every possible impediment -is to be thrown in the way of foreign merchant-ships ascending or descending the river. There are to be two quarantine establishments —one in the island of Leti, the other in that of GeorgieWsk ; but in neither of these places -are goods allowed to be purified—the are to be UMET, tneretore, [or a r.nii - §h 'ship, for in -stance, whose cargo is consigned to a port in %Val laohia, to go to Odessa in the first place, and sail direct from Odessa to the Danube, than to go to the Danube, then to Odessa, then back to the Danube again. The ships sent for purification to Ismael, a port in Bessarabia which belongs to Russia, can only be those which descend the river. Consequently the whole object of the quarantine is'plainly to prevent English and other foreign merchant-ships from carry ing on a direct trade with Wallachia or Moldavia, and to render it a matter of necessity that they should trade with the Danubian States only through Odessa. The concessions apparently made to merchants, clerks, tra vellers, and crews of ships wrecked in the neighbour hood of the two islands, Leti and Georgiew•sk, are to be set down amongst those flourishes of " magnani mity," " disinterestedness," and " generosity" of every sprt, usually found at the head or the tail of all Rus sian documents which mean mischief. All that we need add to what we have now said upon this sub ject. is this, that if the notification above quoted from a Frankfort journal has emanated from Russian _authority, _and if the system of quarantine therein pointed out is to be really carried into effect, there is an end to British trade in the Danube. No pre cedent, we believe, exists for such a vexatious appli cation of the sanitary laws to such a purpose as this declaration reveals upon the face of it. The quaran tines of Ismael, Galacz, and Giurgeva, are already snore than sufficient to protect Bessarabia and the two principalities from infection. Those about to be superadded at the Sulinsky mouth of the Danube are utterly superfluous, in a sanitary point of view, and are intended for no other purpose than interference with the rights of every trader who is not Russian. The British merchants, therefore, who have already established houses at Bucharest and Jassy, and who have embarked in them large capitals, may as well abandon their enterprises at once, and we may bid adieu to all the brilliant prospects which the steam navigation of the Danube opened to all Europe. The trade of the river is to be monopolised by Odessa.— Morning Chro n icle: From some cause or other, the Melbourne Ministry does not seem to get much a-head with those great measures of which its chief boast is to have been the originator, and on the accomplishment of which, ac cording to its advocates, the well-being of the empire depends. -One of the first promises of the Whig go vernment, five years ago, was a Bill for the commuta tion of tithes in England and Wales ; but it is no less edifying than curious that Sir R. Peel, the Con servative, who was guiltless of all ostentation or pro fession upon the subject, should have been the first to bring forward a Tithe Commutation Bill which was (3egerving a second serious thought. Sir Robert Peel aro -unded his measure of commutatien upon a volun taryo agreement between tith eowner an d landown er , t o which ,he naturally took for granted that a sense of mutua l i, iterest would incline them both, and he en grafted up. 4 'n this root a provision f or perpetuat i ng . b y foree of law that same adjustment of th eir respect i ve rights and ob. l ig ations which at first they h a d spon taneously concurr ed in. It is to be pr esume d t h at wherever an affreet ve nt took place, each party wo u ld be previously satisfied of its fairness , and therefore, after t wo or th r ee ycars' experience of the beneficial working o f suc h a vo luvtary system, that the autho r ity of law might be employed for its cont.'nuance without nt to it, and hardship to either party, :whose first asse ,4 to be suosequent acquiescence in it, had proved 1, rea sonable and effic • . acious. The workin aof sue h a mea sureh the n would o b v i ous l y furnish safest and th,' most satisfactory data for the details of a compulsory co.m mutation bill, if one should be found necessary, a:: probably it would, in order to meet cases where 'Par ties from ignorance or interest could be brought to 310 agreement at all. Now, the delay of - liliiris ters in proceeding with their bill, t. which substitutes immediate compulsion for temporary freedom 'n the bargain between the tithe-payerand - i 4 • tithe-ret.6tver, leads to the suspicion that something has gone w rong. The dissatisfaction it has produced is universal oi it of doors, nor do we believe that Lord John Russell' can reckon upon even a strong minority in the Ilou. le pf THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 23, 1836. main provisions ?