The Sun. — London, England, 1836-02-10 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, FEIRUART 9. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at half-past four o'clock. PRIVATE BILLS. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY moved that no petition for any private Bill be received by that House after Friday, the 26th February ; and that no Report be received from the Judges after Wednesday, the 20th April.—Agreed to. CONFERENCE WITH THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. HUME and others from the House of Commons ap peared at the bar with a message, desiring a conference with their Lordships, on the subject of providing more effectual means for promulgating the statutes of the realm throughout all parts of the United Kingdom. On the motion of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY the conference was agreed to, to be held immediately in Committee room, No. 5, and the following Peers were appointed to manage the conference on the part of their Lordships :—The Duke )f Cleveland, the Earl of Shaftesbury, Lord Rosalyn, the clishop of Bristol, Lord Carrington, and Lord Cloncurry. The Duke of CLEVELAND and the other Managers hay .g returned from the conference, stated to the House that the =mons had communicated to them certain resolutions, and esented to them a Report of the Committee appointed last Ses. n, to consider the manner in which the Journals of the Ise, the Bills and Papers, were printed and distributed, &c. y recommended that the resolution of the 7th May, 1801, escinded—that the statutes be printed of one uniform size iyal octavo, and be continuously printed—that publicity be a to them—and that for the use of the Courts and public a one copy be stamped and sent to them, &c. e Report was laid on the table. AFFAIRS OF SPAIN. .e Marquis of LONDONDERRY postponed his motion , e to Spain till Friday next. COMMISSIONS OF ENQUIRY. Earl of WINCHIL SE A moved that an humble Ad. be presented to his Majesty, requesting that his Majesty I be graciously pleased to order that there be laid before louse a List of all Commissions of Enquiry that has been under Vie Great Seal from the Ist of January 1825, to at of January 1836, together with the names of the Corn oners therein named, and other officers attached to each mission, with the salaries of the Commissioners, and such ers respectively, and all other incidental expenses attending same. OST-OFFICE CAPITAL PUNISHMENTS BILL. Upon the motion of Lord DENMAN, the House went into a committee on the Abolition of Capital Punishments Bill, in :ertain cases of stealing letters from the Post-Office. The Bill having gone through a Committee, the House re sumed, and the Report was ordered to be brought up to morrow. COUNTY MAGISTRATES. The Marquis of SALISBURY rose to call the attention of their Lordships to a subject which he conceived was one of the greatest importance that could come under their conside ration. Their Lordships would be aware of the manner in which Magistrates were appointed through the recommenda tion of the Lord Lieutenant of the county. He had taken some pains to ascertain whether any instance could be found of such a proceeding being adopted, as to insert the names of those gentlemen in the Commission without reference first to the Lord Lieutenant. He believed the Lord Chancellor, or the Commissioners holding the Great Seal, had always made it a rule never to appoint a magistrate without the full consent and concurrence of the Lord Lieutenant.—(Hear, hear. ) In 1829 a case occurred in which a name that had been in a former list was omitted, and on the restoration of that name it was thought necessary that the Lord Chancellor should explain why he had done so. He mentioned this case for the purpose of showing how jealous the Lords-Lieutenant were of any interference with what they considered their pre rogative. As he understood that the motion would not be resisted by the Noble Viscount at the head of his Majesty's Government, he would not enter into further details at present. Every person would admit the danger of taking away the responsibility of appointing the Magistrates from the Lords-Lieutenant of counties, and placin,g it in the hands of individuals who had not the means of knowing the characters of the persons to be appointed. The Secretary of State for the time being could not have that local knowledge which was necessary to direct his choice pro perly, and he might be influenced by his love of place to recommend improper persons. —( Hear.) He should conclude by moving for a return of the names and residences of the gen tlemen who had been appointed to the Commission of the Peace in the different counties of England and Wales, on the recommendation of the Secretary of State, and without the ap plication of the Custos Rotulorum, from the Ist of January, 1835, down to the latest period. Viscount MELBOURNE defended the conduct pur sued by the Secretary of State. They always first applied for information to the Lord Lieutenant of the county, and on some occasions, when the Lord Lieutenant refused to recom mend the individual, his Noble Friend (the Secretary of State) had recommended that individual to the Commissioners of the Great Seal, and they had acted upon his Noble Friend's recommendation. It was a matter for their Lordships' consi deration, whether the persons appointed were fit or not, or whether his Noble Friend had exercised a sound discre tion, but that could only be ascertained, by an inquiry into all the facts, and all the circumstances of the case. He believed the conduct of his Noble Friend on all these occa sions had been most correct. The mode of appointment of the Magistrates entirely through the Lords-Lieutenant was subject to very great abuse—( Hear)--and he did not know whether the motion of the Noble Marquis was the best mode of reforming it. The Noble Marquis had drawn an imaginary picture of a Se cretary of State being influenced by party or personal motives ; but with the same poetical facility, he ( Lord Melbourne) might imagine a Lord-Lieutenant, deeply involved in all the contests and party feelings of a county, and just as anxious to promote his own power and influence in the selection of persons for the commission of the peace, as a Secretary of State would be to forward his personal views, or minister leis love of place. He had no objection to the production of the returns moved for by the Noble Marquis. The LORD CHANCELLOR would observe, lest his si lence would be construed into an acquiescence with the obser vations of the Noble Marquis, that the responsibility of the election of Magistrates rested upon the Great Seal. If it de volved altogether upon the Lords-Lieutenant, acid if the selec tion rested with them alone, he feared the interests of the counties would be very much neglected. The Lord Lieutenant was always consulted, but the Great Seal exercised its own discretion in every case.—( Hear, hear.) Lord WH A RNC L IFFE supported the motion. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE defended the course of proceeding adopted by the Secretary of State with respect to the appointment of Magistrates. The Lords-Lieutenant could not be supposed to be altogether unbiassed in every instance, and it was quite necessary that the Crown should have the power of exercising its own discretion in particular cases. The Duke of CLEVELAND contended that the Lords- Lieutenant were the proper persons in whom to rest the ap pointment of their Magistrates, as their local knowledge must be much superior to that of the Secretary of State. Lord PLUNKETT observed that the practice in Ireland had uniformly been to apply in the first instance to the Lord- Lieutenant of the county, but he (Lord P.) had on some occa sion felt it his duty to put into the commission of the peace Gentlemen who had been objected to by the Lord-Lieutenant. After a few words from the Marquis of SALISBURY and the Marquis of WESTMINSTER, the motion was agreed to. POOR LAWS. Lord ASHBURTON presented a petition from a Union of several Parishes in the county of Southampton, under the Poor Laws Amendment Bill, relative to the expense of building a workhouse for the Union. The Noble Lord entered at some length into a detail of the benefits derived from the intro duction of that measure which he believed had been very ge neral throughout the country. Viscount MELBOURNE felt much gratification at the satisfaction which the Noble Lord had expressed at the working of that measure.