The Sun. — London, England, 1832-03-17 00:00:00

C. (x , BANK OF ENGLAND, MARCH 13, 1832. THE COURT of DIRECTORS of the GOVERNOR and COMPANY of the BANK of ENGLAND give Notice, That a GENERAL COURT will be held at the Bank, on TnuasnaT, the 22d instant, at Eleven o'clock in the forenoon, to consider of a Dividend; and also that another GENERAL COURT will be held at the Bank, on TUESDAY, the 17th of April next, from Ten o'clock in the forenoon till Four in the afternoon, for the ELEC TION of a GOVERNOR and DEPUTY GOVERNOR for the Year ensuing (which will he declared that evening), and the same Court will be continued, by Adjournment, and held at the same place, and during the same hours, on WEDNESDAY, the 18th of April next, for the election of Twenty-four Directors (which will also be one of the Quart*-rly General Courts appointed by the Charter), and the Election of the Twenty-four Directors will be declared as soon as the Scrutiny is over. Printed Lists of the Proprietors, having Votes, will be ready to be delivered at the Bank on WEDNESDAY, the 28th March. JOHN KNIGHT, Secretary. N.ll, by an Act passed in the 7th year of the reign of Ilene 111 , no person will be entitled to vote at the said tlection who shall not have been six calendar months possessed, in his own right, of the Stock for which he shall then give his vote, unless the said Stock shall have been acquired, or shall have come by bequest, or by mar riage, or by succession to an intestate's estate, or by the custom of the City of London, or by any Deed of Settle ment, after the death of any person who shall have been en titled for his life to the Dividends of such Stock. SIR WALTER SCOTT'S POETICAL WORKS, WITH ILLUSTRATIONS BY TURNER. Preparing for publication, uniformly with the Waverley Nov,-Is, to be comprised in Twelve V 01,., at s s. each , THR ENTIRE POETICAL WORKS of Sir WALTER SCOTT, Bart, including the Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border, and all the Minor Poems, the engravings on steel by the most.eminent ar tists, each volume having a Frontispiece and Vignette Title Page. This Edition, which will appear in Monthly Volumes, as will be afterwards more particularly an. nounced, will contain the new Introductions by the Author, and be illustrated by twenty-four Designs, by J. M. W. Turner, R.A., of real scenes described in the various Poems, the whole of the Drawings made expressly for the Present Edition by Mr. Turner in July and August, 1831. These illustrations by this celebrated artist (each volume having a full Frontispiece and Vignette Title) are as fol lows :—The Minstrelsy of the Border—Carlisle Castle— Carlaverock Castle—Jedburgb—Kelso (frontispieces)— Johnny Armstrong's To wer—Lochrnaben Castle—Small ., holm Tower (near which Sir Walter Scott lived when a few years old) —Hermitage Castle (vignettes)—Sir Tris tram--Dryburgh Abbey (frontispieces)--Bemerside Tower, known as one of the resorts of Thomas the Rhymer (vig nette)—The Lay of the Last Minstrel—Melrose Abbey (frontispiece)—Newark Castle—Selkirkshire (vignette)— Marrnion—Edinburgh, from Blackford-hill (frontispiece)— Ashiestiel, the residence of the Author when the- poem was Written (vignette)--Lady of the Lake--Loch Katrin—lsland, Ben-venue (frontispiece)—Loci► Achray and the Tro. lacks, from Stewart's Inn (vignette)—Rokeby—Mort ham (frontispiece)—Bowe's Tower (vignette)—Lord of °the Isles—Loch Coriskin—lsle of Skye (frontispiece) — Staff / (vignette)--Bridal of Triermain—Skidda, from the Lake (frontispiece)—Mayboro (vignette)--Dramas—Ber- Wick, from near the Scottish gate (frontispiece)—Abbots ford (vignette). As a number of Mr. Turner's drawings are ready, they will be seen at Messrs. Moon, Boys, and Graves, 6, Pall mall, for a week after the 14th instant. Printing for Robert Cadell, Edinburgh ; and Whittaker and Co. London. NOTICE TO FAMILIES, TAVERN-KEEPERS, AND THE TRADE. NOW on Sale, at CARTER and Co.'s, 2, Chearide, near St. Paul's, Ninety Pieces of BRUSSELS CARPETING, the best quality ever manu factured, price 39. 10 4 . per yard. N.B. Many of the Patterns have been drawn at a very greet expense, and were designed exclusively for the LARGE UPHOLSTERY Establishment that has re cently suspended payment. Also, 500 HEARTH RUGS. March 5, ISM MINERAL SUCCEDANEUM FOR FILLING DE CAYED TEETH, without Heat or Pressure, and IN CORRODIBLE ARTIFICIAL TEETH, without Wires or other Ligatures. MONSIEUR MALLAN and SONS, Sur geon Dentists, No. 32, GREAT RUSSELL STREET, BLOOMSBURY, and 9, HALF-MOON STREET, PICCADILLY, grateful for the high and eXtensive patronage which has so eminently distinguished tkeir professional exertions since their arrival in the British Metropolis, respectfully announce to their Friends and the Public is general, that they still continue to restore DE CAYED TEETH, with their celebrated MINERAL SUCCEDANEUM, so universally recommended by the Faculty of London and Paris. The operation of Filling Teeth is performed in a few seconds, without the slightest Pain, heat, or pressure. They also FASTEN LOOSE TEETH, in a manner singularly efficacious, and SUPPLY WHOLE or PARTIAL SETS of TEETH formed of the shove INCORRODIBLE MINERAL, or of Natural Sub- Stances, without WIRE or other LIGATURES—guar/in teed to answer every purpose for Articulating and Masti llating.—Charges as in Paris. The Faculty are respectfully invited to witness the sue "idol result of the Mineral Succedaneum. ADVICE. —When Men of Education and professional skill use persevering endeavours to discover the most safe and certain method of treating a c tvr prevailing diseases, the successful result of their expe ience is the best proof of superiority. Messrs. GOSS and Co., Surgeons, have been induced to make the cure of the following the object of their par ticular study, viz., a certain disorder, frequently contracted in a moment of intoxication, and its concomitants, Stric tures and Gleets, which, by an improved plan, are speedily and effectually cured ; as also debility, whether arising from Bacchanalian indulgences, long residence in warm climates, or a secret solitary vice, too often unhappily pur sued by the youth of both sexes, in the one causing steri. lity or barrenness, and in the other a numerous train of nervous diseases, which, if not timely remedied, termi nates in impotence and consumption. In that distressing state of debility or deficiency, whether the consequence of such baneful habits, or arising from any other course, by which the powers of the constitution become enfeebled, as regularly educated Surgeons of London, they offer a firm, safe, and speedy restoration to sound and vigorous health. • Messrs. GOSS and Co., exclusively professing the cure of these particular complaints, in order that they may not b e , by a Mistiken few, marked with the obloquy so justly attached to the ignorant empiric, think `it but justice to themselves to state, that they have been properly educated and initiated into every branch of the profession (certifi cates of which, from different HOSPITALS, and testi monials from the most eminent Professors, they have to convince any inquirer) that the success resulting from their endeavours first induced them to quit the practice of the general practitioner; and they presume that their preten sions constitute a fair ground for the unprecedented confi dence with which they have, by the Public, been so libe rally honoured. The result of a long and extensive practice has enabled them, by a superior method, to remove Venereal Com plaints however inveterate or complicated, without sub jecting the Patient to the least restraint in diet or exer else ; and in recent cases, where an early application is made on discovery of the infection, they frequently perform 1 a cure in the short space of a few days. The unprece- I dented success of their mode of treatment, which has never been known to fail in one single instance in a practice of `.