- Will even he have the confi dence to affirm that Mr. Preston is non-apprehenSive as to the meaning of a Bill creating a rent charge on landed property, or that Mr. Eagle does not under stand provisions relating to tithes? With all deference to the station and character of the Secretary-at- War, we venture to tell him that the opinion of West minster Hall is of rather more value on such a subject than his opinion, and there is no man with a lawyer's gown on his back who would not immediately yield, with the deference weich knowledge is ever ready to pay to well-earned reputation, to the opinions of such men as these upon such subjects. We do not find that when the deputation of landowners (of whom we believe Mr. Eagle, the author of works of great pro fessional authority on the subject . of tithes, was one) waited upon Lord John Russell, that his Lordship taunted them with having misapprehended the main provisions of his Bill. He seemed rather to desire to reconcile those who waited upon him to the operation of the evils in the Bill, which, according to him, it is impossible to avoid. This is another form of that con fidence in their own abilities which our Ministers pos sess—certainly in as high a degree as their pretensions justify. It is true, said Lord John, with surprising coolness, that highly cultivated lands' will be made 'sub ject for ever to a rent charge calculated upon that high cultivation, whatever their future condition may be ; but, then, on the other hand, lands which are now compardtively unproductive will, when highly culti vated, pay no more tithe than they pay at this mo ment. His Lordship thinks of averages, and forgets the injustice on both sides, of which the mean— which practically will not exist at all—is equity. The injustice to those charged, under all circum stances, with a tithe rent charge calculated upon high. 'cultivation, will be the greater and the more intolerable, because other lands, in the possession of dther landowners, which have been' more re cently brought into cultivation, will be subject only to a tithe charge calculated according to their former barrenness. 'The competition of these more favourably circumstanced lands will make it the more difficult, to bear the burden of a tithe charge fixed upon an er roneous and an unjust principle. We are very curious to see the course which Lord John Russell will take after he shall have " screwed his courage to the stick inc.-place" regarding :the Tithe Commutation Bill. Hitherto he certainly has not improved upon the Bill which Sir R. Peel brought in last year, and has now re-introduced. Of that Bill it may be said that, in stead of sweeping away the evils complained of in the tithe-system, it only affords the means of adjustment between the parties, which, if they are agreed upon, will remove these evils. But this much is clear, that if such a Bill, in consequence of not being compul sory, falls short of certainty in producing good, it can not enforce new or aggravated evil. The complaint against Lord John Russell's Bill is that, under the name of a remedy, it introduces a confirmation of an -- acknowledged evil, and even adds to it hardships and hopelessness which hitherto have been unknown. We think his Lordship will be wise to take the advice of Mr. HodgeS, and postpone his Bill until after Easter. During the recess it is possible he may learn that the " misapprehension of the main provisions of the Bill" has not been with, the public. --Morning Herald. The impartial and judicious report of the Commis sioners appointed by his Majesty. •to inquire into the system of discipline in the army, and the interesting and satisfactory evidence upon which that report is founded, are calculated to set the question of the aboli tion of corporal punishment completely at rest. Yet it is already evident that they will fail to do so, and that they will fail not from any deficiency in the evi dence itself, or from any inaccuracy in the reasoning founded upon it, but simply because there are many persons whose interests will not permit them to forego the opportunities of agitation which the continued dis cussion of- the subject may afford, and a still greater number—the willing dupes and slavish followers of the former artful and wicked class—who— " Convinced against their will, Are of the same opinion still." For the condition of the public mind, in reference to this important subject, i piznqv c t u e r s, ; 6,"i'tie3 - Mk acid Radical parties, and especially some of the prin cipal Members of the present Administration, are chiefly responsible. They have laboured throughout their woole political lives to inflame the passions and to pervert the understandings of their countrymen upon this as upon other subjects, when their object was merely to force their way into power by means of a cheap and vulgar popularity. And, now that they are in possession of power, and would elude, if they dared, the performance of their unprincipled promises and the accomplishment of their daring and senseless projects, they at least have no right to com plain if they should be held to the letter of their vicious compact, and be compelled to encounter the hazard of attempting what they so vehemently and recklessly urged upon their predecessors. The Ministers of the Crown must hazard all the conse quences of an attempt to abolish corporal punishments in the army, or plead guilty to the charge of having heretofore, in their wickedness and folly, agitated tile public mind upon a subject which they did not under stand—upon a subject which ordinary diligence and activity in search of information would have enabled them to understand then as fully as they call under stand it now —upon a subject of such vital importance that the man, professing to be a Statesman, who has once permitted himself to speak or write upon it in ignorance, is manifestly guilty of one of the highest of public crimes. We willingly leave, however, the Whig and Radical Ministers of the Crown to steer their course as they may think fit between the opposite dangers, of gratifying the expectations they have ex cited among their deluded admirers, and of attempting to legislate upon so important a subject as that of the discipline of the British army, in opposition to such a Report and such evidence as now lie before us. A more interesting and a more useful employment than that of speculating upon the future conduct of such men, now demands our attention—that, namely, of describing the results of the laborious inquiry which has been pursued by the Commissioners appointed for the purpose by Sir R. Peel, and the character of the evidence upon which their conclusions rest. The Com missioners have the merit of having collected what may, without exaggeration, be termed a complete body. of evideneo upon the important subject committed„, to . their -investigation. 