The Sun.
London, England, 1831-10-12 00:00:00

BIRMINGHAM, OCT. 11.

TO THE EDITOR OF T.& SUN.
Si R,—Th e geneyal feelings of the i n habitants of Birmingham upon
the ill-advised rejection of the Reform Bill by the House of
Lords, are quite in unison with what I learn from the London
Papers are those of the country in general.
You are already acquainted \kith the fact of the tolling of the
bells in funeral peals unc.o. the arrival of the mournful intelli-
••gence, by express, on SatUrday afternoon, and also of the Ad-
dress published by the Political Union Council, the good effects
of which we at this moment experience, every thing in this
town being in a state of perfect order. It is very true that the
feelings of the great majority of cur town's people are very much
excited; yet so great is their confidence in our Most Gracious
King, supporting and suß,orted by a firm and patriotic Ministry,
all enjoying the entire -confidence of the people, they will pa-
tiently await the issue of the !Inure Ministerial endeavours to
pass this leng-_sought...for Bill, and carefully avoid taking .iny
steps that might produce riot and confusion. Yesterday (Mon-
day), certatnly, there were several rather tumultuous assemblages
of the people at different times of the day ; but this, in my opi.
'ion, is solely to be attributed to this enemies of the Bill. Let
the people here, as elsewhere, enjoy their undou,,ted right ot-
peaceably proclaiming their on,t, nions Unmolested, and then thetc
will be little the matter. Black flags were hoisted upon St.
Martin's and St. Phitip's churches yesterday; this, and the con-
tinued" tolling of thebens, It appears, displeased the officiating
minister. c 4 l, Philip's, who, upon attending to read prayers.
yesterday mambo>°, demanded by whose authority they wero
placed there, and directed their intnwiate removal. I betieve
they were taken down for a time, the knowledge of which soon
oecoming public, an imuicii4e concourse of people assembled in
the church-yard, a, (,onslderable portion of whciaa entered the
church, and aft wnseh altercation with the 'parson insisted
upon the ret.,,o,:tstiing of the flags.
A sirnSlar scene occurred in the aftetum—(prayers are react
here twice a day). A'still. greater crowd assembled. The tier.
gyman was very mighty. The people determined rot to cub.
mit, and at last were so much iheented by the conceitedly annov-
ing conduct of the Rpmeucl Mr. E. Mersall, that they threat_
cued if he removed the flags again, to stick his head upon a peas
in the place efthetn. They called him every thing but a gentle-
man, and appeared to become more and more excited. It was
thoUghladviseable to send for Mr. Cleorge Edmonds and Mr..
Weston, the town churchwarden, and also one of the Political
Council. As soon as they arrived, a bench was brought out of
the Church, which both there gentlemen mounted; their in-
fluence with the majority of the people here has Inca too fre-
quently seen to be denied, and after a speech fl'om each, and
three cheers l'or thespmkers and the King, this tumultuous as-
sembly lulmediately quietly-distiersed.
About half-past seven o'clock last night, I was standing at the
shop door of a friend in Nevi.strect, when suddenly my ears
were assailed by the sound of much shouting and yelling, and
soon a multitude of people mule along New-street I should
think to the nureter of two or three thousand, shouting and
huzzaing witli t. eir might. For a moment, I assure you, I
felt much alarmed so were the shop-keepers, most of whom
they usedThhuindeista
utuethiutg, to guept
Bull-suretheirsh,u,tttr'' up.ey went in that direc-
The mob soon re-
turned,tion, and I saw no more of them. But, it appears, they went
into St. Mary's-square, \there they broke the windows of the
Rev. Mr. Burn, the Minister, who had made himself obnoxious
by interfering, though unsuccessfully, with the tolling of the
chapel bell, The scene here on Saturday night last, I learn, was
a very ludkrous one. Mr. Burn went to the belfry steps and
called to the ringer—the roan came down—Mr. B. demanded
him to desist tolling, lie said he was a,uthorised, and immedi-
ately ran u steps again and gave the bell a twang. Ile was
p the
called by tie parson again to come down—again went up—
again twang—and so on, till the poor devil of a parson ascended
the belfry himself. 'Upon trying the door he was told by the
ringer that he could not get out to him again, for he was II t,‘ll
in. So, boiling with rage, the Minister of Peace was obliged Jto.,
submit. The Larne mob broke many other windows ru.sulii.
thes
Mary's and in the square, as well as in a few other places Of the
town. But do not vou London folk lay this to the
to
Political Union. such thing. The mob L.'
men scum sixteen or
1 may say, entirely of boys and. youcnf,,„-noleol Union diseoun_
eighteen to twenty years of age. T
twenty of the ringleaders
be repeated to-night. Eighteen or twenty ,
l'he military have bees!
nor do I thiiik this will
by the
at a imomenet3 notice, but not yet
several days in readiness to a
Vf
T. 1,
wereenac e
takendisoirndten Custodyevery dc'ecriPtlin'
wanted.

tkVir*Vil

~Y

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

' HO USE OF LORDS, OCTOBER 11.
The Loan CHANCELLOR took his scat on the Woolsack
at Ten Minutes before Five o'clock.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE presented a petition from three
individuals on the Game Laws.
Lord RODEN presented a petition from Coleraine,
praying that British soldiers in foreign parts might be re-
lieved from doing homage to the host in Roman Catholic
processions.
The Earl of CAMPERDOWN presented a petition from
Galway relative to the extension of the elective franchise.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH presented„a similar
petition.
The Earl of RADNOR presented a petition in favour of
the Reform Bill.

