The Sun.
London, England, 1837-04-22 00:00:00

di

:iebate. Now, with reference to what had fallen from Noble
Lords opposite, he contended that this was no interference
with the Government of Spain. What special pleading
had there been used in this debate? What co-operation or
assistance was it hot to give all the assistance in our power
to further the object which our ally aimed at ? He would
contend that if the Noble Duke had been in the command
of the Spanish army, he would have expected from then,
Precisely the same assistance as he had expected in the
ease of Admiral Penrose. The Noble Duke had given a
true and just account with respect to the employment of
Marines. Now, he was quite certain that those Marines
hWho were employed in Spain could not be placed in safer
ands than those of that gallant, able, and discreet officer,
Lord John Hay. He was satisfied that under his com-
mand the national honour would be preserved. The No-
ble Duke, however, had commented upon one thing upon
which he (Viscount Melbourne) wished to have some dis-
tinct explanation. The Noble Duke had adverted to what
had been done in Spain as matters arising out of Stock Ex-
change speculations or machinations, and that the state of
things in Spain was kept up because the Stock Exchange
speculators thought it necessary that troops should he em-
ployed here or there. Did the Noble Duke mean to say
that his Majesty's Government had designs of that kind, or
had any Privity with those persons on the Stock Ex-
change ? He thought the Noble Duke had expressed
himself very warmly on this point, and, indeed, so much so
as to leave some imputation of the kind. It was, indeed,
an extraordinary notion to suppose that persons engaged in
these pursuits or designs had any influence with the Go-
vernment.
He could only declare for himself, and on be-
half „f h•
„ Colleagues, that they had not been influenced by
anY motives of the kind which had been alluded to.
The Duke of WELLINGTON was understood to re-
Peat that we had no right to interfere in this contest in
the way we had done. If the Noble Viscount referred to
7hat he had said, he would find that he (the Duke of Wel-
.l/?,_g,t°n) had stated the object of the treaty was a blockade.
'Hs was intended even after the month of August. The
Noble Duke concluded by declaring that he ha not, and
It'leiver could have, the least wish or intention to impute to
vis..(3reverument such motives as those to which the Noble
Viscount had referred.
,r,", answer to some question put by Lord ALVANLEY,
tw; Line Earl of MINTO said that Lord John Hay was
tile retreat of the British Legion and Spanish troops from
rternani,
He was upon the ground, and present at every
ini'vernent made by the Marines ; and every step was
fact,
upon his judgment. He believed, in point of
act, that if it were necessary Lord John Hay was,
and always would be, present. Of course his Lord-
shin was the responsible Commander, and the Officers
tnder him were responsible to him. He believed that
he battalion of Marines were never engaged but in his
eresence. With regard to another question which had
ten Put by the Noble Lord, there must, of course, in cer-
ain instances, be a communication between the two Gene-
nerals. General Evans was perfectly independent of the
Marines, and the Marine battalion and Kiog's troops were
tinder the sole command of Lord John Hay. They were a
separate force, under the sole command of Lord John Hay.
He did not think this the most convenient course for adop-
tion, but it was the only shape in which the King's troops
could co-operate. He took it for granted that the ge-
neral outlines of the operations were matters of arrange-
'pent amongst the different officers.
Lord ASHBURTON adverted to a charge which bad
bbeen made against him of having said that peace could not
e maintained for six months when the present Ministry
came into office. He denied that he had ever said anything
of the kind, and for what he had said he would refer to the
Pages of the Mirror of Parliament, where the whole pas-
sage was to be found without any such prophecy as that
which had been attributed to him. What he had said upon
a question which had reference to Belgium in stating his
°Pinion was, that the affairs of that country were not in
such a state as to secure the peace of Europe. But nomi-
nally the Government of Belgium was established. This was
the substance of what he had said, and the prediction which
hihad made was one which he was proud of having made.
e did not now think it necessary to waste their Lord-
-BhiPs' time on this part of the subject, but he would advert
to,, the majority on this question, of 36, in another House.
tle believed that nearly two-thirds of the other House
also entertained the opinion which was the unanimous
°Pinion of the country in reference to this question. In
the course of his recollection of Parliamentary proceed-
ings (and he would appeal to the Noble Viscount) be
never recollected a great debate like that which had just
been concluded elsewhere to pass over in the other House
of Parliament, where the conduct of the Government was
arraigned, and a direct motion to arraign the conduct of his
Majesty's Government-
Lord HOLLAND rose to order. The Noble Lord
was out of order in alluding to what had occurred in ano-
ther House of Parliament. But not only did the Noble
Lord allude to the debates in the House of Commons, but
INe was about to enter into a disquisition on the conduct of
'4 Members.
Lord ASHBURTON said a few words which did not
?each us.
The motion was then agreed to.
Several Bills were advanced a stage, and the House ad-
Jourrled at ten minutes past Ten.

the shipping interest it gave but very little advantage,
for according to the statement of the Honourable Mem-
ber himself; ships were to be taxed for that from which
they could derive no possible benefit.—(Hear, hear.)
It was the duty of the Government, in his opinion, to
examine propositions of this kind, and to come forward
and state to the House whether they approved of them
or not. Such projects as the one now before the
House were merely raised for private purposes, and
the individuals who wished to establish them ought to
pay for them. He would never cease to raise his voice as
long as he had a seat in that House against the system of
passing tolls for the maintenance of harbours. It was a
dangerous principle, and there was no possibility of limiting
or preventing it, unless the House on occasions like the pre-
sent opposed it.

Mr: CAI LEY thought the speech of the Hon. Mem-
ber for Tynemouth would have been much more applicable
to the Committee of last year.

