The Sun. — London, England, 1832-01-28 00:00:00

specting the county of Cork. The county of Cork con . . twined as nearly as possible the same number of inhabitants as the whn'e principality of Wales. Yet Cork was to have only five or six Members, while Wales was to have 2 Members. Now nn one would say that Wales Was so far advanced beyond Cork in civilitation and wealth as to 'warrant such a disparity. He d4d not say that too much I:ad been done for Wales, but that too little had been done for Cork. It was impossible, in his opinion to recoecilti. these discrepancies. He trusted that the Noble Lord vzoiriii accede to the motion of the Him. Member for Notnersetshire, in order to men those alterations in the measure which were so - Lord JOHN RUSSELL observed, that the Right Hon. Gentleman seemed to have taken up a notion that this BM was founded upon some regular arithmetical propor tim► of population. It had never teen so laid down by aNnse who supported it ; so that the whole of the arctt anent founded by the R;ght Hon. Gentleman on that hypo thesis fell to the ground. The reason why he (Lord John Russell) supported the clause for the division of counties was this ;—Our county representation was, generally s-yeaking, excellent; but it had this defect, that in certain cases the expence of the election was so intolerable, that men of small fortunes could not venture to become candi dates; and by that means the electors bad not the freedom of 'choice which they would otherwise have. Those ex pences resulted from, first, agency, then the conveyance of voters to the poll, and lastly (though illegal, yet in some cases absolutely necessary), refreshment. If the counties were left entire, the agencies would he doubled, the dis tance of travelling would b lengthened, and the necessity far refreshment increased. By dividing the counties, those evils would he diminished ; and men of small fortunes might be able to go to the poll. Mr. CROKER explained. Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN argue] in favour of divid ing the counties. Mr. STRICKLAND said his opinion had been eirAtied on this subject. As to the large counties he had no objec tion wha►ever to the division, which must work well. The only difficulty was ovith reference to the smaller counties. He was persuaded that the greet advantage of these divi sions would be to prevent contests and unsatisfactory torn - promises. Mr. C. WYNN thought that this giving of four Mem bers to one county, while another hail but two, would be a cause of jealousy to the Inhabitants of the parish in the county where only two Members were returned. lie thought that the evil of that system was likely to be some what diminished by the present clause, which went to di vide the large counties, and he should therefore vote for it. Mr. SHELL referred to the Irish Reform Bill, which he was glad to find contained one el iuse which was a great improvement on the former Reform Bill for Ireland. In the new Bill, the certificate of the registration of tht free holder, when supported by an affidavit of the freeholder himself, was conclusive, to all intents and purposes, on the question of the right of voting. The production of it was sufficient to establish his right; and what would be the consequence ? why, the delay and expense of elections would be much reduced. That was an improvement which be much hoped to see introduced into the English Reform Bill. Lord ALTHORP did not mean to deny that there might he something ulvantagenus in the proposition of the Hon. And Learned Member ; but be did not well tee how it could he adopteil at the present moment ; and as tl e clause for the division of the counties had a general ten dency to diminish the expenses of elections, he trusted that it would have the support of tl-e Hon. and 1- , arned Member, whose object in saving expense would be so far answered. Mr. CRESSET PELI-TAM spoke amidst manifest signs of impatience on the part of the Members. He was on. iderstood to say the Ministers had failed to shew any suffi cient grounds for what they were now recommending to the House. Mr. HUNI' had before voted with the Ministers on this clause, and should vote with them again now, for no ar eumeots he had yet heard had had the effect of changing his opinion on the subject. Mr. J. WEYLANi) intended to support the clause for the division of counties. The Hon. Member went on to make some further observations, but the cries of " Ques tion" became so vehement, that none of his remarks could be distinctly heard in the gallery. The Committee then divided, when there appeared— For the clause 213 Against it g9 Majority -M On our re-admission we found the House on the 15th clause, and Lord ALTHORP proposing to fill up the blank by the word " three," so as to Rive to certain counties therein named three Members each. Lord MILTON urged that this plan of giving three Members to some counties would be attended with in convenience, and would ensure contests. He had a still stronger objeetion to the monstrous selection that had been made of counties to be so privileged. He alit not intend ieae tne sense of the House; but he felt bound to enter his protest against the amendment. Colot..el SIETHORPE rejoiced at anything like the ap pearance of discord on the other aide of the House, and was therefore happy to find the Noble Lord opposed to his colleague (Lord Althorp) regarding one clause of this de testable Bill. He contended that the selection of counties for additional Members was most unjust and unequal. Mr. WORTLEY said, that there was no instance of what might be termed treble representation, and single re presentation was of comraratively modern date. In his opinion it would have been much better to have given quadruple representation to a greater number of counties, than to allow three Members to any. Besides, the whole oysten t was so unjust : while the West Riding of York shire, with a population of about a million, sent only two Members, the county of Buckingham, with 100,000 in habitants, was allowed three. The fifteenth clause con tained the names of the counties to be so favoured, so that it was a clause and a schedule in one; yet Ministers bad agreed to postpone the schedules, and this ought to have been deferred with the rest. Lord ALTHORP agreed that the last criticism of the Hon. Gentleman upon the clause was just it did include the names of the counties, and they ought to be postponed, and added to the Rill in a schedule. The question was, whether, what he might call second-rate counties ought to have three Members ? and it was to he recollected, that if f.ur Members were to be allowed to them, the districts would be inconveniently small. He could not see any solid objection to three Members. Political opinion was usually divided, and among the voters was also usually a number of moderate men, belonging to no party, and they would be ready to vote for the third candidate. Com promise might then be prevented ; but, on the whole, the effect would be advantageous. The franchise in counties possessing three Members might be more valuable, but the House ought not to regard the interests of particular voters, but of the class of interests to be represented. He admitted that the practice was new, but it would not be injurious. Colonel WOOD maintained that an opportunity of compromise in counties was desirable, and that contest would be ensured and unavoidable where there were to be three representatives. Mr. ADEANE was of opinion, that the agricultural in►erest had not been sufficiently attended to, and in this Bill more neglected than in the last. Cambridge was an agricultural county, and was entitled to an additional Member. Sir J. WALSH concurred with those who