The Sun. — London, England, 1845-04-05 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSP Or TORDS, 7iI 4 The House met at :he yawl hour. IRISH CONc'T VAULARY.—SANITARY IREGULATIONS. The Maquis of NO tt ANBY gave notice that he would, ot, Monday next, move for a return of the appointment cf the constabulary from the ht of May, 1838, to the present He would on the same da• also present a petition frn the Mayor aryl towd council of Kilkenny, in •he eoun•y . 1 t ittletter the ,uhlect of sanit- ry regulations in towns. The Nola , Marquis al‘o gave notice that tie would put a go, s tion on the Kam,- day. •n order to aseerta:n hoe soon th. Go vernment Bill o i this i.ubject would b in roduced before the House. HILL- COOLIES—SUN DAY TRADING—LOCAL RATES. The NOBLE MARQUIS &so presented a petition, numerously signed, from the town of Leeds against the inroduction of hill c,''lte, two Jamaica . aim pe'itions from Yorkshire again. } tne opening of publi..--h ; also a vow!, in.ni the mayor nd k, praying th...t instead the grand jut,-, they should hive some other tribunal fur th, settlement of local THE WELSH BISHOPRICS. The ashop BANGOR presented several petit;ons from places in Wales praying tor a repeal of the Act uniting the Lishopries . of Btngor a.:d Sr. Asaph. INCOME TAX.—IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT. Lord BROUGHAM preserved a petition from a house owner in the distrm. of St. Join's-wood, complaining of the oppressive o e eration of certain parts of the Income-tax Bill. The Noble Lord alsc urerented a -,:etition from tra , lesmen against the administration of the Act passed last year abolish ing imprisonment for debts under 20/ The petitioners cid hot object to the abolition of imprisonment, but they complained that creditors had not an adequate remedy. PUNISHMENT OF PAUPER'''. FOR NON-PAYMENT OF PO FR-RATES. Lord BROUGHAM had two petitions to present respecting most unjust and cruel imprisonment of two paupers, not for the mere non-payment of poor-rates, but for the non.payment of charges in the magistrates' office. Thomas Lukin and Ann Ward were sentenced by the insat.e magistrates" of Leicester for non payment of poor-rates—the one pauper in the amount of ss. 4d., and the other in the amount of 3s. 70. Some humane person paid the amount of rate due by Ann Ward, but those tt insane magistrates" committed her for the costs, in the amount of 205., which was four times the amount of her debt, When, being evidently unable to pay these smaller sums, they were plainly tumble to pay the larger 'urn of 20s. They had stated their utter inability to pay the ss. and the 35., aid when having thus shown their inability they were, against all law and reason, sent to prison for a month with hard labour, a punishment which could be inflicted on no man in this country, without a man had committed some crime of so infamous a character as to take it out of the common class of misdemeanours. This was the first time that ever he had heard that debt was to be treated by the laws of England ce a crime. He was aware that there was an Act, the Act of the 18th George 111. c. 19, by which a power was given to magistrates to . commit anyone to prison for one month for the non payment of the costs which had been awarded to an irjured patty. But in this case all such power had been exceeded ; and when these persons declared their poverty—when they had stated their inability to pay the ss. 4d in the first instance, they had, in the exercise of their power, committed them to prison. Those magistrates might have acted discreetly, they might have acted legally, nay, he would even go so far as to allow that, deep as the sarcasm might appear, they might even have acted humanely. Of their conduct in the mere committal he would not complain, but there was one thing of which he did complain, one thing which he would confide not to their Lordships, but to his noble Friend on the Woolsack, and that Vas the committal without a hearing. He understood that those magistrates were highly respectable individuals, but he would tell them—he would tell any man— he would tell every man, that no respectability, however great, could place any man so high, be he lawman or he he layman, as to lift him above the law. He must do his Right Hon. Friend the Secretary of the Home Department the jug ice to say, that as soon as the matter was men tioned to him, he immediately relieved these men from their imprisonment. But he thought that something more than this was required, and he would leave it tohis Noble Friend on the woolsack to say whether such men as those were fit to be left in the administration of justice in this country. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that, if, after inquiry. he found the conduct of these magistrates was such as it had been represented, that. he ..hould feel it his duty to rem..ve them from the Corornio.ion of the Peace. The Duke of RICHMOND said that inquiry ought also to be made to see if there was not some remedy for the injustice they had suffered, and if rot, the soorer the law was altered the better. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that, in a ease of in kustiee by a maaistrate, the inju ed party was entitled to remedy by an action. The Earl of CL AR'''. presented a pri.ion from the parochial schoolmasters of the parish of Aueiterardcr, in Perthshire, praying fur an increased remunerattoa. income-tax, would amount to 47.900,0001., so that ther would be a deficiency in 1846 of 1,740,(.001. Against that sum there was to be see two quirter receipts from the property tax, which would amount to 2,6C10,0001. There would alio he a sum of 6(10,0 01. which they expected to receive in the coarse of the present year from China. If, however, they added these sums to the ordi nary revenue of April 1846. the! e would be a surplus, sup posing no change took place, of 1,200,000/, But from what he had stated it weuld be seen tha , that eurplue would entirely be owing to the amount to ~ teduc - ed fur'Jh:i ieenme-tax in the c mrse of the pre ent year. and the tii:0.00 , 4. to come from con,egitenth in ihe following y.iar upoing the pro perty-tax t i discontinue. and there w s n extra rdina , y in erea e in the ordinary receipts ef the corr. tr y, or a con , iderable diminution in t•ft übl:c experdi are, that they would fled the s.mie deficienc in the revenue in 1.447, which existed in 1542. Th.. , eft: et of renewing this tax would t.e to give tt e publi c exchequer in April 1846, a surplus revenue of 4,560,0001 , which would enable the Government now to remove certain burdens, which at the presilit moment pressed with great severity uiion the prospe. ity of the country. Tkey proposed to remove al , t'u.i , s an ran materials, kith the exception of timber, an., They :ill the sten of eir,bliiig the Breish matiuracitur-r to c. mrie itit lereiEnrrs Thy No!,le Lord then went t th. various avid., upon which the duty is to be tski ri off, comm• ntili k , as he went along upim those which lie thought. most important. lii esp , et to glass, it might he asked why they did not. choose soap in stead of this article; but, for his part, he confess. d they could not well do without the amount of duty levied on so p w bile the removal of the duty on glass would op. n a wide fell for the operation of the manufactures of the country. The ..mount of duty proposed to be taken off was 6,0; 01. Then <a ne the ar ticle of cotton wool, the duty upon which amounts to 650,000/, This they proposed to take eff, as well a; to m.:ke a reduction in the duty of sugar to the extent of 130,000/. This would undoubtedly reduce the price of sugar, and plane it within the reach of those who had never be n able to enj .y it. before. These, and other reductions, when deducted from the 4,000,000/. would still lave a surplus of 890,000/. It might be objected that these reductions would result in making these imp. , sts permanent taxes, but he thought the ex p er i ence of the past justifi e d the belCf that the commercial affairs of the country would be so improved as to enable them to disece.tinue the tax at the end of three years. It they looked back they would find that not only had the national debt been reduced, within the last three years, from 29,452.000/. to 28.365,000/. but that the value of our imposts h d Increased by no less than 505,000/. Now, all this convinced him that at the end of three years they would be in a position to dispense with both the income and property-tax. The press pect of eimmercial prosperity was such, if they might judge of the steady progress of the last few year., as to bear them out in the supposition they had just exp. essed. With .ut referring to the two great subjects of reduction further, and for a moment only touching upon wool and timber, he would lay before the House a few statements of what m ght be considered the m'n articles which had b--en affected by the reduction of 1842. The first he would take was coffee, and he would state the gradual increase which had been experienced in the consumption of that article during the last five years. In 1840, the consump tion had been, according to the Cus om-house report., 28,654,0001b5. ; for 1841, it was 28,370,000 lbs. ; for 1842, 28,593.0001b5. In 1843, 29,979.0r.;01h5. In 1844, 31,394,0110 lbs. Shoeing an increase of upwards of 2,700.0001b5. And be would observe, that in 1842 the greatest quantity of coffee had been consumed which had ever been known during any pre vious period. There was another article, which perhaps many of their Lordships had never yet seen—CA laugh)—but he had had an opportunity of not only seeing, but using it. and had found it both nutritious and palatable, he meant chiccory. Their Lerdshiys might smile, but it was well known that in France coffee was seldom used without a dash of tesiccory. without the income.tax, instead of a surplus, there would. in 1846, absolutely be a deficiency.—(hear.) It was evident that a surplus of 3,000 0001. or 4 000,000/. was necessary. The Noble Mai quis opposite objected to the im position of this tax. because he said that he had an objection to their imposition of this tax, and jet he wished that there should be nn deficiency, that they might not have to say, " score up hest. ss." Why the very first object which they had in view in the imposition of this tax was to pay off the score which she Government, of which the Noble Marquis was a member, had run up; and by this tax they had not only been able to pay off flat score, to Ihe tune of 70! ,0001. El year, but at the same time to grant very large relief to the e of the e,,utrry. So that this tax, which the Noble Marq is so grievously complained of, had enabled them to in ere ee the conies:it, tion, and, at the same time, to check the smuggler by re.eittitig dirks, which raised the article of tea, for instance, to a price which induced the contraband introduction of it. The consumption of that article had increased fully one-fourth within the last five years. Again, if they took the article of tobacco, they would find that the reduction of the itut) upon tobacco had led to a very large in e ea-e .n the eensumptien of the article. In 1842 the quentity intredluesd was 3,448,00e1b5. ; in 1843 it was 3,605.0001b5. ; and in 184 lit was 3,863,0001bs So that it appeared the im r-ition of tlis tax had enabled them largely to relieve the trade of !he country. They proposed no less a reduction than 3,800,000/., and the Noble Lord himself had stated that a tytter selection of articles on which to remit duty could not be made than that they had adopted. In the price of sugar they had effected a larger reduction than was contemplated in the celebrated scheme of the Noble Lord opposite. He had not heard any one complain that the eritire reduction of the duty on glass had given a great stimulus to the manufacture. If they had not taken the duty off glass the manufacture would year by year have gradually decreased, and the duty upon it could not have been relied upon as a source of revenue. He had not heard, even in the daily papers or anywhere else, still less in their Lordship's )louse, that the relief which they had granted was tete which would not largely tend to promote the cemtnerce of the country and promote the con sumption and the comfort of the people.—( Hear. ) Another important tax ehieh had been passed over by the Noble Lord was the 600,0001. imposed on the importation of raw cotton. Was there a more objectionable tax than that ? It pressed heaeily .m the manufacturer, and its removal had long been looked for by the country. Well, then, without the im position of an income-tax the Goverriment could never have ventured upon these important financial changes. It was said, that the tax w s popular with those who did not pay it, but those who spoke in those terms forgot that all our former systems of taxation had reached their maximum, and those upon whom they were imposed were unable to bear thews. Were the Government to blame, then, for removing the burden of the chief taxes to those who were well able to bear them ?