The Sun.
London, England, 1838-08-04 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, AUGUST 4, 1838.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT:

remain, at Well an wildt prepoodto lie removed. He
had no hegltatiCiri in Saying, that he differed vviCti
mil:tee, rmany, thonghti that
the tJorlittiiitV6 pensions an many, whose
circumstances ind situations gave t1;6?-11_ nn ;Om'
Hear, hear.) Time Ought, to be given to MClttleLl
consider chat should e adopted, particularly When it
wat li,,V th3.t tztti no right to ,rnedle
with the pensions granted miler t :eOrnai of ,freland.
It propoSed by this Bill that power shouij.. !_2,0011
to the 6,leen to charge the, „Cd*lidated Fund with
pensioni, not ececding lqd,purji. ; and he wished to
know whether it was inteildtal t9at tide IRermfon AnOPOsed
to be granted were to b'e continued during int 1...4c4i.
of the pal-tieg, oi Only during the life of, the Queen. If the
On 600 lq Ogii<iu etahirin6',
.J4l,ii;ietpne the parties,
'eat was altering the whole law c.,q'tanding upon the
:uhject. Without wishing to prevent the payionf.t. the
ler,s,ions for the current year, he (Mr. Hume) thought it

HOUSE OF L'OM:iiONS. Ai crrsr
SEA:k“. tbOk tht bhair at the Ong
ti,u, the iliotlon of Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET,
the Cirencester Hundred Coors' Bill was reed a second time,
end ordered to be etommittH.on, V,Tediieschly neXt. .
The Mar4nis qIIANBY tiresented Oititioti frtim
fo-.'4.o,iinst the Parochial Assessment Bill.
IJIBSON presented a petition from ChelniSford against
the encouragement of idolatrous worshiti India;
Sir G. GREY pretenteq fie td sami effect
froin oik
CARNAC presented a petition
,from the
shipowners, merchants, and others flgred in the Eait .India
trale, complaining thatn4slfrs,..:inu, sVaeiccl
Were not sufn:clewrt '4tl4.!ineu to nit the situations, and tug-
expediency of appointing commissioners to examine

pensions for _
401iiii j4e Prdier tci Vdst-prae, any decisive legislation 6n the
subject till next S'esstort. 11/eig were eneny Peers upon the
who appeared to him to hale no claim whatever
but their poverty and there were massy, high in rank, and
pess.essed of tonsitlerrible personal property, whose names acre
etnitineed on the list. It would be unpleAsant to single out
bathes j lie wiehed the House to look carefully over the list and
judge for themselves. The Abstracts of each case, which were
eurttained in the Report, furnished little or no informaton.
Resides; in alt st every instance, the parties had not been ex-
amined personally, and the evidence was only written, or
fonislied by their agents, Upon all these grounds, he, ( Mr.
flume) therefore, thee/0 that the further considerat'oa of this
13111 be deferred till that day three months.
Oa the SPEAKER inquiring " who seconds the amend-
ment ?" both Mr. D. W. Harvey and Mr. O'Connell appeared
to do so,
The CHANCELLOR or the EXC H Mal Elt com-
menced by affirming that netet had he been more surprised
than at the proposition of the Hon. Member for gilkenny,
who had been Et Member of the Conlimittte, and Yfriy a patty
to the Report, directly in opVtisitidn to that pt opeigal,
( Hear.) The Hon. Oentlemen might have bed some grounds
for his argument if any thing had been done on the authority
of the Committee itself; but the flodse bad eppreved of the
Inquiry, and bad delegated its authority to the tiewirilittee in
question. The Committee had eat thirty-five or forty
days, and no efforts *etc spared dit the putt of its
Members its Oder to arrive at the truth l±± kvery
ewe. To show the unanittlity which Wee-ailed in the Conie
mittee, he would only state that the alit !alone were reduced
to the lowest possible number. Having made tbeeni 'igneous
and scrutinizing inquiries, the Committee concluded its repet4
by recommending that a list of any pensions regranted should
he laid upon the table of the House of Commons. This was the
report the Hon. Member proposed to throw overboard. There
was no desire of concealment on the part of the Government.
They had taken the resolutions of the House as deciding them
in their course—namely, to consider the whole question, with
a due regard to the rights of all parties. They bad so consi-
dered it, and the report was the result of their determinations.
He trusted be had now said enough to induce the House
to negative the proposition.
Mr. HARVEY did not rise to take any part in the dis-
cussion, further than to ask a question of the Right Hon.
Gentleman. He had stated that it was part of the report
which had been made that the name of every person to whom
pensions were granted should be printed by tke next
Session.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Now he wished to know
whether the names were to be printed for the [101.13C,
and Hon. Members were to be allowed to challenge
those grants, or whether it was printed only for the informa,
tion of those who had the Royal Bounty; if it was the latter, it
would be of no use, hut if the former, he thought it met the
suggestion of his Hon. Friend. He agreed with his Hon.
Friend that it was impossible for any person, except a Member
of the Committee, to make themselves acquainted with the
Report. He had not the good fortune to hear the speech of the
Right Hon. Gentleman the other night, but he had had the cu.
riosity to read it, and he must express after that he thought
the Right Hon. Gentleman seemed rather covetous of praise.
