The Sun. — London, England, 1845-06-25 00:00:00

These opinions were echoed by the Anti-Slavery Society, and' i by every benevolent man who took part in attempting to put down slavery. Such was the opinion also of the Marquis of Lansdowne. Such, also, was the opinion of the Marquis of Nermanby, who had proved himself, as Secretary for the Colo nies, one of the-e most able and beneficent Ministers to whom the celonies lied ever been entrusted. The Hon. Gen tleman then read an extract from a dispatch from the Neile Marquis, expressing regret at the total failure of the measures taken to put down the slave trade. (The reading of the ex tract was mush cheered.) The next witness he would refer to was the Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir R. Peel) who, in a epeeclf - at Exeter Hall (from which the Hon. Gentleman quoted largely), declared that at the time when he was addressing the meeting, the horrors of the slave trade were greater than at any former period.--( Hear.) His next witness was Lord Aber deen, from whose dispatches he read similar extracts, in which the- Noble Lord complained bitterly of the bad faith of the Spanish and Portuguese governments, in conniving at the ter rible aggravation of the slave trade.—(Hear, hear.) He then read extracts from a pamphlet published by Mr. Clarkson, in' which that venerable author stated that the attempt to suppress the slave trade by force had completely failed, and had led to a tremendous sacrifice of life. He would not detain the House longer than was absolutely necessary to put it in possession of the facts upon which his motion rested. The fact vase that so greatly had the evil been increased, that whereas at the end of the last century, the amount of Africans oartied off to America as slaves was but 90,009, the number in 1843 was 200,000. From the Bight of Benim alone 150,000 were carried away. [The Hon. Gentleman then went into ex tended numerical statements, but so rapidly read, that they could not be made intelligihle, as we caught them, without the aid of the documents.] 192,000 slaves were now annually im. pored into Cuba and Brazil. Could it be doubted then that taking the whole of America into account, the toenber imported from Africa was at least 20d,0.0. But it might be said that since these returns were received the citizens of the United States had taken less part in driving the trade for the supply of other countries, that greater precautions had been taken, and that fresh treaties had been entered into. But he would call the attention of the Houae to the report of the Commissioners of Sierra Leone, who stated that there had been a great increase in the trade and a great aggravation of its horrors. He wished to bring these facts before the common sense of the House. If they were to be decided by, argumentative disputation he well knew his incapacity to meet the Hon. Gentleman opposite. He thotight that he had stated to the House sufficient facts to cause an agreement to that part of the resolution which he referred to. He had another charge to make against the means which mere adopted to suppress the slave-trade : the system pursued in-order to put it down caused a great many evils. He be lieved that the intelligent people cf Cuba and Brazil looked at the large disproportion that now existed between the numbers of blacks and whites with the utmost alarm. That was the prevailing feeling amongst the intelligent people of those countries. The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to read part of , a dispatch sent to Lord Aberdeen, stating the consternation that existed. It contained the most vehement denunciations of the means adopted to suppress the slave trade. He was not astonished at the hostility which was exhibited to that system when it was enough to enlist vast prejudices against it. It was not surprising that we excited a disposition to oppose us. He shout! like to know what would be the feeling of the population of cenntry if they were in the habit of hearing that any vessel from any port in this island was chased by a foreign ship of war, either Dutch or American, and had been destroyed be eanseit was engaged in smuggling, because the American or Dateh Government wished to put smuggling down. He be lieved that every person acquainted with the subject was con vinced that the means resorted to to put down the slave trade were totally inoperative. Though they heard of the number of African.; taken away by the slave ships, though their consuls anclagents were able to furnish them with those accounts, yet they had no account of the number that were massacred in the course of the proceedings, aed no account of those who perished in the barracoons while waiting for exportation. There ware no accounts of those who petesned in the slave ships, of those who died when they had a storm at sea, or of those who were thrown overboard when a British cruiser was nearing one of their vessels. They had no one to tell them of the:stiff:ming and mutery of those who escaped death and the horrors of the voyage. They knew nothing more than that it was going on for many years, and that it was, above all the horrors and scenes of crimes, misery, blood, and death, with :Whiitth the records of the world made them acquainted, the most awfully horrible. While tile slave trade was unprohibited they heard little or nothing of this. When the slave trader had an: interest in the slaves he took care of them. He would say, that when the African chiefs brought down their slaves to aieenvenient point on the coast, when they leisurely embarked, they were provided for with some concern for their physical being, and new, since that first interest had been taken away, :therreonsequence had been such a complication of horrors as he had stated. The greater part of those evils arose from their systens of suppression, and every man in the Legislature was a participator in the crime of the Minister who refused to change it... He was not going to bring before the House any of those dreadful scenes which he was compelled to go through ; if he did,. be would awaken a strong feeling of compassion. The African shiefs bring their slaves to the barracoons in thousands, alereat part of whom die by starvation or by pestilence, wit le waiting for exportation. At length the slaver came ; the etictims were chosen ; those who were r e jected were delibe eately murdered, and the parties elected were put on board the elute ship. There were many Hon. Gentlemen who, perhaps, had never seen a slave ship. He ha I the opportunity of seeing so eat Natchi-z. What was called the hold of the vessel was the reeeptac:e for human beings. In that dark and miserable hole beings were crammed in hundreds. The papers laid before the House stated that these vessels were 22 inches between deeke. In that hole, under a tropical sun, they were conveyed tin hundreds acrass the Atlantic Ocean. Of course they suffered, and many perished, and those who did not die were taken out of the hold with their limbs dislocated and distorted, and mul tierles of them never recovered their former position. What elitist be their miseries at sea, when storms at sea added to this combination of horrors. Mr. Hill's statements of these horrors were borne out by the papers on the table of the House of .Commons. Were these cruelties to continue for ever? They had cots red into a treaty with France to continue it for ten years. .No object could be a good object which was to he propitiated by .human suffering. He showed the House that the system which . they were pursuing had added to those horrors which many ! , 'years ago had excited public attention. They were aggravated by. , he immediate effaces of their Government. The expense of this attempt to suppress the slave trade was unquestionably esa f large. Sir F. Buxton had calculated that the expense from the year 181.1 to the year 1839 amounted to 15,000,0002., and since 1.819 they had added 2,000,0001., which made it 17 ; 000,000/. They had also expended 1,300,000/. to bribe Spain and Portugal. The annual expense had been generally taken a! } w et a million; the other expenses varied according to the nut-n -iter of ships voted. He thought that he had shown the cruelties, exeien--es inconveniences, and iaoperation of this system, and hd wished tonlay those e fles before the House. He may he otk al nintlitr he was prepared with any other system. He se-wetly thought that it was his part to suggest any system. Ref thoughtit sufficieut to prove to the House that the pre. scot tsar one which they could not continue consistently w ith the onlinary dictates cf humanity. Ile had another point to bay before then , namely, that they should, as much as possible, teeter open their ports and harbours of the West Indies to the eretteee of free labour. He believed that such a coutse could etit heproductive of anything but beneficial result. It would put dewn the slave-trade by underselling its productions. It could render the African. in his own country, in a position tee eyed himself of the wealth and advantages of a civilised country, and then they would be able to point to the West latiliee as an example of the success of their generous policy. He le hayed that if they gave fair play to the corn-hers they would find the people of Cuba and Brazil more anxious than them selves to suppress the slave-trade. Texas and the United States must see in that country some evidence of their own deenees. What must be the consequence of their persevering 1:1 that trade? The reeublicans of America must see a most powerful confederacy with the slaves of America. The Hon. Orntleraen her, moved thereselutiiin. Sir G. COCKBURN thought that the withdrawal of our t.rci's from the coast cf Africa was not the most effectual elan tn. put down the sl tee trade. Since the increase of our forms there the commedere on that station made a report to the Ad mit elty, enclosing a list of forty-five slave shits which had been captured during a period of some months, only one of aJiich was sub qui:truly released. And he stated at the same titre that he hoped their Lordships would receive that as a proof of the effieieney of those under his c immand. The slave tes.sle e he added, had received a great check, and would yet re ceive a mere decisive bow if it was not wholly put an end to. even Hugh a result was not beyond :his hopes. This was the Ignesuage of one who was entitled to some credit, and it afforded a, strong proof that the slave trade was not now in the flourish ing condition it was some time since. With regard to the loss di* life of our own people, he thought the Hon. Member had eery much overstated it, for with the exception of the Niger expedition three, or at most . four, per cent. was the greatest amount of death from all causes. He thought therefore that any interference now would be extremely Int un- While France was sending out 23 or 30 ships to assist e large force we ourselves had there, he thought he might venture to say that it was scarcely possible that a single slaver ehtild escape. Those who were engaged in that infamous traffic were beginning to think that the risk they ran in car rying out slaves was scarcely compensated by the gain which tepid accrue to them. He hoped, therefore, that what he said Would induce the Hon. Gentleman to allow the present operetions to go on without interference, for he had no besita. lion in saying that, with the additional force from France, an end would be put to the trade altogether. Any change in the nrgient p:oceedings would have another bad effect. It would desttey all treaties with the native chiefs, who, when they no ottger saw any difficulties in the way would, if our ships were withdrawn, send down loads of slaves immediately. Under allefeeee circumstances, and believing that the most serious mis chief would be produced if our forces were withdrawn, he should certainly oppose any attempt at interference with our present proceedings. ,Lord HOWICK could not allow this debate to be closed without expressing his concurrence in most of the opinions of t4O :11on . urable Member for Gateshead. He confessed that he fueene did not think that the mischiefs foreboded by the Hon. and Gallant Member who had just sat down, were at all likely tojoilow our interference with the course of proceedings which the, Government at present pursued with regard to the slave teade.,, He did not know but it would be a more wise and more ete effsil policy to withdraw our cruisers altogether. lie came titthat conclusion, because during a period of twenty years every new plan that was proposed, every fresh instruc tion that was sent out, every new expedient that was devised, Neas unsuccessful in puttirg an end to this