Lord LYTTLETON presented a petition from a
parish in Worcestershire, in favcur of Reform.
Mr. BERNAL, and others from the Commons, brought
up the Arms (Ireland) Bill, which, on the motion of the
Earl of SHAFTESBURY, was read a first time.
PRESCRIPTION BILL.—TITHES.

Lord KING had two petitions to present on a different
subject from that of the Reform Bill. Both petitions were
in favour of the Prescription Bill introduced by the Lord
Chief Justice of the King's Bench, but which was likely
to be strangled in this Session as it had been in the last.
One of the petitions was from the owners and occupiers
of lands, to the extent of five thousand acres, in the county
of Suffolk ; and they prayed that the Bill might speedily
pass, as otherwise they would he continually harassed with
suits for tithes, as they had recently been, after an exemp-
tion for centuries. The petitioners stated, that the lands
which they hold had belonged to the Priory of the Isle of
Ely, and as such had been exempted from the payment of
tithes ; and that they had remained exempt for several
centuries, till suits fur tithes were recently commenced
against them by the Dean and Chapter of Ely, who were
Lords of the Manor, in which law-suits the petitioners
had expended five thousand pounds. The Dean and Chap.
ter had lately granted a new lease to their own Steward of
the Manor, by the terms of which it was taken he was
bound to prosecute these suits. The Dean and Chapter
had also taken fines from them on the renewal of their
rights, as if the Lords had been exempt from the payment
of tithes, and had appointed a Vicar of the parish, who, as
might be expected, was a non-resident and a pluralist.
'l'hisdisturbance of the ancient order of things then came
from the Clergy, who professed to be averse to all changes,
and to be desirous that every thing should remain un
changed, but who, when their own interests were con-
cerned, became the arch disturbers.—(Hear.) The other
petition was to the same effect, from a place in Ireland.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH—He thought it his duty to
call the attention of the House to an expression which the
Noble Lord had used with respect to the clergy. The
Noble Lord had said that they were the arch-disturbers
when their own interests were concerned, although under
other circumstances they were adverse to all change. But
the more that he saw of the conduct of the clergy, the
more he was convinced there was the grossest injustice in
making such a charge against them. Even they them-
selves had lately come forward with measures of improve-
ment and amendment. He knew the abilities and kind-
ness and excellent disposition of his Noble Friend, but
really these constant attacks on the clergy had a tendency
to detract from the position which his Noble Friend ought
to hold in that House, and very much disparaged him.
Lord KING thanked his Noble Friend for the good
opinion which he entertained of him in some respects ;
but yet he must still say that the complaints in the peti-
tion from Suffolk were well founded. They had enjoyed
the exemption from the payment of tithes for centuries,
and now they were disturbed, not by laymen, but by the
Dean sod Chapter of Ely. The clergy there were the
disturbers of the existing order of things, and if the Pre-
scription Bill should not pass, the grievance would become
intolerable, and the strongest odium would be excited
against the clergy generally. The petition from Ireland
prayed for a speedy passing of the Bill, as delay was a
bonus and a premium on law-suits.
Lord SUFFIELD—Being warmly attached to the
Church of England, he bad frequently suggested to his
Noble Friend (Lord King) to abstain from these attacks
on the Clergy and the Church ; but he confessed that what
had taken place within these few days had caused some
change in his opinion respecting the general body of the
Right Rev. Prelates, although his attachment to the Esta-
blished Church remained as strong as ever. But he felt
that he owed some apology to his Noble Friend, kr he
thought that the conduct of the Right Rev. Prelaf.s diri
gall for some observation_ He certainly flit; not come pre-
pared to make any such, for he had not been aware of the
petitions to be presented by his Noble Friend, nor of the
observations which lie intended to make on presentine
them. He bad always considered the existence of the
Right Rev. Prelates in this House as liable to one objec-
tion, as they always threw almost the whole weight of their
body into the scale of Government.—(Hear, hear, from
the Opposition benches.) He would presently show how
be meant to apply that observation. The Right Rev. Pre-
lates, in a firm and close phalanx, lent their weight to the
Government, and this led him to observe, that the Right
Rev. Prelates always did so when the Government was
arbitrary and oppressive ; but that the very instant that
a liberal Government came into power, and proposed liberal
and beneficial measures, the Right Rev. Prelates voted
against them.
The Earl of CARNARVON rose to order. It was de-
cidedly disorderly fur any Noble Lord to arraign the con-
duct and motives of other Lords because they happened to
vote contrary to the opinion and vote of him who made the
charge. There would be an end to all freedom of discus.
aion and decision if this were to be allowed.
The LORD CHANCELLOR—He had been taunted
for not taking care to keep order, but he could only give
his advice which he would now give, and valeat quantum.
To refer to any speech that had been made in the course
of a former debate was not strictly according to order, but
still it was often done, and overlooked. But to arraign
the motives of any Noble Lords in voting as they did, was
certainly contrary to all rule and order.—(Hear.) But
he did not hear that his Noble Friend imputed any sinister
or bad motives to the Right Rev. Prelates in voting as
they did, but merely stated the fact, and his opinion that
this might prove injurious to the Church Establishment
of which he was a firm and stedfast friend. It was in
that view that his Noble Friend made observations on the
conduct of the Right Rev. Prelates, and neither they nor
any Noble Lords were exempt from observation, both here
and in another place. The Right Rev. Prelates did not
want to be exempted from observation. They courted
observation. The Right Rev. Prelates had no doubt acted
with the greatest disinterestedness....-(Hear, hear.) Good
God ! to impute to the Right Rev. Prelates that they
zees' from selfish and interested motives ! No, they had
with the utmost disinterestedness acted against the present
Government.—(Loud cries of hear, hear.) They thought
of tripping up the present Government—(Hear, hear)—
they had a right to do so—(Hear)—and it could not be
imputed to them that they were actuated by selfish mo-
tives when they acted against the present Government,
and attempted to trip it up, Ltd probably thought they had
tripped it up.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord ELLENBOROUGH rose to order. The Noble
end Learned Lord had risen to give his opinion on a point
of ostler, and now he was treating them with a speech
from liituaelf.
Earl GREY—He hoped the House would allow him to
say a few words ott the point of order. He bad often oc-
casion to advert to the very great inconvenience attending
these discussions when they took place, merely on the oc-
casion of presenting petitions. It appeared to him that
his Noble Friend, (Lord Suffield) had rather overstepped
the bounds of order ; but without giving any positive
opinion on the subject, he put it to the consideration of his
Noble Friend whether lie ought to persevere in a course
which could be attended with no advaat,ge, and was sure
to be very inconvenient. The discussion conl4 lead to no
good.
Lord SUFFIELD—If he was out of order, he was very
sorry for it. Certainly he had not come prepared to make
any observations on tke conduct of the Right Reverend
Prelates. He had not been aware of the intention of his
Noble Friend to present these petitions, nor had he been
aware of any observations which he had made on present-
ing them, but he had felt that he ought to take the oppor-
tunity of apologising to his Noble Friend. He did not
question the motives of the Right Rev. Prelates, though
he had thought that he was in perfect order in making
some observations on their vote. Their motives were, no
doubt, excellent. He bad only observed on the matter of
fact, that the Right Rev. Prelates had, for the first time,
voted against the Government, when that Government
happened to be a liberal one. He had stated the fact,
without arraigning the motives of the Right Rev. Prelates;
but if he was in any degree out of order, he begged leave
to apologise to the House.
The Bishop of LONDON was aware of the inconve-
nience of entering upon these discussions, on occasion of
presenting petitions ; and be was averse to prolonging this
discussion. But there was one expression used by the
Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack, upon tehich he
was anxious to say a few words. lie had himself given
neither opinion nor vote on the subject of the important
measure lately before the House; but when the Noble and
Learned Lord said that the Bishops desired to trip up the
Government, he must say that no such thought had ever
entered into their minds, The Bishops had no reason to,