He said he bad been the active advocate of this inquiry, and
he was delighted to find it had had the effect of dispelling the
delusion to which the public were exposed. Such- being the
case, he ( Mr. H.) must put in his claim to some commen-
dation. He had heard that there was to be a public meeting
of the pensioners, for the purpose of expressing their thanks
to those individuals wha had originated the inquiry.
—( Hear.) The Right Honourable Gentleman had opposed
this measure, Session after Session, but he (Mr.
Ilarvey) wished to redeem the country's fairest forms and
homeliest matrons from unjust imputations.—( Laughter.)
He was willing to concede that a great number of the persons
had produced evidence well calculated, and deservedly, not
only to justify the grant of the pension, but also for its continu-
ance. But, on the other hand, in many instances no satisfactory
evidence whatever was given, which should induce the House
to recognise the original grant, and far less its continuance.
However, according to the rules laid down by the CoMmittee,
he was only surprised that any pension whatever had been
withheld. There was no particle of parole evidence taken,
except he believed in one single case. The parties were called
upon to state the grounds for the pension, atid its continuance.
Now there was not a pauper in the receipt of one or two
shillings a week, whose name appeared on the list of
any union, the lists of which had been inspected by the
Guardians who, had they been written to, would not have made
out good and tangible and forcible reasons both for the
original grant and its continuance.—( Hear, hear.) The
House had thought proper to exclude from the Committee its
author--( Hear, hear)—he would tint, however, descend to
pick out individual cases. It frequently, however, occurred
that the excuses made were near and sometimes distant
tics of relationship ; for instance, it frequently happened
that the receiver had had four brothers in the army, and
probably one fcr thirty or forty years, in various gradations of
civil office—a circumstance which, if they had been prudent,
should have given them the means of keeping themselves.
How many of the c.ld and poor parochial pensioners could
say, " I am the mother of 'seven sons, all of whom fell in the
service of their country as private soldiers, at ls. a-day—they
sustained the glory of their country by their own lives."
The answer to such an appeal would not have been received
in the manner the State pensioners' replies had been received
by the Committee. There did not appear to have been one
pension destroyed by any act of the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer.—( Hear.) lie ( Mr. H.) found in the divisions which
bad taken place, that when the pension was maintained
the Right Hon. Gentlemen was always in the majority, and
that when the pension was knocked down he was always in the
minority.—( A laugh.) The Right Hon. Gentleman had,
therefore, imposed on many persons a debt of obligation. On
many of those divisions, in which the Right Hon. Gentleman
was in the majority, he (Mr. H.) should have been in the mi-
nority, and where the Right Hon. Gentleman had been in the
minority he should have been in the majority.—( Hear, hear
H Gentl-

ineir qu,litications. , ,
SAW tit' 144-111 t% ,
Mr. O'C'n'Ti IV M!,enteu a petition from the pro,
latis;to.4, vi the Bath Journal, complainingdf an action for
til:1 having been taken against them ibr hating published a
report of proceedings at the Quartb- Sessions Wa a tharne
of perjury tvai hi:might against cartaitt partiestliat,
the , perfectly true, and that one of the
lilarties, who was a pauper; had been instigated 141- ail
attorney there to bring an itctioia tof clamag6B.
they had a Iroatk de trace to the action, but that it
ro,old kkttt them to the cost of two or three hundred pounds to
Ill_erend themselves.
The SPEAK k,lt. —What ao they pray ?
Mr. O'cOnisiE L L.—That the law may be altered In that
rearlett.—(Laughter.) The Hon. and Learrted Nidthbef
then presented a petition front the Ileensed spirit and malt
dealers of Dublie praying for a continuance of the clause
prohibiting,
.at'Oces from selling spirits,
UOULI3tI.OI prestAnted a petition from Bil
13111storl, In
Yorksaliire; itainSt the qualification of Members ; also a
petition, praying that the military stationed at Malta might
be excused from attending the religious ceremonies of the in.
habitants. The Right Hon. Ueritlernan then presented a pcti.
tion from the Registrars and Deputy Registrars of the several
dieettes in Ireland, stating that they had been called upon by
the House of Commons tb make On a return of the names
of those persona Who paid Church-rates, amounting to
five ohillinglss per year, and those who paid less than five shit,
rings—that the return was a very laborious One, which would
employ a great portion at their time without receiving any re-
muneration; And ptayiug that they might be excused from
pretarint
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had no
hesitation in saying that if the facts represented were true, it
would have been better that those officers who were usually
employed in making these returns should have been called
upon to make them. He thought, whatever returns were had
from public bodies should be given without expense.
Lord CLEMENTS brought up the Report of the Com-
mittee on the Pawnbrokers (Ireland) Act.
Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice that to-morrow he would
move that the proceedings of the last Dublin Election Com-
mittee be printed.
IRISH RAILWAY COMMISSIONERS' REPORT.
Mr. ELLIS wished to ask a question of the Right Hon.
Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He held in his
hand a copy of the second Report of the Railway Com-
missioners for Ireland, addressed to the Queen's Most
Excellent Majesty, and in a note at the end of page 93,
he found the following- .—" So long back, as December
1836, a body of capitalists, represented by Peirce Ma•
honey, Esq., after an interview with the Chief Secretary,
communicated to the Commissioners a readiness to undertake
any lines to the south-west they should recommend, and of-
fered to contribute one thousand pounds towards making the
necessary survey ; and in May, 1838, they repeated their
desire, on understanding that the Commissioners' Report
would be very shortly after presented to Parliament.
They explain the cause of their not having pressed in
Parliament any view of their own, as they considered
that such a proceeding must have tended to einbarass
the execution of the propositions that should be made
by us," and he concludes with these words—" We have
added the two letters to the Appendix." In the other copies
of this Report which he (Mr. Ellis) had seen, and which
had been freely distributed, the note which he had
just read did not appear, and, as it seemed to
him (Mr. Ellis), to be of particular importance, espe-
cially after the complaints made the other night by
the Honourable and Learned Member for Dublin against that
report of the Commissioners, he therefore wished to ask the Hon.
Gentleman by what authority so important a note had been
expunged in the other copies of the report to which he had
alluded.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
was not aware of the fact to which the Hon. Member had
called the attention of the House, but he would make inquiry
on the subject.
Mr. ELLIS—The Right Hon. Gentleman would see the
importance of the question, and be hoped on a future day to
hear a satisfactory explanation on the subject.
In answer to a question from Mr. HUME,
Sir GEORGE GREY said he had no reason to believe
that there was now a body of Indians acting in concert with
the Regular troops in the warfare now carrying on in Upper
Canada. The last dispatches from the Commander.in-Chief
there made no mention of the fact.
KING OF OUDE.
Mr. PRAED gave notice that he should take the earliest
opportunity of a motion for going into a Committee of Supply,
to call the attention of the House to the circumstances con-
nected with the Treaty with the King of Oude, and to move
for the production of papers relating to that Treaty.
MILITIA BALLOT SUSPENSION BILL.
' On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, this Bill was read
a third time, and passed.
STAMP DIES BILL.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the
Order of the Day for the committal of this Bill, stating (as
we understood) that the object of the Bill was to provide that
the Stamp Dies should in future be the same in England and
Wales, great inconvenience having arisen from their being
different.
The Bill passed through Committee.
The Valuation of Lands (Ireland) Bill passed through
Committee, and was ordered to be reported.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX-
CHEQUER, the Public Works Bill was reported.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHE-
. QUER, the House went into Committee on the Bank of
Ireland Repayment Bill.
Mr. HUME inquired what was the annual balance of
public money on which they paid no interest?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER believed
k about a million and a half.
I Mr. O'CONNELL said that was about the sum ; and

powers ve.ctf!c! 94 flip Savereta.
After a few worth ii'dt.f.l lIUME,
Sir IL PEEL understood that tle amount of the Pe ;iori
L:st with which the Committee had to drat was 136 000/. ;
and that the total amount of compulsory saving would be
3,4001., being only about 2 per cent. on the whole mown.--
(Hear, hear.) The Right lion. Gentleman (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) had very truly stated that the inquiry just
concluded by the Committee had resulted in decisive proof
that the powers of Government had never, in the granting of
pensions, been perverted to corrupt purposes. They might
have acted with too ranch liberality, hut they had not rendered
themselves liable to the slightest taint of corrupt purpose.
The saving, then, would only amount to about 2 per cent., and
considering that the uniform practice had been to respect these
grants—considering that they were about to establish new re-
gulations to prevent future abuse, he must say, that on the
whole, he could wish that the Committee had concluded its
labours with the recommendation that the Queen of England
should not be left in a situation differing from that of her pre-
decessors, and that not for a saving of 2 per cent, should
Queen Victoria have the disagreeable duty imposed on her of
discontinuing pensions not granted fur corrupt purposes, and
to which owners had an undoubted right. As he said before,
he could not enter into ii:dividual cases; if hie had been on
the Committee he should live voted with the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, whether in the majority or minority. He had
not the slightest difficulty in avowing these unpopular opinions.
Mr. HAWES said that any recommendation to Govern-
snot from the Right llonourab!e Gentleman opposite gave him
ilasves) considerable apprehension, for this reason, that
lie did noi know bow soon it might be adopted.—(A laugh.)
hat the Right Honourable Baronet had
He did not thin.if
sigf.424 the saving fai'!v in limiting it to two per cent., but
even .if That were all, lie tNurz,lit that the Committee had
effected a great goad by their inyZNtigation.
Sir ROBERT PEEL said that i;te honourable Member
had mistaken him. What he meant was that, when the whole
saving was 2,400/., it was hardly worth while for that to
make victims.
Mr. HUME said that the Right Hon. Baronet, in calculat-
ing the saving, had omrnitted the 3,500/. which had been given
up in consequence of this inquiry. Of course those who had
thus resigned did not belong to the best class of pensioners.—
( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Hume) did not, however, look to the
amount; it was the principle for which he contended.
Captain PECHELL suggested that the proceedings of the
Committee should be published. Their publication was very
much desired by the friends of some of the parties concerned.
