The Sun.
London, England, 1832-08-08 00:00:00

LORD CHANCELLOR'S FEES.

The Report of the Committee on the above was read;
it recommended the abolition of the Lord Chancellor's
fees as Speaker of the House. and fixing his saliry at
4,0001. in such capacity. The fees to be paid into the ge-
neral fee wr] of the House.

O❑ the motion of the Duke of RICHMOND the report
was agreed to.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Mr. SADLER brought up the report of the Committee,
and the evidence taken, upon the Factories Labour Bill,
which were ordered to be printed.
The HON. MEMBER presented petitions from Ipswich
and from Pendleton, in Lancashire, in favour of the *c-
tories Labour Bill, and a petition from Leith against the
punishment of death for offences against property except
in cases of personal violence.
Mr. H. HUGHES presented a petition from 1,600 re-
tail dealers in London in favour of the better observance of
the Sabbath. The Hon. Member and Mr. Sadler sup-
ported the prayer of the petition, which was ordered to be
printed.

Sir F. BLAKE presented a petition from a Baptist De-
nomination at Berwick-on-Tweed, praying for a total and
immediate abolition of slavery. The Hon. Member ex-
pressed his hope that slavery would be early abolished,
but lie did not put himself forward as an advocate for its
immediate abolition.
Mr. BURGE said no individual that he knew of
wished to perpetuate slavery, on the contrary, all were
in favour of its abolition ; the only question was as to the
means by which it was to be accomplished in order that
the least possible injury should be done to the West India
proprietors:

The petition was ordered to be printed.
Mr. H. L. BULWER presented a numerously-signed
petition from Coventry, praying for the immediate dis-
charge of Somerville from the Sots Greys. The Hon.
Member hoped, as the Court of Inquiry had terminated,
that the evidence would be made public, and that Somer-
ville would be immediately discharged.
Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE said the proceedings before the
Court of Inquiry had been laid before the King to-day,
and as soon as his pleasure was made known, he (Sir J.
C. Hohhouse) would be happy to afford every information
upon the subject. With respect to the discharge of
Somerville, he bad made an application to the proper

quarter, for that did not depend upon him, nor was it in his
power to grant a discharge. The answer, however, which
he had received gave him reason to believe the discharge
would soon be made out, and nothing that had occurred
since had given him reason to alter that opinion.
Colonel SIBTHORPE had served for nine years in the
Scots Greys, and he knew that the officers were on all
occasions disposed to act most kindly towards the privates.
He knew from experience it was extremely painful to be
obliged to punish soldiers, but it was necessary to pre-
serve order and regularity in the army, and to hold a power
over the army which was never enforced except in cities
of absolute necessity. He deprecated all such complaints
as these, as chiefly coming from those who had but little
desire to see order and regularity in the army.
AL.. H. L. BULWER knew that many other armies
were kept in good order without corporal punishment,
and he saw no reason why our army could not be as well
regulated without flogging.
Sir C. BURRELL said it was a mistake to suppose
that no soldier after having been flogged became a good
and useful member of society. He had known many
instances to the contrary during the time he was in the
army; in one instance a drummer was flogged, and after-
wards behaved so well that he became a sergeant ; and after
leaving the army, he was elected to be governor of Lewes
house of correction.

Colonel SIBTHORPE made some observations, which
were inaudible in the gallery. . . .

Mr. H. L. BULWER wished to know whether he had
understood the Right HOH. Gentleman correctly in stating
he was not aware of anything existing to prevent the dis-
charge of this man.
Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE said if anything did exist tend-
ing to prevent the discharge, it was entirely unknown to him.
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT presented a petition from
the operatives in employ in the cotton factories of Disney,
in favour of the Factories Bill. Also a petition from a
parish in Fife, praying the House to give to Scotland a
5/. instead of a 10/. franchise.
NOTTINGHAM.

Mr. DENNISON said that it would be in the recollec-
tion of the House, that an lion. Member had presented a
petition from a prisoner in the gaol of Nottingham, com-
plaining of the conduct of the gaoler and the magistrates.
An inquiry had taken place upon the subject, the result of
which had been transmitted to the Home Department;
and he wished now to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman op-
posite (Mr. Lamb), whether those documents had received
the attention of Government, and whether, upon the pe-
rusal of them, it was not clear the charges were totally
unfounded ?

Mr. LAMB had not the least hesitation in stating that
the documents referred to by the Honourable Member
had received the attention of Government, and that the
result of the inquiry was an entire refutation of the slan-
derous charges brought forward in the House against the
magistrates and gaoler of Nottingham. The Right lion.
Gentleman regretted it was not in the power of the Go-
vernment to visit the author of those slanders with some
signal punishment, in order to prevent the recurrence of
such attacks in future.
SPEAKER'S RETIREMENT BILL.

On the motion of Mr. SPRING RICE this Bill was read
a third time. On the queseion being put by the Speaker,
that the Bill do pass, the ayes resounded from all parts of
the House.
The SPEAKER said that before the Bill left the
House, he trusted he should be permitted again to assure
it most respectfully that he entertained the highest sense of
gratitude for this distinguished mark of its liberality and
kindness.—(Hear, hear.)
On the motion of Mr. Loan, the observations of the
Speaker were ordered to be entered on the Journals of
the House.

The Special Constables (Ireland) Bill was read a third
time.

The Land Tax Commissioners' Names Bill was read a
third time and passed.
Mr. SPRING RICE moved the order of the day for
the House resolving itself into a Committee of the whole
Home on the Consolidated Fund Bi'l, for the purpose of
moving the insertion of an appropriation clause.
The House having gone into Committee,