thought that the effect of this clause would be to increase the expence of county elections, and to occasion perpetual contests Mr. PRAED did not think that contests would be in creased by the clause, but be objected to the increase of the power and influence of the individual voters. Mr. CROKER would postpone the observations he had to make on this question until it was again before the House; but he must say now he conceived two would be a much safer number to fill up the blank with than three. He proposed an atnendment to that effect. Mr. GOULBURN also objected to the filling up the blank with the word " Three." He agreed with the Noble Lord in the propriety of preserving the agricultural interests as much as possible in the counties; fur the pur pose of balancing the representation of the towns; but be apprehended that after the Bill came into operation, the con►tests in the counties would be solely carried on by the town and the country parties, for the purpose of securing the third Member. Mr. F. PALMER had been much is Berkshire since this triple representation was first proposed, and he had not found a single person who did not approve of it. Lord PALMERSTON recommended the Right lion. Gentleman (Mr. Goulburn) to look at the list of coun ties which were to have three Members, and he would find that they were counties the most agricultural of any in England, that they bad the smallest number of large ti‘wris, arid that those towns were of a description the most under the influence of the great landed proprietors.— (Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman seemed to think that the number of contest* would be increased by having three Members instead of two; but he (Lord Pal merston) thought there were obvious reasons why the pos session of the right to return three Members would dimi nish contests.—(oh, oh! and laughter.) It would be seen that there were always three parties, and where the re . was a third Member, they would n aturall y settle the dm. pute by a compromise. Mr. GOULBURN denied the statement of the Noble Lord with respect to the preponderance of the agricultural interest in those counties, atad instanced Cambridgeshire, where the potver of the town of Cambridge throughout the county was so great, that it must always return one of the Members. After a few words from Colonel SIBTLIORP6, Lord Mwroii, and Mr. l'titcrltzr, the gallery was cleared for a ; but the Committee ultimately agreed to insert " three" in the blank." On our return to the gallery we found the Chairman putting the question on the pace ?tatiSe, that two Mem bers instead of one be gieen to Caermarthen, Denbigh, and Glamotgan ; but on this question the Committee aban doned the English Reform Bill, and applied itself forthwith to a consideration of the Scott+. Mr. R. A. DUNIDAS hoped the Noble Lord would inform them why it was th it these Welsh counties were to have two Members, while many of the counties of Scotland, with treble their population, were to haVe ohly one Member ?—(1-I.ar.) Lord ALTHORN replied. that the question of giving additional reprotentatives to Wales was a very different one from that of increasing the representation of Scot land. The increase given to the Scotth counties was not, it should be recollected, at the expense of Scotland, but at the expense of tilgland and Wales; and he really did not think it was necessary for him to enter more fuly into the reasons why the Scotch counties were to have but Oe Member. Mr. DUNDAS stid the thsWer of the Noble Lord confirmed him to the opinion he had before held, that equal justice was not done to Scotland is the arrangement of a 2 new Constitution.—(Hear.) Mr. C. FERGUSSON was ale.) of opinibn that the Noble Lord's explanation was any thing but satisfactory. As long as the proportions settled at the Union, were pre• served ) Scotland, although she felt herself not duly repre ttnted, could not complain ; but the moment that settle ment was abandoned, the moment the principle ivas in fringed on, she was in a condition to demand a fair allot ment in the settlet',.elft ot the new system of representa tioutlear, hear ) When the old principle was aban doned, and the Noble Lord set about the re-modelling the whole representation of the empire, he should take into his consideration the whole of the constituency ) and look not to England and Wales apart from Scotland or Ireland, but to Scotland in contyetion with the whole of the em pire.—(neak, hear.) bed iONN RUSSELL acknowledged that there was truth in the Hon. Member's objection, and that the Go vernment had been guilty of some imprUdence in not con fining itself to the numbers of the representation of Scot land and Ireland, as it was fixed at their union with England.t—(l-lear, hear.) But he would ask whether the Reforming Members of those kingdoms were the persons to turn round on the Government and say, " We will make you repent your liberality—we will make you rue your misplaced generosity, and feel it would have been better ybu had never exposed yourself to attack for having intended to confer on yeu a benefit."—(Hear, hear.) He (Lord J. Russell) had never complained of the Anti. Reformers when they attacked the additions to the Scotch and Irish representation. In them it was fair and con .intent ; but he would say to those engaged with the Go vernment in carrying a measure of Reform, that it was neither fair nor just on their part to indulge in reproaches on that head, and that they should consider the situation in which the Government stood, not with reference to what esch Member might consider best to be done, but with reference to tl e ultimate success of the cause in wl ich they were engaged.—(Hear, hear.) He thought, however, the Hon. Member forgot that the Scotch bo roughs were to have eight additional Members. Mr. C. FERGUSSON claimed the right to express his opinions on the Reform question, in defiance of the ani inadversiona of the Noble Lord—(Hear, hear)-0-e only judges of the propriety of his conduct being that House, his constituents, and the country.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. DIXON hoped that Ministers would find means to increase the representation of the large counties of Scotland. Mr. PRINGLE contended that all the parts of the em pire ought to be treated on an equal footing. Sir G. CLERK defended the propriety of putting in the claims of Scotland on this occasion, because, if this Bill passed without the claim being made, the Members for that country would lose the only opportunity for mak ing their claim. The Members for Scotland wanted no thing from the generosity of his Majesty's Ministers ; hut they boldly threw themselves on the justice of the House. There was a general feeling in Scotland that that country was not fairly treated by that Bill.—(Hear.) Mr. GILLON deprecated this discussion, and deel - ►red that the people of Scotland were pleased not only with the additional Members, but still more with the alterations that were to be made in the franchise. The Hon. Gentleman opposite, he believed in his conscience, only made these re marks with a view to defeat this Bill. Mr. DIXON denied, in the most unequivocal manner, that he made any remarks with a •iew either to delay or defeat this etcellent Bill. Sir GEORGE MURRAY claimed an increase of re presentation for the agricultural population of Scotland; and insisted that justice would not he done to that country, unless it received an additional Member for each of the large counties. Ireland, too, he believed would not have justice done to her unless ber Members now insisted on it. Mr. STANLEY said that the gentlemen opposite, who had all along opposed Reform, were now become the advo cates of the extension of the rights of the people, and the advocates for equal representation.