The Sun.
London, England, 1841-06-04 00:00:00

SPAIN.

Our Madrid letters of the 26th ult. have arrived by this ex-
press. They state that the Ministers had been beaten on the
election of a Vice-President to replace General San Miguel,
appointed Minister of War. The Ministry and the Trinitarians
supported M. Cortina. The opposition proposed M. Burial.
Of 132 voters there were 79 for the latter, and only 49 for the
Ministerial candidate.
The Five per Cents. were at 27 for cash.

WATERLOO-BRIDGE COMPANY.—Yesterday
the Half-yearly Assembly of the Proprietors, was held at the
Crown and Anchor, Strand, the Rev. John Rush in the chair.
The minutes of the last meeting having been confirmed, Mr.
Powell, clerk, read the report, which stated that the toll for
the past half-year, ending the 23d February, amounts to
(1,8591. 3s. 4d., being an increase of 2851. 2s. I Id. beyond
what was received during the corresponding period of the pre-
ceding year. That increase was caused by the stoppage of
Blackfriar's-bridge. A decrease of 2021. I Id. took place on
the foot toll, which was attributed to the severity of the winter.
Since the reduction of the latter toll to a halfpenny, the dimi-
nution in the receipts was very great. From the Ist of March,
to the Ist of June, the receipts were 2,4101. 19s. 7d., being a
decrease of 281/. 13s. 6d. as compared with those
received during the same period last year for foot
tolls. For the first two months after the reduction,
the foot tolls diminishedat the rate of 41. Is. I Id. a day, and
for the last month their decrease did not exceed 17s. 60. a
day. During the 27 days that Westminster-bridge was closed
the receipts increased to 844/. 4s. 4d. Mr. Powell was elected
Clerk, vice Mr. Bridell, deceased, at the salary of 300/. a-
year ; he was also to act as surveyor. Mr. Boundman was
elected Assistant Clerk, at a salary of lOU a-year. The
expenditurecole,
pe
conded by Mr. James Bird, the Report was adopted.
to l,
Cornier to give 500/. and the latter 250/. security. On the
23d of February a dividend of 2s. 6iL was paid to the an-
nuitants. The bridge and its approaches were in a sound state.
The roe6c3eli. Opt
s.
6d.
amounted
Upon
6
to 7,2e8m2/o.t4iosn. 9d.,0f John
n
ROYAL BOTANIC SOCIETY OF LONDON.--
The Gardens of this Society were opened to the Fellows and
their friends on Wednesday, for the purpose of exhibiting the
progress of the works' now being executed in accordance to
the design of Mr. D. Burton and Mr. Marnock, which was re-
cently adopted by the Society. Many of the walks are com-
pleted. The principal one forms an extensive promenade,
which was thronged by the numerous assembly attracted to the
spot upon the occasion. The lesser walks wind among the
trees, which afford an agreeable shade, and at various inter-
vals open to beautiful views of the neighbouring hills of Hamp-
stead and Highgate. The arrangements for the several scientific
gardens are made with judgment, and prove the curator to lie
a man of experience and taste. The weather was delightful,
and the inner circle of the Regent's Park was literally crowded
with gay equipages. Her Regent's
Highness the Duchess of
Cambridge and suite, and a great nuiriber of nobility and
gentry were present, and appeared to be highly pleased with
the change rriada during the last two months in the state of the
grounds. Among the visitors were the Princess Augusta of
Cambridge ; the Turkish Ambassador and suite ; Kurreem
Khan and suite ; Mannockjee Cursetjee
; ; .r•Poreptess Obert ;
Barons Kneseback and Dudon ; Duke and Duchess of Argp ;
Duke and Don Luchivico di Lante ; Archbishop of York; Afar-
Y ; Ladies Panmure,
quis of Bristol; Earls Stanhope, Coventry, and Dartmoausthle;..
a a ndr Loake
Dashwood King,
Pearson, Fowke, Nippesley, Lushington, Campbell, Prideaux,
Countesesas Cardigan and StanhEl
e peg lordso
i Bo
Burghersh
, Castle
Imvaeinineo;c n
Bishops of
sh Durham,pccp
y
Norreys, Maclean, Hamilton, Sheffield, Burrow, Archer shee,
the Hon. Mrs. Phipps,
.Kennedy, Tolleniadie, Wyndham,
Pennant, Codsal, Effir.., Hon. Misses Hardwicke, Katilline
Ponsonby, Harriet Ponsonby, Erskine, the Hon. E. Phipps,
A. Trevor, Vernon Harcourt, Sir Olin Campbell, Archibald
Maclean, Burges Camay, Steven Hannock, George T. Staun-
ton, John Barrow, F. Fowke, J. Hamilton, Wm. Peirson,
Norres, Edward Johnson, Benjamin Hall), Jauies Clark, John
Hare; Colonels Austen, Muttlebury, cm-,„1,11
Miles, Jervis, Yavasour ; Captains R. inson,
Hamilton, Evans; 7diss bong, Dirs. Grindlay,
Joseph Gurney, Esq., Airs. Parrxatt, John

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, June 3.