Mr. G. F. YOUNG—I was on the Dublin Election
Committee during the sitting of that Committee.—(Hear.)
Mr. CAYLEY was proceeding to address the House
on the Bill before it, when he was interrupted by Sir
Augustus Clifford, Usher of the Black Rod, who appeared
at the table, and summoned the House to the House of
Lords, to hear the Royal Assent given by Commission to
several Bills.

The SPEAKER, attended by several Members, immedi-
ately quitted the House.
On the SPEAKER'S return, he reported to the House
that the Royal assent had been given by Commission to
several Bills ; for which, see Lords' Report.'
Mr. CAYLEY resumed. He supported the Bill, be-
cause of the report of the Committee of last year. He
was not in favour of every clause of the Bill, but he would
support it on the ground he had already named.
Sir G. CLERK, as Member for one of the northern
ports, was most decidedly opposed to the Bill, because it
went against the interests of the shipowners of these ports,
and against the principle laid down by the House, that
passing tolls were bad in principle. He was of opinion that
no private harbour could be of any use for general pur-
poses. He cared not whether the Bill was opposed now or
afterwards, for the passing toll clause must be struck out,
and then the Bill would fall to the ground.
The LORD ADVOCATE gave his strongest opposi-
tio❑ to the Bill.

Sir F. TRENCH supported the Bill, considering it a
most important measure in favour of the cause of huma-
nity. The harbour of Scarborough, as it at present existed,
though extremely defective, had been greatly productive to
the safety of life and property. Out of 217 vessels that bad
been wrecked, no less than 40 had been lost in the bight of
Scarborough. The petition that had been presented that
night had been laughed at by the Honourable Mem-
ber for Durham. Now he (Sir Frederick Trench) had
looked to the names attached to that petition, and
he found a great number of them actually residing in
that part of the country which the Hon. Member represented.
He was sorry the Hon. Member had thrown out remarks
of that nature, because he could tell him they were utterly
without foundation. There never was a stronger case for
the second reading of a Bill than that which was then pre-
sented before the House. He trusted Hon. Gentlemen
would take the trouble of reading the evidence given before
the Committee, and of coasidering the question, before they
made up their minds to oppose a measure which was ab-
solutely necessary for the preservation of life and property.
—(Cries of " Divide, divide.")
Mr. LAMBTON must vote against the Bill, and he
should do so upon principle.
Mr. P. THOMSON was decidedly opposed to the prin-
ciple of passing-tolls, although he did not think himself
justified, on the part of the Government, in opposing the
second reading of the Bill. He should prefer leaving it to
the House to decide whether the Bill should be sent to a
Committee or not ; but if after it left the Committee it
contained those clauses relative to the levying of passing-
tolls, he should on the part of the public decidedly oppose it.
Mr. BELL objected to the Bill, and should give his
decided support to the amendment of the Hon. Member
for Durham.

Mr. ROBINSON said that a great difference of opinion
had existed in the Committee with respect to the present
Bill, and he, for one, had opposed, as he always should, the
system of levying passing-toll.
Sir E. CODRINGTON thought the question could
never be properly settled unless the Government took it
into their own hands.

Mr. BETHEL defended the Report of the Committee
and could assure the House that every gentleman belong-
ing to it had notice of the day the Report was to be
agreed to.

Mr. B. THONIPSON conjured Hon. Members to
pause before they threw out a Bill which was calculated to
do so much good.
Sir J. JOHNSTONE replied.
Mr. W. DUNCOMBE wished to correct the supposi-
tion that the Bill imposed any now duties : it did no such
thing.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when there appeared—
For the second reading B6
Against it

Majority against the second reading... 4
The Bill was consequently lost.
On the motion of Mr. MILES, the Clum Forest Inclo-
sure Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be com-
mitted.