`, twenty years, during which period many thousand persons of both sexes have been cured, even after severe and inju rious methods had been pursued by other practitioners without effect, induces them to thus publicly offer their advice. To he consulted daily, by Patients of either Sex, with secrecy, &fleetly, and attention.—Letters from the country, containing the particulars of the case, enclosing a remit tance, duly attended to, and Advice and Medicine for warded to any part of the world. GOSS and Co., M.R.C. Surgeons, No. 11, Bouverie-street, Fleet-street, London. Just published, Twenty-first Edition, 1- The £GIS of LIFE, a familiar commentary on the above Dieeases. 2. The SYPHILIST, a Treatise on Venereal Com plaints. And 3. HYGEIANA, addressed exclusively tothe Female Sex. May be had at 23, Paternoster-row, London ; Port e r, 72, Grafton -street, Dublin; 86, Trongate, Glasgow; at 9, C altonal stree;t,ritlwinnburgh; Wrightson, Birmingham; üßa ' Ino and Reid, Bristol; Weller, Chel t e nham ; Loder, E l i cadge ; Trewma g ni E n ; Woad, Huntingdon ; Hatt, 1 Le ek; Gore and sta. I. ?eter ; Deck, Ipswich ; Hobson, i i i platt end Todd, sy,, fh . l 77lZ c l o ; Bawler , Manchester ; and for Co d ., Brodi Norwich ac l I 091.d0n and Lewndes, and Slattenr, d o wding,Saliebury ; °ltit Y ,W iadlor i and of all Booksellers. ,ffrritelle. each. • • .J4 L ' ;Irtile' , l v;C - :•:-.:\ :.$4.?.. ,5),,, _---- ~c. (, I t 1;01 , ''N -- , 1 , t , ~,,,- ~.7 ~...,, 4 2,-..*------- nn ~„...• ~.,.,, .:__.. e• K (rA it ~.......,‘„,..,,.,,,„„ _..„ •4 `kV, 'i/ ' .. . 6 4- ' -6 -e.'..4) , s-, ---A -V , %LAY' - ..... 411 .1111/. i - 1 1 0414 , , irk - I t 0 4'l l -- .1 1: , ;1 : , : 9 ' . ' , , , ,iff,,L,, •i b V 1.,/ 1 PI _, V. LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 17, 1832. (PRICE 7D.) (No. 12,328.) This day was published, in 1 vol. beautifully embellished with a Portrait and Twelve Plates, price 21s. bound, MEMOIRES DE HORTENSE, DUCHESSE DE ST. LEU, EX-REINE DE HOLLANDE. Suivis des Romances, composees et mises en Musique par Elle-meme. Printed for Henry Colburn and Richard Beritley, New Burlington-street. POPULAR NOVELS, &c. Lately published by COLBURN and BENTLEY, New Burlington•strtet, And to be bad at all respectable Libraries. I. THE EXQUISITES: or, a New Portraiture of EXCLUSIVE SO CIETY. 3 vole. 21s. __ TALES of MY TIME. By the Author of•" Blue- Stocking Hall." 3 vols. 111. The ROMANCE of REAL LIFE. By the Author of " Pin Money," and the " Manners of the Day." 3 vole. TALES OF LONDON. By au Antiquary, the Au thor of " Chronicles of London Bridge." 3 vole: VALPERGA ;- a Roreanri. By the Author of " Fran kenstein," and " The Last Man." 3 vols. 21s. TALES OF PASSION: By the late BARRY ST. LEDGER, Author of " Gilbert Earle." 3 vols. FOR CHILDREN CUTTING THEIR TEETH. The following recent case is submitted to the Public : To Mr. Hallow, Chemist, 2, High-street, Islington. Stn,—l have great pleasure in giving my humble testimony to the efficacy of Mrs. Johnson's American Soothing Syrup—expe. rience has taught me .its value—as 1 have been the mother of 13 children, and have used the Syrup with 11 successfully. Two of them had fits, and must have died but for the blessing of the above Syrup. Having heard that there is a spurious article called " Soothing Syrup," I am particularly anxious to caution parents from purchasing it, as I have never known any but Mrs. Johnson's that has been used with success. I shall be happy to state the same to any lady who may wish to call on me. I am, Sir, your humble servant, Jan. 25, 1R,32. ELIZA DUTHY. 13, White Lion-street, Pentonville. _____ The Genuine SOOTHING SYRUP may be had as above, and of the Proprietors' Agents ; and parents should he very particular to ask for JOHNSON'S AMERICAN SOOTHING SYRUP, and to notice that the names of Barclay and Sons, 95, Farringdon-street, London (to whom Mrs. Johnson has sold the ri-eipe), is on the Stamp affixed to each Bottle.—Price 2s. 9d. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 16. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool sack at five o'clock. The Earl of ROSEBERRY presented a petition re lative to the claim to the Earldom of Stirling, and gave no Ice that on Thursday next he would move for a Se lect Committee to inquire into the mode of election fur representative Peers in Ireland. Lord Aloarrni, and others from the Commons, brought up two private Bills, . . The Earl of SEFTON presented a petition in favour of the Factories' Bull. Lord KENYON presented a petition against the new system of education in Ireland. Lord LORTON presented petitions from Newry, and several other p 1 ices, to the same effect. Lord KING presented petitions from Belfast and places in the county of Limerick, against tithes in Ireland. Earl RODEN presented a petition from the county and city of Cork against the repeal of the Union, Reform, and the new system of education. Lord ELLENBOROUGH asked of Earl Grey whe ther he had made inquiries as to whether the Royal assent ought not to be given to the Zemindar of Nozeed's B‘ll, before it was considered by their Lordships? Ea.' GREY had made such inquiries, and the result was that, in his opinion, it was not necessary, but if it had he would have been prepared to have given such assent en the part of his Majesty, as it was equal either way. After some further observations between Lord ELLEN BOROUGH, Lord TEYNHAM, and Lord WHAANCLIFFE, the conversation dropped. PLURALITIES BILL. Lord SUFFIELD stated that he had several im portant amendments to propose to this Bill, and he wished to know whether it would be against the rules of the House, that those amendments should be printed and laid on the table, previous to their Lordships going into Committee on the Bill? Earl GREY stated that such practice was against all precedeot.