The Sun. — London, England, 1840-03-31 00:00:00

EVEN I.NO EDIT tON. !SECOND EDITION. SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock. AN TI -CORN-LAW DELEGATES. (THIS DAY.) The Delegates met to- ay at one for the purpose of waiting on Lord J. Russell, the Chancellor of the Exche quer, and the President of the Board of Trade. When the Delegates had entered the room of Conference it was found that Lord J. Russell was absent, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer stated that this absence was °wing to a slight i n di s position of his Noble Friend. T he Chancellor of the Exchequer afterwards stated the oßinio n of his Noble Friend on the present system of ..orn-l aws. It was this—That the system was attended with great inconvenience, and it was his wish that a mode ate fixed duty should be imposed on foreign corn, till it reached the price of 705., and that the duty should then be gradually d:minished. d CHAIRMAN, and after him Mr. E. ASHWORTH, ad _r_TA at some length the two members of the Govern ment present, pointing out the many evils of the present . ti slaws, and the necessity of repealing them. Mr, BREWSTER said he had, fur the last twenty years, been connected as a clergyman, as an overseer of the poor, taken withcould a parish containing upwards of 30,000 souls, and speak to the relative amount of distress which had tha n Place at the different pee iods of depression during 'ended ti me. The distress three months ago, though not so among the working classes as on some former occasions,lled Was accompanied by greater suffering. This nattributed to the fact, that at former periods of distress the middle classes were able to relieve them by subscriptions d other means, an rea c h, while, at present, the distress having d those classes themselves, it was found impossible oro, r aise subscripti ons to any amoun t for the relief _ the d est i tute labourer. It ha d b een hi s l ot these wi tness much of thi s su ff er ing which resulted from circumstanc es . e had seen children around the beer lie of taf a dead mot h er, whose d eat h t h ey attr ib u t e d t o wan t ° °'-1 He had seen f at h ers o f f a milies who had not tasted food for (lass ; and he had seen mothers with infants at their b reasts, who had not received any nourishment for t: f e previous twenty-four hours. Had he been in tile place t hose parents, he would have felt it to have been his duty, and he would have been warranted, he conceived, us ev erY principle of religion and morality, after • g all other m eans t o obtain food for his perish. ing family without effect, to have taken food for them wherever he could find it.—(Here considerable symp tom did s of dissent were ex hibi te d b y t h e mee ti ng .) He rest . not anti c ip a t e any x,,ressiun cf dissent from one 7 ,,,,2 . rig upon th e hi g h est authorities in lew and in ethics. "use gentlemen must remember that in Scotland the un entpl ,yed labourer receives no relief from the poors' funds, and that any man in the position he had described had no alternative between being accessory to the commission of mu rder —to the death of fellow creatures, of a wife and obildien depending upon them for subsistence, or the be.. e°l ning a criminal in the eye of the law, though justified, a s he thought, by the great principles of morality and r eligion. It was t h us th a t th e p eo pl e were thrown out of em ployment by the operation of the Corn-laws , and being drive n to desperation by their sufferings, some of them becam e the inmates of prisons, and had the brand of cr ime fixed upon them for life. He knew something of the feelings and opinions of the people of Scotland ; and though he felt convinced that the demand for farther re forms beyond the repeal of the Corn-laws could not now be stopp e d, yet that an immediate and total repeal of these l aws would greatly tend to render the progress of those reforms safe and constitutional. He had just been in -1" Hied by some of his friends now present, belonging to Paisley, that thousands would immediately be thrown out of employment. Ha asked how, without any means of relief to the unemployed in Scotland, the authority of the lam otdd be ma'ntained ? Mr. JJICKINS, the Mayor of Carlisle, entered into a detail of the distresses to which our labouring population is now exposed, adding that those distresses were yearly i ncreasing. Mr. Bactoxe, the borcughreeve of Manchester, stated various facts which had come under his own knowledge in Manchester, showing the misery endured by the poorer classes of that town. From a printed document it ap peared that there were 1953 families in which the average earning of each individual did not exceed Is. 41d. per week. A large part of that sum must have been spent in Pawn-offices. The mill-owners were every day declining, and had greatly reduced their hours of labour. He had sold a mill in Manchester four years ago for 32,0001. and he had lately re-purchased it for 10,0001. Mr. LABOUCHERE said that he need hardly observe, that la giving his opinion en the present occasion, he spoke r uefely as a Member of Oarliament, and not in his official capacity., He was afraid his opinions would not completely satisfy the gentlemen present. He was certainly opposed to the present system, as he thought it was attended with i many disadvant a g e s, a nd made the corn trade little b etter than a gambling transaction. He was satisfied the system Was a bad one, and he would never refuse voting for in quiring into it. lie would therefo re su pp ort the motion of Nlr. Villiers this ye ar Ls he had done last year , but a t th e same time he could not advocate a total repeal of the existing l aws , He believed that such a change would be of too violent a nature, and he did not think it would be advisable to deprive our agricultur:sts of all protection. His vote would not, therefore, he for a total repeal, but for a fixed duty, which he thought would be a more ra moderate, and just system than the present. Mr. ELLISON, of Dewsbury, said he was a Poor-law Guardian in the centre of a manufacturing population, and ha felt convinced that the Corn-laws and the Poor-laws could net subsist together. The CHAIRMAN said in allusion to observations which had often been made, that he thought Government might inquire into the possibility of entering into negotiations with the Governments which had entered into the Prussian League for the purpose of enlarging our commerce with them. The Chancellor of the EXCHE6WER said that the facts which had been brought forward undoubtedly deserved the attention of the Government and the country. It would, however, be very difficult to enter into negotiations with foreign Governments, unless there was a certainty of their being sanctioned by Parliament. Nothing could he more dangerous than such a proceeding. Mr. COBURN said that the present question was of far too important a nature to allow the Government to remain undecided on it. Ile thought that no Ministry could any long er stand without being committed one way or the other On the subject ; and that a Ministry taking up the repeal of th e Corn-laws would eventually have the support of the Majority of the country. The Deputies returned to Brown's Hotel shortly after three o'clock. The CHAIRMAN, on taking the chair, stated that he sup posed all present had been to the interview, and had beard all that passed, and from that every gentleman could form his own opinion. One thing was perfectly clear, and that was that there was only one course to pursue, and that was to go en with their appeal to their fellow citizens over the whole country. To enable them to do that, one thing was necessary, namely, funds, and they would, therefore, allow him to call their attention to the subscription list which was laid bef,re the meeting yesterday. Many gentle men, yesterday, st a t e d th a t they wished to have time to consult with their colleagues as to the sums I . vhich th e y s h ou ld put d own . I t was necessar y for them 10 buckle on t h e i r armour an d procee d i n t h e course which had already met with such success. Mr. Beaden, a Dele gate from Taunton, was present, and would be enabled to inform the me e ti ng o f some ex t r aordinary exertions in their cause that were taking place in the agricultural districts. Mr. Alderman COBDEN said he should not be doing jus tice to Mr. Beaden if he did not state that he had been a gitating their cau se i n T aun t on , w h ere he had lectured and spent mu c h money i n t h e g l or i ous wor k th e y had in view. _ • Mr. BEADEN th en came f orwar d am id muc h c h e ering. It was true, as had be en s t a t e d by M r . Ald erman C o bden, that he had devoted his time, and not a little money, in 1 a gitating the su bj ec t. Il e h a d w i t hi n t h e l ast f ew d ays delivered a couple of lectures gratuitously, and the result was a Working, Man's Association. Ile had never wit- nessed such excitement. It was said by the chairman that they must proceed in the agitation ; now all that he was afraid of was that agitation on this question could not be stopped.