trade. He was con • vlnced. therefore, that so long as the profits attending it were so:n i grmeus all the proj ec t s a d o pt e d t o pu t i t d own by f orc e w t continue t o b e unsuccessful. The Commissary Judge at_h , avannah, in writing to Lord Aberdeen, said that whatever -might be th e e ff ect of the steps taken ' by her Majesty's Gevernment, the self-interest of tho s e engage d i n th e t ra ffi c wohhl 'continue to baffle all their efforts unless other Govern ments, gave their assistance for its suppression. Other officers ill the same thing that th e s l ave tra d e was st i l l i ncreas i ng. sill in Cujia, in consequence of the increase of newly iitati?pentetl appointment,n e g roe s w4oewreevieneaof constant state of apprehension. allpyea that alarm, but one of two things cruisers along that island would, either go on increasing, and tu must happen—the trade f increase those alarms, or e et must be put an end to ' altoeethe s r if all a dread o protection t t i h o n e enesequenees that would be likely to follo n w m i was withdrawn. What really kept up the trade Te ta Cuba was ilia connivance of the Government offieers great g d ains evhieh attended the trade enabled th ose w h o were e it; to purchase their opposition, but if th e mot i ves to bribe them wee removed, and the apprehensions whi c h h e referred to were to continue, he did not hesitate to say that any course having such an effect would be more likely tQ . .uppress the trade than the proceedings which the uoyernment were at present adopting. He also agreed wit)) the Hen. Gentleman, the Member for Gateshead, th a t OUT interfeece e nee in this subject hall excited in foreign govern meets a feeling that we were interfering where we had no haziness. He would like to know how we ourselves should feel ii . ..Peesons in the employ and acting as agents under foreign ppwers, were continually reporting our cruelties, and holding up,oux o , fllee-s to the odium of their Governments. He con fessed he was not surprised to see the reluctance of foreign Governments to co-operate with them. The Gallant Officer - • had said that this was a bad time to bring forward such a mo- Ap t igu t , He owned he did not see that. lie ent irel y a pp roved of -, •thb- - "tclirtkeiprwd by the Hon. Gentleman. lie thought 7 - c' -o .tliat-thersyketrr 61 , an English and French squadron co-operating - - ' ' ": aldini; the mast ofAfrica, would not be productive of much - gYrTd. Ile was erettally afraid of the respective officers agreeing, or 4 ..: - ..Le- (Wetting too tench. He thought that the emulation which isee ::': 4, etehd be excitea the breasts of the officers of both nations '' ' .l-.-1 ' WA to 4 - __ln questionable proceedings. Again, if the ;had(.....,,_ - .1.. .•'.1....._ u..- 40 ,44,;,-.. ~, ~..t;,.... ....) 1...‘... t.1.L:1 a... J a, ,. ..1) . . officers of neither squadron could proceed to force, without the consent of the other, nor enter into treaties but in common, he was very doubtful whether their joint co-operation e ould lead to any successful result. He agreed with the Hon. 'ember for Gateshead that what would put down the slave-trade roost effectually was the extension of legitimate commerce.—( Hear, hear.) He did not wish to say anything harshly of the French Government, but he thought, that when that Government saw its subjects left behind in commercial enterprise, it threw obstacles in the path of those who had been more successful in their career. In conclusion, he saw with regret that the system of force was still to b 3 persisted in ; but as a treaty had Jast been concluded on the subject, he saw no advantage which would be gained by pressing the present motion. He thought the better course would be to leave it to her Majesty's Government to follow up their treaty, and if it should turn out that the ad vantages anticipated were not realised—that, instead of putting down the slave-trade more effectually, no other result fol lowed but increased expense to the country, he would then put it to the Right Honourable Baronet at the head of the Government whether he would not consider it more wise and more expedient to try a different course of policy from that which was at present carried out.—( Hear, hear.) Sir ROBERT PEEL said, the Noble Lord would not attribute it to any disrepect towards him, if be (Sir R. Peel) declined following the Noble Lord with regard to the policy of the convention which had been completed between this country and France. That subject would come on for discus sion upon a future occasion. He (Sir Robert Peel) thought that the Hon. Gentleman who had brought forward this motion had proceeded on very exaggerated and erroneous grounds. He (Sir R. Peel) would in the outset admit, that the measures which had been adopted by her Majesty's Government hall not been successful for the abolition of the slave-trade. He must also admit that the horrors of the slave-trade contined—he trusted that they were abated in some degree—but they continued to an extent which every friend of humanity must deplore.—( Hear.) He must, how ever, remicd the Hon. Gentleman, that when the proposals were made for the abolition of the slave-trade, it was foreseen that the measures which had been adopted would lead in some cases to an aggravation of the evils which were ia tended to be abolished. Those who had been averse to the abo lition of the slave trade, contended that any steps that might be taken for the abolition of the slave trade would tend to in crease its horrors amongst the illicit traders. The general feelings of humanity, however, prevailed over objections of that kind. The Hon. Gentleman had contended that, compa-, ratively speaking, the horrors of the slave trade had been less than had been represented. He (Sir R. Peel) held in his hand a copy of the evidence of a person who had passed two months on beard of a slaver. This evidence was of the most harrowing description. He could admit with the Honourable Gentle man, that the feeling respecting the slave trade had some what subsided in this country; but in England the people were subject to hot and cold fits. They would take up a subject with the utmost earnestness and afterwards look upon it with indifference. The evidence which he held in his hand detailed the sufferings to which slaves were subjected on their passage in the slaver. The witness said that the slaves frequently attempted to rise, but finding that they were unable to do so they begged to be allowed to throw them selves overboard. Many of them died of mortification f rom the wounds which had been inflicted with the thumb screws. The witness was asked if he had ever seen any merriment on board, and he said that he had on one occasion, which was that of the funeral of the slaves whe died. The rest of the slaves re joiced that one of them had been released from the suffer ings which they were compelled to undergo. The Noble Lord, speaking of the interference of this country with the slavers, said, " how indignant would we feel—how indignant every independent country would feel, if they were subjected to interference of the sort to which Brazil and Cuba were subjected ?" Why, they were subjected to that interference in consequence of the slave trade. So far from their having a right to complain of the interven tion of this country, it was this country that had a right to complain of the constant violation of treaties by Brazil and Cuba. He deeply lamented the failure of the exertions of this country for the suppression of the slave trade, but he still thought that there was a prospect of ultimate success ; and, therefore, it would be unwise in us to withdraw our efforts for the suppression of that trade. The conduct of Portugal within the last two years had been niost exemplary. The Portuguese had lent to this country the most sincere and cordial co-operation for the suppression of the slave trade. In two instances, two officers of the Portuguese navy had been promoted for having takers two slavers. In one case the Portuguese captured, on the 27th of May, 1844, a Brazilian brig called the Cassador, hawing 850 slaves on hoard. The commanding officer on that station recommended the guard marine for promotion to a lieutenancy, on account of the vigilance which he bad displayed for the suppression of the slave trade. , Tisat recommendation was attended to, and the Earl of Aberdeen had the satisfaction of congratulating the Portuguese Government upon it. In the other case, the officer also distinguished him self in the suppression of the slave trade, by effecting the capture of a S7anish slave-trading vessel. and in that case also the Portuguese officer was pro moted to a lieutenancy. Those promotions had produced the most salutary effect on the Portuguese navy. The conduct of Portugal with re , pect to the slave trade had been such as to deserve the grateful acknowledgments of every friend of hu manity. He believed that if a unity of action were determined upon between this country, France, and Portugal, to suppress the slave trade, their efforts would be successful. He trusted, thereon., that. the Hon. Gentleman would not push the motion to a division, as its effect would he to injure the efforts which this country was making. Although there had been great exiitnditure and much sacrifice of life in our efforts for the suppression of the slave trade, yet we hid the consolation of knowing that those efforts had tended very materially to diminish the h trrors of that dreadful trade. That the slave trade existed to a great extent, he was quite willing to admit, and, therefore, it was mare neces sary that this country should set an example of its efforts f tit the suppression of that trade. If they were to remove their squadron from the coast of Africa, the horrors of the stave trade would be further extended, and, ultimately, they would find it necessary for Great B: itain again to adopt the course at present pursued with far less chance of success than there was now Under those circumstances, he trusted that the lion. Gentle ma s would not pr ss his motion to a division. Sir C. N APIEII really behaved that if sufficiently energetic powers had been put in force the slave trade would long ago have been put an end to. Portugal, the country whence the stave trade had originally emanated, had taken steps to abolish the dealing in slaves altogether.—( The Hon. and Gallant Member was proceeding in his ob•ervations when an Hon. Member rose, and moved that the ?loose should be counted. Forty Members not being present, the House was adjourned. ) MOUS E OF LORDS, .I ,, ne 24. Their Lordships assembled shortly after Five o'clock this evening. Lent' CHARLEVILLE informed the House, that in con sequence of Lerd Gardnet's neglecting to attend his Commit tee, the consideration of the G' asgow Bridge project had been postponed. The Duke of RICHMOND observed that many of their Lordships were not aware of the great inconvenience arising both to public interest and private enterprise from such neg lect of duty as the N ible Lord (Gardner) had evinced. He was sorry to perceive the disinclination on the part of his Noble Friend to attend the duty imposed upon him and should move that a substitute be appointed to sup ply the place of the ab , entee Member, and that Lord Gardner be ordered to appear in his place in that House on Thurs day next, to explain the reasons of his non-attendance. He, therefore, took the liberty of proposing to their Lordships that the Select Committee be requested to recommend another individual in his place that the parties may not be put to a useless loss of time and expence, and that Lord Gardner be requested to state in his place on Thursday next his reasons for not attending the Committee. Lord BROUGHAM considered that Lord Gardner must have laboured under some misapprehension and did not intend any disrespect to their Lordships. It was a mistake to sup p: se that the attendance of Noble Lords in that House was voluntary, as every Peer ‘-as bound to attend, and the precedentscompelling attendance were numerous, and a fine of UP/. had in some eases been imposed. In one case a Peer was fined because he did not attend when requested, and he was committed to the Tower for refusing to pay it. Lord CAMPBELL had lately searched the journals of the House, in which he found innumerable instances of the House compelling the attendance of Peers not only for the service of the House but on Committees. It also appeared that all Peers were compelled not only to attend in their places when the role was called, but they were not allowed to leave the House until it adjourned.