Lord EBRINGTON said that nothing but the strong desire
of the parties or their friends could justify the publication.
Sir A. DALRYMPLE, on the part of a friend interested
in that inquiry, begged to state that his friend had not the
slightest objection to the publication of the evidence.
IRISH MUNICIPAL BILL.
The Order of the Day for the further consideration of the
Lords' amendments on the Irish Municipal Bill was then read.
Mr. BALL proposed the rejection of the Lords' amend-
ment, containing the administration of charity trusts in the
hands of corporators.
Lord ST AN L E opposed the rejection.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the CoMmans, if they
adopted this amendment, would be retracting their own ex-
pressed opinion. In consequence of the alterations made by
their Lordships in proposing to continue the trusts in the old
body, he must prefer the restoration of the old clause.
Mr. GOULBURN objected to vestir', in any servant of
the Government the power of giving a political character to
the administration of those funds.
Mr. VERNON SMITH said, in his opinion it would
be much hater to give the proposed power to the Lord
Chancellor, than to continue the trusts in the existing corpo-
rate bodies.
The SOLICITOIR-GENERAL contended that in the
matter of appointing trustee 5 the Lord Chancellor was not ac-
tuated by political influence, but proceeded as he did with the
other judicial business of his Court. .The Court of Chancery
—for that was the proper denotnination—was much less likely
to be influenced by political motives than the ex-corporators.
Mr. O'CONNELL wondered to hear it said that there
was no charge of abuse made against the pscsent holders of
charitable trusts in Ireland, when these charges were to be
found in the reports of the Commission which had been ap-
pointed to inquire into them. Did they not find dim; 2,900/.
was disposed of in Belfast, he supposed in hospitality And
other corporate virtues ? In Drogheda the land left for
charitable purposes had been let to Protestant tenants for 99
years; but in making the leases the best Protestants were
foun in the families of the corporators. In Dublin also the
Pipe-water Company misapplied a sum of 75,000/. Why
would they refuse to vest this power in the Lord Chancellor,
and yet vest him with such extensive power over all other
trusts to the amount of countless millions. The Bill would
not be worth having if those trusts were to be continued in
the hands of the old trustees ; continued, too, for their lives
without check or responsibility. To him it appeared that it
would be better to abandon the Bill than continue the controul
of the charities in the hands of the present trustees'.
Mr. SHAW said that the whole of the pipe-water case, to
which the Hon. and Learned Member referred, was a mil-,
statement. It was true that a decree for the 75,0001. had
been obtained against them, but the affair was a matter of ac-
count, and not a fraud. It was not the intention of the amend-
ment made in the Lords to take from the Corporation their
property in the pipe-water case. It would be most unjust to
do so, and that property, in the event of the Bill passing,
should by right revert to the new Corporation which would be
appointed under it. With respect to the charity itself, he
considered the amendment made in the Lords a considerable
improvement.
Lord J. RUSSELL wished to add to the clause a proviso
that no such Companies as the Pipe-water should be included
under the name of the charitable trusts.
The amendment made in the clause by their Lordships was
then negatived without a division.
Mr. BALL objected to the amendment made in the other
House, which required that all trusts held for the use of per-

their doing the public business without charge, cost the public
75,000/. per annum.—( Hear. )
Mr. HUME said they were now paying 4/. 75. 91. per
cent, interest, whilst they could borrow money at 3/. 33. 9d.
Allowing the system to continue another year would be a waste
of the public money. There was no reason why the Govern.
ment should not reduce the amount of the interest paid the
Bank for that loan, it being competent for the Chancellor of
the Exchequer to obtain it at a lower rate of interest. It was
a pure waste of the public money.
After a few words from tile CHANCELLOR Of the EXeHEQUER
and Mr. A. YATES,
The Bill went through a Committee, and was reported
with amendments to the House.
PENSIONS.
On the Order of the Day for the House resolving itself
into a Committee of the whole House, on the Pensions Bill
being read.
Sir R. PEEL said there was one class of public officers
whose case he isished to bring under the notice of the House.
He alluded to the Commissioners of Metropolitan Police, who
had rendered more important services than almost any other class,
and that he believed at the expellee of much personal labour.
No gentleman who had occasion to call upon them officially,
but must have been impressed with a conviction of the great
impartiality and zeal with which they had discharged their
important duties.—( Hear, hear.) He hoped the Noble Lord,
the Secretary of State for the Home Department, would
think these officers well descrying of consideration.
Lord J. RUSSELL felt bound to say the the conduct of
the Commissioners of Police had been praiseworthy in the
highest degree, and there could not be two opinions that the
manner in which they had performed their duty had given the
public the greatest satisfaction. Ile had not hitherto thought
it to be his duty to bring before the House or the Treasury the
excellent conduct of those officers, as he had reserved it till
the general subject should be brought before the House,
when he thought their conduct would be well deserving of
consirlerat:on.'