Mr. HUME siid t)at he would avail himself of that
opportunity to state that he had concurred on many of the
votes during the present session, in order to save the
time of the House, and to allow the important business of
the session to proceed. He adverted particularly to the
Reform Bill that had just become law. He would hold
himself at liberty in a future session of Parliament, to
bring forth the whole of the Civil List. He hoped before
long to see all pensions enjoyed by persons who had not in
any way served the State abolished. In the army, also,
great reductions must be made. He was sorry Government
had not been able to reduce the number of men which they
had added to it last year. It was to the reductions
in the army and navy that the people looked for relief, and
not in the lesser reductions, though they were not to be
despised. There was one annual grant made for the yeo-
manry that he considered a stigma to the country. Surely
there was as much public spirit in this rich country as in
others where such forces served without pay. The militia
also presented great room for reductions. The expendi-
ture of the country was at present upwards of forty-five
millions, but he had no doubt but that a Reformed Parlia-
ment would in a year or two bring it under forty millions.
He was obliged to the Hon. Secretary to the Treasury for
the clearness he had already introduced into the public ac-
counts : }ant he hoped before next Sesssion that Hon. Gen-
tleman would lay such accounts before the House as would
show the real amount that was drawn from the pockets o
the people, and put an end to that system of juggle which
had been long practised, of deducting the cost of collection
from the taxes before the accounts were laid on the table.
He trusted the system at present carried on in the
Navy Yards would be greatly altered. Since the peace
upwards of 29 millions had been spent in them, which
would have bought our present amount of ships twice over.
Mr. S. RICE was obliged to the Hon. Member for the
compliments he had personally paid him, and he could
assure him and the House that the ultimate saving to the
country on the civil charges would amount to up-
wards of two hundred and fifty thousand pounds,
and that the reductions in last year amounted in all
to 2,000,0001. At to salaries, be believed that in the
last year and a half the reduction in them amounted to a
larger sum than those made in the three years before the
present Government came into office. He admitted that
a great deal ougbt still to be done, but much had been
done in so short a period. The correction which bad
been made in the public accounts was good, and would be
probably carried further.
Mr. COURTENAY differed from the Hon. Member
for Middlesex, in almost every word that l ad fallen from
him. He should have another opportunity, when he would
state his sentiments more fully.

Colonel SIBTHORPE said there was no blame to be
attached to the gentlemen who usually sat upon his side
of the House, for every proposition that came from the
other side—the Reforming side was, sure to be carried.
He quite agreed with the Hon. Member for Middlesex
that all pensions to idle people ought to be abolished, and
be fur one would support such a proposition. There were
also many of the high officers of the state whose salaries
ought to be reduced; for instance, there was the First
Lord of the Admiralty—to him he would allow 3,0001. a
year, thereby saving 2,0001., which would be made up in
patronage and honour : if the Right Hon. Baronet would
not accept that sum, he (Colonel Sibthorpe) would take
the office and transact the business for nothing.--(A laugh.)
The Hon. and Gallant Member said it appeared that Par-
liament was to be dismissed with the consolation that
there was already a deficiency of 700,0001. and the proba-
bility of a further deficiency of 400,0001. next year, but
which deficiency he in his conscience believed he could
show would be at least 2,000,000/. He, however, hoped
Ministers would be able to face the country, and prove to
him that his conjectures were wrong.
Sir J. C. HOB HOUSE said he had given notice of his
intention to introduce a clause in the Bill to permit of-
ficers on half-pay to hold at the same time civil appoint-
ments, but be would not move to introduce it except on
the report being brought up. He would, however,
state his intentions and his motives for introducing
such a measure. The Right Hon. Baronet then recapi.
tulated the several changes which had been made upon this
subject from the year 1810, and stated that for a long
period no officers on half-pay had been permitted to hold
civil appointments except as Barrack-masters or on
foreign stations. In accordance, however, with the Fi-
nance Committee's recommendation, the previous re
gulations, viz.—those of 1820, had been re•
vised. It was always considered the half pay was a
sort of retaining fee, but it by no means followed that
that was to be a rule without any and many exceptions.
It could not be a retaining fee as regarded the sick, in.

I firm, or very Aged, or those who were excepted by
the regulations of 1811, besides which, out of the im-
mense number of officers holding half-pay, it was morally
impossible that ever any large majority of them would be
called out upon service. There were about 7,000 on half-
pay. The Report of the Finance Committee of 1828 went
on figure., which certainly seemed very astounding ; for
it was said that there were four hundred and four officers
on half-pay, receiving also civil salaries, and whose
whole incomes arnounte I is 41,6821. The inference
of the Committee was (and which was in his opinion
a very erroneous one, as the results proved), iliac
the whole of that sum might be saved, and so they thought
with regard to those Naval Officers whose hail-pay and
civil salaries amounted to 33,000/, a year ; the Commit-
tee thought to save about 73,006/. a year. The result
had, in fact, proved that by allowing Naval aid
Military Officers on half-pay to hold civil
offices, the country would be the gainers. By
the returns laid before the House it appeared that the re-
commendation of the Finance Committee had
,only the
effect out of the appointment of the civil offices of 401,
officers, to remove 21 in four years, for only that number
would consent to give up their half-pay and receive civil
appointments. It had been clearly proved that officers
would not give up their half•pay on condition of re
ceiving civil salaries. Of 291 officers who were co
situated at the beginning of this year, 181 were
of the lowest scale of officers, 106 of them holding
civil appointments under 1501. a year, and none above
2501. He was of opinion that half-pay officers in certain
situations were the fittest persons to fiil offices. Taking all
those circumstances intoconsiderations, considering also that
it was hard to keep a perpetual bar against a meritorious
person, and that by giving this boon, no extra expense
would be incurred, the Right Hon. Baronet conceived he
was justified in moving his amendment. It was tit he
should state that this arrangement would not discharge
officers from the liability of military service. Th s charge
he proposed should take effect from the Ist of January next,
and that it ,hould I e recessary in each case tl have the
joint sanction of the Treasury, and the Secretary at War,
and in order that there niiztat be no misunderstanding as
to the parties so employed, it should be provided that b f e
the Ist of April iu every Session a retain should be made
to Parliament of all office., so employed.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUME had not the slightest doubt that his Right'
Han. Friend thought he was doing a service to the army,
and benefiting the country by the proposed measure.
He, however, felt sorry that he took so narrow a view of
the subject, and he must protest against the measure as an
innovation on the principles laid down by the Finnance
Committees.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Honourable Gen.
tleman had laid all the blame on the Committee of 1828.

ST J. C. HOBHOUSE said, that he had most dis-
tinctly stated that the Finance Committee had brought the
matter down to the regulation of 1820.
Mr. HUME observed, that if reduction had gone on
since then, there could be no necessity for making any al-
terations now. He must repeat tl at his Right
Honourable Friend had been acting upon a principle
quite different to that determined on by the
Finance Committee. In that Committee there
was not a dissentient voice on the impropriety of making
charges as for the army, when in fact the parties were
filling civil offices. If the proposed plan was acceded to,
all the officers of the army and navy who since they had
taken holy orders had been deprived of their half-pay rims,
be:restored.ln his opinion the measure would effect no saving
but the public accounts would become exceedingly con-
fused. He should, therefore, object to the clause being
brought:,up now.