—( Cheers.) Lord Bacon said there was no reasoning with a man who had a hungry belly. lie be lieved that the people were ripe for revolution; the Go vernment would do nothing for them till they were in a scrape, which he was afraid would soon be the case. It appeared to him that they ought to get this question continually before Parliament; let detached motions be brought forward ; let one, for instance, be for ascer taining the cause of distress; let others be for other sub jects, all of which would have a tendency to the repeal of the Corn-laws. Such motions would pester the Govern ment, and something like alteration would be the result. —(Cheers.) As far as he could agitate he would do so ; he was no new convert to the question, but had been its advocate for years. Sir Thomas Lethbridge had told him that he was for a fixed duty; but rather than no alteration should take place, he would vote for a total re peal. But ho was ready to support a fixed duty of 7s. if it was an expiring one. Sir Thomas Lethbridge had got much odium for the course he had adopted, but he was determined to persevere in his good work. A DELEGATP. said that Lord Hatherton was of the same opinion ; if he could not get a fixed duty he would vote for a total repeal. Mr. Haywaito said that from the interview they had had that day, it was clear that it was the conviction of her Majesty's Ministers that the great mass of the people were nut prepared for a repeal of the Corn-laws. This was their fortress, and how was i t to be attacked? Why, by e nlightening the people on time subject of the Corn-laws, which starved them. By agitating the questio im in the manner they were doing, the result would be pressing the People on the Ministers. That was not to be done without funds, and he trusted, therefore, that all should come forward quickly, _(C beers.) Mr. lI!SDLEY, M.P., apologised for attempting to ad dress the meeting, not being a Deleg,atc, but he trusted those present would excuse him if he said a few words, as he was intimately connected with the commercial in terests of time country. His object in coming da d to nY " w there to- M forw to know whether trey really intended r. Villiers to b r ing forward the motion to - mo r row, ard e:cpress the strong fveling, he had against pressing it that A t lie bad DELEGATE 'I ATE observed that he had seen t-. Villiers; passed a good night, his health was much im proved, and that he wou ld cer tainly bring forward the motion to-morrow evening. Mr. lIINDLEY dirt n ot a t a ll d es i re to interfere with the d etermination of Mr. Villiers who had taken such a Ought to be consulted, but h e ( M r. Ili n dl ey ) f e lt th a t he ..W.oyledoh: wanting in his d u t y to his constituents if h e did re eto st a te hi s op i n i ons—these opinions mig h t taken for what they were worth. If the motion were brought in to-morrow, the division would in all Probability take place on Friday; and he believed that all expected a strong majo r ity aga i nst them. It was said they should appeal to the country. The Mini s t ers sa id th e majorit y of the country were against the repeal, and that they m ust enlighten the country upon the subject.—• t.......____ of the w orst rion of ;e vert' 'i , c t of ogre" th. w° (Wing on a the ree blYof 7 and Ti Le' )1e 'ca' N f o rr.-: Lber 3 Y, od g'' Irti°lls ititl a ro the Is , o f .ri°" 171.1 (Hear, hear.) Now he would ask, would the cha::ee of enlightening ;he country be so great after the determine tion of Pariiamont was known on the subject ?—( Cries of '6 Yes, yes.") His opinion was very different. He would allow that the feeling of passion among the pec,ple--the feeling of r , Bret and desperaton, if he might use such terms—might be greater at the moment, hut it was trlt that kind of passionate fey iig on which they ought to rely. The a lvocates of free trade ought to ap peal to the reasoning of the people, and his opinion was that if Mr. Villiers' motion were postponed till after Eas ter, and the Delegates in the meantime returned to their constituents and agitated the country, there would be a much better chance of the motion then being carried than if it were brought on this week. Another thing to which they ought to look was the state of parties. The present Mi nisters were not certain of continuing in office three weeks, and when parties were so nicely balanced they ought not to be too precipitate, but endeavour to find out which would offer the highest prize.—( Hear, hear.) He begged pardon for obtruding his sentiments on the meeting, but he should deeply lament if they persevered in their present determination. - _ The CHAIRMAN said the Delegates were greatly obliged to Mr. Ilindley for the expression of his opinion, but this subject was very fully (Lseussed by the Delegates last evening, and there was scarcely a dissentient voice as to the propriety of having the question brought on imme diately.—( Hear, hear, hear.) A note had been re ceived from Mr. Villiers, in which he stated that he would be able to bring the motion on to-morrow, and that his opinion was that it ought not to be further delayed.-- ( Hear, hear. ) LORD ASHBURTON'S 'MISTAKES. Mr. BAINES was anxious to make a few observations in reply to a remark made by Lord Ashburton, in the House of Lords last night, on the subject of the Corn-laws. Lord Ashburton was the Pres dent of the Board cf Trade under Sir Robert Peel in 1835, and wal formerly, as Mr. Alexander Baring, connected with one of the greatest mercantile houses in this country, and he might have been supposed to have persevered in those more enlightened opinions which he formerly held on the subject. Lord Ashburton ;vas reported to have said last night in the House of Lords that " Manufactures had hardly ever been in such a sout,d state as they were about two years antecedent to the present period, and yet the Corn-laws were in existence. Nothing could prevent a country from having vicissitudes of seasons, but how could it be laid that Corn-laws prevented corn from being ob tained in time of need, when it was known that no less than hree millions were brought in last 3 ear ? That was an ans wer to those who said that in a time of distress corn WAS not to be found. Whenever the subject came properly be fore the House, he should be prepared to show that this country suffered less from the fluctuations in the price of grain, which were inherent in the nature of trade, and could be prevented by no law, than most parts of the Continent, and particularly less than France, where the fluctuations had bean very great." Before he replied to that extraordinary doctrine, he would observe; that it had been stated by several writers, but by none more ably than AIL James Wilson, the author of a valuable Treatise on the Influence of the Corn-laws, pub- dished last year, that fluctuation was one of the most seri cus evils to which the trade of any country could be ex posed, but more especially fluctuation in the price of the chief necessary of life, and that that fluctuation more than counterbalanced any benefit which the agriculturists them selves derived from the Corn-laws. Lord Ashburton felt that fluctuation was a great evil, but attempted to show that the fluctuations in the price of Corn were not so great as the fluctuations which existed in other countries in Europe, and that they were not so great as existed in the price of other articles of produce and consumption. The fluctuations in this country were very great. The average price for wheat in 1839 was 70s 6d., while the average for 1835 was 395. 4d., being a difference of 79 per cent. upon the average for the whole year. Had he taken certain parts of the years he could have shown that the difference on many occasions was more than 100 per cent. Even in late periods that difference was as great—in Ja nuary, 1838, the price of wheat was 535., while in twelve months, in January, 1839, it was 79a., being in that short period a difference of 48 per cent. He admitted that there were greater fluctuations in foreign countries than in England—he admit el that to the Noble Lord. According to the circular of Messrs. Sturge in 1838 the average price was 565. to 605., while according to the Report of Dr. Bowring in 1834 and 1836, the average price was 275. 6d., being a difference of mere than 100 per cent.—so far, Lord Ashburton was perfectly right. Again in Hamburgh, in 1835, the price of wheat was 88 marks per last, and in 1838 the price was 160 marks per last ; so that this seemed to bear out the assertion of Lord Ashburton. But what was the cause of all these great fluctuations ?—why the English Corn.laws.—(Cbeers.) It was not the fluctuation of seasons, or demand, or in the consumption of those countries, but purely in consequence of the variations in the demand for the consumption of England.—( Cheers.) The time of low prices abroad was exactly the time when England imported nothing.—( Cheers In 1835 Hamburg exported only 3,573 lasts, that was the season of low prices abroad. In 1838 the price was doubled, and the quantity exported was 24,344 lasts.— ( Hear, hear.) That was at Hamburg alone, and it was the same in other places abounding in wheat. In 1835 the imports of wheat were 46,560 quarters, but in 1838 the quantity amounted to 1,000,240 quarters, and in 1839 it was 2,000,638 quarters.—( Hear, hear.) These being the facts was it to be wondered at that there should be fluctu ations abroad ?—( Cheers.) Now, were these fluctuations in foreign countries to be quoted as an apology for the English Corn-laws? Were they not rather a double con demnation of them.—( Cheers.) They were the fruit of those very laws of which they complained. Lord Ash burton was taking advantage of his wrong, which was against all principle—he was quoting the fluctuations caused in foreign countries by our Corn.laws, in order to justify the fluctuations in England. Our Corn-laws were the great cause—the only cause—of the great fluctuations which had taken place in Hamburgh and Dantzic. Mr. Wilson had in his pamphlet well laid down three reasons why there should be less fluctuation in the price of the great staple commodity, wheat ; first, the produce of wheat acre,rtdh an t r ding to th e quan tity o f l a nd cu lti va t e d w as any at other ood th e produce eol d o fwinter, ad was th e heremark ablyat of per greater ha to o a ;Tn.: grow I g ve a o f t forth almostt h tl e m h agr every v o i ne d er n ya e s scosof country ter ypGlaoando and s — S u e m i e t e m ‘ n v e d a r lgy , possiblet fromliereb t thereby e s every climate—every country on the Continent as well as in England, and in Africa and America—so that we could receive a supply of wheat from enough of places in case of need. But there was a third cause, which had not been so fully and prominently brought forward as the others. It was the uniformity of consumption and demand, for it was an article of which a man would only buy enough ; he would waste none, nor could they consume more than a certain quantity. There were many articles, such as cotton, to bacce, &c., of which the necessity of growth or variation of supply were greater and more precarious than the article of wheat. In the first place, they were more precarious in supply ; but in the next place, these articles were much less necessary than that of food ; they were affected by fashion and other causes, and the necessity occurring for them was therefore by no means so steady as that for the supply of wheat, Therefore there were the two causes of fluctuation in supply of the article, and demand of the ar ticle, which were the double cause of the fluctuation of price ; and just in the same way the steadiness of demand for the article, and of its consumption, were the double