ROUSE OF COMMONS, APRIL 21.
The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before four o'clock.
Mr. LOWTHER brought up the Report of the York
and North Midland Railway Bill.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON presented a petition from
Sunderland against the Bridlington Harbour Bill. On the
motion of the Hon. Alderman the Durham and Sunderland
Railway Bill was read a third time and passed.
SCARBOROUGH HARBOUR.
Sir J. JOHNSTONE moved the second reading of the
Scarborough Harbour Bill. If he did not think an efficient
harbour could be established, he would not have brought
the present Bill before the House, but he was sure it could ;
and further he was certain it would be a great improvement
to Scarborough, and of benefit to the shipping interests.
he next point upon which he should ground his
was, that the harbour was wanted. Scarborough was
Placed within the deepest part of the indentation
to the coast, between Flarnborough Head and Whitby
elt. It was not denied that each of these large indenta-
"os on the coast required harbours to enable vessels which
"old not weather the headlands to anchor with safety.
It was stated that three millions, and a thousand men, were
annually lost on the coast—the harbour he advocated
Would be calculated to save many of the lives,
Proi much of the property. By the improvements
.Posed, the vessels would be enabled to enter it at half a
tide earlier than now. At any time of the lowest tide there
Would be five feet water, while the spring tide at the lowest
w.nuld be seven feet. He hoped, on the principle of hi uma-
ilttY, the House would agree to the Bill.—(Hear, hear.)
b Wes not more than fourteen months ago si,
boat, with fourteen men, was lost, who decidedly. would
the
bltve been saved had the harbour been
Lr°P°sed improved state. The Hon. Member conicnluded
jlll"ing the second reading of the Bill.
and Mr.
PEASE objected to the second reading of the Bill ;
notaithstandinr, the statements of the Hon. Member
4.'PPosite, it was most remarkable that all the shipowners
theinterest was in the trade with Scarborough had peTthitewhar_
Hoed
against the introduction of the measure.
"" of Scarborough had already had upwards of 60,0001.
expendedupon.
been derived, it, from which no benefit whatever had
that the expenTad he had no hesitation whatever in saying
p d b the Bill would have the
Same effect, Thouirleart3orou-roof Scarborough, according to the
accessible
that had been iven by several naval men, only
ve:essible for eight hougrs out of the twenty-four ; wandan he
;_.ould, therefore, put it to the House, whether it
an es.
Ilne so large an expenditure under such circums of Sir
forl-1". Member here referred to the evidence
thJeolinstone and others before the Shipinr, Coinmittee,
Would Purpose of showing that the harbour in questionnny
as
vessels confe no advantages on the Shipping comm
Into were more likely to receive damage by running
to a port like that of Scarborough than by standing outh.
~021e,a: At a public meeting held in the town of Scardeor
a very strong opinion against the projectedu
ha:
g %vas expressed by many of the influential n
nts.--(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The payment
I under such circumstances, was, •• his opinion,highloy
f
t°bbeie',ltYtable, and for these reasons he should move that
itturlll.be read a second time that day six months.
• 'Alderman THOMPSON rose to second the amend-
Cant, because the Bill would inflict a very great hardship on
'llll constituents. The ships belonging to Sunderland
tax.had
4..4.r, ;before been proposed to be subjected to a passing_c_
buc_tnis Bill, no ship which passed within 100 miles of b
441111 would be exempt from the tax. It was a novel,_
4;7 'n his *opinion a very bad precedent, for the. cotrnhe
of this country. There was no passing toll in
eot'for of Sunderland, yet 12,000/. a year bad been laid
of that twenty years, all contributed by the ship-owners
ship..:" Port. Was it just or honest, then, that these
r.. %veers were to be taxed in this way, for the
rrPo.,se of making pleasure grounds and improvements
ine people of Scarborough. He opposed the Bill
• ustle ground, because on a gale from the North East no
~,,,"L:tibte.tioleulndnglyo into the proposed improved harbour, when that
wind in which vessels from the Tvne could
sietun
,Y Make any use of it. He, therefore, with pleasure
bur haumed the amendment of the Hon. Member for South
h4rßillG
u • r • YOUNG opposed the second reading of the traveolVn two grounds. First, that it was in direct cone
chased " of the principle which the House had de-
hour ass determination to preserve, namely, that in har-
-43i1l it would not sanction the payment of passing tolls ;
%you], fldlY, that it did not offer those advantages which
u induce the House to sanction such a measure, To

The Belfast and Hollywood Railway Bill was also read
a second time, and ordered to be committed.

TRINITY (NORTH LEITH) HARBOUR.
Sir ANDREW L. HAY moved the third reading of
the Trinity (North Leith) Harbour Bill.
The LORD ADVOCATE would feel it his duty to
oppose the third reading of the Bill.
Sir G. CLERK also opposed the Bill.
The Bill was then read a third time, and passed.
The Goring Bridge Bill was read a third time, and passed.
Mr. W. O'BRIEN begged to know whether precedence
would be given on Monday to the Irish Poor-law Bill ?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL could not give any decided
answer.

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, APRIL 22, 1837.

published ought to be left to the Committee. He would not
say that the resolution of the Noble Lord was strictly neces-
sary, but lie thought it was expedient, and he should there-
fore support it. All publication should take place under the
authority and sanction of the Speaker, and not otherwise.
The evidence taken before the Committee on the affairs of
Canada had not been published, because the Hon. Memb..Jr
for Bath suggested that doing so might close the doors against
an amicable arrangement. Evidence affecting the character
and honour of individuals ought not to be published without
the sanction and full consideration of the House. The Com-
mittee had been anxious to avert this appeal to the House.
They did not think that although the Hon. Member for South-
wark had avowed himself at the Stamp Office as the proprie-
tor of the True Sun, in which the publication took place—they
did not still think that he would have braved the decision of
that House, and submit, as he said ha should, to go to New.
gate, or to be expelled. The Hon. Gentleman had been told
by the Committee that he was guilty of a breach of privilege,
but instead of attending to that representation, he still con-
tinued to publish, nor did he publish the evidence fairly, for in
many instances he gave garbled extracts only of the evidence.
But was this all? No. The Hon. Member actually published
a document which the Committee had not received in evidence
at all, but had laid aside, to consider whether or not they
would receive it at a future time ; and yet in 48 hours after the
Committee received this document, and before it was even con..
sidered, the Hon. Member published it. The question of pub-
lication, however, was only a secondary one. The great ques-
tion involved in this discussion was, whether or not that House
was prepared to maintain its privileges ; and rather than per-
sist in violating those privileges, he hoped the Hon. Member
would still bow to the decision of the House, if it adopted the
Noble Lord's resolution.

Mr. HARVEY denied that be had said he would brave the
decision of the House, or set himself against_ the majority of
the Members ; but he said that he would submit to be sent to
Newgate, or expelled, if he infringed the law. With respect
to the document to which the Right Hon. Baronet had alluded,
that document was brought before the Committee by Mr.
Hawley, a witness, and there was therefore every right to con-
sider it part of the evidence.
After a few words from Sir J. GRAHAM, in explanation,
Mr. HUME said, that although he agreed that the privi-
leges of the House were generally good and salutary, still he
thought it would be for the public advantage that the evidence
taken before Committees should be published. Cases might
arise in which it would be desirable to suppress part of the
evidence taken before a Committee. This was done in the
case of the evidence given by the Duke of Wellington before
the Finance Committee. It was deemed advisable that the
Noble Duke's evidence should not be printed. In this he, as
a member of the Committee, concurred, and he regretted it
ever since, for the publication of it might have saved an ex-
penditure of 2,000,0001. in Canada. There was nothing
peculiar in this Committee to require that the evidence
should not be published from day to day. On the contrary,
it would tend to disabuse the public, and to remove a great
deal of the misrepresentation that had gone abroad. If ever
there was a case which ought to be made an exception to their
general principle it was this. They were near carrying a pro-
position of the same kind in the Committee. It was lost by a
majority of only one to two.

