The Sun.
London, England, 1836-02-26 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, PRIDAI, P_EBRUARY 2G, 1856.

panislesoldiers were stripped and left together, that the
rench, ttelopS,,wlien they,came up, could always distinguish
the bodies of the English by turning them up, as they generally
found their backs marked with the cat.—( Cries of " Oh, oh.")
He, of course, did not state this on his own authority ; but it
was asserted in a eublication written. he understood, by a per-
sou who was formerly a surgeon in the army'.
' Dr. B °WRING remarked that he visited the town of St.
Sebastian soon after it was taken by assault by the English
troops, and he had the declarations of the magistrates of the
place in his possession, as to the conduct of the soldiers. He
had then heard it stated repeatedly, that many officers had been
destroyed in endeavouring to prevent the horrible depredations
and crimes which were committed by the English soldiers.
He had no doubt that the British officers could have exercised
such a Control over the soldiers as to prevent them committing
such atrocities) had it not been for the system of flogging.
The soldiers of the French army entertained an almost
boundless confidence and attachment to their officers, and this
chiefly arose from the lightness of' the punishment inflicted in
that arnity.
Mr. HA it VE Y stated, that when the question wastrought
forward last year, it was postponed at the suggestion of the
Noble Secretary at War, who steed that Government had ape
pointed a commission to inquire into the system of military
punishatonte, with a view to see whether a change could not
Ile efPected, and that it was desirable to wait for its report.
From what the House had that night heard, it appeared pro-
bable that a lane. delay would occur. He trusted, therefore,
the 'House would not allow the matter to rest.
Mr. R. C. FERGUS'SON repeated, that all the witnesses
that it was intended to cell had been examined, and the report
was nearly ready to be laid before the House. The hwestiga-
tiee had been carried on in such a way as to throw the most
perfect light on the subject.
Colonel L. JONES PARR Y observed, that as one of the
oldest officers In the army, he was anxious to trouble the
Huse with a few observations. He believed that he might
quote the authority of Lord Hill, In saying that punishment in
the army was declining, and that there was little doubt but
that it meld within a short time be got rid of altogether. He
lied Served many years in a regiment in a most excellent state
of discipline, and during that time he did not recollect a single
instance of petiishrfient having been inflicted.—( Hear.) As
some auctions had been made to the marines—and he begged
to observe that he had the honour during a portion of the late
war of commanding two battalions of marines—a more excel-
lent or useful body of troops did not exist in the service, and
their conduct was so exemplary during that time that there
was no necessity to resort to punishment,-.s` Hear. )
After a few words from Mr. LENNARD, the motion was
agreed to.
At the suggestion bf Mr. HUME a similar return was or-
dered with reSpdet to the itiatitie§,
trig LAW I/F CdrititOVERTEIJ ELEM'IONs.
Mr e. ULLER rose for the purpose of bringing under
the attention of the House the present state of the law relating
to the trial of controverted elections, and to move for the ap-
pointment Of a gonireitthe to inquire into it, He was aware
that the etilajeet Was not of a popular character in that House,
Bikb lid trusted that attention would be given to him for a short
time. He could not help feeling that he should have brought
forward this motion with greater advantage during the last ses-
sion, when Members had to attend Election Committees, and
when their attention was directed to the subject. At that time
many Members on both sides of the House admitted that they
found the present system to be inconvenient, and that occa-
sionally it was attended with injustice. If the feelings of
Hon. Gentlemen had somewhat moderated since then, still he
trusted that they had not altogether passed away, but that
they were willing to enter upon the consideration of' the sub-
ject, and that they would devote to him for a short time their
serious attention. Some Members might feel shocked at a
proposal to make at once a complete change in the system of
trying controverted elections ; but although he was satisfied
that such a course of proceeding would be expedient, still
he did not intend to do so, but merely wished to move
for a Committee of Inquiry. Before the Grenville Act was
passed, the House assumed to itself the right of exercising
a jurisdiction in matters of election petitions, and determining
in such cases who was entitled to a seat in Parliament. The
decision of the House in such cases was come to under the
same party feelings as operated on Members' minds in other
matters, and a decision in a case of contested election was a
party triumph. Never probably were the rights of such an
important body as the elective body in this country, so reck-
lessly trampled on as by that which happened to be the predo-
minant party in the House.—(Hear, hear.) He would only
'refer to one fact in the history of the last century in confir-
mation of this. Every Hon. Member was aware that the
downfal of Sir Robert Walpole was occasioned by the deci-
sions of the House in two controverted elections. A histo-
rian of that period (he believed it was Horace Walpole) said
that although the Minister was in a majority of four, he
thought that this was not sufficient to enable him to go,pn ;
and in this view he was supported by the opinion of all honest
men. The Chamber of Deputies in France also determined
all cases of controverted election in the full House ; and he
believed that he was justified in saying, with an equal sacrifice
of justice to that which formerly was experienced here. The
appointment of a Committee of limited numbers, and form-
ing something like a jury, was undoubtedly a great improve-
ment ; but still the system, in many respects, was defective.
Indeed, he believed that it was now generally admitted that
the tribunal for determining cases of elections, was most
imperfect and incompetent, and there was a suspicion attach-
ing to it which he thought they ought to be proud, as. English-
men, did not attach to any other tribunal in the country.--