causes of producing a steadiness of price ; and that article, in which, above all others in the world, there ougt to be, and would be, in case of free trade, the least variation, was in consequence of the operation of these laws the most fluctuating. But Lord Ashburton said, " Nothing can prevent the country having vicissitudes io seasons." Most undoubtedly not 1 But was not this the strongest reason in the world for opening the ports, and having perfect freedom for the importation of corn? He would now just allude to the familiar principle of in surance. The effect of a man's insuring his life and pro perty was, as had been beautifully expressed, that of spreading the amount of private hardship, calamity, and suffering over the whole community, so that it was scarcely felt by any—this very principle of insurance might be ap plied to the present subject, just as insurance by affecting a good many persons to a slight amount, had the effect of preventing the man insured from being ruined by spread ing his loss over a great number, so the sufferings of a particular country, from the vicisitudes of the seasons could be spread over the whole world, and would be lessened to all in • proportion as it was spread over the widest extent of country. He would allude to one other observation Lord Ashburton had made in the same speech. He said, " Manufactures had hardly ever been in such a sound state as about two years antecedent to the present period, and yet the Corn-laws were in existence." Yes ; but what was the price of corn? The price of corn in 1835 was 395. 4d., and in 1836 but a few shillings higher. Perceive, therefore, how the low price of corn tended to what Lord Ashburton admitted to be the soundest state in which he had ever known a manufacturing country. According to Lord Ashburton, the lower the price of corn the sounder the state of manufactures. What, then, became of the Corn-laws, the object of which was avowedly to rise the price of corn ? Lord Ash burton said twenty-five years ago he had been opposed to the Corn-laws, but it was less than half that period since Mr. Baring(now Lord Ashburton)made the following brief, but most important and valuable speech ( April 25, 1828), on the motion of Mr. Grant for the House resolving itself into a Committee of the whole House to consider the Corn-laws, with reading which he would conclude his observations :—" Oa the motion that the Speaker do leave the Chair, Mr. Baring (now Lord Ashburton) said he entirely agreed with the Right lion. Member for Louth, that nothing could be more idle than the perpetual references made in that House to the average prices of wheat at various foreign ports. It was ridiculous to make references of this kind, when they had just opposite to them, as it were, and had had for the last century, a port, Rotterdam, which had always been, as a corn, a free one. At that port, the price usually varied from :30s. to 345. ; the same would be the price in the port of London if the Thames were equally free ; and it should be recollected, that this corn. parison was not without its appplication ; for the provinces of Holland composed a country of no trifling consumption of corn. They were still populous, and had once been ex it opulent and powerful as a manufacturing nation ; nor let Hon, Gentlemen ever forget that from that opu lence and power they had declined, absolutely, from levying enormous duties upon the corn consumed by their subjects. The same fate resulting from the same cause as irresistibly awaited this country as one day succeeded another. As to the talk about high prices, the danger of our present system arose, not from positive, but relative prices. He owned that he was amazed at the course which so many gentlemen had pursued upon this question. How was it possible that any men, having the powers of reasoning or reflection, could come down to that house day after day, acd talk about protection to corn, protection to wool, protection to oak bark—the differ_ ence, meanwhile, in the price of breat between Great Britain and the nations of the Continent being a s the difference in favour of the latter between 255. and 645. ? How was it possible that they should expect we could g o on exporting manufactures, as we now did, to the amount of b etween fifty and sixty millions a-year, there being this fright- THE S[TN, LONDON, TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 1840. ful disproportion 'oetween the corn creole g ourselves and cur continental neighbours ? Heartily did he wish that some man among them, with honesty in his heart, would come down and tell them plainly it was their duty to eonzider, not how they might get in their own proper rents for that particular year or so, but hew the couhtry was to subsist with its establishments for the next fifty years. But, on the contrary, he declared with pain, that whenever the corn question came on for discussion, it was argued by them on the most selfish and narrow minded principles that any Legislature ever condescended to listen to. He Was himself a landed proprietor; but he disdained to seek pro tection for his interests in that capacity, by means which, being intended for the benefit of one class of the commu nity, must one day crush them all. Mr. Moncis thought the Delegates were much indebted to Mr. Baines for the speech they had just heard. He wished, however, that Mr. Baines should also explain the fluctuations in corn in France alluded tc by Lord Ashbur ton. The allusions to the other countries of Europe had, he thought, been completely answered. Mr. BAINEs thought the case of France might be easily explained. The fact was, that France had already Corn laws almost a•s bad as those of England. Mr. ASHWORTH then rose for the purpose of moving a Committee which would take into its consideration the best means of raising those funds which would be necessary for meeting their expenses, and without which they could not proceed in their exertions. He moved that a Committee should be appointed, consisting of the following gentlemen : The Boroughreeve of Manchester, Mr. E. Ashworth of Bol ton, Mr. J. Teneont of Glasgow, Mr. G. Wilson of Man chester, Mr. H. Stanfield of Leeds, Mr. Lawrence Iley worth of Liverpoo►, and Mr. R. Nicholson, and Mr. Wynne ; and that the above Committee report on Satur day next, the amount of promised support frpm each asso ciation. Mr. DICKSON seconded the motion. The motion was agreed to. The CHAIRMAN said that they weae undoubtedly much indebted to Mr. Baines for his refutation of the speech of Lord Ashburton, who was formerly a violent opponent of the Corn-laws. The fact, however, was that Lord Ash- burton had been celebrated for speaking one way and voting the other—( Hear, hear, and laughter)—and he hoded that might be the case on the Corn-law question, and that they might have the benefit of his vote, as they had not his speech in their favour.--( Hear.) Mr. COATES said that it had been erroneously assumed that the working-classes werr opposed to agitatian, in favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws. They were, after holding a meeting on the subject in tie Tower Hamlets, and resolutions in favour of repeal were unanimously carried. They had accordingly sent a petition, with prayer to that effect, to their Member, Mr. Clay, which was to be presented that evening. It was signed by 43,767 persons, most of them agricultural labourers.—( Cheers. ) Mr. PRENTICE thought that no exertions should be spared in agitating the country, and that anti-Corn-law lecturers should be sent to the various places which elected Members for Parliament. A. trusted that the deputies who could not afford to put down their 1001. a year would go away with the determina• tion of giving 1001. worth of labour, if they could not give it in money. For himself in North Cheshire he would pledge himself that not a single labourer in that great dis trict shonld be without information and knowledge of the bearing of the Corn-laws.—( Cheers.) As he went forth as an unpaid labourer, he might say something with respect to what Mr. Baring had said. He had said that there was no chance of a repeal of the Corn-laws. Now he was an unpaid labourer when it was said, as Mr. O'Conn , ..ll observed on Saturday, that the machinery of the House of Commons la quired to be improved. In stead of endeavouring to repress such feelings, he would wish them success. Mr. L. HAYWARD had received a letter that day from the Brougham Institution, stating that they were preparing a petition, which they would send up to him next week. He thought that perhaps more good was done by lectures than giving money. He trusted every would use their utmost endeavours to make apostles to their cause. Mr. BRAN, one of the deputation from Nottingham, stated that he would put down his name for 1001.-- ( Cheers.) With respect to what Lord Ashburton had stated, two plentiful years, that was true enough ; but he believed there were times when he and his friends were placed in the same position as those who now advocated a repeal of the Corn-laws.—( Cheers.) There was a time when he and two cr three hundred of his friends were saved while millions were allowed to starve.—( Cheers.) Mr. JOHNSON, of Derby, had come up in consequence of the statements that had been made to Lord Melbourne when the deputation waited upon him, for after those statements the Anti-Corn Law Association there would not rest satisfied until his Reverend Colleague and himself left for London to inform the League of how matters were going on at Derby, and its im mediate neighbourhood. Last year there was a pe tition got up at Belper for Derby, &c. In the latter place there were 2,800 persons signed the petition, but in the present year no less than 4.798 persons had signed it, The public mind there, with very few excep tions, was in favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws ; and, for his own part, he was convinced that the people would never be satisfied until they had obtained justice—( Cheers) —and he was sure if they did not obtain it from the Ilouse of Commons as at present constituted, they would be in favour of a further organic change. Such was the dis tress of the people in Derby and its neighbourhood, that there were between 1,100 and 1,200 persons desti tute of the means of obtaining food, unless through the medium of public charity, and this was all caused by the I obnoxious Corn-laws.