Their Lordships met at Five o'Clock.
A Messenger from the House of Commons brought 'up the
Turnpike Roads Bill, and several private Bills.
The Duke of WELLINGTON presented several petitions
from places in Somerset, Norfolk, Hampshire, and other coun-
ties against any alteration in the present Corn-laws.
The Earl ofi ROSEBERYI presented several petitions from
places in Stirlingshire, praying for an alteration in the Corn-
laws. " - • - •
The Earl of LICHFIELD presented several petitions from
the borough of Great Yarmouth, in favour of the abolition of
the Corn-laws.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA presented petitions from Can-
terbury and other places in Kent against any alteration in the
Corn-laws.
The Earl of WARWICK presented 55 petitions from the
counties of Devon and Somerset, and 61 petitions from War-
wickshire, against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Lord BEAUMONT presented petitions from places in
Oxfordshire and Suffolk against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
The Earl of RIPON presented 34 petitions from places
in Essex and Kent, against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
The Earl of HARE WOOD presented a petition from York-
shire, against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
The Marquis of DOWNSHIRE presented a petition from
Buckinghamshire, against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Lord BROWNLOW presented a petition from Lincolnshire,
against any altera ion in the Corn.laws.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH presented petitions from
Somerset, Oxfordshire, and Northamptonshire, against any
alteration in the Corn-laws. Also a petition from certain in-
dividuals in Somerset, the rental of whose lands amounted to
90,0001. annually, and on which 100,0001. had been expended
in improvements. The petitioners stated that any alteration
in the Corn-laws would deprive them of a chance of remunera-
tion for the immense outlay of these sums. —( Hear, hear.)
Earl BEAUCHAMP presented petitions from North and
South Devonshire. and several places in Worcestershire, against
any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Lord KINNAIRD presented seventy-six petitions from
places in Scotland ; also fifty-eight petitions from Dundee and
its neighbourhood, one of which was signed by 8,900 persons.
He (Lord Kinnaird) had received a letter from a gentleman
who had signed that petition, in which he complained of what
he termed the smothering of discussions in that House.
Earl FITZWILLIAM presented petitions from Hastings,
Stirling. Stroud, Birmingham, Warwick, Devonport, Fife,
Devonshire, and several other places, in favour of the re-
peal of the Corn-laws.

Lord PORTMAN presented a petition from Stockton-
upon-Tees for an alteration in the import duties ; also a peti-
tion from Inverness, praying for no alteration to be made in
thy present system of Banking in Scotland; also a petition
from Staffordshire, praying for the abolition of Church-rates.
The Duke of RUTLAND presented a petition from Lei-
cester, in favour of. ,church-rates ; also a petition from
Grantham, praying thit no alteration be made in the present
Corn-laws.

Lord ASHBURTON presented several petitions from Es-
sex, against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
ARMS (IRELAND) HILL.
Lord DUNCANNON, after adverting to the conference that
had taken place between the Houses respecting the amend-
ments to this Bill, moved that their Lordships should not insist
upon their amendments.
'The Earl of CHARLEVILLE said, as the rejection of this
motion would be the loss of the Bill, and as he thought an Arms
Bill was necessary for Ireland, and that the present Bill was an
improvement upon former ones, he should not insist upon the
amendments he had proposed.
The motion was then agreed to.
VICTORIA PARK BILL. _ _

On the motion of Lord DUNCANNON, the Victoria Park
Bill passed through Committee.
Several private Bills also paved through Committee.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented petitions in favour
of the Corn-laws.

The Earl of DEVON presented similar petitions from
Blandford.

JEWS' DECLARATIONuBILL.

The Marquis of BUTE moved the second reading of the
Jews' Declaration Bill. The Noble Marquis said the object of
the Bill was to enable persons of the Jewish religion to held
offices, to which they might be elected by their fellow-citizens.
Ile would remind their Lordships that an Act had been passed
to enable Quakers and Moravians to accept office without tak-
ing the usual oaths. It was not then deemed expedient to in-
clude the Jews, but he was free to confess, that, in his opi-
nion, the case of the Jews rested upon much stronger grounds
than that of the Dissenters. He did not mean to go back to a
remote period of history; but in their own day they found
these Dissenters not only refusing Church-rates in the most
obstinate and disagreeable manner, but also refusine, tithes.
It really seemed to him that the claims of the Jews, under such
circumstances, abstractedly from all political considerations,
were much stronger than those of the Dissenters. He would
ask their Lordships what was the state of the law as it at pre-
sent stood. He appealed to any legal Lord present whether
it might not be evaded by any party who chose to do so? It
was only necessary for the party elected to any municipal office
to subscribe the declaration of the 9th Geo. IV., and the thing
was done. It was to avoid the legal quibbling which such a
state of things gave rise to, that he prayed their Lordships to
give their assent to the second reading of the Bill.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said the Noble Mar-
quis had certainly taken great care to avoid any topic of irri-
tation in his observations, and that added to the feelings of
pain with which he felt it his imperative duty to oppose the
second reading. There was one point which, it appeared to
him, the Noble Marquis was in error respecting, and that was
with regard to the insertion of the words " in the true faith
of a Christian" in the declaration to he subscribed by the
party accepting office. The Noble Marquis had stated that
there had been no violence or resistance to the law on the
part of the Jews, and to that he was ready to bear his testi-
mony ; but it was not to the character of the individual he
looked in conceding a great principle like the present. His
objection was to the religious profession of the parties, and he
could not forget that they were of a religion which
was apostate from the faith of Christ, and who held
and believed that that faith was a tissue of fraud and
imposture. He could not, therefore, give his consent to
the admission of these persons to municipal offices and
situatitsns of power and trust in this Christian country.
It their admission was sanctioned by the Government he
would say that the great principle on which they accepted
office was violated, and that the exclusively Christian character
of the country was done away with. It had been said that we
ought to be charitable towards our neighbours, and do to them
as we would be done by; but he did not think that a virtuous
species of charity which would extend indulgence to individu-
als at the expense of their duty towards their God and the
State. he Must Rey. Prelate concluded by moving that the
Bill be read a second time that day six months.
After a few words from the Marquis of BUTE; in reply,
their Lordships divided, when there appeared,

. .. .
Contents
Non-contents
Majority for the second readin..
The Bill was then read a second time, and
° _ .

