The Sun.
London, England, 1831-10-08 00:00:00

fled to judge such a question. Perhaps they did not understand
paradoxes—perhaps they did not understand the new, and
curious, and ingenious system of morals, which justified the
purchase and sale of nomination boroughs ; but their inability
to understand these things they shared with Pitt and Fox,
Locke, Saville, and Blackstone. He would appeal to the Right
Reverend Bench on his left, to disavow and repudiate that sys-
tem of immorality. He inquired of them, were they prepared
to do evil that good might come of it?—(Loud and long_
continued cheers.) Would they sanction hypocrisy, false-
hood, and fraud ? Would they admit " the money-changers
into the Temple," and resist any measure to dislodge them ?
Would they vote an establishment of that pollution by which
it was desecrated.—(Loud and enthusiastic cheers.) The system
which it was the object of the Bill to correct was an eye-sore, a
blot, a blemish—it was worse, it was a consuming ulcer, which
eventually would spread gangrene throughout the whole Con-
stitution. The Noble Earl then proceeded to reply to the argu-
ment founded upon what was called Corporation robbery—the
Corporations lost nothing, except what a large proportion of
them were perfectly willing to lose, for they all felt the evils of
non-resident voters. He next proceeded to contrast the argu.
ments of a Noble and Learned Lord opposite with those of the
Noble Duke at the table. The Noble Duke seemed to fear the
influx of a tierce democracy, while the other Noble Peer con-
tended that the Bill would prove a cheat and a delusion. These
arguments, he observed, were scarcely consistent with each
other. It was not to be denied that the consequence of the
refusal to entertain that measure would be general flissatisfac.
tion and discontent.—(Hear.) He agreed with the Noble Lord
opposite, that even a tacit combination amongst any number of
people to resist the payment of taxes was unlawful, But the
people had shown great patience in all the difficulties with
which the country had had to contend, and they would have
just cause to complain if the present measure was unceremo.
niously rejected.—(Cheers.) He thought that there was much of
party spirit in the opposition to the measure, both in that House
and elsewhere, and that a system of attack had been carried on
against the Government, with a view to drive them out of
office.—(l-lear.) So far as the question of Reform had any
thing to dq with that, be must say that to the present measure,
or to one of equal extent, he was pledged ; and If a more mo,
derate measure would satisfy the people, although no man could
be more happy to see that result, he would not be the person to
introduce such a measure.—(Hear, hear.) As to what course
he should follow under those circumstances it was for him to
consider. But this much he would say, that he should be cul-
pable if he were to resign his office, and abandon his King, so
long as he could be of use to him—(Loud cheering)—,flor he was
bound to him by gratitude as great as ever subject owed a
Sovereign. Therefore, so long as be could be a useful servant
—so long as he could carry measures necessary to the security
and happiness of the country, he would not abandon time King.—
(Cheers.) Although, he would not contend with others, in
ability and fitness for office, he would yield to none in zeal, or
in the desire to do the best that he could for his country anti
his Scvsreigp, at any cost of personal sacrifices. He did net
mean to make any prc,fessioris of rare disinterestedness ; but he
would say that he found himself placed in, a situation in which
he thought that he could not stand back from the services of his
country? when he was called upon.—(Hear.) It was under that
conviction oe duty he hail accepted office- He had lived long in
retirement, and had never acquired that attaphintud to an official
life which a long connexion with office is supposed to produce.
He had been accustomed to live in the bosom of his family, and
nothing could have tempted him to embark upon those
" Stormy seas?
" Bankrupt of health, and prodigal of easp."
(Hear.) Rot he hail quitted kis retirement from a sense of
duty to his country and his King, whom he would continue to
serve so long as his Majesty was pleased to require him. But
if the King and Parliament should withdraw from him their
confidence, he was ready to return to his happy retirement,
with the ciniscii4.isness that he had done his best for the good
of his country and the service of his Sovereign.—(The conclu-
sion of the Noble Lord's address was followed by repeated