'I. hey sought information from officers of all ranks in the British army-=from privates of the British army, recommended for the general ex cellence of their character as soldiers and as men— from four intelligent and distinguished officers of the French army, sent by the Government of Franc e , at their request, for the purpoSe of being examined—f ro , the most eminent persons in political and military life, t who are most promine n t i n t h e eye o f th e wor l d as the opponents of corporal punishment—from a ll printed and manuscript docum en ts of an a ut h entic character which could be expected to shed light upheon any branch of the subject. They have challanged world to compare their Report with this mass of evi dence, by presenting, as was their duty, the tw o to gether ; and they have done this in the just and well founded confidence that the latter will fully andco ad com pletely sustain the former. The Report alleges, and the allegation is fully supported by the whole ma ss o f mor e testimony, that the mode of recruiting the B r i t i s h army by enlistment, as compared with the compul sor levies of other States, is a circumstance highly unfa vourable to the character and discipline of a mili tary force ; and it asserts, what is, in truth, no than a plain conclusion of common s ense, that a military body so constituted requires a different sy s _ tem of discipline from that which is held to be neces sary in the Continental armies , drawn , as the l atter are, promiscuously from the various classes of society, and containing a smaller proportion of men who are induced to enter the army by the desperation of their circumstances, the result of antecedent improvidence or vice. The report and ev idence further sh ow , what in deed scarcely required to be shown, s i nce it is self evident, that the British system of recr u i ting by bounty cannot t 1 e c b o e nt exchanged nent. of Europe, fora and that the origi na l mate rial conscription system, like th a t of of which our army is composed cannot otherwise be imp rove d w ith ou t su ch an increase of the expense o f our milit ar y es t a bli s hment as the nation is not prepa re d to endu re . H a d t h e ev id e nce stopped here, it would Surely have been enough to dissuade from any altera tion of the British system of discipline in deference to the example of other States, whose armies are com posed of such materials as are not within the reach of the British Government, for this purpose. But it is a just subject of triumph and of pride to the country that the evidence does not stop here. It is proved by evidence uncontradicted and unimpeachable, that Bri tish subjects, who enter into the military service of their country, undergo a change'in that service, and by means of its system of discipline, more beneficial than is imparted, in similar circumstances, to the subjects of any other State—that when in the army they speedily attain not merely to an equality with the mili tary-subjects of any other Government ,in those par ticulars in which they might .naturally be expected to be permanently inferior, but that in those very particulars they greatly surpass every other army—that whether at home or in the colonies— whether stationed for a time in the dominions of a friendly Power, or acting in the face of an enemy—whether flushed by victory, or depressed by defeat—whether animated in an advance of har rassed in a retreat—in all positions, and in all circum stances, they invariably prove themselves to be the most orderly and best conducted of any military body on the face of the earth. These facts, uncontested and incontestable, are surely decisive against such es sential and irrevocable change in our system of mili tary discipline, as the sentimental pretenders to supe rior humanity and refinement urge with so much im portunity and vehemence. It is notorious that the discipline of the French army is maintained by frequent recourse to the punishment of death, a severity scarcely known in that of Great Britain ; and it is equally no torious that notwithstanding this habitual recurrence to this fatal extremity of punishment, and notwithstand ing, also, the superior social elements of which- the French army is, undoubtedly composed, the latter is immeasurably l infeiior to the army of Great : Bri tain in respect to the daily personal conduct of the troops, particularly in an enemy's country. Would it be gratifying to our humanity-mongers to know that in the next campaign in which British troops shall be en gaged, for every man who but for their stupid interfe rence would have been flogged, it will be`necessary that a man shall be shot ? Yet this is the most probable result of their exertions. Those who are ready to con sent that the youths from our counting-houses, shops, factories and farms—from our grammar-schools and Universities, from the laboratory of the chemist, and the studio of the artist—shall be forced into the ranks by an indiscriminate conscription, may, with out absurdity or 'wickedness, insist on the aboli tion of corporal punishment in the British army. Those who are ready, to consent that persons of the above-mentioned classes shall be induced volun tarily to enter into the ranks by such inducements as must double the expense of our military establishment, may, without absurdity or wickedness, insist upon the abolition of corporal punishment in the army. Those who arc ready to consent that twenty soldiers should be shot by their comrades, for the preservation of discipline, in the place of each one who now suffers that extreme penalty, may, without additional ab surdity or wickedness, insist upon the abolition of cor poral punishment in the British army. After the full and conclusive investigation the subject has now un dergone, nothing can be more just than to demand of every man, who continues to urge the abolition of corporal punishment, to which of the above classes he beiongs.