wish that the present Government should be tripped up,
They had no reason to complain of the present Ministers,
who had always shown a dispositio❑ to consult the best
interests of the Church ; and even the Noble and Learned
Lord himself had introduced, or promised a measure.
which was of great advantage to the Church. Setting
aside the Reform Bill, the Bishops had no reason to com-
plain of the present Ministers, and as to the vote of the
general body of the Bishops on that Bill, whatever might
be said as to the wisdom of that vote, the Prelates were
clear as to their integrity and sincerity.—(Hear.)
The Bishop of LLANDAFF—IIia own frame of mind
in regard to this Bill had been very much like that of the
Noble Earl (quere Haddington), who had pronounced a
splendid eulogium on the late Mr. Canning. He had been
most anxious to find reasons which might enable him,
consistently with his own sense of duty, to vote for the
second reading. That had been the state of his mind.
He had been anxious to vote for the second reading, but
could not find reasons to enable him to do so. He bad
been convinced that the Bill could not pass, and then the
motion for the second reading was the only one on which
they would have an opportunity of intimating their sincere
and conscientious opinion on the measure. As to the im-
putations insinuated, if not expressed, that they had voted
from interested and selfish motives, he regarded them as
idle sounds—as mere echoes of the discordant noises with
which they had been assailed on their entrance into that
House.—( Hear. )
The Bishop of EXETER—The Bishops had not op-
posed the measure because it was the measure of a liberal
Administration, but because in their consciences they
could not approve of it ; and they were ready to brave the
censure of the mob, even when urged and instigated by
those whose duty it was to restrain these ebullitions of the
mob—those who ought to uphold and maintain all the in-
stitutions of the country. And now they were to be told
that they always supported an arbitrary Govern-
ment, but voted against the Government when it
acted on free principles, and introduced liberal mea-
sures. He defied any of the accusers of the Bishops
to show a single instance in which they had voted
from interested and selfish motives, although they had
been outrageously insulted by a person holding the highest
station in office ! If he was wrong in being so warm, he
trusted that the occasion would be some apology for him.
A trumpery petition was presented, and that occasion was
taken to hold out that the Clergy, who professed to he
averse to all change, where the greatest disturbers of exist-
ing rights and institutions, and were spoken of with sar-
casm and insult, as being interested and selfish, and en-
gaged in a conspiracy against liberty.