—the usual course being, when the House went into Committee on the Bill, for Noble Lords who had amendments to bring forward, then to propose them, and to ask that the Committee ought to stand over till those amendments were printed. Lord ELDON concurred entirely with what had fallen from the Noble Earl. The calls for the Duke of Wellington resounded at this time from all parts of the House. The Noble Duke rose, but gave way to Lord SUFFIELD, who wished to know whether the Archbishop of Canterbury had any objection to the Bill going into the Committee pro forma, for the purpose of his moving the amendments, and then that it should adjourn till they were printed ? The Archbishop of CANTERBURY complained of the Noble Baron having taken him by surprise, as he had not heard one syllable of the Noble Lord's intention to say a word upon this Bill till he came into the House that evening. The Committee upon this Bill had been delayed from time to time—the Session was now get ing on, but at the same time there was no desire on his part to refuse any reasonable request. The Bishop of LONDON could not consent to be party to the Noble Baron's proposition. All that he could consent to was the postponement of the Committee, pro vided the amendments of the Noble Baron were worthy of consideration. Lord SUFFIELD then stated that he would give notice, that on Monday next he should move for leave to bring in a Bill, the object of which would be precisely the same which the present Bill professed to have in ♦iew. REMEDY AGAINST THE HUNDRED BILL. The Duke of RICHMOND moved the second reading of the Remedy against the Hundred Bill. Lord ELLENBOROUGH thought it expedient that the Bill should extend the Remedy to cases of destruction of thrashing machines, which at present it did not do. There was no reason why agricultural machinery should not be protected as well as manufacturing machinery. He supposed that the leaving thrashing machines out of Sir Robert Peel's Bill on the subject was a mere oversight. The Duke of RICHMOND said, that this was merely a Consolidation Bill, and that whether it was by an over sight or not that thrashing machines were left out of the former Bill, it was not intended at present to make any alteration. Lord MELBOURNE was of opinion that it was not by oversight that thrashing machines were left out of the former Bill, but that it was done advisedly, and it was net intended at present to make any alteration in that respect. The Earl of WICKLOW thought, as the Noble Lord and Noble Duke appeared to be at variance on the subject, and to know nothing about the Bill, the second re a di ng ought to be postponed. The Duke of RICHMOND knew a great deal about the Bill, but did not think that any alteration ought to be made at present. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY thought it ex tremely hard that when the windows of his house were demolished, be bad no remedy against the Hundred. He submitted that the case of the demolition of windows by mobs was one for which redress ought to be afforded to the injured party against the Hundred. The Duke of WELLINGTON observed, that this de molishing of windows was a case in which the middle classes were particularly concerned. As for himself and some others, if their windows were demolished, they could afford to pay for replacing them. But then tradesmen and shopkeepers were peculiarly liable to have their win dows demolished by mobs, and as the window-tax often fell heavily on them, it was hard that when their win dows were demolished, they should be left without a remedy. He thought that agricultural machines ought to be protected. Lord MELBOURNE still thought that the distinction between thrashing-machines and ethers had been delibe rately and advisedly made. At present it was not intended to make any alteration in the law, either in that or any other respect. Tire objoct of the present Bill was merely to consolidate other Acts. He doubted the expediency of prudence of extending too much the remedy against the hundred. - Lord ELLENBOROUGH persisted that the protection ought to be extended to thrashing-machines, and gave no tice of proposing an amendment to that effect in the Com- mittee. Lord MELBOURNE still thought the remedy against the hundred did not generally operate as a protection to property, but as a fine for the loss upon those who had no opportunity to protect the property. The Bill was read a second time. BELGIUM. The Duke of WELLINGTON then rose to bring forward his promised motion relative to the affairs of Belgium. The House would recollect that when he gave notice of his intention so to do, he bad stated that his object was to bring before the consideration of their Lordships a speech delivered by M. Perier. If that speech to which he referred had merely ap peared in the newspapers of the day, he should not have thought it necessary to call the attention of their Lordships to it ; but as that speech had been circulated by authority, and as it contained a review of a vast number of transactions, and also took, what he certainly considfred, a very erroneous view of them, tranaatetions wkh veliialtirtrajesty's Governinini were concerned, he thought it was his duty, for the sake of his Majesty's honour, and for the honour of the coun try that he should bring the subject forward, in order to request of their Lordships to look into the documents, in order to see whether his Majesty's Govern ment did or did not concur in the statements that bad gone forth. For that purpose he should begin with drawing the attention of their Lordships to the particular passages in M. Perier's speech, which he wished particularly to notice, namely, those with reference to the foreign policy of France. He would begin by calling their Lordships' attention to some passages of the speech on which he meant to com ment ; and the first was as follows : " The Revolution of Belgium broke out at the close of Sep tember, 1830: but such was, at that moment, the general conviction of all persons as to the advantages of maintaining peace, and consequently the respect due to treaties, that no one at first thought of seizing that revolution as an advanced position against the European system, nor of making use of it as an arm, menacing alike peace and the treaties on which it is based. Perhaps the French Government could then discover some embarrassment. But the rapid march of events, and the sympathies suddenly awakened in favour of Belgium, the considerations of neighbourhood, and the interests of frontiers, decided the Government of the King to support the Belgian Revolution, always by laying aside previously all ideas of am bition, and consequently avoiding all grounds of collision with the other Powers. This was the means of rendering this protection efficacious to Belgium ; it was an opportunity of explaining fairly to Europe the true spirit of the Revolution of July in its exterior relations. France of July was about to establish her diplomacy; upon this first step depended the nature of her relations with the other Governments and people; in this was comprehended her futurity of peace or war. Well, then, gentlemen, the conduct of Government at that epoch, in affording a pacific, but efficacious support to the Bel gians, was approved of by the country, salutary for Belgium, and decisive for the system of peace. Let us not lose sight of this point of departure, since the policy of Government has had a continual reference to