—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Marquis had said that the property-tax was not only grossly unjust in princip:e but grossly unequal of its operation. Why, where could they find a tax which was not in some respects unequal in its operation ? All taxation must bear differently upon those who have a permanent and those who have only a temporary interest in property, and in these two instances he could hardly see how the tax could operate with any great degree of inequality. If the tax were raised now to remove a debt some tenor twenty years hence he should agree with the Noble Marquis in thinking it was partial and unjust to tax an annuitant, but where the tax was made to meet the current expen•es of the current year, and levied upon the current income of an individual, he could not comprehend the argument which went to show that the tax was either unequal or partial in its operation. At all events, he should sit down convinced that a property-tax was the best and the most equitable which they could impose upon the nation, for removing what appeared to him to be a permanent deficiency in the revenue. He did not mean to say, that the coffee might not be as well without it, but the introduction of chiccory reduced the expense, and did not in the least degree affect the aroma. The introduction of chiccory in 1840 was 1,440,000 lbs. ; in 1841, 1,921,000 lbs. ; in 1842, 2,268,000 lbs. ; in 1843, 2,448,000 lbs. ; and in 1844, 3,164,000 bs. Cocoa also, which was an article of much request in some ranks of society, had in creased 2,591;,0001b5. within the last five years. Now it might be supposed that. the increase of these articles might have been made at the expense of tea, which was used for si milar purposes as the articles he had just named. But what was the fact ? In 1840 the quantity of tea introduced was 32,2.5 ',MO lbs. In 1841, 36.675,000 bs. In le4`2, 37.353,0001h0 In 1943. 4 .293 0001 h,; and in 1844, 4 . ,366.Citifib-.. showing an in crease in 1845 ..f no less than 4 7e2 0.4)1tt5., since the time that the reduction t oi.k place, and not less .hut one-fourth of the white quantity that had ben computed, if th whole five were to be taken into con-iperation. As might naturally be expected, there had been a corretponding inerea-e in the etin -ump lion of sugar. Not only bad the comfort of the poop'e been added to. but there had been a great advantage ob ained in obviating the adulteration .If this article, which had been 1.-ng effected by all sorts of articles. It , houtd be rentealb:•red that this "as an inerea , e in consumption, accompanied by no arti fice, without any undue extension of the currency, and indeed in the face of a law which teat been passed for restraining t':e amount, and which had effec ustly scented it from any depre ciation in its value. It was evident, therefore, that this was a solid increase, and that they might rein—and they mi.-ibt safely rely—on the increase of the Customs' duties for emit ing them to do away, at the end of three years, with this obj etiern-,ble and moat ungracious tax. He. therefore, thought he might. safely call upon their Lordships to consent to the third reading of the Bill. Lord MONTEAGLE reminded their Lordships that, when the nati3nal debt was contracted, the assessed property of the country amounted to 56,000,0001. Since then it had increased to 166.0,0, 001.; and they were now about to tax parties to meet the charges of a debt, from which those parties had never derived any interest.—(Hear.) He had heard many ingenious calculations, based upon the resources of this country, but he was convinced of this, the resources of the country had never been greater whether in a time of war or peace than they were now. He was inclined to praise some of the s.lections which the Government had made in the articles upon which they proposed to remove the duty. The article or glass was a very important one, and he had no doubt great benefits would result to the country from the re moval of the tax hitherto imposed upon it. Hut they were n t to discuss a property-tsx in a commercial point of view. It was in a financial point of view they must examine into it, and he moat •ay, looking at it in this 11 ; :ht, it was founded upon a fallaciuus and dangerous doctrine which was calculated to cause great nuschier out of doors if not to jeopardise the peace of the e,uirry. There never was a more needless sacrifice of revenue than the giving up of the auction duties. The sacri fice had not been called fur. Hnw could it be expected that the reseal ef the exc.se duties would promote consumption so ranch as to compensate for the losses to the revenue? The Go vernmei.t of a future day would he compelled to yield to the der , nds of the country. He believed that the labourers of the country were as much interested in opposing this tax as the richest and most fully endowed. When he com pared the estimates of the year 1b35, under the same !rime Minister, with the estimates of the present year, he could not help stating that no good reason had been given for the increase. With respect to the sugar duties, he could see no reason for the measures of the Government. All the authorities of any value upon the question, were against the arguments all-ged by the Government in favour of its own measure. With respect to sugar you lose a million and a half; the President of the Board of Trade stated the sum of two millions. The very classification, the very system, was adopted from the paper prepared by Mr. Hume, which had called a rigmarole paper. They lost by the timber duties up wards of 600,0001., and by the sugar that which made up a loss of two millions and a half. The way in which they had dealt with corn had diminished their resources. In corn, THE OREGON QUESTION. The Earl of CL ARE NDON, in rising to erive notice of his motion on the suhject of the Oregon territory, said, he had no wish to interfere wish any of the rules which their Lordships had thought fit to lay down, for their guidance, although he thought that a little convenience might be sacri ficed, in order to obtain infarmation from the Government for the satisfaction of the no: ion at large. He wished that certain papers should be laid on the table respecting negotiations with the United States, in reference to Texas and the Oregon territory. He wished to direct the attention of the Noble Lord opposite to that one part of the President's speech which re ferred to the annexation of Texas. He was astonished th a t a any body of men should have given their sanct a ioti such so measure, so deeply injurious to the cause of h uinnhioh at p resent i t o y, calculated to ruffle those amicable relations, "' existed between that country and the United States. With respect t o th e Oregon territory, he thought the language in the speech of the President betrayed a studied neglect and a want of courtesy to other nations. Not only was no allusion made to this country, but the President took it for granted that the American claims to the Oregon territory were clear and u ncon • tradict e d . H e did not th i nk that was a fitting opportun ity for discussing the British claims to the Oregon territory, but, n eve rtheless, with the permission of their Lord s hip s , h e wou ld 17 x few wor d s upon t hi s part o f t h e su bj ect, i n order to ren 'r c 'ore intelligible the character and . extent o f th e P res id ent ' s letter. If priority of discovery could constitute title, this e r "nt rY had the strongest claim to the territory, for Sir L ra ncis Drake w as the first who visited that cou n t ry . In 1578 ie found the land unappropriated, and he pook possession of it. But this did not constitute the British claim. In 1792, the light of the British claim of the territory was acknowledged by the United States, and in 1813 the Hudson Bay Company esta blished an extensive fishery and regulated the colony by Bri tish laws. The claims of America were originally from the sale to them by Napoleon of Louisiana, and their boundary was afterwards settled by a treaty between Spain and the United States. it was, therefore, the duty of Government to main tain their rights westward of the Rocky Mountains ; and if the question could not be amicably netted, he trusted the Govern ment would take such steps as might be thought necessary for vindicating the national honour of the country. Lord ABERDEEN said, if he followed his own inclination, he should at once lay all the papers relating to this matter on their Lordships' table, and he was sure they would give satis faction to their Lordships and the country. But the time, he thought, had not et arrived fur hi s a d opt i ng that course. He could as s u re th e House and the Noble Lord that the inte ergs of the country had not been neglected, at the same time that every justice was done, and would be done by her Ma jesty's Government, to meet the fair demands of other par ties.—( Hear, hear.) Their Lordships might be assured that the public interest would not be neglected.—( Hear.) It was necessary to state that the negotiations upon this subject were commenced immediately after the signing of the treaty of Washington, by his Noble Friend, Lord Ashburton. Before he went into a statement of the negotiation. he wished to draw the attention of the House to the last act of the late Presi eat That functionary, in December last, inform. d toe Congress that the negotiations on this subject were proceeding in the most ami cable spirit.—( Hear, hear.) He ( Lord Aberdeen ) thought that the late President had gone somewhat too far when he spoke so strongly of the amciable spirit in which the negotia tions were carried on. But however that was the la.t official declaration on the part of the American Government—tor the inaugural address of the new President had no official au thority —it was addressed to the pe - pie, not to the Congress. The treaty now in force could not be annulled wilhout twelve months' notice upon either side. The American Congress would not meet until December next, and the no tice of departure from :he t , rms of the treaty could not be given before that tone. Th re was, taerefore, 110 public ground of necessity for the preduct on of the papers desinal by his Noble Fr:end. At the some time he was aware that, in other places, he had been accused of makiog unaecessary concessions, and of giving up that high tone which, as the Alinister of the British empi-e, he was bound to maintain. He was aware, indeed, that in some places the most unreserved language had been applied to his conduct. He had been termed das'ardly, mean, cowardly, and everything that indicated an inadequate discharge of the duties of the office which he had the humour to fill. But he knew how these epi theta were to be translated. He knew that they were to be translated as indicative of conduct that was just, honourable, and true. And he did say, that he was not oily indifferent to these epithets when applied to himself, but that he was satisfied that they would prove complimentary to himself. He did not hesitate to say, that her M.ijesty's Government fully e-tanated the blessings of peace ; and no men would make greater sacri fice to preserve it than themselves. He believed that war was not only the greatest crime, but the greatest folly which a country could commit, if it were unjustly entered into. He was inclined to conclude with a moral writer, that it was the greatest proof of he natural fledravity of human nature, that war Wit sometimes lawful. Fortunately for this country, we need tot be so very sensitive on the point of honour, as some people t.ippeared to be.