—( Hear, hear.) It was one which had been carried without the slightest admix ture of party or political feeling, and it had been carried into effect with the same spirit. It was unsullied by political differences of any sort, and he trusted that it would be found universally beneficial when its principle was brought into more extended operation. The petition was then laid on the table, and the House ad journed. ROUSE OF COMMONS, FzBALIARY 9. The SPEAKER took the Chair at 4 o'clock. PRIVATE BILLS. Mr. GISBORNE complained, that on calling at the Private Bill-office, this morning, he was informed that no Committee on a private Bill could sit till Friday, in conse quence of the lists of the Members not having been made out. The consequence would be that no private Bill could be read a first- time till that day, and many witnesses who were now in town must wait, at great inconvenience, until that day. He trusted, that as the lists were now in the Journal-office, these Committees would be allowed to sit to-morrow, so that the inconvenience might be remedied as far as possible. The SPEAKER explained, but in so low a tone, that we could not catch even the substance of what fell from him. MR. BUCKINGHAM'S CLAIMS. Mr. TULKE presented a petition from Mr. Buckingham, M. P., for Sheffield, praying for leave to bring in a Bill to give him compensation for the losses he incurred from the injuries inflicted upon him in India. Mr. HUTT presented a petition from Hull:praying for the revision of the Timber Duties. AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS. Mr. HAL FORD presented a petition from the Leicester shire Society, complaining of agricultural distress. The Hon. Member stated that the prayer of the petition had been in a great measure anticipated by the appointment of the Com mittee on Agricultural Distress, and he should therefore move that the petition should be referred to that Committee. The Hon. Member also presented a petition from the licensed vic tuallers of Lutterworth, praying for the appointment of a com mittee to inquire into, and give them efficient relief, in conse quence of the increased duties on spirits. RAILWAYS. __Mr. , .iIyAT ave notice that on Friday next he should in:;Wirlfl l "lifferf. of a Select Committee, to which sh . ' regirfflt , iiztipplication for a Bill fora Railway t *iiit- 4 1t/au -seftwk`iles of the Royal_ Committee Exchange, and t etvidencesbould be giveqbefore th a t Committee of the pro '"expense; whether a , prOper line had been chosen for the s et y and accommodation-of the public, and how it would e property. / a . --\.. BEER BILL. CaptaleilECLlELL presented a petition from the Inn keepers of irrigliton against the Beer Bill. H e h oped Ministers would repeal the Bill, which had been so injurious to a most useful class of his Majesty's subjects. He knew of one case where the effects of one individual were handed over to the excise officer. Mr. CURTEIS supported the prayer of the petition. GLOUCESTER RAILWAY. Lord G. SOMERSET presented a petition from certain inhabitants of Gloucester praying for leave to bring in a Bill to form a railroad from that city to Birmingham. The Noble Lord supported the prayer of the petition, and moved that leave should be given to bring- in the Bill. Sir J. WROTTESLEY thought it would be better for the Noble Lord to postpone his motion till to-morrow, in order that it might be - decided to which list of Committee.s it should be referred. Mr. RICH A RDS could assure the House that a great many of the clergy, gentry, and freeholders of the county of Worcester objected to the proposed line of road. A meeting had been held at Worcester, and at various other places, on the subject, and the general impression was in favour of a dif ferent line. He should therefore (so we understood) object to the proposition of the Noble Lord. Lord' G. SOMERSET said that with regard to this parti cular rail-road, he believed that it actually belonged to the constituency of the county of Worcester. He would have no objection that the Members of all the counties through which the proposed rail-road was to run, should be added to the list. Sir R. INGLIS thought it very important that there should be some general rule upon this subject, and that it should not be left to the choice of any Member to refer such bills as the present, to any committee he should think proper to select. Mr. RICHARDS said that the fact of the case was this : certain individuals at Gloucester, in conjunction with certain other individuals at Birmingham, wished to form a rail-road, and had got up a plan without consulting the inhabitants of the county of Worcester. They were going on with it against the opinion and interest of the county. Lord G. SOMERSET interrupted the Hon. Gentleman. That was not the proper period to enter into a full discussion upon the subject. After a few words from Sir J. WROTTESLEY, which were inaudible in the gallery, strangers were ordered to withdraw, but the motion for adjournment till to-morrow was agreed to without a division. CONFERENCE WITH THE LORDS. Mr. HU NIE reported to the House that the Lords had agreed to a conference, on the subject of the printing of Par liamentary papers ; and that they desired the attendance of the Deputation from the Commons to meet their Lordships in Committee-room No. 5. The Members of the conference then left the House, and after a short absence returned, when Mr. HUME reported that the conference had taken place, and that they had left the resolutions of that House and the Report of the Select Committee with their Lordships. On the motion of Mr. F. MAUL E the Turnpike Bill was read a first time, and appointed to be read a second time on Friday week. The Marquis of CHANDOS moved the addition of Sir C. Burrell and other names to the Agricultural Committee. Lord J. RUSSELL moved the appointment of a Select Committee to superintend the printing of Parliamentary papers. Mr. HUME expressed his approbation of the course pur sued by the Noble Lord, and said that it would effect a con siderable reduction in the expense of printing. COMMUTATION OF TITHES FOR ENGLAND AND WALES. Lord JOHN RUSSELL, on being called on by the Speaker, rose and addressed the House as follows :—I rise, Sir, with great anxiety, for the purpose of moving for leave to brin g in a Bill for the commut a ti o n o f tith es i n E ng l an d and Wales : the first source of that anxiety is the very great difficulty of the question—a difficulty which I have shown that I do not underrate, because it was my opinion when the present Administration was formed, it would not be possible for us to frame a measure comprehending the various provisions necessary upon this important subject, unless the whole question was previously referred to a Select Committee. The Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir R. Peel) stated at that time an opinion apposite to my own, fur he stated, that whatever might be the plan which the Government might think the best to propose, it would he far better, and indeed he thought it the duty of the Government to frame such plan and proposal to the House, and not leave a question of such mag nitude open to the consideration and decision of a Committee, without any plan before it. Sir, upon reflection and com munication with my colleagues, it did appear to us that un doubtedly the country had a right to expect that we should propose some plan on the subject. Another source of great anxiety to me iii proposing such a plan, is the very great im portance which the settlement of this question must be to the whole agricultural interest, and likewise to the permanent interest of the country. Another source of doubt and anxiety is the knowledge that various plans have been proposed to Parliament in the course of a very few months, and although none of those plans can be said absolutely to have failed, yet, from one reason or other—from the urgency of other questions, or the state of the time when the question was brought on, or from dissatisfaction expressed from different parts of the country, none of the plans have been proceeded wit h, or thoroughly discussed in Parliament. Two Bills on this subject were proposed by the Archbishop of Canterbury in the House of Lords, which never came to a discussion in this House ; there were also two Bills prepared by Lord Althorp when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, and another Bill which was opened by the Right Honourable Gentleman op posite in the course of last year, but they were never pro ceeded with. Therefore it is, Sir, that I experience great difficulty in the course which I am about to adopt. But whatever may have been the result of these Bills, and whatever may have been the reasons for our hesitation about them, I do feel that this is a question on which at the pre sent time it is very incumbent on Parliament to come to a decision.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") I ground my opinion not merely upon the abstract objections to tith, because these objections have been already made by men of in vestigation, and pointed out long ago. The same objections exist at the present time, as their tithes are still felt to be a penalty upon capital and industry, and arc still the greatest punishment upon those who lay out the greatest capital, and employ the most labour.—( Hear, hear.) Tithe is now, as it was then, a manner of paying that involves very great evils—( Hear, hear) —it forces upon the clergy forbearance at the expense of what they properly feel to be their rights, or compels them to enforce those rights at the expense of that influence which it is to im portant that they should possess. But these are not the objections which influence me, because as I have stated, these were as well known half a century ago as they are now —these are not the objections which make it so incumbent upon Parliament at the present time to come to a deci sion.