—(Cheers.) Such was the feeling with respect to the Co.n-laws, that in the village of Mel bourne, the principal tenant of that Noble Lord had be come a total repealer—(Cheers)—and that gentleman bad actually invited himself and his reverend colleague to go over there and explain the bad effects of the Corn laws. They dip go there, and the result was, that a pctitien against their continuance was got up, which was signed by 467 persons, seven-eighths of the whole population of the place, and such was the progress that had been made there, that they had got a Anti-corn•law Association.—(Cheers) At another village, which was the property of Mr. Evans, the Member, every farmer with only one exception, was in faveur of the Corn-laws.— (Cheers.) He had a list of petitions coming from diffe rent parts of Derby and its neighbourhood containing altogether signatures to the number of 8,733. ( Loud cheers.) He thought, therefore, th• observa tions of the Ch mcellor of the Exchequer that day were nos borne out by the fact that the people of the of the Agricultural district had not a knowledge on this subject.—(Cheers.) At another village called Weston, an attempt was made to get up a petition in favour of the Corn-laws, but it wat given up as the parties inter ested in getting it up were informed by the people there, when asked to sign them, that they would not do so, that they were unjust in principle, and therefore they declined signing a petition in their favour. One mao, when asked to sign said, that a petition of that sort would not do, as the poor man liked to get a large loaf.—( Cheers.) He believed that such was the feeling now throughout the country, that no person could carry on the Government upon the;principle of supportingthe Corn-law s.—( Cheers. ) Mr. BRADLEY, the Delegate from Nottingham, was one of those who thought that even if wages were high, and the state was in a state of prosperity, that the Corn-laws were iniquitous.—( Hear, hear.) Distress existed in Not tingham to an extent that he could not pourtray to the meeting. The homes of the pour in Nottingham were daily becoming more wretched, and he had that day asked one of the Members for Nottingham how they were to con tend with the unemployed population, and he had just re• ceived intelligence that he had been appointed overseer of the poor.--( A laugh.) He should very much like Lord Melbourno to tell him how he was to administer the Poor law. He did not pretend to say whether the present Poor laws by themselves were good or bad, but of this lie was quite sure, that as connected with the Cor-laws they were cruel—( Cries of " Hear, hear")—and he had found that the poor would suffer any privations rather than sub mit to the rigid provisions of the Poor-law.—(Hear, hear.) For that reason not one 1-10th of the miseries arid privations of the poor came before the Poor-law Guar dians. Many poor persons were compelled to remain in their miserable hcuses on Sundays with their children be cause neither children nor parents had shoes to walk to Church in. He believed the country was fast verging to a state of desperation, but he was one of those who would wish to see that day put off to as remote a period as possi ble.—( Hear, hear.) If the principles of free trade were adopted he believed the horrors of war would never be known again. lie was a member of a Peace So ciety, but he had repeatedly told his frieuds, that, unless they became the advocates of free trade all their efforts for the accomplishment of universal peace would be ♦ain.—( Hear, hear.) He sincerely trusted that the strength of the agitation now ailaat would be such as to show their rulers the repeal of the Corn-laws could no longer be withheld.—(Cheers.) The CHAIRMAN hoped that Delegates would not leave London with the notion that the debate in the House of Commons upon Mr. Villiers's motion would close on Fri day night. It was impossible to say how long it might be kept up. Mr. SIDNEY SaulT❑ observed that they were deter mined the question should not be burked in the House of Commons. _(Hear, hear.) He hoped that the mo tion of Mr. Villiers would not be the only one that would be brought before the House this year. If the subject were constantly brought before Parliament, the public attention would be kept alive, and the most impor tant facts in support of their cause would :be disseminated from one cud of the kingdom to the other. Agitation was going forward, and if every one would go home with the impression on his mind that all were to work, and they could not fail, for they had the best side of the cause, and they must conquer. They must convince their neighbours and the country that they were in earnest—success would then be certain. The Rev. W. BREWSTER had contributed something to maintain order and law in Scotland, and he could assnre the Delegates that nothing was better calculated to con tribute to that great end, than a continted agitation under the influence and controul of that great, enlightened, and atriotic body.— Adjourned. DISSOLUTION OF PARLIAMENT.—A rumour that Ministers have determined to dissolve Parliament on Thursday next has prevailed through town all this morning, and continues to gain ground. We know not upon what authority it rests.— &undo, d. [Pooh ! pooh ! pooh !] Mr. Villiers was prevented by an attack of influenza from bringing on his motion on the Corn-laws this even ing. The motion was postponed till to-morrow, when we hope the Hon. Member will be restored to health, aul enabled to proceed. The Earl of Motley retains his appointment in the Household of Prince Albert. Mrs. N. M. Rothschild, widow of the late emi nent Hebrew capitalist, has given to the Jev; ish Free School, for som e years past, the truly beneficent annual donation of 5001., besides expending at least very nearly the same amount yearly in clothing 450 children, male and female, educated there. The same lady subscribed 4001. in support of the family of Air. Aaron, the melancholy suicide of whose daughter ex cited so much sympathy in the city last week. THE LONDON GAZETTE, (THIS EVENING.) WHITEHALL, 31Aucn 30, 1840. The Queen has been pleased to direct letters patent to be passed under the Great Seal, granting the dignity of a Duchess of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland unto the Right Honourable Lady Cecilia Letitia Underwood (eldest sur viving daughter of Arthur Saunders, second Earl of Arran, by Elizabeth, his third wife, daughter of Richard Underwood, late of the city of Dublin, Esq. ), and the heirs male of her body lawfully begotten, by the name, style, and title of Duchess of Inverness. ST• JAMES'S PALACE, MARCH 7, 1840. The Queen has been pleased, on the nomination of Lord Foley, to appoint James Norton Smith, Esq., one of her Ma jesty s Honourable Corps of Gentlemen at Arms, vice Smith, retired. WHITEHALL, MARCH 19, 1840 q Tile Lord Chancellor has appointed Robert Jackson , of Rochdale, in the county of Lancaster, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. DECLARATIONS OF INSOLVENCY. WILLIAM MASH, coach maser, Leamington Priory. ANNE REBECCA HICKMAN, victualler, Abergavenny, Monmouthshire. BANKRUPTCY ENLARGED. FRANCIS COLLINS, scrivener, Leominster, Hereford shire, from March 27, to ilay 6, at eleven, at the Red Lion Inn, Leominster. BANKRUPTS. JOHN PINKERTON, glass cutter, High-street, South wark, to surrender April 14, and May 12, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Turquand, Copthall-buildings, official assignee ; William s; Strutt, and Galsworthy, Ely-place, Holborn. WILLIAM BATES, theatrical manager, Liverpool, April 11 and May 12, at one, at the Clarendon Rooms. Liverpool. Holme, Loftus, and Young, New-inn, London; _ _ Booker, Liver- WILLIAM PA RTINGTON, woollen-cloth manufacturer, May 23 and May 12, at two, at the Court-house, Leeds. Haslam and Bischoff, ICopthall-court, London; Teale and Wainhouse, Leeds. SAMUEL WAITE, cloth-manufacturer, Farnley, York shire, April 18, at one, and May 12, at ten, at the Court house, Leeds. Wilson, Southampton-street, Bloomsbury, London ; Payio, Eddison, and Ford, Leeds. JOHN SMITH, commission agent, Manchester, April 11, and May 12, at one, at the Commissioners'-rooms, Manchester. Milne, Parry, Milne, and Morris, Harcourt-buildings, Temple, London ; Slater and Heelis, Manchester. JOHN WRIGLEY and HORATIO BARTON, cotton spinners, Ancoats, Manchester, April 13, and May 12, at ten, at the Commissioners'-rooms, Manchester. Milne, Parry, Milne, and Morris, Temple, London; Crossley and Sudlow, Manchester. • SAMUEL CHAPPELL, butcher, Lawrence-lane, April 18, at one, and May 12, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Groom, Abehurch-lane. Loudon ; yenning, Naylor, and Robins, Tokeuhouse-yarsi. GRIFFITH RICH ARDS and THOMAS MANWAR ING, linen drapers, April 9, at twelve, and May 12, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Clark, New Broad-street -court, official assignee ; Farrar and Lake, Godliman-street, Doctors'. commons. ROBERT YOUNG, silk mercer, Long Room-street, Scarborough, April 20 and May 12, at twelve, at the Talbot Inn, Scarborough. George and Thomas Brace, Surrey-street, Strand, London ; Page, Scarborough. JAMES BURTON, plumber, Manchester, April 23 and May 12, at three, at the Commissioners'-rooms, Manchester. Milne, Parry, Milne, and Morris, Temple, London; Bent, Manchester. JAMES WILSON, victualler, Toxteth-park, Lancashire, April 15 and May 12, at eleven, at the Clarendon-rooms, Li verpool. Worthington and Holt, Liverpool ; Taylor, Sharpe, Field and Jackson, Bedford-row, London. COURSE OF EXCH./ A Hist cal., . l2 4% Ditto, at sight Rotterdam U. 12 5 Antwerp... Hamburg. M.E 13:3 A1t0na..... Paris, 3 days' eight 25 40 Ditt0....... ........... 3 Ms 25 70 Marseilles. Bour.leau x Frankfort on Maine, Ex.M. 150% l'etersbutgh, ruble... 3 Us. 37% Berlin Vienna, effective 11...3 M lO 6 1.6 8 26% .......... 3658 gaga .... . ......«..........« 36% B ircelon a O6 iNGE.-(THIS DAY.) SO s'i .• ••••• ...... .••• ..... ••• 25 75 Venice ...... • .. •.. 47 Naples ........«.................. 4ON ralcrino uz. Lisbon •-••••••••• 54 Mu Janeiro Bah Buenos Apes New York., 21 days'i.nriit ... 46 1 / 4 I'RiC! CD 8L1.1.11r. , ... per OZ. Portugal II i ming! Gold 60 17 9 NOV Dollbi4,4ilS (1 gi Nov Dallus 4 14 Silver Bars 5 0% Eeville 3O IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS EVENING.