The Sun.
London, England, 1838-04-07 00:00:00

NEGRO SLAVERY.

-----
Sir G. STRICKLAND seeing the Hon. Member for Leamington
(Mr. Mackinnon) opposite wished to ask him a question. He had been
informed that the Hon. Member had an estate in Antigua the value of
which under theold system had been considerably reduced, but that since
the Act for the emancipation of the negroes had passed, that estate had
much increased in value. Now he wished to ask the Hon. Member for
Leamington if that was the fact ?—(Laughter and cries of " Order,
order—chair, chair)—in the midst of which
Mr. MACKINNON, and two or three other Gentlemen on fbe
Conservative Benches, rose. The cries of " Chair, chair," and " Order,
order" were increased, when
The SPEAKER said, that even if the Hon. Member were disposed
to answer the question, he should have put it to the House whether it
wcted sanction such a proceeding.
Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND in his own Justification, begged to
state that he communicated to the Hon. Member his intention of putting
the question, and the Hon. Member made no objection.—(Hear, bear,
an., a laugh.)

MEDICAL PROFESSION.
Mr. BROI7:IERTON wished to a'k whether it was the intention
of the Attorney-Ck.wral to introduce eny Bill for the purpose of
amending the laws relating to the medical profession.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was fully con;inced of the urgent
necessity of such a 13111. He had left the subject jrl the hands of his
Hon. Friend the Member for Bridport, and he was in gre.zt hopes that
he would not desert a subject to which he had paid such great atten-
tion. If no other Member did this Session, he should feel it his duty
in another Session of Parliament to introduce a 13ill for the purpose of
remedying that grievance.
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE—SHAFTESBURY ELECTION
COMMITTEE.

Mr. BLACKSTONE said he felt it his duty to call the pt_
tention of the House to a letter which had appeared this day
in the " Morning Chronicle" Newspaper, which he considered,
and he thought the House would agree with ij m in considering
it as a gross and scandalous breach of the privileges of this House. Ile
felt the greatest difficulty in approaching the subject. He could hardly
believe that a gentleman who had so long held a scat in that
House as the late Honourable Member for Shaftesbury (Mr.
Poulter), a gentleman of the legal profession, could have written this
letter. And lie thought it would be necessary, first, to call the printer of
the newspaper to the bar, to ascertain whether Mr. Poulter did really
write this letter. He (Mr. Blackstone) was sure that if env of the nom
Members of that Committee (the Shaftesbury) were present,
they would agree with him that the statements in this letter
were most unjust and unfounded. He would commence by reading
several of the paragraphs in this letter, to which he wished the
attention of the House to be called. First, however, he would
observe that the, letter was signed " J. S. Poulter," and dated
" Temple, 4th April, 1838." The letter, therefore, was not the
first impulse of an unsuccessful candidate, for the resolution of the
Committee, unseating Mr. Poulter, was come to on the 31st March—
the letter then was written with due deliberation, and even with at
Sabbath-day intervening.—(Laughter.) The letter commenced with this
paragraph: " To the electors of Shaftesbury—Gentlemen, an unprincipled
combination, to which I have for sometime been exposed, has been too
successful. And a petition, which under ordinary circumstances,
with a fair Committee, would have been voted as frivolous
and vexatious, was by the effect of chance, enabled to call
to its assistance the services of the most corrupt majority of a
Committee that ever degraded the administration of justice, and the
Commons of England. The consequence has been, that I have
ceased to be your representative. The printing of the evidence
taken before the Committee (by ender of the House) will
exhibit to the world, the particulars of this most.
flagrant and wicked case." The next sentence which he (Mr. Black.
stone) would read, was in justice to a Revising Barrister who, without
being compelled to do so, had come before the Committee and given
evidence in the fairest and most honourable way : " The conduct of
a Revising Barrister of the name of Graves in not giving the
Overseer of Stour parish a full day for bringing in his list,
or adjourning, as it was his duty to do, caused the first
monstrous injustice to be inflicted upon me. The Committee having
decided this point in my favour, after an unanswerable argument, con-
sented to re-open the case on the application of the petitioners,"
—(Hear, hear, from Mr. O'Connell and other Members on
the same side of the House.) As he heard some Members cry
" Hear," he would tell the House what Committee really had done.