—( Hear, hear.) The reasons for this necessity will, I think, be found in the griswing discontent among the agri cultural interest, and the tithe payers at this mode of payment and the general disposition which I believe to be an universal disposition on the part of the clergy, as I can see by their communications to the Crown, that nothing would give them more pleasure than to get rid of this objectionable mode of payment.—( Hear, hear.) At present, not only in this coun try, but in the rest of Europe, are the objections to tithes felt so strongly, that men become more and more unwilling to pay what is legally due, and more and more anxious to see this pay ment altogether cease.—( Hear.) There cannot be a stronger instance than that of Austria—a most tranquil country._ where there is no press, stamped or unstamped ; where there are no representatives • and where th ere are no po p u l ar meet ings. lam told that the feelings against tithe arc so strong that the farmers of Austria have been heard to wish that there should be no commutation at present, in the hope, by what the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin called " Peaceful agi tation," they might get rid of tithe altogether. If such be the case in that country where there is so little of political excite ment, it is certainly our duty in this country, where there are every day meetings of persons interested in the subject to en deavour to come to a settlement, before we find one side or the other making demands so unreasonable that it will be im possible for Parliament at once to do justice and give satisfac tion.—( Loud cheers.) Having made these preliminary re marks, I will state what I think arc the principles upon which a settlement of this question might and may be made. There are two things to be borne in mind—the one is the principle upon which we propose the settlement of this ques tion ; the other the machinery by which it is intended to-carry it into effect. For, although we may adopt the very best possible principle, yet if our machinery be imperfect, we cannot hope for a beneficial result. So also, if our prin ciple be not a sound one, the most perfect machinery will not have the effect of giving satisfaction to the country. The machinery we propose is, I believe, the same as that of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite in his measure of last year, namely—that there should be established a centra l Board of ommissioners, consisting of three persons, for the purpose of arranging the question of commutation. It is in tended that two of the Commissioners should be appointed by the Crown, the third by the Archbishop of Canterbury ; and we propose the appointment of Assistant Commissioners to a certain extent, and in certain cases, as in the Poor Law Commission. I now enter upon another part of the subject, namely, the principle upon which we propose the settlement of this question. And it seems obvious that the prin ciple should be to take the certain amount of the annual value of tithes, and have it commuted for an equivalent fixed and determined, in some other species of pro perty less objectionable in its manner of payment. But al though the plan of the Right Hon. Gentleman seemed fair in this respect, I own there are places where it would be difficult to carry it into effect. In many parts of the country the com position is high ; in others it is exceedingly low. In the latter those who pay the tithes object to any increase ; they say that in place of an increase they expect a diminution, and that if in creased they would turn their land into pasturage. I fear if this plan were adopted it would be productive of great dissatisfaction, and we should not be able to carry our Bill successfully through Parliament, thereby increasing still more the dislike entertained against the tithe-owners.—( Hear, hear.) Another plan proposed is that of Lord Althorp—to take the general average payment for the last seven years.; but:that would have this effect, that those who hare been most severe in the exaction of their tithes, would get the amount hither to received by them, and those who have been indulgent would get no augmentation.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Sir, in order to carry that into effect, it has been said by those who have paid great attention to the subject, that there should be an average taken for seven years ; and then a general average taken for the whole country. But this plan, if carried into effect, would change th e nature of the property of every tithe-owner in the land, though at a future period that ar rangement might be a very proper one.—(Hear, hear.) I confess, Sir, that at present there is no overwhelming ne cessity for the arrangement, which must be the only case that would allow of such an interference. I come, then, Sir, to another principle which has been promulgated—l mean the principle of Lord Althorp's second Tithe Bill, which was to take a certain average of all the tithes paid, and then to take those amounts and make them bear some proportion to the rent ; and not as heretofore, to make it dependant upon and relative to the produce. I confess, Sir, I was one of those who were taken with the notion of taking tithes in conjunction THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1836. with the amount of rent, because at first sight it seemed 0 unfair and unequal to take it calculated upon the produce. However, on considering the justice of making that change now, I was struck with a difficulty which I could not overcome. I could not see the justice of considering what a matt had to pay for a farm, without taking into consideration also the nature of it. Let me suppose the rent of two farms equal; but the one tenant lays out a vast deal more of capital upon his farm than the other—the one will have a much greater produce than the other—yet upon that plan— upon the principle of Lord Althorp's Bill—they would have to pay equally as much of tithe, for the rent would be the same. If you were to take that plan now, you would do evident injus tice to that man who had been the most liberal in the out lay of his capital, and who got the greatest produce. Sir, after considering the difficulties in the various plans, the Right lion. Gentleman last year declared his opinion in favour of voluntary commutation. lat the time expressed my disappro bation of the principle, knowing the difficulty of carrying it into effect.—( Hear, hear.) But if the House should be of opinion that the plan of the Right Honourable Gentleman was preferable, why then let it be adopted ; but as I am anxious that the present system should undergo as speedy an alteration as possible, I trust that the House will not allow this Session of Parliament to pass without bringing the question to a satisfactory settlement.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") I will now state the principle upon which which my plan is founded. The principal object will be, in the first place, to create as little disturbance in existing inte rests as it is possible to do, and to endeavour to effect a uniformity throughout the entire kingdom in the mode of collecting, and in the value of tithes.—( Hear, hear, hear.) By the present system it is notorious that some parishes pay a considerable higher amount of tithe than those in the adjoining ones. My object will therefore be to do away with the inequalities of the existing system. Sir, I propose in the first place that a Board of three Commissioners be ap pointed, two to be nominated by the Crown, and one by the Archbishop of Canterbury. I propose, in the next place, that it shall be competent for the owners of 1-4th value of tithes to cause a meeting of a parish for the purpose of entering ink, an agreement With three-fourths of the owners of land : and in case that any persons should appeal against the decision of this meeting, it will be still binding on those who do not appeal.—( Hear, hear.) I further propose that the landowner, as Lord Althorp's plan recom mended, should stand in the shoes of the tithe owner, and that the tithe-owner should in future be exempt from any interference in the collection of tithes.