—( Hear.) He appealed to the friends of the measure who represented Scotland, not to oppose the English Bill, as that must be a means of stopping Reform altogether, though they only wished to obtain greater advantages for Scotland.—(Hear, hear.) He was surprised at the inconsistency of the Hon. Gentle men opposite, who had pledged themselves to General Gascoyne's motion, and now asked for a diminution of the number of Members for England, in order to increase those for Scotland.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. GOULBURN hoped, when complaints were made of irritating opposition and speeches to provoke delay, that the House would remember the revolutionary speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman. Mr. SINCLAIR did not intend to have intruded upon the patience of the Committee, and should not detain them many minutes. He was induced to rise, in consequence of the assertions, repeated from several quarters, that those Scotch Members, who support the Scotch Reform Bill as it now stands, would not dare to face their constituents at the next general election. He paid no tribute of servile allegiance to his Majesty's Ministers, but owed to them a debt of cordial gratitude, because he felt convinced that, without their interposition and their exertions, the country to which he had the honour to be long would have obtained no additional represen tatives at all. He should be sorry to requite their patriotic efforts, by vexatiously disturbing that arrange ment which, under all the circumstances of the case, is, in their judgment, most conducive to the general interests of the empire. The present Cabinet contained, in his opinion, the only Statesmen of our day, who would have had the courage and the honesty to grapple with the difficul ties of the question, or who would have rescued the people of Scotland from that state of political thraldom and de gradation which had subsisted during so many centuries, and from which, in every part of the kingdom, they are now so anxious to be freed. He rejoiced in the addition 1 which had beeu made to the Members for the principal towns in Scotland, and the counties would now obtain an increase, if not to the number of the representatives, at least to that of their constituency—a boon to which a pa ramount importance is attached by the people of Scotland; the middling—most intelligent classes of which may be considered a s actually called into a state of political exis tence by the system which his Majesty's Ministers have bad the integrity and the wisdom to introduce. Had other politicians continued in power, he was quite persuaded they would always have found some self-satisfying rea son for letting what they called well, but what he Galled ill alone. He was at perfect liberty to act in this Parliament upon those independent principles, for the same general prevalence of which lie trusted he was contending when voting for the Reform Bill of his Ma jesty's Ministers. But if he should be permitted again to solicit the suffrages of the county, which he had the honour to represent, be should ground his chief claim to the re newal of their confidence upon the consistent and cheerful support which he bad felt it his duty to give to this Pleas sure, both in its principles and in its details. Sir C. WETHERELL thought that the attacks made by the Ministers upon gentlemen on that (the opposition side) were entirely unprovoked. He did not blame them for being a little out of humour after the division of last night. But be thought, that if the Right Hon. Gentle man could not succeed better in suppressing agitation in Ireland than in that House, the sooner he withdrew from the Government of that country the better. He would not prolong the discussion ; but, whatever effect his re marks might have had, they at least had not disturbed the rest of his Hon. Friend the Chairman.—(Shouts of laughter, which awoke Mr. Bernal.) After the laughter had subsided, the question was put upon the clause as amended, which being agreed to, the Chairman left the Chair, and the House resumed. Lord ALTHORP moved that the House, at its rising, should adjourn to Tuesday. The Corporate Funds Bill was read a third time and passed. CONTAGIOUS DISEASES. The Bill for the better preventing the spread of conta- gious disease 4 in Ireland was head a second time, and ordered to be conimitted on Friday next. The Exchequer Courts Bill (Scotland) was read a second time, and referred to a Select Committee. The Embezzlement Bill was read a third time and passed. . . . Mr. CRAMPTON obtained leatte to king in ~ilf for the erection of a Nisi thins Court in tOMSIIiTEV. ON EAST INDIA AFFAIRS. Mr. C. GRANT said, that in rising to move for the appointment of a Select Corntilittee on East India Affairs, it would be 'receesery for him shortly to revert to what heal been done on the snbject in the last session of Parlia ment, as well as to the coulee which, in his opinion, it would be expedient to pursue in the present session. As the period at which the charter of the East India Com pany expired aeprached, a veiy general wish had arisen the! the stibjaCt should be investigated 13y both Hotises of Parliament. Accordingly, select Committees were Ap pointed for that purpose. The Committee of the House •of 'Commons Stet :sad nearly the close of last year. The .Aarter would expire in 1834. The time was rapidly passing away, and it became necessary, without further delay, to consider the best means of prosecuting the inquiry during the present session. set the end of that period he trusted that the Cosernittee would be able to core their labohrs, and to present to the House and to the country such information as might qualify them to form a sound judgment on the great question which was about to be determined. During the interval between the close of the present session and the commence ment of tilt next ) an opportunity would he afforded to the gouge anal to the country to look into the various mate rials which would be collected by the Committee, and to prepare their minds for discussing the important subject. At the same time, it would be the duty of his Majesty's Government to avail themselves of that interval, for the putpoe of duly considering those plans which they must, on their own responsibility, propose for the future conduct of East Indian affairs. In the discussion of those plans the whole of the next session would be occupied ; and there was every reason to hope that, after the ample ma terials laid before them, and the ample time afforded for deliberation, Parliament would, by the close of that ses sion, be enabled to come to a complete and satisfactory decision on the subject. The Committee, which had already been appointed by both Houses of Parliament, had collected a vast mass of information, although some of it existed at present in an irregular shape. But in the course of their examination there were many important paints which he was apprehensive had not yet been touched upon. When he proposed the Select Committee on the subject twelve mouths ago, which Committee was accord ingly appointed, it was his feeling, and the feelino of the ether Members of the Committee,'that it was not desirable that his Majesty's Government should take any prominert part in the proceedings of that Committee. There were at that time, and of course there were at the present time, two parties ; those who approved of the renewal of the privileges of the East India Company, and those who dis approved of the renewal of those privileges. It was from the controversy between those two parties it was expected the truth must be elicited ; each party endeavouring