The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-03-19 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL STANb3Rto. Imprrial Vartiament. __— ELOOSE OF LORDS. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 13. Petitions, praying for the better observance of the Sabkath, Were presented by Lord Suffield, and by the Bishop of Bath and Wells, from certain stage-coach proprietors,—Earl Sefton presented a petition from certain Protestant dissenters at Tox teth, praying for the removal of civil disabilities affecting the Jews.—The Earl of Roden presented a petition from a place. in Scotland against church patronage.—Petitions, praying for the Abolition of slavery, were presented by Earl Fitzwilliam, (ten in number) from places in lelorthamptoushire; and by the Lord Chancellor, from - Fowey.—Adjourned. THURSDAY. The Marques of Westminster presented a petition, praying, as we understood, for the repeal of all laws relating to the ob e r van cc of the Sabbath. Earl Cawdor presented a petition from Carmarthen, praying for the abolition of slavery. Earl Grey presented a similar petition from Portsmouth, as did also the bard of Gosford, from Caithness. EDUCATION. The LORD Cuatechetoe, in rising to move that a message be sent to the Commons for a copy of certain returns connected with the subject of education, said that. he would take that op portunity of explaining the reasons why he did not think it ex pedient now to bring forward the measures relative to popular education, which he introduced into the House of Commons when he was a member of that assembly. This was not a reso lution formed yesterday, for, six years ago, he stated his inten tiou not to proceed with the measure, which he first introduced iulB2o. It appeared from returns made prior to 184 that there existed in England and Wales a considerable number of en dowed and unendowed schools, in addition to Sunday schools, - for the education of poor children, but these establishments wery by no means adequate to the wants of the country, inasmuch aP they furnished the means of education to only about 600,000 or 700,000 children. It was then thought, by some of the best friends of education who had investigated the subject, that it was not advisable to establish a compulsory rate for the support of schools, lest those benevolent persons who then, by volun tary contributions, maintained 14,000 unendowed day schotes, Ist which 478,000 were educated, should withdraw their support from those establishments. Nevertheless he, in common with many persons, was of opinion that a compulsory rate should be established for the purposes of education, and for this reason— that the support which schools received froM voluntary subscrip tions was of a temporary, fluctuating, and fleeting nature; so • that not only might it vary in one year as compared with ano ther, but it might utterly pass,avcay. In 1826 he again brought forward his bill, but in consequence of the serious objections which the great body of Dissenters entertained to many of its details, he withdrew it. In 1828 a new era opened with respect to the Dissenters. Iu that year the repeal of the Test and Cor poratiou Acts removed the distinction which had principally di vided his Majesty's subjects into Churchmen and Dissenters, and it then appeared to him that the objections it which the latter body had formerly entertained to his bill would be removed.— But also occurred to him that it would be most material to endeavour to ascertain whether the voluntary support which was given to schools in this country was of so fluctuating, fleeting a nature as he had supposed. In order to satisfy his mind upon this point, he addressed, in his individual capacity, about 500 letters to clergymen in every county in the kingdom, requesting information on the subject of the schools in their respective pa rishes. To these letters, which were addressed quite at random, lie received nearly as many answers, and the information which they contained was highly gyatifying. The result showed that, whereas in 1818 there were in the whole kingdom, as he had al . ready stated, 14,000 unendowed day schools, educating 4 . /8,000 . tiri:oren, in 1828 there were in the particular places to which he had addressed his letters alone uo less than 3,•200 schools of this description, educating 105,0(A) children. Takine these places as affording a fair sample of the rest of the kingcrom, as he had • a right to do from the manner in which he had addressed his circulars, the result would be, that there were 230,000 unendow ed day schools educating 1,030,00 X) children, all supported by voluntary subscriptions, independently of the endowed schools, which educated 165,000, and of the Sunday schools, which fur vished very useful and salutary education, though necessarily . of inferior importance to that which could be obtained from day . schools. Unuer these circumstances he became a convert to the opinion of those who thought it would be unwise to disturb a state of things which produced such admirable results; and therefore he abandoeed - his plan for establishing a compulsory rate for the purpose§ of education. Ile still, however, consi dered the `means of education defective in two points. In the first place, they were defective in small parishes. There were .500 parishes in which no schools existed at all. This was owing to the parishes being small in size and of limited mutation. — in many of them there were not more than 30 or 40 families.— It was evident, that however perfect the system of education might be, the inhabitants of such districts must depend upon private means fur instruction. In the second case, however, the defective, means of education could not be too much de plored, or too speedily taken into consideration, with the view tsf applying a remedy,—he alluded t 6 the large towns, particu larly the eapitaLand the large manufacturing towns in the north of England.. There was no part of England in which there . was a greater number of persons more in want of the ordinary means of obtaining the most common education. Persons una quainted with the subject could hardly conceive any idea of the extent of the evil, it was the common observation of persons who had not attended to the subject that, notwithstanding the increase of education, the amount of crime had gone on as ra pidly increasing. It was too much to expect that, in the short period of a few years, education could produce such an effect as to show a diminution of crime on the face of the calendar.