Earl GREY—This was the most unfounded accusation
that he had ever heard brought forward against any Mini-
sters by any member of the Bench of Bishops.—(Hear.)
Whether the attack was personal to himself, or was meant
to apply to his Noble and Learned Friend on the Wool-
sack, he did not know ; but when the Right Reverend
Prelate said that they (the Ministry), or some of them,
had spoken of the Bench of Bishops with reprobation and
sarcasm, he would ask that Right Reverend Prelate
whether, in the few words that he had spoken, there was
anything like reprobation or sarcasm ? As to the annoy-
ances that the Right Rev. Prelates might have received
from the people, lie and his colleagues had done everything
in their power to prevent such annoyances, both as re-
garded the Right Rev. Prelates and others whose votes were
most likely to expose them to such annoyances ; and he
asked the Right Reverend Prelate whether he meant to say
that he (Earl Grey) had ever done any thing to excite
and encourage such annoyances ? The Right Rev. Pre-
late had said that a person in the highest station in office
had insulted end vilified the Church. Now be was in
what was generally considered as the highest station in
office ; and he asked the Right Rer. Prelate whether he
alluded to him or to his Noble and Learned Friend on the
Woolsack ? But to whichever of them the Right Rev.
Prelate alluded, sure he was that to neither of them could
the accusation be applied with justice or truth.—(Loud
cheers.) But, not content with this, the Right Rev. Pre-
late, with a warmth which little became the garb that be
wore, had been so grossly unjust as to accuse them of being
exciters and instigators of a mob to vilify and insult the
Right Rev. Prelates.—(Hear, hear.) To that he could
only reply, that he repelled the imputation with the
utmost contempt and indignation. There was not a
syllable of truth in it—(Hear, hear)—and be could de-
scribe it in no other terms than as the foulest calumny.
If he could be capable of exciting and instigating a mob,
there were no terms of reprobation with which he would
nut deserve to bc visited. But he repeated, that there was
no truth in the imputation, nor shadow or colour of truth.
He denied the charge. He bad done nothing but what he
was justified and bound to do in the discharge of his duty
in that House. Instead of exciting and encouragiug
a mob against the Right Reverend Prelates, and
any other Lords who bad voted against the measure,
he had exerted all the powers of Government to
protect them, however hostile to him their vote might be.
That vote they had a right to give if they chose it, and he
never meant to question that right. He therefore, called
on the Right Rev. Prelate to state the evidence on which
he rested so foul an imputation. In all his observations
he had shown the greatest respect for the Right Reverend
Prelates, and was a firm friend to the Established Church
of England ; and lie still respected the Right Rev. Pre-
lates as a body, notwithstanding the most improper speech
and the foul aspersions of the Right Rev. Prelate who
spoke last.—(Loud cheering.)
The Bishop of EXETER—He was ready, on being thus
called upon, to produce the evidence on which he rested his
assertions. He wished to premise, however, that he im-
puted no improper motives to the Noble Earl, however he
might disapprove of his language. It might be irregular
to refer to what took place on a former debate ; but when
thus called upon, he might be allowed to produce his proof.
On the first night of the debate on the Reform Bill, the
Noble Earl was pleased to call on the Bishops seriously to
consider what would be their condition in the estimation
of the country in case they voted against the measure. The
Noble Earl had put this in such a way as if he meant to
induce the Bishops to vote for the measure, from a
dread of the odium which they would encounter in case
they voted against it. This, whatever might be the
Noble Earl's intent, was to call on them by a menace, to
vote for the Bill, and it had a tendency to excite the
people against the Bench of Bishops. The Noble Earl
had called upon them under a threat to vote for the mea-
sure, and he had assumed the character of a prophet, and
called upin them to set their House in order. The Noble
Earl did not, indeed, conclude the sentence. That he had
left for themselves to do. But, at the same time, the mean-
ing was clear that destruction to the House was threatened.
The Noble Earl had also reminded them that certain im-
portant questions were under consideration, of which the
decision might be favourable or unfavourable as the vote
might be. What were these questions, and where were
they under consideration ? Was it before the Members
of the Government, or was it in Parliament that they were
under consideration ? Did the Noble Earl mean that
schemes of plunder were in agitation, which might be
affected by the conduct of the Bishops ? Whatever was
meant, they had not supposed their conduct to be affected
by such threats, but bad voted as their conscienees and
sense of duty bad dictated. What he said was, that
the language of the Noble Earl had a tendency
to expose the Bishops to odium in the eyes of the
people, and to instigate the people against them ; and this
was the echo of what others had suggested, for the very
same language was held by the public Journals, which
had assailed the I3ishops because. they had done their duty.---
(Hear, hear.) The Bishops, at the time of the Revolu-
tion, had opposed an arbitrary Government, when they
found themselves called upon to act in self-defence. This
was the first time since the Revolution that the Bench of
Bishops, as a body, opposed a great measure of Govern-
ment; and yet they were threatened and menaced for hay.
ing done so iFs compliance with their own sense of duty.
Earl GREY—If any part of his speech on the first
night of the debate on the Reform Bill had given offence
to the Right Rev. Prelate, he ought to have commented on
it 4t- the time, and then he would have answered. But
the Right Rev. Prelate's proof corresponded but very
little with his assertions, for the Right Rev. Prelate had
said, that Ministers had encouraged and instigated the
mob to annoy them.
The Bishop of EXETER—No, he bad not used such
an expression. He did not recollect that he had said so.
Earl GREY—Ht i certainly did understand that the
Right Rev. Prelate had said, that the Ministers, or some
of tlieni, had encouraged and excited a mob against them.
But certainly thp. Right Rev. Prelate did say, that they
had assailed the Bishops in the language of outrage and
insult, and how did he- make out this by proof? The
Right Rev. Prelate had said, that he had on the first day
of the debate on the Reform Bill addressed them in a tone
of menace. He bad certainly addressed them in a tone of
warning, but not of menace. He had put it to them as
he had put it to other Noble Lords, to consider the conse-
quences of opposing a measure, upon the passing of which
the public mind was so much bent, not meaning to ca 'l on
them to surrender their consciences, or to vote ally other-
wise than as their sense of duty prescribed. Ile did put
it to the Right Reverend Bench to look at the state of the
country carefully, and to consider well before they decided
how they should vote; but this he bad done, not in the
insult
language of and outrage, but in terms of the greatest
respect, and as a decided friend of the Church. He abso-
lutely could not acnceive what, the Right Rev. Prelate
meant when he said that he had addressed them in the