to prove its own case. But the Court of Directors did not feel themselves called upon at that time to enter into the examination of the question at all; and those who were opposed to them, owing to particular cir cumatances, were unable to do justice to their own case. The examination, however, proceeded during the session; with a confident expectation that in the present session the Court of Directors would take a leading part in it. No petition from them to that effect had, however, been pre sented to Parliament; and it was now felt that some more direct and extensive means of investigation must be re sorted to than those which had hitherto been adopted. His Majesty's Government had, in the last session, not felt it their duty to take any direct part in the investigation, but had felt it their duty to watch the proceedings of the Committee, and to supply all the documents which they had the power to furnish ; being resolved that if no other mode of obtaining final information on the subject offered itself, a satisfactory mode should be proposed by them in the present session. In the course of the last Session some most important parts of the question were brought under the consideration of the Committee, and a number of individuals were examined, whose knowledge of India enabled them to communicate a great deal of valuable in formation upon the subject. But at the close of the session it became a matter of consideration in what man ner, during the present session, the question might be most advantageously considered ; anal the result of that consideration was the motion which he was about to have the honour of submitting to that House. He need not dwell on the vast variety tad the subjects which would necessarily come under the consideration of the Committee, connected with the whole legislative and other policy of our Indian empire. In proposing the appoint ment of the present Committee, he was quite aware that he asked the gentlemen of whom it was to be composed, to take upon themselves no light task. He had communi cated to those gentlemen his intention ; and he had ex pressed to them his earnest hope that, if they did under take it, they would bestow upon it their almost undivided attention; and he had received assurances from them that they were disposed to do so. Looking at the vast range of subjects which were to be considered, it must be evident that it was impossible they could be advantageously inves• tigated by a single body. It was absolutely necessary that he should submit to the House the expediency of sub-di viding the Committee, and thereby availing themselves of the great principle of the division of labour. In order to carry into effect this principle, in the best possible manner, it would be necessary to have a considerable number of sub-divisions, at least six or seven, all diligently devoting their time and attention to the particular p.ints submitted to them. It might appear to some persons to be a difficult matter to assign to the different sub committees the dif ferent topics upon which their labours were to be particu larly employed. But those departments had been already defined elsewhere. In the India House, and in the Board of Controul, the business was divided into six distinct depart ments, each occupied with its own peculiar subject. He should propose, therefore, at least six sub-committees, each of which to have the consideration of a particular depart. meat. But there were other matters requiring considera. tion, and he should, therefore, proceed as far as to propose eight sub-committees. This practice of forming sub-com mittees had seldom been resorted to by that House, ex. cept in cases like the present, of the highest importance. Committees were generally appointed for some specific purpose, on which they were expected in a few days to make a report to the House. The number of Members of which such Committees were composed was consequently comparatively small. But in this case, as the subject was one of extreme importance, as it would require long-con tinued attention, and as the gentlemen of whom it was his intention to propose that the Committee should be formed hail assured him that they were prepared to devote as much of their time as possible to the investigation ; and further, as the number of the Sub-Committees would be seven, or probably eight, and at least labouring four days in every week, it was impossible to prevent the number of Members from swelling far beyond the usual amount on such occasion ; it was necessary also to provide for the un avoidable absence of some of the Members, and for other contingencies ; in order that there might always be a supply equal to the demand. The number which he thought desirable was about forty-eight or forty-nine. General Committees en this subject had always been numerous. That last year consisted of thirty-eight Mem bers—that the year before of thirty-five. In 1813, the General Committee on this question consisted of forty Members. He trusted that the M.mbers of the pro posed Committee and the House would do him justice to believe, that in making this proposition his only motive was to facilitate the labours of the Com mittee, to bring those labours to an early close, and to place before the House and the public, pre vious to the Parliamentary decision on the case, as fairly and fully as possible, the materials on which alone a sound judgment could be formed. It might be supposed by some, that notwithstanding the number of the members of the Committee, and notwithstanding the number of Sub-Corn tmo i tbtre bring which theml b ri : ecnihntn.vhi investigation Certainlytipgproposedraetvioi onutsoet t nat logacfutol enquiry. ni difficulty l large . g h e e mde Session xi affiissctuolitff the ß would t p r esent auwould o th f er P eh d a i information had been obtained by former Committees, and was lying on the table of the House- The Committees of the House of Commons and House of Lords had received the evidence of many individuals on the subject ; and although that evidence was not systematically arranged, still the materials were there, and with those materials the proposed Committee might be :applied. In addition to this, directions had for some time been given by the Board of Controul for its officers to prepare to give all the information which it was in their power to commu nicate. Those officers bad been employed in arranging the evidence given before the Comtnittees of the House of Lords and the House of Commons, and in framing a sum mary of the whole. Immediately on the appointment of the Sub-Committees, the attention of each of them would necessarily be directed to the collection of the evidence peculiar to that department confided to its examination. In addition to this, the great officers of the Board, with which he had the honour of being connected, were pre paring statements, historical summaries, and every specize of document calculated to place the main facts of the case in as clear a point of view as possible. The Board of Controul had, in addition, collected many most important documents, which would be laid before the Committee. The same labour bad been undertaken at the ludit-house, and the Directors had offered their best assistance on the subject. That assistance would be valuable, as all must acknowledge, who knew any thing of the zeal and in dustry of the of of the India-house. They had, he was happy to gay offered him their assistance in the most pintiipt manner ; and he expected to receive the most va- Itiable aid from their labours. He believed he should be thus enabled to lay information of a most important nature before the public; and he owed it in justice to his own department to say, that they had shown the utmost zeal to forward the inquiry by their services. Under these circumstances, be should move " That a select Committee be appdinted upon the aftairs of the E ist India Company, and to inqiiire into the state of the bade between Great Britain and the East Indies and China, and to report their observations thereon to the House." Mr. T. P. COFRTENAY thiiught the inquiry now proposed would be of the utmost advantage. H.