Lord ALTHORP said that there had been a saving
to the country of 34,000/. a year, by evading
the regulation, and he did not think its adoption
at all simplified the public accounts.—(Hear, hear.)
With respect to his Hon. Friend the Member for Queen's
County, he had certainly told ilia) he was opposed to the
alteration, but he also said he would leave it on the
responsibility of Government, and would not come down
to oppose it in the House. The Hon. Gentleman had
charged his Hon. Friendwith courting popularity with the
army by bringing forward this measure, but he
ought to have known his character better by this time.
He was not a man to go out of his way to count either the
army or the public.

(LEFT SITTING.)

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, AUGUiT 7.
CHANCERY PATRONAGE BILL.
(Concluded from our Second Edition of yesterday.)

The Earl of ELDON said, that he did not object to the
Bill, although he thought that all the offices which it would
abolish were not sinecures. lie had been Lord Chancellor
for 25 years, and let it not be supposed that during that
time his attention had not been directed to what was called
the reform of the Court of Chancery. He would v, nture
to say too, on behalf of his predecessors, that from the
time when Lord Clarendon made his orders, the judg, s
who presided in the Court of Chancery had always been
anxious to improve the practice of the Court. It was not
by any extensive changes that improvement could be ef-
fected, but by orders made from time to time as circum-
stances should suggest. He trusted that the Noble and
Learned Lord would always secure to that House an op-
portunity of attentively and patiently considering any alte-
rations which he might propose. The Noble and Learned
Earl defended the Chancery Commission front the charge,
which he said had been brought against it elsewhere, of
being a most expensive Commission. He knew that none
of the Commissioners bad either received or solicited re-
muneration for their labours.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that no change in
the practice of the Court of Chancery, or any other court,
•hould ever be propounded by him without the most grave
consideration, and without obtaining, as far as human pre-
caution could go, security against rash and hasty legisla-
tion.

The blank in the Bill was then filled up with the words
" the 20th of August, 1833," and the Bill was read a
third time and passed.
The LORD CHANCELLOR.—As this Bill is now
passed, I trust that I may be indulged by b,ing allowed to
address a few words to your Lordships, which I have ab-
stained from doing until now. lam sorry to find, from
what has parsed in another house, that some observations
which I made at an early stage of this measure have given
pain—l will not say in what quarter, for I never once re-
ferred to any individual, by name or description, in a way
vhich was unparliamentary or offensive; and if I had done
so, your Lordships would have been the first to correct me.
I understand, however, that my observations have given
pain, and it is always deeply Trtin'ul to me to give pain.
1 trust I may be allowed to add, that I do net say that I
made these observations under the influence of irritation or
anger. I will not say so; but I did feel a degree of c.an tempt
and scorn for a charge which I understood to have been in-
sinuated against me, at the very moment of nay life (and I
will venture to say, at the moment of the life of any public
[llan, be he who he may, that ever eximed) when such
a charge was least merited. I felt that this charge was in-
sinuated at a moment when I was in the course of doing
what I freely admit to have been an act of some impru-
dence, it may, perhaps, be called folly,—an act which,
considering every thing, strictly speaking I had no right,
in point of ordinary prudence, to do. I felt it a little irk-
some to have insinuations thrown out against ale, as if my
conduct was sordid, and inconsistent with my principles,
at the very time when to those principles I was making a
great and substantial sacrifice. It would be folly—it
would be mere childishness, to say that I do not feel that
the sacrifice which I was then making was considerable,
hut, so help me God, I had not the slightest reluctance in
making it. I mention this circumstance as a reason why
I felt great scorn and contempt at the insinuation which
was directed against rne, and when I was esprissing my-
self, I perhaps carried my scorn and contempt further than
I ought, and applied them in some respect, or at least made
them seem to apply, to the quarter from which the charge
came, whereas I should have applied my scorn and con-
tempt to the charge itself. My nature is very abhorrent
from the charge which was made against me, and it is not
extraordinary that I should have felt scorn at it.
Adjourned.

HO m Ua n Su
fEa t
uOr
eFr
oCf OL
cNo
inSp,
aAi
ntri
no: s.rf 7'
l
s
ondon,
the silk Mr. Alderman VENABLES presented a petition from
de-
cision of the Committee en the silk trade. The Hon.
Member entered into a long detail of the grievances com-
plained of by the petitioners, which he thought well
the
worthy the attention of the House.
Mr. H. L. BULWER hoped, as Member for Coven-
try, he might be allowed to say a few words upon this
subject, which was so intimately connected with that
town. The Hon Gentleman then went into the evidence
that was given before the Committee, in order to show
that the distress among the silk-workers was much greater
now than when a much less quantity of silk was used.
Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN felt called upon to state
his views upon this subject. He held in his hand
several protests against the proceeding of th*t Conimitti e,
from which it appeared that the greatest distress existed,
Vice-President
autwithstanding the declarations of the of
the Board of Trade to the contrary. The present was not
A subject for levity of manners.
Mr. P. THOMSON denied having treated the sub-
ject with levity. The Hon. Alderman had referred to hint
by a name not usually wade use of in that lions?, and it

was in cons, quence of that be smilea, and not in respect of
the subject to which the Hon. Alderman was adverting.
Mr. Ald. WAITHM AN resumed. -With respect to the
Committee, it was quite apparent the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman had lost ground, for before it evidence had been
brought forward which distinctly proved the existence of
unequalled distress in various parts of the country as well
as at Spitalfields. But look at the unfair way in which
the Committee was named ! why, it was as well known
at first how votes would be as it was at last ; vet,
after sitting four months, after having received
upwards of 12,000 answers, it was attempted by the op-
ponents to reject the whole by bringing forward
fresh evidence, at least what was called fresh evidence,
but the parties had actually been in the Committee Room
every day of its sitting. The Hon. Member for Middlesex
attempted to get rid of the whole business, because they
could not carry their favourable plans of reducing the duty
on thrown ,ilk.

Mr. ROBINSON, when he observed the mass of evi-
dence that bad been laid upon the table, and considered
that no report had been made upon the subject, could not
help thinking that that omission was occasioned by the
Right Hon. Gentleman oppo•ite not being able to procure
a report conformalde to his own opinion.
Mr. P. THOMSON—I was most anxious that there
should he a report. and as a proof of it I have only to
state, that when the Hon. Member for Roas-slire
to adjourn the Committee, fearing that we could not get
through the evidence, I opposed the motion, in tie hope
that when the evidence was gone thrr ugh, a report would
he founded on it.