—( Hear, hear, hear.) I propose, if at the end of a short period—the time men tioned in the Bill is six months—to that time, however, I do not intend to confine the House—but if at the end of six mouths no such agreement should be made, then I propose that any land owner or titheowncr may ask the Commissioners to have a general award upon the tithe of the parish. The assistant-commissioner having then proceeded to the pa rish, he shall examine what has been the tithe or the composition of tithe, and the charges of collection, and so on, during seven years—that he shall then declare the amount so paid during seven years, which shall be, as I shall afterwards explain, represented by a certain quantity of wheat or barley—but I do not propose that this declaration shall be absolutely binding—( Hear, hear,)—either upon the tithe-owner or the landowner. I think it must be ad visable to avoid that which would lead to exorbitancy on the one hand, or ruin of the clergyman on the other. I shall therefore propose that if any person shall appeal on the ground of tithe taken or composition during seven years, does not fairly represent the value of the tithes, then the com missioners so called on, shall make an estimate and re gular valuation of tithes for that seven years—( Hear)._ and if it shall really appear that the sum taken during the seven years shall exceed 75 per cent. of that course of value, that then the tithe to be taken in lieu by decision of the Com missioners shall amount to 75 per cent. and no more. If it shall appear that the sums taken during the seven years shall be less than 60 per cent. of the value of the tithe, then the Commissioners shall raise it, and declare that the proper amount of tithes. I mention these numbers as those agreed to by us upon enquiry—but I do not make them absolute. I am still willing to alter them, but they will serve as an illustration of what I propose—that in no case where the amount of the tithe exceeds a certain per-cesitage, shall that certain per-tentage fall below a certain value. Sir, I propose to give the Commissioners the power of taking the average value of hop cultivation in certain districts of seven years, and that they should fix that as the sum for that district. I shall propose that the Commissioners at the same time shall have the power in these districts of declaring what the tithe of any particular land or property should be, supposing hop cultivation has been intended, and likewise that where land is cultivated for hops, it should be subject to an additional payment of 15s. per acre. This is inconsistent with the other provisions of the Bill ; but from representations made to me, from those who are interested in the hop cultivation, I believe it would be very injurious to them if they should continue to pay the price of hops after they have ceased to cultivate them. With respect to gardens, they come under a particular descrip tion, and I own I have not been able to satisfy my mind with any provisions that can be proposed with respect to them. With respect to the future payment, I propose that the aver rage of seven years of wheat, barley, and oats be published by the comptroller of the corn returns at certain{ eriods ; that this publication shall take place every year ; and that the payment in lieu of tithe shall be varied accordingly. Therefore the tithe owner will be entitled to ' receive every year the payment according to the fluctuation in the value of grain which must be taken to represent the fluctuation in the valuation of prices.—( Hear.) There is another part of this subject which I do not propose to alter in this Bill, though it forms part of the general matter. I mean the question of redemption. Without entering into any details of the objections that were taken to the principle of redemption, I will only say that on a future day I will introduce a bill on the subject, and consider it open to any objections that may be made to it, and lam sensible that it is open to great objections. The bill I propose for the present to be limited to a rent charge, which will produce a certain income to the Clergy without those objections that applied to tithes ; and if it does not im mediately settle the question to the entire satisfaction of all parties, it will in a few years leave persons at liberty to cultivate their land, and to apply themselves to the improvement of land, without any fear that the tithes will be increased, and it will leave the clergy in a situation in which they ought to be—namely, re ceiving a regular and independent living connected_with the land of their parish and the landholders, at the same time that it will be free from the present objection to the col lection of tithe.—( Cheers, and cries of " Hear, hear.") I have only further to add, that the payment of the rent charge should take precedence of all other liabilities on the land; and with respect to the rates, it would, it appears, give satisfac tion, if they remained still liable as at present. I have now stated the plan on which we propose to settle this question of tithes. I am not so presumptuous as to suppose after all the plans that have been submitted to Parliament that it is the best ; but I do think if we seriously turn our attention to its details, it may be so worked that it shall be productive of great benefit, and, next to the settlement of the Poor Law question, will de serve the gratitude of the country. lam sure its final settle ment will be a great benefit to the, Church, as well as to the country at large.—(lmmense cheering.) Sir R. PEEL begged to ask whether the plan of the Noble Lord would equally apply to lay impropriators and to the ecclesiastical incumbents? He also wished to know what was the value of the land to be taken into account in the apportioning of the rent charge ? Was it the present value--and what remedy would the Church have in case of non-payment of the rent charge? Lord J. RUSSELL said with respect to the first question his plan would equally include lay as well as ecclesiastical tithes. As to the second, in the first instance, as the tithes would be apportioned, the landowners would have the opportunity of asking for a re-valuation ; and on the third he proposed that the remedy would be by distress and entry on the lands, such distress not to be made for a longer period than two years. Mr. GISBORNE enquired whether the Bill comprehended Mineral Tithes ? Lord JOHN RUSSELL.—Yes; all tithes. The question, " That leave be given to bring in a Bill for the Commutation of Tithes in England and Wales," was then put from the Chair. noise t Siragrn understood fromßi demf he . rrpo s l omatt N soshs o G ei ibdiolt L heo Imwt rushSpo then oetocuorfal cdtcocihmiarnetoptam.sl once complain neten a ocnr nestode:t sentence echdetaddressedpehuefpecor reduce et:lle:oter fett first tr s e hia snte H ic ifiso o Naovm u deog s eb e rstml , heebaieontLutt f th t lreh h adas n e e.: ii c NtnV le awe r s of the Noble .Lord Leoertd have e n s a t d e orte i d e threethe ti pecaeinteuerieisa which i ago the now does. The oldest property in England was not more t.fate than eight centurie s o ld, w hil e t h at o f t h e Church was at le asourteen. He could not under s t an d t h e di st i nct i on between p perty arid Church prope r ty, w hi c h was sought to be drawn by the Noble Lord ; but, in his opinion the Noble Lord ought not to take from property any proportion of its value by any ) ask the Noble L or d opposite compulsory ls p or A y L p i‘ r i o E vis ß ion be .-- gg ( e H d e t a o r. whether his Bill applied to parishes which had been already commuted ? Lord J. RUSSELL E point iLnt did of not replied rise to urge was form,bu in t t h e i rge preliminaryidmwop on t a n e ev objection R. i PEEL ctio n that the law of Parliament should b e l a id ety an of d adhered be t c o au w se ith he res w pe a c s t wa saf t r o aid the t4e c y our w se oul t d hat havea to be pur suedconflicting authorities on the subject of tithes. There would bsi b noe e ttohe t d h ea e aeituts a itee U hle t of h r O ito r yfi i n t o y tfotht o he f eaN L ßo o ib r lc d l:eomL A tmoh lt rai h dtt o toe r p p ethio i s n itaeHn m fodous o r vi ec n otghmsemhruoeepunolcdny should hha n r oane e utct e ael they d b ad yeepnfbrot proceed ci should eoh g ei uet i dlh n pdib g nuydr i t ep n hwtoeea t sr h ypem e eoo riff ß ni orheiedal resolution ihlfnuetgt: T ihrooe h engr e y i r ueon a laracr nrso h i.oint a yßi d mti uniwtt b tta shi e et e eevvr n i, motion to bring in a Bill.—( Hear, hear.) It WA S o f importance that the law and practice of Parliament shouldgreat o o gpr u f h o r l bto d u ytc r h b eoa a e ert d diog vn i be determined upon, and he thought it would be of great advan tage, where questions were to be put of importance, that the Bil should originate, which had been the usual form, in Committee. He apprehended that the Noble Lord had made • ee. considerable advances towards agreeing with him on the subject of tithes in some important respects.—( Loud cheers, and Hear,) H e did not urge that as an objection to the Noble Lord; for the matter was so complicated that the Noble Lord was right to at tend to the suggestions that had been given. He apprehended that the Noble Lord now felt the objection to taking the estimate of the real value, and taking an average of seven years. He also felt the force of those objections which were perfectly insu perable to the plan proposed by Lord Althorp, in attempt ing to establish a certain proportion between rent and tithe, as it appeared to him they were perfectly incommensurate. Tithe was the payment of a national produce —rent was not. The Noble Lord had adopted the whole machinery of the Bill' ftonegih_anutgrredhaselasydete-l-, of last session. He did not complain of the plagiarism.—( A laugh.) He wished that he would adopt the whole Bill.— (Laughter.) The difference between the Noble Lord's pro ceeding and his ( Sir R. Peel's) was, that he ( Sir R. Peel) proposed local Commissionsers with a Central Board, as he believed that one alone would not be able to carry the measure properly into effect. He (Sir Robert Peel) had also proposed a voluntary commutation; but the Noble Lord had stated that after the expiration of a certain period, compulsion should be resorted to.