-, there fore, by no means meant to oppose the motion, but he hoped that the Committee would remember that the questions to which they were about todirect their attention were, whether the China trade should be opened, whether the Government of Indi t should be continued in the hands of the E ist India Company, or under what other jurisdic tion it should be placed. He thanked his Right lion. Friend for having entered on this inquiry, and he had no deubt that they should derive the greatest benefit from his labours. Sir J. MACDONALD said that there were no topics connected with this subject which would not be well worth the attention of the House and the public. With respect to the ultimate object in view, be belived it to be that which his Right Hon. Friend had just suggested, namely, how the interests of this country could be brought to bear advantageously nn those of that great empire, and how the interest, the prosperity, and the happiness of the people of that country could be best promoted and secured. Mr. STUART WORTLEY wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman whether it was intended that one of the several sub-committees should devote its sole attention to a subject on which a Committee had already been occupied during the whole of one Session? Mr. C. GRANT answered, Ctat the words of the re so lution he had just moved were the same as those which bad been used on a former occasion. Certainly, for him self, be was not prepared to say that one sub-committee should be solely occupied with the department of China. Those matters of detail, however, would be best regulated in the Committee. l't e Committee was then agreed to and the Members appointed, five of whom were declared to be a quorum. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at a Quarter-past Two o'clock. EAST INDIA COMPANY. (From the rotes and Proceedings of the House of Commons) Select Committee appointed, "on the present state of the af fairs of the East India Company, and to inquire into the state of Trade between Great Britain, the East Indies, and China; and to report their observations thereupon to the House :"—Mr. Charles Grant, Mr Hume, Mr. Baring, Mr. Warburton, Lord Viscount Sandon, Sir James Macdonald, Mr. Stuart Wortley, Mr. Whitmore, Sir James Mackintosh, Mr. Courtenay, Mr. Strutt, Mr. Warre, Mr. Astell, Mr. Morrison, Sir John Mal colm, Mr. Marshall, Mr. I.abouchere, Sir Robert Inglis, Mr. Heywood, Lord Viscount Morpeth, Mr. John Loch, Mr. Shell, Mr. Robert Grant, Mr Cutlar Fergusson, Mr. John Wood, Mr. Lytton Bulgier, Lord Cavendish, Mr. Frankland Lewis, Colonel Torrens, Sir George Murray ,Mr. 'Villiers, Mr. Ewart, Sir Henry Hardinge, Sir John Byng, Mr. East, Sir Henry Bunbury, Mr. Stewart Mackenzie, Sir Charles Forbes, Colonel Maberly, Mr. Jenkins, Mr. Irving, Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Wilde, Mr. Pusey, Sir Francis Vincent, Mr. Bonham Carter, Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Dixon :—Power to send for p, rsons, papers, and records, to re port Minutes of Evidence from time to time, and to adjourn from time to time, and from place to place ; Five to be the quo rum :—Report and Minutes of Evidence taken before the „Select Committee on the East India Company's Affairs in Sessions 1830, 1830-1, and 1831, referred. vIOTION. Y of HO USE of 1832. LORDS. Fife (Far► of) Gower Dover Wellesley (Marquis) Oakley Ponsonby of Imokilly Foley Myron Lilford Hill Kilmarnock (Earl of Erroll) Mendip (Viscount Clifden) Belhaven Brougham Durham ITeynham BISHOPS. Chichester Killaloe TELLER. Lord Auckland LORDS. Ponsonby (Earl of Besborough) Kenlis "(Marquis of Headtort) Vernon Dormer Templemore Segrave Plunkett Granard (Earl of Granard) Clement (Earl of Leitrim) Dinorben Ducie Howard of Effingham Hawke Boyle (Earl of Cork) Howard de Walden Dawnay (Viscount Downe) Ludlow (Earl of Lud low) Dunmore (Earl ot) Staftbrd Stourton Sherborne BISHOP. Norwich LORDS. Wynford Stuart de Rothsay Boston Bexley Clanwilliam (Earl of) Ellenborough I)ouglas Colville Montagu Carrington uraarnr itsiey Lyndhurst 1 Lord TKLeLnEyRo.n THE COURT-MARTIAL ON CAPTAIN WARRINGTON. BRISTOL, JANUARY 26. The Court assembled at ten o'clock. and Sir C. Dalbiac con tinued his case. Setjeant ninage called in, and his examination resumed. While yciit were in attendariee at the Recruiting-office, did any despatch, letter, or message come from any officer or other person of the 3d Dragoon Guards for the officer commanding the troops in Bristol 7—No. To your knowledge, was Lieutenant-Colonel Brereton ever inside the Recruiting-office, between half-past ten o'clock on Sunday night the 30th, and half-past two on Monday morning the 31st of October 7—Not within side, but in the court. Do you know that the officer commanding the troops in triStol Was engaged in 'natters of duty in the immediate neigh bourhood of the Recruiting-office, and alkilli College green, for half an hour, or thereabouts, some time between half-past ten arid twelve o'clock on Sunday night, October 30 7—He was. Did you not, between twelve and one o'clock on Sunday night, October 30, convey to the quarters of the officer corn manding in Bristol an official despatch, which was delivered for him at the Recruiting-office ?—I delivered a despatch to Lieutenant-Colonel Brereton, which despatch I had received, not at the Recruiting office, but at Lieutenant-Colonel Brere ton's door. Did you not consider it to be the special duty for which you and the other serjeants were detained at the office during the night of Sunday, the 30th, and the morning of Monday, the 31st of October, to convey to the officer commanding the troops any letter or official reference to him, that might be left, or ad dressed to him, at the office ?—Yes. By Captain Warrington—Will you take upon yourself to state positively that you never quitted the :office between the hours of nine o'clock at night and two the next morning, while Serjeants M`Leod and Platts were both absent ?—I cannot. Did a person, who delivered to you the despatch at the door of the Commanding Officer of the troops in Bristol, state from whom he brought that despatch ; and if so, be so good as to in form the Court ?—He did, from the Mayor, and directed it to be delivered to Lieutenant-Colonel Brereton, as soon as he could be found.—The witness withdrew. Troop-Serjeant:Major Allen called and sworn, Were you on duty with a squadron of the 14th Dragoons in this city, during a part of the riots on the 29th, 30th, and 31st of October last ?—Yes. During what period was the squadron absent from this city in the course of Sunday, the 30th, and Monday the 31st of Oc. tober 7—From about half-past twelve on Sundaymorning till half-past nine on Monday morning. John Fisher was next called. Did the commanding officer of the troops in Bristol call at your repository relative to the accommodation of some troops at any time between the hours of half-past ten and twelve on ...Sunday night, October 30 ?—Yes. Can you state whether the officer commanding the troops in Bristol was engaged in matters relative to the same troops in or about College-green, previously to his coming to the reposi tory; if so, state how long he was previously so engaged ?