— '1 here were various causes, into which he would not then enter, which satisfactorily accounted for the apparent increase of crime during the last 10 or 14 yea's. lie, however, would maintain, and, if necessary, would..prove it to the satisfaction of every one, that crime decreased in proportion as the people were better instructed. It was notorious, that in all parts of - the world where education had made progress, a diminution of Crimes connected with violence had taken place, although the population had gone on increasing. Persons, therefore, who maintained that a diminution of crime was not the result of an extension of education, talked without regard to facts or to the essential principles of the human mind. in Russia, where edu cation might be said scarcely to exist, out of 5,800 crimes tom . Mitted within a certain period, 3,500 were accompanied by vio lence ; whilst in Pennsylvania, where' education was generally diffused, out of 7,400 crimes only 640 were accompanied by vio lence, being iu the proportion of 1-12th of the whole number, instead of 3-sths, as in the former case. If it was necessary to decide this question by arithmetical results, he could easily pro duce abundance of evidence to support his view of the case. He -Would, however, content himself with stating, further, that in a gaol which it was not necessary to name, out of 400 prisoners who were confined in it, 200 were utterly incapable of reading and writing, and 50 more knew only the alphabet. The noble end learned lord concluded by observing, as we understood, that lie had felt it necessary to make these remarks in order to pre vent his conduct being made the subject of misconstruction. He moved that a message be sent to the Commons for a copy of certain returns connected with education. Lord ELLENBOROCOH said, that after the statement made by the noble and learned lord, it must be a subject of great gratifi cation to him that the measure which he had brought forward . ten years ago had not been adopted. He had always been op . posed to a compulsory rate for the purposes of education, be cause he thought it would deprive the rich of the power of con . tiliating the lower classes, watch they at present possessed, by extending to them the means of education. For the same rea son he was reluctant to adopt any compulsory proceeding with respect to great towns, which the noble and learned lord still seemed to consider necessary. He certainly had not been pre pared to hear such a statement as the noble and learned lord had given of the state of ignorance which prevailed in those great towns, because it was only a‘short time since that the ex • traordinary intelligence of those great towns was urged as a reason for extending the elective franchise to them. if the in habitants of the great towns were in the state of ignorance de ecribed by the noble lord, it was their own fault. The opera tives, as they were called, received much higher wages than the . agricultural labourers. He was inclined to leave it to the 'talus rat feeling of parents to provide the means of education for their c hildren, amid also to large capitalists, whose duty it was to con tribute to the wellbeing of those from wh om th ey d er i ve d t h e i r wealth. Without wi lling to enter into any argument w i t h respect to the noble lord's proposition, that crime was dimi nished in proportion as education was extended, he would merely remark that in Ireland, where snore persons in propos , ton to the population could read and write than in any other . c tuntry in the world, a greater number of crimes was perpe t axed. The Earl of CLARENDON said a few words, which were in aulible. The Loan CHANCELLOR said it required a refinement of in - genuity, for which lie had not given even the noble baron cre dit, to drag the Reform Bill into a discussion on the subject of "education. The noble baron should recollect that ministers had never recommended the establishment of universal suffrage, though som e thi ng 'tending to thatpoint had been recommenued by the opponents of the,Reform Bill. The rich manufacturers del contribute towards the education of the poor; Latthe means were neverthekss instifficient. Lord ELLENBOROUGH said, he must again declare, that the noble and .learned lord had formerly given a very different de scription of the population in the manufacturing towns, without any distinctions as to, rich and poor, from that which he had given this evening. With respect to the Reform Bill, he had only incidentally alluded to it, and never would enter into any general discussion upon it. , _ The motion was then agreed to. The Law Amendment Bill was read a second time. Adjourned. FRIDAY. Petitions praying for the better observance of the Sabbath were presented by the Bishop of Bangor, from a place in Berk shire ; by the Bishop of Bristol, from the town. of Pembroke-, by the Marquis of Cholmondeley, from Chipping-Sodbury and by Earl Fitzwilliani, from a place in Yorkshire.—Petitions praying for the abolition of slavery were presented by the Earl of 'Albemarle, from Tavistock ,• by Lord Teynham, from a place in Ayrshire; and by Earl Fitzwilliam, from two •parishes in Yorkshire.—The Earl of Roden presented a petition from the Isle of Skye against church patronage in Scotland.