—(Hear, hear.) We need not seek the " bub ble reputation in the cannon's mouth," or, indeed, anywhere else. Our position, our past acts, our resources, and well known ability to bring those resources into play, placed us far above any fear of any imputation on the p oint of h onour . — (Hear, h ear.) But he believed that we had rights which were Clear and innisputable. They were quite ready to make every concession which would avoid the necessity of any extreme Course, but if they we re compe ll ed to take it, they were content rest upon these rights, and, with the blessing of God and the assistance of their Lordships, he believed they were fully pre. Pared a n d d etermined to maintain them. BASTARDY-LAW AMENDMENT BILL. 9 11 the motion of Lord STANLEY, the order for the Com miut_t_te.e on this Bill, which stood for to-day, was discharged, and — "non) , next was appointed in its stead. th e for rlhe Duke of RICHMOND said that as it was impossible Bill t appeals of those parties who were aggrieved under this 0 be heard at the next quarter sessions, he trusted that I°lne provision would be made for the payment of their expenses. On the motion that the Bill be read a third time, The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said there were three reasons which would justify the imposition of ao income-tax— the existence and long c•mtinuance of a formidable war, the still greater importance of inter ine commotion and civil broil, and the third, a defi,iency in the revenue, whisk they had no other means to supply. it was on the first of these reasons that Mr. Pitt, Lord Grenville, and Lord Seymour, had intro duced it. It was on the third that Sir Robert Peel had pro posed it to Parliament in 18-12. Ho saw no reason to hope, even from the statement of his Noble Friend, that they would be able to remit the tax at the end of the three years. He feared, indeed, there was some ulterior reason f it. the propo.i- tion of the tax and that it was intended to substitute this system of taxation for that indirect mode which had hitherto prevailed. He found, upon the statement of the Government, that the revenue, with the arrears of the property-tax, would be fifty nine millions. He disclaimed any desire to stint the public service of the country. He did nut complain of the increase of estimates for the public service. He would be still less dis sugar, and ti ber, there appeared to be a fatality ' • and it seemed by the pamphlet which Mr. Gladstone had written, that there was r. reduction of one-half the amount of duty. He was quite prepared to discuss the question as one of economical reience, and he thought that on that principle the Government had mistaken the course they ought to pursu.. Lord ASHBURT , .N said, his Noble Friend had not an swered his objection, for he thought the principle of a sinking fund, of that which was equivalent to a sinking fund, was the diminution of the principal, and not merely the in terest of a debt. _ posed to re fuse any grant of public money for the support of that arm of the public service, the navy. There was a pro position of the Government which gave him unqualified plea sure—that was the increased grant for the education of the Catholic priesthood in Ireland. He looked with entire satis faction upon the measures which the Government had adopted to release industry Still, a- he thought, raiinisters ought to be sincere in their declaration that the property-tax was only temporary, they should at the same time take measures which would enable them to repeal it. One of the great objections of the present Prime Minister to the repeal of the malt-tax was, that it would lead to the imposition of a property-tax in time of peace. In seven years afterwards the same Right Hon. Baronet, being at the head of the most powerful party in the country, declared that he would not attempt to make up the deficiency of the r evenue by the imposition of a property-tax. He did not agree with the Prime Minister in thinking that there were not other means by which the deficiency could be made up with greater benefit to the public. He had heard, as welt as his Noble Friend opposite, that there were persons who called the mse l ves " philosophers, " and who '° liked " this tax on account of its equality. But he would ask their Lordships could they imagine anything more unequal than the operation of this tax ? The t a x was imposed upon persons whose income depended almost entirely upon their state of health. Was it Just to subject them to the same amount of taxation as persons who derived their income from fixed property? Again, if he came to the funds, he might ask were all the persons who had pro. perty in the funds to b, dealt with alike? The mere fact that a certain amount of property stood in a man's name in the books at the bank was not suffirient to show that he enjoyed that property. So also was it with respect to landed property. The declared income of a man from landed propert t was rot a fair index of his means of paying taxes.—( Hear, hear.) H e would not deny that in direct taxation there was this advantage, that every man would know what he was eontributine t the necessities of the State. But the difficulties in the way of justly apportioning an income-tax were nut to be obviated by any scheme which he had ever heard propoueded. El , • would not propose the entire rejection of the Bill, which, however, he looked upon, atter all, a a Bill for ultimately taxing labour ; burr h- hoped their Lordships would modify its ere,sure. He would not objec so strongly to the Bill, as a temporary moa.ure, it he saw it accomeasoed by other measures which woud enable the Government. to dis pense with it at the end of three years.—( Hear.) It had been said that thi: tax •vas popular. itut , here had been no proof that it was popular exeept with those alio had not to p,y I r.— ( Hear. and a lough.) He did not believe that the country would I e reconciled to the tax, acid he hoped that Parliament would find the means of inducing the Government to abat.don it at the end ref three years. Lord AShBU it TON said that the present discussion af forded him an pportunity of stating the grounds upon which he had the misfortune to differ with the most prominent mem bers of both parties in Parliament and the country. He. how ever, agreed with the Nob e Lord who had ju-t sat down in condemning the income-tax as a permanent impost. He re ferred to a passage in the books of Mr. M`Culloch, in which that economic philosopher had shown that it would be great in justice to subject income from land to a peculiar tax, as that would be a bar to all improvement. Capital was the chief in gredient in the improvement of a nation, and any tax upon ca pital—whether that capital was represented b) land or by raw material of any other kind—or engaged in commerce—was inevitably a cheek upon improvement. He agreed with the Noble Lord opposite, that a tax upon income should only be resorted to in times of great emergency. —( Hear, hear.) In the whole of the financial arrangements of the Government the great matter which he regisited was their inattention to the debt of the country. That was the great incubus upon the in •ustry of the country. Sur , ly it should have been the duty of the Government—of every succeed ing Government—to relieve the country from that heavy weight. Whilst the debt remained in its present amount, what resource would the country have if a war arose ? Nothing co ld be doge but borrow.—( Hear, and a laugh) The country could only do as Falstaff did in the tavern—" score up." For his part he should never feel comfortable unless he saw some tax imposed for the purpose of grappling with the debt. That was a comfort which, at his time of life, he could scarcely hope to enjoy. —( A laugh.) He had, however, great happiness in saying that, in the whole course of his long life, he had never set n the country in a happier state of quiet and comfort. There was not a speck in the horizon, except in the small territory of Oregon. —( A laugh.) Yet, he could not but express his regret that nothing was done to get rid of the debt. He would not deny that the sinking tund had failed to a great extent of its object, but it ought to have been sustained as a means of reducing the amount of the debt, and of facilitating the system of borrowing, if a resort to that system should become necessary. This was a year of.unexampled prosperity Nothing could be a greater mistake than to suppose that the laws of any Government can prevent those alterations which will assuredly ever he experi enced in coinmereial affairs. With respect to the banking measures for which his Noble Friend had taken so much credit, he thought that they might possibly have done no harm. But his great objection was to Vie disposal of the surplus, and he thought the better plan would be to prevent any surplus at a future period. Lord STANLEY-said that he thought that his Noble Friend had hardly done justice to the efforts which had been made by her Majesty's Government. His Noble Friend had complained that his Right Honourable Friend at the head of the Treasury had made no effectual relief for the pressure of the debt. It might be true that no actual re duction in the amount of the debt had made place, but. the in terest of the debt in 1828 was upwards of 32,000.000/., and now it was only 28,000 000/. ,• and here there was a reduc tion of not less than 4,0(10,0001., which was equal to not less than 1,000,000/. Yet this was not all, for by a burden with which they had saddled themselves now for the benefit of the future, in 1"54, by the cessation of the terminable annuities, there would be a reduction of ab me 650,00 I/ in the annual interest. I o 1864 there woalo b: , a reduc•ton rue the • by the cess tine of the long annuities of above 1.2 0 00n/. a year ; and is, 1/.435 there would he a stair further reduction of above 200,010/. a year, and he thought that this was a re duction which went very largely is reduce the debt. But his Noble Friend had said that he had no objection to a surplus at present, but he dui object to the imposition of that tax by which the surplus was created. Why, it was a fact. well known, that his Right Honourable Friend at. the bead of the Government ba4 clearly ehown that, The Duke of RICHMOND said that he did not. object so much to the vote, as to the appropriation of the funds which are to be supplied by it. His Noble Friend had allowed, that he was totally ignorant of the nature of some of the items in the list of duties which he was prepared to reduce. Now, he thought, that if reduction were to be made, it ought to be made in some of the articles in which benefits would accrue to the agricultural interests..--( Hear. ) But what did they do? They imposed a rate upon a farmer, so that if he had 3001. a year rent, they taxed him after the rate of obtaining 150/. profit—but what was the case? An in dividual who had last year had an interview with Sir Robert Peel, had stated that, in 1843, he had lost 6001., and in 1844 he had lost 7001. He was assured that the distress in the country had been occasioned by the measures of the last three years. The Right Hon. Baronet had come into office on the supposition that the agricultural interest would be taken care of; but he would be glad to know what would be the opinion now, if the country were called upon to express it. One thing surprised him, that every body talked against the Bill, but every one resolved to vote for it. This was very strange, but still it was a fact, that without the tax they would not have the surplus which appeared requisite for the necessities of the country. Lord BROUGHAM complained that the debate had beers a most wearisome one, and he thought it was a bad system to use so many figures in speaking of a subject like this. He had waited an hour and a half in anticipation of this debate, but they had heard all about everything but the precise point in question. It reminded him of an anecdote of a great states man, who had expended, like all other Chancellors and ex- Chancellors of the Exchequer, a great deal of labour in getting together a series of calculations, and he went to Lord Lauder dale, who advised him to throw his figures altogether over board, just as he would throw physic to the dogs. The Noble ex-Chancellor was, of tourse, in an agony of disappointment, but stid the advice was good, and if it hail been followed, it might have saved a good deal °f the wearisomeness of this debate. He must say that, notwithstanding the objections to this tax, still he was prepared to vote for it, as he had dune in the first instance for the first three years on tne ground of necessity ; and in the second instance on the ground of something very like necessity. In the abstract, and indeed in practice, these were great objections to the imps,- sition of a pro ,erty-tax, especially for a permanency. That there were objections also to in-irect taxes, he was perfectly aware ; any attempt to press upon the mean, of consumption must press up in the enjoyments of those classes to whom the comterts thus restricted were everything. Yet, notw iths' and mg this he still deemed it necessary to refute the supposition that. this tax, or indeed, any direct tax, could fall equally on pro l e rty. It was one of the essential elements of property that it should be unequal, and he thought that when the ima gination of his Noble Friend was inclined to be active, it would nut be a bad plan if he were to call his