—Morninfr Post. With feelings of " indignation, abhorrence, and dis gust, too strong for_ language to express, we have lately referred to the revolting Report of the Commis sioners appointed to inquire into military punishments; however, it is but justice to the Commissioners to state that the atrocious nature of the evidence brought be fore them extenuates, to a certain extent, the enor mity of the sentiments to which they have given expression. We have merely to take as a specimen the testimony borne by his Grace of Wellington, which for absurdity, inconsistency, and inhumanity, may serve as a model for all less eminent in the prac tice of tyrannical inflictions. His Grace appears to have but one principle of , a i ctior fiecria - Catholic — emancipation. "It is inflicted," says he, " because it is a matter of necessity." He denies that solitary confinement has ma produced y , aeenpy ioccas i onallynmg a man nh mw n fh y r 0101 am : effec t, ct sxs pa, saved esn tnls diudrLteiehretesod the heat solitary ivateraryftn from nmoad climat e s fifaantefiiegnv i t enr t c bL o y t trko Thereb o a r r a e t e, if few pluieuischamn,enstuscflriunainwiirlircahtiomnaeln,asusicidrtion es peciallyfrum that the of u n beingt el 1 e l e c f t t u a w l i t hu o t r i t t i o e n u , prink, m s p h aiu i o p r . e t h Butan it e y lv d o e ud be a nlee throughs irksome it a sb at s unnecessary b atities.His to fl Grace, ra o c lw the e o ,ina word, states " there is no punishment which makes an impression upon any body, except corporal pu nishment I!" What I—is the British soldier so brutal and debased that the terror of the lash is his only incentive to action ? In allusion to taking pri soners to solitary confinement, his Grace observes, " Moreover, you would soon require something to prevent what I should call the knocking-down system —the knocking-down the sentry or the non-commis sioned officer who is taking the man to the place of solitary confinement." But is there no danger of the " knocking-down" system being acted upon in cases of flogging ? Is the man who would knock down the person who might take him in charge to.confinement, likely to forbear from taking greater vengeance on them who might be accessary to inflicting on him a punish ment from which English laws protect the brute - ? And should he do so, who would feel sympathy with the victim of a retribution which the law of humanity —a tion_ law pru th el a a t im ca s n , n in ot th b r ee heartepele a of d e b v y er t y yra ma n n na le ,ictol be islajust, and consistent with the dignity . and impulses of his nature ?—Morning Advertiser. SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE. VESSELS ENTERED INWARDS AT THE CUS TOM-HOUSE, MARCH 22. The Ludd, Jackson, from Antwerp; Henry, Bishop, Havre; Eliza, Lafally, Demerara; Amity, Burton, Dunkirk. ENTERED OUTWARDS FOR LOADING, MARCH 22. The Libra, Engelsman, for Amsterdam ; Sir Edward Banks, Norwood, Rotterdam; Alfred, Dixon, Bembia ; Har lequin, Boulogne; Thomas Snooks, Brown, Cape; Eclair, De Alena, Cadiz and San Lucas; Charles Wylie, Laing, St. George's, Africa ; Transit, Wrightson, Lisbon; Stanford ham, Heron, Quebec ; Margaret, Stanford, Oporto; Tourist, Ling, Antwerp ; Pet, Stone, Malta, &c. ; Mary, Constance, Gibraltar; Eliza Stewart, Miller, Canton. - CLEARED OUTWARDS WITH CARGO, MARCH 22. The Cherry, Partridge, for Hamburgh; Columbine, Stran nack, Hambuagh ; Sir E. Banks, Norwood, Rotterdam ; Rosabel, Steer, Grand Canary ; Nereid, George, Santander; Lady Brougham, Faber, Lisbon ; Harlequin, Middleton, Boulogne. CLEARED OUTWARDS IN BALLAST, MARCH 22. The Dwina, Volum, for Grand Canary ; Dispatch, May, South Sea Fishery ; Trois Freres, Tapley, Barfleur ; Zebulon, Foster, Richebucto. ARRIVED AT LIVERPOOL, MARCH 21. The Propontis, Mayhew, from Mobile ' • Montreal, Leitch, Bahia; Mentor, Gibbs, Palermo; Asia, Willcott, and New Orleans, Cole, New Orleans. ENTERED FOR LOADING, MARCH 21. The Pearl, Cove, for Algiers ; Rebecca, Cresswell, Bahia; Wareham, Game, Cadiz ; Riviere, Rosewall, Elsineur; Ceres, Toper, Havre; Balley, Orfeur, Leghorn ; Elizabeth, Cranston, Marseilles; Magistrate, Taylor, Mobile; Noble, Mustard, Hibernia, Wilson, and Oconu, Wilson, New York ; William Herdman, Gilmour, Quebec; Fairfield, Slack, Sa. vannah. _ CLEARED OUTWARDS, MARCH 21. The Dampier, Newlands, for Jamaica ; Washington, Balti more; Raynard, Wetherell, Marseilles; Mary, Bell, Con stantinople; Inez, Boston; Frances, Heath, Barbadoes • Pan lane, Parer, and Uni on , V anstre i ne, O sten d ; Jane, dranby, Oporto. SAILED, MAncu 21. The Colonist, *Master, for Boston; Imogen, Riley, China; Black-eye'd Susan, Watkins, Constantinople; John Porter, Jenkinson, Halifax ; Brechin Castle, Nicol, Laguyra; Sir Watkin, Armon, Sierra Leone; Queen Adelaide, Bor land, New Orleans; Otterspool, Dowling, St. Andrew's; Frances, Heath, Barbadoes. TELEGRAPHED. Off Point Lynas, inward bound, the Hesperus, for Deme rara ; Prince Leopold, Cardiff. Off Grert Ormshead, the Arrow, from Bristol. The Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry i 3 so much indisposed as to render it necessary for him to authorize, by special commission, Archdeacon Hodgson to trsnsact all the ordinary business of the diocese till his Lordship is able to re sume it. The Bishop will defer his visitation this year. The Archdeacons, however, will visit as usual. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. fiqUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 22 . The' LORD 'CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at the usual hour, when a number of private Bills were brought up from the House of Commons, and severally read a first time Lord SKELSMERSDALE presented a petition from a place in Yorkshire, complaining of agricultural distress; and one complaining of the additional duty on spirit licenses. The Earl of RO SE BE R Y wished to call the attention of the House to the state in which the question of the Scotch Laws of Entail was left last Session. He had not pro ceeded in the matter, because he had hoped some Bills on the subject would have been introduced which would have been more in harmony with the feelings of those who would have to decide upon the law. He was sorry that he had been disappointed in such a hope, for he was now obliged to abandon all intention of originating any mea sure in the present Session.—( Hear.) Whether he would be induced to bring in a Bill to extend the powers and relieve the restrictions which now pressed upon the heirs of entail in possession in Scotland, depended upon the wishes of those who were interested in the question, and whether he thought he could surmount the difficulties which surrounded it. Lord PLUNKETT brought in a Bill for amending the Laws of Bankruptcy in Ireland. He would only say that the objects of the Bill were to consolidate the Laws in Ireland which extended over a great number of Acts—to assimilate the practice of the two countries— to extend to Ireland the improvoments which had been intro duced in this country by the 3d of George IV., and the Ist and 2d of William IV. There were at present 25 Commis sioners in Ireland. The Bill proposed to abolish the whole of them, and entrust the working of the Bankruptcy Laws to one Commissioner. He would on the second reading of the Bill, state the details of the Bill at length. The Bishop of BATH and `YELLS presented a petition from the owners and occupiers of ecclesiastical property in Somersetshire, praying that the Bill for amending the law with regard to the renewal of leases of such property, might not pass into a law. The Bishop of ROCHESTER could not help expressing his surprise that such a petition should have been pre sented, in the absence of the most Reverend Prelate who had charge of the Bill.—( Hear.) It was was well known that the Bill emanated from the Church Conimissioners, and he denied that it would do .mare; than modify some great abuses which had arisen from the present state of the law. —(Hear, hear.) He did not think that the petition was either modest or reasonable, for the Bill would not interfere in any way with the fair rights of any one connected with such property. The Bishop of BATH and WELLS said if he had not presented the petition now he would not have been able to do it, for he was obliged to leave town on very important busi ness He thought the prayer of the petition was both fair and reasonable ; for if the; Bill; passed, the occupier of any Ec clesiastical leasehold property could not get his son's life in serted, which would be a great detriment to the public. The Bishop of ROCHESTER defended the Bill. Was it fair that the incumbent of any living should, just when when leaving it, grant a renewal of a lease for young lives in place of old ones, by which the property was rendered value less to three or four of his successors ? On the motion of Lord GLENELG the Report on the Administration of Justice in the West Indies Bill was brought up, and agreed to.—To be read a third time on Thursday. The Marquis of L ANSDOWNE presented a petition from the prisoners confined for debt in Whitecross- street prison, praying for the abolition of imprisonment for debt. As some measure on the subject was to be introduced this Session, and as the petition was short, he moved that it be read by the clerk. On the motion of the Earl of SII A FTE SB U RY the House then adjourned to Thursday next. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Maßcm 22. The SPEAKER took the Chair at a few minutes to four o'clock Mr. G. F. YOUNG presented a petition against the Scar borough Harbour Bill ; and one from an individual against the North Midland Railway Bill. Mr. CRAWFORD - presented a petition from Edward Roy, croft against Stevenson's Brighton Railway Line. EAST SUFFOLK COUNTY HALL. On the motion of Lord HENNIKER, the East Suffolk County Hall Bill was read a third time and passed. Mr. ROBINSON presented a petition from Worcester against the British Alkali Company. HUNGERFORD MARKET. Tha HON. MElunEit then brought up the Report of the Com mittee on the Ilungerford Market Bill, and obtained leave to bring in a Bill to alter and enlarge the powers of that Company MIDLAND COUNTIES RAILWAY. Mr. GLADSTONE presented petitions from Market. Ilarborough, and other places in North Leicestershire, agains certain clauses in the Midland Counties'Railway Bill. Sir G. CREWE presented a petition from Robert Ark• wright, Esq., against the Midland Counties Railway. TRALEE HARBOUR. Mr. M. O'CONNELL brought in a Bill for making a har bour and navigable canal at Tralee, in the county of Kerry. Mr. D UGD ALE presented a petition against the Grand Junction Railway Bill. LANARKSHIRE ROADS. On the motion of Mr. JOHN MAXWELL. the, Lanark Mr. TOOKE presented a petition from Brixton, agains Rennie's Brighton Railway Line. FAMILY ENDOWMENT SOCIETY. On the motion of Mr. TOOKE the Family Endowment Society Bill was read a second time. Mr. HAL FORD presented a petition against the Midland Counties Railway Bill. On the motion of Mr. HINDLEY the Hyde Small Debts Bill was read a second time. Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented a petition from the trustees of a road in Kent, against the Dover Railway Bill. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from Drogheda in favour of the Drogheda Railway Bill. On the motion of Mr. ANGERSTEIN the Greenwich Pier Bill was read a second time. Mr. HALLIBURTON brought up the Report of the Committee on the Dundee and Arbroath Railway Bill. On the motion of Mr. PENDARVES the Cornwall Assize Hall Bill was read a third time and passed. Mr. P. STEWART presented a petition signed by 107 of the most eminent commercial men in London in favour of the Commercial Railway to Blackwall. General PALMER presented a petition from Bath against the Cheltenham and Great Western Railway Bill. Mr. WAK LEY presented a petition from an individual named Henry Cook, complaining of the conduct of the offi cers of the South Western Railway, and praying to be heard before the Committee by counsel. Mr. HUME thought-the House would not do its duty if it referred this petition to the Committee. Their powers were already large enough. If the Committee did their duty, they would ascertain whether the shares were bona fide subscribed for. Whatever stock-jobbing had taken place between indi viduals, he thought that the House of Commons would not entertain it. Mr. GISBORNE said that the petitioner did not pretend to be affected by the line of Railway against which he was pe titioning, and that was one of the principal grounds why the House ought not to interfere. EDINBURGH POOR LAW BILL. On the motion of Mr. CHALMERS, this Bill was read a second time and ordered to be committed. LONDON AND BIRMINGHAM RAILWAY.—DE FALCATION OF SUB-CONTRACTORS. Colonel SIBTHORP presented a petition from between 80 and 90 persons employed on the London and Birmingham Railway, praying the House to make some provisions by which the proprietors of railways would be made answerable for the conduct of their servants. The petitioners had been employed on the London and Birmingham Railway, and in consequence of two of the sub -contractors having absconded they had been mulcted of their wages. The Hon. and Gallant Member moved that the petition should be referred to the Committee on the London and Birmingham Railway. Mr. HUME said that there was an Act in existence for the very purpose which the petition had in view, which provided in the case of masters and workmen making contracts, a speedy mode to make them fulfil them. If the petitioners were ag grieved, they might have the parties before a Magistrate, in a summary way. As to the petition being referred to the Com mittee, he would venture to say, that if it was, they would be able to do nothing with it. Mr. ROBINSON thought the ease was one for the Courts below. Colonel SIBTHORP said such a course might do for some parties; but if the petitioners knew as much of law as he did, he was sure they would never go to a Court of Law upon the subject.—(Laughter.) Mr.. C. BRUCE presented a petition from an individual against the Forfar Railway Bill. MANCHESTER AND STOCKPORT RAILWAY. Mr. M. PHILLIPS presented a petition from certain in dividuals in Manchester against the Manchester and Stockport Railway Bill. Mr. BERNARD presented petitions from Woolwich And Dartford against the South Eastern Railway Bill. LONDON AND CROYDON RAILROAD. Mr. HUME presented a petition from a company of proprie tors of the London and Croydon Railroad, stating that there was a Bill in progress through that House which would inter fere with the track of their railway, and praying to Le heard by counsel against such Bill. Mr. BUCKINGHAM presented a petition from the master, mates, and seamen of the ship Dundee, praying the sea men might not be prohibited from insuring their wages. STAMP DUTIES. The same HON. MEMBER presented a petition from Cole'Zas we heard it) signed by 2,834 persons, praying for the total abolition of the stamp duty on Newspapers:_ ABOLITION OF . TiTIIES. Mr. CALLAGHAN presented a petition from the city of Cork, praying for the total abolition of Tithes. Also a pe tition from the same pl ace , pra yi ng t h at th e gene ral Turnpike Trust Bill might not be renewed. IRISH CORPORATIONS. The same HON. MEMBER had also another petition to present from a parish in the city cf Cork, which was signed by 700 inhabitant householders of that city, convened by pub lic advertisem en t, an d pray i ng f or cor p o rate reform. Th e petitioners stated that if a qualification of 1,0001. were re quired for Town Councillors, it would greatly prevent the g oo d effects of th e Bill . H e wou ld ta k e that opportunity of stating, although the Honourable Member for I3andon was absent, yet as he had given him notice that he had to make a remark on a statement made to the House by that Hon. and Learned Member, and as no opportunity had before offered itself to him to make that statement, he felt himself bound to address a few words to the House before the Bill should have gone into Committee. The Hon. and Learned Member (Mr. Jackson) might know a g reat deal about 13a31' _ don, but he could not know the city of Cork as well as those Members who represented it. The Hon. and Learned Member had stated that there were not less that six bun' dred inhabitant voters who could not write their own names. He was authorised to state that the Hon. and Learned Member for Bandon was greatly mistaken. The stataement verY was altogether erroneous, and the House would form erroneous notion of