Mr. ROBINSON said it was unfortunate that the re-
port had not been made. Gentlemen generally looked at
the report, and not at the evidence, and he feared that the
great mass of useful evidence taken on this occasion would
he lost. It seemed to him that Government were depart-
;ng, from the great leading principle acted on by every
other Government of Europe—that of providing for its
working population. He could not see why so much in-
dulgence should be extended to France. The whole of her
commercial regulations were opposed to those free prin-
ciples laid down by this country, and which we vainly at-
tempted to induce her to adopt. Again, let then, look at
the conduct of the United Stares. That country, he
would assert, outstripped us as much in their legislative
measures as we outstripped them in fire arts. They pro-
ceeded with reference to their commerce, on a foundation
very different from that which we took. They had, it
was true, modified their tariff, but they still had left suffi-
cient protection (or their manufactures against foreign
competition. Dr. Bowring bad been sent to Paris for the
purpose of gaining information. Now be thought that he
was not the most eligible person to be selected, because the
bias of his opinion was very well known, and he (Dr.
Bowring) imagined that the liberal sentiments which he
heard uttered in certain circles were the sentiments of the
whole French people ; but such, assuredly, was not the
fact. He would tell the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite
that the authoritative manner in which he (Mr. Thomson)
spoke upon these subjects was not pleasing to the manu-
factoring and commercial world.
Lord PALMERSTON, after censuring the liiseuision
of evidence which was not in the hands of Members, pro-
ceeded to observe, *hat an insinuation had been thrown out
that the French Government had encouraged some esta-
blishments on their coast, for the express purpose of facili-
tating smuggling. That assertion, he was sure, was not
founded in fact. There was such a good understanding
between the two Governments, as 1, d him to believe that
of France would not sanction a deliberate violation of

the laws of this country. With respect to France and
America, if the Hon. Member (Mr. Rnbins.on) supposed
that the administrations of these countries did not partici-
pate in the liberal Ad enlightened commercial views of the
British Government, he was very much mistaken. Much
had been said about smuggling. In his mind, the true en-
couragers of smuggling in this country were those who up-
beA duties inconsi,tent with the interests of commerce,—
who, endeavouring blindly and absurdly to effect impossi-
bilities,—to prevent the introduction of foreign manufac•
titres, gave in effect a large premium to those who were
engaged in smuggling transactions.
Mr. SADLER supported the petition.
Mr. S. MACKENZIE def.tnded the Committee in the
course which it had adopted.
After a few observations from Mr. Alderman W./aril
MAN, Mr. Alderman VENABLES, and Lord D. STUART,
the petition was brought up and read, and ordered to be
printed.
Lord D. STUART presented petitions from the manu-
facturers and throwsteis of silk in Macclesfield, and from
the silk manufacturers of Spitalfields, respecting the Silk
Committee, and praying for protection tor the silk trade.
Ordered to lie nn the table, and to be printed.
_ .

Mr. BERRIES, in a low conversational tone of voice
across the table, was understood to ask the Noble Lord, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, what were the intentions of
Government with respect to the distribution of the fund
received from the French Government, for the indemniti-
catiun of British subjects for the loss of property unduly
confiscated by the French Authorities, and whether that
distribution was to be effected by a new Act of Parliament,
or by commission issued by the authority of the Crown.
Lord ALTHORP was understood to state, in reply,
that it w.is the intention of Government to tffect the dix-
tt in question, not by a new Act of Parliament,
dint by a new Commission.
Colonel EVANS presented petitions from New Sarum,
ood from Ryde, in the Ise of Wight, praying that the
House would take into its consideration the case of unfor-
tunate Poland.

Mr. HU:SIE presented a similar petition from Bridge-
water and its vicinity.

POLAND.

Colonel EVANS then rose to bring forward the reso-
lotion of which he hal given notice on this subject. That
motion merely went to assume that which was an unde
triable fact.—namely, that England had completely fulfilled
the treaty of 1815, and to deduce from that fact this con-
sequence, that under such circumstances England was en-
titled to call on any other Power which had been a party
to that treaty, to fulfil the obligations which it had thereby
contracted. lie did net think that it was possible for
hint to expect any opposition on the part of Government to
a motion 'of that description. He did not bring this mo-
tion forward, as it was his intention to do, and in stronger
terms, in the Committee on the Russo-Dutch Loan, a-
the Noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had re-
ejuested
him to introduce it in a separate and distinct
shape to the House. It was only necessary for him to de-
tail the conduct purstoal by Russia since the last subjuga-
tion and overthrow of Poland,—a conduct that exhibited
profligate violation of all engagements and of all ph dges,
however sacred,—to induce the House to agree to his mo-
tiori. After the amnesty granted to the Poles, on the re-
preaentation of the Governor of Galicia, and at the request
if Austria, the Pelee, who had fled into Galicia for
protection, •
urned to Poland on the faith of that am-
re,
'nesty. Immediately on their return an ukase was issued
by the Rwsian Government, condemning all those Poles
who had borne arms against Russia in the Polish insurrec-
tion, either to serve as privates in the Russi in army, wher-
ever Russia pleased tosend them, or to be thrown into prison.
The consequence of the promulgation of this tyrannitail
edict was, that a number of Poles dal back into Galicia
for protection. The Austrian Government, thinking that
their presence there would be productive of inconvenience,
resorted to measures, either to prevent their entrance into
Galicia, or to prevent them from remaining there. But
people of Galicia, united to them by that sympathy
whial; a proximity of territory produced, were moved on
hebalf of the unfortunate Poles. The Diet of Galicia can
tldress the Emperor of Austria through the medium of
the;; Governor, and it appears that 300 members of the
Diet of Galicia drew up a representation on this subject,
and cent it thi ough their Governor to be transmitted to
the Emperor. He did not know whether that address
had been trausmittad to the Emperor or not, hut this he
did know, that it was an authentic document,—that it
was signed by the principal persons in Galicia, resident
on the frontiers of Poland, and who must be considered
good authorities as to what had recently taken place in
Poland ; and it was a remarkable fact, that it corro-
borated all the statements made in a former debite
in that House, with regard to the atrocious conduct
of Russia towards Poland. The Hon. Mernhei here read
several extracts from the document, in proof of the cor-
rectness of his statement. He then proceeded to say, that
it was quite true, as had been eloquently said by an Hon.
and Learned Friend of his, the Member for Louth (Mr.
Shell) in a former debate on the Russo-Dutch Loan, that
" there was a time when we [night have interfered—when
an Admiral in the Baltic might have interceded with more
eloquence than a Minister at St. Petersburgh," and that
now that- Poland Laei perished, we could not avail our-
selves of her misery, " to mike an entry of her wrongs in
our fiscal ledger, to convert them into items of sordid cal-
culation, and to balance the account with Poland's best
and noblest blood." The Hon. Member then went on to
argue, that the convention of 1815, on the faith of which
the payment of the Russo-Dutch Loan was continued to
Russia, was inseparably connected with the whale of the
general treaties bent e.n the Allied Powers in 1811. and
1315 ; and that one of the stipulations of those treaties
was the preservation of the narional indeiientlence of Po-
land. He begged to ask what had been the conduct of
Russia ever since ISIS? Had it been that of a civil and
faithful ally towards this c. untry, or had it net been
directly the reverse? Immediicely alter Napoleon had
been put down, Russia at once declared that her at mies