They did not re-open the case.—(Hear, hear, from Mr. O'Connell.)
As the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin had been one of those
who cheered, he wished particularly to call his attention to the real
off the vote of facts of the case. They were called on to strike .
George Mullins, and as the evidence which was adduced dal not appear
to the Committee sufficient to invalidate the vote, they therefore
struck off the vote.—(Great laughter.) Yes, they struck off the vote of
George Mullins. Counsel for petitioners then applied to the Corntiaittee
for liberty to give further evidence with respect to the remaining eases
of that class, which they allowed him to do; but they did not allow him
to go into further evidence with respect to the case of George Mullins.
He was sure that any lawyer would bear him out in saying, that they
could not come to any other decision on the evidence which they had
before them. The Honourable Member then proceeded to quote
the next passage which, as well as we could catch it from the
hurried and agitated manner in which he read it, was to the following
effect : " That the revising barrister, a man of long standing at the
bar, and of the same politics as the majority of the Committee, whose
business it was to know the law, and to act upon it,
had departed before the proceedings terminated ; but was
induced to return. He declared that he knew nothing of the law with
respect to the point then before them, and begged of them to instruct
him." He begged here to observe, in justice to the gentleman in ques-
tion, that what he said was, that he knew this question would come
bef ,re the Committee, and lie therefore did not wish to give any
opinion upon the matter. " The majority of the Committee, whose ig-
norance was second only to their corruption, were thus enabled to put
their decision on the shoulders of this gentleman." Now he
begged to say that the question was carried by a main-
rity of seven to four. " The next main feature of the
case is this. An overseer was called for the purpose of
striking off two of my votes on the ground of the non-payment of rates.
His oath was contradicted by the production of two receipts, in his own
handwritieg ; and I will venture to say that no judge would have per-
mitted a case to go to a jury on evidence so contradictory. My
Counsel applied for the restoration of four votes on the poll which had
been previously struck offon his evidence, but the Committee refused his
application. In this way my majority was destroyed, and my scat filched
from me, as much as ever a purse was filched on the highway." Now this
was a gross mis-statement. The Counsel for sitting Member asked the Corn-
mitteeto reverse their decision, which they refused to do at that time. They
were satisfied of the man's inaccuracy, but did not think that
was the time for replacing the votes on the poll. The next
paragraph was one which he was sure the House would agree
with him in thinking was most unjust and unfounded.—(Hear.)
" I was unwilling to witness in person those disgraceful scenes, but I
am assured that all the proceedings of a section of the Committee
were accompanied by such external and convincing signs of partiality to
my opponent and prejudice to myself, as to excite the disgust, even of
casual spectators. . . It appears to me that I have been made the
victim of injustice, compared with which the irregular acts of all firmer
Committees may stand excused." He (Mr. B.) would not trouble the
House with the remainder of the letter, but would take the opportunity on
Monday next of calling the printer of the Morning 6.7onick and Mr.
Poulter also to the bar of the House. The Committee all ,cted to the
best of their conscientious belief and the justice of the case, and he had
no doubt that the individual who differed from them had come to as
conscientious a decision as they had done, and would give those who
differed from him the same credit which he claimed for himself. lie
would now merely hand in the paper.

The Clerk then endeavoured to read the letter, but was unable
ei do so from the smallness of the type. The difficulty in which he
was placed excited some laughter, and the house became completely
convulsed, when, in attempting to throw additional light on the paper,
by drawing nearer the candles, he actually set his wig on fire.