it, and because it could not at the present moment be consistently reproached for its fidelity to principles which had been unanimously recognised. Such was the well-understood interest of the Revolution of July, in its material as well as its moral relations—for if a war party had existed at that time, which, regardless of the horror of a revolution, whose moderation was its force, should have called for invasion and conquest, what could it have required, what would it have been able to accomplish in the then military situation of France after the dissolution of the Royal Guard, the dismissal of the Swiss, the division of our force in Algiers and in Greece, and, lastly, the desertion organised by the spirit of party, and the employment of extraordinary troops in the west and south P The most declared advocates of war would then have been compelled to acknowledge (all other considerations out of the question) that the state of the army rendered this line of conduct absolutely necessary, even though a more enlightened policy had not pointed out the prudence of it. But as it was, the Government did not _hesitate to-del dare that It would regard as an act of hostility against itself the entry of foreign troops into Belgium. The promptitude of this declaration, and the firmness with which the established principle was defended, have been, I affirm with ut hesitation, the salvation of Belgium, and the foundation of her independence." Every man who had read that passage, or indeed any part of the speech of the French Minister, must be aware, that although it might in some respects deserve the ap plause bestowed upon it by the Noble Earl on a former night, yet that the intention of it was to encourage the morbid desire now existing in France, and which had always existed there during the last forty years, to ac complish aggrandisement by arms. What related to Ancona in that speech sufficiently showed its design.—(Hear.) He would also direct the notice of the Noble Earl to ani,ther part of the speech of the French Minister, which adverted So the intimate alliance and union between this country and France, there called " a measure of efficaciousness." He feared that it would be " a measure of efficaciousness" in forwarding the views of France.—(Cheers.) He heartily rejoiced at the cordial good understanding between the two countries—he admitted it to be a measure of ne cessity, second only to the greater necessity of maintaining the honour and interests of Great Britain. The Noble Earl would find, however, that she could not be united to France alone ; but that if the peace of Europe were to be maintained, she must also be in union with the other great Powers of Europe.—( Hear.) The affair of Ancona Was a trifling warning of what might occur hereafter—of events tending both to the dishonour and disadvantage of Great Britain. When he spoke of the morbid desire of aggran disement in France, he begged it to be understoed that no man was more sensible of the benefit of peace than he was ; but while anxiously endeavouring to secure that be nefit, the utmost care ought to be taken that no sacrifice were made on the part of this country either of character or advantage.—(Hear, hear.) The transactions to which the speech of the French Minister referred, commenced in July, 1830. After the Revolution of Paris, the King of the French, Louis Philip, was recognised as Sovereign, and be was admitted a party to all treaties and alliances. That very admission placed him under certain obligations, and one of the most important of those was, the engage ment with the House of Orange. If, on the other hand, the King of the French encouraged the revolu tion in Belgium, he broke a solemn treaty, not only with his country, but with the King of the Nether lands. But the fact was directly otherwise. If the Noble Earl would grant the papers, with a motion for which he (the Duke of Wellington) should conclude, it would appear, that from the moment at which the Revolution in Belgium broke out, to the latest hour the last Government was in office, the French Government never did promote or encourage the revolution in Belgium. On three dif ferent occasions the French Minister had voluntarily de clared that measures had been taken by his Government to prevent any assistance being given to the rebellious Bel gians, and no patty in France had even contemplated the fitness of affording assistance. Up to the very last me r meta that he (the Duke of Wellington) was in office, the French Government was anxious to a degree, in sonic manner or other, to re-establish the House of Orange in Belgium. Even in the January after tke dissolution of the last Cabinet, a letter from the Prince of Orange showed that an attempt had been made by the French Government to maintain the authority of the House of Orange. He (the Duke of Wellington) hoped, therefore, that the Mi nister who made the speech from which he had quoted had done so without knowledge of the real facts and cir cumstances of the case. The British Ministry had kept nothing concealed from France—they communicated all intelligence regarding the designs of the House of Orange, and of the intention of the King of the Netherlands to apply for aid to the Allied Powers ; and they were fully convinced of the sincerity of the French Cabinet, for the Ambassador in London had expressed his fear that his Court would not be able to maintain peace if there were any armed interference by other nations in the affairs of Belgium. Another circumstance evinced the feeling of France throughout the transaction ; her Minister had ad mitted at once that Luxembourg stood on a different fuoting, inasmuch as it was part of the German Confedera tion ; and while be objected to the 'ending of troops into Belgium, he had not resisted the dispatch of an expedition to Luxembourg should it be deemed necessary. It was known that the restoration of the House of Orange by a wintery force was impracticable, after the Dutch troops had been driven front Brussels. With these facts before it, he (the Duke of W.) thought that this was a case into which Parlisment should inquire by the production of pa pers; and as a precedent for his motion, he begged to re fer the Noble Earl to a preeeeding of the same kind, in which he (Earl Grey) had been concerned, when he had procured the production of a document to set right the conduct of this country in relation to a passage in the Speech of the King of the French. He only required that that precedent should be followed in the present instance; and he therefore moved an Address to the Crown for ex tracts from, and copies of certain correspondence between the French Ministry and the British Government. Earl GREY—If the documents for which the Noble Duke had moved were laid upon the table, the House would readily believe him when he stated that they would he found to contain nothing derogatory to the Noble Duke's Government, or to the honour of the country. To the manner in which the Noble Duke had brought forward the subject, and to the facts be had stated, he (Earl Grey) had nothing to object; on the contrary, he felt it his duty to confirm those facts, and it was possible that that confirmation might supersede the necessity of laying upon the table the papers which the Noble Duke was anxious to obtain, and which, he (Earl Grey) contended, could not be produced without inconve nience. He had heard the speech of the Noble Duke with great satisfaction—the principles it enforced met his ready assent—he acknowledged the importance of good under standing, and even of a union with France, and he ad mitted that the value of that union must depend upon the fact, that it was consistent with the honour and interests of the country. The honour and interest of Great Britain Iressitzrhad-esated-on a.former occasion)--ahould be the first object of every Ministry, and if it could be shown that be (Earl Grey) and his colleagues had neglected them, then, and not till then, should they be open to condemnation.