( Hear, hear.) If the public were but behind the curtain they
would be surprised at what took place at the ballot of an elec-
tion Committee. What would they think if they saw gentle-
men who were to be called upon to exercise their functions in
a judicial capacity come down to the House under what was
called "the whip." This was the case on both sides the
House, and, therefore, he did not bring the charge more
against one, party than another. For the last three or four
years both sides the House had been assembled on the balloting
for every election Committee under "the whip." What would
the public say at hearing the expression of party feeling in the
House on the appointment of members on this judicial tribunal
where three or four names were called from one side ? He
repeated, that he did not apply the observation to merely one
side, for it was equally applicable to both. If was also com-
mon to hear a Member's friends complain of Was a matter of
shame if his name was called, and he was not present.
Again, if a Member approached the table to be sworn off
the Committee on the ground of age or official situation,
what murmurs arose from his friends and what feelings of
dissatisfaction were manifested,! After a ballot, also, nothing
was more common than to hear a Member who might be peti-
tioned against, being congratulated on having a good com-
mittee, that was, one constituted of members of the same party
as himself. He recollected a naive instance of the expression
of public opinion on this point. Last session, on the ballot
for the Ganterbury committee, a great many Members were
chosen on it from the other side of the House—one of the
great supporters of the Tory party at Canterbury stuck up
the names of the committee with the letters T or R against
each, so as to designate each member as a Tory or Reformer.
On this becoming known, the Tory party got up a great jubi-
lation at their triumph in striking the committee.—( Hear.)
He was sure that he should have the votes of all those gentle-
men who had experienced the expensive nature of an election
petition. As an instance of the enormous expense of this tri-
bunal he,would mention to the House that he had repeatedly
heard it mentioned that the expense of the Salisbury petition
in 1833swas remarkably low, and on enspiiry he found that it
was about 1,0001. The same observation had also been made
in a more recent case, where the expense did not exceed
2,0001. The House could hardly be aware of the expense of
some of these cases, and he happened to know one case in
which the charge for counsel on one side was 10,0001. It
was of the utmost importance for the constituent body that
there should be' a satisfactory tribunal for the determination
of election petitions, and that the expense should not be exces-
sive. One of the chief causes of expense was the great
delay that took place, and this was chiefly occasioned by
the circumstance that a committee did not consider itself
hound by the decision of previous Committees. A point of
law might have been decided over and over again by previous
Committees, but, each Committee claimed the right of hear-
ing counsel and coming to a different conclusion. Of this the
two Montgomery cases formed memorable examples. The
Hon. Member, in illustration of the feeling generally enter-
tained of the nature of these Committees, told an anecdote
of a Member whose return was being disputed before a Com-
mittee, stating to a friend that the event greatly depended on
the weather—( A laugh)--and explaining, that if it should be
rainy the Committee would have no objection to remain
quietly under shelter and hear the statement of a knotty
point on which the case turned, by which, if it were a fine
day, they would not be very likely to stay and listen to.
—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The great objection to Com-
mittees as at present constituted, was their absolute incompe-
tence to the work entrusted to them. The objection was, not
That Members of the House were so swayed by party feeling,
one way or the other, that they really could not be just and
impartial, but that they came into Committees, in the great
majority of cases, knowing nothing of the law, general or par-
ticular—( Hear)—that Committees were not bound by the de-
cisions of former Committees—( Hear, hear)—that cases were
decided upon no fixed principles; that every question had to
he urged before each Committee as a fresh. question ; and, as
a general consequence of these circumstances, that there was
in every case an utter uncertainty as to what the law had been,
and what the law would be.—( Hear, hear.) One of the prin-
cipal questions before Committees was as to qualification, and
on this subject the most contradictory decisions had been come
to. The decision in the Drogheda case last Session was alto-
gether at variance with other cases.—( Hear, hear.) Then
as to the question of custody of the poll-book—on this point
the Dublin and Cork Committees had come to quite different
decisions ; the former refusing absolute proof of the custody,
in the very strictest sense of the word, of the books ; thelatter, deeming the proof of a much less strict custody sum-
eient.—( Hear, hear.) So in the two Montgomery cases ;
the proof of custody which satisfied the first Committee was
anything but adequate to the requirements of the second ; the
severity of the latter Committee might, however, perhaps be
accounted for, from the fact that the day on which this ques-
tion came before them, happened to be the day of " The
Oaks."—( Hear, hear.) The next question was as to the
opening the register. This was a point of great importance,
viz., whether the decision of the revising barrister should be
final. All English Committees had decided in the affirmative,
as bad the Scotch ; but in the Irish Committees, the case was
different. Various opposing decisions had among these been
come to on the meaning of the term conclusive, as applying to
the barrister's decision. Galway, Coleraine, and two other
Committees, limiting the meaning ; Carlow and Youghal ad-
mitting it to the full extent. The Clonmel Committee took
a middle course,_ admitting an appeal from the decision 'of the
barrister in such votes as were objected to at the time of the
registry, and this seemed the mostreasonable view of the point.
—( Hear, hear.) Then came the proof of agency, a point