The Bishop of LONDON moved fora copy •f the despatch
from the East India Company to the Governor. .General of
India, on the subject of further separating the Governor-Ge-
neral of India from the idolatrous practices carried on in that
conntry.—Ordered.
Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 3.

The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four o'Clock.

ifaltby, from the Trinity Hou;e, presented papers.
Mr. BERNAL brought up the Reports on the following
Bills :—the Exeter Small Debts Bill, Stead's Patent Wood
Paving Company, the Scottish Marine Insurance Company,
and the Abingdon Inclosure Bill.
Mr. Alderman COPELAND moved the third reading of
the Stoke-upon-Trent Small Debts Bill.
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented a petition from the parish
of St. Nicholas, Deptford, against the South Metropolitan
Gas Bill.

-
On the motion of Sir J. YARDE BULLER, the Jackson
Estate Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed.
Mr. ROUND brought up the Report of the Committee on
the Walton (Essex) Improvement Bill.
On the motion of bir T. FREMANTLE the Whaddon
Chace Inclosure Bill was read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Sir G. CLERK the Stamford Improve-
ment Bill was read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Mr. LASCELLES the Wakefield Water-
works hill was reported, and several clauses added.
On the motion of Lord J. STEWART the Ardrossan Har-
bour Bill was read a third tims and passed.

General ABERCROMBIE presented eleven petitions frOm
places inStirlings.hire, praying for the repeal of the Corn-laws.
Petitions to the same effect were presented by Mr. Childers
from three parishes in Buckingham ; by Mr. Pease, from Bar-
nard Castle, and other places in Durham, and praying for
a revision of the tariff; by Mr. Brotherton from four pa-
rishes in the county of Down ; by Mr. Marsland from
Stockport in favour of the Government measures, and pray-
ing for the revision of the commercial tariff, and four petitions
from agricultural parishes in the county of Barks, swing that
the present Corn-laws make bread dear, employment uneer.•
tain, and wages low.

Mr. W. EVANS presented several petitions from North
Derbyshire, praying for a revision of the Import Duties, and
two from South Derbyshire, praying for the repeal of the Corn-

laws ;
Mr. THORNELY presented petitions from Stafford, and
five other places, praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws.
Petitions against a repeal of the Corn-laws were pre-
sented by Mr. Roche and Mr. Pease from an agricultural
pasish in the county of Durham ; by Sir E. Wilmot, from
places in the county of Warwick ; by Sir R. Hill, from
Shropshire; by Lord G. Bentinek, from King's Lynn, and by
Sir J. Y. Buller, from 67 parishes in the county of Devon.
Mr. R. CURRIE presented 20 petitions from the metro-
politan dieti icts in favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. VILLIERS presented a petition from a place in W-ur.
cester, and petitions from St. Pancras and st":4ls‘i other dis-
tricts in the metropolis to the same pied.
Mr. WALKER presented four petitions to the same effect
from Beverley.
Mr. MUNTZ presented two petitions from Birmingham,
against the Bill for regulating buildings in large towns; also a
petition from the ward of St. Martin, in Birming-
ham, in favour of the commercial measures of the
Government ;- and petitions from a place in Warwickshire,
and the National Discussion and Mutual Improvement Society,
in Birmingham with a similar prayer ; also a petition from
a congregation of Unitarians in Birmingham, praying for the
abolition of Church-rates.
An Hox. MEMBER presented fifty-three petitions from
places in Cumberland against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Mr. STRUTT presented several petitions from places
in Derby, praying for an alteration in the Corn-laws.
Mr. HINDLEY presented twelve petitions, signed by up-
wards of 3,000 persons, from the metropolis and its neighbour-
hood, to the same effect.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE presented a petition faom Canter-
bury, in favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD presented petitions frem Birming-
ham, Stepney, St. James's, Westminster, Marylebone, and
several other places, all praying for the total abolition of the
Corn-laws.
Mr. BENETT presented thirty-five petitions from Wilt-
shire, against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Mr. CHRISTOPHER presented petitions from Stroud,
Gloucestershire, and Buckinghamshire, to the same effect.
Mr. VILLIERS presented thirteen petitions from thirteen
different parishes in the county of Buckingham, signed chiefly
jay labourers ; also one from Walthamstow, Elpsom, Lei ton,
Spitallieldl, St. Pancras, and Whiteehapel i and nine other
petitions from different districts in London, al praying for the
total repeal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. HECTOR presented a petition in favour of the repeal
of the Corn-laws.
Sir M. WOOD presented a petition from a, congrentiop of
Dissenters in Fetter-lane, against Church-rates.
Mr: C. ROUND piesentecla petition from a place in Essex,
praying for Church Extension.
Mr. W. PUNCOMBE presented a petition from a place in
Yorkshire, against any alteration iii the Corn-laws.
mr. riptigES present 4 a petition from a place in x„„.
miring for an Rlteratign in the •Corn.lawa : Si..- . ..
i''' - ''' i • fan gteation in th- ''
im le 1.0. _-X -... several peti-
.... ,orn-laws.
• •
1 Mr. tiAIN t S presented a petition from a place in the West
Riding:of Yorkshire against Church Extension.
Air, T. Dimiccolp,E presented a petition from Middlesex,
.i9,„ed by 1,606 persons, iii favour of the Government measures
'""