Mr. BLACKSI ONE then moved that John Jeyer Poulter, Esq., of
the Temp!e, whose name was affixed to the letter, and Martin Smith
Metcalf, of 3, Savoy street, Strand, printer of the Morning Chronicle
newspaper, be called to the bar of the House, on Monday the nth inst.
Mr. ELLIOT, as a member of the Shafteebt:ry Committee, felt himself
bound to say a few words, snore especially as the Hon. I:..ember had made
such allusions to him as compelled him to rise upon the present occasion.
However he might have differed from the members of that Cori:mittee,
he never intended by that to imply any corrupt motive to them. He
differed in almost every point with many of those gentlemen, but he
did it honestly and openly.—(Loud cheers, and cries of " Hear, hear.")
He expressed his opinion strongly, and he gave them great credit fbr
doing the same.—(Cheers.) He blamed them for nothing more than
what he would call an honest perversion of judgment. When he said
so, he meant what one man would consider a perversion of judgment.
when another differed from him.—(Cheers.) The Hon. Member had
alluded to the vote of George Mullins, and the course adopted by the
Committee with respect to it. Now, as to that, the House would
allow him to say a few words, as he thought the Honourable
Member had not put the House fully in possession of the facts
of the case. It was understood in that Committee that the decision
upon that vote would decide thirty-ono votes. The Committee took
that into consideration, the Counsel proceeded, and the Com-
mittee decided that that vote was good. During the discussion
upon that subject the Counsel for the petitioner taxed the other party
with not bringing before the Committee the Revising Barrister, who
was said to be the only person who could properly answer
the case : to that it was said that it was not usual
to summon a Judge to give evidence of what had taken p'ace in his
own Court, and therefore the parties had refrained from summoning
him. In fact, the Counsel on that side put out of all question the
summoning of the revising Barrister. After the Committee
had decided upon the vote of Mullins, the Counsel for the petitioner
observed that he supposed they were now to conclude that
they had now disposed of that class of voters.--(Hear, hear, hear.)
To which it was answered—No. We have other objections to take,
The following morning the petitioner's Counsel proposed to the
Committee to call in the revising Barrister, in order that he might bear
testimony 'as to the thirty votes that had not been brought before the
Committee. Now it was his opinion, and that of a portion of the
Committee, that they had disposed of those votes by the decision
they had given in the case of Mullins. It wa►, however, the opinion of
others that they had not. Certainly Hon. Members had a right W
entertain their own opinions upon the subject, and he was quite
sure tnat the opinion expressed, though erroneous, was an honest one.
Counsel acre called in, and the consequence was that the Committee
discovered that their decision in the case of Mullins was not a right
one, Is...cause the evidence of the revising Barrister went to contradict
the evidence upon which they had formerly decided.—(Hear.) The
whole matter was whether they should, after having disposed at
31 votes, go again into evidence upon the 30. Looking at the evi-
dence of the revising Barrister, arid he thought it was very fairly and
honestly given—(hear, hear)—he did not know to what party he be-
longed—but be it what it might he considered that the evi.
(fence was given in a most fair and honest spirit. The person
whose vote was alluded to as being in question was objected to because
he had, it was alleged, not paid his rates in time, and the Counsel
for the petitioner called to prove that fact the collector
who deposed stoutly that such was the case. The Counsel for
the sitting Member then put into his hands a receipt for the taxes, dated
June, which contradicted his former evidence. He then said he recol-
lected well he had made a mistake, and put down June instead of May.
Ile was asked repeatedly respecting that point, and, after asserting it
pretty roundly, the Counsel put into his hands a receipt for the taxes
then due, dated in May.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") The vote was
retained, and he believed it was the unanimous opinion of the Com.
mittee that the veracity of the witness had been much impeached.
With respect to treating—treating was proved to have been carried on
in Shaftesbury long before, tip to, and even after, the testing of the writ.