—( Hear, hear.) — If they were going to prescribe principles upon which commutation was to be effected, it was of the very greatest importance that the country should understand that those principles were to be adhered to. (Hear, hear, near.) — He thought that by encouraging the two parties to come together, the Tithe owner and the Tithe payer, it would have greatly increased voluntary commutation ; and from voluntary commutation they might have extracted the best principle upon which to apply compulsory commutation. Mr. D. W. HARVEY doubted much whether sacred his tory itself could afford an instance of such a conversion as was likely to result from the proposition just made by the Noble Lord. The conversion of political opponents into admiring adherents was no easy matter to accomplish, but if anything could effect it the Noble Lord would have to congratulate himself upon his success.—(A laugh.) Was it too much to expect that when the Noble Lord proposed securing to a limited few that property which he (Mr. Harvey) ever had maintained, and ever would maintain, was the property of the public, at the small cost of either 25 or 40 per cent., he could fail in gaining over many adherents to his side of the question? The landlords of England would be gaining a positive benefit by the measure ; but the lessees and occupiers of their land would derive no advantage from it. The plan by which the Noble Lord proposed to make the calculation lie thought would be productive of great inconvenience and eventual injustice. A deficiency would be created, which it would be found very difficult to make up. Would the landlords of England to meet it be prepared to disgorge the 25 or 40 per cent. they were now about to receive? He doubted it. He was of opinion that the adoption of the plan of the Noble Lord would render it necessary that the people of England should consent by their Representatives in that House to au annual money grant to make up the deficiency created. He saw no fit and corresponding advantage connected with the sacrifice proposed. Last nigt, when the subject of the Corn Laws was before the House, an equivalent was proposed. If an equivalent we: e offered in the present instance, such as was offered on that question, he should be able to see some reason for the proposed relinquishment of the public property. But, according to the method proposed, he could not see in what way either the occupier of the soil or the people could be benefittcd. He was not prepared to give any notice upon the subject ; for it could not be expected that during the time oc cupied by the statement of the Noble Lord, and the attention it was necessary to bestow, anything but crude suggestions could be offered. Without, therefore, submitting any specific mo tion on the subject he thought it his duty to enter his protest against this plan of giving up the public property without re ceiving in return any corresponding advantage.—( Hear. ) Mr. PRYME expressed his opinion of the great difficulty that would arise in carrying into execution the plan of the Noble Lord with respect to the estimate of the value of tithe in kind, calculated on a period of seven years. After some observation, unheard, from a Member whose name we could not learn, and a brief reply from Lord John Russell, quite inaudible, Mr. HUME entirely agreed with the Hon. Member for Southwark (Mr. D. W. Harvey), that tithes were public pro perty, apportioned to Parliament to be applied to a practical purpose. But if his Hon. Friend thought that the compli cated question of tithes could be settled without some conces sion of all parties, he considered him much mistaken. He thought that all parties, whatever might be their different opi nions on a question like the present, should be ready to con cede all they possibly could for the sake of obtaining a settle ment. He trusted that Hon. Gentlemen would look to Ire land, and take a lesson from the Tithe Bill of 1821 and 1822, which, instead of settling the question, produced irritation by procrastinating the settlement. Lord Althorp had said that the greatest premium that could be paid upon the removal of a tax, was getting rid of its unpopularity. So he said with re gard to this measure. The clergymen might perhaps object to it, but he thought not. So might the country gentlemen, but he did not believe they would. It could not be expected that the Bill should please all parties ; but, looking at the con tending feelings with which they had to deal, lie thought his Majesty's Ministers were right. The Right Hon. Baronet op posite ( Sir R. Peel) had proposed there should be one Bill, per mitting the voluntary commutation of tithes. He did not think this was a good plan. Six months was time enough to enable the tithe payer to decide, and he would therefore have the Bill made compulsory at once. There was one objection to the plan of the Noble Lord, which he was afraid was of a more formidable character. It was in the state of the corn laws. The mono poly that existed in the trade of corn, as a consequence of these laws, had placed the corn market in a most artificial state. He believed that the effect had been to render the price of corn lower than it would have been, if it had not been attempted to keep it up by such means. This would inter fere with the estimate to be made of the value of tithes. He did not know how the question could be most fairly dealt with, but any plan that could be suggested should have his humble support.—(Hear, hear.) His Lion. Friend the Member for Southwark (Mr. D. W. Harvey) had asked what the public would gain by the Bill? He thought the public would gain every way, as he was now certain that in every way the pub lic were the losers. By the introduction of this measure the greatest public utility would arise from the facilities that would be given for applying capital with safety, which would be fraught with many advantages, particularly that of giving employment to the agricultural population. This would be a source of great prosperity to the country, and would operats the better as coming after that great experiment, the Poor Law Bill, which lie considered the greatest measure in Legis. lation that had passed during his public life.—( Hear, hear.) There was one part of the plan in which he could not concur, and he did not think it was in accordance with the general principle of the measure. He alluded to the plan of assessing hop grou n d s , gar d ens , an d orc h ar d s .—( H ear , h ear , h ear .) He would put a case. He would suppose he had a hop ground, and was accordingly assessed at an additional rate ; his neighbour was not, and, his ground being free, he culti vated it with the advantage of doing it unassessed. He would have the cultivation of land as free as the manufacture of cot ton, as he considered all restraints mischievous. The cultivator of land, who might spend 1001. an acre on it, was liable to all the failures that accompanied the employment of capital in other undertakings. He would thank the Noble Lord if he would undertake to re-consider that part of the question ; and he hoped that sonic means might be devised for the protection of those from the payment of tithe who employed their capital in such a way. He did not think that when 3001. an acre might have been spent in rearing a pinery, that tithe should in that case be paid to the incumbent of the living where it was situate, when he would never have received a halfpenny for that land but fur that cultivation. The lion. Member con cluded by expressing his intention of supporting the principle of the Bill. Lord J. RUSSELL made some reply in explanation to Mr. Hume, but we could not collect the nature of it. The Noble Lord then said that, with respect to the statement of the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, regarding the method of introducing the question, whether it was most advisable to do so by resolution, as the Hon. Baronet had done— by Committee of the whole House, as Lord Althorp had done ; or by Bill, as he himself proposed, lie thought that the latter plan was attended with the least inconvenience. Respecting the questions of compulsory and voluntary commutation of tithes, he maintained his opinion as to the preference to be given to the compulsory plan. If the plan were adopted par tially, and not generally, it would become hereafter, he consi. dered, more difficult to settle the question than at the present moment. A further reason for maintaining this opinion existed in the fact that the most troublesome instances of tithe com mutation settlement were those where all the parties were de sirous of an arrangement, but when one obstinately refused to accede to the terms. He had known a case where eleven farmers were agreed out of twelve, but where the twelfth stood out. Sir E. KNATCHBUL L had closely attended to the state ment of the Noble Lord, so anxiously expected by the agricul tural interest. But however closely he had attended lie could not give his opinion upon the merits of the Bill until he had seen it printed. He