— (Laughter.) In the time of Charles I. they were net allowed to leave the House until the debate was finished. He rejoiced that the motion had been made. The Duke of WELLINGTON had not the smallest doubt that their Lordships had the power of enforcing the attend ance of Noble Lords, and that the Noble Lord hail not attended the Committee this morning frernlmere inadvertence. He thought it totally unnecessary to adopt any measures in consequence. The Marquis of CL AN RICA [IDE thought they should no only consider the subject before the House, but with respect to the great quantity of railway business before it. Those who were in the habit of attending the Committees had a great and onerous responsibility thrown upon them—( Hear, hear)—as they were entrusted with great and important interests in con nexion with the railway schemes before them. He put it to the House, whether .they ought no' to call upon those Peers in the country who had taken out proxies, to attend and hear their share in the additional labours thrown upon other Noble Lords. Lord BROUG lIAM said he intended to move that their Lordships should consider what steps they ought to adopt in consequence of the immense mass of railway business before them. He was about to move that a Committee of the Howe should communicate with the Commons' Committee on the subject. If all their Lordships were to attend, it would be utterly impossible to get through all the Railway Bills. The LORD CHANCELLOR put the motion that Lord Gardner be requested to attend in that House, on Thursday, at five o'clock, to explain his reasons for not attending the Committee.—Agr ed to. ABERDEEN RAILWAY COMMITTEE. A NOBLE Lott; said, as Chairman of the Committee, he begged to report that it had adjourned until half-past two o'clock to-morrow, in c - ,nsequence of the non-attendance of Lord Ormond. Lord ORMOND said he• was out of town when the sum mons was left at his residence, and that he did not, in conse quence, receive it until it was too late to attend today. COIIIION LAW PROCESS BILLS. Lord CAMPBELL said, at the earnest request of those for whose opinions he had a great respect, he had to lay two Bills on the table of the House, from which he trusted the public would derive great benefit.—(" Hear, hear," from Lord Brougham.) If he had had only to consult his own ease and comfort he would have washed his hands of these Bills, but being charged with a public duty he felt hound to bring them under the consideration of the House. Yet the public were very nearly losing a very great benefit.—(" [fear, hear," from Lord Brougham.) When this subject was last before their Lord ships the name of a respected friend of his (Mr. Sergeant Murphy) was mentioned in connexion with it. He was sure their Lordships would bear in mind that he said nothing dero gatory of that Learned Sergeant, or offensive to him ; on th 3 contrary, he must say that if he had been present he would have been aware that what he said ought not to have given him the slightest uneasiness.—( Hear, hear.) A misapprehension prevailed in some quarters as to these measures. It was supposed they would intrench upon the jurisdiction of the Irish Courts, and prove prejudicial to the profession of the law in Ireland, but he could assure their Lordships that a greater mistake could hardly have been fallen into. He hoped, however, upon a reconsideration of the measure :It i h n ßato th pu e orot o iti t o h nA e s r House, these misapprehensions would vanish, a n d t h e Bi ll would meet with a better fate. l M of ag th rer. m l w ea it , h are his ha N d o h b e l e e n a g od eos L sl e y ar m n i e s d . appr h LORDele7n ded T CHANCELLOR felt that he owed the Hon. and Learned Sergeant some apology for an ob servat i on w hi c h m ha a d rke f d all t e h n at (flotmhesehißmillsownera eformeraware occasion. He had re toa joke," that abyutatthe time he made that re mar k h e was sacrificedot corres pondence had passed on the subject between the Noble and Learned Lord and the Hon. and Le arne d S ergean t . He made the remark, however, in perfect good hum our , an d w i t h no intention of woudding the feelings of the Hon. and Learned Sergeant. The Bills were then read a first time. PROTESTANTISM IN MADEIRA. The Marquis of BREADALBANE said, perhaps he might putting a question to the be penuited to take that opportunity of 2111 F, SUN, LONDON, Noble Lord opposite regarding certain events which had lately • taken place in the island of Madeira. lie had been induced to bring this question before their Lordships from a strong feeling of the great injustice of the case. The sufferer had still been unable to obtain redress for the injury which had been done to him, and the same system of persecution was still practised to wards a most respectable medical man in the island of Madeira, a Scotchman by birth and a Presbyterian by faith. This gentleman had resided for a long time in the island, and had obtained the respect of all who knew him. He was a gentleman of great prudence, of sound judgment, and, he might say, of moderation in his views, notwithstanding that he had exposed himself to the persecution of some of the authorities in the island. The Noble Lord then detailed with great minuteness the course of proceeding which Dr. Kalley pursued after his imprisonment. Having appealed in vain to the superior tribunals at Lisbon, he was liberated on the Ist of January, 1844, after the remonstrances of Lord Howard. In May, Dr. Kelley wrote to Lord Aberdeen of the injuries he had experienced, and it was not till the 12th of January following that he learned that on the 7th of December previous his case had been decided against him. Besides the woman Maria Joacquina, whose case he had already mentioned, twenty-two other inhabitants of the island were similarly persecuted for apostasy, and a large body of men, headed by the British Conservator, sent to exterminate those who professed doctrines condemned by the Catholics. These facts were not asserted alone by the sufferers or repre sented by those aggrieved, but corroborated by a friend of his (Lord Breadalbane's), and their truth could not be doubted. He would ask his Noble Friend what this treaty was for, if it were not to permit British subjects to worship in their own dwelling-houses, and to celebrate their religious rites without any interruption whatever? He should be happy to hear fro.n his Noble Friend what rights and privileges British subjects possessed in the isle of Nladeria, after the treatment which Dr. Kalley had received at the hands of the Portuguese Government ? Lord ABERDEEN acid, although the Noble Lord had read the Portuguese treaty once, he would have done well to have read it again. The treaty was protective for Portuguese sub jects, and at the same time gave them no power of aggression. Judging of Dr. Kelley, who was a Presbyterian, from the pro ceedings of his fellow-labourers in this country, he suspected that the gentleman did not always indulge in very select lan guage with regard to the religion of the State—the Roman Ca tholic religion. He was in the habit of preaching in the Por tuguese language, and however much the natives might benefit by his predications, he thought his countrymen did not derive much satisfaction from them. The real object of the privileges mutually granted were by the treaty of 1810 declared as fol lows :—That British subjects should have free permission to enjoy their own forms of religious worship as freely as the natives, with the exception that their chapels should be on the exterior like private houses and without bells. This practice existed to the present day. It would be recollected that it was only last year that all the Acts existing against the privileges of Roman Catholics were repealed even in this country. It was only as recent as the time of Queen Anne that it was felony by the law for converting a Prctestant to Roman Catholicism. And any Portuguese seeing this enactment would naturally think he was entitled to reciprocate. In Portugal, however, there had been no in stance of any person having been put to death for religious prin ciples since the time of Martin Gonsalvez. As far as the pri vileges of British subjects under the treaty were concerned, they were intact, and would be resolutely maintained, and although Dr. Kelley, in the system of proselytism which he had been pursuing, had acted contrary to law, yet, perhaps, he was not punishable to the extent which it had been originally intended to apply. The authorities had acted prematurely and unwisely. In consequence of the irregular proceedings of the authorities in incarcerating him, he (Lord Aberdeen) had made a summary of the loss which he had sustained, and the remuneration which he ought to receive. The amount had been abrayed by the Portuguese Government, and had been agreed to, but before the payment of the sum, Dr. Kalley removed to Lisbon. But as he subsequently wished to return to Madeira, he said he would give up all claims to any compen sation from the Portuguese Government, if they would allow him to return. He had authorised her Majesty's Minister at Lisbon to consent to this proposition, if it coincided with the views of the Portuguese Government. The matter had been arranged, and he believed Dr. Kelley was now residing in Madeira, though he trusted he was not now pursuing the sys tem of proselytism, and preaching in the Portuguese language, which bad been so offensive to the authorities. Lord BROUGHAM considered that it was a new principle in the law of nation., that a person who was prosecuted by the Government, and whose sentence was afterwards reversed, should receive compensation from the Government of this county. He was of opinion that he had no right to com pensation. The Marquis of SALISBURY and Lord Beististowr rose tovetlier. Lord BEAUMONT said he was desirous of offering a few remarks. . _ The Marquis of SALISBURY—There is no motion before the House. Lord BEAUMONT—Then I shall make a motion. He, rose to make one remark. He must say that he regrettted as distinctly as his Noble Friend behind him (the Marquis of Breadalbane) the intolerance that prevailed in Portugal, and in some other countries on the continent, rtgarding religious discussion; but he could not help reminding the Noble Earl (the Earl of Aberdeen) and the Noble Marquis of the great mischief caused by the missionaries sent out to those countries by Bible and other societies. In this country there were socie ties possessing enormous wealth, who employed men of great talent and zeal for the purpose of making proselytes of persons, the religion of whose country was Roman Catholic, to their own faith. This was well known abroad, and those mission aries were directed not to lose any opportunity of gainieg over to their opinions those whom they are sent amongst. The understanding in treaties was that these persons should merely preach to their fellow countrymen, and not interfere with the religion of its natives. Therefor e, if the objects of these socie ties were carried out, they were carried out in direct opposition to the principle and understanding of the treaties, so that when any of these persons were taken up by the authorities, they could not claim the protection of the treaties, because they did not refer to the ease of proselytism. He had beard many com plaints of these missionaries from persons in a high position. He would, therefore, suggest the adoption of what had been partially recommended by the Noble Earl, namely, to erase from their own statutes, from their own practice, from their own laws, all that might sac: ur of that intolerance which they were now condemning in other nations. The work was commenced last year, end if INkble Lords had read the volume in relation to this subject, as he had done, they would have found that there were many statutes which were a disgrace to the Legislature. He would conclude by puttirg this question to the Noble and Learned Lord on the woolsack, whetl - e•, before that evening closed, he intended to bring in the measure sug gested in the volume to which he had alluded? 'f he LORD CHANCELLOR said he had never heard of a question being lut in the shape of amendment when there was another amendment before the Huuse.—(Laughter.) Lord BEAUNIONT—I then move for the correspondence between the Foreign-office and the Portuguese authorities. The Bishop of SALISBURY wished to correct a misstate ment of the Noble Lord ( Lord Beaumont) with respect to the Missionaries of the Bible Society, and of the Society for the Pro palation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts. He had fallen into an error, and he wished to inform him that the Bible Society was not in the habit of sending missionaries into any foreign countries professing the Roman Catholic faith, and that the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel confined their mis sionaries to the colonies and foreign dependencies of her Ma jesty. The Marquis of BRE ADALB.ANE was afraid that the ex planation of the Noble Earl would not be satisfactory to the religious people of this country—they would not be satisfied to hear that Dr.