cheers,)
The Duke of WELLINGTON said, that when he recom-
mended to their Lordships to keep themselves free from any
pledge upon the question of Varliamentary Reform, he looked
upon the state of the question to have beep quite altered by
his Majesty's speech at the opening of the present Session, from
what it had been when he retired from ofliee.—(Hear, hear.)
He would not complain of any thing personal that had been
said of him, and he was sure that the Noble Earl (Grey) would
do him the justice to say, that he had rendered the Noble Earl's
Government any assistance which he could give them consis-
tently with his avowed sentiments.—(Hear.)
Lords GREY and LYNonuitsT mutually explained, amidst
cries of sc Question l"
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, when their Lord-
ships divided—

Contents Present 128
Proxies 3O

-litS

Not Contents Present 150
Proxies 49

-199
Majority_against the second reading of the

Their Lordships then adjourned, at a Quarter past Six
o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, OCTOBER 7.

Colonel EVANS presented a petition, praying for the repeal
of the taxes on knowledge, especially that upon Newspapers.

Mr. HUNT presented a petition from a person in Hunting-
donshire, complaining of the conduct of some Magistrates of
that county, and praying that before Magistrates are sworn they
should be examined as to their knowledge of the law ; also one
from the Rev. Robert Taylor, complaining of his treatment in
prison, and stating that the Chairman ( Hedger, Esq.) was
drunk when he passed sentence. The Hon. Member would not
have presented a petition to the House containing such a grave
charge, but he had the assurance of two respectable gentlemen,
totally unconnected with Mr. Taylor, that they saw the bottle
passing round upon the bench.
Mr. TREVOR said that Mr. Taylor's conduct had been so
violent upon one or two occasions that restraint was necessary.
He was of opinion that Mr. Taylor had been properly punished,
and was happy that A body of men had taken the prosecution in
hand.

Mr. GOULBURN thought it strange that no complaint had
been made of the conduct of the Chairman sooner than at the
expiration of three months. He entirely disbelieved the impu.
talon.

Mr. HUNT moved that the petition be printed. He also
presented a petition from Finsbury against the tax upon News.

paper s.

Mr. BRISCOE defended the Magistrates of Surrey, and
stated that there was not the least foundation for the charge
against the Chairman.

Mr. KEARSLEY presented a petition, praying that the
beer-shops might be closed at an earlier hour on Sundays than
at present.
Mr. JOHN WOOD could not see what end Hon. Members
had in view in crying out so against the new beer-shops; it
could not be for the morality of the people, as nothing was said
against the licensed houses. By shutting up these beer-shops
at an early hour it obliged the people to go to houses where
more temptation awaited them than in the beer.houses. The
Hon. Gentleman then presented several petitions, praying for
an assimilation of the hours of beer-shops and licensed houses.
Mr. HUNT supported the prayer of the petition.

Sir R. INGLIS presented a petition against the Beer Bill.
Mr. GOULBURN presented a petition from the West India
merchants of Liverpool, against the Bill for allowing foreign
sugar to be imported into this country for the purpose of being
refined. They were convinced that much of what was im-
pertgq. found its way into the consumption of this country,
Mr. J. WOOD acknowledged the respectability of the peti -

tion which containe4 $9 many misrepresentations, The fact
was the petitioners were grussly imposed on by a discarded ser-
vant of one of the refineries.

After a few words from Sir J. NEWPORT, Mr. BUIWE, and
Mr. EWART, the petition was ordered to be printed.
cQNSOLIDATED FUND.