should retain possession of Poland, and should not give it
op until she had re-established her power there, and her
doing so at the moment that the general treaty was under
consideration was, as the Noble Lord opposite knew, almost
the cause of the breaking out of a new war on that occasion.
The subsequent conduct of Russia had been one series of
unjustifiable aggressions on other nations—of territorial
aggrandizement, and of violations of national law and na-
tional faith. The war with Persia, and the subsequent
war with Turkey, were both instances of unjustifiable ag-
gression on the put of Russia in the first instance, and the
result of both those was the territorial aggrandizement of
that overgrown Power. Russia, it was well known, was
the principal moving power in preventing the establish-
ment of constitutional Governments in Naples, Piedmont,
and the other States of Italy in 1923 ; and it was equally
well known, that it was principally owing to the it floence
of Russia that France sent that unjustifiable expedition
which she despatched into Spain. Next came the case of
Poland, and it was not necessary for him to dwell upon
the atrocious conduct of Russia in that instance. The
object of his motion was to give support and strength to
those negotiations which he knew were at present being
carried on by one of our• Cabinet Ministers with Russia,
and after those few observations he should conclude by moving
the resolution of which he had given notice. The Hon.
Member then moved the following resolution :—" That in
conformity to the spirit, though contrary to the letter, of
a treaty dated 19th of May, 1815, his Majesty has agreed
to renew certain obligations to the Emperor of Russia ;
that said treaty and obligations were connected with, or
arose out of, the general treaties between the Allied Powers
of 1814 and ISIS; that therefore, in the opinion of this
House, the convention to the above effect affords his Ma—
jesty a special claim on the power profiting by it, for it
faithful interpretation of other engagements, to which
both parties may have been contracting parties, and espe-
cially with regard to that concerning Poland."
Lord PALMERSTON should feel it his duty to move,
as an amendment on his motion, the previous question.
Though he was ready to admit that there were some por-
tions of that resolution which it was impossible, as ab
,tract propositions, to deny—sucb, for instance, as that
this country, having faithfully fulfilled its engagements,
teas entitled to claim on the part of other countries the
fulfilment of theirs—yet he was not prepared to affirm
that abstract proposition, coupled as it was with other
propositions contained in this resolution, and accordingly,
without negativing it, he would, for the purpose of getting
rid of it, move the previous question. He was exceedingly
adverse to the joining, as this resolution went to do, the
fulfilment of our bounden engagements as to the Russo-
Dutch loan with the conduct of Russia towards Poland,
and he was sure that the House would thihk that he
(Lord Palmerston) should best discharge his duty by not
adverting to the observations which had been made on
that subjet in a former debate. The Hon. Member.
however, who had introduced this motion, having ad-
verted in very strong anti condemnatory terms to the
conduct pursued by Russia since the peace of 1815, he
(Lord Palmerston) felt it his duty, o❑ this occasion, to
do justice to a Power in alliance with this country,
and he should therefore trouble the House with one
or two oliservations in that point. The Hon. Mein-
her had alluded to the wars with Persia and Turkey, and
bad characterized them as one series of aggressions on the
part of Russia. Now he (Lord Palmerston) had paid
some attention to those in titers, and he felt bound to say,
that in both those cases Russia was not the aggressor, but
that Persia and Turkey had each respectively provoked
the attack made on them. He would not go into a dis-
cussion with the Hon. Member as to the influence of
Russian councils on the conduct of Austria in Italy, anti
of France in Spain ; the Hon. Member's observations on
that point were only founded on surmise. The Hon.
Member might be right, or he might be wrong, in his
surmises; but, at all events, as the question was not one
of actual fact, he (Lord Pahnersten) should not discuss it
with him. Whatever, too, might be the questio❑ that
might be raised as to right or wrong with regard to the
violation of the constitution of Poland, there could be no
doubt that the first hostile aggression was on the part of
Poland, by a hostile resistance. Those who considered
Poland aggrieved, of course maintained her unquestion-
able right of resistance on that occasion, but he ❑ow merely
stated a simp:e matter of fact—namely, that the first hos-
tile aggression was on the part of Poland. On these
grounds, he should oppose the resolution moved by the
Hon. :Member.

Sir C. WETHERELL would oppose the original mo-
tion, and vote for the amendment moved by the Noble
Lord.

Mr. 11UNIE supported the original motion, and asserted
that the conduct of Russia ever since 1515 had been but
one series of violations of those engagements which sh© bad
then entered into with the other Powers of Europe. He
denied that the aggression was made in the first instance
ou the part of Poland. Poland had been driven to des-
peration by the tyranny of Russia, and she flew to arms
for redress. The Noble Lord onght Ling ago to have
given to the House some explanation as to what had been
done by Government to make Russia fulfil her engage
meats with regard to Poland. He denied that in the war
of Russia with Persia, Persia had been the original ag-
gressor. On the contrary, be would assert that it was
the opinion of every one connected with India, that Russia
had been the aggressor in that instance ; and though Mr.
Canning, then at the brad of our Government, did not in-
terfere on behalf of an ally to whom we were bound by
treaties, it was not because he did not consider that war
an act of unjustifiable aggression on the part of Russia, but
because he did not deem it convenient for us just at that
thine to interpose in the matter. He should support the
motion of his Hen. and Gallant Friend, if he took the
sense of the House upon it.
Lord GROSVENOR. contended that the statements
made with respect to the conduct of Russia to Poland had
been much exaggerated, though the conduct of the former
towards the latter Power had been most arbitrai y. lie
differed trom the opinion expressed by the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman opposite (Sir C. Wetherell), who
thoraart that the conduct of Russia was not a subject that
ought to be discussed in this House. He could only sac,
that the debates which had taken place here had been pro-
ductive of the best effects, for, from a correspondence
which had rewired him from Poland within the last there
hys, he was enabled to say that the severity of the punish-
ment of banishment, which had been pronounced on
many of the Nobles, had been much mitigated. He, at
the same time, begged to say, that he entertained great
doubts, whether, under the treaty of Vienna, any inter-
ference by this country could be made.
Sir CHARLES FORBES supported the motion, and
contended that Persia had, in her contest with Russia,
been abandoned by this country, and left to her fate, He
lagged to be allowed this opportunity of setting himself
right with the public, with - regard to what had fareir
frosts him last evening on the discussion of the Poona,'
question, and to correct what was, he felt certain, an un-
intentional error. In the leading journal of the day, he
bad been made to say that the affair, with reference to the
case of Narroba, was a disgrace on the British army and
the Brirish name. He never had intended to cast any such
imputation upon the British army. What he had said
did nut affect the a: my, but his observation was that
which be now repeated, that it was a disgrace to the Bri-
tish name, that under a British Government such cor-
tnities had taken place
Mr. COURTENAY concurred with Vs Honourable
and Learned Frind (Sir Charles Wetherell) in supporting
the previous question, though the motion was one which
it cc as natural enou,lll the Hon. and Gallant Member
should move, and which he thought also that his Noble
Friend opposite, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, ought