—Ad journed to Monday. HOUSE OF COMMONS. WEDNESDAY, MAltsu 13. ADJOURNED SITTING. At five o'clock the house resumed. Sir J. BYING brought up the report of the committee on the Newry borough election petition, stating that though the sitting and duly returned Member, Lord A. Hill, was not implicated, bribery and corruption were extensively practised at that elec tion, and they particularly called the attention of the house to the part taken in those practices by James Lisle and other electors. The petition was declared to be neither frivolous nor vexatious. • The iiiinutes of evidence were ordered to be printed: ' The Si;iikkErt having informed the house that the petitioners against the returns for the king's county, for the county of Carlow; (Mr. Bruen,) fOr the' county of Gafway,'ancLfor had not entered into the proper recognilanees; the orders of the day for the consideration of those petitions were diScharged. On the motion of Sir H. VERNEY, returns ivere ordered of the number of persons charged and punished by penalty for breaches of the customs 'and excise laws last year. Mr. ROBINSON presented a petition from Portsmouth for an amendment of its chartdred municipal laws and institutions. On the inotion of the same hon. member, returns were ordered of the number of commissioners of excise and customs who en joyed retiring pensions since 1810, stating the amount of salary and pension in each case. Lard SANDON gave notice that he would to-morrow move, on Presenting a petition to that effect, 'that the corporation of Liverpool be heard by their counsel before the Liverpool bri bery committee. Mr. O'CONNELL obtained leaie to bring in a bill for amend ing the, aw of fine and recoveries in Ireland. He adopted the principle of the Solicitor - General's bill for t ngland, the dif ference of provisions being consequent upon the difference of land tenure in Ireland. Mr. W. PATTEN postponed his motion to 'an earlyday (not named) for a commission to receive evidence respecting the labour in factories. His only object was to enable these manu facturers and employers who were inculpated by the former evidence to rebut the charges against them. His motion was not designed with any view to defeat the bill brought in by Lord Ashley for regulating the hours of labour in factories. Lord ALTHORP moved the order of the day for the house resolving itself into a committee on the IRISH DISTURBANCES BILL. On the suggestion of Mr. FERGUSON, the noble lord con sented to postpone the court-martial clause till the others were disposed of. Lord ALTIIORP said, that in consequence of the strong repre sentations which has. been made by several supporters of the principle of the bill, ministers had agreed upon effecting two alterations in its provisions—the one in the court-martial clause, the other in the'clause relating to the domiciliary visits by night. (Hear.) They proposed that no officer should be permitted to sit in the court-martial under the rank of captain; (hear) and, secondly, that when the number on the court-martial did not exceed seven persons, that no verdict should be valid unless at least five out of the seven agreed upon it; (that if the court martial consist but of five persons, that no verdict should hold good in which all five had not agreed; (hear) and that when the number exceeded seven persons, that seven must agree to the verdict. (Hear.) They also proposed that in the case of a domiciliary visit, where the party summoned answered by name, the civil force should not possess the power of enforcing an entrance. (Heat, hear.) Mr. ROBINSON conceived the proposition insisting upon the perfect unanimity of a court-martial consisting of but five persons to be objectionable, as the chances of acquittal under it were dis proportionately greater than under a more numerous tribunal. Lord ALTHORP said that the smaller the number the greater was the necessity of unanimity. (Cheers.) Mr. WadayirroN asked whether the commanding. officer would possess the power of sending back a verdict for re-con sideration, as in ordinary courts-martial? No answer was given to the question. • On the question that the Speaker do leave the chair, Mr. O'CONNELL rose to propose, as an amendment, that it be an instruction to the committee to preserve inviolate the right of petition to the King's subjects in Ireland for redress of griev ances, the petitions to be addressed to the throne and the two houses of Parliament. 'He had intended to have offered a direct opposition to the Speaker's leaving the chair; but, after the overwhelming majority which had voted against him on a for mer occasion, he thought it needless to give hon. members the trouble attendant upon a division, and therefore adopted the less direct and more convenient form of opposition. He would, however, make no farther concession, and wouldlake the sense and opinion of the house on the principle of each ,clause. He began with the first section of the first clause, that which went to deprive the people of Ireland of the sacred and constitutional right of petition, and he was anxious to afford every hon. mem ber au opportunity of expressing his opinion on the principle involved in it—in fact,'of declaring whether or not Ireland was to be deprived of every vestige of the British constitution, and whether its connection with this county} is or is not to remain a bitter mockery ? His amendment was merely to preserve to the people of Ireland the power of peaceably meeting for the purpose of petitioning for the redress of grievances—bona fide grievances—for he would not object to such provision as would prevent the power being abused to other than botiafide griev ances, and only in the cases of addressing either houses of Par liament or the King in person. '1 he hon. and learned member, after contending that the existing law was sufficiently strong to prevent the Use of inflammatory language at public meetings, and that the clause to which he had directed the attention of the house was unnecessary for that purpose, concluded by mov ing—"'That it be au instruction to the 'committee to preserve inviolate and effectual the undoubted right of his Majesty's sub j ects in Ireland peaceably . to propose, prepare, and present petitions for redressing grievances to his Majesty and to both houses of Parliament." Mr. F. O'CONNOR seconded the amendment. Lord ALTHORP was not quite sure whether, according to the ordinary practice of the house, the hon. and learned gentleman was quite justified in moving au instruction