Mr. W. W V'NN said the original motion of the Noble Lord
and the amendment were not opposed directly one to the other.
The motion went only to assert the general rule, but that was
not incompatible with making the particular case of this Corn-
mittee an exception. The great point was to maintain still
the privileges of the House. A Committee could have no
privileges but what it derived from the House. The power of
sending for !persons, papers, and records, of adjourning and
reporting from time to time, was given under the authority of
the Speaker, who derived his authority from the House. The
power of reporting from day to day might be given, as well as
the power of reporting from time to time. It appeared to him
very clear that it would be highly inconvenient if one Member
of a CommUtee were permitted to publish the evidence taken
before that Committee from day to day. The House, how-
ever, if they judged proper, might direct the evidence to be so
published. If the amendment was brought forward in a sub-
stantive shape he, for one, should have no objection to it.
Mr. WA RBURTON was ready to support the general
rules, asserting the privileges of that House, whether as to the
printing of evidence taken before Committee, or to the exclu-
sion of strangers. lie and his Hon. :Friend ( Mr. Hume)
sometimes infringed the privileges of the House by reporting
what took place with closed doors, and in so doing they thought
they exercised a sound discretion. He would not be under-
stood, therefore, as condemning, in all cases, any lion. Mem-
ber for publishing what occurred in a Committee. He never
sat on a Committee, select or secret, the proceedings before
which might not be published at Charing-cross without in-
convenience.

Mr. W A KLE Y said, if ever there was a case in which it
was desirable to publish the evidence from day to day, it was
this. The interests to be vindicated were those of the poor
and feeble, who had not the power to protect themselves, and
could not afford to hire a person to protect them. It might,
indeed, be said that they were all disposed to protect the poor ;
and he felt himself bound in justice to take this opportunity of
openly declaring that in the Committee it was, from the pro-
ceedings, impossible to ascertain who were friends or enemies,
for the inquiry was conducted in the :most fair, manly, and
candid spirit.—(Cheers.) He saw in the Committee no dis-
position on any side to refuse any evidence, no matter what the
tendency of it might be. If they refused to publish the evi-
dence from day to day, he feared that then an unfavourable,
however unwarrantable, opinion out of doors might be the con-
sequence. If this was not allowed, they might as well termi-
nate their proceedings at once.
Mr. WARD would support the amendment, if brought for-
ward as a substantive motion.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE moved that the debate be adjourned
to that day six months. The amendment might then be brought
forward as a substantive proposition. The Times newspaper
published every morning the evidence taken in the case of the
Longford election ; and why should the lion. Member for
Southwark be particularly selected ? The rule of the House
was violated day after day.
Mr. ROEBUCK said if the House wished evidence not to
be made public they had nothing to do but to make any Com-
mittee secret, in place of making it select. He was not in-
clined to make a martyr in this case.
Lord J. RUSSELL said his object was not to make the
Hon. Member for Southwark a martyr, but as the privilege of
the House was called in question, he felt it his duty to submit
this resolution, for the purpose of removing any doubt upon
the point. He hoped the House would have the opinion of the
Chair upon it.
Mr. ROBINSON would support the original motion, but
if the amendment were brought forward as a substantive pro-
position he should support it, because in this case it was most
desirable the public should know that there was no disposition
to withhold the evidence.

Mr. RICHARDS would affirm the general proposition of
the Noble Lord.

The SPEAKER said that all papers connected with the
proceedings of the House were printed under the authority of
the House, and for the use of the Members. It was different
with papers printed by order of a Committee, and such papers
were for the use only of Members of the Committee. This rule
was occasioned by circumstances which occurred in 1814, when
a Committee sat for the purpose of inquiring into the mode in
which lunatic asylums were managed. It was thought the evi-
dence might, if made public, be productive in soma cases of
pain and inconvenience, and hence arose the rule that papers
printed by order of a Committee were for the use only of its
Members. They were printed under the ,authority vested in
the Speaker by the House, but it was on the faith, and with
the understanding, that they were for the use only of theiCom-
mittee. If any member of a Committee took upon himself to
have such papers printed and given to the public, the Speaker
would have no alternative but to recal his order for printing,
and, if that should not be found sufficient, to bring the matter
before the House. A Select Committee had no authority of
itself to print papers. Their authority to print them was
derived from the House, and therefore there could be no
doubt that in the present case there was a breach of privilege.
The House then divided on the adjournment of the question
( Mr. T. Duncombe's motion), when the numbers were—
For the motion BB
Against it
Majority against the adjournment 43
On our re-admission to the gallery, we found—
Mr. HARVEY on his legs. The Hon. Gentleman ex-
pressed his hope that the amendment he had proposed on the
motion of the Noble Lord would be disposed of that night—
( Hear)—because the merits of the question, as far as regarded
the opinions of Hon. Members on both sides of the House,
were already exhausted. Though the subject was undoubt-
edly one of very great importance, yet, if it were to stand
over till Monday, the whole question would be re-opened,
every Member would have something to say upon it, and the
time of the House would be again wasted in discussion upon
a point which was already fully matured for division. If,
however, this proposition wore not agreed to, he hoped the
Noble Lord would allow it to come on on Monday in the
shape of a substantive motion, for, if not, he (Mr. Harvey)
would move it as an amendment on that night to the Order
of the Day, let the business before the House be whatever it
might. —( Hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL would not object to the amendment
being brought forward in a substantive shape on Monday, upon
which,

Mr. HARVEY immediately withdrew it until that day, and
the discussion ended.