- Kalley would be permitted to return to Ma deira—to a country where he had committed no offence, except propa;sating his own religion. His answer was not satisfactory to him, nor was it satisfactory that they had laws in the Statute Book equally as persecuting as those of the Portuguese Government. He maintained that that Was no answer to the question he had asked. He would also add that the members of the Free Church of Scotland e - ould stand competition with the members of the Established Church of England ; they were liberal in their sentiments, they were friendly to other churches, and had made noble sacrifices in the cause of religion. Lord BEAU NIONT said he should withdraw his motion. ,4 ...Al, • The Earl ." of ABERDEEN wished to say a few words in reference to the remarks about compensation to Dr. Kalley. fle was illegally imprisoned for five months in opposition to law, the treaty, and to the Government, and although he was well treated it was yet thought that it furnished a fair case for compensation, which would have been given to him had he not objected to receive it, and expressed a desire to return to Madeira. The subject then dropped. TENANTS' COMPENSATION BILL. The Earl of SALISBURY said, as an important discussion was aoout to take place, he must take the liberty of asking the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies, before it com menced; 1 question with respect to this Bill which contained a prinoiple of compulsion, on landlords, with which he, for one, could not agree. He wished to know whether, if he withdrew his opposition to the measure, that the compulsory clauses would he withdrawn ? Lord STANLEY said the question resolved itself into tit's, whether by assenting to the second reading of the Bill, the Noble Lord committed himself to support the compulsory clauses of the Bill in its future stages. He did not hesitate for a moment to say that he conceived no Noble Lord would be so committed. Ho conceived, however, that, in assenting to the second reading, the House recognised the principle that it was expedient to secure by legislative enactments compensation to tenants for improvements which they had made of a permanent character at their own expense, by which they added value to the estate, and for which sufficient time had hot elapsed at the time of their leaving to give them fully those advantages which they looked forward to in making such improvements at their own expense. The question of the right of the land lord to exercise his right to prevent such improvements when he thought it necessary to do so, was quite open to discussion in the Select Committee. Those who were not satisfied with the Bill might reject it on the third reading. The Marqnis:Of SALISBURY said, under these circumstances, he should not press any opposition to the second reading. Lord BROUGHAM said as that was the last day for pre senting petitions against certain Bills, he should merely pre sent those with which he was intrusted, without opening them, one of which was from Lord Hastings, and another from Mr. Spooner, and would simply move that they be referred to the Railway Committees on the Bilk to which they related. He also moved the appointment of a Committee to confer with the Committee of the House of Commons with respect to the railway businessbefore their Lordships. , The motion was then agreed to. Lord STANLEY then moved the second reading of the Tenants' Compensation Bill. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY objected to the measure, as it would endow tenants with powers with which they ought not to be intrusted. He considered that landlords should maintain the same influence over their tenants as at present. For a tenant to be allowed to make . his application to the Commissioner at Dublin without the consent of his land lord would be most injurious. He admitted that the report out of which this Bill emanated contained very valuable information. He believed that the Commission did not owe its origin to the parties who had brought the Bill forward. He rather thought it originated with the great disturber of Ireland, and that to him alone was it indebted for its existence. He thought, also, that the labours of the Commissioners bad been con ducted with great rapidity. They only remained for a few most mischievous.llrds,sthws icoh p noe e t an hours in one place, unless where they were obliged to examine of witnesses from a distance, and he therefore trusted that no Parliament would legislate on that report. He would ask if the Commission itself approved of the Bill now brought for ward? If it did, then the House might be inclined to give credit to it, but if certain of the Commissioners told them that they could not approve of the machinery of the Bill, and if they added that the framers of the measure had de parted from their recommendation, why then it appeared to him that every individual in that House had a right to express his opinion fairly and honestly. This was not a question of party. It was simply a question between the landlord and his tenant. The Bill was defective in another particular, for even what might be applicable to one part of Ireland would not be applicable to another. He could not speak, indeed, of that part of Ireland in which he had never been, but he would not hesitate to give a conscientious opinion as to its effects on that part of the country with which he was perfectly conversant; and he did not hesitate to say that the results there would be d Peers dr st d T :hpwe h eoce e sl rsaHei f rb a aool c tuyp t i :pwentoasesesdintghot examined signed dr thisitoh b u eys measure, h3se t a6a h et:o a ur t f per, theeatta Secretary rrin g i great th a :o t e shitthat italma joritydid nutei n f e chistt,h would insist on bringing it forward. He did not think that the Noble Lord, after that paper had been read, would present this measure in its present state to the House. The Noble Lord did not say it was his Bill, but he certainly did introduce it in a long and eloquent and able speech, hut that speech did not convince his (Lord Londonderry's) mind that anything could be achieved by this most extraordinary mea sure. Why, one clause in the Bill gave the Commissioner in Dublin power, not only to decide in every case that might occur, but gave him also the power of indicting in some in stances a fine of 201. upon the landlord.—( Hear, hear.) What was this if not subjecting the landlord to the power of this gentleman? He did not conceive that this measure was at all required in Ireland—at least, in the north,of Ireland—and he should, with their Lordships' permission, just read the " rights" of the tenants in that part of the country. The Noble Mar quis then read a paper which stated that while the tenants or their descendants conducted themselves properly, and paid their rents, they should never be disturbed in their possessions. This stimulated their industry, and caused them to improve their farms, and what more did the measure before their Lordships require ? In ordi r to test the working of this tenant right, he should only have asked the Noble Lord (Lord Stanley) to examine into the circumstanees of those tenants, to look at the improvements effeete Iby them. He should like to know how they were to act with regard to their leases under this Bill. What they were to do with them ?—(Hear.) If new conditions were imposed upon the landlords these leases could be of no use. Why then, without any necessity, entail new arrangements upon landlorils and tenants who were now living happily enough . together. It was quite a mistake to sup pose that compensation was what the tenants required in Ire land. What the tenants really required was security for their tenures. They wanted something to stimulate theit exertions. Again it was a mistake to suppose that security to tenure was the same with fixity of tenure. Fixity of tenure implie.l a pro prietary right, but security to t-nure did no such thing. The one was mischievous ; the other, well-regulated, had quite the opposite tendency. On this particular point he should ask the House to turn its attention to the evidence given before Parlia ment on the subject. The Noble Lord then read an extract from the evidence taken before the House to support the opi nion he hail advanced. His own opinion was that the improvements in Ireland were great, and that if Go vernment left them to their own resources, they would be still greater. The Bill introduced by the Noble Lord was disapproved of by every Noble Lord connected with Ireland (with the exception he believed of two) who had seen it. It was disapproved of in the other House of Parliament by Mr. Sharman Crawford, and in fact, it was disapproved of univer sally by every one connected with Ireland. That was the actual state of opinion on the subject, and yet the Noble Lord pressed forward this measure upon the House.—( Hear, hear. ) He had stated his own opinion upon this most obnoxious Bill, he was supported in that opinion by other Noble Lords inte rested in the welfare of Ireland, but the power of Government was so great that he had but little expectation of their being able to stop its progress. He would now read the declaration to which he had referred in the course of his remarks, and he trusted that the sentiments contained therein wouid have their due effect upon the Members of the Government. The Noble Lord then read the declaration, which stated that they disap proved of the Bill introduced into Parliament, and while they admitted the principle that the tenant was justly entitled to compensation for all actual bona fi de improvements—( Hear) —they stated that they conceived the tendency of the measure as destructive to the rights of property and as injurious in its operation, and they hoped the Govern ment would not persevere with it. And (continued the Noble Marquis, emphatically) there are thirty-six signatures of your Lordships belonging to Ireland attached to it. He had now said all he intended to say on the subject. He had done his duty in that House, and he had done his duty to his tenants in Ireland, as his forefathers had done before him, and he could not, therefore, concede the right or the necessity of any appeal to a resident Commissioner in Ireland. _ ___ After a few words from Lord GOSPORT, which were almost inaudible in the gallery, but which we understood sug. gested the propriety of referring the measure to a Committee up stairs, Lord STANLEY said that he had at all times stated his anxiety that the details should be fully discussed in the Select Committee by those Noble Lords who were connected with Ireland. But he was not prepared to withdraw the Bill; on the contrary, he was prepared, if necessary, to defend its every principle. He thought, however, it might be possible to avoid any lengthened debate en the question, if it were uncle rstood that the measure should now be read a second time, the details considered in Committee, and the discussion take place on the third reading, The Earl of WICKLOW was fully convinced that the prin ciple contained in the Bill was a good one, and it appeared to him that the Bill very properly made it a compulsory principle. Until this Bill was introduced, he confessed he did not think that any man was of opinion that the principle ought to be otherwise than compulsory, for what was the ohj 'et of ap pointing the late late Landlord and Tenant Commission ? Their Lordships would no doubt recollect that a Bill, contain ing a similar principle, was introduced into the House of Com mons some two or three years ago by a Gentleman connected with the north of freland. That Bill was withdrawn upon the understanding that a commission should be appointed to investigate the matter, thereby indicating that the commission was to inquire and advise upon the best mode of granting com pensation to tenants without the consent of their landlords. Mr. Sharman Crawford's Bill contained precisely that principle, with almost all the exceptions and exemptions to be found in the Bill now introduced by Government. It contained one principle,however, which he was happy to say was not to be met with in the present measure. The former Bill gave tenants power to undertake works and improvements upon the land without giving soy previous notice of their intention so to do to their landlords. Now, in this respect the present Bill was a great improvement upon the first, for it required that previous to any works being undertaken a notice should be given to the landlord, and an inquiry instituted as to the necessity for them and their probable expense. The only question then for them to con'ider was this. Wes the machinery of the Bill sufficient to attain the object it had in view? For his ! art he thouelit the appointment of a local commission in Dublin was a con siderable improvement upon the suggestion, and he might here remark that it was only on that point that the Bill differed f, urn the recommendation of the Commissioners. It had been said that the principle of the Bill was a revolution of the rights of pro perty. and ho entirely agreed with - those who entertained such an opinion. He admitted that in this country the principle wouid not be tolerated for one moment, but in the present peculiar state of Irelend he thought something of the kind was absolutely and indiseensably necessary.