— (Cheers.) When the Noble Duke warned him not to maintain the union with France separately, be admitted the correctness of that line of policy, for it was of the greatest importance to maintain the connection between England and France without diminution of the good un derstanding with the other powers of Europe. Hitherto it had been so preserved, and sure he was that -foreign States had received no just cause of complaint against Great Britain.—(Cheers.) The Minister of this country had acted firmly and decidedly, and the result had been the preservation of the national character, and the national interests. He now came to the particular object of the Noble Duke's motion. The high authority of the speech of the Minister of France, he (Earl Grey) did not dispute, but he reminded the Noble Duke, that it did not appear in that authentic and official form which would render it a fit subject for a Parliamentary motion. He need not en ter into much argument to show that nothing could be more inconvenient, nor more likely to lead to unpleasant consequences, than to make speeches delivered in the Chambers of France or in the Parliament of England the subject of quesrion and dispute on either side of the water. He (Earl Grey) stood in this difficult situation : he could not he called upon to explain the speech of the French Minister, and at the same time it was not expedient for him to make any harsh comments upon it. He might, how ever, say, that he had looked over- the correspondence to which the Noble Duke referred both before and since the notice, and that the statement in the speech of M. Casimir Perier was not correct. He was not sure that the passage read by the Noble Duke positively bore the construction put upon it; and if he (Earl Grey) admitted that France did aid the Belgian revolution, it certainly fol lowed as a consequence that the Ministry of that country had been guilty of a breach of good faith. He doubted if it were the intention of the French Minister to say more than that the revolution having broken out in 13,Igium, his Government had acted upon the principle it professed, of protec , ing the revolution so far as to prevent the inter ference of foreign Powers to suppress it. He (Earl Grey) bad no hesit.tion in subscribing implicitly to the statement of facts made by the Noble Duke. The French Govern ment not only did not profess to encourage, but expressly disclaimed all interposition. The whole correspondence, as the Noble Duke bad stated, was conducted in an amicable spirit; and if it were not presumptuous in him (Earl Grey) to say so, he might add, that the proceeding was high .y to the honour of the Government of the Noble Duke. Not only was there no evidence of intention to interfere but the evidence was most complete that on an application to the Government of the Netherlands for military assistance from this country it was immediately and at once refused. If any 'imputatiois were intended against the British Go vernment of that day, the Noble Duke could not be more anxious to repel it than he was. In the course of the correspondence, although anxiety was expressed that there should be no intervention of foreign force, there was nothing in the way of menace on the part of Great Bri tain. Farther, he begged leave to remind the Noble Duke that the words of the French Minister were very gene ral, and did not seem directed against this country. A re ference to all the circumstances of the case chewed that the production of the papers was objectionable ; they related oely to the part this country had taken, and if laid upon the table it might be urged by the French authorities, that farther and more extensive disclosures were necessary to set the matter in its true light. The inference to be drawn from the speech of M. Casimir Perier was that, the steps taken by the French Government had prevented an armed interference with Belgium ; and while on one one side it was urged that a dread of the power of France had kept foreign States in check, it might be answered on the other that those foreign States had disregarded all threats, and had been guided only by the principles by which they had always professed to be governed. Be tween the two who was to decide ? The production of the papers required, without many others, would not settle the point, while it would provoke discussion. He might add, also, that the correspondence, as the Noble Duke must be aware, contained many matters that it would be inexpedient to expose at present to public comment; and although the Noble Duke on this account had required only extracts of some papers, he had moved fur the whole of others. It would likewise be urged, perhaps, by the French Minister, that what had been laid upon the table was only the commencement of a long correspondence, the whole of which was necessary for the ascertainment of the true merits of the case. With regard to the supposed precedent in which the Noble Duke had said that he (Earl Grey) was concerned, he must remark that he had moved for a single document to explain a passage in the speech of the King of France, which was itself an authentic and official paper, and not like the speech of the Minister, perhaps unauthorised and incorrect. He begged to add, that he had once set a precedent directly opposite to that alkich the Noble Duke now wished to establish, and the Noble Duke had himself supported him in it. The French Minister had made a speech containing a mis-statement of facts ; but instead of moving for papers to contradict it, he had merely alluded to it in the course of an address to the House. He trusted after what he had said, that the Noble Duke would feel satisfied that his own and the re putation of the Government of which be bad been the head was as secure as if the papers moved for had been produced ; and he would repeat, once for all, that the cor respondence showed that there was no pretence for saying either that Great Britain bad herself entertained the inten tion, or encouraged it in others, to interfere in the affairs of Belgium with an armed force, or that the French Go vernment had made representations which induced other States to desist from such an enterprise.