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took the Chair, a few minutes before Four o'Clock, when a great number of petitions, chiefly on the subject of the Corn-laws were presented. But in conse quence of a " Call of the House" standing the first of the Olden of the Day, the galleries were not opened until ten minutes past Four, when we understood the Order was discharged. Mr. B. WOOD presented a petition from an indi aidual possessing property at Bankside, praying for the insertion of a protecting clause in the Greenwich Rail way Bill. Mr. JAMES presented petitions from Cumberland signed by 6,00 persons ; and from Scotland, signed by 2,000 persons, for the repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. GREGG presented 63 petitions to the same effect from places in Lancashire, Devon, and Glasgow. Mr. WALKER presented similar petitions from Bury and Lnncaster. Mr. SOMERS paesented a similar petition from the borough of Sligo. Mr. BRISCOE presented a similar petition from the Operatives of Westbury, and another petition from the same place, which we understood to be against the repeal of the Cord-laws, and in favour of a change of the cur rency. Mr. NEALE, Mr. C. WARRINGTON, and several other Members on the Opposition side presented a great num ber of petitions against the alteration of the Corn-laws. Dr. L USHING TON presented a petition, signed by 43,657 inhabitants of the Tower Hamlets for the repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. CRAVEN BERKELEY presented a petition in favour of the repeal of the Corn-laws from 0 ,525 men of Gloucester, and another from 1,039 women of the same place.—( A lengh, and cries of " Hear.") He also pre sented GO petitions from the various trades of Bristol, and from 70,000 inhabstants of that city. Mr, M. PHILLIPS presented a petition from dealers in beer, in Lan c ashi re , p ray i ng to be put on the same foot n as the tavern keepers. Mr. DUKE presented a petition from Boston, praying that the beer trade should be thrown open. Mr. THO RNL E Y presented petitions in favour of the repeal of the Corn-laws from Wolverhampton and its vici nity—one of them signed by 5,000 persons. Mr. DUN DA S presented a petition from the city of York against the Co; n]laws. Mr. MILNES presented a petition from York against the alteration ache Corn-laws. Mr. ORMSBY GORE presented petitions from " va- rious parts of England, Scotland, and Wales against the repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. LIDDELL presented several petitions in favour of the Corn-laws, from places in Durham. Similar petitions were presented by Captain Percival, Colonel Rushbrooke, and Mr. Begg. Mr. BROTi'HERTON presented a petition against Church-ratas and the Ecclesiastical Courts ; and two pe titions, one for and one against the Corn-laws—( Hear, and laughter)—from places in Lancashire. Mr. H. LUNDE presented a petition for the repeal of the Corn-laws and all other taxes.—(Laughter)—also for Universal Suffrage, &c. He did not concur in the prayer. The 110 N. NIEMPER also presented a petition from New castle, for inquiry respecting the dismissal of three persons from the Post-suffice, for refusing to deliver letters on a Sunday. Lord CLEMENT presented a petition from a place in Ireland, complaining of the oppressive conduct of landlords towards tenants, who voted contrary to their dictation. Sir JOHN HOTHAM presented 22 petitions, one of which was signed by upwards of 16,000, in favour of the repeal of the Cure-laws. Mr. DRINRWATER. Mr. DARBY, and a number of oth: r Hour Members on the opposite side, presented petitions against alteration of the Corn-laws ; and also petitions in favour of Church extension, and some others against the grant to the College of Meynooth. Lord SANDON presented a petition from Merchants of Liverpool, against the equalization of the duties en East and West India produce, which they said would be ruinous to the West Indian Colonies. The NOBLE LORD presented also several petitions from the Society of Friends and others, praying this House to put an end to the trade in Opium. LUDLOW ELECTION. Mr. ORD brought up the lisst of Members selected to try the merits of the petition against the retur n f er Ludlow. They were, Sir J . D. Acland, Mr. Wrightson, Lord Iloiviok, Lord Sandon, Baring, and Mr. Horseman, Chair.rman. The Committee were sworn in, forthwith. 111 Sandford, M r . B. and directed to meet PSWICH ELECTION. Mr. ORD brought up the Report of the Ipswich Elec tion, and the following Committee was appointed and sworn it to try the merits of the petition : Mr. W. Mrickham, lion. F. Spencer, Mr. W. Wode house, Sir J. Pollen. Mr. G. Evans, Lord Henniker, and Chairman, Lord Eliot. BIRMIN GHAM AND DERBY JUNCTION RAIL WAY (TAMWORTH APPR O ACH) BILL. The amendments to this Bill were agreed to. Mr. GEORGE WOOD brought up the Report of . :ohlie petitions. WAR IN THE EAST. Mr. GOULBOURN gave notice that on the 9th of April he would move that there be laid before the House copies of anv communications between the G overnment and the East India Co m p an y , showing any arrangements made for paying the expellees of the army n ow preparing in India.—(ll.2ar.) PENSIONS. Mr. HUME gave notice of a motion for a return of all the pensions granted since 1792 for alleged publi c set v i ces. CROWN LANDS AND COLONIES. Oa the motion of Mr. O'BRIEN, certain Returns INTTO ordeied regarding the sale of Crown Lands in the British Colonies. CORN-LAWS. On the suggestion of Mr. HUMS, it was agreed, that, for the convenience of the House, and in order to the pre sentation of the hundreds of petitions regarding Corn-laws, the time for presenting petitions exclusively on that subject should be extended. Lord EL LlO'l T presented twenty-six petitions from East Cornwall, in favour of the Corn-laws, signed by mechanics, as well as agriculturists. Mr. CLAY presented several petitions from artisans in Spitalfields, in favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. O'CONNEL L presented a pesition, signed by upwards of 20,000 of the operatives of Dublin, praying for a repeal of the tax upon bread, which they said was not required for financial purposes. Also a petition to the same ( Ect from Darlington, signed by 1,73) individuals. Also from Newtown, in the county of Downe ; and from variuus other places. Lord WOR.SLEY presented a large nnmber of peti tions from the county of Lincoln, in favour of the Corn laws. Mr. MUNTZ presented a petition from Glasgow, pray ing for the imniediat abolition of the Corn-laws. Mr. HA WES: presented a petition from St. Giles, Camberwell, against the Corn-laws, as detrimental to our commerce.; also similar petitions from various other places. Mr. WALL presented four petitions praying for a total and immediate repeal of the Corn-laws. One of thew petitions was signed by 4688 persons, residing in the West Riding of Yorkshire. KNATCHBULL presented two petitions from parishes in Kent, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. General LYG ON presented a petition from Bewdley, to the same 4 fleet. Mr. MA CA ULA Y presented five petitions from Edin burgh and other places, praying for a total and immediate repeal of the Corn-laws. * Mr P. BARING presented a petition in favour of the exiting Corn-laws. . Sir A. WOOD presented six petitions praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws. Lord LINCOLN presented twenty petitions from parishesiin Nottinghamshire, and fifteen from parishes in Derbyshire, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Sir C. BURRELL presented two petitions to the same effect from parishes in the country of Sussex. Lord DA LME NY presented five petitions, praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. HENNIKER presented a petition in favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. J. MARTIN presented a petition against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Mr. HUM E ivesentee petitions from Aberdeen, from places in Wilts, Devon, and Middlesex, from the Sunday School teachers of Torrington, from Forfarshire, from places in Lancashire, from Arbroath, and from other places, against the Corn-laws. The number of petitions presented by the Hon. Member was twenty. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL presented petitions from various places in the county of Edinburgh, praying for a total and immediate repeal of the Corn-laws. Sir J. TYRRELL presented thirty-five petitions from parishes in Essex against any alteration in the present Corn-laws. Mr. SLANEY presented a petition from a place in So mersctshire, against any alteration in the Corn-laws. Mr. BARNABY presented a petition from a place in Hereford to the same effect. Mr. WARBURTON presented petitions from Ux bridge, from places in Devonshire, three petitions from the parish of Lambeth, and one from Drury-lane, in favour of the immediate repeal of the Corn-laws, Mr. GILL ON presented several petitions from places in Stirlingshire to the same effect. Mr. B. WOOD presented a petition from Swaffham, in Norfolk, in favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws. Mr. BROA DLEY presented a petition from the West Riding of Yorkshire, in favour of tho present Corn-laws. Mr. PA KINGTON presented several petitions from parishes in Worcester against any alteration in the Corn laws. Mr. BROTHERTON presented petitions from Stock- port and Heaton Norris, praying for the release of John Thorogood ; a petition from the Direstors of the Fife and Kinross Associaliln for the suppression of Intemperance on the subject of the Opium Trade with China; two petitions from Eccles for the repeal of the Corn-laws, and one peti • tion from Stockton•on-Tees, praying the House to reject any motion for the rlteration of the Corn-laws. PRIVILEGE. Mr. WARBURTON presented a petition from Brid port, signed by the Mayor, two Allermen, seven Council men, and four Justices of the Peace, stating that they con sidered one of the most important functions of the House was the right of printing and publishing its proceedings, and of enabling the public to purchase their reports at a cheap rate. The petitioners viewed with regret that the House bad not asserted and maintained the privilege in question with that firmness and dignity with which long enjoyed, and exercised with so much national ad. vant age. A Conservative MEMBER inquired how many signatures were attached to the petition ? Mr. WARBURTON said the number of signatures were altogether 150, but it was important, not so much on account of the number as on account of the stption of the individuals who signed it.