It was also proved that Captain Matthews had sent down
a large sum of money to Shaftesbury—it was traced by the Counsel
front one Bank to another. It was also proved that Messrs,
Chitty and BucUand were the agents of Captain Matthews,
and that Mr. Iluckland had dr twn 400 e of that money by eheq„es,
which were proved to have been paid to the publicans in whose
houses the treating had been carried on.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
It was sufficiently proved that treating had taken place, and on that
ground he did express a very strong opinion. It was but fair that he
should state on what ground it was the Hon. Gentleman opposite differed
with him. Thy took this ground. First of all it was sworn to by all
the publicans, that they had received no order to open OM public houses
for Captain Matthews, but they had opened their houses on speculation.
They acknowledged they did expect to be paid by Captain Matthews;
they acknowledged that on all former occasions they had been paid by
Captain Matthews, and that they did expect to be paid by Captain
Matthews on this oCca.sion.—(Cheers.) „But it was proved by the publi

cans they had received no orders froia Captain Matthews.—(Hear, hear,
from the Tories.) The Bills for the treeeing were all taxed and reduced
by the agent .for Captain Matthews.—(Hear, hear.) A certain dedees.
eierewes nestle from every nm—some were reduced by one h 01( 5f their
amount, and others by one quarter—others were rtlue-_,..." by 10 per
cent.; but mere tees no role which seemed to it:DI-ate the deductions in
those Mlle, It was suggested by the Couing) for the petitioner that pine
liable, those deductions were male tecause the Bi'ls contained in lbilo' A
charge for treating afro; 0r.,, test of the writ; end, k'evis)Whlg that was
illegal, they had deelteeted so much for the Mlle, That suggestion was
received by the Members of the Ceseanittee as a probability. lie sled
not eoncur in that probability—(Hear)—and, for this reessoele kAht the
treating 'tent on. for twenty.five days. If there were' tee days for that
beyond the testing of tee writ, then there weeetel here been a deduction
Tula every'Etlil of one fifth. That wax efet the case, and the nebileens
therasielres swore the deductions wsre Merle because ,4.0 hill; were too
hash—(Cries of " Hear.") One said that the o.l9oction was made
!because Mr. Buckland considered the niite were too high i ew.other
said
Mr r'nek""l's COmenitlee hest taxed the Bill; and those sta'e-
ments induceileitm to think deductions retold net nett been male on
the see" ennte'',l'll for, end therefore he was ?it npinion that trresting
was prover!,—(Liear, hear.) The Hon, ileritteman opposite 'has of a
centrery epiresee_cc
cent sr beers.) However, it did appear to him to be
gto justice in every sense of the word. Other Members formed
theirnpinions on their own mode of reasoning, as he (Mr. E.) did his.
Independent, of these circumstances, the witnesses called to prove the
tre flog were unwilling witnesses—they gave as little evidence as they
coeld, and every '`,Tensber, he had no doubt, was impeessed with that
opinion. Another point way,' that an account book which was required
wes not produced, ant it Was proved that the son of the person tore the
leaves out of 'the book. As this unentnnate letter hid appeared, he
Legere! to say he Was the last person in the world who would attribute
motives to Hon. Gentlemen who sat in so serious a position. He would
net impute to them feelings of th it description, however much he leelelit
differ `..,0m them in opinion,--(Hear, hear.)
'Captain MATH F; WS did not feel authorised to:diode to the evidence
;given in the Committee, although he had been e witness of its proceed-
ings in the room the IS bole time. But with regard to the assertions
'made by the late Hon. Member in his letter he would, in the first place,
altogether deny the existence of what he was pleased to call a combina-
tion. Treating hart been the practice of Shafteeteiry during all the elec-
tions which had taken place there, but the treating at the late election
had been earned on not only without his (Captain Mathews's) consent,
bat against his directions. It was said by the Hon. Gentleman that the
landlords. who were examined appeared to be unwilling witnesses, He
wondered that, %Neill his usual acumen, the Hon. Gentleman should have
come to such a conclusion. The fact was that they had only been al-
lowed ha;( their bills. One of them complained that he had been
ruined by the election, and it was the interest of all to have a renewed
contest. He regretted exceedingly what hid taken place.