—(Cheers.) The Duke of WELLIN GTON—If he were not even satis fied, which lie was, he assurgd the Noble Earl that his de claration, that to produce those papers would be inconveni ent to his Majesty's Government would alone be enough to induce him to withdraw his motion, and he would, there fore, with leave of the House, do so.—(Hear, hear.) At the same time he must address a few words to the House. It was true, then, that the speech to which he bad alluded was but the speech of a Minister in one of the Chambers, but it was also true that it had appeared in a manner and in a shape in which no speech of any Minis ter of this country had ever been circulated. When the Noble Earl had come down with the documents respect ing the French King's speech, it was true he had done so by the King's command, but there was also another an swer to that speech in a letter written by the Prince of Orange on his leaving this country in January. Having sa id thus much as to the documents, be would now say one word as to any threat having been held out in any quarter. On looking over all the correspondence of the time, it would be seen that this Government had been not only on terms of friendship with the French Ministry, but also with the Ministers of all the Allies in EuroVe ; and if there had been any intention hostile to France, or any jealousy felt in France of such intention, the Government here m ust have known it. PLURALITIES BILL. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY moved that their Lordships should go into Committee on the Pluralities Bill. Lord SUFFIELD did not wish to see the priviledge taken away which the chaplaincy to the Peerage con- Jerred, and which he knew to be untol in rnaty respects. Tha Bill was a delusion both as io what ought to be done and what ought to be left undone. This delusion, ~ f course, he did not lay to the charge of the Most Reverend Prelate, but to that o f th ose w h o h a d b een his advisers with respect t o t h e present Bill. The provision against the power of the Bishop of Norwich to erect small p u tilities was highly ohj •ctionable, because in that dioce-,s most of the parishes did not exceed 1,000 acres, and did not produce more than from 801. to 1001. a-year ; and the churches were so close, that a clergyman could with great ease officiate in more than one, and thus obtain what would be a decent provision. No man was more friendly to the church than he was, and church property, be con ceived, ought to be preserved and devoted to religious pur. poses. But this Bill passed over the abuse of the union of large livings, while it limited that of small ones. The principle on which he wished to go was that of value, and he would give to the Archbishop of Canterbury, as head of the church, and to the other Bishops, large discre tionary powers. These, however, should he restrained within certain limits,—say that of no union producing over 3001. a year ; and he thought there should be a strict return made of all livings in the church which produced higher emoluments. He would not, however, say more now, as they were about to go into Committee. The Earl of ELDON thought that this Bill ought to be postponed, as, in his opinion, it contained many provi sions which were very objectionable. Lord HOLLAND observed, that the Noble Earl, on the last discussion of this topic, had amid., that be would have nothing more to do with the ChoattnAvlssreas-he now wished for several days' further time to consider the subject. The Earl of ELDON did not object to the Noble Lord's wit at his expense, as he was happy to find the Noble Lord upon any terms recognize so humble a being as himself in that House. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said, that different objections were made to this Bill by some, that he was in novating on the Church, while a Noble Lord near him (Suffield) said the Bill was a delusion, inasmuch as it only pretended to prevent the creation of large unions. He would refer particularly to the diocese of Norwich, in which the Bishop had with pleasure given up his right, and , expressed his satisfaction at the provisions of the Bill, while the Noble Lord (Suffield) held an opinion quite the reverse. He had not heard any of the Noble Lord's ob jections before to-night, and he did not precisely compre hend thOm now, as the Noble Lord's statement was very confused. However, it was his (tie Archbishop's) wish to bear every objection that might be entertained, a , id his de sire was, consistently with the rules of the House, to afford an opportunity for this being done. He apprehended the Committee was the beet stage for the purpose, and intended himself to propose one or two amendments, and afterwards a day might be fixed for the discussion of the whole subject. Lord SUFFIELD was sorry he had not explained him self sufficiently, but his wish was to go into Committee to have the whole subject discussed. The Bishop of LONDON thought it right, for fear of misconception, to state that the object of the Bill was to enable the poor clergyman to hold two livings without a dispensation, the expense of procuring which was now considerable. He gave full credit to the Noble Lord (Suffield) for the purity of his motives, and for his seal towards the Church ; and he only regretted that when this Bill bad been so long before the House, the objections entertained had not been before stated, so as that if pos sible they might be obviated, and the Bill pass during the present session. Lord KING defended the course pursued by hie Noble Friend (Lord Suffield), who thought that the union of large, and not small livings, ought to be prevented. For instance, Stanhope and Winwick, in Lincolnshire, o ' 7,0001. a year, might be held under this Bill. The clergyman, too, who }coked to private patronage might be excluded from all benefit, as livings generally went with estates, which were scattered, and not, perhaps, within the distance of SO miles, allowed by the Bill. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY would say one word as to the possibility of holding large livings under this Bill. The Noble Lord who had spoken of this bad made no allusion to the power vested in the Archbishop of Canterbury, who under the Bill was to have the power of giving a dispensation, or a license for the holding of more than one hying. By the Bill his powers, hitherto doubt ful, would he settled; and when hi often _Allis _power under the Bill, he did so under a ity which it was not at all likely he would violate. Lord SUFFIELD meant no discourtesy, nor had he an opportunity before to-night of stating his sentiments res pecting this measure. But would any one believe that under this Bill one person might hold the bishoprick of Winchester, the deanery of Durham, the rectory of Stan. hope, and the living of Winwick, the largest benefice in England, all together ? Lord KENYON, after some observations which were inaudible in the gallery, was understood to express his surprise at the eagerness displayed by the Right Rev. Prelate opposite (the Bishop of London), in supporting a measure of this description, which went to prevent in future others from holding pluralities, when be had him- self held at the same time a large living in London, and another in a distant part of the country. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY defended his Right Rev. Friend from the attack made upon him by the Noble Lord, and said that both the parishes in ques tion, when held by hint, had been exceedingly well ad ministered. The Bishop of LONDON said, that before he accepted the larger living of Bishopegate be had laid out on the smaller living of Chesterford more than would purchase the advowson of it. Considering, therefore, what he had laid nut on it, taking into account its smallness, and know ing that he could have the duties of it fully perfortred with the assistance of a curate. he confessed, that he did not feel he was acting wrong in accepting at the same time the larger living in London. But supposing that lie had acted wrong in that instance, was that any reason why he should not support a measure of this description ? (Hear). He begged to observe that the number of epis copal was very small, compared with the number of lay pluralists. The House then went into committee pro forma on the Bill, and having resumed, the Bill was ordered to be committed to a Committe of, the whole House on Friday next. The London Bridge approaches Bill was read a first time, and ordered to be printed. Adjourned at Half-pa Eight o'clock to Monday. HOUSE OF COMMONS, MIACK 16. LONDON BRIDGE APPROACHES BILL. Alderman WOOD moved the third reading of the Lon don Bridge Approaches Bill. Sir THOS. BARING asked a question of the Hen. Alderman as to whether he intended to propose any amendment respecting the progress of the Bill in another place, as far as regarded a subject which had lately excited so much attention. Alderman WOOD did not see the propriety of the question which the Hon. Member put to him ; he really was unable to say whether or no he should speak to any Peer upon the subject. It had been advertised that in the Committee the restoration of the Ladye Chapel, or the proposition to grant the space in front of it, was carried by a majority of 17 to 2. The fact was, that two Mem bers were absent from the Committee. After some further observations from Mr. BYNGI and Alderman Woon, the Bill was read a third time. Mr. Alderman WOOD then moved the first reading of a clause by way of Rider to the Bill. It was merely to designate the new sheets on the London and Southwark sides of the bridge, as Adelaide-place, King William street, Arthur -street, Wellington-street, and Duke-street. The clause was then read a first, second, and third time, and added to the Bill, which was passed. Sir F. NORTH brought in a Bill for the better Light ing and Paving the Town of Hastings in Sussex, and for Supplying the Inhabitants with Water, which was read a first time. Mr. STRICKLAND brought in a Bill to extend and enlarge the Acts of the 4th and 6th Geo. 111., for drain. ing and improving certain low lands in Holderness, in the East-riding of the county of York, which was read a first time. Lord SANDON brought up the report of the Com• mittee on the Liverpool and Manchester rail-way. Mr. SHAW brought in a Bill for providing an addi tional cemetery in the parish of St. James, in the city ol Dublin, which was read a first time. Lord R. GROSVENOR brought in a Bill for extend ing the period for completing Dee bridge .n the county of Chester, which was read n first time. LABOUR IN FACTORIES BILL. Mr. HEYWOOD presented a prtition which was signed by 735 operatives employed in certain factories at Salford. They viewed with alarm the Bill before th• House, which was to reduce the hours of labour from 69 hours a week, the period allowed by the Act of last ses sion, to 58 hours, and they declared that such a deduc • tie° would so much reduce their Wages, is greatly to Ni t ss ahridge their comforts, and would c had hitherto subsisted by their labou ;;; I ' p irochial aid ; they therefore pray ihridgement of their hours of labour migh The Hosr. Mamma also presented a petitio • • ir 6 salllP subject from certain operatives in Staffordshire. Both the petitions were ordered to be priated. IRISH NATIONAL EDUCATION. Mr. SHAW had several petitions to present respecting National Education in Ireland, signed most numerously and respectably, and by many persons of great influence. The first was from thirty-five clergymen of a Manery (we could not hear the name of it) in the diocese of Norwich ; N.e second was from a place in the North of Ireland ; the third was from the county of the city of Coik, respectably signed by nine Noblemen, and alm,st all the resident gentry to the number of 4,116 persons; the Ith was from the minister, elders, and coneregation of the Presbyterian Church of Usher's-quay, Dublin, and the iifth from Archbishops, Protestant clergy of various deno minations, and Protestant laymen of Leland, to the number of Pl,OOO persons.—(Hear, hear.) He was un willing on that occasion to enter into a war of opinion with Hon. Gentlemen opposi-e, but while he conceded to the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland, and to his learned Friend the Solicitor-General for Ireland, and to those who entertained opinions different from him self, the free use of those opinions, he claim d for himself and for those who thought with him, tie ri,sht to exer cise his - own opinion and to act according to his own judgment. But he protested against the assertion of the Learned Solicitor-General, that this subject was not understood by those who opposed it. W. 1., the Protestant Bishops of Ireland, almost without exception, had opposed the system recommended by his Majesty's Government ; seventeen of them had signed a srotest against it, and had warned all their clergy against promoting or encouraging it. The Irish Bishops and the Presbyterian Synod of Meter were, surely, as likely to understand a IgAtset relating to a mar' in - avbieh - cation of the poor commit.ed to their eh it ge—as the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland, or the Darned General.