language of insult. He had put it to them whether they
ought not to vote for a great measure of Reform ; and
had expressed his joy at the circumstance that sonic of
themselves had appreciated the times, and had introduced
measures of Reform and amendment. If the Right Rev.
Prelate had taken his objection at the time, he would the❑
have answered and explained ; but instead t.f that, the
Right Rev. Prelate had said nothing at the time, but came
down afterwards with a general charge, which was nothing
better than a calumnious aspersion, for which there was
not the slightest foundation in anything that he (Earl
Grey) had ever said or done.
The Duke of WELLINGTON—The whole of this dis-
cussion had arisen on the question whether a petition
against the payment of tithes should be laid on the table ;
and the Clergy were censured by a Noble Lord, because
they asked for that which was justly due to them. Ano-
ther Noble Lord had assailed the Bishops, because they
who had always voted for an arbitrary Government, had
now voted against a liberal one. He called on the Noble
Lord to say what he meant by an arbitrary Government.
He had been at the head of the late Government ; but he
denied that that was an arbitrary Government, and he
wished the Noble Lord to state on what fact he rested his
charge that the Government was arbitary ? As to the
charge against the Bishops, there was not a question for
the last ten months in which they had decided against the
Government, till the question as to the measure of Reform
had come to a division a few nights ago; and yet they
were accused of voting against a liberal Government, be-
cause on that one occasion they had thought proper to
judge for themselves. If they had opposed the Govern-
ment, it was of course because they thought it their duty
to do so. Nothing could be more unfair than to take every
occasion, even on presenting petitions, to throw out these
charges against so respectable a body of men as the Bench
of Bishops and the Clergy in general.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE asked whether those who
had voted against the Bill were to have protection for their
lives and their property ? He himself had been assailed
by a mob, and had applied at the office of the Home De-
partment for protection, but found no one of authority at
the office. He thought it the duty of the head of the
Department to take care that some one high i❑ office
should he always in attendance. He had then applied at
the head police office, and there had received proper pro-
tection. Bat in reality there was at present no Govern-
ment, or rather they were under the government of the
mob. He had heard of collections of persons who had
done him and others much mischief, but he only men-
tioned the circumstance for the general good.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—He was not much
inclined to trouble the House with anything personal to
himself; but as the subject had been started, he would
mention what had happened to himself. The police
I stationed about the Houses of Parliament did not
extend further up than George•street. As he was
coming down Parliament-street, at Whitehall, a mob
assailed him, and a strong fellow gave him a
violent blow on the arm, and he and others at-
tempted to pull him out of his cabriolet ; and if
they had succeeded, he believed they would have
murdered him ; but the cabriolet was driven on,
and he escaped. He thought that the persons and the
property of those who voted against the Bill ought to be
more effectually protected. All the windows of his
house, which had been spared by the mob on a former
night, had been broken by a mob last night. He was in-
different, however, about that, but unless their persons
were more effectually protected, Noble Lords would carry
arms in their pockets to protect themselves ; and if lives
were lost, the Government who did not protect them
would be answerable. For his part, he would protect
himself, if he should not be protected by Government. He
hoped Ministers would take inure precautions ; for, if the
police bad been extended up Parliament-street, to White-
hall, he would not have suffered ander the affliction of a
dastardly mob,
Lord MELBOURNE—It had been the endeavour of
Ministers to afford every practical protection to person and
property, and they had had particularly in view the pro-
tection of the persons and property of those who were
most likely to be obnoxious to the people. He deeply la-
mented the agitation which prevailed, and was very sorry
that the Noble Marquis and others had suffered by it, and
he had directed a strong body of police to be ready to af-
ford protection wherever it was wanted. But their Lord-
ships must be aware, that when very great bodies of people
had assembled and separated, there was generally a rabble
left behind who were inclined to do mischief. But it was
impossible for Ministers to guard every house in town.
He was sorry that the Noble Duke did not find any prin-
cipal officer in attendance when he called at the Office
of the Home Department ; but every arrangement had
been made by Government to afford protection, and the
Noble Duke had only to apply at the head police office to
get the requisite protection, and he had in fact found it.
But outrages on persons were still worse than outrages on
property, and he was truly sorry for the violence which
had been offered to the Noble Marquis. But here again
the observation applied, that it was impossible for Govern-
ment, at such times, to afford complete and efficient pro-
tection to all, but orders had been given to afford as much
protection as possible ; and the orders had been given in
the spirit of attending particularly to the protection of
those who were most obnoxious to the populace. But
Government could not prevent all outrage, and he deeply
lamented the one to which the Noble Marquis had bees ex-
posed. He would be one of the last in the world to en-
courage such proceedings, and had used every means in his
power to prevent them.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—He gave the
fullest credit to the Noble Lord for everything that he had
said ; but what he complained of was, that the police
force had not been extended up the whole length of Par-
liament-street : and he suggested that they should still
be extended from the entrance of the House to Whitehall.