- : -
to concur in.
Lord SANDON said, that under the treaty of VlC‘nna,
the breaches of which by Russia were such that all the
other Powers of Europe were bound to interfere and
combine against that Power, promises bad been made by
Russia, which she had not fulfilied. he object of this
country and of Europe was to prevent that amalgamation
of Poland with Russia, the r ff,cts of which were now
seen as well as those which would soon follow. The sub-
ject was one which not only applied to the feelings, but
was one in which it was manifest that it was the interest
of Europe to keep that great despotic power from inter-
fering with the peace of Europe, and to prevent that
collision (which he feared was fast approaching) be-
tween the despotic and democratic powers of Europe.
The conduct of the great Potentate of the North
tended in effect to declare that there should be no amelio-
ration of the condition of Europe, and at the
same time to prevent the spread of moderate and ta•
clonal improvement. With these views, he could not but
thick that the present occasion was a most fitting one fin•
the expression of the feelings of the House upo❑ this sub-
ject ; and as the House would do so without interfering
at all with the foreign policy of his Majesty's Government,
he trusted such an expression of feeling would have its
effect with that Grvernment. He had never expected
that when the condition of Poland was the subject for the
discussion or the evening, that even the name of Russia
would be mentioned; tor, looking at the general conduct
of that country, it never could be said she had kept faith
with Poland. Hiving neglected to do this, it could not
be expected that she would keep faith with other nations.
He was not altogether prepared to support the motion of
the Hon. and Gallant Member, although the Ilcuse had
agr, el to the Russian-Dutch loan, and he would therefore
recommend the Hon. Gentleiean riot to press this question
it, a division, and he hoped that from the feeling mani-

feted already in the House, his Majesty's 'Ministers would
see, that on the subject the feeling of Parliament and of
the country was not asleep, but that it was gathering
strength every day, and that the flood of public:, opinion
would burst forth, and perhaps become more inconvenient
to the Government of this country.
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT, in supporting the motion
of his Hon. and Gallant Friend, felt some difficulty in ex-
pressing his own feelings upon the subject ; for though he
was anxious to follow the suggestion of the Noble Lord
who bad just sat down, that no personal attack should be
made upon the great Power of the North, yet it was diffi-
cult to keep the words within that line so as fully to con-
vey the meaning that was intended. There was not to be
found, nor could there be, one honest man in the civilised
world who would hesitate for one instant to deprecate the
conduct of Russia towards Poland. It had been and still
was most odious, tyrannical, and detestable.—(Hear.)
How far it was connected with the subject before the
House, he would not now stop to inquic e ; but it was im-
possible not to deprecate the crimes committed and new
committing, after the hopes held out to the gallant Poles
before Warsaw and on its surrender, that some relief
should he afforded to them, from which period there had
been one continued series of tyranny exercised towards
them, such as history did not record any equal. It was
true, that in early periods there were some instances where
great conquerors had adopted abominable practices to ex-
terminate a nation ; but in the nineteenth century, it
could scarcely he believed that such a line or course of
conduct could be pursued by one nation towards another,
if the nation and the present age had not seen the attempt
and the object perfected before their own eyes in the very
case of the conduct of Russia to the Poles.—(Hear.) The
Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite (Sir Charles We-
therell) had had the hardihood to assert that the Poles
had been the first aggressors. In that respect he (Sir F.
Burdett) believed that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
stands singly and alone in this House and in the world, i❑
the maintenance of such an opinion.
Sir C. WETHERELL, across the table, was under-
stood to observe, that what he had said was, that the con-
duct of Russia had not been in breach of any treaty.
Sir F. BURDETT could not but admire the self-
conttol of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman in avoiding
the expression of any such opinion, and as the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman had not done so, it led to the suppo-
sition that he entertained a contrary opinion. It htd been
said that there had been no violation of treaties, hut he
(Sir F. Burdett) felt ashamed of the conduct of England
and the other Powers, with reference to the conduct of
Russia to the Polish nation, when there had been a