—He was engaged from I should think 20 minutes to half an hour. Sir C. Dalbiac here announced that the evidence on the part of the prosecution, as to the first charge, was closed. The following witnesses were then called and examined upon the second charge. The Mayor of Bristol. Did you send a letter or despatch early on Monday morning, October 31, addressed to Lieut.-Colonel Brereton, or to the ofti. cer commanding his Majesty's troops did. Was that letter under your own signature ?—lt was. lf you have a copy of that letter, be pleased to lay it before the Court ; if not, relate the contents or purport thereof ?—The purport is this : _ " Bristol, three o'clock, Monday morning, Oct. 31. " Sir —I direct you, as commanding officer of his Majesty's troops, take the most vigorous, effective, and decisive means in your power to quell the existing riot, and prevent further destruc tion of property. Yours, &c., "CHARLES PINNEY, Mayor. "To Lieutenant-Colonel Brereton, or the officer commanding his Majesty's troops. " Per Mr. Samuel Golney and Mr. Wintour Harris, jun." Be pleased to state as precisely as you possibly can the exact time of the morning when that letter was despatched, and from what house ?--It was despatched at three o'clock on Mot Way morning, from Mr. Daniel Fripp's, in Berkeley-square. Through what person or persona was that letter despatched ? —Mr. Golney and Mr. Harris, jun. By Captain Warrington—ls Mr. Daniel Fripp a Magistrate of this city ?—He is not ; but he is a relation to Mr. Alderman Fripp, who was with me at the time. When did you write that which you have given to the Court as the purport of your letter addressed . to the officer command ing the troops on the 31st of October ?-1 copied it two or three days ago from acopy made at the time. Were you not told by a serjeant on the night of Sunday, the 30th of October, that the officer commanding the troops had left his address at the District-office, and that if any inquiries were made for him, he was instantly to be informed of it ?—I have no recollection of being so told. By the COURT—To what place were the messengers who carried your letter directed to proceed in quest of the officer commanding the troops ?—I do not recollect that any particular place was named. They were directed to deliver it to the com manding officer, or to Lieut.-Colonel Brereton, as addressed. The witness withdrew. Samuel Golney, surgeon, sworn. Did you receive a letter from the Mayor of Bristol at an early hour on Monday morning, the 31st of October last, ad dressed to Lieutenant-Colonel Brereton, or the officer com manding his Majesty's troops ? If so, state at what place that letter was delivered to you ?—I did receive such letter at the house of Mr. Daniel Fripp, in Berkeley-square. State, as nearly as you can, the hour at which the letter was put into your hands ?—About three o'clock a. m. To whom did you deliver the letter, and at what place ? I delivered the letter to Captain Warrington, at Leigh's Bazaar. Relate, as correctly as you can, any conversation which passed between Captain Warrington and yourself after he had read the Mayor's letter.—He said that Lieutenant-Colonel Brereton was not there; that he believed he would be back about six o'clock in the morning ; and that he would take care the letter was delivered to him. I understood him to say that he could not himself act without a magistrate going every inch of the road with him. He likewise expressed his willing. nets to do every thing in his power, and he expressed regret that the Doddington troop of yeomanry had left Bristol, as they would have been of great service to him to have backed him. There was some conversation about the 14th leaving Bristol, which I do not recollect, but he said it was clear there was a great screw loose somewhere, but where he did not know. Did Captain Warrington say any thing about the horses of his troop, or of the number he could send if employed ?—He said he had but 2.5 efficient men, and that their horses were so tired they were scarcely able to carry them. Had you, in your way towards Berkeley square, before you received the Mayor's letter, stopped at Leigh's Bazaar ?—Yes. Had you any conversation with either of the Officers of the 3d Dragoon Guards on that occasion ? If so, state it.—l had with Cornet Kelson. I called there merely to see if the soldiers were there, as I had heard. Cornet Kelson was standing on the outside. He complained how very cold he was, and said that he was very anxious to go out and do his duty. I said I would en deavour to get him an order for him to do so. lie Captain Warrington—Did you inform Captain Warring tonThat the Doddington troop of Yeomanry had left Bristol ? I certainly said so. Did Captain Warrington state to you, when you gave him the letter before alluded to, that it was not directed to him, but to Lieutenant-Colonel Brereron, who was the officer commanding the troops ?—He did. Did you not then state to him, that if he would open the letter you would take the responsibility upon yourself ?—I cannot state what I said about responsibility, but I certainly suggested to him the propriety of his opening the letter. Did not Captain Warrington request of you, after he had opened the letter, to take it to the officer commanding the troops, whom you would find at the Adjutant's quarters at the corner of Unity-street ?—I don't remember any such request. Did you refuse to take the letter back from Captain War rington after he had opened it 7—No. Did Captain Warrington offer it back to you 7—l do not re_ collect. Who delivered to you the Mayor's letter ?—Mr. Daniel Fripp. When Captain Warrington told you that his horses were so tired, did he not add, that notwithstanding that fact, he was willing to turn out immediately, if he could get proper orders, or the company of a Magistrate ?—Yes. By the COURT—Did you ask where Lieutenant-Colonel Brereton, to whom the letter intrusted to you to deliver was ad. dressed, was likely to be found, or urge the necessity of its im. mediate delivery ?—No, I did not do either. Did you observe any backwardness or unwillingness to act on the part of Captain Warrington P—On the contrary he ex. pressed every willingness to do any thing upon proper orders. When Captain Warrington stated to you that he could not act without a Magistrate to go every inch of the road with him, did you make any reply, or take any measures to communicate to the Mayor or the Magistrates what Captain Warrington had stated 2—No, I did not ; I did not know where to find any other Magistrate than the Mayor; the Mayor had particularly re quested me, through Mr. Daniel Fripp, not to mention where he was. Mr. Alderman Fripp. Were you at the house of Mr. Daniel Fripp early on Monday morning, the 31st of October last, when the Mayor of Bristol despatched a letter or note addressed to Lieutenant-Colonel Brereton, or the officer commanding his Majesty's troops ?—I was ; I advised and dictated that letter. State as exactly as you can, the time in the morning that letter was despatched from Mr. Daniel Fripp's house ?-Imme. diately after three o'clock. How are you able to state the time so particularly ?—I looked at my watch at the time I dated it. No question was put by Captain Warrington. Henry Smith, Esq., Solicitor. Were you in and about Queen -square during Sunday night, the 30th of October, and up to five o'clock on Monday morning, the 3lst 1-1 was in Queen-square during the whole of the night, except at short intervals, when I retired to my own house in Prince's -street, close by. About what time on that morning did you see a detachment of the Dragoons reach Queen -square ?—As near as I can guess, about five in the morning. Was the whole or a considerable portion of the southern wing on the west side of Queen -square destroyed between the hours of half-past three and five on that morning ?