--(lroeicvl cheers from the Con servative benches, and counter-cheers from the Mihisterial.) SULPHUR. Mr. HAWES, seeing the Right Hon. Ghntleman the President of the Board of Trade in his place, wished to ask him whether the negotiations with Naples relating to the trade in sulphur had been broken off unexpectedly land without the chance oFa favourable result ? Mr. LA BOUCHERH replied that desra'ches had recently been received by his Noble Friend, the Secretary of State for the Foreign Department, and it was not true that that negotiation had been broken off. Mr. HUME wished to ask when the returns respect ing the commercial treaty with Austria might be expected, as they had been moved for and ordered some time ago ? Mr. LA BOUCHERE was not able to answer tLa question without first consulting the Noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Mr. HUME gave notice that he should to-morrow make a motion on this subject, as the course now adopted was really frightful.—(Laughter. Sir E. KNATCHBULL wished to ask the Hon. Meru la:r for Bridport if he could inform the House, whether it was the intention of the Hon. Member for Wolverhamp tsn to b,•ing forwurd his motion on the subject of the Corn laws, or nut? Mr. WARBURTON said that the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton regretted exceedingly that, owing to in disposition, he had been prevented from bringing forward the motion that night, but it was his intention certainly to bring it on tomorrow night. CHINA. Lord SA NDON said that he:should withdraw a notice of motion with respect to China, upon they ssurance of her Majesty's Ministers that a Cammittee should be appointed on the subject. The notice for the appointment of that Committee had beer, standing on the paper from day to day for weeks past, and yet the Committee had not been named. He wished, therefore, to know when the Govern ment intended to name that Committee ? SIR JOHN HOB HO USE understood that the Com mittee was to be appointed to-morrow. He begged, however, to remind the Noble Lord that the proposition did not originate with the Government, but with the Hon. Member for London. THE KING OF HANOVER. Mr. HORSEMAN seeing the Hon. and Gallan Member for Sligo in his place, wished to put a question so him relative to what he had been represented to have said the other night. It had been stated that an application had been made to the King of Hanover to give up that part of St. James's Palace which he had occupied previous to be corning King of Hanover, and to that application an answer had been sent refusing to give up the apartments. From the statements it appeared that the Hon. and Gal lant Member stated that he was instructed pozitively to deny the statement. Now he wished to know whether such were the fact ?_ Col. PERCIVAL said that he did not on that occasion state that any such application had been made to the King of llanover. What he stated was, that no application had been made to the Duchess of Kent, and upon the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies stating that it was new to him, he (Colonel Percival) when the Noble Lord sat down, read the authority to the House on which he made that statement.--SCries of " Hear, hear.') The Gallant Colonel here begged leave to read the follow ing passage from the letter of Sir F. Watson which he had received last Friday—" It has been erroneously conceived th t the King of Hanover's apartments at St. James's have been required by the Duchess of Kent ; but ,in fact, her Royal Highness did not only not express a wish for them, but ( yen observed that Viey would not suit her ; and further, her Royal Highness is nit pleased with the manner in which hi r name her name has been used upon the subject." The Gal. Col. then continued—" I may be permitted to state that the assertion !made was not that no application had beenmade to the King of Hanover, but that none hal been made by the Duct ess of Kent.—( Ironical cries of " Hear, hear. ) The very conclusion of the letter I read shows that some application had been made, or her Royal Highness would not hive bean displeased. The Hon. Member seems to think that I have received since Friday some fresh infor ina,i , n. That I consider at least as part of his question. Aid I cm prepared to say that I have heard from a Mem ber of the Government that an application was made to the Kin ; Hanover, by the First Commissioner of Woods and For .sts, for the use of the apartments in St. James's, on be half of her Majesty, and that it was refused.—( Hear, hear, hear")—and that another application was made to the same ogee by Lord Melbourne--which was also refused.— ( Hear, hear.) I stated that no application had been made by t'ie Duchess of Kent.—( Ironical cries of" Hear, hear," and " Oh, oh.") I do not understand the tr;umphat t tone of Hon. Gentlemen.—(llear, hear.) The letter itself, I repeat, intimated that some application had been made. PLIVILEGE. Tie Order of the Day for the consideration of this subject The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he understood the Sergeant-at-Arms bad a statement to make as to the action of trespass. He moved that he be called in and heard. The Sergeant-at-Arms being called to the bar, said the Assistant Sergeant said four messengers had been served with notice of declaration in actions commenced by T. B. Howard : and he produced the declaration. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved that it be read by the Clerk. The declaration was then read, which stated that it was an action of tresdass, brought by Thomas Burton Howard against Edward Allen Gossett, William Be llam y , and others, for entering the plaintiff's house, and creating a disturbance therein. The damages were laid at 1,0001. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that in the ab sence of his Noble Friend it became his duty to pro puce a motion to the House upon this subject. From the verbiage of the document which had just been read, was difficult to discover either what was the exact form of the action to be brought, or what it was of which the plaintiff complained. It did not appear that he questioned the privileges of the House, or the legality of the warrant. but what he said was, that there was an excess of violence on the part of the Officers of the House in the execution of that warrant. Th e Hon ourable and Learned Member for Ripon, whom he did not then sec in his place, had, he believed, re ceived a letter from Mr. Howard on that subject, and he himself had received our purporting to come from Mr. Laurie, Mr. Howard's solicitor, in which he stated that the complaint was of excess of violence on the part of the officers of that House. The question was, what course ought the House to adopt where there was an absolute breach of the privileges of the House, it was not only right but the House was called upon to interfere in a summary manner, but in this case the action was brought, no to op pose the orders of the House, but to complain of what the cfficers had done in the execution of their duti. (LEFT SPEAKING.) HOUSE OF LORDS. TIIC LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at Fire o'Clock. Several Bills were brought up from the Commons. The Earl of RO SE BE Et Y presented a petition from Linlithgow, prayiug for atotal and immediate repeal of the Corr-laws. It vial almost unnecessary for him to state that he could not support the prayer of the petition in all its extent; be was favourable, however, to a modification of those laws, and he thought it would soon be indispensible to modify them, particularly with reference to the scale of duties. He was convinced that by such a plan much might be done for the improvement of the country without being at all injurious to the interests of the agricultural interest. The Marquis of BUTE present:d :etitions from Avon dale, Hamilton, and other places, in favour of the Non intrusion principle, and 30 petitions from different parts in favour of the present system of Corn-laws. The Bishop of LONDON presented two petitions from parishes in Nova Scotia, praying . for protection to the Church in the colonies. The Marquis of WESTMINSTER presented a peti ion from alparish in Cheshite praying for the repeal of ,he Corn and Provision Laws. The Duke of CLEVELAND presented a petition from Durham, praying that a stop might be put to the Opium Trade. Also one very numerously and respectably signed by persons in the county of Durham, praying for the total and immediate repeal of the Corn-laws. He could not go that length, but had the petitioners prayed fur a modification of the laws, and a reduction of the duty upon corn, he would most willingly have given the peti tion his support. He had the good fortune to possess a certain portion of land, and he naturally wished agr:culture to succeed, but as he thought the excessive protection given to agriculture was the cause of much of the distress and poverty which prevailed throughout the country. He knew that there were many able advocates both is that House and out of it for a continuance of the Corn laws; but, in h:s opinion, they ought to be revised, and the duty reduced, for his maxim had always been " to live and let The Marquis of LONDONDERRY, although he had not the :good fortune to possess the same influence and power in the county of Durham as the Noble Duke, but he could not permit it to go forth that there was not a very considerable portion of the agricultural interest in that county hostile to any alteration of the Corn-laws. He wished to ask the Noble Viscount opposite whether there was any truth in what he saw stated in the journals of the day, relative to a certain meeting said to have taken place in Downing street. From that report it appeared that two hundred persons, calling themselves delegates, had taken Downing_ street by surprise, and had entered to a very considerable extent into the question of the Corn-laws. lie should like to know in what manner that meeting was to he viewed, because, at the end of the report, the Noble Vis count was made to say that he had received and answered them in his private, not in his official capacity. Now he (the Marquis of Londonderry) could not conceive how the Noble Viscount could ecetva two hundred delegates upon such a quo , - lion in his private c pacity. He