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL could bear testimony to
the admirable manner in which the Police of the Metropolis
had conducted themselves, together with those who superin-
tended them. But in the north, they thought that while they
contriblited to the expences of the Metropolitan Police, they
ought to have some contribution from the revenue for the

hear.) As to the first claim the Right ..on. sentle.
had urged, he hoped he might be allowed to participate
with him in having done a good service to those pensioners by
the inquiry, and the opportunity it had afforded them to place
on the chronicles of Parliament their pretensions. He thought
there were some continued with great propriety ; there were
others that .demanded more investigation, and there were some
that ought to be entirely excluded.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER .said his
view in delaying these returns to next Session was to show
that the Government had carred into effect the recommenda-
tions of this Committee. The Right Hon. Gentlemen went
on to deny that he had taken credit to himself for his
conduct on the Committee, in which he had only endea-
voured to do his duty to the public, and to protect the
just rights of the parties. As to the particular mode
in which the inquiry had been carried on, the Hon. Member
(Mr. Harvey) had formerly suggested it himself, viz., that a
circular letter should be sent round. He (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) was glad to hear the Hon. Member acknowledge
that the result of the inquiry in many cases had been very
satisfactory. There was no inconsistency in his (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer's) having formerly resisted
the inquiry which he had since advocated ; for, on the one
occasion; the money had already been granted, and an inquiry
would have been a violation of compact; in the other, a new
reign was about to commence.
Mr. 11UME said the Right Honourable Gentleman hid
certainly misrepresented him. They had been pre.
eluded from inquiring into the circumstances of the par.
ties, whether the services were public or otherwise.
Ther.s was one instance of the sister and daughter of a Peer
receiving pensions, to %illicit he had objected. Another was
the case of a lady whose husband was worth 18,000/.
a-year, and who had been lately left a sum of 120,000/.
_ The amendment was then negatived without a division, and
the House then went into Committee on the Bill.
Mr. HUM E wished to know whether the pensions were to
be continued after the life of the present possessors, or whe-
ther the House was to have the right of renisine them?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the pensions granted by her Majesty would come under the
revision of the House in the case of the consideration of
anotl.er Civil List, which he trusted was far distant
but the pensions now under consideration would be a charge
so reference

sons belonging to the Established Church, or for the use of
Protestant Dissenters, should' only be administered by Protes-
tants. He objected to this, as being a marked insult to the
Roman Catholics of Ireland.
Mr. SHAW said, if the amendments had teen proposed id
this House they might probably have been objected to, and
therefore it had been a better course to propose them in the
House of Lords.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL agreed in the principle
of the clause; he thought that when a charity was especially
devoted to purposes connected with the Church of England it
would be improper to appoint Catholics or Dissenters trustees
of the administration of such a charity. But he had this ob-
jection to the introduction of the clause, namely, that it inter-
fered with a duty which the Lord Chancellor would doubtless
perform in order to ensure protection to the charity if such a
clause never existed.
Sir ROBERT PEEL thought it would be difficult to di-
rect that the commissioners or trustees in the cases of Protes-
tant charities should be of the Established Church, without
any distinct reference to Catholics or Dissenters. He should
propose that the clause should direct that the trustees should
be of the Protestant Church without any reference to Pro-
testant Dissenters or Catholics.
Mr. O'CONNELL concurred in the opinion expressed
by the Right Hon. Baronet. It was evident that when the
trust was for the purposes of religious education it should be
confided to Protestints. For his part, he should not wish to
Ii ire auy connection with such a trust. The clause was;
however, unnecessary, as the Lord Chancellor had already
sufficient powers to fulfil all the purposes for which it had
been framed.
Lord MOR PETH sugzested the insertion of words to the
effect that in all cases where the trust was for the purpose of
education, Sc., in the Protestant Church, the Commissioners
or trustees should he of the Established Church.
Lord STANLEY did not, object to the amendment, but he
feared that it would not be able to reach all the cases which
might occur in Ireland.
The clause as amended was agrred to.
Clause 75, rcgoluting the administration of certain trusts, as
it came from the Lords, was omitted, and clause 72 as it ori-
ginally stood substituted.
Several other of the Lords' amendments were agreed to.
After clause 151, several new clauses were proposed by Lord

.. .
Police in Scotland. He thought that subject well worthy of the upon the Consolidated Fund, and would have n,
consideration of the House. to the continuance of the life of her Majesty. Morpeth, for the purpose of giving potter to certain towns not
Mr. HAWES believed that the strong feeling that per. Mr. HUME said that would preclude him from agreeing included in the Act, to apply the provisions of the 9th of
waded the metropolis some time ago against the Police, had with the Bill. With regard to a large class of pensioners upon - Geo. IV. To one of them
been converted itro feelings of the greatest satisfaction at the the revenues of Ireland, they were told by the law;officers of Sir R. PEEL objected. He did not think the Noble
efficient manlier in which they performed their duties. the Crown that they could not meddle with them at all. He Lori had giv..o sufficient notice of the clauses ; aed he took it
Mr. O'CONNELL was not going to ask for any additional wished to know whether that opinion of the law officers would for granted that the Noble Lord by this proceeding did not
force for Dublin from the Home Government. He wes, how- be laid on the table of the House. mean that the Bill should piss.—( Hear.)