—I should think from three to five would be the period during which the part alluded to was destroyed; only two houses remained. What proportion of the houses so destroyed between three and five o'clock was fired or destroyed subsequently to haltl three ?—I should think an that are now burnt down. Was any house fired in Queen-square after the Do arrived in the square ?—None. By Captain Warrington —Was any house in Queen-IscP fired before half-past three?—Oh yes, all the Custom-h ( side, and part of the west wing. Mr. Wintour Harris, jun. Were you with Mr. S. 0. Golney at Mr. Daniel FripP" Betkeley-square, at an early hour on Monday morning of 31st of October last ?.—I was, at about three o'clock in morning. Do you know that he, Mr. Golney, there received a 1 from the Mayor of Bristol, addressed to Lieut-Colunel ton, or the officer commanding his Majesty's troops ?...-Nes.,l Did you accompany Mr. Golney when he went to delivi letter ?—I did accompany him. Relate, as correctly as you can, any conversation which heard bet Ween Captain Warrington and Mr. Golney, after( ..da taro Warrington had real the Mayor's letter.—He '''''' 1 Warrington) hesitated about opening the letter, but afte had opened it, at the suggestion of Mr. Golney, he said th e) should be very happy to do anything that lay in his power, he could do nothing without a Magistrate ; that he shouldil quire a Magistrate to go every inch of the road with him Ig. • side, and he hoped we did not think the blame rested with"; He expressed his regret at the Doddington troop of Yeol ll l - having retired from Bristol, from their being unable to o' o Magistrate. He likewise expressed his regret at the 14th b 1 _ ... ing been sent out of town, and he ended the conversatio n saying there was a great screw loose somewhere. By Captain Warrington—Did not Mr. Golney induce C tain Warrington to open the letter, by saying that he 0 take the responsibility upon himself believe that he duced Captain Warrington to open the letter, but I do not member his saying anything about taking the responsibilitY himself. Captain Warrington hawing proposed another question, 25 sending the letter, _ . The PRESIDENT said, that the officers then assembled , by whom Captain Warrington was to be tried, might coal that it would have been more proper to have sent the letter some other mode than to have asked two civilians to have veyed it to the Commanding Officer. He said this by war advice, and to rescue him from those who might perhaps me , n mend him to adopt a mode which, in a military sense, 11 '1 bear against him. The question was then withdrawn. Did you take any means to apprise any Magistrate that CI, taro Warrington was willing to turn out with his troop if Magistrate would accompany him ?—I did not know where find any Magistrate except the Mayor, and Mr. Golney ands self were requested not to say tehere he was. I did know to find Mr. Barrow ; but I knew he was ill. In re-examination—Did Captain Warrington press you' Mr. Golney to go back to the Mayor and say that his I )t seller or that of another Magistrate was indispensable to' employment of the troops ?—I do not remember that he did. Mr. Alderman Thomas Camplin examined. Were the riots raging in Bristol with increased and destr , tive violence from two o'clock in the afternoon of Sand? Oct. 30, till five o'clock on the morning of Monday, Oct• last ?—.They were. Did you go to the Horse Bazaar on Monday morning, Oct. for the purpose of calling out the troops ? If so, be pleased state as precisely as you can the exact time of your going then I went there about four o'clock, a.m., for the purpose of quiring whether any troops were there. Who accompanied you, and to whom did you apply for t assistance of the military ?—Mr. Danson and two or tht others accompanied me, and on being informed there 'wg troops there, I applied for the commanding officer. I th' applied to Captain Warrington, who appeared as commandi' officer. State all that passed between you and Captain Warring o a , th... Horse Bazaar ?—I t )1d Captain Warrington rnylnabO j that I was a Magistrate for Bristol; that unless troops we.,' instantly sent to Queen-square, the whole square would °, burnt down ; he told me the horses and men were all tire that he had a letter from the Mayor, dated three o'clock, 0 Lieutenant-Colonel Brereton, and that he could not find hi! any where. I read the letter, and said it was a very pror one. He said, he could not send more than 24 men. Ire " Don't talk of sending, but go yodrself,—a man of you experience,—and do not send an inexperienced officer," words to that effect :he said the troops should not fire. 14 reply \vas, I believe there has been some understanding' meant rotative to firing. He said, the troops should not without a Magistrate; upon which I said I was ready to ; with them. He then said, the troops cannot go until I 110 seen Colonel Brereton. I replied, let us go and look for hir We went together to No. 2, Unity-street, College_gree l where we unexpectedly met with Colonel Brereton. I 3, unexpectedly, because lie had been previously denied by tv , females who looked out of the window. I expressed my pleasul at finding Colonel Brereton, and conversation ensued betvve , Colonel Brereton, Captain Warrington, and myself, in tl presence of several others. The witness was very anxious to proceed further on tbil point, but the prosecutor stated that he had carried Capfa i° l Warrington to Unity-street, and he did not wish to procce further. The witness again said he wished to make a remat but the President told him that the Court were satisfied, 0 1 ( that was sufficient. .] Did a party of the 3d Dragoon Guards proceed afterwards t Queen-square, according to your direction ?—They did. What time elapsed from the time when you first saw c a ptai Warrington at the Horse Bazaar, to the arrival of the Dragoon in Queen.square, and at what hour did th e y reac h t h e square . Nearly an hour elapsed. They arrived there about five o'cloCU" What is the distance from the Horse Bazaar to Queer!' square ?—I conceive about the third of a mile. What portion of the square was destroyed when the Dragoe o arrived ?—Nearly two sides, and the mob were commencill% upon the third. By Captain Warrington—Did Captain Warrington tell ye ti , 1 before you left the Bazaar, that whatever Magistrate require ° thetroops to fire must accompany them P—l do not recolleC t that he did. Did you, when the troops went to Queen-square, accompan: them ?—I did, on foot. • How long did you remain with them ?—Until about sever o'clock. When you told Captain Warrington that you were a magic' trate, did he not say, " Come along, then ?"—To the best of to/ knowledge, he did not. Were - any persons present at the Horse Bazaar when yog held the conversation with Captain Warrington which you have stated to the Court ?—Yes, Mr. Danson I can state poSi' tively to, and as to the others I cannot say. By the COURT—When you expressed to Capt-Warringtont in such strong terms. that it was your opinion he should go biro' self with the Dragoons, and not send an inexperienced officer , did he make any specific reply to what you said, or did he merely say the troops should not fire 7—He made no specific reply. You have stated that Captain Warrington said he did not know where to find the officer commanding the troops ; at whose suggestion, then, was it you went to Unity.street to look for him P—l had seen a Mr. Francis, an officer connected with the staff, some time ago accidently going into No. 2, Unity-street; that induced me to go there, thinking I might find Lieutenant' Colonel Brereton there, knowing that he lived some two or three miles from Bristol. • Frederick Maxwell Danson, Esq. examined. Did you meet Alderman Camplin in College green early 01 Monday morning, the 31st October, and if so state at about what hour ?