—( Hear, hear. ) In that country improvement could not be made on the land, be ceuse here were cases in operation to prevent it, which could only be removed by legisla.ive interference. The countr was fertile beyond wha ny person who was unacquainted with it might expect, and vet, in the midst of all this fertility, the land was uncultivated and lying waste, while ground that could pro duce five fold more than it did, was in a most uncultivated state. What was the cause of this? Why the cause was that the landlord was either not sailing, or the tenant was not able to effect an improvement. The landlord would not or could not make an attempt at improvement, end as it was pretty cer tain the tenant was nut able to do so, he should sit down re peating his conviction that Government had very properly corn, forward with a measure well calculated to remedy this sad state of things.—( Hear.) The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said he had now heaed for the first time what was the object of Government in ap pointing the late Commission. It was sent to Ire l and, after Mr. Sharman Crawford's Bill had been disposed of, to see if it could not somem rl od l ef L r O g W revingmar compensation to tenants. remarked that he h a d had no The escoEvaerrl of WICKLOW other authority for making that statment other than that of the public papers. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE was not aware that the public prints had placed the same construction on the object of the Commission as the Noble Earl had done ; but be that as it might, he thund n oshing in the mandate of the Commis sion, which made; any allusion to the subject of compensation to tenant:. Nor did it say a word about the amelioration of the law of landlord and tenant ; but the Commission was simply to ascertain whether the ex'sting law could not be so alte r ed as to be calculated t o encourage the cultivation o f th e so il an d extend a better system amongst agricultu r i s t s , as we ll as t o improve the relation between landlord and tenant in that part of the United Kingdom called sreland. He denied that the principle of the Bill was to give compensation to the tenants for work they might have executed upon the land, whereby the owner in fee or the lessee was to derive a permanent benefit. That was a principle which had been much talked of, not only in Ireland, but in England and Scot land too, and it appeared to be generally admitted that some amendment ought to be made in the law of landlord and tenant at present existing in Great Britain. At all events, how ever, be would venture to assert that the opposition of the peo ple of Ireland to this measure would be withdrawn, if Govern ment would only consent to strike out one clause, the shortest, he believed, in the whole Bill; namely, clause 28, which enacted that this Bill shou ld exten d only to Ireland. But if such a measure as this wer e p ro p os ed for England there would he no end to the opposition which would be offered to it. Well, then, it was admitted that as the Bill was a violation of the right principles of legislation and the rights of property, it ought not to be applied to England, and he wanted to know what the peculiar state of Ireland was, that rendered such a measure as tire present necessary ? What was the peculiar circumstances in the state of Ireland which made it necessary for them to violate the just princ i p les of legislation and the rights of property ? Of all the countries under the power of Government, Ireland was the one in dealing with which they ought to be most cautious not to commit a violation of the right of property. The drift of Government, as dis played in their measures relating to Ireland, had hitherto been to assimilate the laws of the two countries ; and if they intend to maintain the union inviolate, they ought to show themselves to be unvarying in that course of legislation. Ireland was better now, in an agricultural point of view, than it had ever been before. lhe tenantry were not so suspicious of their superiors as they were wont to be, while they evinced a stronger inclina tion, to follow their landlords in the path of improvement. The real cause of the existing evils of Ireland was , tha t n o thing had been done to check pauperism. The population depending upon the land was becoming greater and greater every • day ; and he, therefore, hoped the Legislature would lose no time in taking the subject of pauper ism in Ireland into their most serious consideration. He hail seen by the public papers that the Prime Minister had been reported to have said, that in the promotion of this mea .sur e higher motives actuated the parties to it than merely the ; considerations of landlord and tenant. Well, he (the Marquis 'of Clanricarde) hail assumed that such was the case ; but if it ' were, he would ask was not the Legislature doing all it could 'to destroy the good feeling that now existed between landlord 'and tenant in that country? The Earl of WICKLOW begged to interrupt the Noble Marquis for a moment. He (the Earl of Wicklow) was ready .to admit that great improvements had been going on lately in Ireland in aericulture.—( Hear, hear.) The LORD CHANCELLOR then proceeded to put the 'question on the amendment, upon which The Earl of FORTESCUE rose and said he did not think he would be warranted in sitting there if he 'did not state it was his intention to give his most cordial support to the general principle of this Bill, without, at the same time, in any way committing himself to the details of the Bill. It was well known to every one in EnlanJ and Scotland (though of the latter country he could not speak from his own knowledge), that no landlord in those countries ever let a farm without first seeing that all the buildings and offices were in proper tenantable repair--( Hear)—or, if not, that he at least gave the tenant such a term of his farm as enabled him to do so.—( Hear, hear.) Many instances had occurred under his own knowledge, of farmers having taken farms worth a considerable sum, and to repair which the tenant laid out considerable sums from time to time, hut which, if the landlord was called on to do, would cost him several hundreds of pounds. Now, in such cases, he would ask what security had the tenant, unless he lead a lease?—( Hear, hear.) He would be certain to be evicted either at the caprice of the landlord, or at the expiration of his lease, if it should be a short one.—( Hear, hear.) It was to remedy such grievances as this that this Bill had been introduced, and to give 'the tenant a 'compulsory power over the landlord to recover in such cases, and therefore he fully approved of it, and was very glad that such a Bill had been founded on that introduced by Mr. Sharman Crawford in the other House, and• he would again repeat, that it should have his cordial support.—( Hear, hear.) In cases Where a good understanding should happen to exist between the landlord and tenant, the measure would be a dead letter; but under circumstances of a contrary nature he did think that the tenant should have a compulsory power of protecting him self against the landlord.—( Hear.) The Duke of RICHMOND said it would be impossible for him to give his support to the second reading of this Bill, if he had not heard from the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Co lonies that he intended to 'refer the Bill to a Committee, in WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE 25, 1845 which the various clauses would be reconsidered. At the same time he did think that the Bill, even as it stood, contained se veral provisions which should not only have the effect of law in Ireland, but which should also be enforced in Scotland and in England.—( Hear, hear.) It was a Bill founded upon jus tice and fairness, and so far from setting the tenant against the landlord, it would render the position of each still more satisfactory.—( Hear.) He would not detain the House fur ther, and would not have done so even now, but for the obser vations of the Noble Marquis who had just left the House, but to ,whom he would say that he hoped not only to see this mea sure carried for Ireland, but also a similar one for England and Scotland. —( Hear.) Lord MONTEAGLE said he would occupy the House but a very [few minutes. He was ready to admit that the present position of the tenantry of Ireland was such as demanded Par liansentary interference. He was ready to admit that there was a vast mass of the tenant population in Ireland in very great distress, and even destitution; but, admitting all this, he would ask, did this Bill propose a remedy for the mischiefs complained of? He had heard reasons adduced for sending the Bill to a Committee; but, in his opinion, the very same reasons had been given for not adopting that course.—( Hear, and a ) Not only was this Bill not in consonance with the principles of the law, but it would not even be tolerated in Prigland. Thus much for the landlord. He would now ad dress a few words in reference to the tenant; and he spoke under correction of the Noble Lord at the head of the Com mission in Ireland. There was a great spirit of im provement now afloat in that country.—( Hear.) And of all countries in the world where the principle of agricultural improvement could be effected by chemical and scientific in ventions, Ireland was the most adapted for the experiment ; but this Bill would go far to check and impede that improvement already commenced by these means there.—( Hear, hear.) Ireland was divided into small parcels of land called, by cour tesy, " farms"' in that country, but which would here require a new name to be invented for them. Drainage was prt posed to be carried on in one of these parcels, and the water was to be drawn off and collected; but where was it to go? Where was the water to flow? or, into what channel was it to be di rected ? The proposition was an absurdity, and affecting to encourage, would be the very means of preventing an effi cient system of drainage. At present a good feeling was spring ing up between landlords and tenants in Ireland for the purpose of effecting agricultural improvements on the estates. Lord STANLEY—This Bill will not interfere with them. Lord MONTEAGLE felt assured it would stop all such at tempts ; there were systems not susceptible of compulsion, and the interposition of Acts of Parliament, so far from stimulating, too frequently checked exertion. Southey had describe Ke hama as capable of assumingnine characters at once ; but the commission that had inquired into the condition of the landlord and tenant in Ireland had proposed that no commissioner should undertake the duties of adjudicating the rights of property of the whole of that country. A country of 20,000,000 of acres was to be brought under the review of one commissioner ; to such a provision he objected, and the Government at least ought to be invested with some responsibility as to the conduct and efficiency of its commissioner. He admitted much might he done for the Bill in Committee on its details, but would he be discharging his duty if he sent it to Committee before he saw any prospect of its being amended there ?—( Cheers.) He for one would not advance any measure sub siientio, of whose benefits he entertained a doubt. Disappointment and injustice had been the chief sources of calamity to Ireland, and this Bill would but excite hopes and fears in Ireland, the former never to be realized, the latter unfortunately too-well grounded. The only consolation perceptible in the Bill was the words " consoli dated fund," hence it appeared that all expenses created by the working of the measure would fall upon England. He could not imagine how any Noble Lord, cognisant of the state of Ire land and its existing condition, as respected the rights of land lord and tenant, could, doubting the efficiency of the Bill, give his support to its second reading. Such a man might sleep upon his pillow that night in peace, but he could not see how that course was consistent with his duty either to himself or to the country.