to the committee of the nature proposed. ' He had always heard it laid down as a rule of that house, that instructions to a committee, not giving that committee power beyond what it possessed before, could not be moved. The committee already possessed the power of altering the clause to which the hon, and learned member had referred, and therefore his instruction, to say the least, was un necessary. It appeared to him that the moving of such au instruction coulu only be intended for the purpose of delay. (Hear, hear.) The hon. and learned gentleman had told the house what he wished to take its opinion upon three great constitutions) questions—first, upon the impropriety o f abolish ing the right of petition; next, upon the impropriety of abolish ing the trial by jury; and, thirdly, upon the impolicv of sus pending the Habeas Corpus Act. Taking these questions as abstract questions, it would, no doubt, be favourable to the hon. And learned gentleman's object to ask the house whether it was favourably disposed or not to the right of petition ; for there could be no question that every member would agree that the right of petition was one of the most valuable rights enjoyed. by British subjects. he hon. and learned gentleman sa id, that by the first clause of this bill the right of petitioning was done away with altogether. Now, nothing could be a greater exaggeration than such. a statement (hear, hear;) ,for the fi rs t clause of the bill merely said that the Lord-Lieutenant might, by order, prohibit or suppress the meeting of any assembly deemed by him to be dangerous to the public peace, or incon venient with the due administration of the law. As to the right of meeting to petition in a district proclaimed all di sturbed, he really saw nothing more mischievous, nothing more likely to continue the disturbances which all sides wished to check, than the assembling of large meetings at which discussions were to take place similar to those which had recently taken place in Dublin. (h ear.) Mr. H. GRATTAN conceived that those who were opposed to this bill were bound to express their objections to it at every sta g e of it. The hon. gentle man th en procee d e d to con d emn the bill, because it took away the right of petition ; because it destroyed the liberty of the press and f ree d om of discussion; because it was intended to promote the collection of tithes ; because severe as it was, it was not adequate to the purposes for , , which it was intended; and because the justification of it was not' made out—a justification which rested on the increase of crime in Ireland having been greater during the last three years than the increase of crime in England; but which was completely contradicted by returns which were on the table of the house, and which had been quoted with such triumphant effect on a former night by the hon. and learned member for Dublin. He concluded by calling upon the right non. secre tary for Ireland to give the house a distinct avowal that he did not intend to use this bill as an engine for the more certain collection of tithes. The gallery was then cleared for a division, when the num bers were : For adopting Mr. O'Connell's instruction 63 Against it Majority There was a second division on the question " That the Speaker do now leave the chair." The numbers were— For the motion l5l Against it Majority On our readmission to the gallery we found the house in committee, Mr. Baring in the chair. On the question being put "That the preamble be postponed," Mr. O'Corimut, rose and said, that the preamble contained a recital to W„hich he entirely objected. It set forth—" And $ t whereas divers3Peetin s grid assemblies, inconsistent with the public peace and/ safer ' and with the exercise of regular go vernment, have for som time past been held in Ireland; and whereas the laws now in force in that part of the united king dom have been found inadequate to the prompt and effectual suppression of the said mischiefs, and the interposition of' Par liament is necessary for the purpoSe of checking the further progress of the same." Now, he denied the truth of that as sertion. He should therefore move, that after the words "that the preamble be postponed," there be added these. words, " the same containing an untrue recital." Mr. COBBETT said the preamble of every bill ought to be strictly true. He should heartily second the amendment, and he hoped that the hon. and learned gentleman would divide the house on the question, and carry his point. Mr. ClieNkiAN opposed the amendment. He had sufficient confidence in his Alajesty's ministers to indulge in the hope that they would not pass the bill without some qualifications. Mr. O'llwypn condemned the preamble as untrue. The right hon. secretary'for Ireland had endeavoured to prove its correctness by adducing evidence on which a man could not be convicted even of petty larceny. It was his determination to support his hon...and learned friend, and to divide the house With him. Mr. C. FERGESSON said the opposition to the preamble would be extremely reasonable at the proper time, but the postpone ment of it was only a matter of form. It must be considered hereafter. It was said that the existing laws were sufficient for the suppression of disturbance in Ireland, while at the very same time it was admitted that some new laws were necessary for the pacification of that country. If new laws were consi dered necessary, then it was clear that the present laws were insufficient. He should vote against the amendment. There was, however, one part of the bill to which he was opposed. He did not approve of giving over any portion of his Majesty's subjects to a military tribunal. Mr. O'CONNELL said that the preamble set forth that "the laws now in force in Ireland are inadequate to the prompt and effectual suppression of disturbance." He wanted proof of what was asserted in the preamble ; he called for that proof; and if it were not given, then it would be impossible for the house to carry this measure with anv show of justice. Mr. F. O'CONNOR said, he would_ support the amendment on the ground taken by . the hon. and learned member for Dublin— namely, diat there no foUndation for the recital. He, as a barrister, had opportunities of seeing many criminal cases, and he never knew any want of witnesses or of Jurors. Mr. STANLEY would read one sentence from the preamble of the bill, and a short passage from the report of the committee on the state of Ireland, and having done so, he should leave it to the house to determine how far the assertion of the hon. and learned member for Dublin, that the preamble was negatived by the report, could be considered to be borne out by the facts of the case. The preamble stated that " Whereas the laws now in force, in Ireland have been found inadequate to the prompt and effectual, suppression of the said mischiefs."