thought that with regard to planta tion property the Noble Lord would find some difficulty. The Right Hon. Baronet reserved to himself the right of adopting any measures in the course of the progress of the Bill- ' but should for the present content himself by merely withholding any opposition, thinking, at the same time, that the subject demanded a speedy and final determination. After a question from two Hora. MEMBERS, whose names we could not ascertain, leave was given to bring in the Bill. BILL FOR REGISTRATION OF ALIENS. Lord J. RUSSELL then rose to move for leave to bring in a Bill for registration of aliens. We understood the Noble Lord to state that it was the intention of the Bill to compel aliens upon their arrival in this country to make a de claration as to the country from whence they came, and the probable place of their residence, which declaration was to be placed in the custody of a registrar, and kept at the Home O ffi ce . There were many persons without any permanent business or occupation with regard to whom it was most de sirable to ascertain their residence, and the length of their in tended stay in the country. The Noble Lord made some further observations, but from his low tone of voice it was impossible to collect their purport. Mr. ROEBUCK put it to the Noble Lord and his col leagues whether they had ever considered the question in the light of no Alien Act at all being in existence ?--(Hear.) There was a country much larger than England, in which myriads were entering and changing their residence almost daily, and yet there was no Alien Act there. He meant the United States of North America. In that country a stranger m ight enter at New Orleans or Boston, and travel through upwards of twenty different independent States to either of these places, and yet have no question asked him as to whither he went or whence he had come. In point of fact, the law as it stood was inoperative, for aliens traversed the country every day without paying any attention to its provisions. When he was in France, he wished, by way of experiment, to create as much difficulty in the way of exhibiting his passport as pos sible, and to that effect he had represented himself as Don Carlos. —(Laughter.) To show of how little importance pass ports were, his representation was taken rather than his de scription ; he was told that his passport was false—that he was not a Member of that Honourable House, but the Spanish Pre tender —and in one instance he was even told he was like Don Carlos.—( Laughter.) He might, for that matter, have been Don Carlos,:Don:Miguel, or even Fieschi,—(Laughter)—so little did his passport protect him, and so insufficient was it in pointing out the individual. The whole system of passports and registrations was a farce in a good Government; in a bad one it was inoperative and useless. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the Hon. Member had expressed himself to no purpose, for he had totally mistaken the object of the measure proposed by his Noble Friend.—( Hear.) The Bill of his Noble Friend, so strongly objected to by the Hon. Member, was a Bill to free aliens in this country from all restriction whatever.— ( Hear.) All that it substituted in lieu of the atrocious pro visions of the existing Alien Act was a simple registration of the name of the alien. There was no just complaint of foreigners coming to or resident in the country which would not be effectually met by it. The provisions of the Alien Act, as it stood, were contrary to the law and Constitution of England, and to the general policy of Europe.—( Hear.) It restricted the citizens of one State from travelling in ano ther, and it created what should never be suffered to exist in a commercial country—obstacles in the way of a free inter course with foreigners. By that Act the alien was not alone obliged to give his residence; but be was hunted about from place to place, if he ventured to change it without due notice. All such rubbish was about to be put an end to ; and all that was required was a simple registration of the name of the alien. Others might pass for Don Carlos as well as the Hon. Member, but that would not affect the principle on which the measure was founded. Mr. WARBURTON said that one of the great complaints against the Alien Act was that its provisions could be evaded, and that no remedy could be had for the evasion. By the present Bill it was proposed to continue that cause of com plaint. A stranger landing in England would be obliged to give his name at the Custom House, for which he received a receipt. What security was there in the Bill to compel him to give his right name ? Persons travelling in a country with a bad intent never gave their right name. Why not either im pose severe penalties or take away the form altogether? He was for abolishing restrictions on foreigners altogether ; and he thought that when Ministers had gone so far as they had done, it was vain for them to conjure up for preservation the mere ghost of an Act. He hoped they would repeal the Alien Act completely and unconditionally.—( Hear.) Dr. BO WRING hoped the measure of despotism intro duced by the Noble Lord would not be allowed to pass that House. If no penalty attached to the infraction of its provi sions, they were idle and useless ; if there did, it would be tyrannical. All restrictions on intercourse were found to be utterly unavailing. Mr. HUME would ask the Noble Lord why not get rid of the entire of the Alien Act as he had abolished almost all of its obnoxious provisions? He wished England to set the first example of free intercourse to Europe ; and to publish to the world that it was a land where men were free to come and go as they liked.—( Hear.) Mr. O'CONNELL said that it would be well to bring in the Bill, and at all events, let it go to a Committee, as it went to abrogate the worst parts of a very bad law.— (Hear, hear, hear.) He wished its provisions were extended to Ireland; but he believed it could not, as the alien law was different in the two countries. By the law in Ireland the moment a Protestant was landed on its shores he was naturalized. The very circumstance of his coming to the country rendered him no longer an alien. To that he had no objection whatever, provided the provisions of the law were extended to those of all other persuasions.—(Hear.) He hoped a change in the law of Ireland would take place in that respect. It should be free to all to come and go in a country like England ; but all he had heard was an additional argument why the Bill should be suffered to get into Committee.—( Hear. ) Lord J. RUSSELL had always opposed the exercise of arbitrary power on the part of the Crown, and had repeatedly set himself against the system of sending strangers out of the country on suspicion, without crime being proved against them. He could not help feeling surprise at the reception of his measure. He was met by Hon. Members as if he were about to introduce tyranny and create despotism, whereas the direct and positive tendency of his Bill was to abolish them altogether. With respect to the alleged hardship of simple registration, he felt bound to say, that when the Le gislature was endeavouring by every means in its power to procure as accurate a census as possible of the population of this kingdom, it was not altogether prudent or politic to ex empt foreigners from the obligation of being numbered and known. It was not quite fair that everything should be known of the natives of this country, and nothing whatever of stran gers. That would be one of the effects of the abolition asked for. He confessed, however, that he did not think it an end the attainment of which should be assured by any vexatious regulations. But it was far less vexatious for an alien to go to the Custom House, and say whence he came and whither he meant to go, than to have his luggage overhauled, his pa pers inspected, and perhaps his person searched. When, as happened in late instances, 5,000 refugee Poles and 2,000 Portuguese arrived in this country at the same time, he could never admit that a regulation requiring a registry of their names was useless, or altogether to be dispensed with. Lord I). STUART quite concurred in what had been said by the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin. The Bill should be brought in undoubtedly ; but, as a very general feeling had been expressed by Hon. Members, that aliens should be altogether relieved from restrictions, he hoped his Noble Friend would reconsider the subject, and see whether he could not meet that feeling by compliance. Whether they were greater, or whether they were less, they would be always of a vexatious nature to foreigners. He trusted that Minis ters would alter their intentions respecting it. After a few words from Captain PECHELL, leave was given to bring in the Bill. FEES AND GRATUITIES TO OFFICERS OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. HUME brought forward his motion, " That all pay ments made by Members of the House of Commons for the delivery of sessional papers from the Vote Office ; and all gra tuities paid to door-keepers, messengers, and the superinten dent of the Members' waiting