AFFAIRS OF CANADA.
Mr. P. M. STEWART wished, before the Houso pro-
ceeded to the Order of the Day on the resolutions respecting
Canada, to ask the Under Secretary for the Colonies whether
he had received any information with respect to a letter of
M. Papineau, addressed to the House of Assembly of Up-
per Canada, containing certain resolutions which had been
come to by the House of Assembly of Lower Canada ; also
an address of that Chamber, calling upon the House of Lstg_
sembly of Upper Canada to adopt the said resoli:.:;ions
and an address of the Assembly of Upper Can-.0. to I„,is
Majese ty, praying for the annexation, of Montrer.4' to that pro-
vinc?

Sir G. GREY said he had received a s'a:;.ng of resolutiona
from Lower Canada, but not axaetly
of nature alluded to
by the Hon. Gentleman.

Re
In reply to a question from Mr. E BUCK
Sir G. GREY said that his Majv tv's Government had re-
ceived no information of mn
, ili „---rcricance relative to a resolu-
tion
of a Committee of to any e
or
_at of Assembly of that colony
to make the Legislative Cow
Mr. O'CONNELL ask .
received a copy,oil elective.
cd theilon. Baronet whether he bad
the Bill to 7.lilch t 49
Mr. O'CONN
brought forward in the.
ik ,use of Assembly of Upper Canada ?
of a cer'a'in Bill which Mr. Haggerman bad
Sir G. GREY plied in the negative, but had understood
the Bill in question had b ,een rejected.
a majority of two.--CM ; were unable to catch the name of
ELL si Lid that it had only been rejected by
Itt on, and Learned Member referred.)

Mr. ROEBUCK hoped the Under Secretary would not
object to lay on the table of the House the string of reso-
tions from Lower Canada which he had just stated he had
received.

Sir G. GREY had no objection to do so, together with n
copy of the despatch received at the same time from the Go-
vernor of the colony.—( Hear.)
Mr. HUME begged to know from the Hon. Baronet whe-
ther he had received any intelligence respecting the Report of
a Committee as to the existence of Orange Lodges in the pro-
vince of Upper Canada ?

Sir G. GREY had not received any very perfect informa-
tion upon the subject.
Mr. HUME expressed his astonishment at the answer of
the Under-Secretary, as he (Mr. Hume) held in his hand in-
formation upon the subject.—( Hear.)
Sir G. GREY had no objection to lay upon the table a
copy of what he had received, provided, at the same time he
knight be allowed to accompany that information with a copy
of the dispatch of Sir Francis Head, received with it."
Mr. C. BULLER asked a question with respect to New
Brunswick, the purport of which did not reach the gallery.
Sir W. MOLESWORTH presented a petition from the
Working Men's Association against the resolutions of his Ma-
jesty's Ministers relative to Lower Canada.
Laid on the table.
Lord J. RUSSELL then moved the Order of the Day on
the adjourned debate on the Canada resolutions.

Mr. LEADER, in rising to move the postponement of the
further consideration of these resolutions, was convinced it was
the wish of his Majesty's Government, as well as Hon. Gen-
tlemen opposite, in supporting these resolutions, to restore
tranquillity to Lower Canada.—( Hear, hear, hear.) But his
Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Bath had proposed
the other night a plan regarding Canada to which the Noble
Lord had objected, as not being in conformity with the wishes
of the Canadian people, and of which the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet opposite had said that it was not sanctioned by any con-
stitutional authority.—( Hear, hear.) Now, as that plan of
his Learned Friend was highly approved of by many persons
out of that House as well as by many Hon. Members within it,
all he (Mr. Leader) wished was, that his Majesty's Govern-
ment should postpone these resolutions, in order to give time
to the Canadian people to state whether they agreed with
the plan of his Hon. and Learned Friend or not.—( Hear.) It
was allowed by the Noble Lord himself that the chief object
of the resolutions was to prevent the non payment of certain
officials.—(Hear.) But the question was, whether the rights
of a whole people should be postponed to those of a few
Judges--whether the salaries of a few unpaid officials were to
be put in comparison with the constitutional claims of a whole
nation.--( Cheers.) He trusted the Noble Lord would not so
insult the Canadian people, and for such a purpose.—(Hear,
hear.) The course the Noble Lord was pursuing was in every
sense unjustifiable ; and he might depend upon it the effect of
these resolutions would be not only to exasperate the people
of Lower Canada, but also to alarm those of the Upper Pro-
vince, as well as all their North American colonies.--( Hear,
hear.) The question was not confined to Lower Canada alone,
but affected the whole of our American colonies : and he would
once more, and in the most friendly spirit, entreat the Noble
Lord, if he could not agree to any plan proposed by him (Mr.
Leader), and those who thought with him upon this subject,
at least to put off the further consideration of his own until
communication with Canada could be made and replied to.—
( Hear, hear.) Ile assured the Noble Lord that it was as pain-
tul to those with whom he acted to oppose the policy of the
Noble Lord as it was for the Noble Lord to be opposed by
them.—( Hear, hear.) They had ever supported the Govern-
ment when they could do so conscientiously ; but, in the pre-
sent instance, they felt it to be their imperative duty not to do
so.—(Hear, hear.) He begged to move, as an amendment to
the Order of the Day for going into Committee upon them,
" that their further consideration be deferred for six months,"
for the reasons he before had stated.--( Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUME seconded the motion, and begged to ask the
Noble Lord what he would do in case the House of Assembly
should refuse to give their consent to the adoption of the reso-
lutions ? Would the consequence of such a refusal be the
restoration of good feeling towards the mother country on the
part of the Canadians ?—(Hear.) For ten long years the
people of Granada had petitioned that House in vain. On one
occasion they had sent up a petition, signed by 87,000 per-
sons, and he would put it to the Noble Lord whether, under
such circumstances, lie was warranted in persisting in the
course he had adopted ? He would ask him to give the Ca-
nadians time to consider these resolutions. It was true that
318 Members of that House had voted in favour of the No-
ble Lord's plan, and only 56 against it. But let not the No-
ble Lord imagine that the people of Canada would be in-
fluenced by any unanimity of the votes of that House in their
views of the justice or injustice of that plan.
Sir G. GREY could only say, in rising to support the
motion for proceeding with the Order of the Day, that the
Government had, with regard to this question, taken that
course which they felt imposed upon them by a deep sense of
their duty to this country and her colonies--(Hear, hear)._
that they saw nothing inconsistent with their principles in
adopting that course, and that they most assuredly would not
shrink from it.