ever, anxious to Lear his testimony to the merits of these gen- The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the Lord STANLEY said that this clause was for the purpose
tlemen. They bad trained the officers who had the commend Hon. Gentleman was aware that that opinion had been given, of introducing a new system of taxation into the towns in Ire-
of the police in Dublin, and the conduct of them, and the and was laid before the Committee. He was mistaken in land, and therefore to adopt it without due notice would be to
men under them, was above all praise. There were too few supposing this a large class of pensions; it was really a very abrogate that useful rule. The clause had not been submitted
of them, however, for the men were harrassed by their heavy small class. previously to Parliament in any way. He ( Lord Stanley) sub -
duties. They had almost totally suppressed combination in The ATTORNEY-GENERAL had no hesitation in mitred that, in point of form, and certainly in point ef justice
that city, which was at a "lost- fearful extent "hen they were stetting his opinion, which was, that by the common law of and reason, the House was not competent to discuss it.
formed. If a smell addition was made to their force they England the King, by his prerogative, could alienate the real Though he did not say he would take the sea'e of the House
would soon eradicate it entirely. property of the Crown and his revenues; but that prerogative on the subject, he should certainly enter his decided protest
Col. SIBTHORP had opposed the introduction of the Po. had been limitedl in England by the statute of Anne. No such against it.
lice Force; but from his observation since then, he thought the statute had been passed for Ireland ;no such statute had been Lord J. RUSSELL said the complaints of the Noble Lord
,system worked well, and was very beneficial to the public. passed for Scotland. Therefore he and the Attorney-General and the Right Hen. Baronet were of a very singular character.
Mr. HUME said that knowing the great interest which for Ireland had come to the opinion that the common law pro. In a Bill to which 92 clauses had been added by the Lords,
Mr. HAR VE V wished to know if, after all his labour, the rcaomtiopni
the public felt on the subject of Pensions,' and knowing the rogative still remained to the Crown in Ireland.
great attention which the Committee had paid to that subject, left was to agree to the very words
he was anxious that what was done upon it should give complete Chancellor of the Exchequer was only to save to th„o„niee of the Lords.—( Hear, hear.) That he could cover consent
satisfaction to the public. He regretted the proceedin,gs of 2.71 3/. ? W.aintAwlla adweastlitaotbtehe Commons should make any alte-
sitting o What a pretty result after twenty-seven days' • • t be could never consort that the Lords should change the
the Committee had been thrown over to so late a period that of the Committee ! form and nature of the Bill, and the Commons have no power
very few Members had had an opportunity of forming
an
opinion The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER considered of altering it. The Lords certainly could not expect that,
thatsm
upon what might he done. What. he therefore proposed the amount of saving as- quite secondary to the principle in- after so many obnoxious amendments as had been made in the
was, that of instead of proceeding tvith the Pension Bill new, volved in the inquiry. But the mini, was considerably more principle of the measure, it could be silently -acquiesced in by
the Chancellor of the Exchequer should (as a former Chan- than that mentioned by the Hon. Gentleman. ' that House ; and he (Lora J. Russell) contended that the
cellor of the Exchequer had done) take a vote for whatever • Mr. HUME said that what he wanted to know was i Right Hon. Gentleman had no right to charge him shat the
.
money might be required to pay the pensions row, and bring whether the Act in question did not restrain the granting of 1 intention of not passing it—( Hear, hear)—beeause he would
not bow to these a
in a Bill early next Session. Members would then have
. 1
pensions, and whether the Sovereign, in giving up his re. amendments and submit his neck to the yoke.
what had been done by the venues, did not consequetlt —(
en opportunity of seeing y give up his power to grant pen-
Committec, and of seeing what pensions, had been allowed to ' .:iosLi from them ? •• •, pro Hear, bear.) The nature of the clause which was. now
posed was that by the appointment of a Board of Commis-
•' ::

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the t-
Horion?Ale sioof.rs in small towns without Corporatioca, the inhabitants,.
Member, in thinking the Crown had no right to alienate its lA/ woull not otherwise be oua'iiied for the municipal 'film—
i,eie.fro, Irhm/red under a gross mistake, because, by the o'n:i.', t'',..otind have the power of controlling their own local
eomino'n.lavY ak F:sfiv,!reign hail a right to alienate in perpe- taxation. Was he to be told that, because he proposed such •
I,s;ttitt. f-le otio• neral had comidered most an amendment, Fitt 1,74 s insulting the majesty of the Lords, and
ea`r:"±.l'ulf:l the Act Abided to- by !lie Honourable M,.rribcr, and d••,irous to prevent thr pac.,ik gof the Bill ?—( Hear, hear.)
hat:ing igii*.stii'lfcni ale ~.;'olicitor- General, they 11,1 come to 1 lie thought his proposal knore reasonable than the course par-
the conclusion film, A di'd nit &t A limit 111 e powers of the sued by the other side; and 3t had, moreover, the merit of
CroWn..
