The Sun.
London, England, 1833-07-20 00:00:00

ORANGE PROCESSIONS.

Mr. LITTLETON, in reply to a question, said he had
no objection whatever to the production of the papers
relative to the conduct of the Orange processions that had
lately taken place in the north of Ireland ; and he had no
hesitation in saying that four Roman Catholics had lost
their lives in the unfortunate affray at Cootehill. The
conduct of the Roman. Catholic population, he was bound
to say, from all the information he had received, was most
exemplary, while that of the Orangemen was provoking,
unmanly, unchristian, and unjust& dile.
Colo►:el PERCEVAL complained of the Right Hon.
Secretary's making such observations pending a judicial
inquiry, and, although an Orangeman himself, he must
say be sincerely deplored the melancholy event to which
allusion bad been made, or that the law had been violated.
It was, be thought, to be regretted that the Irish Govern-
ment bad not placed confidence in those who bad influence
with the Orangemen, and if such letters as those from Sir
W. Gossett to Dr. O'Reilly had ❑ever been written, the
great probability was, that this Iv:lntonate occurrence
would not have taken place. The Orangemen were in i-
tated and goaded on by these letters, but, although he
blamed the Government for the injudicious course they
had taken, he certainly could not defend those who had
violated the law. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by
moving for copies of the letters written by Sir W. Gossett
to Dr. O'Reilly, of Cavan, dated the 28th of June and the
6th of July last.

Mr. O'DWYER observed that one such speech as that
which they had just heard from the Right Hon. the Se-
cretary for Ireland, would do more in establishing tran-
quillity in that country than 20 Coercion Bills.
Mr. LITTLETON said that he had no objection to the
motion of the lion. and Gallant Offices.

Motion agreed to.
THE FACTORY BILL.

Captain ELLIOTT presented a petition from the
woollen-spinners of Hyde, in Roxburghshire, against the
Factory Regulation Bill.
Mr. ROBINSON expressed a wish to know the course
the Noble Lord (Althorp) meant to take with respect to
this Bill.

Lord ALTHORP, in reply, said that he could not say
further at present as to the course he should take relative
to this measure than that he entertained a strong convic-
tion that some legislative provision for the protection of
children labJuring in factories was called for.
The petition was laid upon the table.
THE PUBLIC EXPENDITURE.—SAVINGS.

Mr. S. RICE wished to call the attention of the House
to the statement which he made a night or two ago re-
specting the reductions effected by the present Government
in the expenditure of the country. He had been charged
with miscalculatio❑ by his Hon. Friend the Member for
Middlesex; but it was his Hon. Friend and not he (Mr.
Rice) who had fallen into the error. This his Hon.
Friend had subsequently discovered, and candidly and
frankly acknowledged. His Hon. Friend's explanation
had not, however, reached the public, and it might,
therefore, be imputed to him (Mr. Rice) that he had
wilfully stated a saving of upwards of three millions Lt.
have been effected in the pudic expenditure by the pre-
sent Administration when that was not the fact, and than
the saving did not exceed 100,0001. His Honourable
Friend, in his speech tl the 6th of July, had said
" that the expenditure of 1833 was within a very
,mall fraction as large as the expenditure of 1820.
The reduction in the amount of it arose entirely
from the diminished charge of the national debt.

To the year I P. 2 I, the •expeo4Tit e w 51,000,000 r: ;
w ow) C>', ,(10.000L

pwards \rent. 0 t ay tot• iiit, rt,E „ir,i:r ;
it the iffeeence In tie ,tttt '1,371t of the charge ut the
,tor this'inl v,t 8%19; withinnd 1833
a win' round numbers 2,900,0001-
:.,-very soldl fraction, the sum or"
7'‘e difference between the amount of the expenditure in
islff and 1833. The saving on the establishment of
1819 was met', in the year 1833, not more than
!00,0001." Such was his Hon. Friend's statement; bur.
how stood the fact Why, that the excwridittrre of
1833 was not within 6,059,0001. as large as the expeo-
iture of 1820. Of this sum only one half, 0r3,130,2461.
!tad arisen from the diminution of the charge of the
tattionai debt. In 1821 the gross expenditure was
:i7.601,8461., and the net expenditure 52,433,0691. Now
1833) the gross was 50,908,328/, and the net
46,000,0001. Of this 28,223,751/. went to pay the in-
:west of the debt. The difference in the account of the
debt., therefore, was 3,130,2461. ; and this, so far from
heing a small fraction of the amount of saving, differed
From that saving by 3,363,2721. If the amount were
brought up to the sth of July, the difference would be
augtnented from 6,059,0721. to 7,039,995/. It was
elear, therefore, that his Hon. Friend was wrong, and
that he (Mr. S. Rice), was correct in asserting that the
strings effected exceeded 3,000,000/. The Right Hon.
Gentleman then moved for a return of the public income
and expenditure of the year ending the sth of January,
1823, and subsequent years to 1833, showing the in-
crease or diminution that had taken place.

Mr. HUMI admitted that be had been in error. He
had en a former occasion acknowledged his mistake, but
explanation had not reached the public.

_ .
The return was ordered.
BEER LAWS.

Mr. G. LAMB gave notice that he should on Monday
wove for leave to bring in a Bill to alter and amend' the
beer laws.

CLERGY IN INDIA.

Mr. HUME moved for a return of all moneys paid by
the present Government of India towards the maintenance•
of tit.: clergy and priests of every religious persuasion in
that country, and whether Protest, Catholic, Hindoo, or
Mahommedan, during the years 1830-31.—Ordered.