which ought to be clearly laid down and understood.—( Hear.)
But even on this question various contradictory decisions had
been made, the question being whether proofs of acts of bribery
should be allowed before the proof of agency had been esta-
blished. In the Session of 1833 the NoVry, Oiford, IVar-
wick, and Norwich Committees decided in the afiktaiiie,
while those of Ennis and Hertford came to a precisely dif-
~ • so that before the Bristol Committee
?•- At a loss to understand
•th Corn-

ferent determinats...,
counsel expressed themselves as qui.,
which of these decisions was which. Nay, the Yarmos.—
mittee of 1834 actually came successively to two different de-
cisions on this point in the cases of two brothers of the name
of Tower.—(Hear, hear.) The second Canterbury and the
Ipswich Committees had decided the new point that paupers
were entitled to vote, so these were good Committees for the
paupers.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) It had also been ge-
nerally understood that persons under age were disqualified to
vote ; but these two Committees held that if the name of an-
infant happened to be left in the register he had a right to
vote; on the same principle, if the name of a female were by
mistake returned on the register, these Gallant Committees
would no doubt admit her claim to vote, and perhaps they
would not be so far wrong..--s( Hear, and a laugh.) On the
other hand, the proltwicli Committee went so far as to lay it
down that they would not admit the claim of a Peer whose
name happened to be left on the register. Another under-
stood principle bad been that no persons employed in the eol=
lection of the revenue should have a vote ; but a contrary de-
termination had been come to by the Windsor Committee of
last year. Lastly, on the subject of wagers ;on this point,
too, the most contradictory decisions had been made ; one
Committee disqualifying on account of a betted bottle of wine,
another going equal lengths the other way. The lion. Meet=
ber proceeded to state that he had brought forward this sub-
ject in the shape of a motion for a Select Committee, because
he thought such a course would be better than moving for a
Bill in the first instance, and would be so considered by the
House.—( Hear.) It was most desirable that the subject
should be fully inquired into, in order that adequate, and not
more than adequate, remedies might applied.—(Hear.) It
was the opinion of some that no good would be done till all
jurisdiction in these cases was taken from the House, and
vested in some other tribunal ; but he certainly could not
agree in this opinion.—( Hear, hear.) The jurisdiction, he
thought, should be continued in the House ; but the tribunal
should be rendered as perfect and unexceptionable a one as
possible.—( Hear, hear.) Several other plans had been sug-
gested ; but he thought them all open to objection in some
point or other. The plan which he should propose went to
limit the extent of Committees—( Hear, hear)—to increase the
responsibility of the Members—( Hear, hear)—to have the
Committees struck off in a manner so as not to leave room for
that violent party feeling and party exertion which was too
often perceptible.—(Hear, hear.) These would be, he
thought, useful changes ; but the most advantageous sugges-
tion he should make was, that as they had not the assistance of
Learned Judges in that House, some gentleman should be
appointed to preside permanently as Chairman of Commit-
tee, in whose knowledge of the law and experience of the
practice of Committees, the House would feel confidence.—
( hear,) His plan was this :—That a Chairman (or ra-
ther several, as many as might be thought necessary) should
be appointed at the comniencement of each Parliament of
the House—( Hear, hear, hear)--that he should preside
ex officio upon Committees, with a' right to vote ; that in the
first week of every Session the name of every Member of the
House, whether present or absent, should be ballotted for,
unless sufficient excuse were offered, and allowed by the
House ; that every name so ballotted for should be placed on
the Committee list in its turn ; that the list of the names in
that order should be printed in the votes, and that such
printed list should' be considered a sufficient notice ; that all
applications for delay should be left for the decision of the
Chairman ; that for each Committee a list of eighteen should
be made out, of whom six should be struck off by the one
party, and six by the other, and that the reduced list of six
should, with the Chairman, constitute the Committee.—
(Hear.) He (Mr. Buller's) own opinion was in favour of but
four Members for each Committee, but this would be for the
consideration of the Select Committee. That in all cases
on which divisions were called for, the Chairman should pro-
nounce his opinion publicly, and that in all cases he should
charge the Committee publicly. He did not by this mean to