—(Hear.) The Archbishop of Tuam pre• sided at the meeting at which the petition, signed by 13,000 persons was agreed upon ; and it was also signed by Serjeant Pennelather and two King's c ounsel, who were well known to many Members of the House, and who were as fully competent to form an opinion on any subject submitted to them, and to deal with it as candidly as the Learned Solicitor-General. Therefore it was in vain to say that such persons did not understand the subject. But to deal fairly, it did not appear to him that the Solicit, r- General or the Right Hon. Secretary understood the nature of the opposition to the system. They stated that the opposition was to extracts from the Scriptures. Now the opposition was not merely to using extracts, but to the making such extracts a substitution for the entire Bible. They objected to any system of national education in which there was a substitution of a portion for the entire word of God, because it wee inconsistent with their feelings and their wishes. The objection was not to extracts, together with other religious books, being made part of the religious educa tion of children in Ireland, but the petitioners insisted that the foundation of that education should be the pure, simple, and entire word of God. It seemed, as he con ceived, to be taken for granted, that those persons who opposed the system charged the Government with having tor their object the taking of the Holy Scriptures out of the hands of the Protestants altogether ; that was a most erro neous notion ; but he maintained that the petitioners were justified in placing ne reliance on Ministers in the sys tem they were adopting. In hie opinion there wan but one recommendation to their plan, it was one which had been alluded to by the Member for Armagh, namely, that it carried in itself the seeds of its own destruction. With the exception of one M-mber of the Synod of Ulster, he (Mr. Shaw) had not heard any Protestant Irish clergy man speak in favour of this measure. How therefore could his Majesty's Government expect that an experiment which met with such decided opposition could ever succeed ;? Those who opposed this measure were charged with do ing so upon political grounds ; there never was brought forward a more unfounded charge, and he believed, that would he proved this very night, as he saw a Noble Lord, the Member for Liverpool, in his place, who had a simi lar petition to those he had just presented, to bring forward from his constituents. He conscientiously believed it to be the duty of every well-thinking and honest man to give his most decided opposition to this measure, the very foundation being based upon most erroneous notions. The petitions were then read. Sir R. INGLIS seeing the Hon. and Learned Gentle man, (the Solicitor-General for Ireland) in his place, would take that lapportuai _aeking seam of any of she-Me . his Majesty's Cabinet; a few questions upon the snlect of these petitions, to which he would expect a reply. He objected as much as any one to long discussions upon petitions, but this subject, which was of much importance, actually requiring discussion, could not otherwise, -as it had already engaged the atten tion of the House, be gone into, but upon the presentation of petitions. It was said there was no mutilation of the Bible —if that were granted, for the sake of argument, be would ask whether upon the Right Hon. Secretary's own chewing, if any bey or master should introduce a Bible into the school on any of those four days, not directly devoted to religious instruction, he would not be guilty of a violation of the rules and dicipline of the school ? It was said that the system bad been re commended by the 14th report of the Commissioners of Education. He begged, however, to state that that report did net disturb any existing system, but was merely supplemental. He did not think a system of national education so latitudinarian in prin ciple, should be adopted by a Christian nation, which being Protestant, had enjoyed so much the advantages of possessing unniutilated the sacred Scriptures. He trusted that Government would see in the combined expression of public opinion from Episcopalian and Presby terian clergy, and from the laity of all classes, a proof of the unpopularity of their system, and that they would, therefore. unhesitatingly abandon it. They bad miscal culated both their own duty and the interests of those persons whom they designed to benefit. Mr. CRAMPTON hoped the Hon. Member for Oxford would not consider him wanting in cour tesy if he declined, at present, to enter at all into the discussion—the matter bad already been before the attention of the House, and if it was thought neces sary to have a further discussion of it, it would be much better that a regular notice of it should be given. He, however, begged the House not to consider him as acceding to what had fallen from the Hon. and Learned Member =for the city of Dublin, and from the Hon. Mem ber for Oxford. Mr. LEADER did not deny the respectability of the petitioners. On the contrary, he believed that they com prised many of the Noblemen and Gentry, and respect able Laity of the districts of Ireland, but there was on the other hand a million of people now petitioning for education, on a footing with the present system, who had long been hereav,d of that inestimable benefit. Mr. LEFROY was firm in his belief that these petitions spoke the true sense of the county. Government had miscalculated the means to the end, and while he gave the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland crick for a desire to achieve what was very important in a national system, namely, a united education, he had taken the very means to defeat his object.—(Hear, hear, hear..) Neither Episcopalian nor Presbyterian clergy, nor the body of the dissenting Laity, wird join in the si stem, and the necessary result would be, as he hoped, that it would be abandoned, as mischievous in principle and nu gatory in practice. The system was quite a felo de se." Lord SANDON thought an attempt to conciliate by compromise would be altogether fruitless and ineffectual, and before hewou the h would, therefore, th e, vote sh tea ape of o against the system t. when it came Lord GROSVENOR did not think it possible that a united system of education on the principles now recom mended could be carried into effect. Mr. W. Y. PEEL thought, that from the very consti tution of this system it could net be brought to accom plish its objects, and the only way was, now that they had withdrawn the grant from the Kildare-street Society, to make no grant whatever. Mr. H. GRATTAN believed that the Kildare-strest Society had intended well, but, practically, it did not work beneficially. Commission after Commission had sat for twenty years—they bad thoroughly investigated the subject of national education in Ireland. The body of evidence which they had furnished was most complete, mud a system founded upon their report, like the present, be considered a fair, a just, a proper, and, he hoped, a successful e xperiment. The present was merely a contest among different parties who should educate the children. It Hon. Members were disposed to give the system a fair trial, he had no doubt it would succeed. Lord INGESTRIE was determined to oppose the .ystem. Petitions, it might be said, from the wholeof the n r o el t i h g i i n o g n o d f iiite the spe c ct u i o n n i try to . Protestants of Ireland had been presented . to Parliament against the proposed system. T he Protestants of consistent ty ste io n h t ed w , ith how the however, Ireland f e lt th a t this system wou ld be giving more to the Roman Cathol ic reli g ion than was or of the Roman Catholos, but he held th a t w h ere th ere was an established religion in a c o untry, it was the ditty of the government of that country to protest and keep that established t o say