—( Cheers. ) The Earl of DEVON did not ground his support of the pre sent measure upon the principle propounded by the Noble Lord (Monteagle), who had just sat down, that it implied an entire distrust of the Irish landlord, and he :should be reluctant to appear as a supporter of the o ßill pledged to such an opinion. Although lie was aware of what improvements might be ex pected from the Irish landlords, he also knew that there were many others from whom no co-operation could be expected by the tenant; but he concurred with the Noble Lord (Mont eagle) opposite, that entertaining the strong opinion he did,;the only course was to oppose the Bill. The selection of evidence under the Committee was supposed to:have been partial ; many had said that being composed of five Irish landlords is recom mendation would favour that class ; again it had been said that the interest of the landlord had been sacrificed to that of the tenant ; he felt surprised at such conflicting accusations and denied them both. No one would have introduced such a measure from a theory of preconceived opinions, but from a firm conviction of the benefits that it would entail upon Ireland. One of the great objects of this 13111 was to bring into opera tion the labour of the working classes of Ireland, as for, from four to five months in the year, the agricultural labourers of that country were not employed. He beseeched their Lord ships, in discussing this Bill, to consider the great difference beta een the condilon of Ireland as compared with England. In the former country there was a great deficiency of capital, with a superabundance of labour, which did riot exist in the latter country, and hence a measure of this kind was necessary to protect those who might make improvements in their laud, and to encourage them to greater exertions. Great allowance should be made for the difference in the condition of the two countries, and they should legislate accordingly. It would be necessary for him to go into the large blue-book before him, even at the risk of tiring their Lordships, in order to show the exact condition of Ireland, and the necessity for the improve. meets proposed in the measure under consideration. He denied that. the proposed Bill would interfere with the landlords in making improvements on their estates. In his opinion it would rather facilitate their opportunities than other wise. There were large tracts of land in Ireland which would soon be brought into cultivation and made profitable to both landlords and tenants, if this measure were carried into a law. The Commissioner's Report, so far front deprecating improve ments by landlords, expressed a strong opinion that the land lords should make every improvement they could in land, as far as it was practicable ; yet whatever the landlords might do to this effect, the Commissioners were of opinion that much in the way of improvement would still be left undone, and hence it was, for the object of inducing the tenants to take up and carry out such improvements, that the measure before the House was recommended. The Noble Lord here read several extracts from the report to the foregoing effect, com menting on them as he went along. Their Lord ships would recollect that a measure siniilar to this in effect was introduced into the other House of Parliament by Mr. S. Crawford, before the issuirg of the Commission. That was in 1833, and the measure was then supported by Mr. Wyse and Mr. Lynch, two gentlemen, than whom better land lords did not exist in Ireland. The principle was therefore not new. 'lndependent of this, he might say, that it was based upon the most carefully collected evidence. The number of witnesses examined by the commissioners, in all, were 303. Of these forty-seven were landlords ; 128 farmers ; the re /minder were undated. Out of this number filty-five consi eered the right way to protect the tenants was by giving them 'eases; while 146 decidedly gave it as their opinion that the beat mode of securing the tenant for the capital and labour he might expend on his farm, would be by a system of compensa tion similar to that proposed in the present Bill. These 146 were independent of many others,. who gave a more qualifies opinion in favour of this plan of comp nsation. He would read extracts from the evidence of several of the most important witnesses examined, to bear him out in the statement he had made. The Noble Lord then read the ex tracts to which he referred, from the evidence of Mr. Sharman Crawford, Mr. Balfe, and Mr. Buroes; the former an exten sive landed proprietor in the north of Ireland, and the other two intelligent farmers, their evidence being to the effect that interference between landlord and tenant on the subject of compensation was absolutely necessary. The measure was one which would secure both the property of the landlord and the tenant—neither giving undue privileges to the one or to the other. For many years there had existed a right, on tho part of the tenants in Ireland, to take away, at the expiration of their leases, the trees which they had planted during their tenantry. As the stumps were f: equently left in the ground, it deteriorated instead of improved. So that even at the present moment the tenant might leave the land which he had occu pied in en injured instead of an improved state—whereas, under the Bill, this would not be allowed, as conmenim ion from his landlord would be secured to him for the improvements which he had effected. It was only right that a landlord should not have the power of suddenly ejecting a tenant who had effected improvements on the land at his own expense, without making hint that compensation to which he was entitled, and which, if not afforded, might reduce him to a helpless state of poverty. Then the impetus which would be given to the improvement of the land under the security given to the tenant by the Bill would call into use during at least five months of the year, a great portion of the unemployed labour 'of Ireland. Then the Bill would not interfere with the contracts between landlords and tenants, only with those who would not enter into any specific contracts with their tenants. He should like to see contracts carried out to a greater extent than hitherto, to see facilities afforded to those desirous of doing so, and that means should be taken to have such contracts registered. Be sides, a tenant would feel greater ease when there was a fair un derstanding between him and his landlord. The Irish landlord under the Bill would be placed in the voluntary position of an Eng lish landlord. Ha landlord would not place the necessary out house s, &c., on the land which he let, and the tenant was compelled to do so at his own expense, he considered that a reas)nable compensation should be secured to him by law, in the event of his leaving the lar.d before he had derived suffi cient benefit from the outlay. He was, therefore, extremely anxious that this Bill should be read a second time. When it was in Committee, those minor alterations which Noble Lords thought necessary, would, of course, be made. Lord CAREW, who spoke in so low a tone that scarcely a word he uttered reached the gallery, was understood to say that he considered alterations by the tenants ought not to be made without the consent of the landlord, but believing that tenants were, in many instances, entitled to compensation, he should not object to the second reading of the Bill. Lord ESSEX said he was one of their Lordships who had some property in Ireland, arid that he should not support the second reading of the Bill if improvements were to be made without the consent of landowners, or if the compulsory clauses were retained. The Marquis of SALISBURY would vote for the second reading, reserving 10 himself the full power of voting against any of its provisions in a future stage. A INoble Ea r l seemed to avow that the Bill would be of no use, unless it contained compulsory clauses. From this opinion he dissented, and would hereafter express himself more fully on that head. If his Noble Friend the Secretary for the Colonies thought it worth while to maintain the Bill without the compulsory clause, he would support it, but otherwise he would be willing to crush it on the second reading. The Earl of RODEN would oppose the second reading of the Bill, and would not support the principle of Government interference between landlord and tenant. On behalf of the teoantry of Ireland, as well as on behalf of the landed pro prietary, he would oppose the Bill on the second reading and every other stage. The Marquis of NORMANBY wished to say a few words on the subject of the Bill. He was one of those who was op posed to the appointment of the Commission, not that he doubted the diligence of the Noble Earl, but because he thought it would raise expectations which could not be justified. He thought it was better that the Government should have brought in specific measures for the evils which existed in the landlord and tenant system in Ireland, than such a sweeping and com prehensive measure. The Noble Earl (Devon) had not ans wered any of the objections which had been urged against the Bill, and seemed to doubt whether it was carrying out the sug gestions in the Report of the Commission. The Government ought to take upon itself the responsibility of the disappoint ment which would be felt in Ireland from the failure of this Bill. Should his Noble Friend (Lord Stanley) say that he thought it probable no other measure could be brought forward this session to remedy the evils which existed in the landlord and tenant system in Ireland, he would vote for the second reading. The position of the tenant in Ireland entitled him to protection, and to that part of the Bill he would give his unqualified support. The Bill in its present shape was obviously impracticable, and he thought it had better be deferred until the other measures to which reference had been made were introduced. By putting forward this Bill against the practical opinion of all parts of Ireland, they would oppose the feelings of the whole of the country. It was wholly with this desire that he had said those few words, and he did hope that the Bill would be de ferred until the other Bills of which he had spoken should be introduced. Lord CAMPBELL said that the aw of England was de• cidedly in favour of the chief enactments of the Bill, and when ' he looked to the enactments of this Bill he found that the Government officer was the person who was to carry them out. He was quite ready to give every facility to the arrangements of the Bill, and he should therefore be glad to vote for the Bill, so far as it went, to promote the advantage of Ireland. But this was a direct interference with the right of property. It was in fact neither more nor less than oblig ing a compensation for those alterations which were made upon the estate, whether it was to its advan tage or its prejudice. The law, where there was a lease, pro vided for the evil, and how the Commissioners could come to a conclusion whether these improvements were to the advan. t age or to the prejudice of the estate he could not possibly ima gine. If the landlord and tenant were agreed as to the terms of the agreement, no Bill was necessary. But, suppose the landlord to disagree, the Bill might provide a remedy. They were very much indebted to the Noble Lord for his labours in this field. But during the whole of the time for which a lease was granted the tenant could not be ejected. On these grounds he thought it necessary to give his vote against the Bill. Lord STANLEY—I shall not, at this late hour of the night, attempt to enter into any discussion respecting the merits of this Bill. lam certainly not prepared to enter fully into the feelings of the Noble Marquis and of my Noble Friend who has just sat down. Those Noble Lords might well con ceive that, from their knowledge of their own estates, and from the way in which they were managed, that no complaint could possibly exist as to the management, at least so far as their own experience was concerned, of their estates. But a difference may exist as to the future, and I do not apprehend that any difficulty will arise which will at all affect the working of this I Bill. I should feel, my Lords, as if I had no task to perform if I had merely to answer the objections of the Noble Lord, but I feel conscious that I have something more than that to do. And when I look at the objections of the Noble Duke on the cross benches, and feel that those observations require that the Bill should be extended to England and Scotland, I am com pelled to observe that there is a great difference between the tenant in Scotland and the tenant in England. lam aware that the principle of compensation should be allowed, and that a tenant should receive the advantage of his autlay. In Eng land the relation between landlord and tenant is essentially dif ferent from that in Ireland. In either of the other two countries there was an allowance made for the improvement which had been made upon the estate without any regard to the ultimate benefit of the alteration. But in this Bill the compensation had only reference to the permanent advantage of the property, and in proportion to the advantage which a tenant had wrought upon the estates was to be the compensation. and that, too, not in accordance with the legal rule, but according to the prin ciple which has invariably been recognised as the rule by which compensation should be granted. Ihave paid great attention to this subject, and I am compelled to observe th A there is but ltttle attention paid to the improved relation of landlord and tenant. It is supposed that the mere title of right exists in consequence of the occupation of the land, but I am prepared to show that this is not a fair representation of the positions in which the landlords stand. They have another and a greater tie. Almost all the land in Ireland is held by a supposition that a loan has been granted for the cultivation of the land by the original issue; and I think that this Bill is very desirable for establishing the principle that some arrangement should be made by which the permanent improvement of the soil should be effected.