On the motion of the Warmly of WAR, that the House
form itself into a Committee on the Consolidated Fund, with
instructions to receive the appropriation clause,

Sir H. HARDINGE said that there was a mdst invidious
clause in the Act, which prevented officers in the army receiv.
ing th.er half-pay if they accepted any civil appointments.--
(Hear, hear)„„rhile officers in the navy were exempted from
such regulation. tic ;was confident, both as a matter of eco.
nomy and policy, it would iso right to allow half-pay officers
the army to fill civil offices without ga;ilcting them of their
pay. Be.fore the year 1828, officers in the army wore not obliged
to give up Wel; half-pay if they filled civil offices ; but in that
year the Finance Co -i.--ttee recommended that course to be
adopted, and an Act was passed for that purpose. He knew it
was Ow opinion of Mr. Iluskisson and Lord Palmerston, that
an exception aught to have been made in favour 'of officers of
the army holding civil offices in the colonies.—(Hear.) If a
Captain in the army, with 7s. a day for half-pay, was appointed
a Barrack-master abroad, at a salary of 7s. fitl, a day, he was
compelied to give up his half-pay—(Hear, hear),,ana many
officers had retum4 to accept of employment, in consequence of
which the service had beer, greatly injured.—(Hear, hear.) He
should move that officers in the army on half-pay be allowed
to fill the one of Magistrates, or any other civil office, with-
out being deprived of their half-pay.—(Hear, hear.) He asked
the House whether there wars anything like a semblance of jus.
tiee
:in allowing the officers of the navy to have their half,
pay, and to fill civil situations, while the officer: of the army
were wanded from doing so ? Such a course could but bt
the means of iaeptpig unfounded jealousies in the minds of the
members of the two Secv,;4;es.—(Hear, hear.) Why, he would ask
should a Captain in the navy r,oziye his pay, and also his
sallry, if he was appointed to an office In ti.ic household,
while the officer in the army must give up his half-pay From
1806 to IRS, toere was no such limitation, and the Finance
Committee had recomincmlf,d the stopping of the half-pay of
officers in the army on their obtaiohig civil situations, without
hearing evidence on the subject—(Hear)—and to make the dis-
tinction io the two services was most invidious.—(Hear, hear.)
Why should the tiva service be treated with great liberality
while the officers of the army, whose services appeared to have
been almost forgotten, and why shcgild a Commissioner of
Bankrupt; who had only been appointed a few weeks, retire
for life on a pension of 2001. a year ? ►

Sir HENRY PARNELL considered it merely a question of
expence. In fact it was whether or not they should save to the
country 70,0004 a year ; and he observed, that as a Committee
had recommended retrenchments on the ground of economy, he
thought the abandonment of the Bill now would prove an un.
advised measure. He admitted there were individual cases of
extreme hardship ; but he felt bound to say that he was con-
vinced that the officers of the army ought to be placed on the
same footing as the civil servants.
Sir HENRY HARDINGF. denied that there would be a
saving of 70,000/. a year by the arrangement, because the civil

offices must have been filled by civilians if the military officers
did not accept them.
Mr. HUME approved of the report of the Finance Committee
of 1828 ; and he was of opinion the civil service should be put
on the same footing. He knew military officers who had been
in the army thirty years, who could obtain not more than 2001.
per annum, while officers in the civil departments held various
situations amounting to nearly 1,0001. a year.
Mr. FERGUSON thought it would be for the benefit of the
service that both naval and military officers should be allowed to
fill civil offices, and also receive their half pay.
Mr. HUME said he had known officers who had seen active
and dangerous service for above twenty years starving and pining
in penury, and to prevent this, he would have had the old
officers put in active service, instead of a parcel of boys, who
filled the places of old and efficient officers.
Mr. MABERLY thought the officers of the army were not
well dealt with—(Hear, hear)—and they ought to be on the
same footing as the civil service. In the civil service, some
gentlemen held several situations and sinecures.—(Hear.) The
Clerk to the Treasury held three distinct offices, with salaries
amounting to 2,500/. a year, besides a retiring allowance of
500/. a-year as a Commissioner of the Lottery.—(Hear.)
Sir G. CLERK knew not why military officers on half-pay
should not be allowed to fill civil offices. It was a monstrous
anomaly that officers of the navy should have the favour, and
military officers be precluded.—(Hear.)
Sir H. PARNELL said a few words respecting the Report of
the Committee, which stated that 78,0001. per annum might be
saved to the country.