Lord WORSLEY thought that as the evidence was to be printed it
would be tic Well to postpone any further discussion of the matter until
the eveience was distributed.
Mr. lILACKSTONE could not consent to the proposition of the
Noble Lord.
-Mr. G. PALMER said, with respect to the case before the Com-
mittee, it would of course be competent for the House to judge of the
facts when the evidence was before it. But, whatever the contents of
the report might be, he wished to know whether the House would per. it Gentleman not then a Member of it to do that for which, if he
were a Member, he would be called to order by the Speaker ?—(Hear,)
Mr. O'CONNELL should not have spoken on the subject but that his
case had been alluded to. What had the douse gained by that pro-
ceeding ?—(Hear, hear.) It was a had precedent, and ought not to be
followed up. It had been said that the House had nothing to do with
the truth or falsehood of the allegations. Now, suppose they were all
well-founded, were they to punish him for the truth ? It was but
right to have the evidence before coming to a conclusion. They had
come to a stage With respect to those Committees that rendered it most
important for the House to set itself right with the public.—(Cheers.)
Did that cheer mean aeprobation or condemnation of his opinion ?
(Renewed cheering.) Then why take this isolated case and seek to make
a victim ? He would not propose that Mr. l'oulter should attend. It
was said that Gentleman would make an apology. If he were in his 1
menses he certainly would not. Having deliberately written and
signed the letter, iliac were now to apologise his position would not be an
enviable one.
After a few words in explanation from Mr. BLACKSTONE and Mr
O'Co:veeet.,
Sir I', FREMANTLE said that there would be no necessity for
calling the printer, if Mr. Poulter avowed the authorship of the letter.
Otherwise, the House must lose a day, in proceeding after the usual
manner.
Lo'd J. RUSSELL would merely make two remarks, The House on
a former ocecasion, in a case of this kind, had decided that they should
proceed. He would again repeat that he was of a contrary opinion. He
was every day more and more convinced that the more dignified course
to be pursued was, to allow such things to pass unnoticed. With re-
spect to the Shaftesbury Election Committee, he would not enter into
the merits of the question. It was the regular tribunal for the trial of
such questions, and he should presume that they had conscientiously ad-
hered to the oaths, and impartially fulfilled their duties —(Heer.) With
respect to the letter, he had no doubt that it was a genuine document.
Neither had he any doubt that the writer was as had been slid, a person
of ardent temperament. With regard to the expressions in the letter,
he would only say that anonymous charges were every day made on the
Committees, and including the conduct of Members on both sides of the
House, imputing corruption and unfairness. So far from being preju
diced against the writer of the letter, it had increased his- (Lord J.
Russell's) respect for hire, inasmuch as he thought there was more
courage in giving his name, than in making an anonymous charge.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, but none took' place, the
motion having been agreed to in our absence.
SLAVERY ABOLITION AMENDMENT BILL.
Lord J. RUSSELL moved the Order of the Day for going into Com-
mittee on this Bill.
Sir G. STRICKLAND gave notice that he should, after Easter, move
the total abolition of slave apprenticeship.
Lord STANLEY presented a petition from certain parties (as we un-
derstood in London), praying that the operation 'of the Bill before the
House should not extend to Barbadoes.
Mr. J. STEWART rose to move that it be an instruction to the Corn.
mittee on the Slavery Abolition Act Amendment Bill, to insert a clause
providing that negro apprenticeship shall totally cease on the Ist of
August, 1838. The Hon. Gentleman brought up his motion.