judgment into his aid to render his lucubrations as useful as the detail of them was effective. He regretted that Mr. Pitt did not take, in the time of the war, long annuities, instead of contracting an almost lasting debt. If that had been done the country would not new have been in such a condition as to render either an income or a property-tax necessary. Improvements might be introduced into the Bill under discussion, but he thought the country would bear the irconvenience of the measure in its present state, fully relying upon the intention of Govern ment to discontinue it at the expiration of three years. The country he was convinced would never object to an income tax in a time of war, or when large funds were required to de f. nd its honour. But God forbid that the present peace should be disturbed ; but knowing the frailty and vicissitudes of hu manity, he could not conceal irom himself that a time might come when ii might be necessary for the country in defence of its rights or its honour to resort to arms, and then he was satisfied the people would cheerfully pay not only an inc tine-tax, amounting to three, but to ten per cent. He ti usted that the sentiments he had seen in the President's message would be repudiated by the American people; but if they were not, he retied upon the British Government's adopt ing measures to vindicate the national honour, and they might depend upon England contributing a liberal income and pro perty-tax to aid them in doing so. Should, however, no extra ordinary steps be necessary, it was the duty of Government to keep the tax down as much as possible; and should it be found necessary to continue it at the expiration of the three years, such modifications ought to be introduced into it as would make it less inquisitorial and less painful to the great body of the people. The Marquis of NORNI A NBY had strong objections to the continuance of the preperty-tax, because sanctioning it a second time looked very much like making it a permanent tax. At the termination of the Chinese war, it was held out to them that the increase it would occasion to the commerce of the country would have the effect of removing the income and property-taxes, and he could see no reason why this principle should not be now fulfilled. He did not think that the other deductions of taxation were equivalent to the increase of impost upon this tax. He, therefore, opposed the proposition of the Government, and would say " non-content.' The Earl tit' RADNOR would also say "non-content" to the imposition of this tax, because it was unequal, unjust, and inquisitorial, in its operation. lie contended that, in all seasons of agricultural depression, the laws were chiefly in fault. He objected to the tax because it was unjust and oppressive. He would not object to an income.tax it it were fairly apportioned. He did not think that it could be so. But he was convinced that it e , uld not be brought forward in a more objectionable -hape than the present. The Duke of RICHMOND moved an amendment, as a rider to the Bill, " that, in the event of farmers suffering a loss through a bad harvest, they should have a power of appeal against the assessment of the tax. Lord STANLEY thought the Noble Lord's proposition un reasonable, because it was impossible to make such distinction. The Duke of RICHMOND would rather have the inquisitorial power than the real loss. He objected that they were obliged to ascertain their losses. and he thought it very hard if a man incur , eil a loss that he should pay as if it were profit. He would not divide the House upon it, because he thought it would he useless to do so. Yet he knew that it was competent for them to alter a money bill, and, with the present power of the Government, he was convinced that the Right Hon. Rtronet at the head of the Treasury would be very well able to make any alteration he pleased in the Bill. The Marvis of NORMANBY said that he agreed with the Noble Duke that thin was the csowning inipity of the ICME-TAX The E ar l of RIPON s N aid O it had been • his lot in 1842 to pro inn", an Act to th e i r L or d s h ips for the iinposition of a tax upon n 'eome. Ile deemed it then a duty on behalf of her Majesty's Government to enter into considerable detail to show the reasons why they proposed it. He did not conceive it was necessary to go to th e same extent and variety of explanation u Pen the present occasion. But he was aware that some rnearts were necessary to induce their Lordships to continue 9iat into tax thre e years longer. It was not now requisite to enter Inexany lengthened argument to prove that it was wise and pedient to conduct the business of the country un with a de neient revenue. !object Ile had o n a previous occasion gone into that at some consitleralla length. The House passed the Income- deemed calculated t o supply the deficiency in the • renue. — (Hear, hear.) It would be necessary for him .. to state, first, what the condition of the revenue was th fore the t ax was P asset!, as c om p are d with the revenue during R e s ucceeding years. The tag their their Lordship s were awa . e, reve cas passed its 184' 1 , in whi c h year these was a d e fi e i,• ney in t h e ue to the amouct of 2,139,000/. On the sth of April, 1843, they had realised no surplus ; but in 1844, when they had ftur complete quarters, the tax produced to Government The su m of 5, 356,000/, giving a surplus of 2.750,000/. in the c omae of the preceding year. If they did not renew this tax, ethat would be the state of the public Exchequer in 1846? In the Year ending thp 5.h April, I-16, the estimated expendi ture of the country would be 49,643 , 0_ 0 1 ., including all the s upplies v o t e d for the use of the army and navy. The ordi nary revenue of the country, supposing they did not renew the THE SITN, LONDON, SATURDAY MORNING, APRIL 5, 1845. Bill ; and though he was among the non-contents of the Bill he would not divide the House on this occasion. The amendment was then put and negatived. and the House adjourned. 110 USE OF COMMONS, April 4. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. SECOND READINGS. The Newcastle-on-Tyne Coal Turn Bill, the Glasgow and Shots Road Bill, the Glasgow Bridges Bill, the York Road Bill, the Thames Waterworks Bill, the St. Helen's Canal Bill, the St. Helen's Improvement Bill, the Blackburn Waterworks Bill, the Dublin an.' Drogheda Railway Bill. the Wolverhamp ten Waterworks Bill, the Enniskillen and Dundalk Railway Bill, and the Harrogate and Ripon Junction Railway Bill, were severally read a second time. Mr. T. DUN COMBE gave notice that he should, on the motion for the third reading of the last of these Bills, move that it be read a third time that day six. months. LIVERPOOL AND BURY RAILWAY. The Bill for this railway was brought in and read a first time, on the motion of the Earl of LISTOWEL. SPARROWS lIERINE ROAD. The Bill for this road was read a third time and passed. LOWESTOFF RAILWAY AND HARBOUR. This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be com• mitted. GRANT TO MAYNOOTH. Mr. Parnell, Mr. Brotherton, Mr. Hamilton, Col. Acton, Mr. Aglionby, Mr. Stuart Wortley, Mr. Bailey, Mr. Divett, Mr. Palmer, Dr. Bowring, and several other Hon. Members presented petitions from various places, against any additional grant to Nlaynnoth. CHURCH EDUCATION. Mr. BATESON presented a petition from the county of Derry, in favour of the grant for Church education in Ireland. JEWISH DISABILITIES BILL. Dr. BO WRING presented a petition from the Unitarians of Bolton in favour of this Bill, and praying the House nut to throw impediments in its way, but to still further extend the spirit of toleration which had dictated it. SAWYERS. Mr. SPOONER presented a petition from the sawyers of Bir mingham complaining of the present system of importing from America, into this country. ready-cut boards, free of duty, and praying the House to appoint a select committee to inquire into its operation upon the operative sawyers of the country. Mr. COLVILE presented several petitions from Derbyshire against the grant to the College of Maynooth. The Stonechurch Road Bill was read a second time. Lord JOHN RUSSELL inquired if a correspondence had taken place in respect to a provisional arrangement between the Colonial-office and Lord Sydenham? Mr. HOPE said there had been a correspondence with respect to the disputed territory. Mr. HUNIE said that all dispatches connected with this dispute ought to he laid on the table of the House. Srl ROBERT PEEL said, if the documents could be pre sented without any injury to the public service, he had no .113- objection to their production ; but this matter having been settled between this country and the United States, he did not see why they should be produced. He did not think any public object would be answered by their produc: ion, but if the Noble Lord wished for any particular papers which could be produced without detriment, he should have them. BRAZILS. Mr. MILNER GIBSON wished to ask a question of the Right Hon. Baronet on the subject of the present state of our relations with the Brazils. It was well known that we had had a commercial treaty with that country which had expired in the month of November last. Under the provisions of the treaty British subjects residing in the Brazils were entitled to certain privileges, which were not pos sessed by the Brazilians, in reference to the disposal of their property by will, the English Consul taking care that in the event of the death of a British subject his property went to his heirs. That treaty expired in November ' • and it was the general opinion that the privilges wh ch had been enjoyed by British subjects had expired with it. A case had recently a- isen in which considerable alarm had been felt as to the disposal ef the property of British subjects dying in the Brazils, or dying in this country, and leaving property in the Brazils. He wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet first, if the Government had taken the matter into their consideration? Secondly, if Mr. Hamilton had made any con.munication to them on this sub ject? And thirdly, if he could bold out any hopes that the same privileges would be continued to British subjects in the Brazils, which they had enjoyed previously to the expiration of the treaty? Sir. R. PEEL replied that it often happened that the mer chants of Liverpool and Manchester received earlier intelligence of matters of this nature than was received by the Foreign office. The Government had not received any account of the transaction to which the Hon. Gentleman referred, but he would make this general statement that by the treaty which ex pired in 1844, on the death of any British subject in the Brazils the administration of his effects devolved upon the British Cowie and not upon the Brazilian authorities. Her Ma jesty's Government had made a proposition to the Brazilian Government on the subject of the treaty, and that stipulation was a part of the proposal which they had made. THE ASHBURTON TREATY. Lord PAL MERSTON did not think that the answer which the Right Honourable Baronet had given to his Honourable Friend the Member for Montrose on the sub ject of the extracts from the dispatches which had been read by Lord Ashburton in another pla-e was altogether satisfactory. He did not know exactly the extracts to which his Hon. Friend had alluded, hut, from what he had heard, he understood that Lord Ashburton had read elsewhere some extracts from certain dispatches, for the pur pose of showing that some statement that had been made by a member of that House (the Heuse of Commons) was erroneous. Now he would assume that to be the fact— (" Hear, hear," from Mr. Hume)—and he would ask where did Lord Ashburton get those dispatches?