give the chairman any powers derogatory to the House, nor to
assimilate his course in this respect to that of a judge in a
court of justice, but simply to enable the Committee to benefit
by his knowledge and experience. That all divisions should
be stated in the reports, with the names of the assentients and
dissentients on each resolution.—(Hear, hear.) The only
other change he should propose was in reference to costs. At
present the costs were decided in reference to the nature of the
petition or opposition to it, whether frivolous aql vexatious or
otherwise ; but what he proposed was, that the Masts should be
proportioned by the different allegations in the petition (so vte
understood this part). There were other points which would
be better stated in Committee. The Hon. Member con-
cluded by reading his motion—" That a Select Committee
he appointed to inquirelinto the laws regarding the determi.
nation of the right of voting, and the trial of controverted
elections."—( Hear, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER believed
that no person acquainted with the nature of election commit-
tees could deny the advantage of acceding to the motion. It
would not, however, be just to attribute unfair dealing or dis-
honesty of purpose to these committees. Mott of their mis-
takes arose from the defects of the system.—( Hear, hear.)
The Right Hon. Gentlemkn then proceeded to refer to an in-
stance of inconsistency in his own case. In the case of Limerick
the committee would not allow the seal of the poll-book to be
broken ; but the Bristol committee, sitting about the same
time, did allow the seal of the poll-book to be broken, though
the book was offered in evidence under precisely similar cir-
cumstances. He approved of the principle laid down by his
Hon. and Learned Friend, and he particularly objected to the
course recommended by some, of taking the power of trying
contested elections out of the hands of the House.—( Hear.)
He was sure the House would not allow the Court of King's
Bench, or any of the other Courts, to be mixed up with party
politics, and thus become exposed to suspicion.—( Hear, hear. )
His Hon. and Learned Friend's description of the balloting for
the committees was a dramatic description, but it was true.
Surely they ought to adopt some plan by which committees
would be rendered more impartial tribunals. He approved of
a limitation of the numbers composing the committee ; by
limiting the number, they would increase the responsibility.
If, however, the number were to remain fifteen, there was still
a better protection than limitation—a protection which had
been often asked for, and it would be a real protection—he
meant publicity.—( Cheers. )
Mr. WYNN begged to express his thanks to the Hon. and
Learned,Gentlemanfor the ability and industry he had exhi-
bited on this occasion. When he first came into the House,
which was about thirty-nine years ago, he recollected that it
was an object to strike particular Members off the election
committees, not on the ground of any suspicion that they would
take an unfair advantage ; but they were held to be dangerous
men, because they were known to be so determined to act fairly
that in doubtful cases they would rather decide against their
own party than in their favour. Ile recollected having thought
there was some doubt as to the decision of the revising bar-
risters being conclusive,' and he urged on Lord Althorp the
necessity of passing a declaratory Act on the subject. The
Government had promised that there should be a declaratory
Act with regard to all the doubtful points in the Reform Act,
but unfortunately such a Bill had not been introduced.
Mr. W A SON supported the motion of the Hon. and
learned Member for Liskeard.
Mr. BE RNA L had no wish to throw impediments in the
way of the Committee moved for by his Hon., and Learned
Friend, but he believed it would be impossible to find an ade-
quate remedy for the evils referred to.
Sir F. PO L L CK expressed his entire concurrence in the
motion that had been brought forward. He had attended many
controverted election committees before he was a Member of
that House, and now in his placb in that House, he declared
plainly and frankly, that a ComMittee of that House was the
worst constructed tribunal he was ever before.—( Hear.)
Mr. ROEBUCK remarked that they all agreed as to the
evil, but difFered as to the remedy which ought to be applied.
What he should propose was, that at the commencement of
Parliament the House should determine to elect a judge, not a
Member of the House, but appointed by that House. He
would suggest that the person to be so appointed should be
one of the twelve judges of the land, and who would have
nothing else to do but to decide election matters.
After a few words from Mr. Ewart, Colonel Parry, Mr.
Aglionby, and Mr. Potter,
Mr. BUL L R briefly replied, and the motion was
agreed to.