. •
for the reduction of duty on timber, sugar, and corn; also a
petition from Abingdon, praying that all restrictions on the
importation of necessary articles of consumption be removed ;
also petitions in favour of the liberation of all political pri-
soners, and a petition in favour of the Carter.
Colonel SAL WEY presented a petition from Wellington
prying for the abolition of the Corn-laws.

Mr.''BAILEY presented fifteen petitions from the county
of Hereford against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Sir H. PARNELL presented a petition in favour o; the re-
peal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. GILBERT HEATHCOTE presented a petition from
Lincolnshire, against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Mr. H. ELLIS presented several petitions from Lancashire
against the existing Corn-laws, one of which the Hon. Mem-
ber said was signed by the largest landowner in the county.
Mr. HUME presented four petitions from Bucks in favour
of the repeal of the Corn-laws; a petition, signed by tvw
hundred and sixty-nine persons, from Johnshaven, in Kin-
cardineshire. Several similar petitions from Ireland,
Also a petition from Sudbury, Suffolk, against any restric-
tion on free trade ; also a similar petition from Richmond,
Yorkshire; and several from Scotland ; also twelve petitions
from different pari:hes in Devonshire, praying for the repeal
of the Corn-laws.

Lord ELIOT presented ten petitions from the county of
Cornwall against any alteration in the existing Corn-laws.
Mr. PENDARVES presented a petition from Camelford
in favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented 15 petitions from places in the
neighbourhood of the metropolis, in favour of the repeal of the
Corn-laws ; also one from Colchester to the same effect.
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT presented apetition from Wilt-
shire, against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Sir HUSSEY VIVIAN presented a petition from Fal-
mouth, in favour of an alteration in the Corn-laws.
Sir W. FOLLETT presented a petition from the neighbour-
hood of Exeter against any alteration in the Corn-laws : also
one from the Victoria Theatre, praying for the abolition of the
tolls on the metropolitan bridges.
Mr. EDWARD ELLICE presented a petition from Nun-
eaton, signed by 1,460 persons, praying for a total repeal of the
Corn-laws.

Mr. R. STEWART presented similar petitions from various
pal is of Scotland._

Mr. COMPTON presented a petition from Hampshire
against any repeal of the Corn laws, and praying the House to
address her Majesty to dismiss her present Ministers.
On the motion of Mr. WOODHOUSE several returns were
ordered with respect to the price of Foreign and English corn.
BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS.
Mr. GODSON moved that the petition of Edward P. Coxe,
presented the second of June, should be printed with the votes.
Mr. 'f. DUNCOMBE did not rise to oppose the motion,
but these charges ought not to be made against, or any in-
quiry into the practice of bribery confined to, one party ; he
therefore moved that the petition of Samuel Doubleday, pre-
sented by him yesterday, be also printed with the Votes.—
(Cries of " No, no," and'. Order.")
The SPEAKER said no notice of the motion had been given
by the Hon. Member for Finsbury. He was proceeding to
put the motion when
Mr. DUNCOMBE said both petitions related to the same
subject, and ought to go together. He, therefore, moved that
the debate be adjourned till to-morrow.—( Cries of " No, no.")
On the understanding that his motion would not be opposed to-
morrow he would withdraw his motion.
The original motion was then agreed to.
Mr. DUN CONIBE then gave notice of his motion for to-
morrow.

LORD WA LDEGRAVE.
Mr. LEADER, before the debate was resumed, wished to
say a few words with respect to a misstatement which had ap-
peared in the papers of last week, and in consequence of which
two persons considered themselves aggrieved. If the misre-
presentation merely affected himself he should not have thought
it necessary to offer any explanation. He had received last
night a letter from Mr. Chapman, the Marshall of the Queen's
Bench Prison, and also a letter from Lord Waliegrave, who
was confined in the prison, stating that they had seen a
report of a speech of his (91r. Leader's) in which
he had said that Lord Waldegrave and Captain Duff
were allowed to be outside the walls, and received indulgence
which other prisoners were not allowed. That, he believed, was
the substance of the letter, but he (Mr. Leader) had not said
that they were outside the walls, but in the out ward of the
Queen's Bench prison. He made that statement in justice to
the character of the marshal of the Queen's Bench, who con-
sidered it injurious to him to have it stated that he allowed an
indulgence to those persons which he did not extend to other
prisoners.