Nlr. H tME said the Right llonourtlife the Attorney- Ge- proposal which deserved, at all crents, to be fairly cot sidered,
-,:dal 44f'4 tn,Vrety leading the House astray h. talking of the and he could not think so ill of tit' Lordsas to suppose t'iat
Common la*, •ke, :hi& as Well talk of the law of Pekin, in as they would altogether reject it. IF they did, however, he hoped
far a's the subject before: Ortz' ottese was affected. What he that they would assign their reasons tor' so doing.—( ELear.)
(Mr. litimeY wanted to know was, whether the King, in ..t'llr K. PEEL had never heard a greater misrepresenta-
suri* his revenues, and being restricted to 1,2001. a tion of his Noble Friend and himself tln.t.r. that made by the
year for peii!iii)o,l, stfilt retained a right to alienate those 7C. Noble Lord opposite.—( Cheers.) Did hi, (Sir goutel) the
? jeet to the Noble Lord's opposition to the amend mad('
The SOLICITOR-GE N'Eliiii. .toneurred in the opinion in the Bill by the House of Lords, or denv.the competencv ef
4 0,40, It iihpt Honourable the Attortley-o,oerst as to the the house of Commons to consider them, an 'I make any alto'
ration in them they might deem requisite ? -(Hea% near.)

This, and this alone, he objected to—that the Noble Lola
?ho4lcl call on the House of Uomnion3 to adoia a cause con-
taining an important principle without
them the
slightest notice of his intention to propose it fo r their consi.
deration. Toe Noble Lord had said that he ga re notice in
his speecli of last night ; the Noble Lord, in so saving. misled
hinielt and others also. And then the Noble Lori, to cover
his departure from the rule of Parliament, found it e 'onvenieut
to raise a cheer by mistaking altogether the purpe rt of his
( Sir R. Peel's) argument ; and talking big about not: bowing
his neck to the yoke of the House of Lords.—( Cheers:) Hr
( Sir R. Peel) had said nothing which could warrant t. ie 01)
servation of the Noble Lord in respect to him, and cer,..ainl!
nothing to justify the display of determination manifeste
him on the occasion.—( Hear.)
Lord MORPETH maintained that his Noble Friend (tor
J. Russell) had not misrepresented the statements math" o,
the other side of the House. He also maintained that .1115
Noble Friend had given due notice of his intention
respect to the clauses before the House in his :Teeth of the
1_ receding night.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said the Noble Lord had talked
trippingly of " the dignity" of the House of Lords ; but II"
could tell him that they knew perfectly well how to preserve
it, by resisting all attempts at crude and injurious legislation.
and guarding all existing rights and privileges by whomso-
ever assailed. The Noble Lord had also talked of " passing-
under the yoke ;" but if he only recollected what had been
done in the case of a certain Bill sent up to the other House
recently, without the assertion of a principle, which had some
time before been so harshly asserted to be iodisp‘msable sod
imperative, he need not fed so squeamish about passing under
the yoke.—(Cheers.)
The SPEAKER said that with respect to the question cf
the Hon. Baronet, he certainly thought that there shook! have
been a Committee to enable the amendment to be consistently
entertained. Perhaps the most regular way would be, for
the House to resolve itself into a Committee, and then talLe
the an:endment into consideration.—( Hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER begge'r
leave to sa:. that the amendment contained no taxing power
but what was n the original Bill, or only differed from it i"
establishing a lim.itadem With respect to the 9th of Geo.-IV.,
he could assure the
t-louse that the whole Bill for England
and Wales was passed ;7 ithout a previous Committee of anY
kind sitting in support of
;he taxing clause, although there
was a Committee on the whole Bill. He contended, also, that
the original power of taxation (for ;,aving, lighting, and cleans-
ing, salaries of officers, &c.) possessed by the Corporation wsa
infinitely more than that proposed in ti,e Bill sent up to tb°
Lords.—( Question, question.)
The House divided, when there appeared--
For the amendment
Against it
Majority for Ilfilisters
The remaining clauses and the schedules of the Bill were
then disposed of.
WAYS AND MEANS.
On the Order of the Day for the Committee of Ways atii
Means being read,
Sir F. TRENCH moved for a Select Committee to it'
quire into the cases in which the Irish Government had offered
rewards for the apprehension of offenders, and the cases in
which such rewards have been withheld, and the causes whY
they had been withheld. The Hon. Member stated that the
conduct of the Irish Government in withholding rewards,ii,e
cases of apprehension had tended very much to interfere
the ends of justice.
Colonel PE RCE VAL seconded the motion.
Major BRYAN opposed the motion.
Lord MORPETH said that the present Government of
Ireland acted in conformity with the practice pursued by their
predecessors, and on the suggestions of the stipendiary msg.'s;
trates. In the cases where the full amount had not been eV
the deduction was the consequence of the misconduct of
witnesses, arid the manner in which they gave their evidence.
Mr. SHAW must say that the case of the Noble Lord war'
not very creditable. It was not creditable to Government Ur
say, " We are so dissatisfied with the manner in which Y.°ll
have given your testimony that we will in some measure vio-
late our premise. We arc not sure that you have done as Y°u.
ought on this occasion, and being in this state of doubt w:v.
shall only give you half the promised reward." Such
arrangement wou:.d not be attempted by a private gentlernau
in a private case.