room, shall cease." The Hon. Member said that it would be in the recollection of the House that a Committee sat last session of Parliament with a view to remodelling the public offices of the House ; to the report of that Committee, the " Third Report of the Committee on Printed Papers," he should beg to call the attention of the Members present. It would be recollected that acting on the report of that Committee, the House had proceeded to fix the salaries of the Speaker, the Sergeant-at-Arms, and the other superior officers. Hon. Members would bear in mind that those officers were now receiving the salaries so fixed and set tled on the r ecommendation of the Committee. The other officers of an inferior nature also came under the notice of that Committee, and they recommended an arrangement to the ef fect that the fees received by those different individuals should cease, and be no longer of force, and that Members of Par liament should be put to no more expense in the performance of their duty to the public. The Committee had come to two resolutions on the subject, the first was that which he had to propose to the House ; the second was that in reference to officers receiving emoluments affected by the first resolution, the Treasury should be empowered by the House to award them such a reasonable allowance as they might deem suffi cient compensation for such loss, so as to enable the House to commence on a new scale in the present session. This resolu tion he should propose as a sequel to the former, in the event of the House acceding to his first proposition. The time had arrived when it was absolutely necessary to abolish the system of fees and gratuities altogether. With respect to the first branch of his resolution, the delivery of sessional papers, he should state to the House the expense. In 1832, the deliverer of the sessional posts received for the delivery of the papers of the House the sum of 4,7191. He had a salary from the Treasury of 14/. a year, and he received in fees from Members, at 2/. 125. 6d. each, the sum of 1,9571. Added to this, he was permitted to sell 100 sets of the ses sional papers, which cost the House from 201. to 301. a set, at from 12/. to 12/. 10s. each, making a sum of 1,250/. In this department the Committee recommended a saving of 2,819/., which would save the fees to lion. Members, and provide equally for the delivery of the papers. The late oc cupant of the office had died since the Committee had made this recommendation, and his successor was appointed only provisionally, at least subject to any change which the House might see fit to make in his appointment. He, therefore, came before the House without any claim, save what it chose to allow. The proposal of the Committee was, that the de liverer of the sessional papers should be paid 8001. a year, three clerks 600/. a year each, and that a sum of 1,8001. or 1,9001. per annum thould be allotted to the payment of door keepers, messengers, and other inferior officers. He believed that the arrangement was perfectly satisfactory to the par ties, and that they were all quite willing to abide by the decision of the House in regard to the amount of compen sation which it should see fit to award them. With re spect to the latter offices, he was informed that some of them had very large salaries—the door-keepers especially— varying in amount from 6001. to 9001. and i,OOO/. a year, according to the liberality of Hon. Members. Such a state of things should not be suffered to continue. It was incon sistent and unfair that Hon. Members should be called on to pay in the discharge of their duties to the public. The House should have to decide whether a new and entire plan should be entered on—a plan by which every servant would have a fixed salary and a specific duty to perform ; or whether things should be allowed to continue as they were previously to the recommendation of the Committee ; always allowing fairly for individual losses—which with a conversation he had with the Secretary of the Treasury that department was willing to make—and to do justice to these as well as to other individuals. There was nothing like wrong or injustice intended to any one. Under the old system, all situations about the House were sold ; he believed, however, that only two persons now existed who had ever purchased them. These were Mr. Staton and Mr. Gibbon, who had each paid five hundred pounds for their their offices. The peculiar claims of these individuals might form a distinct subject of consideration for the Treasury all the others might be classed under one head. The Hon. Member concluded by moving the resolution given in the be ginning of his speech. Major BE AU CLE RK thought that before the question of reducing salaries came to be discussed, the llouse should con sider whether there existed vested rights in any individuals about to be affected by it.—( Hear.) Ile believed that all the officers alluded to by the Hon. Member did not agree to the proposed arrangements ; but as they had no other resource, he was willing to admit that they were ready to abide by the deci sion of the Ikuse, and throw themselves entirely on its feeling. He should suggest that all salaries at present enjoyed by these individuals should continue during their respective lives. Mr. POULTER thanked the Hon. Member for Middlesex for bringing forward this most important motion. A more disgraceful practice could not exist—disgraceful to the nation and not the individuals—than that of private applications for gratuities. It always raised a conflict in his mind--(Laughter) —between feeling and high principle.—( Laughter.) He had paid these fees up to the last Session of Parliament ; but a sense of duty, not any wish to spare his money, compelled him to refuse them since—(Laughter)—and he should con tinue to do so, on the principle that Hon. Members should not be obliged to pay for performing their duty.—( Laughter.) It was making the House of Commons like an opera-house— (Laughter)—with this exception, that Gentlemen came to it in performance of an arduous public duty, but they were made pay for their seats. Was it for the private interests or ad vantage of Hon. Members that the papers of the House were delivered to them, or was it for the interest of the public ? No one would maintain the former. Why, then, pay for them ? If they were to be payed for, the House should come to a resolution on the subject ; but until then, acting on a high principle—( Laughter)—he should refuse to pay for them. Sir R. H. INGLIS hoped that the House would not be led to believe, by the eloquence of Hon. Members, that the question was one of public economy.—( Hear, hear, from the Opposition Benches.) Hon. Members were called on by the resolution to save their own pockets alone, and nothing more. It might be right or it might be wrong, but that was not the question. The fact was, the resolution—divested of all its accompaniments--would only have the effect of saving the pockets of individuals, and not of benefitting the public in the slightest degree. Mr. KEARSLEY (we believe) said, when the Hon. Mem ber for Salisbury pays his arrears I shall consent to support the motion, but not till then.—( Laughter. ) Mr. B. BARING begged that the House would understand the true state of the case. It was not, as the Hon, Baronet had stated, to enable Hon. Members to save their pockets that this motion was brought forward ; but in pursuance of the re commendation of the Committee, that a revision of the whole system on which the officers of this House received remune ration should be effected with the least possible delay. Whew the public saw most respectable individuals, with duties fully as responsible, and yet with salaries and allowances cut down year after year, they might be expected to criticise with some se verity any favouritism or inconsistency which the House might be inclined to exhibit to their servants.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He believed there were no other public duties better paid for than those which it fell to the lot of the officers of that House to discharge ; yet, for his own part, he felt disposed to advo cate their interests (in any new artangement affecting them) with all possible tenderness and care. It had been stated that the fixed salaries of the two door-keepers were 1,100/. and 6001., an allowance already so ample that it might be seriously asked on what grounds the House would be justified in refusing to deal with their extra allowances according to the recommenda tion of the Committee. They would get little credit for a desire for financial economy and reform in other branches of the public service, if they shrunk from looking into the •alarie. of their own servants.—(Hear, hear.) He thought that hie Hon. Friend well deserved the thanks of the House for urging his motion, founded, as it was, on the unanimous advice of the Committee. It was now an acknowledged object in every step of financial reform to get rid of these disgraceful fees, and the principle should not be allowed to be arrested in a case thus brought home to the door of the House of Commons itself.