After a few words from the SPEAKER, a short discussion arose on the
question as to whether the motion be entertained as an instruction to
the Committee, in which Mr. Warburton, Lord Howiek, Mr. Ward,
Mr. Jervis, Mr. Goulburn, Mr. P. Howard, Sir E Sweden, aed the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer took part. It terminated in the withdrawal of
the 'motion.
On the question that the Speaker leave the chair,
Sir E. SUGDEN explained briefly to the House the reasons which
induced him to waive all opposition to the Bill. They were the atop.
tion by the Government of certain suggestions which he had embodied
in clauses, with a view of proposing them in Committee. The first re-
/ated to the flogging of negroes in prison. He found that the Govern-
ment meant to make it imperative that no punishment of the kind
should take place except in the presence or by the order of a special
magistrate. That was all he required. They had met the second by
oposing to give each Colonial Governor in Council a power of making
h regulations for the treatment of slaves in hospital as he deemed tit,
us affording a coatroul over the local legislation. The third was, that
apprenticeships should cease and determine altogether in August,
, 8-10. To addition to these, he trusted that the condition of the free
children would be attended to by the Government,
Mr. BAINES wished to know whether it was the intention of tile
Government to remedy the evils arrising from the imperfect marriages
of the slaves.
Sir 0 GREY said that t4e Government were extremely anxious to
remedy the evil, and only waited until they should ascertain whether
the Colonial Legislatures would entertain the subject or not. If they
did not, the Government were pledged to introduce a measure for the
purpose; but he should be extremely glad to give any welLeonsidered
measure brought in by the lion. Member himself, or any other Hon.
Member, his best support.
Mr. E. BULLER gave notice that he. should move a clause for the
purpose of exempting female negroes from field labour altogether.
The House then went into Committee on the Slavery Abolition Bill.
Clause I was verbally amended.
Clause 2 pas eel without esterase).
Clause 3 was ainentleil, on the motion of Mr. BULLER, by the addi-
tion of the words—"'That no apprenticed labourer from whom such
allowance shall be withheld shall be liable to p nishment during the
period that such allowance shall be withheld from him.
Clause 4 was passed unaltered.
Chute 5 was verbally amended.
Clause 6 was passed unaltered.
Clauses 7,8, 0, and 10 were agreed to.
Clauses 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 10 were agreed to, with some verbal
ainendmeets.
On clause 17 being proposed,
Str G. GREY moved to amene the clause by introducing a provision
that ne female apprentices shall be punished by labour on the tread-
mill, or in any chain or by whipping.
The proposition was agreed to.
Mr. BRISCOE moved that "the cutting off the hair of female ap-
prentices, and other indignities," sheted be included with the exemp-
tions of the Hon. Baronet's amendment.
Sir R. PEEL said it would be inconvenient to legislate for minutim.
Sir G. GREY and Lord ,lofts Reamer. concurred with the Right
Hun. Baronet, and the amendment was withdrawn.
The remaining clauses of the Bill were then agreed to without discus.
slots, except the 25th, which was struck out.
Sir G. GREY thew proposed a clause rendering it lawful for the Go.
vernor, with the advice of the Council, to make such new regulations as
to the treatment of imprisoned apprentices as to him should seem fit.—
Agreed to.

Mr. GLADSTONE proposed a clause to the effect that the Gorernor
should report to the Parliament at home the circumstances attending any
maniiini::sion of apprentices that might take place, and with ether ob..
jects which we could not catch.—Asreed to.
Sir G. GREY proposed another elause, that no persons should be
bound by any indenture of apprenticeship in any colony after the Ist
or August, 18.10, except the Mauritius, in which indentures should not
be binding after the salve day in 1841.—Agreed to.
Mr..l, STEWART then moved a cl,,ttse for the total abolition of
negro apprenticeship in. the island of Jamaica on the Ist January, 1839.