Mr. O'CONNELL wished the Government would shrink
Hear, and a laugh)—for they might rely upon it they would
cause great dissatisfaction to both their Canadian colonies. Sir
Francis Head seemed to be a great favourite with the Govern-
ment, and yet no later than last year he had given considerable
encouragement to Orange Lodges in Upper Canada.—
( Hear.) There was another point he wished to press on the
attention of his Majesty's Ministers. The Solicitor-General
of Upper Canada, Mr. Haggerman, had, on the last day of
the sitting of the House of Assembly of that province, when
one-third of the Members had left town, brought in a Bill for
a repeal of the Aet by which the clergy reserves were held in
trust equally for the benefit of all the people, both Protestant
and Catholic. Now, the Bill which that gentleman had, un-
der these circumstances, introduced, had for its object to re-
invest these revenues in the Crown, for the sole benefit of the
Protestant Church.—( Hear, hear.) Was that, he would ask,
in unison with the policy and professions of the Government ?
—(Cheers.) Whether so or uot, it was the policy of their re-
presentative, Sir Francis Head. He was astonished that the
Hon. Member for Worcester and others connected with the
Land Company, which was already unpopular in Canada,
should render it still more so by supporting the resolutions of
the Noble Lord.—( Hear. )

Sir G. GREY Could assure the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man that the Statement he had made with respect to the Soli-
citor-General was altogether at variance with the facts.

Mr. P. M. STE WA R T objected to any further delay with
regard to these resolutions. The Hon. Member for Middlesex
had said that 56 had been the minority in that House upon this
question, but let him remind that Hon. Member that 56 had
been the majority in the House of Assembly in Lower Canada,
when the 94 notorious resolutions had been carried in that
Assembly, in 1834. —( Hear.) He would venture to say, how-
ever, that the minority, in any division which might take place
upon the question, would be less than those on preceding occa.
stons.—( Cheers.) Talk of giving time to the Canadians to
consider them. Why, from 1828 up to the present moment,
the abuses of which they complained had been undergoing
correction—( Hear)—and M. Morin himself had stated, that
out of the last twenty appointments which had been made in
Lower Canada, not one had been given away with an eye to
increasing the influence or interest of the Government. The
two main resolutions were passed, and he trusted the Govern.
ment would not be induced to concede with respect to the
remainder.