— The committee state in 'their report " that although it is quite true, as has been stated by the Chief Justice of the King's Bench in his charge to the grand jury of the Queen's county, that the ordinary and regular laws had been found sufficient to put down the various Whiteboy associations which have from tune to time existed, it is equally true that in every instance every association has made itself complete masters of the county where it has been formed, and committed all kinds of crimes and enormities with impunity for a cOnsiderable period before the enforcement of the powers of the law has produced a remedy." Could it be said, after this, that the report nega tived the allegation " that the laws now in force had been - found inadequate to the prompt and effectual suppression of the mischiefs." Thus, instead of the preamble being contradicted, it was fully borne out and strengththened by the authority quoted by the hon. and learned member for Dublin. (Cheers.) Mr. HOME was of opinion that the report did contradict the preamble. At a future time he should be prepared to agree with his learned friend that no part of the allegation was borne out by the facts of the case. Mr. O'CONNELL reiterated his former assertion that the re port negatived the preamble, but was willing, in conformity with the recommendation of his lion. friend - the member for Middlesex. to withdraw his amendment. 111 r. H. GuivrTAN said, that the six judges in their charges to grand juries had completely contradicted the allegations in the preamble, that such " alarm and intimidation ' had been created " as materially to impede the due course of public jus tice, and to frustrate the ordinary modes of criminal prose cution." Mr. STANLEY, in reply to the hon. member for Meath, had only to repeat what he had distinctly stated on a former occa sion, namely, that it was not the intention of government to make this act in any way available for the enforcement of any civil process, whether for the recovery of rent or tithes. Mr. J. GRATTAN had no doubt, after this explanation, that the act was to be applied to the collection of tithes. He main tained that there was no "conspiracy against the rights of pro perty," with the exception of tithe property • and asked the right hon. secretary to state what he considered to be the other rights of property that were invaded in Ireland ; Mr. STAMEY.—The hon. gentleman asked him " what he considered to be rights of property?" He was perfectly pre pared to answer the hon. gentleman. lie considered it to be a right of property that a man should be allowed to let his own land to whom he pleased. (Hear, hear.) He considered it to be a right of property that a man should be permitted to take land from whom he pleased. (Hear.) It was a right of property cultivate land as a man pleased. (Hear.) It was a right of property that a man should be maintained in the safe and se cure enjoyment of his dwelling and his land, without being ex .posed to the incursions of nightly marauders and murderers, terrifyinc , the peaceable inhabitants, burning their houses over their heads, dragging them from their beds, murdering them at their doors, and parading the roads and highways by night and by day in the commission of every atrocity. (Loud cheering.) complained that the right hon. secretary only adopted such a portion of the report as he thought suitable to his purpose, at the same time that he introduced a measure ne ver contemplated by the committee. Ile took the liberty, with great respect, of asking the right hon. secretary whether, as far as a judgment could yet be formed from the result of the assizes now taking place, he conceived that justice had or had not been fairly and fearlessly administered ? (Cheers.) Lord ALTHORP said that a good deal of confusion had been produced by the different subjects and questions introduced to the notice of the house on this occasion. With respect to the assizes now in progress, if he were not misinformed, though there might have been some convictions for offences described in the bill at the assizes, the outrages were still going on, and it could not be affirmed that the assizes had been successful in the repression of crime. Mr. O'CONNELL said the question raised was, whether the bill was not, in truth and in fact, a tithe bill, though it embraced some other objects? He was of opinion that it was a tithe bill. What had all the meetings referred to in the pre am bl e , an d which it was sought by this bill to repress—what had they been held for if not for an abolition of tithes ? Mr. SHAW said that he, for one, would not be indebted for the preservation of his life and property to the breath of the hon. and learned member for Dublin. If that hon. gentleman could give them peace he surely could destroy it—he was at least as powerful to do evil as to do good, and he, (Mr. Shaw) for one, would never consent that the peace of Ireland should be dependent upon his mandates. Mr. O'CONNELL very much doubted whether it was becoming on the part of a judge of the land to pursue the course which the lion. and learned gentleman was now pursuing. Mr. M. I YFERRALL remarked, that if the right hon. gentle man (Mr. Stanley) had adopted the measures recommended in the report of the committee of last session. such a measure as the present would not be at all required. Mr. SHAW said that he was not a judge of the land, but that even if he were, had he been wholly unconnected with the trials in question, he did not see how it would be unbecoming on his part to give an oinion on the subject, and he fancied that he Lad as good a right to do so as the prisoner's counseL ''`',. C .