—I met him at about twenty minutes after four. Did any circumstance occur to enable you to mark the hour with any particular exactness P—Yes ; before leaving the house in which I reside in Park.street, I looked at the clock. and saw it was just a quarter past four. Did you accompany Mr. Alderman Camplin from College green to the Horse-bazaar ?—I did. The Court adjourned it being now four o'clock. FRIDAY, JAN. 27. The President and the other distinguished officers coal posing the Court entered, and took their seats precisely at ten o'clock. The names of the officers having been read over, the examination of Frederick Maxwell Hanson, Esq. which com menced yesterday, was proceeded with. If any thing passed between Mr. Alderman Camplin and Captain Warrington, or between yourself and Captain War rington on that occasion, be pleased to state the particulars.-- Alderman Camplin asked for the Commanding Officer, and we were shown to a place covered with straw, where we say/ some Dragoons lying down on one side, and the horses stand.. ing on the other. We went back, and almost immediately , after Captain Warrington came up. Mr. Camplin told hit» that he was a Magistrate, and he came to require the assist ance of the troops in the square. Captain Warrington ex pressed great willingness to come. He said " Very well, Sir, they are ready ;" and Capt a i n W arr i ngton said to Mr. Camplin inquiringly, " You will go with us ?" Mr. Camplin seemed to hesitate, and Captain Warringtod said, " No ; my orders are that the troops shall not go out without a Magistrate." I had a word or two with Mr. Camplin, and then said, " 01 course the Alderman will go down ; he will go as a Magistrate to direct the use of the troops." Captain Warrington said, " I suppose you know we have received a letter from the Mayor, requiring the service of the troops." Mr. Camplin then said, " That confirms what we are come for." Captain Warrington then pulled out his pocket-book, and gave it to us to read. On my asking him whether he had it, and if he would suffer us to read it, some conversation ensued about the numbers. Captain Warrington said, " I can only send down five-and-twenty." Mr. Camplin replied, " Won't you go yourself ? you had better go with us." Captain Warrington said, " No, I shall send an officer ;" and inquired what the troops were to do when they got to the square. Mr. Camplin said, " Oh, they'll ride in among the mob, and beat them with the flats of their swords." Captain Warrington seemed to doubt the efficiency of their num bers for that purpose. I said, but as you will have a Magis trate with you, if necessary, of course you will fire. Captain Warrington answered promptly„' No, my orders are not to fire." On which I said, I take it for granted you get those orders from the Colonel (meaning Colonel Brereton) ; if so, we can't expect you to act contrary to them. Then either Mr. Camplin or myself asked Captain Warrington to accompany us to Colonel Brereton, with the view of seeing if we could get further instructions, to No. 2, in Unity-street. How much time do you conceive to have passed with Alder man Camplin in College-green, before you reached the Bazaar ? How much during the conversation there with Captain War rington, and how much in and about No. 2 in Unity.street be fore you lett that house, prior to the Dragoons being called out ? —About three minutes in College-green, under ten minutes in conversation with Captain Warrington at the Bazaar, and fully about a quarter of an hour in Unity -street—about half an LORDS. Bagot Farnham Stowell Redesdale Prudhoe Lauderdale (Earl of) Manners Hopetown (Earl of) Clanbrassill (Earl of Roden) Maryborough Oriel (Vise. Ferrard) Kerr (Marquis of Lothian) Bayning Dynevor Sheffield (Earl of) Wallace Southampton Rolle Cowley Yesterday was the birth-day of the Duke of Sussex, when his Royal Highness completed his fifty-ninth year. Their Royal Highnesses the Duchess of Kent and the Princess Victoria, honoured Drury-lane with their presence last night (a juvenile night), to see the performance of the Brigand and the Pantomi►ne.. Prince George of Cumberland, accompanied by his tutor, honoured with his presence the performance at Drury-lane Theatre, last evening. The Marquis of Lansdowne, the Earl of Carlisle, the Lord Mayor, the Master-General of the Ordnance, the Right Hon. Charles Grant, Viscount Palmerston, and the Duke of Rich. mond, visited Earl Grey yesterday, et the Treasury. The Belgian Minister had an interview with Viscount Pal merston yesterday, at the Foreign office. Despatches were sent off last night from the Office of the Se cretary of State for Foreign Affairs, for Viscount Granville, our Ambassador at Paris ; and also for Sir Charles Bagot, our Am bassador at the Hague. Sir James Kemyt, the Master-General of the Ordnance, had an interview with Viscount Goderich yesterday, at the Colonial office. A petition has been sent up to the KING from Nottingham, very numerously and respectably signed, praying that lie will be pleased to extend his Royal mercy to the five poor men now lying under sentence of death at that place for their share in the late riots. We are given to u nderstand that a strong feeling exists in Nottingham, th a t the interests of justice and good order will be more advanced in that town by saving, than by sacrificing, the lives of these men. As far as we have been able to ascer tain the fact. a similar notion prevails largely in the me tropol is. Times. - - ----- LORD ABERDEEN'S MAJORITY and MINORIT LORDS, .14. v. 26, MAJORITY. PEERS PRESENT, .5! VISCOUNTS. Hood Goderich Falkland LORDS. Say and Scle Lynedoch Fingal' (Earl of) Poltimore Dacre De Saumarez Sefton (Earl ol) Sea , ord Holland Selsey King Chaworth (Earl of Meath) Cloneurry Sundridge (Duke of Argyll) Melbourne (Visa) Somerhill (Marquis of Clanricarde) H. R. H. the Duke of Sussex DUKES. Norfolk Richmond Des onshire St. Alban's MARQUISSES. Lansdowne Cleveland EARLS. Shrewsbury Pomfret Radnor Tankerville Essex Mulgrave Oxford Albemarle Cowper Grey Gosford Chichester Carlisle Denbigh PROXIES, 73. EARLS. DUKES. Grafton Somerset Brandon (Hamilton) Bedford Portland MARQUISES. Winchester Queensberry Anglesea Staftbrd Westminster Breadalbane Northampton O'Niel Spencer llchester Derby ISCOITNTS. Leinster (Duke) Granville St. Vincent Lake EARLS. Ferrers Camperdown Lichfield Charlemont Cawdor Fortescue Morley Hillsborough (Mar quis of Downshire) On-low Buckinghamshire Huntingdon Nelson Craven Minto LORDS. Suffield Wenlock Dundas Montfort Gardner Clinton Fisherwick (Marquis' of Donegall) Lovel and Holland (Earl of Egmont) Lyttleton Yarborough Erskine Sondes Crewe Mounteagle (Marquis of SligO) A lvanley IHowden. H. R. H. the Duke 6 Cumberland MINORITY. 'JEERS PRESENT, 30, DUKE. Wellington MARQUISSES. Abercorn Salisbury Thomond EARLS. Wicklow Vane (Marquis of Londonderry) Carnarvon Eldon Delawarr Mansfield Rosslyn Bathurst EARLS. Orford Verolain Jersey Brow nlow Caledon Beverley %ISCOUNT9. Lorton Sidney Gordon (Earl ofAber. deen) (Arbuthnot Arbuthnot LORD. DUKES. Newcastle Rutland Buckingham Northumberland Beaufort MARQUISSES. Ailesbury Exeter Hertford Bristol Tweeddale Bute Camden Cholmondeley Penshurst (Viscount' Strangford) EARLS. Hardwicke Morton Longford Digby Doncaster (Duke of Buccleucfi) Chesterfield PROXIES, 56. EARLS. Scarborough Leven and Melville Selkirk Norwich (Duke of Gordon) Wilton Lonsdale Glengall Mount Edgecumbe Dartmouth Falmouth Home Warwick Graham (Duke of Montrose) VISCOUNTS. Clancarty (Earl of Clanc irty Hereford Strathallan Gort Exmouth COURT CIRCU LAR.