—( Hear, hear.) Can you deny that on the vast face of the surface of Ireland there is room for improvement to be effected by labour? Can you deny that in a vast portion of that country there is not a superabundance of labour wanting a market ? Those are the circumstances under which I ask you to give security for labour. The Noble Lord sitting at the table had referred to the security given in England by lease, and also by custom which was recognised in the courts of law for compensation for improvements effected without even asking the leave of the landlord. In certain parts of the country it was well known that the custom of the country entitled the tenant to claim compensation for having manured so many acres on the surface of the land. That custom is held as good in the courts of law. —ollear, hear.) Then, again, in the case of drainage in the greater portion of England. Where a large quantity of drainage is necessary them is no more common system of drainage than to drain with pollard wood. This is not a per manent drainage; it may stand for twenty years, yet, when ejected from the land, the tenant can come upon the landlord for compensation, and this by the custom of the country is acknowledged and acted on in the courts of law. That is the law and the custom of England ; and I a.ls you to apply the same law in Ireland that is thus acknowledged and acted on in England. That is all we ask be: this Bill, merely to allow the tenant compensa tion for the improvementi he may have effected. What are the apprehensions which are conjured up by this Bill? The apprehensions are that the Irish tenants shall, out of their own pockets, and at their own expense, lay out a fearful and alarm ing amount of money for the improvement of the properties of their employers. This is the apprehension which we are told to guard against. I think that apprehension is in itself most unfounded, for I have no doubt that the tenant will outlay out his capital indiscreetly or improvidently, or unskilfully in Ireland, however he may do so in England, where he is pro tected by the drainage he has wade. Lord BEAUMONT said that if the custom of the country were allowed, still it was left to arbitration what amount the land ought to pay, but it ought also to be remembered, that with regard to drainage, it would only be allowed for two years, and with regard to dust, one year. Lord STANLEY—I know this, that without the consent of the landlord certain improvements may be made, and the tenant when removing from the land, can require the outlay which he has expended in drainage, without the consent of the landlord. Surely, if this law be good for England, it may with safety be applied in Ireland also. But the tenant has no right in Ireland to apply absolutely his labour or capital to the improvements of his land, without in . the first place consulting the wishes of his landlord. He is bound by the terms of the Act to cioomunicate to his landlord his intention to begin those improvements, and with that view he is bound to obtain from the Government a form of application with instructions as to the oroper course to be pursued. He is compelled to sub mit that proposal to hislandlord, and for greater security, and in order that the landlord should know it, the Commis sioner is compelled to serve another notice on the landlord, and then the landlord may, if he elsoses, object to the undertaking. And now with regard to this question, and it is an open ques tion, whether the landlord may be permitted to place his veto on the proceedings, and, for my own part, in the present state of Ireland, I do not think that he ought to be allowed to pla:e his veto on the proceedings. Ido not conceal my opi. nion. I think that if this is allowed it will be a serious detri ment to the efficiency of the measure. It has been . objected that there should be any compulsory proceeding between the landlords and tenants, and it has been argued that a voluntary agreement would be the better system. I think .that it is an important feature in • this measure that there should be one registry office for the whole of Ire land ; but, so far from that being a constituent principle in the measure, if it be objected to, by the House, Ihave no desire to adhere to it. I think that the whole principle of the Bill, if carried out, will increase the letting value of the estates. It has been said by a Noble Lord ( Lord Londonderry) that drain ing is going on on scientific principles in many parts of Ireland, and that it we only leave. them alone they will do exceedingly well.—( /leer, hear.) On a well-managed estate that may do, but, on the other hand, it is likely to perpetuate the present miserable state of Ireland, and hinder improvements which are so much required from being carried into effect. It has been said . that the landlord has no means of knowing whether the work is done; but there is a provision in this Bill by which the landlord or his agent has power to see the work in every case in process of being done. How can we secure that this compensation will be awarded? It has been said, secure is the tenant .a long lease, or give him a fixity of tenure. 'Sow, that is what the Legislature c +mot do. A good deal has be'n said about the infringement of the rights of pro perty, and yet you say, secure to the tenant a long lease, or fixity of tenure—a thiag which it was not in the power of Parliament to do, and an interference which he repudiated on the part of the Government altogether. What we do is this. We will not interfere between the landlord and the tenant ; give him a long or a short lease as you will, but if he lays out money upon the land, by which its value may be increased, you are not to take advantage of his time, labour, or capital, and he, being a tenant at will, turn him out without giving him some compensation for the im provement he has made.—(Hear, lo ar. ) The question then is, who shall decide the amount of this compensation ? If you leave it to the landlord, it is quite clear he would have an undue advantage over his tenant. You must then have some disinterested person to go between the landlord and tenant to award it. Some may ask why not let them go to a court of justice ? But, my Lords, in many cases a great proportion of these improvements are ola trivial character in point of ex pense, and a litigious, angry, or prejudiced landlord might drive his tenant to so much trouble and expense as to render the compensation absolutely nugatory to the tenant. We de sire therefore to establish a cheap and speedy tribunal for the adjustment of these questions, and in establishing such a tri bunal we reduce as much as possible the discretionary power to be given to the presiding barrister. We lay down the principle which shaU guide him, and the arbi:rator will thus have little to.. decide except the fact of the time when the improvement was undertaken, the amount of outlay, and number of years which has expired since the outlay was commenced. We propose that neither the landlord nor the tenant shall be subject to any expense in going to this tri bunal, and the effect of this will be to secure an impartial and unprejudiced arbitration. Can you expect to get a more im partial decision in any other way? Can you obtain the same advantage of impartiality by referring the question to a jury or the revising barrister? The public may complain of the ex pense thrown upon them, bat the mode of adjustment proposed by the Government is the cheapest and the best that can be devised for securing the interests of the landlord and the tenant. But if you think, after due inquiry, that a reference to a jury or an arbitration is more satisfactory, then in the name of God adopt either of these proposals, but whichever you choose de fine the principles upon which the compensation shall be awarded. I think it is hardly necessary for me to detain your Lordships upon the importance of inducing landlords to encourage and advise their tenants to lay out capital in the im provement of the land they occupy ; but I may here remark, that while all admit the policy and importance of taking steps of this nature, you one and all oppose a practical measure brought forward for securing compensation for the improve ments. The benefit and importance of the suggestions made by the Commissioners are generally admitted ; but when a practical measure is proposed for carrying them out you feel called upon to oppose it. Well, then, 1 ask you, under these 'circumstances, to go into Committee, and in doing so to bear in mind the state of Ireland, apart from the state of England and Scotland ; and I ask you to bear in mind the inability of a great portion of the landed proprietary of freland to contribute towards the .improvement of the land, and the great importance of encouraging the tenant to make these improvements by giving them that compensation in Ireland which custom 'gives to the tenant in England. Do not let the people of Ireland have cause to say the House of Lords is studious to provide for the interests of their own body, but have no con sideration or regard for the interest of the occupiers of the land. Many Acts of Parliament have been passed. which have received the sanction of your Lordships, for enabling the tenant for life who may be advanced in years to recover from his successor compensation for the money be may have laid out in improving the property, and I ask your Lordships to compare this with that of 'the landlord and tenant who has no lease, and point out to me the difference between the two cases. 'I hat is all that we call upon the landlords of Ireland to do. Let them take whatever precautions they like to secure that the improvements shall be real; but secure to the tenant of Ire land that he shall haie the same remuneration which you have secured to yourselves and to persons in your own position. In making this proposition we have not taken the opinions of men of any party, or of persons; in anywise interested. We have taken the opinion of men of the highest character and the g.eatest experience—men separated from each other by party and local interests--we should deserve the want of confidence which our conduct would produce, and would be responsible for the consequences.—( Hear, hear.) I do not call upon your Lordships and Parliament to agree to this Bill at once in all its details. But Id) say that if your Lordships reject the Bill without sending it to a committee, without fully examining all its details, we shall not be responsible for the consequences. The Earl of ESSEX put a question to the Noble Lord re lating to the 10th clause. Lord STANLEY said that it would be for the Committee to report upon that clause as well as upon every other. • In answer to a question from the Earl of RODEN, Lord _STANLEY said that the Commissioners had not been unanimous in the recommendation that the adpeal to the Goe vernment Commissioners should be final. ' The Marquis of LONDONDERRY (amidst loud cries of Order, order,") read an extract from the report of the Com missioners, in which an appeal to the assistant barristers was recommended. Lord STANLEY briefly replied. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said he could not agree that this was not the introduction of a new principle. He thought it was a new principle to compel the landlord tCI pay for an expenditure of which he did not app rove.—(H, hear.) He regretted that the inquiry had been set on 'foot with so much ostentation, for it had raised expectations amongst a eoe well known to be too easil excited to hopes which could pl not be realised by any measure,y and which could only suffer the most painful, and, he feared, the most disastrous dis. appointment from the poor result of the inquiry in this Bi ll.-- ( Hear, hear.) His Noble Friend had intimated to the House that he should be most desirous of passing this Bill i f the con!' pulsory power should be thought fi t by their Lordships that it should be omitted in Committee. He wis hed to know it be was wrong ? Lord STANLEY said that his Noble Fr iend was entirely wrong in that point. What he said was on l y that he did not go so far as some of his Noble Friends, who thought that this Bill would have no beneficial tendency if that compulsory power was withdrawn from it. He thought that it was a great ad vantage. He did not conceive that the Government officer SV3S the principle of the Bill. He was ready to have any other ar bitration which would secure to the tenantry tages and security for compensation. With regard to the G: vernment o ffi cer and the Commissioners, the/ did not wish .o pledge themselves to their adoption, but leave it to discussion the same advan the Committee. He reserved also, on the part of her MajegtY Government, the option of receiving the Bil l at all, after these alterations were made. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said tha t it was the first time his Noble Friend had mentioned the last sentenc Te two former he had repeated for the third time. He b oug ht that it would he advantageous to the honest tenants, tinny, rnigLt be a weapon of endless vexation and torment t h e hands of a litigious and dishonest tenant. The system? e j t , agreement was one which was fast gaining ground in Ireu ti L and which would prevail to a grea t er extent in some nolo: hence. It was the b ounden duty of their Lordshi to ad Lordships a it for the purpose of giving the fullest eff ect to• their pl_eL Every tenant who wished to improve his land, should lorh; his landlord in the first instance as to the means by w hie his would effect his improvementi. Well then, hearing from Noble Friend that he did attach importance to this Act, yet if he still stated that anything would accrue from this Bill to the benefit of Ireland, after altering the objections; parts, he (Lord Lansdowne) was not prepared to oPP w wo e , Bill going into Committee. He would say, before he sat do _ that he did look upon the Bill as one of great importance.T. Ireland, and also of equal importance to England and Si t' land, for though the position of the countries was not identical, yet he would say the time might come when the same prieff, might be recognised in a Bill of a like effect for countries. re ex t r a few The Earl of DEVON said he would occupy but :xtracts words in explanation. The Noble Earl then l%ii e j i the from the proposed Bill, showing the manner (I - i n refer power of the Commissioner in Dublin was restric' e ho od take ence to the duty imposed upon him in the part be 5 " as The media.or Marquisbet ween LONDONDEßßY conteade4 rd and tenant. that the q ast Noble Earl who had just sat down had said nothing b at , " .,„„ a the the House knew already, merely reading an extract report.—( Laughter, and cries of " Divide.") Strangers were then ordered to withdraw. • The Flo h u t se e then second d n divided, r e a w g he . . there . ... . .......... .. For Against it -14 Majority ........... ............ The House adjourned at a Quarter past Twelve. PARLIAMENTARY DIV ISI (From the Votes and Proceedings of the House Of tN " ... TUESDAY, JUNE 24• Motion made, and Question proposed, the Diu his OXFORD AND RUGBY RAILWAY Dl"' be uovr out the read a third , time :"—Amendment proposed, to leave_ „ u pon ria,. " now," and at the end of the Question to add the wor ow , stA nd P day six months :" — Question put, " That the wor d " That of the Question." Tl;va House divided: — MAJORITY—AYES, 132. o„nder Acheson, Viscount Ebrington, Viscount 3 1 u rral ' e li, id, J ° ' P Acland, Sir T. Ent vvisle, William see .. , ph Acland, T. D. Escott, Bickham Ne vule i ; John Ashley, Lord Esmonde, Sir T. Now P - , Lord count . Sorre Baring. F. T. Estcourt, T. G. N'ortbland, `'h3 Baring, W. B. Fitzroy, Lord C. ,Brien , J• J. Barnard, E. G. Fbrman, T. S. 0 Connell' 31. , Barrington, Viscount Fuller, A. E. C ' ' •"g ton, J' '' wit Barron, Sir H. Gladstone, W. E. r'''eoii, yise. Berkeley, Craven Gladstone, Captain raial .1. 0 rattch , j a nia Berkeley. Grantley Glyune, Sir S. Fattiaot. Blackburne, J. I. Gore, Roberti r nuipS,, „„ o bert Blackstone, W. S. Granger, T. C. Bodkin, W. 11. r o isfora , " i ir. Greene, Thomas Ro hle Cl!' G. Borthwick, Peter Gregory, W. H. ~,,o und , C. es Bramston, T. W. Harcourt, G. G. . ,eu, Count Buck, W. L. Hawes, Benjamin Russ Buller, Charles Heathcoat, John Sandonv , r 13uller, Sir J. Y. Henley, J. W. scroPe_, , 6. 1,0 rd . s e yrnou. , „. R. Carew, W. H. P. Henniker, Lord Sheridsliv.,!'• J. Castlereagh, Viscount Hill, Lord E. Shirley , I ' Ler a a• Chelsea, Viscount Hill. Lard M. o ,.. nier setv ~ vt, C. Childers, J. W. Holland, Robert Christie, W. D.John Cicinents, Viscount Ho lme s, .W. Hos, W. A'Court Stels• W. 3'. Clive, Viscount Howard, Philip H. Stuartt,ii, George Clive, E. B: Howick, Viscotmt Tllor u i " e ' John Codrington, Sir W. Ingestre, Viscount no d, R. Trev, ~, v • ~. , mir B. Colebrooke, Sir T. Inglis, Sir R. H. Troubrid,c Coote,Kemble, Henry Courtenay, Lord Labouchere, Henry Tyrrell, ~1 da Cripps, William Leader, J. T. - Verner, '-' °l° t Darby, George Lefroy, Anthony iscoun °Svtan.aiiiretl,d, li' • - Davies, D. A. S. Lemon, Sir C. 'Vivian, J. I! ._ Dawson, T. V. Leratox, Lord A. • • J• Ln ni '' Vivian , Deedes, , William Listowel, Earl w a il C. B. -Denison, E. B. Mackenzie, W. F. • H. Warbur o , Dennistoun, John M`Geachy, F. A. Wawa , J'.T' tam Divett, Edward M`Taggart, Sir J. Wemys, tAIP Douglas, Sir 11. Mahon, Viscount T V: i f' : c c:: : 1-I ' l' er-u'r:l"... Wilde, Sir T. Douglas, J. D. S. Martin, C. W. Darlcan, Viscount Mildmay, H. St. John Wood , T C E h t a l, r E I 0 „s e ' . Hayter, W Duncan, George Miles, P. W. S . G. Dandas, David Mitchell, T. A. • . , Shaw, Frederic. Du Pre, C. G. Norris, David MINORITY-NOES, 95. - . - ---- - --- Ackers, James ' - East, James B. Maule, Fox Ainsworth, Peter Evans, William Muntz, G. F. ~ Arehbold,,,Robert Farnham, t.:. B. Newdegate, C• ..7 . , t Arkwright, George Fel;den, William Newport, Vise Ow" Attwood, M. Fremantle, Sir T. Ogle, S. C. Balllie, H. J. Gaskell, J. M. - Ord, Willialn Baird, W iliam Godson, Richard Oswald, Jaglaw, Bannerman, A. Gore, W. 0. Pendarves. f'• Barneby, John Grey. Sir George Philips, Grogan, 31.nr1ce_,,,,, Beam, John' Edward Polhill, frel 11 en ti tick, Lord G. Halford, Sir H. Ricardo, J• L. Boresford, Major Hand.ton, Lord C. - Ross , Th' vid ! r ' . ' p e r' liouverie, E. I'. Hamner, Sir J: Scot t, Ro Bowes,,John Hastie, Archibald Smith, A. Bright, John Hatton , Cap tain Smoßett, kiehod Brockhdiurst, J. Ikathcote, G. J. Spooner, RI 0. liv Brotton, J. Hinde, John H. StanleY9 ."7,,rd Buller, Edward Houldsworth, T. Strutt, VP ~ liusfeild, William IffigheS, W. R. Cartwright, W. It. Irton, Samuel Chapman, Aaron Johnstone, Sir I. ThomPO''' F. J. Clerk, Sir G. . Langston,J, H. Tollcdp ache ' . Cockburn, Sir G. Lascelles, W. S. Train, GO,. Sir J . ..A Collett, W. R. Lawson, Andrew TrollopHor.,- T T a h n o c i r g e e d r , ' , l s t .L A l: ern o Walker, ii.... Collins, W. Loch, James rh sir J • Copelaad, Alderman Lockhart, William IN as ' 0. G. Craig, W. G. Lowther, Sir J. ward ,IL W. Dick, Quffitin Lowther, Colonel NVils ' here, .v.. 0. wrig htson , Dold, George Mackenzie, T. Drummond, H..H. Maclean, Donald t.l o ' s ' ..rE . C Duli, James Mangles, sir nulicombe, T. Marjoribanks, S. Dolled'''. [5OlO Glsborne, Buncombe, A. - Martin, John PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS TUESDAY, JUNE 24. C _A n os g. The following Bills were read a third Ous t 7,k: Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Rallw Oxford and Rugby Railway. . _—_,—,-------- Standing Orders Committee, ,-Resolution reporter6—;fringtoli " That,. in the case of the Ceckermouth alder\\ uo'n'siefers:. Railway Bill, clause and amendments on furth are o f sil,`l a nature as may be entertained by tion of • report, the said clause and arnendroent_a, slia' think tit." . Repot to lie on the table. the Rouse, 11 . toy/ The following Bills, ding with further amendolent2Srd'-erij' were referred to the Select Committee on Stan Edinburgh and Northern Railway (No. 2). Docks- Runcorn and . Preston Brook Railway and Armagh, Coleraine, and Portrush Railway. into C 0 115i' The report of the following Bills to be deration to-morrow : Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole Railway. Wear Valley Railway. Middlesbro' and Redcar Railway. FI IC. 13 LL ° i 46 ' ---- NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE- s d a yd r ,r lJ h og' West London Railway,—Third reading, L eno rt, ' Diss, Beceles, and Yarmouth. Railway',-' %tel l '' day , June 26. „ocester ,41),.., Birmingham and Gloucester Railway ( 6 jauct ly sions, Stoke Branch, and Midland Railway s It'll'''. Aoft Third reading, Thursday, June 26. 1 0 Liverpool and Bury Railway,—Third reading, June 26. Aing 1111" d Cork and Bandon Railway,—Third rcam---' . June 26. • ----....1.1............ ".."'°. --......"'.. g ODCf' 0 1'6 Is jot ..------ THE gt —AIM OF ALDBOROUGH .101° j;e-clicilliteir, PILLS. -- An astounding cure by this tiracelous_rop's Je.....T0 every means hsd failed—See extract of his l',, a , t. JO Pt dated " Villa Messina, Leghorn, February x_istiiitioor.,4o Professor Holloway.—Sir, I beg to acraint Y °ll ol d or d ier have effected a cure of a disorder in nil firer . -- ,ed IP t hs which all the most eminent of the faculty at beut n d eve' l l 0.. , the continent had not been able to effect, naPiti7boroug "and waters of Carlsbad or Marienbad. (Signed) the li"filol-, These wonderful pills will cure any diease o f t FroP'` ). ho u he 3 stomach. Sold (also Holloway's Ointment) 8 ;; ;ce alaY ~i i ii9. lows 's establishment, 224, Strand (whem au • i the 6 gratis), and by all medicine vendors throgh°4 n 10a world. f 184vf 1 949 , BELGIAN FUNDS, JUNE 21.---L°Bll fit/ Lo s" ,', t., g ' bills ; Ditto, 1844, 1021 ; Ditto, 1898, 77i; IV, , ate '' b 1021 bills; Bank, 641 bills.—Exchange on I --n 82i. Or d' na O n_c il BIRTHS . ith scl. ' i t f l e tte of 2 A o . th a it e m it t. i O S e_ t o h in 7 cle,9,tihowinesr,t.o,ftaheeowni.fe of Henry' Sra_ • ce , portlo . the ° w n . a •da COP in O th n e th ß e ny 2 a l i st isT i a n y st y ., , t o l f i e a l s a o d n • y . of N or`{ P uff ' of ° G. N i c o le' inst., in to On the 21st inst., the wife of the Rev. C . ' A. Ott er ' daughter. ..... Tai On the 22d inst., atUpper Hoinerton• 311 ' . f Li' of a son.le °- On the 22d inst., at T . Torkington, Esq., of a daughter. ara Ou the 22d inst., at Blackheath► Mrs. Edsv slobolll 'of a daughter. f •1• unbrid On the 23d inst., Cl t n the lad,' 0- at ap 0 , D.C.L., of a son. ge_w ells, thew 1 virsuord, ----------- d o °lll o .11.411111 ED • iiictisr ~,f, t On the_ 17th inst., at Edwarsten, Suffelak; Ooldie, EN., of the Middle Temple, b ,ri'lLtadtol3 'ailir Harriot Ann, eldest daughter of the late Cal" Thomas mer, R.N.. of Holbrook Hall Suffblk. list, valo On the 21st inst., at St:John's the En w ite ""..:, $ 0 Frederick, third son of the late James flebblethr oaiihew of Leeds, to Louisa Percival, youngest &welt° Forbes Walmisley, Esq., of Westminster. Po tts, 1 0 1 1 N O g h n t n h g e 20th n i inst., t. Clapham-Eli za Dl E'?et hom,vinfoen of Rog er 9 ° Peter Jaci"t) On the 20th inst. at Brighton, Da* v 3 te'' Shoe-lane, London. ~y'ill►s +m On the 21st inst., at BrOMptOn, j 4 4, Man, Esq. Cooper,. of On the 22d inst., Mary, wife of Tho mas 1- „..„, DA , On the 22d inst., Fanny: daughter of Peter xJ-7 Compton House, Axbridge, Soraersetshire. Lo r .,Aon: Printed and Fabl;shed by YURI& So. 1 ' o f !12 ra p st The sos.oupotb.7ooootl Strawi, in the 173recinet of the Savoy, • ' Middlesex, Wednesday, June 25, 1845. ./. SR I'S e a „ R AII] S•ittl ItOT T ...t ery AN - T m 4 Ele d at 1