wished to ask ti e Noble Viscount whether the report was correct, whether it was a true statement of his opinions, as stated by him to the Delegates, whether it was merely the private opinions co" Lcrl Melbourne, or whether an ra of the Ministers, respecting tae Corn-laws ; and, if so, how was the House to look at the discrepancies between those answers, and the statements made by the Noble Lord last year ? Tne declaration made by the :Noble Lord last year was very strong. He could not say that which he .had last made was exactly the same, but let their Lordships look at the statement of what passed, and ask themselves if they con!d gather from it what the Noble Viscount intended to do respecting the Corn-laws, for it was a myst . fication which was unworthy the position he held as first Minister of the Crown. He thought the question was one of such vital importance that the first Minister of the Crown was bound to tell them, whether he meant to repeal, or by changing the duty, to alter the Corn-laws, or was deter mined to support them as they at present stood. Be, therefore, begged to know whether the statement was cor rect, and whether the Noble Lord had spoken in his pri. vate or official capacity. L MELBOURNE said be coul I not say whether th s statement referred to by the Noble Marquis was cor. rect or not, as he had not beard of it, and therefore could not vouch for its correctness, but what he apprehCndecl the Noble Msrquis referred to was some difference between what he bad said in his private and official capacity, not relating to the main subject, but to some opinions be had stated in the course of the meeting with reference to foreign trade. He certainly stated an opinion he very much held, that they would not by relaxing the Corn-laws obtain a greater facility from foreign countries for the irr portation into them of our manufactures.—( Hear, hear.) Oa which a delegate stated that that declaration would have a great effect on the country, and wished to know whether it was his (Lord Melbourne's) private opinion, or the opinion of the Government, and he answered a clearly. He stated it merely as his own opinion. The MARQUIS of LONDONDERRY then read an txtract from the Report of the inteni..w in tale newspaper, to the effect that Lord Nlelboutne said that " the total repeal at present would be most injudicious ; t give all at once was not the way to obtain concessions from Foreign Powers." He wished to know whether that was to be one of Mr. O'Connell's instalments. He thought the Noble Viscount should state the determination of the roment on the subject. The Earl of RADNOR who was heard with great diffi culty was understood to say that, in consequence of the lateness of the last and the ensuing Sessions, there would be a famine, if the Corn-laws were not repealed. He begged their Lordships to attend to the effect of the Corn laws on the Poor-laws. The object of the Poor-laws was to produce a free competition of labour, but that ought to bo accompanied with a free trade in food. Although he was fsvourable to the Poor-laws, yet he would support a modification of them, if an alteration were not made in the Poor-laws.—.( Hear, hear.) The avowed object of the Corn-laws was to keep up the price of bread. That was declared to be the object when they were established, and it was said at that time that if the landlords were not protected in that way they would be ruined. After some further observations he expressed a hope that their Lordships would well consider the subject, and be prepared to deal with it when it came before them. TLe Noble Lord then presented a number of petitions in favour of the alteration from Devon, Hampshire, Cheater, Lanark, Somerset, and other places in England and Scot land. We understood him to say that the petition from Somerset was signed by a very wealthy landowner, Sir Thomas Lethbridge.—( Hear.) The Duke of RICHMOND said the great object of the Corn-laws was that the nation should be independent of any other country foe bread.—( Hear, hear. ) On this view of the subject he would refer his Noble Friend (Lord Radnor) to the speech of the President of Ameiica.—(llear, hear, hear.) His Noble Friend, like other agitators, stated what he assumed to be the opinions of the agriculturists, and then argued upon them. They put the question to the people, as one of cheap bread, but if they told them that the question was whether they would have cheap bread and butter, or no employment, or would have bread at a reasonable price and good wages—( Hear, hear, hear)—if the question was put in that way to the people, they would not be so will ing to sign petitions.—( Hear, hear.) Was it the fact that the labouring classes were in distres.? Look to the state of the Savings Banks. In November 1838, there were 690,138 depositors, and of these 600,000 were deposites of 71. on the average.—( Hear: hear.) That shewed to what what class they belonged.—(Hear.) But in No vember, 1839, there was an increase of 40,000 depositors, and the amount of the deposits was 7,200,00C/.—( Hear, hear.) Did that spew that the people were in distress He should like to know what were the wages in the parish in the Noble Lord's neighbourhood, from which one of the petitions came ? In his own neighbourhood the wages were 12s. a-week, and when the men were on task. work they earned 15s. a-week. If the Corn-laws were repealed undoubtedly there would not be full employment, as a great deal of land would be thrown out of cultivation. Lcrd RADNOR believed that the repeal of the Corn laws instead of diminishing employment would increase it. It would certainly increase it in the manufacturing districts. The Duke of RICHMOND asked how much able bodied labourers got in the part of the country which the Noble Lord raferred to ? The Earl of RADNOR—Their usual pay is about Os. a week. The Duke of B UCCLEUG H said that if they were so well paid, he did not see what complaint could be made on the subject. The Duke of RIC lINIOND presented petiticns from West Grimston and Shipley, in Tussix, against any alte ration in the Corn-laws ; also a petition born the Board of Guardians of a union in the county of Snsscx, and another from a place in the county of Elgin, to the same effect; also a petition from a parish in Aberdeen against the intru sion of Ministers to the Scottish Church. @AFT SITTING.) IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. _HOUSE OF LORD,', MAiscit 30. THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND. The Earl of ABERDEEN presented petitions from immediate froni steps Cait f li o; ss t Glasgow in favou r of non-intrusion, take and o n praying the Government to, Caith ness, settl em ent of the question. Ihe N o bl e E arl said he wished to call th e attention of the Noble Viscount to the state of this subject at the present moment. Eight months ago the Noble Viscount had answered a deputation from the Church of Scotland, that the Government would take the subject into their serious consideration, with the view of supplying some remedy to the disturbed state of the country ; in consequence of the conflicting decisions of the Courts two months ago, after the meeting of Parliament, when he put the question to the Noble Viscount, his ansfier was that he thought it probable some legislative measure would be necessary, but he could not say of what description. On the question being repeated, the Noble Viscount answered that he had not made up his mind whether any measure should be adopted or not. Now, lie could understand that the Noble Viscount could make up his mind to do nothing, and he could understand his not being prepared with a measure, on account of the difficulties of the subject, he N i but to say still th a t h e was not prepare d to cay w hether he it would do som e thi ng or not hi ng , wai it d ece nt? \V as ? Was it, in fact, government ?—(Cricsof from ‘ Hear, hear," including one o f p ecu liar length and cadence the Marquis of Londond e rry.) The peace of was involved, and they had a right to expect an ans wer of the country some description, and that the Noble Viscount wou ld not longer remain in doubt whether he would anything de cr nothing on a subject on which he thought it was the first duty of a Government to interpos e. Lord MELBOURNE, nghat he w t a h s a n n o h t e had nor e th . st i v4ng the opinion of the Noble Earl, could say notif prepared al ready said on this subject, namely, men t t was about to bring in a to say whether the Govern • EVENING EDITION. measure on this subject, or decidedly whether they would do so at any time. He admitted the urgency of the case, but he should ill perform his duty to the country if he could be urged by the taunts of the Noble Earl to take any step in a measure in which he did not-clearly see his way. —( Hear, hear.) Takieg into consideration the great difficulties of the case, the difference of opinion that prevailed upon it, (no ttko men, or two bodies of men, as far as ho could perceive, agreeing upon the course to be taken), and also taking irate consideration the advice given by the Noble Earl himself, not to be precipitate in the for mation of a measure, he could only say be could not at pre sent pledge the Government to introduce a measure on the subject. The Supreme Court of Law on the one hand and the Ecclesiastical Assembly on the other had carried on'the war, he would not say as others did, beyond the power they possessed, but t o th e utmost - extent it was possible they could carry it ; mid being engaged in this manner, point to point, neither being prepared to give way or concede the least point to the other, they turned round and said to the Government, a third party, " Now settle this contest in a manner that will be satisfactory to us both." That was the easy task cast upon the Government. Much as he felt the evil of delay, agitation, and discord, it must at the same time be remembered that a measure might only add to irri tation and discord; and as in all probability it would be more satisfactory to one party than the other, he could not anticipate the salutary and composing effect expected from it ; and on the whole, seeing the difficulties of the case, be repeated he was unable decidedly to pledge the Govern ment on the subject. The Earl of ABERDEEN had heard with great con cern the statement of the Noble Viscount, which explained to their Lordships the foundation of the decision to which he had come. The Noble Viscount said he was afraid he should not be able to propose a measure that would be sa- I tisfactory to both parties. Did it not occur to the Noble Viscount that he had a duty to perform ?