—( Cheers.) He must have procured them either as a negotiator. in which case they would be his own dispatches, either written by him or sent to him, or they were dispatches which had been ob tained from the Foreign-office, or they were dispatches which had been laid before Parliament. Ii they were dispatches which had been laid before Parliament, he had nothing more to say. The Noble Lord had a perfect right to use them. If the dispatches were his own—were dis patches which had come into his power as a negotiator, having been either written by him or to him—if these dispatches had been furnished to him by the Government, then he would say that, in the first case, he had no right to read his own dis patches without having obtained permission of the Government, and if he had obtained that permission, or if they had been furnished to him by the Foreign-office, then it was the inva riable practice of Parliament to lay those dispatches on the ta ble, in order that Parliament might know what they contained, instead ef being only made acquainted merely with extracts read in Parliament. The Right Hon. Baronet would see that it was not sufficient to say that the dispatches merely 'elated to a question which had been settled. The question was not in reality as to anything that had passed in the negotiations between the United States and this country, but it was to see if cer tain statements made in that House by persons formerly hold ing official situations, were or were not erroneous, and whether or not these statements had been made for the purposes of deceiving. He wished to ask another question. On the 16th July, he moved for a return of the number of negroes landed in each year, from 1815 downwards, on the coast of America. That return the Right lion. Baronet acceded to with the greatest rea diness, and he (Lord Palmerston) could only wish that the sante readiness had been shown in furnishing it. The Right Hon. Baronet had told him that he had presented it, but this was not his ( Lord Palmerstor.'s) return, but some other. He trusted the Right Hon. Baronet would male inquiries into the subject and see that the returns were presented. Sir R. PEEL could not understand what dispatches the Hon. Member for Montrose had alluded to. Of course, if it were necessary, any dispatches which had been produced in the other House of Parliament might be produced to the House of Commons, (so we understood the Right Hon. Baronet, but from the low tone of voice in which he spoke, and the noise which prevailed in the House, we could scarcely hear him.) Mr. HUME said he had alluded to dispatches which had been referred to by a Noble Lord in another place, which had not been laid before that House. Sir R. PEEL, with respect to the return alluded to by the Noble Lord, could only say that it was very difficult to get up such returns, but he would use every exertion to have this one made. MEDICAL BILL. Mr. MANGLES said that he presented a petition last night from a numerous body of medical practitioners in several towns in Surrey, praying for some alteration in the Medical Reform Bill introduced by the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department. He wished to put the House in possession of the motives by which these gentlemen were actuated. The SPEAKER said the Hon. Gentleman was clearly out of order in attempting to refer to petitions when there was no debate. Mr. MANGLES said that if he were prevented from stat ing the opinions of those for whom he had acted, he would beg to give notice that he should move certain amendments on the Medical Reform Bill in Committee.. MAYNOOTH. Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE presented two petitions against any increase in the grant to the College of Maynooth. They were numerously signed, and were untainted by any spirit of exclusiveness; but they deemed that any ecclesiastical esta blishment was an unconstitutional imposition, and they prayed the House to modify or reduce the grant. HINDLEY said he had presented several petitions against the grant to Maynooth last night, and he now had to present seventy more. He would not trouble the House with reading the titles of these petitions, for he did not expect they would be of the smallest avail , but,4lie conceived that it was necessary to present them in order to put the House in pos session of the feelings of the country. The parties who had signed these petitions were not induced by any disposition to the ‘• No Popery " cry, but because they conscientiously be lieved that any State support to ecclesiastical establishments was bad in principle. RAILWAYS. Mr. STUART WORTLEY, seeing the Honourable Member for Oxford in his place, begged to ask him when they might expect a notification of the selection of Committees for railways, and in what order they meant to classify the Bills. Mr. ESTCOURT said that the day on which the House se parated before the recess, the 20th of March, was the very earliest day on which any decision could be come to. It was of course clear that some consideration was required after the House met again before the result of tha t de cision could be declared. But h expected that the last would appear in the votes to morrow morning. With regard to the second portion of the Hon. Member's question, it was impossible to say in what way the Bills would be classified, fur their order must depend on the business of the House. Mr. DUNCOMBE gave notice that, on Tuesday next, he would call attention to the Railway Department of the Board of Trade, with a view of pre v e nt ing their inflicting further injury on both public and private interests. On the motion of Mr. TUFNELL a return of the number of apprentices who have attended at each of the schools esta blished in her Majesty's dock- yards, during the year ending December 31, 18.1-1, NEW to. ZEALAND. Mr. FOSTER asked the Honourable Gentleman the Under Secretary for the Colonies if he had any objection to lay on the table of the House the Government dispatches received from New Zealand on the lot inst. I Mr. H OPE thought the House would agree with him that these dispatches were for the information of Govern ment and not for the information of Parliament. At the same time, however, he could state that these dispatches were all ready, and he had no objection to lay such parts of them on the table as the House might wish to see. RAILWAY CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION (SCOT. LAND) BILL. Mr. LABOUCHERE wished to cell the attention of the Lord Advocate ts a report which had gone abroad, to the effect that the Learned Lord had allowed an Hon. Member to add a clause to the Railway Clauses Consolidation Bill of Scotland, without giving any previous notice of its nature, and at a time when the Bill was in its last stage, and there was necessarily but a small attendance of Members in the House. When he mentioned what the clause was, he thought the House would agree with hint, that it was one of considerable importance. The provision was no less than this—that every future railway to be constructed in Scot land, should give an indemnity or guarantee to the landed pro prietors of Scotland for any loss they might sustain through any turnpike- road being affected by the construction of the line. It had created considerable excitement in Scotland ; and he wished to know whether the facts he had stated were correct? The LORD D into the ADVOCATE relEsaatiing to England, and he did not clause was similar to one not think the Committee bad sanctioned any unusual or unjust clause. MR. AIAZZINI. Sir C. NAPIER said that he perceived a statement in the public newspaper declaring positively that Mr. Mazzini had nothing at all to do with that order for the murder at Rodez, which was alleged by the Right Hon. Secretary for the Home Department to have been signed by him. It appeared from the statements in the paper that the order was a forgery, and that Mr. Mazzini was not in France at the time the order was made. He wished, therefore, to ask the I'tight Hon. Baronet if he still maintained his charge, or whether. he was prepared to follow the example of the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury, and make an apology to Mr. Mazzini ? Sir J. GRAHAM said, that the Hon. and Gallant Officer was not so obliging as to give him any notice of his intention to put such a question. He should have thought that he would have observed the ordinary rule of the House in such a matter. But, as that rule had net been observed, he could scarcely be expected to answer the question now. However, he would say this, that he had seen letters written by Mr. Masaini, to which the question of the Hon. and Gallant Officer referred ; and he (Sir J. Graham) last night laid upon the table a the House, by command of her Majesty, certain pape rs which bore di rectly upon this questi on . The House would remember that, when he was making his statement to it upon this question, he said distinctly that part of the accusation against Mr. Alaz zini did nut rest on official information, but on certain letters which he ( Sir J. G ra h am ) h e ld in his hand.—( Hear, hear.) He had heard that it was the intention of Mr. Mazzini to pro. secure the Moniteur newspaper for an alleged libel contained in that paper, but that he did not follow it up ; and he had also heard that Mr. Mazzini did take an action against another paper for the same, and that he had not succeeded in proving_ the allegation. But he told t he Hon. Member for Finsbury that he had never seen those letters or papers, and, therefore, could not tell what the nature of the accusation was. —( Hear, hear.) He (Sir J. Graham) rea lly knew nothing more of the subject th an thi s an d what he h ad already stated, except that he had h ear d th at t h e accusation in the Moniteur was ill-founded ; but he s h ou ld n ow say . bee was bound to state that he did not f ee l j us tifi e d i n declaring that there was no foundation for the charge against Mr. Mazzini. MAYNOOTH COLLEGE. Mr. VILLIERS begged to know when it was the intention of the Right Hon. Baronet opposite to introduce the Bill for the proposed increased grant to Maynooth ? The reason he asked the question was because he had been requested by a large body of Dissentors to put off the second reading of the Bill for a fortnight. the House in Committee last night, in favour of the Bill, Mr. Greene had received directions toprepare it ;and the House Sir R. PEEL said that, in consequence of the resolution of .—(Opp.osition cheers.) then fixed upon Friday next as the day upon which the second and it would, therefore, r r e ee a e d i i v n e g a of se th ec, a n t d ßi r ll ea s d h i o n u g ld on tak th e a p t la d e a e y , Mr. PLUMPTRE said he was requested to inquire whether the time for the second reading of the Bill might not be ex tended beyond Friday next ? LORD ASHBURTON AND LORD J. RUSSELL. Lord J. RUSSELL said that he wished to ask a question of the Hon. Gentleman, the Under Secretary of the Colonies, on a subject which was p ersonal to himself. He had seen existed between him and Lord within the last few hours a statement, purporting to have been made by Lord Ashburton with regard to a speech made by him (Lord John Russell) on elate occasion. He would say, in the their political opinions had not first place, that a friendship Ash burton, which friendship began when that Noble Lord and himself were of the same opinions in with which they politics—( Hear, hear, and a laugh)—and that the difference g i n e t t e ta r e r r u bedp w which ad taken place its always met to good fortune to meet that Noble hene th ve e r was further along from his Lord, and that n wish, his pu in the discharge of nkind bile duty, than to say anything personally u —(Hear.) In the course of the discussion on the navy estimates a discussion, quite unexpected by him, arose with regard to the treaty con cluded . by Lord Ashburton with America, That discussion was introduced by his Noble Friend near him, and, in consequence of what had fallen from the ciotrdwisaslith.yis Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, he (Lord John Russell) had referred to a matter which he conceived to be correctly stated, as far as his recollection on the subject served. He had said that he thought it was advisable there should be some arrangement m adeby which the forces of Great Britain and America should occupy a certain position, which should be the boundary between the two States. For that purpose he bad instructed Lord S y d en h am to carry on negotiations with that object, with the con currence of his Noble Friend the Member for Tiverton. Lord Sydenham informed him in his answer that he could not obtain from Mr. Webster any terms other than terms by which that part of the Madawaska settlement on the right bank of the river St. John should be occupied by the two Powers. It was clear that Lord Ashburton supposed he (Lord J. Russell) al luded to negotiations for apermanent settlement of the boundary, whereas—and he thought it was sufficiently clear from what he had said—he only alluded to a provisional arrangement to be made between the two Governments. If it was the intention of the Government to carry on any diplomatic negotiations, they would, of course, dry e on on by his Noble Friend, and not himself, as the Noble Lard must have known. All he wished to know was, if the Hon. Gentleman the Under- Secretary for the Colonies, had received a copy gave to Lord Sydenham, and his answer to him ? He spoke at the moment from memory, and did not anticipate a dissuasion on what he then stated ; but the Noble Lord had totally mistaken the whole transaction, for that Lord Syden