—( Hear. ) Mr. G OULB URN thought that it was not a question that came strictly within the legislation of the House. It was rather one of personal accommodation of individual Mem bers. The doorkeepers were in the habit of undertaking various duties not incumbent on them, and taking trouble and attention in a variety of matters which Hon. Members ought to attend to themselves. They separated papers and kept them distinct for Hon. Members, who, if they did not like the trouble of keeping their own papers in order, ought to have no objection to gyve proper compensation to those who did. He knew something of the feelings of clerks in public offices ; he knew that they were a class of men not less devoted to the interests of the public than those two individuals who offi ciated at the door of that House, and he thought himself warranted in assuring Hon. Members that those individuals would not as a class feel hurt in any respect at any gratuities which the doorkeepers of that House might be permitted to receive for their extra endeavours to accommodate Members of Parliament in the despatch of their business. For himself, he would say, that he did not object to any regulations which the Hon. Member might introduce for the better regulation of the offices of the House of Commons, but he did object to the spe cific proposition which would prevent him giving a gratuity to any officer if he pleased, when he thought be deserved it by attentions independent of his duty. Mr. RUSSELL thought the most desirable and respect able way for the House was, to pay all their officers completely by salaries, not by fees, which it appeared after all did not go to the persons intended, for those who actually discharged the duties in question were hired, and did not receive fees. Mr. ROBINSON thought it had been a settled matter that these officers should be paid by salaries. The present mode was very objectionable. Some Members paid large fees, some small, and some none at all, and were now largely in arrear. Mr. O'CONNELL said Hon. Members ought to be ex ceedingly cautious in deciding the matter either way, lest they should by one course establish a bad precedent by indulgence, or on the other hand lean hard on those persons who so meri toriously performed the duties which devolved on them as door keepers of that House. There was no question that they should receive a " fair and adequate remuneration ;" but as there might hereafter arise one on the point in what this fair remuneration should consist, he thought it only just to the parties to come to the understanding that it should be taken to mean an equal amount to what they received at present. If any doubt existed in a case of this kind, which certainly was one that required to be dealt with (in the conflicting opinions apparent to the House) with some degree of delicacy, be waS inclined to give the parties the benefit of it, and not injure thern or their families by a too strict interpretation of the point of economy which might be applicable to their case, and he would therefore say, let them have the full amount for life. The onif question was,!from what fund it should come. Were the ques tion to come before the House anew he would vote against it , but they must take the case as they found it, with all its elairO s attaching. Colonel CONOLL Y agreed with the Hon. Member, and, where all concurred in hearing testimony to the efficiency and propriety of conduct which distinguished the officers of the House, he was surprised that Hon. Members should, notwith standing, think it worth while to spend so much time in econo mising in the matter of fees, which did not altogether come to more than about 61. on each Member. Mr. WARBURTON condemned the present system of fees, as not only inconsistent with the progress of reform in similar matters in other departments, but as most irregular M its working amongst Hon. Members. Some paid nothing whatever —some refusing from principle, some perhaps from economy or caprice ; some paying one guinea, some two, perhaps and those who did pay acquiescing from an idea Of custom, instead of any settled rule or order of the House- The whole proceeding had an indescribably shabby appear ance; and it wrs not the less scandalous in the eyes of re flecting men, when they compared the amount which was thus allowed to be accumulated by an individual in the capacity of doorkeeper with that awarded by the State to a Lord of the Admiralty. The latter was allowed 1,0001. a year, the former was, by the indulgence of that House, in the receipt of 1,100/- a year, and sometimes 1,100/. the half year, if the session should only last so long.---( Hear.) Mr. RIC H ARDS argued that the effect of fees was to make servants pay greater attention than they otherwise would to those on whom they waited, as was felt practically in the case of postboys, waiters, &c. The experience of this was so universal that everybody preferred paying the waiters who served them at taverns instead of letting the tavern-keeper pay them.—( Oh.) He thought Hon. Members should pay their fees cheerfully, and look for the proper equivalent of all their outlay in the applause that their grateful country would bestow on their toils.—( Laughter.) Mr. C. FE RGU S SON contended that the motion was al together erroneous, being founded on the false principle. that the gratuities given to the officers of the House were fees, which was not really the fact. Mr. GLADSTONE would suggest as the most equitable and least objectionable course, that every one should continue to pay the present amount as his regular contribution to the effective support of the officers of the House. Captain PE C HEL L thought the public had nothing to do with the question. He did not expect or wish that the public should pay for the care which the lower door-keeper took of his great coat, for instance. Mr. HUME could not conceive how the Hon. Member for the University of Oxford could have argued as he did, if he had read the report of the Committee. The Committee did not desire to interfere with the just compensation of door keepers, Committee clerks, or others ; but they were most desirous that whatever was considered by the House a proper remuneration should be decided on, fixed, and made known to the public. They had come to the conclusion that the present system was highly objectionable where a clerk was paid in the shape of fees 20/. 301. or 40/., for instance, to expedite a particular Bill through the House.—(Hear, hear.) These charges the Committee say ought to be specified and pub lished, laid on the table in fact, so that every one interested might have fair play, and not lose the opportunity of conduct ing his business properly, by being left in ignorance of the necessary expenditure.—( Hear, hear.) Whatever the claims were on the part of these officers, the Committee recom mended t hat they should now be laid before the House, and thence submitted for consideration and revision to the Trea sury, where the subject was sure to receive the attention it merited.—( Hear.) The Committee, after giving the subject of fees every attention, decided that they were inadmissible as a means of equitable remuneration. How, for instance, could it be arranged where there were two Sessions in the year ? Were the officers to have double fees ?—( Hear, hear- ) In future, however, as it was to be hoped that all the officers would be paid by salaries, there would be no confusion on these points. He had been blamed by some individual for a dispo sition to be too liberal—(Laughter)—and the fact was, that the present Report added 25 per cent. to all previous esti mates and allowances in favour of the officers:—( Hear, hear-) He would undertake to say that they should have full compen sation, but it must be founded on the principles laid down by the Committee. [At the request of Mr. O'Connell both resolutions of the Committee were again read, to put the House in full posses sion of the plan proposed in arranging compensation, and Mr- O'Connell added, that a Lord of the Treasury (not now in the House) had promised particularly to attend to it in per son, and complete the measure in a way that lie trusted would ensure compensation.] Mr. BROTH E RTON declared his determination to have justice done to the inferior officers. Mr. T. ATT WO OD begged leave to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer to give his word that the officers of the House should obtain justice from the Treasury in this refer ence, and he should be satisfied. He knew from experience the difference which existed in the result where justice wa s to be procured for small fry and for large fish.—(Laughter. In 1796 the Chief Justices of the King's Bench and o f the er Common Pleas had their salaries raised from 3,000/...1 3 ,., annum in gold money—mind, gold money—to 8,0001,,r , paper money.—(No, no.) Well, 7,000/.—(No, no.) ?A 7,000/. at least. In 1796 he was sure the salary was 3,oin a year. He would now say a word about that Hon. a),`; excellent man, the Member for Middlesex.—( Laughter.) 13 _ did not think it right in that lion. Member to cast his net as to let the large fish escape, while he caught the little (Laughter.) The expenses to which Members of that t" /(