WANT OF CONFIDENCE IN MINISTERS.
ADJOURNED DEBATE.
The Order of the Lay for resuming the adjourned debate
having been read,
Mr. COLQUHOUN said he was sorry he did not see the
Hon. Member for Lincolnshire in his place, for after the phials
of wrath which he had poured out upon his Right Honours
able Friend, it was impossible that he should not advert
to his extraordinary speech. Extraordinary it appeared
to him under all the circumstances, but more ex-
traordinary still since he had come into that House, an
Hon. Friend having put into his hand a record of the votes
given by that Hon. Member whilst he occupied a Tory no-
mination borough.— ( Hear, hear.) He found this Hon. Gen-
tleman, so eloquent on the subject of Ireland, voting
again and again against the Catholic claims, and the
only speech of this tionourable Gentleman, who could not
bear to tear himself from the side of the Reformers—the
only speech of the Hon. Member for Lincolnshire which he
found recorded was a speech on the 28th of ,February, 1822, in
which he denounced with the utmost contempt the measure of
Parliamentary Reform. Then this Hon. Gentleman said to
his Right Hon. Friend, " You have been false to
party, but true to principle." Yes, it was true
that there were men who did abandon the emoluments
of place, and the connections which grew out of it, when a high
and imperious principle demanded the sacrifice. He would
ask the Hon. Gentleman what he thought of those who, on a
very vital question, proved true to party—and a party to which
they had very recently attached themselves—but false to their
principles? The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for
the Tower Hamlets, in that earnest and eloquent speech
which he delivered last night, had said that party connections
were of the greatest value in order to carry great principles.
But what should they say of those Hon. Members who
when the most valuable principles were, by their own confes-
sion, assailed by the Government, st ill continued their support
The Hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr. Handley) was very ttnx,
ious on the subject of the Corn-laws. He (Mr. C.) could
not enter into the Hon. Gentleman's fears upon the question.
He did not think the revision of the Corn-laws was at all
unadvisable ; but he was surprised when the Hon. Gentleman
declared that, according to the great principles of his pelitical
creed, he would support the Government on a motinn ot vote of
confidence in the Government. The Hgq. Member for Lincoln
said last night that he put himself forward as the representatiy4
of the heavy agricultural party of the county uf Lin-
coin,
He (31r. C.) did not know whether the Hon. Gen-
tleman was qualified to be such, but it did strike him that he
was better qualified to serve in a squadron which some
long time ago was called by a very curious name, the
squadrones volantes who figured in the Scotch Parliament
at the time of the Union. They were at the same time friends
of both parties giving their votes on an emergency when
the balance of parties required it—giving their votes
sometimes to one party and sometimes to anothOr, securing
the confidence of neither ; welcomed by both when they came
to them, but trusted by none, and at last when the emer-
gency had passed away which made the assistance looked for
distrusted by all, condemned by the public, and repudiated by
both parties. He (Mr. Colquhoun) did not see the Jedge-Advo-
cate in his place. He turned to his speech with great satisfaction
because it was a speech characterised by honesty of intention,.
and by great ability ; but he (Mr. C.) confessed that bis
Right Hon. Friend had put forward some questions which
rather surprised him. When his Right Honourable Friend
said he wanted to know what were the grotssids
upon which the Conservative side of the house
sought for the public confidence—what measures they had
brought forward which seemed deserving of such confidence—
when his Right Honourable Friend put forward such
questions, he (Mr. Colquhoun), was indeed surprised.—
( Hear.) He thought it a most extraordinary questions
to put to an Opposition, and if the Right Hon. Gentleman,would read the annals of Parliamentary warfare, lie would
find that it was not the duty of the Opposition to tell
on what grounds they claimed public confie,ence. But he
(Mr. Colquhoun) would briefly refer to sortie of the measures
which had been passed through the instrumentality of the Oppo-
eition side of the House. N 1 hen the Jamaica Bill was brought
forward, was it not the Right Hun. Baronet the Member
for Tamworth who had concocted it? Was not the deficient