SCOTTISH LAW AISINDNIENTS.
The LORD ADVOCATE obtained leave to bring in six
Bills to amend the state of the law in Scotland—namely, 1.
A Bill for regulating the sequestration of the estates of bank-
rupts in Scotland : 2. A Bill to amend the law of Scotland
in matters relating to bankruptcy, personal diligence, arrest-
meats, poinding of goods, inhibitions, adjudications, judicial
sales, and poindings of the ground ; 3. A Bill for regulating
the process of cesszo bonorunz in the Court of Session, and for
extending the jurisdiction of sheriffs in Scotland to such cases ;
4. 'Bill to amend and regulate the law of Scotland as to
erasures in instruments of sasine, and of resignations ad re.
manentianz ; 5. Bill to enable bastards in Scotland to make
testaments ; 6. Bill to abolish the remaining jurisdiction of the
Commissary Court of Edinburgh, and to regulate the mode of
taking proofs in consistorial causes in Ireland.
Mr. LYNCH obtained leave to introduce a Bill to extend
the jurisdiction and to regulate the proceedings of the Civil
Bill Courts in Ireland.
COMMISSIONERS OF THE GREAT SEAL.
Mr. HUIVIE moved for a " Return of the amount received
for salary and as fees by each of the Lords Commissioners of
the Great Seal, in addition to the fixed salaries of their diffe-
rent offices, during the time they held the Great Seal ; and
under what authority the same were paid : stating, also, the
amount of salary and fees from their other offices during that
period. Also, return of the patronage enjoyed by the said
Commissioners, in appointing to benefices, offices, and places ;
stating the name of each benefice, office, and place appointed
to, the name of the persons appointed, and the estimated
amount of salary and allowances of each." The Hon. Member
did not wish to make one word of remark upon the subject,
until the return lie moved for was on the table of the House ;
but as soon as that was the case, it was his intention to move a
resolution, to prevent any such excessive payments in any such
contingency in future.
Mr. PE MBE RTON thought that he, also, should best con-
sult the wishes of the House, and of the persons concerned in
this commission, by likewise deferring the remarks which he
had to offer on the-subject till the necessary returns were made
out. He should then take the opportunity of calling the at-
tention of the House to the circumstances connected with the
appointments of the late commission of the Great Seal ; the
time it was permitted to exist, and the raode in which the com-
mission discharged the duties of their office.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL was inclined to concur in

opinion that such a commission as a permanent measure would
be objectionhble ; but he believed it would be found that in the
present instance it had been permitted to endure for as short a
period as possible.
The returns were then ordered.
( M. tifilCH mclre:..4 MARRIAGES IN IRELAND.
for leave to bilng in a Bill to repel
so much of Act liitli George ;:. f: 13 (Irish), as amends and
makes void all marria,,efl Celebrated by any Popish Priest be-
tween Protestant and Catholic.
''l-. Sergeant JACK SON would oml
pose the projected Bill
.I.• ••• •
of the Hon. aa:r.l Learned Member, in every :3
,
AL thought the Bill ouk
ossible called
Colonel PE RCi Y.
stine Marriages ;" ,t to be called
" An Act to facilitate Clatit:P d have
no other effect. for it cOul
Mr. SHAW disapproved of the laW as it stood at present,
_and should be glad to see a general measure on the subject
brought in-by the Law-officers of the Crown. He could not
support the present Bill, however.—Leave was then given.
BOROUGH OF POOLE.