ham could have made such observations seemed to him ( Lord J. Russell) impossible. He wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman to produce the documents he had in reference to this subject. Mr. HOPE said he was not aware that the Noble Lord in tended to put this question. He would, however, make every search for the rapers to which the Noble Lord referred. BUENOS AYRES. Mr. EWART wished to put a question to the Right Hon. Baronet with reference to the affairs of Buenos Ayres and Monte Video. His only object in doing so Ras the protection of British property and the restoration of commerce. Since he had ,I„st mentioned this subject he had understood, from authority which he could not doubt, that the blockade had be come a general blockade of the town of Monte Video. He also understood that the commerce on the river Plate had been pro- hibited. He had also understood that duty had been levied on foreign ships, and that an edict had been issued by the Go vernment of Buenos Ayres for suppressing the English, Scotch, and Irish schools in that town. The question he had to ask was,first, whether such measures had been taken as would en sure the safety of British property • and, secondly, whether such measures were in progress as would restore the commerce of that part of South America? Sir R. PEEL could only make the same statement which he had made sometime since, namely, that steps had been taken by the British Minister in conjunction with the repre sentative of the Court of France to put an end to the unhappy state of things to which the Hon. Gentleman referred. With respect to the protection of British commerce he could state that ample means existed in the river Plate for the protection of British property and British subjects. There were six ships of war in the river Plate. With respect to the schools the Government had received no communication. The Bri tish and scotch subjects had a right to private schools for the education of their children, and any edict prohibiting their private schools would be met by an effectual remonstrance made against the enforcement of that edict. The last thing the Hon. Gentleman referred to was important, he said that the Government of Buenos Ayres claimed the allegiance of the British subjects. A foreigner born within the dominions of her Majesty was a British-horn subject—if a subject of her Majesty was horn out of Buenos Ayres, then he could not be considered a Brazilian subject. But if the son of a British sub ject be born at Buenos Ayres then they had no right to object to the application of that principle for which they themselves contended. While he was entitled to the citizenship of Buenos Ayres he was liable to the burthens of the State. M AY NOO I . 11. Sir It. INGLIS wished to ask the night Hon. Baronet (Sir R Peel) if he intended to press the second reading of the Bill referring to the Maynooth grant at the time now appointed for it ? Sir 11. PEEL said it was a matter of great importance that the sense of the House should be taken on so important a matter, but it was his desire that it should be read a second time on Friday next. THE OREGON TERRITORY QUESTION. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he had a question of very great importance to bring before the consideration of the house, and he hoped he would, therefore, be pardoned if he trespassed upon it for a short time. It was not his intention to call in question either the general foreign policy of her Ma jesty's present Government, or of that which they had given notice with respect to the particular question now before the House ; but what he intended to do was, to bring before the Legislature the question of the Government of the United States in reference to the Oregon territory. His Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Bath had intended to have put the same question to the Government, but he did not do so, expecting to have had a satisfactory explanation from the Government; and he (Lord John Russell) would have pursued the same course had it not been for the inaugural addresses of the two Presidents of the United States, by which it appeared it was intended to take this question out of the ordinary course of diplomatic ques tions, and therefore it demanded more than ordinary consi deration from that House. Had this question been left be tween the Executive Government of this country, and the Executive Government of the United States, as had been the usual course, whatever might have been the result he would have waited in silence, until the close of the proceed ing before he should have interfered.—(Hear, hear.) But if he did not very much mistake, he believed he would be war ranted in saying, that the President of the United States had, in the present instance, adopted a course entirely new— ( Hear)—a course which, if not met by something decisive on the part of this country, threatened to overthrow all the ordinary intercourse which should exist between the Execu tive Governments of the two nations, and leave the de cision of questions of great national importance to be decided on the one hand by popular ad dresses from the Government to the people ; and on the other, by a course which would put an end to all peace and amity, and that national dignity which characterised the existing intercourse, and which was so necessary to the due discharge of that duty to the rights of the ieople of this coun try which the British Government had taken under their charge.—( Hear, hear.) He should here mention—though he would only do so as a passing allusion—that this message pointed at that vast territory of the United States, the annexa tion of Texas, and of which he would not state the boundary, as the limits remained still undefined ; but he would merely say that that vast extent of territory was a most fruitful soil, producing cotton and other articles used in this country, and cultivated by slave labour, and extending, as it would no doubt extend, over that portion of the country. He had alluded to this part of the question only for the purpose of showing that the present conduct of the Execu tive Government of the United States tended entirely to its own territorial aggrandisement.—( Hear, hear.) He said this because it was in direct contradiction of the political declara tions made by Mr. Webster, who had declared that the true policy of the United States was that which would insure a good understanding between the United States and all foreign coun tries, and at the same time advance the interest of their own.— ( Hear, hear.) But be that as it might, such a course had since been departed from. In the next sentence of the message, after declaring his intention, by all appropriate means, to con summate at the earliest period the annexation of Texas, the President goes on with the following remarkable paragraph, which I will read throughout. The paragraph is as ioDows : " Nor will it become less my duty to assert and maintain, by all constitutional means, the right of the United States to that portion of our territory which lies beyond the rocky moun. tains. Our title to the country of the Oregon is clear and un quest onable ; and already our people are preparing to perfect that title by occupying it with their wives and children. —( Hear hear.) About eighty years ago our people were confined on the west by the ridge of the Alleghenies. Within that period __within the lifetime, I might say, of some of my hearers—our people increasing to many millions, have filled the eastern valley of the Mississippi—adventurously ascended the Missouri to its head springs, and are already engaged in establishing the blessings of our Government in the valleys the rivers of which flow into the Pacific. The world beholds the peaceful triumph of the industry of our emigrants. It is our duty to protect them wherever they may be upon our soil. The jurisdiction of our laws, and the benefi t of our p ublic instit utions, should be ex tended over them in the di st a nt regions which they have se lected for their homes . The i ncreasing facility of intercourse will easily bring the States , of which the formation in that put of our territory cannot be long delayed, vtithin the sphere of our federative union. In the sae tntime the obligations im posed by treaties or conventional arrangements should be sa credly respected." Here was, in the first place, an assertion that the title of the United States was clear and unquestion able. In the next place, that the title was perfected by the emigration of certain parties from the United States. In the third place, there is an assertion that before any long time the institutions of the United States would be extended to that territory, and that the new States would form a part of the federal union. It was upon this subject that he wished, after the appeal of the President to the people of the United States, to call the attention of the House.—(Hear.) He, wished to show how far the President of the United State; was justified in declaring his intention, without the sanction of any treaty or convention, of occupying this territory. In a matter of this kind it was necessary to inquire into the usage by which a right to any territory hitherto unfixed and un claimed was claimed. With regard to an uninhabited country there might be a title by ancient discovery, by treaty or con vention, or thirdly by settlement and occupation. Now what was the right of the United States, as he gathered it from re perts made so long ago as 1825 and 1826, by a Committee of the House of Representatives ? With regard to ancient dis covery the United States claimed al the rights that were de rived from Spanish discovery, but he would not much regard a discovery at the end of the 16th century, which consisted of a landing of + a few hours on the coast, withliut any attempt made to perfect it by occupation. But even on the point of prior dis covery he would be ready to meet the President of the United States, and would contend for the discovery of Sir Francis Drake in 1578 as compared with the discovery of the Spanish navigator in 1592. Then with regard to the question of treaty; but before he went into that he would state what was the position of what was galled the Oregon Territory. It might be considered as the territory lying between the Rocky mountains and the Pacific, from east to west, and be tween latitude 40 or 42 and 51 from north to south. Now, as far-as he could ascertain, that large territory did not appear to have been the subject of stipulations between the countries of Europe till late in the last century. It was said by America that the treaty of Utrecht referred to that territory, but he could not find any reference to it in that treaty, and there did not appear to him to be any claim on that ground. It was said again tl at the treaty of 1763, the treaty of Paris, gave to France or Spain, or to one or other, all the territory to the west of the Mississippi. It so happened that on a late occa sion he found it necessary to read the negotiations which had taken place with regard to the treaty of Paris, and had con suited the various dispatches which passed between the Duke of Bedford and the French Minister, and it was clear from those documents that the only question between France and England at that moment was as to the set tlement between Canada and Louisiana.—( Hear, hear.) By the treaty Canada was ceded to England, and Louisiana to France, with the exception of some parts to the east of the Miisissippi. They must then consider whether Louisiana, as it was then held by France, comprehended any portion to the west of the Rocky Mountains, and upon this a very excellent pamphlet had been published by Mr. Faulkener.