Canada Bill, was not the Electors Committee Bill, was not
the Irish Tithe Bisl, was not the Irish Municipal Bill—
( Hear, hear, from Mr. O'Connell )—passed through
the instrumentality of the Right Honourable Baronet ?
He confessed that one proposition laid down by his Right Hon.
Friend surprised him. He said that the proposition which
they maintained was, that a Government unable to proceed with
measures which they deemed important for the public interest
should resign upon the first defeat. He (Mr. Colquhoun) looked
across the House, for he thought he must find there a Govern.
merit just entered upon office, but instead of that he found
a Government that had been in office six years, and had
brought forward measures on which the House had ex-
pressed their opinion, yet they were told they were un-
able to pronounce whether the Government were or
wore not worthy of the confidence of that House.
But the next proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman was,
that if they could not carry measures necessary for the public
service, it was their duty to resign or dissolve. If that was
true in 1841 it was true also in preceding years, Why then did
not the Government act uon it in 1838, when a
great measure affecting the Irish Church, was negatived?
IVhy did they not act upon it in 1839, when they were
defqlied
on their Canada and Jamaica measures? v
did they
not
act upon it in 1840, when they were tyre •.c
.Why
did they not, on these
on most important questions ? times soundly beaten
offices, or appealw to the country ?
occasions, resign thei,r
7..0b1e Lord opposite said this as ee:al case—
Oh but the
it s;S",-,s a special case of finance—and he (Mr.
Colquhoun)Rillt Hon
' afraid if it had not been for the motion of the was
Baronet that special case would never have been . made..
Had it not been for that her Majesty's present Ministers
would have tamely submitted to the beating they had
received, as they had hitherto done. His Right
dt
ivoone, a te,an talked 1 k ed
stated ve rytbaltoudtblyey laston
How; ble
iFlirgibentd,
aboutthe Jaud
gdeissoAlu
that side of the House were prepared for a dissolution.
It was true that on that side of the House they had dared
her Majesty's present Government to a dissolution, but until the
present time they had feared to meet the people. The Right
lion. Baronet, the President of the Board of Control,
had referred to the precedent of Mr. Pitt. He (Mr.
Colquhoun) could recollect the time when the ex-Member for
Westminster would have denounced Mr. Pitt. But
now, such was the nakedness of his argument, that
he was obliged to refer to Mr. Pitt's words. He (Mr. Col-
ouhoun) would now allude to the statements of the man
Of very different principles to Mr. Pitt —he alluded
to Mr.. Fox. Atter quoting from the speech of
Mr. Fox in 1784, he begged to ask whether upon the show-
ing of Mr. Fox the present Ministers were justified in keeping
their places ever since 1838, from which time they had
been unable to' pass any one opposed measure.
;He would ask them whether they considered such
tenacity to office was consistent with their duty—if they could
not conduct the business of the country in that House it was
their duty to. appeal to the people, either by a dissolution, or
in some other manner. But in all those references to the times
and conduct of Mr. Pitt, it is to be remembered his situation was
very different from that of her Majesty's Government. He was
. he
possessed of the undoubted confidence of the C
helievedhe had that of the people, and -in that belie
1.4. as
fully justified, for whenever a general electisin took place,
he was supported by a large majority.
11°'7(Lad the Ministers
possessed—did they believe they possessed the confidence
of the people since the year 1838 ?No—in defiance pg
the well-known opinions of the people out of doers
and in the face of those in that House, whose confidesace they
did not possess, they maintained their places. He would
askcould th I the
ey u Ice ask in what more dangerous position
v maintained °Meek t A
Crown ?—( Cheers. )kieb„ Jowls ..oe power
of carrying a single measure w" ..ley deemed essential for
the welfare of. the Now, although he was well
.....untry. ow,
aviary the people
was not to be
the loyalty of
contended
shaken —that it was indomitable, still he
the Crown in a most
that they were placing
d most difficult position.—(Cheers.)
The Right
dangerous an
Hon. Baronet the President of the Board of Control had been
the Member for Tam-
worth,•with the Right Hon. Baronet
indignant e
called the Government au oscillat-
because he had
ing one; and be said was it an oscillating
Government,