Mr. BL ACKBURNE moved for a Select Committee to
inquire into the circumstances connected with the recent mu-
nicipal election for the borough of Poole, which had been de-
tailed to the House in the petition which had been printed and
circulated among Hon. Members. The Hon. and Learned
Member briefly adverted to the false return made by the
Mayor, in consequence of which a majority was given to one
party n the town council, whereas that majority really be-
longed to the other, and maintained that this was a case which
especially called for the interference of PArliament.
Sir F. POLLOCK did not rise to oppose the motion, as
he should follow now the same course which he pursued the
other evening when this question came before the hoz:se. But
he hoped the House would allow him to make a few remeks
on the observations made, not in that place merely, on the
conduct which he adopted on the last occasion of this motion
coming before the House, for in some measure his own per-
sonal character was affected try them. He thought he then
said he should act very incorrectly and without that due sense
of delicacy which every Hon. Member must feel if he took
part even in the discussion, much less in the decision of this
question. Now he apprehended that the House, in any de-
cision it might come to on this question, was acting in ,a judi-
cial character. He was sure that every Gentleman must admit
the impropriety of a Member who was retained as an advocate in
the Courts below sitting in that House as Judge in any stage
of the same case. The Hon. Member for Middlesex had
said that if he ref Used to interfere in the discussion because he
was retained as an advocate, a delinquent had nothing to do
but to retain as many Hon. Members as possible for advocates,
in order to screen himself by preventing them from interfering.
Was the Hon. Member for Middlesex aware of the still greater
evil that might occur if delinquents were allowed to retain
Hon. Members as advocates, in order that they might take a
part in the discussion ?—(Hear, hear.) Was it not better that
a:Member so humble and unimportant as himself should abstain
from taking part en this occasion than that the honour, the in-
tegrity, the purity of the administration of justice by that
House should be questioned front the circumstance of an ad-
vocate for the accused taken part in its discussions.—( Hear.)
There must certainly be some limit beyond which Hon. Mem-
bers should not refrain from interfering. Eitzt in a matter in
which any Hon. Member was himself personally concerned, or
in which he was confidentially trusted with the case of one of
the parties, it was impossible for him conscientiously to do his
duty to his clients, and to that House at the same time.—
(Hear, hear, hear.) He might certainly be told, as he had
been told, that in such a case there were conflicting duties. It
was true ; but it was a case which could not often occur ; it
was a case which be was not sure ought to occur at all'. He,
however, could not help it. It arose from the circumstance of
a case being brought before the House of which the Courts o!
Law had already got seisin and possession.—(Hear.) The diffi-
culty was none of his creating. The view which lie had taken
of the question was a view not dictated by his own feeling
alone, but was founded upon what, as far as he bad been
enabled to ascertain, had been the uniform practice of that
House. He could quote the authority of two very distin-.
guished men who had been Members of that House, Lord
Brougham and Lord Abinger, and he was convinced that a
contrary practice would be productive of the greatest incon-
venience. He should act that night as he had acted on a
former occasion, and he hoped this explanation would be sa-
tisfactory, and that he could not be fairly accused of aban-
doning a public duty in pursuing that course which a sense of
honour and delicacy alone dictated, and he hoped that the
Hon. Member for Middlesex would not feel it necessary to
make any remarks upon his conduct, either whilst lie (Sir F.
Pollock) was absent or present.— (Hear.)
Mr. HUME said the question stood just where it did. The
Hon. and Learned Member was elected to that House to take
part in its discussions, and by his own confession he was, on
this question, incapacitated from fulfilling that duty. He
would admit to the Hon. and Learned Alember that there
might be an individual case—there might be two or three
cases not worth mentioning—but his position remained un-
touched. He was far from desiring to cast any reproach on
the Hon. Member, as he had no doubt he acted from the most
pure and conscientious motives.—( Hear. )
Sir F. POLLOCK then left the House

Mr. C. WYNN said, that there was in his opinion no
ground for an application to Parliament on the subject of the
motion of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Blackburne)
because the acts complained of had arisen from the clause in
the Municipal Act, which invested certain powers in the mayors
of the different boroughs, that were stated to be abused in this
ease; and the Court of King's Bench was a perfectly com-
petent tribunal to decide this question. The evils which had
resulted from this clause he had pointed out when the Bill was
under discussion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
agree with the Hon. Member wil^ spoke last, that no reason
had been shown for the interference of Parliament in this
case. It should be recollected that the petition whici, had
been presented on this subject was printed scith the view pf
giving the parties affected by the allegations contained in it an
opportunity of meeting the charges_ urged against them. The
parties had not, however, thought proper to answer the state-
ments made in the petition. Parliament was, in his opinion,
justified in acting in the manner proposed, because it was ne-
cessary that a remedy shoulkbe applied to the evil before the
Court of King's Bench coda do so.—( flear.)
Mr. LAW thought, that when Parliament had so lately de-
clared itself unwilling to assume judicial functions when its
own privileges were in question, they would not be warranted
in taking the case out of the hands of the King's Bench. If
they did so, it would fairly subject them to the imputation of
being ready, when the dominant party in the House found
themselves discomfited in a municipal election, to take away
the jurisdiction over the matter from' thc King's Bench, where
both sides could be heard. If such a principle were once es-
tablished, it would lead to incessant calls upon the House to

assume unnecessarily judicial functions.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL, after alluding to the
strong party spirit displayed in the spce;:h of the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman who had just sat down, observed, that
this was a case in which the courts of law could afford no

remedy, because when money was paid away, as in this in-
stance, the Court of King's Bench could inter ere in no way
to restore it. He thought therefore that this was 9. fit case for

the House to inquire whether the paramount power m 3 autho-
rity of Parliament shOuld not be exerted.—( Hear, hear. )
Mr. SCARLE TT hoped, if inquiry were granted in this
instance, a similar inquiry would not be denied to his congi-.

tuents at Norwich if they should think it necessary to demand
one. The Conservative party at Norwich had many grounds
to complain of the proceedings which had taken place there,
under the provisions of the Municipal Corporation Reform
Act.—,(Hear, hear.)
After a few words from Mr. I3LACKBURNE in reply,
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON attempted to address the House,
but was so frequently interrupted by cries of " Question,"
and " Divide," that _ . .