the constituency of the City of Cork f t on the statement of the Member for Bandon. If the qualific were 5/. instead of 101., there would be a very respectable and intelligent constituency. CHURCH RATES. Mr. J. FIELDEN presented a petition from against the continuance of Church Rates. The Hon. Memb er proceeded to read several statements set forth in the petition; • but in so low a tone of voice as to be altogether inaudible 1 that his the gallery. We understood him to express a hope Majesty's Ministers would find themselves in a condition tin abolish entirely a rate which had been productive of so Int ic bad feeling in every part of England. of Mr. WIL KS had been requested to support the prayer Rochdale the petition. In Lancashire and Yorkshire great contentiol was set on foot by the continuance of these obnoxious rates, an he was not surprised at the indignation which was express ed e " ' !, the people on this subject. He would not occupy the Hous any remarks, seeing so many of his Hon. Friends disposed t° speak, but he could not help observing that the case beforde, them added one to the numberless complaints which Pre no t that until church-rates were abolished, the country could enjoy the blessings of peace, or have confidence in those by whom they were governed. n Mr. POTTER said he also had been reuested to suPP - ft the petition of the inhabitants of Rochdale for the aboli tion. Church Rates. The treatment which several of the pari sh , - ioners had met with was most cruel and shameful, an d such "- the House ought to inquire into. Notwithstanding the inha. bitants of Rochdale, had in vestry assembled, refused to grant 3 Church hate, several persons had been proceeded against in ?" most vexatious manner, all of which was detailed in the Peti t tion.—( Hear.) He most earnestly entreated the Governteell, to put an end to Church Rates, and thought as the revenue, of the Church were about to undergo great changes and re ductions, Church Rates ought to be paid by that- Church t°. whose benefit they were alone appropriated. Last Session for be (Mr. Potter) moved for:" a return of the number of suite „ the recovery of Church Rates in the Ecclesiastical- Coats' il3s he he was told the number would be very small, and for en_ under 101. the return would be nil. He held in his hand t Return, and it actually extended over thirteen pages, a nd very considerable number were for sums under 10 /. He trus!e the Session would not end without the odious impost bcing abolihed.—( Hear.) ma th*/ Mr. BUCKINGHAM knew that the facts stated in petition were not exaggerated ; on the contrary, they we re - derrated. Mr. ENVART supported the prayer of the petition• j ha Mr. PATTEN trusted his Majesty's Government vou rd prepared before the close of the Session to bring for' measure for the total abolition of Church Rates. MR. BUCKINGHAM'S CLAIMS. cou ld Mr. TULK presented a petition from some place we not learn, in favour of Mr. Buckingham's claims. The A ke Member took that opportunity of correcting a n' s 4l 3 o which appeared in the votes of the House.—( Hear.) mo st Attorney-General presented a petition from Edinburglkarick, numerously and respectably signed, in favour of Mr. ' fr o ingham's claims, and it was p u t down in the votes as , Paisley. AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS. s ter, Mr. PELHAM presented several petitions from Le ice on the subject of agricultural distress. Lord HE NN IKE R presented a petition on the same stl' DISSENTERS' GRIEVANCES. 01). Mr. WILKS presented a petition from Bewdley on the 0 jest of Dissenters' grievances. t al fu oa Mr. CHARLES LU SHING TON presented a Pe— ly from Ashburton on the same subject. The Hon. Member o concurred in the prayer of the petition, and trusted they Fo never be satisfied until they received the whole of the en l3l ' pation they deserved. IRISH MUNICIPAL REFORM. Notting" Sir R. FE RGUSSON presented a petition fro m that the barn House, sign ewould byd be plea inhabita to n grant a fullts of that townand, effi pracientYing ea -I.l' sure of municipal reform to Ireland. D TAXES. Mr. II LTNIE presented a ASSESSE petition from an individual n a t he Charles Wright, complaining of the manner in wh ieb u on window tax was assessed, and which pressed very unfairly a n d the poorer classes. He had another petition to present , set t he wished the Chancellor of the Exchequer was Pre u b, to call his attention to it.—( Hear, hear, and ala i jo The Right Honourable Gentleman was in his p1ace.).......the was glad to see the Right Hon. Gentleman in his place other petition was from Tottenham, Enfield, Barnet, and places in Middlesex, signed by many hundred househow' the are complaining of grievous surcharges in the levying o f t h a a re sessed taxes ; the officers had waged an indiscriminate vat`' rt against the inhabitants, and by summoning them for ea r a t dogs, horses, licenses, &c., they had been put to very g t the •• ' inconvenience and expense. This was not confined ,_t ° d county of Middlesex alone, and if th e Government wi sue le have these taxes leviivi with th e concurrence of the prop ) they must put .a limit to th ese op p ress i v e sure The Marquis o f CH AND 0 S qu i te co ncurred in the obse . vations of the Hon. M em b er f or Middl ese x. The sa me sys in the cou tne extended to other co un ti es , a nd t h e surc harges which he (the Ma rqu i s o f Ch an d os ) h a d the honour to re sent, were most grievous and ill ega l, and most disgraceful et° the parties concerned.—( Hear, hear.) a rn itte 3 The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUE R a-- ol d sy ste the the existence of the evil which resulted from the the officers having an interest in the fines levied. It was the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill to rented,' grievance.