gu ar rut. e to preserve the Constitution, such as it was,
of Poland. It was, moreover, the interest of all Europe
to have maintained Poland in that situation which had
been provided in the treaty of Vienna. He could not but
maintain, that if treaties had been scrupulously preserved,
as they ought to have been, and if Prussia had been as
neutral to Russia as it had been to Poland, that eves, not-
withstanding the pusillanimity of Europe, Poland would
have kept the situation which she had heretofore held.—
By that pusillanimity the Poles bad lost every thing but
their character, their honour, and their glory.—(Hear.)
Such bad been the sympathy of Europe towards Poland.
—" stint hie edam sua priemia laudi.
Sunt lachrymx rerurn et meotem mortalia tangunt."
Than such a course as this, it would be better to revert to
the s)stein in the days of Elizabeth, when " 'twas Eng-
land's task to watch o'er Europe's state," and " to listen
to afflicted neighbours' prayers," and by such a course
would " all the northern worlds be hushed i❑ peace."
He believed that by a❑ interference of this country nu war
would have ensued, but even if such had been the case,
this country could not have been engaged in a more tri-
umphant struggle. Russia owed the power which she had
assumed rather to chicanery, treachery, and cowardice, as
well as to the pusillanimity of the nations of Europe, who
had looked indifferently Olson pissing events, than to any
power or capability which she herself possessed.—( Hear. )
When this country haul discharged her part of the contract,
it could not be thought too much to expect that Russia
would perform her portion, of which Poland formed the
greatest part. England had fulfilled her portion of the
treaty of Vienna as a subordinate object to support die
balance of power in Europe, and he could not but think
that the maintenance of that balance of power would have
been better secured by establishing the independence of Po-
land than by the establishment of that of Belgium, of which
so much had been said of late in this House. It really
seemed to bitn that it had been a ruse on the part of Russia
to divert the attention of England from that to whiehi
should have been directed, arid from the object which this
country ought to have had in view. The ruse had succeeded,
and with that success he thought that Russia had made
England the laughing-stock of Europe. He did think it
was necessary that Russia should be called upon to fulfil
the treaty, and also that Poland had a right to look for the
support of other nations to maintain her in that state of in.
dependence in which she now was not, but in Which she
ought to have bee❑ maintained. Poland had not, how.
ever, been preserved in that state in which Lord Castle-
reagh, who was not a politician to be swayed by chivalrous
feeling, but with the cold eye of an English statesman,
had fixed for it in the treaty of 1815. Such a station
in which Poland had been left in 1815 could not be de-
stroyed without the shame and disgrace of the rest of
Europe. When it was seen that the liberties of Germany,
nay, of the whole world, were give❑ up as it were to the
unholly alliance of great despotic powers, which it was
the interest of Europe to prevent, it was the duty of the
Government to be upon the alert in the maintenance of
the balance of power. This country was called upon to
assert that character in the world which she had acquired,
and to maintain the liberties of the world. But could it
be contended by any person, that it had been either wise
or politic to allow Austria to take possession awl to make
a province of that country—ltaly, filled by the arts, by
talents,—after debasing it by spoliation awl by plunder.
This was a situation in which England ought never to
have allowed Italy to have been placed ; nor should she
have suffered that infr iction of all those great prin-
ciples which govern mankind in the case of Spain. Italy,
however, was undergoing the fate of Proinetheus,—was
chained to a barren rock, with the Austrian vulture feed-
ing upon its vitals. It was difficult to keep up a good
feeling between the Governments of other countries, but
England and France ought never to have permitted this
state of things, and even though Russia was a great power,
• this country ought not to forget, that considering her
eistern possessions there had been a great aggression by
Russia upon Persia, upon which that country bad no right
to infringe.—(Hear.) He had put England and France
together, because the only balance of power in Europe
would be preserved by the maintenance of a strict alliance
between the two countries.—(Hear, hear.) And inde-
pendent of all treaties, they had a right to see that the
other great powers, Austria, Prussia, and Russia, were not
making conquests under pretence of suffering injuries of
which this country could not judge, nor taking posses-
sion of whole territories on due ground of alleged
grievances. A claim was made now upon this
country to establish the new state of Greece, and to
!dice Prince Otho upon the throne. But why, he
would should this country be called upon to pay a
single farthing for that object, but to maintain the balance
of power, and the independence of Europe.—(Hear.)
Greece then, so established, at the expense of this country,
might then he seized by Russia, and that being done, the
same argument which bad been used with regard to Po-

land would meet such an event, and it would then, as now,
be said that Greece was not worth a war. To return to
the question before the house, he thought that when the
Poles were competing with Russia, and competing as they
did, with success, that the Government of this country
might have come forward to their aid with honour to
this nation, lie concurred in the !notion of his Hon. and
Gallant Friend, for it was now time that some understand-
ing should be come to, by which either to save the coun-
try's honour or the nation's money ; and he also thought
that if Poland was allowed to remain in the suffering con-
dition in which she now was, it would be to the disgrace
of Europe.
Lord J. RUSSELL might be justified in remonstrating
with his lion. Friend, the Member for Westminster, who
had come down at the close of the Sassion, and entered
into the whole course of our foreign policy without any
notice being given of a motion, which could have led any
one to suppose that a speech so excursive as the Hon.
Baronet's could be delivered ; but he abstained front incul-
pating Iris Hon. Friend, whose feelings he rather envied,
seeing that after complimenting the No le L' rd (Sandon)
on tie moderation of his sentiments, the lion. Baronet
himself did not hesitate to give utterance to expressions tar
removed from moderation, and indulge in the most un-
measured invectives against several of the great Powers of
Europe. Ilis Hon. Friend had laid down no less than eight
questions, on which, following out his own principles,
this counti y was entitled, nay, it would appear, required to
go to war. He referred to the Hon. Baronet's remarks
upon the casts of Persia, Turkey, Greece, Italy, Pot 'oda
Spain, Portugal, and Belgium. Ile repeated, he could not
but envy his Hon. Friend this indigence in high and
generous feelings ; nevertheless, he not only as a Member
of the Gaverutnent, but in his capacity of Member of that
House, must shrink from uttering sentiments like those
of his Hon. Friend, the tendency of which was to lead
directly to war.—(Hear, hear.) However precious he
felt the cause of liberty throughout Europe to be, he
Itk,wis2 felt that the blood of England was also
precious, and he would not hazard it in a cause,
where eventually liberty might not prosper, but in

which (whatever were the result of a struggle) England
was sure to suffer.—(Loud cheering.) The Noble
Lord proceeded to detail the history of the treaty of
Vienna, and the subsequent transactions of the Poles and
Russians, observing that it was much doubted by some of
the war nest and most judicious of the friends of Poland
win they the insurrection of Warsaw was well-timed.
However, it had been said that this country ought to have
seized that opportunity to interfere on behalf of Poland.
Supposing that we had interfered, what would have ben
the nature of the contest ? In what must it have con-
sisted ? It was said, in the show of a British "feet in the
Baltic. But did Gentlemen who thought that such should
have been the course of this country imagine, that had we
adopted their suggestion, we should not have had a struggle
with the united military force of Russia, Austria, and
Prussia, while we joined with France in defence of Poland,
and in defence of the liberties of other countries similarly
circumstanced ? Now he ventured to ask, whether (how-
ever we might feel for the calamities of the Poles) any
English statesman, having the welfare of this country at
heart, and its preservation intrusted to his hands,
could wisely and prudently have called upon the na-
tion to go to war on the grounds stated ? If so, then
must we admit that at any time when a party in
Warsaw should prudently or not create an insurrec-
tion, we were bound to draw the sword. Against such a
proposition as that, he felt it his duty to enter his protest.
He would not attempt to follow his Hon. Friend through
the great diversity of topics introduced in his speech, but
must observe, that it seemed rather inconsistent in his Hon.
Friend, who censured the Government for not interfering
even to the extent of a war on behalf of Poland,—it was
rather inconsistent in him to blame the Government for
having interfered in the else of Greece. Was the Greek
loan, which held out a prospect of immense advantage to
Greece, at little or no risk to this country, offensive to his
Hon. Friend on account of the economy of the measure,
by which we put an end to Greek anarchy and disturbance?
Would his Hon. Friend risk a war for Poland, and yet