EVENZNG EDIT

ON,

which had carried so rnanynneastarea, which he enemmetted?
The policy pursued he the Government was, that of throwing
themselves now to the right and then to the left, in
order to adjust the balance of power. That was
their only course, under the very skilful guidance
of the Noble Lord. The Government, Sor instance,
appealed at ine time to the sympathies of such Men es
the Himourable Member for Shrewsbury and ethere, sincere
friends of this Church, and at another time to Gentlemen such
as the Hon. Member for Lambeth and others, who advocated the
voluntary system. Now how, he woeld ask, could any•stee4hie
forward Ministry continua te follow up such a lineof pollee? ie
1836 the Noble Lord opposite supported some Most 'eniellent
Church and Conservative measures-, and the Noble Lord then
opposed the motion for expelling the Bishop* froth the House
of Lords. A similar course was pursued in 1837 and 1838. In
1839, however, the scheme of nanonal education was brought
forward for the purpose of redressing the balance.
It was so, too, on subjects of general polity.
In 1836 the Canada question was deferred, from an
apprehension of displeasing the extreme Liberal party;
but in 1638 certain measures mete adopted in
.regard
to Canada, which led to a defection in tee Minenerial
ranks. hi 1339, however, when the Government, who had
been defeated on the Jamaica question, again rent nod to pnwee,
they thought it peeper to take some step for the pur-
poe of satisteirtg the extreme party, tint tee Ballot
was aceord nely made an open question.—( Hear, hear.)
That sa stern of compromise went on. In 1840, precisely the
same system was pursued. There was a declaration, by the
Hon. thidersSect teary of State, of attachment to the
Scotch Church, which was re-echoed by the Lord Advocate ;
hut when a proposition was brought forward to support the
Church, down came the voluntary princie!e men and
the Dissenters, declaring that if such a measure was
prencsed they a ould withdraw their support from
the Government—( Hear) and thus everything was
obliged to yie d to the system of compromise.
How had it affected their finances? The same sys-
tem had obliged them to pass the Penny-Ponaee,
a good measure in itself, but brought forward at a time wan
they were in circumstances of great difficulty, there was no
justification for it. The Hon. and Learned Member for
Reading had said that it was not material to the question
in what state the finances of the country were left in the hands
of the Government. Now, he thought the, most ma-
terial to the consideration of the question of whether
the Government possess the confidence of that House. If they re.
ceived the finances in a flourishing condition, and left a bankrupt
Exchequer,—if they had a surplus of a million in le3G, and
ended with a surplus expenditure in, he hoped, their last
year of office, of 1.800,000/., did not this justify a vote
of scant of confidence? There was another proceeding in which
he thought the Government was not justified. They had been
cutting and carving out commissions, with what object he
did not know. He could not tell the amount, but upwards of
800,0001. had been doled out amoung 800 Baronets, Majors in
the army, ex M.P.'s, and lawyers of six years' standing.
The eireign affairs of the country had, for the last six Settle,,
been conducted most disadvantageously for its interests.
The Stade duties, the proceedings of the Noble Lord
on the Coast of Africa, and the trade in South
America, had been the subject of complaint with Members who
rarely whispered a syllable against the Government. What
was the result of all this? Why, Commissson after Commie.
sion—a Commission in China, in Africa, in Portugal, and in,all
places where the evil resul:s of this policy had been experienced.
He confessed that on all these grounds—on this ground
of the oscillation of their general policy—on the ground
of their neglecting the trade of the country, and un the ground
that they had afforded no protection to the people, he could
not place any confidence in her Majesty's present Mi-
nisters, anti rejoiced in the present motion. It was only when
they were tumbling out of office that they were endeavouring •
to retrieve their ways. It was most desirable that they should
at last come to the conclusion of the 1-resent .state of
things, and it was time that it should he known which party
had the confidence of the House, and also of the country.
He rejoiced in the motion of the Right lion. Baronet, and
would accordingly support it.
Mr. O'CON N ELL said that there were three grounds.of
complaint which he had to make . against the
Honourable Member who had just sat down; The first was
that he had not mentioned the resolution of the Right Hon.
Baronet; the second was that he had taken a liberty with the
Gallant Member for Lincoln ; and thirdly, that he concealed.
his real antipathy to her Majesty's present Slinistern.
The Honourable Member had not reael the resolution Liocaese
there was not the confidence of the country in it;
and as to his Gallant Friend the Member for Lincoln,
he had attempted to tuke the gilt off his gingerhreed, for he had repeated almost all that he had said, but he had not touched
upon the real cause of complaint agains, the present Ministers.
He (Mr. O'Connell) was not acquainted with the public his.
tors of the Honourable Member for Lincolnshire (Alt. 'Hand-
ley). That Hon. Cent!eman had spoken in Vety serseig
terms of the turpitude of public ineon,istency, He (Mr.
O'Connell) did not know whether be was -eight
iw
his recollection; but eertsinly he thousebt there was
a certain Honourable Gentleman who was Member
for leemarneek, whose principles at the time of the Reform
Bill approached to Radicalism. —(Hcar, hear.) Yet they
found that Hon. Member now on the Opposition benches, the
ardent advocate of that party rho had been opposed to the Re-
form Bill throughout. His (Mr. O'Cnnnell's) object in rising
now was merely to protest against the present attempt of the
variegated party on the other side of the House to seize the
reins of Government. They wrro not now special pleading in,
that House on the precedents of former Administrations-
There was a great question before the House, and that was„
tempt
tt
oi s
seeeilien country
reins
sto o
fbGeogroerrnerrzidat?
wasll enleiveelirevlnedadte:es;:.taiitot:
more courage than at the present moment.
(lltupHre:wetseiaonsbntealoy,,i,ehdvolea:i;itiatgh:et
ihetoes
considered
full
eumrldeedrniaot wee:arsidigiintr
according;
oipo
the
iete ecal la imc o
daring.claims
to hold the reins of power. The Oppoltion 'nadeeteulished
that the principles of the 'present Administreticn were such as
that the country oeknt to condemn it. '1 hey had to prove
that their own -erinciples were such as that the country ought
to adopt thesn, They had beets exceedingly cautious in tell-
ing the House what they would do for the isountry if they
Caine into power. They had not been successful in impeach-
ing the present Arlm'oeistration as to any substantial portions
of their rolise. Their foreign policy the Opposition wouVe
attack he vete They could not say they would be more eve_
cease!) in the East—in Syria, India, or Chine,
ten say that the coleeles were so mismanaeng They could
that it was ne-
cessary to change the Administration it order to establi,h a
better system of things in that part Of the British empire.