Sir H. HARDINGE said, there was no saving at all; but
the public service suffered great injury by the halfpay officers
refusing to accept of situations in the civil service, and they
were obliged to do so, or give up their half.pay.—(Hear.)
Sir J. GRAHAM and Sir G. CLERK said a few words.

Colonel :11ABERLY thought the subject had not been suffi-
ciently considered, and hoped his Gallant • Friend, Sir Henry
Hardinge, would not press any motion on the subject till the
question had been more fully discussed. He thought the army
was not well treated.
Lord ALTHORP said a few words.

Sir G. MIJRRAY was of opinion the service was materially
injured by the regulations which prevented half-pay officers from
filling civil offices without a forfeiture of their pay.—(Hear.)
The situations were filled by civilians, but no saving was ef-
fected thereby.

Sir J. GRAHAM thought the officers in the army filling
civil offices in the colonies, and the officers in the Royal House.
hold, ought not to be deprived of their half.pay.—(Hear.)
Mr. HUME said he felt inclined to dividet he Committee on
that question.

The addition of the clause to the Bill was, after a short con.
versation, agreed to, and the Bill ordered to be reported on
Monday.

SUGAR REFINERY BILL

On the question being put that this Bill be read a second time,

Mr, KEITH DOUGLAS moved that the second reading of
of the Bill be deferral to that day fortnight, in order that time
might be given to the West Indian Committee to make a report
upon the expediency of passing such a Bill, and what probable
effect it would have on the interests of the West Indian Colonies.
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the original motion
Against it

- 130
96
Majority - —34
The Bill was then read a second time.
EXCHEQUER COURT BILL (SCOTLAND).

The House resumed the adjourned debate on this Bill.
Sir C. WETHERELL said, that the present Bill and the
Reform Bill were unequal measures. Both were in extremes,
and he should therefore move that the Bill be read that day six
months.
The House then divided, when there appeared
For the amendment - - 31
Against it - . 95
Majority for the second reading —6.}

The Bill was then read a second time.

Lord EBRINGTON said, that it was his intention to move,
on Monday, in case that the second reading of the Reform Bill
was not agreed to in the House of Lords, to submit a motion to
the House on the state of public affairs.
_ _

The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at a Quarter-past Three o'clock until Monday

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The debate is over,—the decision is made. May it not
be " the beginning of the end !" Who can help the ex-
clamation—" What is this fearful crisis to result in !" Is
any man on earth prepared to conjecture what will take
place in England before this day week? It is now half-past
seven o'clock on Saturday morning, that, in announcing
' the majority of forty-ore against the Bill, we make these
remarks on what we will not still call the fatal issue of
the measure. The death-wound to the Constitution of
the country, to the people's rights, to a free representation
in Parliament, has been aimed, has been struck : but we
still feel confident that national liberty will not expire.un-
der the wound : we still hope that there subsists in the
hearts of Englishmen a strength and a resolution which will
enable them to outlive the blow. There is no faint-
ing, no irresolution, but, on the contrary, so far as
time will permit us to observe, unbounded determi-
nation to renew their exertions with redoubled energy.
We turn from the appalling sight of a wounded na-
tion to the means already in action for recovery. This
day, the very day on which the division but too painfully
anticipated took place, a meeting almost contemporaneous
with the mischief will be held at the Thatched-house Ta-
vern, of all the Members who voted for the people's Bill
in the House of Commons. But it is to the people as
well as to their representatives that we must look for all
the efforts which the law and the Constitution allow for the
maintenance of their injured rights. With equal protnp-
titude, the Common Council of the city of London meet
to-day; and the merchants and bankers, we believe, on
Monday. And, under the support of the whole nation,
the King and his Ministers will not fear to do their ditty.
The greater the majority against the Bill, the greater ne-
cessity there is for an accession to that body (in which the
majority has been found) of persons more identified with
the spirit of the times and the feelings of the people of
the united empire.— Times.