• 4 Mr. O'CONNELL said that he was in the habit of bel ligned, and he did not mind it. He had agitated,..,_ab, agitated successfully, against that faction which t3ebep learned gentleman now publicly disclaimed. Ber nd hon. and. learned gentleman's merits were known •ui was more ready to do justice to his well-known situation he now filled than he (Mr. O'Connell) WI tion placed him where he was, in the office of Recorde lin, and they could place whom they pleased th,ereito rest the Irish bar had no chance of competing w of their choice. aua Mr. FINN said that the magistrates of Kilkenny their duty, and that they bad only themselves to b state in which the county was. r ae Mr. LAMBERT spurned with the most sovereign CO l insinuation that the gentlemen who sat around in"' sent to that house by agitation. s u Mr. O'CONNELL said he would not press the que division,_ but withdraw his aendment. Mr. T. ATTWOOD rose, b ut was immediately tn . t er° loud and repeated cries of ("Question.") utl The CHAIRMAN then rose for the p ur pose ni P question, when h i 0 319 Mr. BUCKINGHAM stood up, but the noise succeeded, occasioned by coughing, and cries of was so extreme, as to induce the hon. member to re seat M . U 11 U pon this 0 11 r. ME rose, and declared that if the hon. ni e be i not allowed to express his opinion on the question Cl house, he (Mr. Hume) would. at once move that the to leave the chair and report progress. Did they wi sh their opponents from being heard ? had to ai Mr.ilincRINGHA again rose, and said that he respect for the rules of the house ever to infringe 11 1 )° , wittingly, and too much regard for the public time for any lengthened period the attention of those eng ° public service. The hon. member then proceeded to the alteration of the preamble of the bill. He cont_e:,', it was of the utmost importance that the truth or fa', the preamble should be decided, inasmuch as all the CO parts of the bill depended on it. that The Chairman then put the original question , amble of the bill be postponed, which was agreed t ° 'fi r bt The CHAIRMAN next put the question, that tne stand part of the bill, and proceeded to read it as foll e , ; it further enacted, by the King's most excellent .",1 and with the advice and consent of the Lords spiritua;s, poral, and Commons, in this present Parliament and by the authority of the same, that it shall be laW Lord-Lieutenant, or other chief governor or gov ern° land,"— Mr. O'CONNELL here rose, and proposed, as an af, r ,4 1 . to insert after the word " Ireland" the following ' ,95 consent or authority of the judges of the Court of l'- i to in Ireland, or any two of them." The hon. and l e i; ti tleman said, that the object of his motion was to r na t ely tion of two judicial persons, who would be imule dia rd sible to Parliament for their act, necessary to the So or suppression of meetings and assemblies. The lw il d 5 0 learned member concluded by observing, that he ba il, b his amendment as not to render the sanction of a n o , two of the Irish judges necessary to legalize the suPr any meceting. Mr. STAN LEY said he had beard the amendments by the hon. and learned member, himself a la wYel )e i utmost surprise, because that hon. and learned m e t in i . c 4 so many occasions, in terms as just as they Wer e 5 60 1 / sated the mingling of judicial with executive floe% now he of all men proposed to introduce an a° l° ,lol must have the direct effect of blending the judicla or e, character. On the grounds he had stated, th ere jected M to the amendment. r of r. O'CONNELL said that declamations in fa vou r servation of the constitution came with a pecu liar trai the right hon. secretary, who had done his best t,e_ fe cio the constitution, as far, at least, as it related to illy now, by that very bill, was about to put down eba c ri g a t and meetings totally unconnected with political no Mr.. " hich ) Serjeant PERRIN objected to the transfer Ni ' proposed to make of the legislative _power to the exq u entertained, however, very strong doubts as to thet tby the meetings and assemblies which were pointe d t he They certainly did not come within the scope ° ai l law, and the danger of their continuance cons e q,,ii tir with the government, which was subjected t° I which such a state of things naturally excited. however, it would be more injudicious, and P3° , - wer' dangerous to liberty, to vest the judges with the I ) co r' dieting meetings, than to transfer that power at Lord-Lieutenant. has Lord Amioap observed, that he should hardly „ that the hon. and learned gentleman needed to 131% so much about the constitution, on the subject ° 3 was a suspension of the constitUtion. Colonel DAVIES looked at the clause with consid er o 3 o as it invested a lord-lieutenant with very arbitrar): V o l Mr. PE.TEIt said (as far as we could unders,t ri question was, whether it was necessary to streng u ' r - wliej of the government of Ireland beyond the law , %and present system of agitation shouhrbe suffered to °i ~OP, man was a greater enemy than he to arbitrary l'T' i et d power of this kind was necessary to enable th e on c ant to act with vigour against the system of agitate in Mr. Ireland. O'CoNNELL complained of the deplorah t l ° o .gt ignorance of the hon. member, in supposing t ha (Con' stated was really the question before the house'd be f noise.) The question was, whether there sho al ers of slavery in Ireland. (Hear.) Would the frarehaant mitigate this clause, or must the Lord Lien i t ' ea ? power to declare what meetings should take T',i n ist . to hear the talk about aeitation. 