Mr. O'CONNELL defended the conduct which the GO'
vernrnOtt had pursued in tn..ese cases, more especially in the
of Carter, who, without the stimulus of money, would eci2
come forward to give evidence, even in the case of his 0"
father.
After a few words from Messrs. Goplburn, E. Tesuleet'
and Redington, Colonel Trench obtained leave to withdraW
his motion.
•
'The House then went into Committee of Ways and Meangi
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUEL 111°v,1,1
e
several items, but in a voice so inaudible, that it was utterly
,impossible to catch either the amount or the purposes to
they were to be applied.
The House resumed, and the Chairman reported progr°ol
CUSTOMS' ACT—DUCHY OF CORNWALL.
The House went into Committee on this Bill.
,ca
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER Te()%
certain resolutions upon which he stated it to be his intend°
to bring in a Bill for the reduction of the import duties on to
The resolutions were agreed to, and the House resumed.
AFFIRMATIONS BILL.
Mr. P. THOMSON moved the Order of the Day for Ong
into Committee on this Bill.
Mr. GO ULBURN objected to this nibbling sort of legiait;
tier), and thought it would be better to attempt the 1111°
question by moving for a Bill to abolish oaths altogether.
Mr. P. THOMSON defended. the Bill.
Mr. PRYNIE thought the Bill calculated to confer Ow
benefit not only upon those who were specially alluded to, 3,e-,
upon society generally. In a case where a woman who ~.'„„1
longed to the Society of Quakers, and became separated ir'"
- -

them by marriage with a person of another sect, the hardot
of not permitting her to make an affirmation was very gre4.
Such a case happened to himself.—( Laughter.)
Sir R. INGLIS was of opinion that the sanctity an
lemnity of an oath ought to be preserved as far as possible. 4
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was anxious they sboteo
have a more extensive Bill than the Bill to which they were r' t 0
adverting. He was not prepared to say that either ought „
be entirely abolished, but when a person entertained any frig
'igloos scruple against an oath, it was monstrous to refuse
affirmation.
Mr. SHAW could state, from his own observations, that
Ireland at least the importance which the; nwer classes irtael,3l;
to the taking of an oath was so ', Teat, that it could not sale
r'
be dispensed with in Courts of Justice.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that the Bill was absolutely ill
cessaey, and he hoped that ere long oaths would be Otti
abolished. A Mr.
After a few words from Mr. Wood, Mr. Lucas, an,.
Goulburn,
The House went into Committee upon the Bill.
Mr. GOU L BURN expressed his opposition to it.
Mr. PRYM E moved a verbal amendment to the 1.3.41.
Mr. AG LIONBY supported the Bill.
After some further observations from the ATTORNEY- G$-
RAL and Mr. GOULBURN, the clause was agreed to, as were t
rernainin,,c, clauses and preamble.
The House then resumed, and the report was ordered t° btr
received to.morrow.
The Report of the Committee on the Oaths V.,iitlity _0.31
was further considered, and with tile amendments agreed to
The Bill was ordered fur the thin reading on Monday
Mr. E. TE NNE NT moved the Ord of the Day for ge
into Committee on the Sprit License (Ireland) Bill.
Mr. SHAW opposed the motion.
Lcrd CLEMENT. although he did not concur with 6;
Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman as to this Bill, sit
thought the Committee on it should be deterred.
Mr. O'CONNELL hoped the Bill would be allowed ill
pass the present stage. tb°
After some further observations from Mr. LUC.Atso
House divided and the numbers were—
For ping into Comrnitho 28
Agaii,st it 23
Mdorit-

The House then resolved itself into a Committee,
O'Connell in the Chair. cvit4
Colonel PE RCEVA L objected to their going !1 oac
such a measure in the absence of Ministers, and inove,oo,
the Chairman should report progress, and ask leave to st
After a discussh,n, in which Mr. M. J. O'Connell, .05
Grattan, and Mr. E. Tennent took a part, the til°6l•
agreed to, and Monday next named for pnceeding
Committee. utY
Mr. R. STEUART brought in a Bill to enable 110
tre.,surers in Ireland to make payments for county In 4
from balances in their hands.
Rer:d a fist time. rht ►
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER brou!-°.,
a Bill for the repeal of the Four and a HalfperCent. Vutl
Read a first time. A dean
The other Orders of the Day were then disPose-
the House adjourned at Halt past Two o'Cioch until fla
Three to•rnoriow ((his day.)

The LotzioitUltSN(.l3tEt,°l.oFtt
Five o'C;och. .. ffc4l
The •
Dal of H A RRO WBY presented etition, the
P• t t
Liverroo
• I, Leeds, Hunslet, and other places, agains,,
It'oo()kßbDis Sse'atAo7 71-re 3• l• 2t.
encouragement of idolatrous worship in India: tl!e
i)
A Message from the House of Commons brought. Ii
Charitable Loan Bill, and another Bill. 6000
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY presented Peo.emot
from pia; es in the county of Derby i%ainst the encourat,
of •idulatrous worship in Indizi. Cortir
Lord BROUGHAM prosented a petition from thc.,totiel
ration of London, complaining of the system of NV-