Lord WARNCLIFFE gave great credit to the people for
the peaceable manner in which they had conducted them-
selves, which, he owned, had caused him some surprise,
considering the great excitement which was kept up by
the Press of the Metropolis. The people had not dune
anything to disgrace themselves. Indeed he was surprised
at their peaceable behaviour. If there were no persons
employing means to excite the people to treat their Lord-
ships with disrespect, he believed that they would not have
been disposed to do that in consequence of the discussion
in which their Lordships had been engaged, but would
rather think that their Lordships had done their duty, and
had given their votes out of a desire to do justice and pro-
tect the liberties of the people. The object of their Lord-
ships was to do justice, and the inhabitants of the town
would repent of the excesses they had committed in the
first heat of their disappointment.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH did not expect any disturb-
ance, and was not surprised that none had taken place.
He did not attribute the excitement of the people to their
Lordships' decision, but to the labours of the Press. If
the Ministers permitted the Press to go on exciting the
people to crime, it was impossible that crimes should not
be committed. He had no doubt that the Government
would preserve the peace of the town ; an 4 had no doubt
that under the present circumstances, the Ministers would
do their duty, which was required of them, both from
their official character, and as men of honour.

Petition laid on the table.
Mr. BERNAL and others, from the Commons, brought
up the Appropriation Act, which was read a first time.

The Earl of CARNAKVON and Lord PLUNKETT pre-
sented petitions from parishes in Galway, praying for
the elective franchise.

The LORD CHANCELLOR presented a petition,
signed by between six and seven thousand persons, from
Bradford, Yorkshire, praying for Parliamentary Reform,
and that their Lordships would pass the Reform Bill.
SELECT VESTRIES' BILL.

Viscount MELBOURNE moved the second reading of
the Select Vestries' Bill.

The Duke of WELLINGTON inquired what was the
object of the Bill' _ .

Viscount MELBOURNE stated, that it was intended
to correct the abuses which had grown up in the select
vestries of the metropolis, and of many large towns.
The Bill had been drawn up with great care and solici-
tude, and was the result of the labours of a Select Com-
mittee of the House of Connuons. He believed that with
respect to select vestries, the great body of the people
found themselves aggrieved by them, and were anxious to
get rid of them. At common law every rate-payer had a
right to be a vestry-man, and to vote at all the proceedings
of the vestry ; but as towns had increased in numbers and
wealth, it had bi en found necessary, particularly in large
p irishes, to introduce some limitation to that right. Many
local Acts for this purpose had been passed, and in general
a close system of vestries now prevailed in a great part of
the parishes of the metropolis. A great deal of discontent
existed on this account among the parishioners in many
places, and even the members of the select vestries them-
selves said that the system required amendment. The
Bill had been introduced with a view to give these parties
relief, and as both parties desired it, to take away the
cause of discontent, it seemed to be a wise course. He
hoped their Lordships would allow the Bill to be read a
second time, and referred to a Committee, to see that all
its provisions were proper.
Lord SKELMERSDALE would not object to the se-
cond reading, if it were to be understood that the Bill
should go to a Committee up stairs.
The Duke of WELLINGTON objected to the Bill
that it would make a great alteration not in the general

law, but in many particular laws. The Bill was optional,
too—at least parishes might have it or not, as they liked,
and he objected to introducing such a Bill at a time when
every parish in London was in a state of excitement. He
wished the Bill confined to such parishes as bad no Local
Act, or that Mr. Sturges Bourne's Act should be ex-
tended to all parishes.
Viscount MELBOURNE explained.
Lord KING admitted that at present the excitement in
London was considerable, but it would be much greater if
the Bill were thrown out. The Bill was demanded by a
great body of people, who were much discontented with
parish management ; and the only way to allay this ex-
citement was to pass the Bill. It was not necessary to
send the Bill to a Committee up stairs; nothing would be
gained by that ; and if their Lordships meant to benefit
the people, they ought to pass the Bill with speed. It
had been proposed that two-thirds of the rate-payers
should decide the question whether the Bill should be ap-
plied to any particular parish ; but for two-thirds three-
fifths had been substituted, which would prevent any
thing being done against the wishes of the majority.
The Bishop of LONDON said some measure like this
Bill was necessary, in order to place the parishes on the
same footing with the Government of the country in which
the people had to elect their representatives. A great
number of parishes, governed by local acts, were in a state
of discontent, and certainly great inconvenience would re-
sult if this Bill were not entertained. At the same time
their Lordships ought not to pass the Bill without getting
some information from the different parishes, which would
be affected by its provisions. He admitted that there was
a great desire for the Bill to pass, but substantial justice
ought not to be sacrificed to speed. The Bill ought to be
properly considered in a Committee, for some of its provi-
sions, he believed, would require modification.
Lord DELAWARRE said a few words, after which
the Bill was read a second time, and referred to a Corn •
roittee up stairs.