was once begua it must he continued. The Noble Lord
should bite as well as show his teeth. Indeed the intimi-
dation system had already been begun. Sir Charles Grey,
one of the Commissioners, told every one with whom he
conversed—had told many members of the House of Assem-
bly—that England- was prepared to send out thre,, or
four regiments, and to force the resolutions down the throats
of the Canadian people with the bayonet. He (Mr. Roebuck)
had a letter from M. Papineau stating that fact. Were these
the persons to send out to pacify the Canadians ? lie would
beg of the Noble Lord not to put faith in such men, or fol-
low the advice of the Right lion. Baronet. Let the Noble
Lord delay a little—offer his (Mr. Roebuck's) plan—and see
whether it would be accepted. The Resolution of 1825 had
been referred to, but this resolution had never been carried
out. Would the Noble Lord give the people a majority in i
accordance with that resolution ? If not, what would he eive ?
Of what use would be a half-dozen in the Legislative Coun-
cil ? How would it operate if tried here in the Upper House?
Would not the composition of that House be still the same?
If the object was to give the House of Assembly a predomi-
nance in the Council, why not do it at once, and not palter o
with a sham reform? Where was the necessity for hurrying
these Resolutions? Was there not business enough for the ?
Ministry without them ? Oh, but they could not do that
business ; they could not carry measures beneficial to Ire- 3
land—what was it that they could carry ? Nothing but co-
ercions.—(Radical cheers.) Something must be done, and
as they could do nothing else, why they cur ed coercions. As 7
they could not carry liberal, they carried illiberal, measures,
if it were only to show that they could carry something.
Sir IL PEEL thought it would be more useful to have the ,
House occupied with the discussion of the Canadian resolu-
tit la: th. n with a discus: io ion his ( 1. Peel's) political life;
The Hon. Gentleman accused him of arrays voting ncrains,
the opinions of the majority. The Hon. Member would have
it that those who did not agree with the majority %sere defi-
cient in political foresight. He also alluded to his (Sir R. •
Peel's) conduct on the Reform Bill, but surely there was no-
thing exceedingly inconsistent in opposing a measure during
its progress, but when it passed into a law acquiescing in it,
and doing all that was possible to carry itinto beneficia effect.
—(Cheers.) With regard to the proposed scheme of the
Honourable Gentleman, he could only say that he appeared-too
irritable a person to undertake the framing of a Constitution ;
he (Sir Robert Peel), however, would probably have escaped .
the vials of the Horn ur ble Gentlen aos wrath if he had not .
unhappily pronounced the scheme absurd.—( Hear, hear, and
laughter. )—lt appeared to him to be so when it was first pro-
pounded, and lie was sorry to say that subsequent reflection
so far from altering had confirmed his opinion.—(Cheers
and laughter.) On the very first refloution the plan appeared
absurd, and notwithstanding the time which had intervened,
he thought it an absurd plan still. —( Hear, hear.) He would
say with great deference—though be did not profess to be so
deep an adept, or so thoroughly versed ;in colonial affairs—
that the Hon. Gentleman, instead of proving his ( Sir R. Peel's)
i 11 -ranee, had only exhibited his own in colonial matters.—
( Hear, hear.) When lie spoke of the plan as an absurd one,
the disrespect was to the plan and not to the author. The
Hon. Gentleman in the plan which the House had heard, and
which was produced without any previous notice being given,
proposed to change the whole course of Canadian Govern-
ment, and to alter altogether the Constitution of that colony,
and pronounced him ( Sir IL Peel) to be in the wrong, be-
cause he would not at once consent to accept it. Because he
was wrong in not at once acceding to Catholic Emancipation
—because he was wrong in not immediately adopting the
Reform Bill—it must necessarily follow that he was also
wrong in not acceding to the Hon. Member's proposition of
a new Constitution for Canada. Now, it was very curious
that the Canadians themselves were opposed to the plan
of the Hon. Gentleman. What right, then, had the Hon,
Gentleman to infer that his plan would necessarily be ac-
ceptable in Canada, when it was evident—not a matter of
opinion or of surmise, but expressly stated by the Canadian
people—that they would prefer an elective Council ?—( Loud
cheers.) The Hon. Gentlemin accused him ( Sir R. Peel)
of utter ignorance in pronouncing the plan absurd, because it
was in accordance with others of our colonial institutions. If
any of our colonies had such a Constitution, he ( Sir R. Peel)
would give up the point. The Hon. Gentleman objected to a
Legislative Council depCndant on the will of the Crown. In-
deed, he proposed to abolish it, and substitute another in its
room, which would not be legislative. Now, the Hon. Gen-
tleman ought to know that the Legislative Councils in the
other colonies were appointed by the Crown in the same
manner as in Canada. but with this difference, that in Canada
they were appointed for life, whilst in the others their appoint-
ment was at pleasure. The question, the only question, he
would put to the Hon. Member was, whether there was in
any of our colonies a Constitution where the House of As-
sembly being elective the Council did riot enjoy co-ordi-
nate legislative functions ? If the Hon. Gentleman did
not know this—he would not call him ignorant—he did not
rise to bandy reproaches with the Hon. Gentleman, his only
object being to free himself from the charges made against
him.—(Cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman's proposition in his
plan was to substitute for the Council a body which was to
have no power, but whose task was like that of washing dirty
linen—( Cheers and laughter)—namely, to correct the blun-
ders of the House of Assembly, who, after all, were not bound
to pay the least attention to their corrections. Heproonploysdedutya
body of men to be appointed by the Crown, whose
would be humbly to suggest amendments which, in all proba-
bility, would meet with no attention.—( Hear, hear.) The
only power in opposition to the House of Assembly would be,
in the lion. Gentleman's plan, the veto of the Governor, who
was to ect es a sort of arbitrator between the Assembly and the
Council. Surely so extensive a power as this, vested in a
single officer, would be more likely to give offence than if
vested in a grave body, selected from the most respectable
persons who could be procured. There was not mixch time
for considering the proposition made by the Hon. Gentleman ;
but there was still less time for delaying the resolutions
before the House. The point at issue between him and
the Hon, Member for Bath was, whether any of our colo-
nies had a Government similar to that which the Hon.
Member was kind enough to manufacture for Canada--that
was, whether there was any which had a Home of Assembly
elected by the people in which there was not at the same
time a Council vested with legislative authority. If it could
be shown there was any such, then the Hon. Gentleman was
right and he was wrong.
Mr. GROTE approved of the proposition of the Hon.
Member for Bath, and thought it would be desirable to con-
vert the Legislative Council into a council of advisers. He
contended that the Legislative Council of Canada was not like
that of any other of th Colonies. As to the question of post-
ponement raised by the Hon. Member for Bridgewater, he
objected to it, and he thought that before they came to the'Bth
resolution—before they passed a resolution of such a tremen-
dous character—a resolution penal in its character—they
Should inform the Canadians what concessions they intended
to make.
The House the divided, when, there appeared--
For the Amendment 29
Againsa it lB2
Majority

On our return to the Gallery the House was in Committee.
Mr. ROEBUCK, on the 6th Resolution being proposed,
moved, as an amendment, " That it is the opinion of the Com-
mittee that an inquiry should be instituted into the circum-
stances connected with the Act establishing the Land Com-
pany."
Mr. BE RNAL doubted whether it was competent to the
Committee to entertain such an amendment. Ilc thought
it was one that should, be put to the House when not in
Committee.