Vainly do the Members, male and female, of fashionable
coteries in some patrician stree s, spend days and nights in
gossipping against Reform. It is the petty vengeance of
the drawing-room and boudoir, which King, Ministers,
and people, can afford to pity and forgive. But in the
name of Heaven, what is it that the borough-tainted Peers
and unteachable Bishops look forward to as the effect of
their trifling majority against the second reading ? Is it
to a change of Ministry? Who then would succeed Lord
Grey? The Duke of Wellington ! Indisputably not. His
Grace may be suspected by some of wishing to play off
against Lord Grey, in respect of the Reform question, the
same game by which, in 1828 and 1829, he triumphed
over the old and consistent advocates of Catholic emanci-
pation. We now believe it not. Whatever may have
been—and we pretend not to guess—the party designs of
his Grace three days ago, it is now impossible to ca i rry nto
execution any scheme for resuming the reins of Govern-
ment, a'ter being nailed to the opposition benches as he
was last Thursday evening, in rpite of many bold and re-
peated, and not quite orderly, attempts to escape from
the gripe, and to parry the sledge hammer of
Lord Plunkett. Of course, as every body will
admit there can be no new Minister but the Duke of Wel-
lington. The argument, then, of Lord Plunkett is, in
few words, as follows :—The Duke of Wellington, when
la.t in office, declared that " so long as he remained a Mi-
nister, he should feel it his duty to oppose any proposition
for Reform." These are the reported words of the Noble
Duke, and the Irish Chancellor pinned him to them with
little show of mercy. Very well. The Duke was beaten
on the Civil List, and resigned because notice of a motion
for Reform was given in the House of Commons, and he
did not wish that the opposition to that motion should
he conducted by a Government " which had lost the
confidence of the House of Commons :" in other words,
the Duke, being pledged to resist all Reform, had
no stomach for a second beating; and his colleagues
confessed what all men knew—that in the then
state of feeling among the people of the United King-
dom, it was impossible for any non-Reforming Minister
to stand. Lord Grey had no inclination to try such an
experiment; if he hail entertained the wish, his good sense
would have told him it was fruitless, Ho made a Reform
of Parliament the first great measure of his administra-
tion. The Commons passed it : the Lords talk of throw-
ing it out, and dream of a " change of Ministry," with the
Duke of Wellington for leader. But one of two things is
first indispensable. The people of England must agree to
do withput Reform, or the Doke of Wellington must agree
to grant it. Does any man of observation imagine hat
the people of England will, at this time of day, fore rthe
Reform for which they have been so long panting Does
any man of honour conceivet:. ithe Duke of Wellington
will assent to that Reform apt st which, "as a King's
Minister," be stands so solemn, pledged It is clear,
therefore, that whoever was to stn. sed Lot goOtey, should
his Lordship resign on the rejection ' this mai measure, it
could not, in the actual temper of the uuntry, be the Duke
of Wellington. There will be no chant of Ministry—the
rats may assnre themselves of that. Lora Grey and his col-
leagues are sensible,that to abandon their postat such an hour,
would argue a total want cf public spirit and patriotism to-
' wards the country, on the eve of a convulsion, and an utter
callousness to the feelings and honour of gentlemen, in skulk-
ing from their gracious Prince, who has shown them,
amidst unexampled difficulties, the noblest and most ge-
nerous confidence. The question stands thus:—The
people of England demand a resumption of their rights.
The mock-reform Peers have rejected their present de-
mand in toto ; but hold out some vague prospect (not
even a distinct promise) of giving them in the course of
another half century a tr'fle less than 6d. in the pound.