'The present ' t hey this charge with admirable mock-modesty, wh e i l , ea r.) selves been aided by agitation. (Hear, hear, 13y they sit there.? (Cheers from the opposition.) (Cheers.) now di Lord PALinERSTON hoped the house wouldth e tention to the clause under consideration, and thatr.) be no attempt to add fuel to.the fire. (Hear , be 4 of Mr. Simi. would adopt the recommendat' °- oce an lord, who was an admirable pacificator on a l ii °t ere lj o l now came forward to mediate between two b e- l ra q.ile.ds In former acts there were exceptions of chariers eili but here there were no exceptions, Hon. inee l nre ctie,, l/ i at the idea of 150 orphans bein g d e p r i v ed of P. no.") What might take pla ce un d e r this h"'', o ; trary secretary than they had now got might c° not 'the orphan meetings be prevented? nlensf Mr. O'DwirEtt said that by this act the Pecti'tehe were deprived of the protection of the law, ; La ps' "- an unmitigated despotism, or mitigated all character of the men'they were subject to. dicey;" The amendment was negativ e d without a t ot original clause agreed to. a t 1 • t ' e r eljr On the clause empowering the Lord Lieu e el L " any body of persons" from assembling ui..4 0 1 re 3( y calculated to lead to a breach of the peace ben't, th at Colonel DaviEs propos e d as an amendn i 9;" should obtain only in "proclaimed district s : ca the rR Mr. STANLEY objected t o th e amendolen"f n rcing to' •its effect would be the temptgt wbie" v —in ftet is not e. c as state of disturba Lieutenant to proclaim a dist in ric ` 8- nce. The main object of the the chi pression of those agitation sche me s which wererato fo(. of the disturbances in Irel an d. Now, th. mischievous agitation was the city of Dubbi,l; fou l e e free from disturbance (loud cries of "Hear_ e nt w) nell ;) so that if the gallant member's amenu_oeiaiin ta the Lord Lieutenant would be forced to beink c e that is, prevent its peaceable inhabitants !r efl. /n one, houses after sunset and before sunrise. i n vested recollect that the Lord Lieutenant W ould " c for dis P ee powers, each di s tinct from the other --°u hn e f the P ea a c bl prohibiting meetings tending to a bird brew' r the e st courts o -martial. a i ts e t s r u ict t . hr a e n e d other, and it by no means followed t tie also establis. proclaimed that courts-martial should ke an alteraV Then, ministers were prepared to In a einnving a ll V t clause which would have the effect or tical offences, in even a proclaimed dis,lt. tam ro be cognizance of a military .tribunal, leay!le)._r.) ail tr • bon' ge n t , by the ordinary civil jurisdiction. (II 0 Mr. O'CONNELL begged the theghtLord Lieutenan.,3 mind that if, on the oue hand, undisturtbev, forced by the amendment to P r" . ct districts inig h r the inhabitants of those undisturbe d to folio' clause as it stoo other hand, forced by the clau, that their l'";.:i. pursued in the disturbed ones, seei nlptiori from despci. duct did not insure them an exentleman that the fo admission of the right hon• . g in d isturbance, Was a _p a r i e li tt_Y„, tion was perfectly freefrom assertions of its fr on the bill and the unfoundedc".tation with disturb triLstod porters, which identified agitation t the clause as whit' ic t L alto the j i that Mr. BEAuMONT would support It'n Ll° va he conceived it necessary to P r t tation which was the curse of 1 e Thos,, i ts folly 'ts a ntidote in "marauders man's charge carrie dto call ma hon. gentleman hadd presurae Mr. O'CoNNEL I felt that the naalignit o f the 11:1 ul every conventional qualification- r -not to say M i ttnanwnnents, natu ra l or acqu i re d . T he atts I llenib e- was as uncalled for as it was absurc .0e that e l 3 e, ali eUushsLteL: opposed the amendment. LestatuT considered it necessary to pass the present stood, because political agitation had 1 tv:hich was utterly incompatible with good go' WhichHe felt it necessary to offer his explanat )( I L he intended to give, because he knei r r exposed to imputations in Ireland. . koltaiszstAs'spoke against the amendment. •,,, PursisEr.4. expressed his surprise that the hon , l' ° r (XL Lambert) should complain of pot TOuse h i e t , hbaedi being oat Catholic, been f for agitation would not o r t e s h p; • .41 0 , 1 • tin n ~ l'EuT observed, that although he appro% he --- u- s ltecti , ng the Cath o li c ques ti o n, it d i d I ad. (He ar.)rove of the ag itati o n a t present pre' h IP e C ti, - 1 ni ,au, Mr. W a lk er, and Mr. D om i n i ck Br( tm -„-„La cal use, on the ground that it was nec 'L r""u agitation, which had reached an at 1.. ttudinent was then negatived. dent,l.l, said , that he wished to propos a„,:i. that the rem , ainder of the clause a ft er 't--011. assembly" should be omitted, but he fe eetlxh.austed. He had now been actively engage Pa f i. , S T l T n h e e five o'clock, and he had not physical !I i l e vi s on o - i f T , e ,eu r i is Zt t id lo er th th e e c s l e au c s ir e c b u e m in st g ances, postponed he h opedt l t e 114 1 0 1 0..d p ,,,(. r0 cie. ,t,igrwreieessass o .,,f o : , . D 'l vid H ei,.) moved that the chairms le to kur tnnip I t. o.a decision upon the clause. Is it CeNNELL withdrew his amendment. expressed a wish that the commitl utlivEN then moved that the chairman re EiweTtoxs,ELL put it to the house whether the I] ar, h e , s t o be allowed opportunity of defending tho at - sat.) He had an amendment to propose to tl itssitohilat late hour he was unwilling to commen If; I., °It ING thought it was too bad that the whole ilbecnse should be stopped because the hon. an tt"Pl „a tt : se i ta a A ad tive e x o h f a t u h s e te p el e a o h p i l m e. self by attending a politi lill g• (Hear, hear.) iainti COXNELL denied that he had shown any sy ltk t °ll bend said that he little expected such a s 1., 0 n lade upon him by one who boasted tha hied ~,'lThoap thought it unreasonable in the 0. eitls'uelliber to ask the chairman to report pro b. it. use under consideration was disposed of. (He, I % Ow "01vs;ELL accused the hon. member for Pe r , • 1 g) with having been guilty of needless and (,4.,,1a1ity towards the hon. and learned mem e b i e . r i l i _tek ') ,:,. 