Mr. R. WA SON denied that the rights of the province
were infringed on by those resolutions.
Mr. ROEBUCK, before the House went to a vote, would
make a few remarks on the observations made on the plan
which he proposed. The difficulty, it seemed, which lay in
the delay which he asked for was that the officers would not
be paid. To obviate this the Noble Lord first proposed to in-
sult the Canadian people, next to take their money, and then
to insist that the differences between Canada and the mother
country were adjusted. Did any one believe that such a
course of proceeding would do away with the differences?
No ; on the contrary, the passing of these resolutions would
but still further excite the Canadian people. The effect
would be to pay the officers for one year, and at the end
of that period they would be in exactly, elle same state as at
present. There was reason in what was urged by the Right
Honourable Baronet and the Noble Lord opposite, namely,
that if coercion was useful these resolutions did not go far
enough. In fact they did not coerce, they only insulted.
The Noble Lord (Lord John Russell), it Would appear, had
not made up his mind to reject his (Mr. Roebuck's) plan, but
the Noble Lord said he was not aware that it would prove
acceptable to the Canadian people. Why not delay, then,
and ascertain that fact? To propose the plan after doing
away with every chance of adjustment would be futile. It would
be then too late—the time would have passed by ; war would
be declared against the people of Canada, and they would
watch the first opportunity of declaring war against us. Why
should the Noble Lord act on the suggestion of the Rig'ee.
Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, and refuse a rap ee
delay to those who advocated the cause of Canada? T hat
Right Hon. Baronet was always too late in his cone,essions.
He was too late with Catholic Emancipation, too I.ate with
the Reform Bill, was he not even now too late,, 'in the opi-
nion of the Noble Lord himself, in refusing to, 'grant corpo-
rate reform to Ireland ?—(Cheers from the Peedicals.) The
Noble Lord was aware of the Right lion.
was aware foresight' of his want of political foresi I:3,'.ronet's defects.
and yet he mould
prefer taking his advice on this subjee•te The Right Hon.
Baronet was not well able to scour 'ctie political horizon; be
could not anticipate the coming ;corm ; he could not see it in
the speck not ierger than a men's haad ; in short, he was not
aware of its. threatenings he•heard the tempest howling
around leieti.—( Radical, timers.) This was-the Right Hon.
Baroneeee peculiar as Led particular weakness ; yet it was to him
that tlae Noble Lord looked for advice and assistance in his
(451.culties. The Right Hon. Baronet had pronounced his
/Ar. Roebuck's) plan absurd. Now this alone ought to lead
the Noble Lord to reflection. The Right lion. Baronet
would act with Canada as he intended to do with reform.
The Right Hon.. Baronet had exhibited—he hoped he would
be pardoned the word—considerable ignorance on colonial
subjects vaten lie pronounced the plan absurd. It happened
that many of our colonies had just such Constitutions as he
proposed for Canada. There were such in our West India
colonies. The Right Hon. Baronet came down to the House
and spoke as ex cathedra, and yet he was not acquainted with
the Colonial Hornbook. Ile was like a blind man with a
stick, feeling his way, seeking a place whereon to set his loot,
and not knowing when he might stumble. Theßight Baronet
came down to the House, and, because of his extraordinary
powers and long standing, was considered of great weight ;
but he (Mr. Roebuck) would show its value. His plan was
pronounced absurd, yet he had shown the Right Hun. Baronet
that it was a system which already existed. and was acted upon
in many places. If it would appear that his plan would prove
palatable to Canada he would ask the Noble Lord to pause
before be proceeded to a course which would for ever pre-
clude its adoption.—(Hear, hear.) If the coercion system

The motion having been more suitably worded, the terms
of which we could not hear, was, then put by the Chairman.
Lord STANLEY defended the course he had adopted with
respect to the Land Company, and said that he had not en-
tered into anylarrangement without a frequent application to
the authorities in Canada and in this country. Those who sup-
ported the conduct of the House of Assembly were desirous
of keeping Canada a French, and not a British province, and
he did not think that a British feeling, for he wished to see it
kept for the benefit of British subjects.—(Cheers) The
Noble Lord then read extracts from the reports of the Com-
missioners to show tiret the laud had been sold to the Com-
pany at a fair value, and that the contract was approved of in
that report. A portion of the laud had been disposed of at
the rate of 3s. ad. per acre, and a considerable quantity of
unimproved land at 3s. The total sum paid by the Company
was 120,000/..„ 60,000/. of which was to be expended on the
making of 'reads and other improvements on the property.
Upon thP:a abort statement he rested his case and the case of
the Coregylay., Right or wrong, it was the duty of Parliament
Navin; 'ient its sanction to the contract, to keep faith with the
part..tei, but under the circumstances of this case, they were
de al.ly bound to adhere to it.
Sir G. GREY asked whether that House, after having, by
'an almost unanimous vote, negatived the proposition of the
House of Assembly, would now by a side-wind permit that
solemn contract to be got rid of ?—( Hear, hear.) The Hon.
and Learned Gentleman had called this a private speculation.
(" Hear, hear," from Lord Stanley.) He admitted the fact,
bat it was a speculation which had proved highly beneficial to
the country—( Hear, bear)—and he was prepared to show that
the public interest had not been overlooked in the private con-
tract. He called upon the House to determine whether they
would sanction the Hon. Member's proposition, brought for-
ward as it was with diminished minorities.—( Hear. )
Mr. ROEBUCK expressed his surprise that the Hon.
Gentleman should taunt him with " diminished minorities."
He could retort, and remind the lion. Gentleman of his
" diminished majorities"—(Cheers and laughter)—and he
would also ask the Hon. Gentleman whether he thought
the Irish Municipal Bill less deserving of public support, be-
cause the majorities by which it had been supported happened
to be diminished ?—( Hear.) The Hon. Gentleman forgot
when he was launching his shaft at him that he might himself
receive the blow. The Noble Lord had called him the paid
agent of Lower Canada. Was not the Noble Lord at one
time the paid agent of the Crown, and did any one find tault
with him for receiving his pay ? He (Mr. Roebuck) had
never suggested that persons who purchased property from
the Land Company should be disturbed in , their possession.
But he thought some inquiry was necessary into the circum-
stances under which this contract was made. When the
CO,OOO/. to be laid out on making roads was deducted from the
120,0001.. the price charged for the land was only is. Gd. per
acre, and when these roads were completed, the land would
sell for 1/. per acre. These lands should not have been sold
by private contract, but by public auction. This was the sys-
tem adopted by the United States. But that country had a
frugal Government, and by adopting this system, they had rea-
lized four millions in one year.—( Hear.) It was clear the
land in Canada had been given away, and the Hon. Member
for Worcester hail made a good bargain of it.—(A laugh.)
Mr. ROBINSON would be glad to learn how many Mem-
bers of that House could be found to vote for a mean; re
which directly struck at time security of property. He mr in-
tained that the Land Company had paid the full value for

ini9.ll
J
/
.r,144
-1,2;e1.44;

..411