Lord KING presented a petition from the rate-payers
of St. Pancras in favour of the Bill.
SCOTCH LAW.

The LORD CHANCELLOR moved the Order of the
Day for the second reading of the Scotch Court of Session
Bill, with a view to postpone it till Thursday.
Lord WYNFORD was understood to say that no other
judgment than the one he had recommended their Lord-
ships to give could have been given.
The LORD CHANCELLOR was surprised that his
Noble Friend should feel that this Bill at all affected his
professional character, which he thought was not likely to
be hurt by it unless he was going to practice at the Scotch
bar. He believed that the English law, not the Scotch
law, had been the chief practice of his Noble Friend, and
he did not know that he was looking to the Scotch
Courts. He did not wish to enter into the discussion, as
the Bill was not his Bill. He had received it from his
Noble Friend, and only introduced it in his official character.
Lord WYNFORD said the judgment he had recom-
mended their Lordships to adopt was the only one which,
in the circumstances, could be adopted.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH objected to the whole course
of the proceeding. He did not think it was necessary to
bring in a Bill to correct an error of that House. He ob-
jected to having recourse to the assistance of the other
House for such a purpose. It was most expedient to bring
in the House of Commons to correct the judicial proceed-
ings of their Lordships. There was no foundation for this
Bill—no petition—no document on which they were called
upon to reconsider their judgment. If it were right to
proceed by a Bill, they ought, at least, not to go to work
hastily. They ought to take time to consider it properly.
Ile objected to the whole motion on principle ; for if their
Lordships' judgments could be thus set aside, there would
he no security whatever for property. He desired to see
their Lordships' judicial proceedings conducted with the
greatest care and caution.
The LORD CHANCELLOR explained that the Bill
was necessary, because without it there could be no re-
hearing, and it was not very expedient to reverse a
judgment without a re-hearing. The thing was not done
lightly. It was not, however, for him to state the grounds
of the proceeding, but his Noble Friend who held the
Great Seal when the circumstance occurred. He did not
wish then to enter into the discussion, as the subject
would he discussed on Thursday.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH thought it would be proper
to refer it to a Committee of Privileges.
Lord WYNFORD complained that he had not seen the
papers on which this proceeding had been founded. The
Noble and Learned I_ ord entered into a history of the
case ; and contended, that as there was a question of fact
at issue, be could do nothing but refer it to a Jury, which
he had done, though he had not said one word about a
Jury of merchants. The judgment he affirmed was right,
and the only one which their Lordships could have adopted.
He objected to calling in the other House of Parliament
to correct a clerical error of that House, when every
Court of the kingdom had the power to correct its own
clerical errors.

The LORD CHANCELLOR again represented that it
was not his case, but that of the Chief Baron, and he did
not wish to enter into it in his absence.

The order was then read, and postponed till Thursday.
EMBANKMENTS (IRELAND) BILL.

The Duke of LEINSTEB moved the second reading
of this Bill.

Lord CARBERY objected to the Bill as interfering
with private property.
The LORD CHANCELLOR expressed a wish that the
Bill might be postponed for this Session. He had already
been sitting as Counsel and as Judge for a twelvemonth,
with hardly a day's interval, and he could not go on sit-
ting beyond the present week. As it was, he must again
sit in the Court of Chancery on the 2d of November, by
which, with other arrangements, he should not have more
than ten days to spare for the recruiting of himself with
the fresh country air.
The further consideration of the Bill was then postponed
till to.morrow (this (lay.)
Their Lordships then adjourned at Half-past Seven.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, OCTOBER 11.

Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from St. Mary-
lebone and St. Pancras, praying the House to adopt some
measures to prevent the inhuman practice of bull-bait-
ing. The Hon. Member stated that Mr. Martin's Act
fur preventing cruelty to animals embraced all cattle but
bulls ; it ran thus—" ox, cow, heifer, steer, and other
cattle," and it had been held that bull► did not come
within each of those denominations. It was the object of
the petitioners to include bulls in that humane Act, and
for that purpose they prayed the interposition of that
House.

The petition was ordered to be printed.
Mr. ENVART presented a petition from the Mayor,
Bailiffs, and Burgesses of Liverpool, against the General
Registration Bill. The petitioners were of opinion that
that Bill would create great expence and much litigation.
The Hon. Member could not concur in the fears of the
petitioners, but the petition was entitled to consideration
as coming from a highly respectable quarter.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that so far from the General
Registration Bill creating expense or litigation, it would
prevent both if persons only took a proper degree of
caution.