—(Hear, hear.) Was this a speculative difference between two parties ? The Noble Viscount forgot the state of the country—he forgot this was a question whether law should prevail or not ? It was a mistake to say that both parties had gone to the utmost extremity of their pawcr. The law remained unexecuted, because if they attempted to execute the law in the district with which he was connected it would lead to universal bloodshed. Ile stated this positively, knowing that the people were armed, and ready to resist if it were attempted to carry it into effect. Here then was the law defied, and a decree pronounced unable to be executed. Was it not the duty of the Government to secure the duo erecution of the law ? It was in vain for the Noble Vie count to expect these matters to settle themselves. It might be good policy, occasionally, to take time, and trust to the chapter of accidents, but in this case long as the delay bad been, he thought the Noble Viscount, when be did interfere, would be precipitate at last. But, considering the state of the country at this moment, he thought it was abandoning the first duty of a Govern ment not to take some steps. He (Earl of Abeedeen) gave no opinion himself which party was right or wrong, but the Government should look to their duty, and not whether any measure they thought should be proposed would be satisfactory to the contending parties. The Marquis of WESTMINSTER presented several petitions, praying for an alteration in the Corn-laws, and alluded to the former opinion of Lord Ashburton on the subject. Lord ASHBURTON explained. What he had for merly opposed was what he conceived the improper eaten. sion of the Corn-laws. Lord SUDELE Y presented a similar petition, praying for such an alteration as would make the supply steady and certain, Earl of CHARLEVILLE inquired if her Majesty's Govo:nment was acquainted with an outrage which had taken place in the county of Limerick. He was informed a person named Arundal Hill had been warned to prepare for death, for that the fate of the Rev. Mr. Da..-gson awaited him because he refused to underlet same land which. if he did without the consent of his landlord, he would fafeit his lease. He hoped, if the Noble Marquis was not acquainted with the eircumstatee, he would make inquiries respecting it. The Marquis of NORMANDY said he was not in formed of the particulars of the case to which the Noble Earl had referred, but would make inquiries on the subject. . OFFICIAL RETURNS. The Earl of MINTO said be had inquired into the cause of the errors in the official returns to which a Noble Lord had called his attention, and had found that they bad been supplied correctly, but that the error was occasioned by the transposition of two letters in printing—an error which he must say was very seldom to be imputed to the printer cf the House. METROPOLITAN POLICE COURTS. In answer to a question from Lord WYNFORD, The Marqu's of NORMANBY said be had no objec tion, on principle, to confining the number of Magistrates to twenty-seven, but he did not think a clause to that effect necessary. With respects to public informers, be had to introduce a clause into the Bill which would make it penal on the part of such persons to compromise their informa tions with tradesmen on the payment of a sum of money. The Bill was then reported to the House with amend ments. and ordered t• be printed. CLERGY RESERVES BILL (CANADA). The Bishop of EXETER said that as the discussions which had already come before the House that evening had occupied a good deal of their Lordships' time, he would defer his motion on the subject of the Clergy Reserves Bill (Canada) till to-morrow. He would also move on Friday, that certain questions should be put to the Judges of Upper Canada, with respect to the Act providing for the Sale of Clergy Reserves, and the distribution thereof. Their Lordships then adjourned, at a Quarter past Seven, till to-morrow. 110 USE OF COMMONS. Motel' 30. QUEEN'S MESSAGE. On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, the House went into Committee on her Majesty's Message with respect to Lord Seaton. The Royal Message having been read, Lord J. RUSSELL rose and said—Although, Sir, I have no doubt that this House will gladly accord with her Majesty's gracious desire to make some provision for Lord Seaton, yet I feel it due to that distinguished indi vidual to offer a short statement of facts ; Ho entered the army in 1794, and joined the 20th Regiment as Lieu tenant in 1796. In 179 S and 1799 he was engaged in the expeditions of Sir Ralph Abercrombie and the Duke of York, and was in several general actions. He was then employed in Egypt—was present at Alexandria-- and eas then stationed at Malta. Subsequently he became Military Secretary to Sir John Moore, and was present at Corunna. He was engaged afterwards in the Peninsu lar campaigns, under Sir A. Wellesley, and was present at Busaco and Ciudad Rodrigo. and there received a wound which disabled him for some time, he having in the meantime attained the rank of Captain, and subsequently rose to the command of that distinguished regiment, the 52d. His zeal for military service again led him to the Continent, after a short lapse of time, and he was present at the battle of Waterloo. Thus, Sir, from the corn n encement to the close of ,the war—from 1794 to 1615 has this distinguished officer gallantly served his country in every part of the world. In 182 e, he was Governor and Commander-in-Chief of Upper Canada. In 1835 he was appointed Commander of the Forces there, and soon after Commander-in-Chief of all the forces in the Provinces. During the troubles which took place in the Colony, the full weight of the responsibility of preserving it to the Crown rested upon him, when traitors were in arms against their Sovereign--( Hear, hear)—and he con ducted the service with the prowess he had often dis played against a foreign foe, and at the same time with the greatest humanity.—(Cheers.) His responsibility was increased by Lord Gosford having left the Colony, consi dering that conciliation was hopeless, end also by another Noble Lord having thought that his presence there would no longer conduce to the service of the Crown. Thus, for upwards of forty years has Lord Seaton borne all the labours and privations of military service, and long absence from his country.—( Cheers.) To add to this plain statement of facts would be unnecessary ; and I think that they will be amply sufficient to induce the House cheerfully to agree to the resolution I now beg to move—" That her Majesty be enabled to grant an annuity of 0 ,000/. a year to Lcrd Seaton, and the two next male heirs."—( Cheers. ) Sir ROBERT PELL rose to second tho proposal of the Noble Lord. He entirely agreed with the Noble Lord, that the simple mention of the forty-five )cars in which Lord Seaton had been engaged in the service of his country was a much greater tribute to his character than the most eloquent language could convey. At the same time he thought it was a proud distinction, not merely to Lord Seaton, but to the ch a r ac t er o f the British army, that they should be able to exhibit to the world a man who had been connected with the British Army for so long a time, and that they should have learnt from him no lessons but those to be derived from the most moderate, humane, and discreet administration. The Noble Lord had omitted one part of the civil service of Sir John Colborne, which he (Sir R. Peel) had an opportunity of observing. He had been in correspondence, as Secretary of State, with Sir John Colborne, when Lieutenant -Governor of Guernsey, at a time when there were many animosities existing which led him ( Sir Robert Peel) to form an opinion from his conduct in that limited sphere, that if he were called upon to act in a more extended sphere, he would support his character for prudence and humanity. Isle would abstain from mere panegyric, in order to exalt the character of Lord Seaton ; but he thought that no man could receive a higher reward than that which the Lords and Commons had evinced towards him—viz., the expression of national gratitude._ ( Cheers.) Mr. HUME was sorry to differ with the Noble Lord and the Right Hen. Gentleman. If 45 years' service was a reason for granting a pension, many men in the army were far more entitled to one than Lord Seaton. If Lord Seaton had been the most distinguished officer In the Bri tish army, he would have no such distinguished honour as that which had been conferre d upon him had he n o t served in Canada ; and unles s Lord Seaton had go t a fortune to support the Peerage, he thou g ht was highly improper. It was creating a that in a constitutional p oint of view the conferrin g upon d hi a n , i s t o h f a tic,leigernsi,ty that woul become paupers o n th e S tate. c l .i 'h'e country had eneug h of them al ready , as the Pen sion-list showed. He hoped Lord Seaton had ample for tune to maintain h i s rank ; an d if so, the question was— whether the Peerage was not quite sufficient recornpence to him for his services, and more than he had any right to expect? Had the Noble Lord and the Right Hon. Gen tleman foigot the circumstance of Sir John Colborne's being removed from Upper Canada, as unfit to continue Governor ? Let the Noble Lord produce the correspond ence that had passed between Sir John Colborne and the authorities there, which com p e ll e d t h e G overnment to withdraw him from the Government of Upper Canada, on the ground of complete inability? Was that to be passed over? But instead of coming home, as any other person would have done after that removal, Sir John Colborne went to Lower Canada, where he was appointed Com mander of the Forces. The pension, ho supposed, was not for his conduct on that occasion: and the question was, what had been his conduct during the time he was Commander-in-Chief? The Noble Lord had stated that Sir John Colborne succeeded Lord Gosford His (Mr. Hume's) opinion was, that had Lord Gosford kry--- ton- ihirc Buto W3l l wfolk shire 1, Sic BY sum nil of , and ) the daetd che w E d. Jani e° I, Mr. let ° tories Nell' , fain into° vii on park , ,untesg t)f to Joule' rep„ e" ;l a ptl- , CM ' fr?` n if ,tch /.