—(Hear, hear.) It appeared, from the instructions sent by Louis XI V. to M. Croissade, who was at that time at the head of the Go vernment of Louisiana, that he did not consider Loui siana extended so far as the Rocky Mountains. It would appear that it was considered to extend to the country westward of the Missouri and • the Mississippi. There was nothing, therefore, in the treaty of 1763. from which it could be inferred even by implication that any title was created to the territory beyond the Rocky Mountains. Next they came to the claims which it was said arose from the discoveries of navigators, and the settlements made on the coasts. In the year 1785, the question arose with regard to Nootka Sound. That settlement was attacked and destroyed by the Spaniards. The English Government demanded re dress from the Spanish Government, that redress was given to them, and terms were agreed on with regard to the future oc cupation of the country. Those terms showed that the country was considered as one to which no valid claim of sovereignty could be established by either party. It appeared that neither the English nor the Spanish Governments had formed such settlements there as to give a valid title to the territory. He could refer the /louse to the C onven ti on a g reed on at the Eiturial, in relation to this subject, which would be formed in " Hertslet's Commercial Treaties." By the sth article of that Convention, it was agreed that the subjects of either country should have free access to the territory to carry on their trade without molestation from the other. It was agreed that all parts of the north of the Spanish settlements should be open to the subjects of both countries, but that neither Spain nor England should finally settle there for the purpose of assuming the sovereignty of the country. Now it did not appear that Spain had any settlements to the north of latitude 40. At all events, she had none so far north as the mouth of the Co lumbia River. By the treaty, it was open either to Great Britain or to Spain to perfect the discovery of the country, and to establish and make settlements in consequence of such discoveries. Captain Vancouver, after that convention had been entered into, was sent by the British Government to make discoveries, and to take possession, in the name of the King of Great Britain, of such territories as he might discover. He now came to another part of the claim of the United States— viz., that which was founded on alleged priority of discovery. It appeared that a merchant vessel, called the Columbia, com manded by Captain Grey, had discovered an inlet, which Capt. Grey supposed to he the inlet to some river. This was in the month of May, 1792. After remaining at anchor in that inlet for some time, and sending out boats for the purpose of ascer taining the limits of the bay, and ascertaining that it was not the inlet of any river, the vessel sailed out into the Pacific Ocean. This was clear from the statement made by Captain Grey, for he said, that after some days having found what they thought was the channel of a river, they discovered their mis take, for what they had discovered was clearly no channel, and they returned. Shortly after, Captain Vancouver arrived, and he not only entered the inlet, but he sent his first-lieutenant, Lieutenant Broughton, in his boat, to go down the river. Lieutenant Broughton was more successful than Captain Grey had been, for he not only discovered the entrance to the Columbia river, but he proceeded up that river to a considerable distance. Captain Vancouver took possession of it and Nootka Sound in the name of the King of England, and this was a valid pos session. It had been stated in an American pamphlet, which he held in his hand, that the district of Louisiana included all the land on the east side of the Mississ'ppi and the Rocky Mountains—that district included between the land claimed by Spain on the one side, and by Great Britain on the other ; but unless Louisiana was included in that part of the territory west of the Rocky Mountains, it ought not to have been in cluded in the convention. With regard to the cession by Spain, the only cession they had any right to make was under the convention with Great Britain relative to Nootka Sound. There was a convention between Spain on one hide, and Great Britain on the other. The two Powers afterwards went to war, and it was used as an argument, on the part of the United States, that in consequence of that Great Britain had lost all title which it claimed under the convention. The eff..ct was, that the convention was renewed by an additional article in the treaty between this country and Spain, in 1814, there fore they could only succeed to such title as Spain held in 1814. It was a title to settle and trade in that territory. Then he would come to the third question, which was the most important of all the modes of establishing a title—he meant the title by occupancy and settlement. The question now for them to consider was, whether there was what the President of the United States called a title, real and unquestionable, to be made out of occupancy and settlement. He had already stated that there was a settlement in Nootka Sound, and that there was also a settlement made by the Hudson's Bay Com pany in the Oregon territory. In 1811, as was stated by Washington Irving, Mr. Aston made a settlement in Colom bia. Shortly afterwards there was a war, and the question was who should take possession of the Astonian territory. The settlers, in the meantime, agreed with a company, called the North Western Company, for the sale of that colony. That sale was effected after the treaty of the year ISIS, when all the property taken during the war was thought right to be restored to the United States. The North Western Company and the Hudson's Bay Company were then united by Act of Parlia ment. There was another company then instituted, called the Pacific Fur Company, which had ended in a total failure, in consequence of the Hudson's Bay Company having entered into a more enlarged spirit of trade, and were obliged to sell their settlements to the Hudson's Bay Company. It was taken, on good authority, that there were 20,000 people living in this part of the Oregon territory, very few of whom were citizens of the United States, and at the same time the Hudson Bay Company had agents who had made settle ments throughout the country. It was obvious, seeing the increase of relations which must take place be tween this country and our Indian possessions and China, it was of the very first importance to have the com mand of that part of the coast. There might be ports as good. or better, further to the north, in the neighbourhood of Nootka Sound, but those ports were unapproachable. What was the result of the statement which he had endeavoured to make to the House on this difficult subject? Why, that with regard to ancient discoveries, England had a better claim than the United States. With respect to the treaties, the United States had no ground whatever to rest. Upon the ground of discovery, then, as well as by treaty, the claims of thi- country were stronger to that disputed territory than those of the United States.—(Hear, hear.) English subjects, for thurnost part, occupied it, and English subjects were now en gaged in carrying on a traffic of great importance there. Having thus, in a general manner, stated the claims of the re spective countries, he would, in general terms, allude to the negotiations which had taken place between them. An impor tant negotiation was carried on in London between Mr. Rush, on the part of the United States, and Mr. Huskisson and Mr. Stratford Canning, on the part of England. Certain proposals were made by Mr. Rush, amongst others that no culnnisation should take place on the American boundary. The claim was at once denied by Mr. Canning. The claim to the Oregon ter ritory was also peremptorily denied, but at the same time Mr. Canning did authorise Mr. Huskisson to propose a com promise on this subject, and the line which had been agreed on running along the 49th parallel of north latitude to the Rocky Mountains should be carried on beyond the Rocky Mountains to a [watch of the Columbian rives called the Magilicuddy River, thence to the main stream of the Columbia, and this was to be the boundary line between the two stations. Mr. Canning would not give up the settlement north of the Co lumbia, because he wished to have the full advantage of the harbour. He ( Lord J. Russell) thought this was a very equitable proposal on the part of Mr. Canning. The proposal was rejected by the American Government, and it became necessary to renew the convention, by which it was agreed that Great Britain and the United States should have the power to occupy and settle, without claiming sovereignty over any part of that territory. Such was the state of the queritsioo en down to the present time, but new events had now a for , The President of the United States had made a p claim to the whole of that territory , and , in an unusuwaelrierothmanptnheeriyr had called upon the people of the Un ited States, b e coming wives and children, to occupy it. The territory was of more importance every year. After this statement of the President it was impossible that the Government would not endeavour to have a speedy solution of this difficulty. If they would feel it impossible that the present unsettled state of re lations between the two countries should be allowed to con tinue without the danger that the people of the United States, acting on the suggestion of the President, would endeavour to disturb British subjects in the enjoyment of their rights, which they held by treaty, and thus promote a state of relation dangerous to the peace of both countries.—(Hear.) He would say, with all moderation, that this country should not abate anything of their just pretensions.—( Hear.) He would not pretend to define what course the Government ought to take, nor where they ought to draw the line, but he would say that they would not propose anything less than Mr. Canning had done with any regard to the interests of Great Britain.— ( Hear, hear.) He might be told that the Oregon territory claimed by the United States was not of much value, and that it del not matter much who possessed it. " Yes, Sir," (said the Noble Lord), "but I say it does matter."—( Hear, hear.) A large territory cannot be a matter of indifference, particularly where our title is better arid jester, nor should it be yielded under such circurest ances to what he might call the blustering announcement—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear," in which Sir R. Peel loudly joined)--on the part of the President of the United States. A communication with China and East India, and the whole of South America, could not be a matter of indifference. The surrender of such advantages to a foreign power could not, he repeated, be regarded with indifference. It was not a matter of indifference that the tone and character of England should be lowered in a transaction carried on with the United States. He thanked the House for the patience with which they had listened to him whilst he made this imperfect statement. — (Cheers, in which Sir Robert Peel joined.) He should not have interfered if the matter had been left to sliplomatic arrangement between Lord Aberdeen and Mr. Buchanan ; but he felt that a Minister, from his position, could not well introduce the matter; and so he thought it right to tell the House and the people of this country what were their rights.—(Cheers.) With this statement he I.,•onlileive the matter in the hands of the Government of the country, and he would not express the smallest doubt that in all their proceed ings they would duly consult the interests of the country and the honour of the Crown, whose Ministers they were. —(Loud and prolonged cheering from both sides of the House. ) Sir R. PEEL could not be surprised, and he would not say that he regretted the Noble Lord had taken this opportunity of delivering the sentiments which he had expressed.—( Hear, hear.) He thought the Noble Lord had partly defined the limits within which it was proper to introduce such a subject in a popularassembly. When a negotiation was pending affect ing the most important interests of two great countries, he thought the Noble Lord had justly defined the rule within whit h a Member of Parliament might exerei=e his discretion.—( Hear, hear.) Popular feeling ought not to be excited during a negotiation unless there was some grave and potent reason for so doing. He did not think that the Noble Lord was responsible for any consequences which might follow from the course he had taken. —( Hear, hear.) By the latest intelligence from the United States, it appeared that the matter had been withdrawn from the cognizance of those authorities to whom the negotia tion had been entrusted, and an appeal had been made for the settlement of the question to others than those to whom its set- Clement properly belonged. As Minister, he must necessarily speak with reserve, and could not exercise the freedom which an individual Member of Parliament was warranted in doing. He could not think it cons'stent with Isis duty to follow the Noble Lord into the whole discussion, or discuss the grounds upon which the United States founded their claim, but he would correct an error into which the Noble Lord fell in his statement respecting the boundary line. There was a negotia tion in 1842, that to which the Noble Lord had alluded ; there was another negotiation, of which the Noble Lord did not seem to be aware, in 1827, at which, in addition to the territory mention'd by the Noble Lord, the strait called Del Fuego, that easy access should be given to American vessels its the adjacent harbour, and that the little Peninsula north of the river Columbia, should be ceded to America. That was the last proposal. In 1818 the boundary line was defined and two subsequent treaties in convention were made, but the last in 1827, although nominally for ten years, included a proviso, that it would contnue in force until either of the parties thought fit to give a year's notice of withdrawal from the terms of the treaty, and at the expiration of that year the Parties to resume their original rights. The Right Hon Baronet thou quoted from Pri;ident Tyler's message, - 3d Dec. 1841, showing that he distinctly recognised the negotiations then in progress between the two co entries respecting the disputed territory, and hoped ;for a successful termination of them. So late even as the 19th of February, 1-45, when a motion was made in Congress for the production of certain papers connected with the boundary qiiestion, President Tyler said that considerable progress had been made in the negotiations, that they were carried on in an amicable spirit, and that the negotiations would be brought to a close in a short period.