11 ,r ) ; but he advised the hon. .m!mb ei I '. f6' ne might subject himself to a similar p itc.tear.) - - Uoit I telf I NG said that the hon. and learned met It a , 4,llllitted twenty times in the course of that ] Ite Vhausted. With respect to personal attacks, !lehePse whether the hon. and learned membei t ,ted - I; n °l4 into personalities against every men A r t s I t i nl ; him and endeavoured to browbeat him ' r . (..' 11 ` °11 s• ' (Hear, hear.) 1 4 1 , 11 ; 1 4 It TER understood the object of the ni Ise, ado ailt h ci a in v:tte wh c i l e a h us h e e r h e l a d d, al i r ; a o d r y de d r t e o ei i. l the co !It(led ,P e t ed pro forma. The discussion of es the 4 41 . uld take place on the next day o f etilel4l Zf L or sa th id h c e ha w i o rm al a d n n t o o t, r u epo po r n t Lemma abort dis a - on upon the effect of the 1)t1 11 ,, t : i t Was el O s y si ed by Mr. Stanley. Its obji 7, tl - ..o e—° , ll h s who in should violate the enactments o t p h r a o t gr under . - T b n l,4 ligs-,,s'Qaud lib4taNineadn le th av e e r il e aw. punished according to the ordin, thq aidie4Ment having been adopted, ) „ I. _ ti 41 , 1 , 4 . jurisdiction of the courts-martial,. . i- ,, 118 i A DV OCATE itn enti brought in a bill to regula -()I ati ll t* 8 ""and. Read a first time, and ordered I a n , o _ . _ . ki t 11 u Vriday. mtoostiitenagaoifuLoaorld,rAidlathyo.rp k,,r';'iti4:eis gave notice, that he would on Friday r 4 1 h8tee r e i tie arresters ta ade t u o n • —4the,fat,erders of the day being disposed of, I .14 1 . ~, g lif-p.st one o'clock. ;ill(' 118.tlit.ZuenoittT,18alabwbsat.h REGISTERINGddeetahye Reform the ex BARRISTERS. ee ß n i s l e l. s ineurre ig !,,',;took, THURSDAY, MARCH Id. _ t 40 4 , - -" ,, ,, not spresented a petition front Truro for a l i t a it ° J . tli t ' — ule-Mar'tvr, London, complaining and r from from the th s e a p m a e n. p s h l aecse of o r p.s.tc •S4 4 'Viar tte t heir property in the land-tax to t r , o okt with the wish of the petitione .. 4111 e 1 f) r1;a4l e t. s k t e se d i11111 al ci. n ta ta x ined . that it would be very unfai o have i from t. Phi e h- itil. '''LL had a petition to present , 4\ i b i ill i s h t„ d e( l e ied:! t a h s ou p t r a e n pa v r i e n d ju t r o y s t h o or he th h a o t ld t e h r e s . i o n f e th qu a a t . ul) - is W 4 4 irmar of better observance of the Sabi Bhen,"%.Bn;Llgned by a persons of all parties and pe 'l'' , V I —eMber Was proceeding to support the G it AL 1 r he Was called to order by t a ste spe;ItObLEY, on the ground that the . radio ~ I,e , „l ° ' th -::,"" °n the presentation of petitions wa !ati c) ,,s'„ As e t ,i 4 ne of the house. (Hear, hear.) tt it tt,:Z, , ai fr il i ia ):Are o s r e ie n y t , ed f.r p o e ra titi ß ols h f o ro ps m ga t t h eL e .we c t o teheo o ir n it - h v ' l4- i n favour of the Factories k(1‘t:;::: j;,6 e ra d viiz i oce t o e tfo s t e h. tit e d a priitiot i l v fr i?omr Aberdeenp '11; f f1 t1 1 °1111 °N ---- ---- -..-------- ------ t i ' bh,„ 11 ( 1 fr om s : le t ; f, Pre o r s a a i r bbath s . byteiie s in Scotland h "41 'abl e • ELI. said that he had given notice of a ,Ni l .lio re ;1111Dortance to Ireland, and which had .••vietkittt tha'llitiortant by recent circum§tances ; but t '' . 4 1 t ) ti:t% f or ..11011se many reproaches thrown out aga ~ h, teeth e bilTasunling so much of the public time, tt,silo isines s of the people of England being Ili t hktfi ll ,, ai d on that account, though himself kno V ,Ite hasdiessness of those reproaches, postpone t t ‘ir t hi t , fix for to-night till another opportunit s gethteether business was postponed, in order to i ••,,k1,1,,,1, 4ssi t o l u v o n f iti t , h o e on h o u i r t ioh uo lt H ef c o o rm ium ( l l i r T e u la E n . d) bi 7111';;4011(SteNentoarcodsaid it was impossible for him to folk postpone his motion. The malts iN ti " . ctbe !lightest delay would prove a serious i • j"Le }I 'M . Parties for whorale appeared. othei 1 4 4 e tt e itAtetition from the corporation of Liverpool th 4t °4 l; ‘ Y counsel before the committee on the b :Y ti lt Deti t l 4l it was now his intention to more tlitt 111 h e l leee e :',4 be complied with. It was not his d 'tit,itnelet)! delay should be occasioned by this pi t9a elseer p h „' willing to agree to any arrangemei ti.fi tt • - 11 1 , 'Y from having the assistance of more %et , 5 1 tiv „ h a eble lord concluded by moving that 1 t 4tr t , w'e Livee":,?l be heard, either ti themselves o 4 e th "soN 0 „"ii borough committee. . • 1 18 id„„e • Inisa b gesed the motion,, on the ground tha i'illit.`lsr,ble e x a r e t,'e,ati on of the corp o , rate funds, .and ,;' , J,„'citot. t. :". the proceeding of the committee f ;`the -a linot i ,,; a l l llortc•d the-inotion. He knew tha ° l i t e tll, l4l tne ns `,„` 3 0 m witnesses had been issued, and I Ole () nttil'it- - ra a•es of evidence which would be in il!,),'aiittittrp,):..ltteit,,aB,,ioecitn.hca , iedr . . :vtlaaee l txso - ta.:e e tnoloi e .n:s c teah o lte.r u ice l e d ite d i e i d c , i t t b o , e satisfac t o r i 1 y invest leti, ll ) w oult:ip a aid - that ,tite. proposition of the n 1:11, Its x siv_n.4inilteereodf. c t o h o ii n t o s :th l l y e l ythlDersou aeerDerted the motion, because he tho oepa unnecessary. d po t iontdelay ofa et t el o W ed an p,, 118 ,, e4 „ef so heinous an offence as bribe p k 110.a.e Wii. ° 6 l.l4l ility of defending,himself. litrist th„e'rt's thouglit the Ciise which wank pr"( 1. liree2Sity f4.7 L atien of Liverpool so flagrant, I 1 4 :DO h i ti tNcrt c ono .ir employment of counsel. that ,the , object of :the nol . Itt i ,„N th e Which had I, ( ' N v impediments in the way of i. ` "!Nt t ,e house, aft,"tt before:the house for three It k' o the attend ah Dointing nominees, would ni t i . 4,e w. RIDI, E y -- :e of COUUSeI. At Nilt i3t() sable ou u `Nretted; that . the committee , e il(lea ..Atember, A lt l ege], of % IL -.. 1 \ptte44:: Constitution. l'It) nvestigations should b wh a g o t t:l l , l e d ir Inexperienced member a l that he belonged to the C 4 tl4i o t. b. i,,of co luiset. vv le also expressed an op; - 41 • .inav ßy , a s unnecessary. seutleme a s of Opinion that the presen, n would be of great advantage to ....imiiiiiftm