--( Hear, hear.) THE MAURITIUS. blaa tg Mr. HUNIE presented petitions from two in -a- n i duct of the Island of M aur iti us , com pl a i n i n g of the °°- the of the Colonial Office towards that colony. twenty years that he (Mr. Hume) had been in During ee t parliaT o . he never knew of s o gross a case. It was n ot e o f tbe pie allegation agai ns t an i n di v id ua l on the part inhabitants, but that justice was not duly administerlaa that the source of justice was tainted that improper I s e % by sat on the bench, and that their acts were countenanoetidea the Government. The case of the inhabitants had been CO, I for to his Hon. Friend the Member for Bath, who had ro ovei the the appointment of a Committee on the subject. On e ° „and most important and material witnesses was Mr. Jer 6te l e ' a ting the petitioners had applied to the Colonial Office, rer,tbo that this public officer would be detained ar .") purpose of having justice done.--( Cries of " Hear, to Pay Rather than lose his evidence, they were obliged t c ,face. 1,0001. into th e h an d s o f an i n di v id ua l i n the Colonial ,-;33";ott, When the day o f mo ti on came , hi s M a jesty's Gover:ei, re through their Under Secretary, objected to the enclt ur fi;ilitY jetted their prayer, and thus prevented the pos s t ea. of the inhabitant s o f th e M aur i t i us h av i ng their case Sk-ogb As the last res ource , th ere b e i ng no other tribunal alloy which they could o bt a i n a return of the money' e came to that Hou se an d requested its interfereo° 00 whatever it might thi n k b est to forward that o bject. t thought the only j us ti ce t h at cou ld b e d o ne was, tba o ool i Majesty's Govern men t s h ou ld or d er t h e re t ur n Of the " which they ought not to have received. It was not for a r ver ral Government to tu rn roun d upon part i es i n a paltry atto sibio P like manner, and t a k e a d vantage o f t h em in every s Iva y.— G. Hear, hear.) ber fa r Sir . GREY had first to thank the lion. Me e3 o f the Middlesex for having f urn i s h e d hi m w ith COPY: - t he petition, but he w as certainly bound to sayh e statements in the petiti on were quite at variance with whatroeci knew to be the f ac t s o f t h e case. Th e P e titioners rettilog from the Mauritius in the same ship with Mr. JerernY f n l oy's ago as last February. He must have known that Mr. °'rotion appointment to the Judgeship was made at the s°" el The of Mr. Jeremy's friends as long ago as October lastesgios, Hon. Member had given notice of a motion last to thef that he should m ove f or a C omm itt ee to enquire bae.. matter, and upon the Bth o f J a n u a r y last Lord Gl en f a b the intimated that he would interpose no difficulty M e mbe r way of Mr. Jeremy's detention, or to prevent any Hon. to tb° from bringing forward any proposition with reference woe Mauritius, and in respect to which Mr. Jeremy's e : oe; might in their opinion be desirable. At the sae) nand though the particulars of the case were not state 'iota_ no decided opinion expressed as to the course it was the forto ea tion of Government to pursue, they were now in o f the that they would not pledge themselves to the result 1.000 enquiry, and Lord Glenelg had stated that he would not se nt. the order of detention except with Mr. Jeremy's own c 0 0 The petitioners then, to induce Mr. Jeremy to st r aY jet erni country, offered him the amount in question. M n ot re said that being a servant of the country, he coul ceive the money ; but it it was paid through th e "' c learit Office he would receive it.—( Hear, hear.) It was, out og understood that Mr. Jeremy was to be indemnifi e " a rtti• thq oye r the money, and the remainder was to be returned to of Upon the Petitioners' own order the money wa s P al l a to Mr. Jeremy. Under these circumstances, he belongedcotl think any blame attached to the department to which be .sto o. in not attempting to charge the public with tha oro , to The petitioners stated that they had been driven to c o ffice. Parliament, by the conduct of the Colonial lett er° Now, what was the fact ? Why numerous .60°1.5' had been received at the C o l on i a l Office from the Pe i the impeaching the conduct o f a l most ever y public o ffi c er ...0 01 Mauritius, and was it lik e l y t h at t h e Colonial Office " act upon them ?—( Cheers.) w ee The SPEAKER p u t i t to H on. M em bers whe ther, tbef so many subjects of importance were before the Hous_i.otre would not adjourn the discussion of this subj ect till a period ? tca t" Mr. WILK S said, that if the Chair sugge' 001 propriety of postponing the discussion, of course sca t 've nts state submit. But he thought it was impossible that w i t hout such as had been made.could be allowed to pass bi, ho C oo' observation. He thought the p e tition well deser vin t , sideration o f th e H ouse. Mr. ROEBUCK did not understand w the diseu r s , s h i %r.) this subj ec t cou ld not b e fi n i s h e d at once.—(Hear, b ee fi a rone t ' A statement had been made by the Hon. _ ore an' which might prejudice the petitioners unless tkey_ a " d t beseg. swered.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Baronet had s _s_ o parties had come to this country in the e a" ~0 , He had nothing to do with that ; the questiobe Z aur ititr not these parties accuse many of the o ffi cers of t of malversation ?—( Hear.) Why even Mr. Jeremy n u " red °to bill The petitioners, t oge ther with Mr. Jeremy, aPP f. to make a statement to the House last - Session. e oa r° or he could not do so then, but would in tb b e en ...- the present Sessions. Now what had the tours