Colonel PERCEVAL at. length moved (perceiving that
there was no longer a disposition to give to both sides a fair
hearing) that the House do now adjourn.
Upon the question of adjournment, the House divided—
For the motion 37
Against it
, . Majority against the adjournment 72
During our absence from the Gallery we understood that
the adjournment of the House was again moved, when, after
some general conversation, the Gallery was again cleared for a
division:—

For the motion
Against it

Majority against the adjournment— 71
On our return to the gallery—
Mr. C. BULLER, after some remarlzs which were not
audible in the Gallery in cons;;quence of the confusion pre-
vailing, was understood to move, as an amendment to the
motion, " That Mr. Sergeant Jackson be now heard."
A long and desultory conversation ensued, which, from the
great noise and the number of lion. Members speaking in an
inaudible tone, we could not comprehend, in the midst of
which—

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE proposed that both sides should
draw lots whether the original motion for adjournment or the
amendment should be adopted.
Mr. WYNN contended that. the conduct. of the Ministerial
side of the House in attempting to force on a discussion at
that late hour after they had by their interruptions at :4,rst
suspended it, and the Opposition benches had become thiuncci
in consequence, was aiming a vital blow at the privileges of
Parliament.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER suggested
a course based on the proposition of the Hon. Member for
Norwich. It was that the original motion should be agreed
to; and the debate resumed, if deemed necessary, on naming
the Committee. .

Mr. YNN rettised to adopt the suggestion. To accede
to such a proposition would be to admit the principle against
which they contended.

A further conversation ensued, in which Mr. Blaekburne,
Mr. Hawes, Colonel 'Perceval, Mr. Roebuck, and Mr. Scar-
lett, took share. •

The House then divided on the amendment, " That Mr.
Sergeant Jackson be heard ;" when there appeared—
For the amendment • 103
Against it
• 29
Majority
—,4
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON moved the adjournment of• the
debate to five o'clock this evening. •
as it was evident those repeated attem
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
were for the mere purpose of putting of the question, and a.
r position for the
the question could not be placed in 1) • .
a at,.
should offer no
public to see the object of tho opposition, he
pts at postponement,
further obstruction.—(Cheers.)
Sir R. BATE SON congratulated the House on tt,:" victory
obtained by constitutional principles.
o_
Mr. WAKLEY protested against the circumstance .e 4:, 4
small minority preventing so determinedly the business of the i
country. ,
Mr. WYNN said that the Hon. Member made ' ;To high a

flight when he took his side of the House to task for exercis-
ing their undoubted Parliamentary privilege. It was in his
own recollection that Mr. Fox divided the House five-and-
twenty times in one night.
After a few words from Mr. FINCH, the amendment was
agreed to without a division.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed or, and
the House adjourned, at a Quarter to Four o'clock.

i;,;R,LIAMEN TARY PAPERS.

IRISH MO-NICIPAL CORPORATIONS.

The subjoined are .the titles and schedules relating to the
principal provisions of the " Bill for the .regulation of Muni-
cipal Corporations in Ireland."
Repeal of all Acts, Chartersiand Customs il.consistent with
the s. Act.
Re:ervation of all rights of property and benefisjal exemp-
tions to i",-eemen, their wives and children.
No person to be admitteil a freeman by gift or pun base.
Corporations- to be styled Mayor, Aldermen, and BuTesses.
Occupiers of house and shops of the value of 101. in bo-
roughs named in schedule A, and of the value of 5/. hi bo-
roughs named in scheduJes B and C, entitled to be BurgesseS,
if resident within seven miles.
No Burgess to be elected who is not qualified under this Act.
Persons who, before the passing of this Act, were entitled
to vote for Members of Parligmeut, may still enjoy such right.
Mayor wilfully and corruptly expunging or not inserting
any name liable to an action.
Mayor, Town Clerk, or Churchwarden neglecting duty,
guilty of a misdemeanor.
The qualification for a Councillor Altilerman is an estate
of 1,0001. in some cases, in others 500/. Dissenting ministers
are excluded from office.
One-half the number of Aldermen to go out of office every
three yea:s.
No inquirs' of the voter, except as to his identity, and whe-
ther he has vott:Sl before at the same_ election.
Existing Mayon: and Councils to go out of office on elec-
tion of Councils under this Act.
Mayor to be elected out of the Aldermen, and to renugn
in office one year.
Every Burgess elected to the office of Councillor, and
every Councillor elected to the office of Mayor or Alderman
of the Ward, shall accept the office, or' pay a fine to the bo-
rough fund.
No person to be made liable to incapacfty, or penalty by
this Act unless prosecution be commenced within two years
after such penalty incurred.
The Mayor to be A Justice of the Peace for tN3 borough
and for the county; and _Retaining Officer at election of Meru,
bers to serve in Parliamern.
Questions to be decided i;v a majority of Councillors pre-
sent; one-third part of whole number to be a quorum.
Constables to be for the county, &c. as well as borough.
Watch Committee to make reolations for the management
of the constables.
Councils may make bye-laws on whi.ch the Crown may ap-
point salaried Justices.
Justices not to be qualified by estates.
Recorder to be a Justice, and to be appo.inted by his Ma-
jesty in certain boroughs.
Recorder to be a Justice of the Peace for the ,imough•
Not to be Councillor or Police Magistrate.
Justices to make declaration before acting.
Sessions of the Peace to be held for the borough. •