Mr, WARD seconded the motion. The Hon. Gentleman then al-
luded to the speech made by the Zion. Member far Newark (Mr. Glad.
atone), and said that he found it impossible to reconcile the statements
made by that 'don. Gentleman with the facts which had come to his
knowledge with regard to the working of the Slavery Bill, and Lb' con-
duct of those by whom its provisions were to he carried out in the coin.
nies. He consid2red the House ought to agree to the principle of this
motion being adopted in the is!and of Jamaica at leant.—(Hear, hear.)
He should certainly support the motion of his Hon. Friend, if he pressed
it to a division.
Sir G. GREY said that as this part of the subject had been so recently
under discussion, it Was necessary for Min only to say that if the lion.
Genticm,..n pressed his motion he should feel it hie duty to oppose it.
Lord STANLEY thought that this explanation of the Hon Gentle_
Man ought to be satisfactory to the petitioners.
Mr. O'CONNELL denied that the question embraced in the lion.
Gentleman's motion had been decided, and said that agitation on the
subject would only end with the deteimination of the term of appretil
tieeship.
Mr. -YATES should oppose the motion of the Hon. Gentleman. H
Mr. WHITE should support it.
Mr. P. HOWARD and not think that the amancipation of the n!':
grries ought to be effected until a proper system of Poor-laws vitti
adopted.
Tilf House then divided. The numbers were—
For the motion 6l
Against it ... ...... 115
Majority
--54

On Our readmission to the Gallery we found Out this and the re.
maining Clauses of the Bill had been agreed to, and the House then
reiume:f.

The Report, o❑ the motion of Lord J, RUSSELL, was ordered to be
read to-morrow (this day).

Mr. HA WES begged to ask the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) whe-
ther it was his intention to proceed with the Benefices Pluralities Lill,
which stood amonz the Orders for that night, before the recess
Lord J. RUSSELL was understood to say that it was not the inten.
tion to go on with that measure until after Easter.
The Poor Law Loans Bill, after a brief conversation between Mr.
Goulburn, the Solicitor-General, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
passed through a Committee and was ordered to be reported.
The Committee on the Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill was
postponed until after Easter.
Lord STANLEY said that, as it was difficult to find the Honourable
and Learned Gentletnan the Attorney.neneral for 'lreland in his place,
he wished to asked the Noble Lord the 8-s.cretary of State for Ireland
when the Bill relating to the registration of voters in Ireland was to be

brought in? Irchuntrable and Learned Gentleman promised to
twirl" !t, lyefore this, but he had not done so, and the reason why hr
`-k Lord Stanley) asked the question was because ht it "desirable
t'-at it should lie en the table of the Easter' in order that
information respecting its PeOv;!4:Otis might be obtaine.l 14rom IreLnd.
Lord I(3ltrFAl‘" said that the Iriegteit AitC4ndani::',`:..' of his Right
ton. the Attorney--geniral t`e,: ItAnd, he was sorry to say, we•
caused by serldnii iiiclDp,?.tloti. It was his intention to lay the Bill on
the tab'e of 'Olt Mouse, so as that it might be printed before the Eastci

The Court of Sessions (sert!arci) itikk 't'he eokirts (Scot-
Innd) Bill were tAth tininifted*O,tfbrissis.
PARKER iireqerttol pctirinn, very numerously and respect-
Abty signed, from the inhariiiants of Predon, in Lancashire, engaged it,
the ma;lufaetnrt or spinning yarn. The peritientts begged to call the
attentitsh of the House to the Mains in_tltosed by the French and Belgian
Governnr nts maiiiifertUrt:s imported from this country into theirs,
an:l they prayer thllt equivalent duties might ts* laposed by this coun-
try on manufactures of those ersontries in particular, especially on
in order to teach the rtench Government the necessity of main_
raining her enmaiert'ial relations with this country on liberal print pies.
The petittrm was ordered to be printed.
Tie °thee Orders of the Day svcre then disposed of, and the Horisc
a!ljourned at a Guarter past Leven o'Clock to tomorrow (this day.)