Sir E. SUGDEN had strong fears that dangers would
attend the Bill. When the proper time arrived he would
state why in his opinion be thought the evils resulting
from the Bill would more than counterbalance the benefits.
After a few words from Mr. HUNT and Mr. CRAMPTON,
Mr. O'CONNELL said, that no civilized country on
earth but what had a general registration except England ;
in France such had been the effects of it, that property
had been raised in value five or six years' purchase by it.
Sir E. SUGDEN made a few observations relative to
the expense of the Law Commission.
Mr. CAMPBELL thought that that Commission could
be very advantageously suspended for the present. As to
the General Registry Bill, the objections to it were
produced from ignoraxce and misrepresentation; The
Corporation of Liverpool would have no cause for com-
plaint, because leases of the nature of theirs would be ex-
empted front its operation.--(Hear, hear.) He would
now give notice that be should not proceed with the
Bill any further this session, but he would bring it for-
ward again immediately on the commencetnent of the next
session.

Mr. D. W. HARVEY spoke in favour of the Bill.
After a few observations from Mr. EWA RT, Sir E.
SUGOEN, and Mr. CAMPBELL, the petition was laid on
the table.

Mr. PELHANI presented a petition from Louth, in
Lincolnshire, praying the House to take into consideration
the state of Ireland.

Mr. Crampton, Mr. Lefroy, Mr. Croker, and Sir
Edward Sugden presented petitions relative to the Gal-
way franchise.

Mr. ROBINSON took an opportunity of explaining
the reason which induced him to give his vote last night
in favour of the motion of the Noble Lord opposite. It was
supposed that all the parties who gave their votes in favour
of that motion gave their unqualified vote of confidence
in favour of the Government; he begged to say that he
gave his vote solely on the question of Reform, and in
order that the House might act with consistency, and not
recede from their own acts. He was opposed to Ministers
"port other queetiotis, but be gave hie support to them

upon the subject of Reform, because he believed it to be
essential to the welfare of the country.
Mr. BI.AKENEY addressed the House, urging the
necessity of carrying the Reform Bill into effect.
Mr. HUNT presented a petition from Joseph Wimple,
complaining of having been beaten with bludgeons by the
police, while passing quietly over Westminster-bridge.
The Hon. Member himself bore testimony to the blood-
thirsty conduct of the police on Westminster-bridge, where
this man was beaten; and as he had last night instituted
a comparison between the conduct of the police towards
the mob that accompanied him, and the mob that accom-
panied the Lord Chancellor, which last he declared was
paid, while he was attended voluntarily.
Mr. LAMB protested against the presentation of such
petitions. They could do no good, and might do harm ;
there was no intention to screen any policeman who acted
improperly, or with unnecessary violence; and if, instead
of coming to that House, which was not a tribunal to
refer cases of common assault, he had contented himself
with applying to the Commissioners, he was quite sine
that every facility would be afforded to an inquiry, and if
the man were discovered, he would be punished. He did
not deny the innocence of the petitioner ; but he contended
that the part of an innocent man having suffered in this
tumult, should be a warning to the Hon. Member how he
collected mobs. If he were correctly informed, the Hon.
Gentleman was attended by a mob of 1,000 persons ; and
this at night ; they were pursuing their way over West-
minster•bridge, with the intention of besetting the House
where the Commons were then sitting. The police had
just dispersed one mob that had assembled in Palace-yard,
and in stopping these persons, he considered the police
had acted with the most perfect propriety ; and had they
neglected to do so, they would have shamefully abandoned
their duty.
Sir R. INGLIS bore testimony to the good conduct
and forbearance of the police, and thought the House was
not a proper tribunal for a case of common assault.
Colonel TRENCH also offered his testimony to the firm-
ness, resolution, and temper of the new police. Ile was
glad to hear the opinions expressed by the Right Hon.
Gentleman, and hoped he would illustrate these opinions
by pr►.ctice in his official situation. He understood that
it was intended by a large body of men to go in procession
to the King on Wednesday. If such processions were
legal, it certainly was extremely objectionable; and if the
people were now suffered to assemble in great and organized
multitudes to shout for the King, these assemblies might
hereafter meet for a very different purpcae.
Sir R PEEL hoped the House would not encourage
the presentation of such trumpery petitions.

Sir G. WARRENDER bore testimony to the efficiency
and general good conduct of the police.
Mr. HUME inquired whether the Right Hon. Baronet
intended to persevere in the inquiry which had last session
been suggested, as to the relative expenses of the old and
new police establishments.
Sir R. PEEL should have no objection to such an in-
quiry, in order that the public might be satisfied that no
improper expenditure was encouraged.

Mr: MABERL Y concurred in what had fallen from
the Right Honourable Baronet relative to the pre-
sentation of such petitions as that under discussion,
and he hoped the Hon. Member for Preston would shew
more courtesy to the House in such matters than he was
accustomed to do.

Mr. HUNT explained, and presented a petition from
some individuals in Birmingham, relative to the sentence
passed upon Mr. Taylor for blasphemy.
Sir JAMES MACDONALD brought up the report of the
Committee of the affairs of the East India Company.
RIOTS AT DERBY.

Mr. RICE TREVOR wished to know from the Noble
Lord opposite (Althorp) whether any official intelli-
gence had reached the Government relative to the
present state of the riots going on at Derby, and whether
any effectual means had been adopted to prevent their con-
tinuance.

Lord ALTIIORP was sorry to say that official intelli-
gence had reached Government of great riots going on at
Derby, to prevent the continuance of which every step had
been taken which could be thought of.
On the motion of Lord ALTHORP, the Appropriation
Act was read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Mr. S. RICE the City of London
Fresh Water Act was read a third time, and passed.