On the centrary, there sees peace asee tranquillity in all the colo-
nies, and the geter, majestic experiment that was made of libe-
rating 800,0()Q human beings had succeeded, even beyond the
most satizeine hopes of the supporters of that measure. Look-
in, Ince on the period of ten years, during which the
ecuntry was governed tau anti-Tory principles, how maeynee-
ful measures were aeon to result from those princtples ? When
he contrasted the conduct of the present Government in Ire-
land with the mode in which that country bad been governed
before them, be felt a most powerful motive to call on the
country to support her Majesty's Ministers. They were the
first and only A dteinistretion that ever sought to conciliate Ire-
land by dting justice to that country. Wnat was it then that
celled upon that House to change the administration ? It was
not as he had said, their foreign policy, nor their colonial
policy, nor the tulmini,tration of affairs in England itself, nor
above all thu administration of affairs in Ireland. Fur in Eng,
land u,hat, impeachment lay against their p, -hey ? If they had
the fault at all, it seas that they had not gone far enough in the
cause of reform, that they had stayed too much the movement
towards ameliorated institutions. They had, governed the
cometee during periods of discontent, and tumult, and turbulence,
and they had, restored peace order, without resorting
so any uneunstitut.unal law, claiming any powers that 'were
not familiar to the institutions of the country. . They had been
o..nhted with the Chartists to go too far; but let the
result be at ; was not peace in that respect completely
etht,lisile3't Had not the Constitution vindiCated itself, and
that without a single attempt being made at a prosecution that
could, be :justly segmatized. 'They vindicated the law ; they
nuoished the delinquents ; they established perfect tranquil-
lity, and abolished the slightest ground for apprehension on
that subject. That was their policy in England. What was
it in Ireland? It was described in one word—doing justice t_43
that country as far as they could. He knew that those twee
would inflict injustice on that country, were the first to, sneer
at the notion of doing justice to it. He defied sole- man to
look back to the history of Ireland,-and point out a period
during which any Government had condueted itself
towards than. country as the tenesent Administration
had done. Let them show him any period in which
the interests of party were not preferred to the inte-
, rests of the people in the Government of that country.
An Hon. Member opposite had spoken of the Irish Corpora-
tion Bill ; and what was the explanation eiven upon that sub-
ject ? It was said that the Bill had been made perfect by the
Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth and his sup-
porters. He (Mr. O'Connell) wished that that should go to
Ireland. The Corporate Reform Bill made perfect ! aye, and
in that way the Administration of the Right Hon. /31;ronet
would be made perfect in Ireland ; that was to say, by depriv-
ing the Irish people of their rights and franchises. The Irish,
Corporation Bill, as brought in by the Government, resembled
the English and the Scotch Acts; but the Right Hon. Ba..
ronet and his party subsequently altered it. He brew
that the Right lion. Baronet would give them very pla'asible
explanations upon the subject, but no extent of i;:ypoerisy
could prevent the people of Ireland from seein4 The indignity.
that hail been done to them. The great euesestoris in agitation
in that House related to the administrateen of affairs in Ire-
land. The differences between both stiles of the House were
of general ; approached each
not great upon any other subject,
y
other at all ever is, but toe nearly in his opinion, on queetio_ns
It
i great and, important divisions took place betweecnant
confidence was said that the Government did not possess thea
but it was on the affairs of Ireland that the
had lost it by reason of separate elections. in isolated Istbomie
thus.‘ja.
sg etehaetremajoritywhoof thheaatrd hiHouse;m that but
did how
th kdn tri h e
tyhplost it?
elections were carried by the grossest
ofan„
from en Hon.
bribery ?—( A loud and vehement cryHe
repeated
that
tiri
Was there one man who did not know thdat
tehvaerymoosrttepaotipame
Member on the Opposition benches.)
although it might not have been confined to
diminished franel4e,lf
created by the
far. The corruption was
coupled with the Bal'Mt, then
berg had taken place to an enormous
dxtwenetiatht
ethresildaeteineleeparoities:::
the franchise' were , extended,
endea
n opposite. 'are allowed to
ficial measures
hheeirreultmt
would not extend the franehine
come into office ? They e
bribery must cease. But
uon -eGleanttcehmaence of any of, -those bens.
t char vm,
yours to annihilate it altoge
he told them their 'would be a lull.
instituted in place of tithes,
England, while in Ireland they would
v When
ne
tt
wide throe and now discoid
ding far and r:,,nout Ireland. Them,
tent Was sprea
disturbances or outrages • had been fewer agrarian since the ac.
Government to office than in any formee.
but he_also told them it would only be aWe
cession of the present
period of the history of Ireland. The consequence was that
landlords and incoming tenants, finding themselves safe, turned'
the
and wretched people out of their hovels—they were
now'
thrown- out in hundreds to die by the way side. Crime wars'
increasing; within the last fortnight two of the most atrociona
murders had been committed of any upon record—committed.'
too, sot upon the enemies of the people, but upon two men who all their lives supported Liberal principles, Mr. 1-1411 and
Mr. Butler
land. Now if Brye
annco , and they had arisen out of disputes as to
he iming, or at least the expeetatit, Adminfs-, tration were to give Ireland Orangemen for Magist.rates,.parti-
sail Sheriffs, and packed juries—nay, i, upon the Bench they
were to see bigoted enemies to the religion of the Irish people •
could it be expected that they 'would suffer it in patience and
sileteo Who was to gove,A Ireland—the Right .Hon. Ba•
rouet? Alas, Ireland knew that ho had governed her before.
His predecessor leatl brought the country to such a state of
quietude that he repealed the Insurrection Act. The Rigid,
Hon. 13aeonet had not been two years in office until he
duced the Peace Preservation Act, the Punishment of Assanits
1 Act, and another, all of which renewed the tyranny tit the
former, In that year, too (in 1814), he proclainetee himself
the champion of Orategeisur; in July of that year he rose in his
place in Parlia:;..ent and gave an account of the rise arid pro-
gresal: oratigeiim. The House might tnov,( 'now true it was
fet the last sentence of the eulogiuee. It was GE se
far from being liable to the charge brought against
them, their only fault was an exuberance of
loyalty."—(Laughter.) Was the man who said
.thg,
fit for the government of Ireland?—(Cheers.) Did be
1 member the, Report of the Orange Committee? Did he re;
wbaesredan the eltuimbea vtish"it e
member the tnianimous vote of that House condemnatory "of
body?fieyteiNti::
Qtligrnnoenlliy)
rfeamulesn
fault
lthoyaatlt
y."
man was
Oran appointed to any office whatever who was net
bigoted geman. He remembered the' time hen'an
tornee-General dared to write to a Chief Justice,sv desiring Milk'