Recorder to be Chief Judge.
Capital Jurisdictions and all other Criminal Jurisdietiona in
boroughs other than are specified in this Act, abolished.
Charter Admiralty Jurisdiction abolished.
Existing Courts of Conscience to be abolished.
The King empowered to grant Charter of Incorporation.
SCHEDULE (A.)
Boroughs which are to have a Commission of the Peace,—
House Laid Franchise, 101.—Belfast 5 Wards, 10 Aldermen,
30 Councillors ; Cork, 8 Wards, 16 Aldermen, 48 Councillors;
Dublin,
.16 N;Yards, 16 Aldermen, 48 Councillors : Galway, 5
Wards, 10 Alde:men, 30 Councillors ; Kilkem2y, 3 Wards,
6 Aldermen, 18 Cox;.ncillors ; Limerick, 5 Wards, 10 Alder-
men, 30 Councillors ; Waterford, 5 Wards, 10 Ald'ermen, 30
Councillors.

scHEDULE B.
Household Franchise, sL—Clonmel, Drogheda, London-
derry, and Sligo, 3 Wards, 6 Alde;men, 18 Councillors etach.
SCHEDULE (c.)
Armagh, Athlone, Bandon, Carlow, Carrickfergus, Cashol,
Dundalk, Ennis, Kinsale, Tralee, Wexford, and Youghaf,
6 Aldermen, 18 Councillors each; Coleiaine, Dungannon,
Enniskillen, New Ross, Portarlington, Antrilm, Ardee, Athy,
Ballyshannon, Bangor, Belturbet, Boyle, Callen, Charleville,
Cloghnakilty, Dingle, Enniscorthy, Feathard, /Gorey, Bells,
Longford, Maryborough, Middleton, Monaghan, iNaas, Navan,
Strabane. Thomastown, Trim, Tuam, and Wicklow, 4 Alder-
men, 12 Councillors each.

PUBLIC PETITIONS—FIRST REPOPT.
Carlow County Election--Petitions, 2 ; signatures, 492.
Protestant Dissenters—Petitions,
3 ; signatures, 390.
Mr. Buckingham's Claims—Petit;Ous, 4 ;
signatures, 603.
Spirit Licenses—Petitions, 4 ; signa:ures,
205.
Agricultural Distress—Petitions, 7 ; B:gnatures, 1,125.

THE BRITISH AUXILIARIT LEGION.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE 15W1V.

Sir—Allow me to tresspass on your attention, r•equesting the
favour of inserting in your columns a true copy' of the last
return from the Head- Quarters of the British Auxiliary Le-
gion, now serving in Spain, signed by Adjutant- Ge,leral Le
Merchant on the 25th of January last.
Observing that a Morning Paper " has reason to believe
that the strength of the Legion is not more than one half
of what it is here stated to be," perhaps the insertion of this
official document will remove the doubts of your Contempo-
,rary. I am, Sir, your most obedient servant,
C.' WETHERALL, Major.
5, Freeman's-court, Feb. 25.
REA R.QUARTERS, VITTORIA.
RETURN OF THE BRITISH AUXILIARY LEGION
ABSTRACT.

JAN. '25, ISZO.

Ic',, Pg 4 ;c:: :::1 rayif'
rg -- F 4 gra.. E:11,-,
Fit for active and immediate ser-
vice at bead-quarters
On Staff employ
A
Sick t headquarters 5 8 8 IIt 53 1058'
5
L Absent:2. 4 7 5
Prisoners
Absent 1
r With leave
t Without leave
On Command ' 4. (i 26 • 15
————
Total
46 102 102 92 9 15S 132 1762:i
- - -- -- - --•. . .. . .. . ~ ___,

(Signed)

J. LE MI

TECH_IN

Lin-General.

TOTAL OF BAYONETS

Head-quarters ....
On Staff employ
Absent with leave.
On Command ....