—( Hear, hear.) On the 4th of March, 1845, the President made the address which had caused the observations which fell from the Noble Lord opposite. Since that address had been blade, no communication had arrived from the British Ambas sador. At the time of his sending the address he had not had time to make any comment upon it. No d plomatic commu nication bad as yet taken place with the Government there up to the date of the last accounts. M.. Pakenham would be inclined, he had no doubt, to continue the same arrangements which he had carried on with the last Government. All they knew of the subject was that which was contained in that ad dress. He considered it his duty, notwithstanding the lan guage of the President, to state that it was his opinion that there would be a favourable result to these differences. In case there should be an unfavourable issue—by that he meant on'y that if the proposals they made to reconcile these differences should be rejected, and no counter-proposals made to the same effect— that he would not object on the part of the Govern ment to lay on the table of the House all the com munications which had taken place ; he trusted, how ever, that that would not be necessary ; he still hoped that an amicable adjustment of the claims of both countries might be made, notwithstanding the allusions contained in the address. He would express his deep regret that such refer ences to the contingencies of the case should be made by the chief executive officer of the United States, contrary to all usage, while such a negotiation was pending. Such a refer ence was not likely to lead to that issue which every friend to the amicable relation of both countries would desire. As the subject had been brought under the notice of the House, he felt it to be his duty on the part of her Majestyls Government to state in language most temperate, but at the same time most determined, that they considered their rights, in respect to the territory of Oregon, were clear and unquestionable ; that they trusted still to effect an amicable ad justment of their claims ; but if, having exhausted every effort . , , . to effect that, their rights were inva ded, that they were re solved and prepared to maintain them.—(Loud cheers.) He hoped that the declaration which he had made would not lead any of the Hon. Members to enter into a discussion that might prevent the result which they all should desire. He wished that the Members of the House would not pro ceed with the discussion, but leave the matter in the position in which it now stood. Lord J. RUSSELL, after making an explanation concern ing the proposal which was made to Mr. Canning, said that he carefully abstained from making any motion, and, after what the Right Hon. Baronet had said, he would not snake any motion of the kind until the Government were prepared to answer St. Lord PALMERSTON agreed with the Right Honourable Baronet that it was not expedient for Hon. Members is press this matter any farther. He would take the opportunity of looking to quotations made by a Noble Lord in another place. He found that those quotations were taken from dispatches which be himself had laid upon the table of the House. He should only say that upon the rointa which had been alluded to, or with regard to the objections which might be made with re spect to the arguments made by him, and which the Nob'e Lord called the Ashburton recapitulation, nothing that had been said in that other place could be taken as an answer to those arguments which two years 2g* he took the liberty of making to this House. Objection had been taken to the manner in which be had stated his views OR this subject. He trusted that on every occasion in which it was his duty to state his opinions on this subject, he had always abstained as much as he could from any per,onal attack upon anybody. The subject then dropved. POST-OFFICE ESPIONAGE. Mr. WAKIIEY (on the Speaker leaving the Chair for going into a Committee of Supply) said that,, as there had been a misun4erstanding with reference to the bringing on of his motion—his Hon. and Gallant Colleague was not in his place—he would, if possible, postpone his motion ; but as there weuld not he a Committee of Supply on Monday even ing, he should now go on with his motion. If the Right Hon. Baronet the secretary for the Home Depariment would pro duce the warrant moved for, he would be saved the trouble of bringing the matter under the discussion of the House ; but as he refesed to consent to do so, he should take the sense of the House upon it. The Hcn. Gentleman then moved for a copy of any warrant or warrants sent to the Postmaster- General by any Secretary of State, directing the detaining or opening of any letter or letters to, or written by, Thomas Slingsby Duncombe, Esq. It would be recollected that, im mediately before Easter, he presented petitions to the House from a number of his constituents, praying that the House would institute an inquiry which would satisfy the public at large as to the necessity of opening Mr. Dur combo s letters, that they might know whether be was any longer entitled to represent them. That was the object of his motion. It was considered in that borough that he had been subjected to un just treatment by her Majesty's Government. It would be harassing to go over the details of the matter, but it seemed most extraordinary that his Hon. Colleague, who first brought the subject before the House in reference to Mr. Mazzini's letters, that he who charged the Government in that transac tion should have his own letters opened. He (Mr. Duncombe) made every effort in his power to prevent the effect of those aspersions which might be cast upon him, for he brought it under the consideration of the House frequently, and offered to maintain his charge at the bar of the House, and called for an examination of the parties concerned at the bar of the House. The motion he now made, he believed, would share the same fate as that of his Hon. colleague, but it would only convince him of the unjust treatment which he had re. ceived. If his letters were opened, why not state the circum stances under which it was done, in the same way as the facts relative to the opening of Mr. Mazzini's letters were laidbefore the Sousa ? The Right Hon. Gentleman stated to the House from the communication he received his information with reference to Mr. Mazzini. He stated that the warrant issued by him was dated the ist of March, 1844, and that he had received a dispatch, stating that the Belgians had re• fused to allow Mr. Mazzini into their country in consequence of disturbances he had raised in France, and said that if any fault was committed it was his fault. Nothing could be more satisfactory than the manner in which he showed that he acted upon the information which he believed to be true. But. what was the course pursued by them with respect to his Hon. Colleague? He (Mr. Duncombe) said that his correspondence had been violated in the Post-office, but they got no acknow ledgement from the Government as to whether they were opened or not, and in that refusal the Government were supported by a majority of the House. Had not his Hon. Friend a right to know who assailed his character at the Home- office? He knew not by whom his character had been misrepresented, and he had a right to urge that he had been ill-used by her Majesty's Government. His constituents did not know what to believe, they had good reason to believe that he had acted as a good representative, but still when they had found that her Majesty's Government had considered it to be their duty to open his letters at the Post-office, they had a right to know under what circumstances that had been done. if the facts are stated in one case, why are they not made known in the other? The responsibility rests on the majority of this House, and if they decide, no matter how unjustly or inconsistently, there is no appeal from that decision. If this warrant were issued and a prosecution instituted in any of the courts of law against one of the servants of ifs Post-office for having, opened the letters of hie Hon. Colleague, that warrant should be produced on the trial, and the absence of it would defeat the prosecution, or submit the party to the consequences of a conviction for a mist!, meariour ; and what means of escape would they have under the statutes of Anne, or the other Acts, without the production of the warrant, for such a course of procedure ? But he saw clearly that the Govert meet, so far from mee log this question in a fair and open manner, were fencing with it in a fashion not a all creditable. Would it not be more creditable on their part, either to produce the win rant at once, or declare frankly that no such warrant existed ? ( Hear, hear.) But the Right Honourable Baronet (Sir J. Graham), so far from adopting either of these courses, declines both, and relies eatirely on his tyrannical majority. It was not upon an adherence to law, but upon a reliance on force that the Right Hon. Bt onet fall back upon. It was not reason, it was not justice. How, he would ask, would any Member of the Government like to be so treated ? The answer was obvious. A Noble Lord opposite had said that his (Mr. Wakley's) lion. `,:olleague was a degraded person.— ( Cries of " No, no," from the Opposition.) Well, then, could it be believed that his Hon. Colleague's letters had been opened without some such alleged cause ?—( Hear, bear.) But notwithstanding ev er y a rgument that his Hon. Colleague had urged, with the view to elicit an answer, the Only one ever vouchsafed was, "We are determined not to say whether there was any' warrant for opening the letters or not."—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Wakley) begged again to repeat that great dissatisfaction existed out of doers upon this subject, and the feelings of his constituents in particular were most intense, for they could not understand why his Hon. Col league, who had discharged his Parliamentary duties with so much ability and zeal, should be so treated by a majority of that House. The question then narrowed itself into this. Was this warrant to be produced, or was it not? He feared that the latter would he the answer; for it appeared to him that the Government were as obdurate now as they were in the begin ning of this discussion. Considering the manner in which his Hon. colleague had dealt with this question from the com mencement, the wound which his feelings had endured, the bold tone in which he bad attern, , ted to vindicate himself, and the whole character of this transaction, he (Mr. Wakley) felt bnind to say that but one feeling could exist in the public mind, if this motion should be refused, and that was, that great injustice had been done. lie knew there would be a majority against him, but that did not alter the tone of the public mind. and particularly of the constituency of Finsbury, who felt that their representative had been aggrieved, and was entitled to re. dress.—( Hear, hear.) It had been said that his Hon. Col league bad been engaged in illegal practices, which bad induced the Government to take this step in his regard ; if so, would it not be but fair to let him know who his calumniatorswere. The Hon. Member concluded by proposing his resolution. Mr. WILLIAMS said be r ose to second the proposition of his on. Friend, and in doing so he begged to assure the li House that he would occupy it but for a very few minu t es. Lie did think that this was a motion to which po otOectia