blame the Ministry for guaranteeing the interest of a loan
of 800,0001. to Greece ? Did his Hon. Friend at one and
the same time censure the Government for interfering and
for non-intervention ? Ministers had pursued a wise and
temperate course. They abstained from interference, where
the risk was great, and the chance of successful interven-
tion doubtful ; they interposed their good offices, when they
found that the result would be highly advantageous, and
_ _

the cost insignificant.—(Hear.) His Hon. Freind had de-
scribed England as being the laughing -stock of the world, on
account of her pacific policy ; this was a charge so gene-
rally made against all moderate Governments, and made
upon such insufficient grounds, as not to demand more
than a simple denial. There were also a few persons
to be found in every country, who exclaimed if the Go-
vernment refused to go to war on trifling occasions,
that the foreign policy was weak and ridiculous. Such
statements were seldom entitled to much attention ;
leitst of all in the present case, wherein the Government
had pursued a wise and temperate line of policy. Par
better was it to adopt such a course of moderation, than
for the sake of a feather or a trophy to take steps that
might have endangered the peace of Europe.—(Hear,
hear.) With respect to the motio❑ of the Hon. Member
for Rye, whatever propriety there might be in the Bri-
tish Government appealing to Russia for a liberal inter-
pretation and large performance of her treaties, on the
ground of the good faith of England with respect to
her own eneagecents to Russia, it would be exceedingly
improper, and might be raised into an improper prece-
dent, were the House of Commons to interfere in relation
to such a subject. In conclusion the Noble Lord ex-
pressed his intention of voting for the previous question,
if the Hon. and Gallant Member refused to withdraw
Lis motion.
Mr. EWART exhorted the Hon. and Gallant Member
to press his motio❑ to a division, and trusted that the
expression of the feeling of the House would be of essen-
tial service to the Poles.
Sir R. INGLIS should support the Noble Lord's mo-
tion of the previous question.
Sir J. DOYLE would support the motion of the Hon.
and Gallant Member for Rye.
Mr. C. PELHANI could not give his assent to the Hon.
and Gallant Member's motion, and should vote for the
previous question.
Sir F. VINCENT would vote for the motion of the Hon.
Member for Rye, but did not wish his vote to be con-
sidered as a vote for war.
Colonel EVANS briefly replied. He did not believe
that the effect of his resolution was to produce war. He
had the utmost respect for the Noble Lord opposite, and
disclaimed any intention of embarrassing the Government
by his motion, which, nevertheless, he considered it to be

his duty to press to a division.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, but none
took place, the motion having been withdrawn, as we
understood.

THE REFORM BILL.

On re-entering the gallery, we found

Colonel EVANS addressing the House on the motion of
which he had given notice, respecting the great numbers
of the town and borough constituency who will be found
disfranchised at the next general election. He observed
that there ought nut to be a single place in the condition
in which he feared the far greater part of the metropolitan
boroughs would be found. In the parish of St. James,
far instance, there were 3,000 inhabitants who would be
qualified to vote in respect of the houses they occupied,
but owing to the greater part of them not having paid
their poor's rates, he believed there would be bat 891
voters in that parish. It was true there were 1,600 who
had paid their assessed taxes, but only 891 who had paid
poor's-rates, and it was reasonable, therefore, to suppose
that the lesser number alone was entitled to the electi, e
franchise. He might, however, add, that the oldest col-
lector in the parish had informed him that there were not
mote than 200 voters. In Lambeth, again, the numbers
of those who were entitled to votes was very inconsider-
able. In the parish of St. Andrew's, Holborn, there were
2,600 persons who occupied houses that would give the
elective franchise ; but out of these there were only 1,200
who had paid their assessed taxes, and consequently that
must be the highest number of persons in that parish en-
titled to a vote. In St. Margaret's, Westminster, there
were not more than 1,200 who would be entitled to a vote,
and in the populous parish of Marylebone, where there were
10,000 rated houses of sufficient value to confer the fran-
chise, there were but 2,900 persons who had paid their
rates and taxes. If the rest of the boroughs throughout
the kingdom were, as he had no doubt they were, in the
same situation, there would he at least two-thirds of those
entitled to their franchise deprived of it by the present con-
ditions stated in the Reform Bill ; so that if the borough
voters of the kingdom amounted to 300,000, there would
be out of that number 200,000 deprived of their elective
franchise. The Noble Lord opposite had given notice of
his intention to bring in a Bill to reme iy this evil, by
changing the day, now fixed at the 20th July, to the 20th
August. That change would not be sufficient. The present
was the worst time of the year for making payment. It

was not the same when the retail dealer, or the merchant,
or manufacturer, received their money, and the agricultu-
ral part of the population had that produce from which
they expected to get their money yet ungathered in their
barns. As a proof that these circumstances affected all
classes, he might mention that there was not one voter in
the whole of Russell-square ; and as a contrast to that,
st least with respect to the condition of the inhabitants.
there were in Windmill-street only two voters. Under
there circumstances, be thought something ought
to be none, that so large a body of people might not be
disfranchised, and he should therefore move the following
resolutions :
" Resolved—That in regard to the numbers of the elective
constituency, whether of the Metropolitan cities and districts,
or in the towns generally throughout the kingdom, the expec-
tations contemplated by the legislature, held out by the Go-
vernment, and entertained by the country, are now found to be
entirely erroneous, in so far as relates to the next general elec-
tion under the Act for the Reform of Parliament lately passed.
" •That in some places there is even a doubt whether there
will be any constituency at all to vote at the next election, ex-
cepting old corporate freemen ; while in many others, instead
of the franchise being enlarged, as was generally stated and be-
lieved would be the case, it will actually be diminished and cut
down to one-fourth, one-sixth, or to even a still less fractional
part of the extent of elective right previously enjoyed by those
towns respectively; and that a similar disfranchisement, mis_
calculation, or delusion, must be admitted as to the newly_
created boroughs.

" That this most unlooked-for and dangerous result,
as affecting the composition of the next Parliament, is
partly attributable .to the severe and restrictive opera-
tion of certain clauses of said Act, especially the
:27th, 3d, 4.lth, and BOth, requiring as a qualification
payment of rates and taxes before specitled days, and pre-
vious to the periods on which these dues are more usually
levied; partly to the distress occasioned to the industrious
classes by the long-protracted resistance to the measure of
Reform, and the consequent stagnation of trade ; also to omis-
sions or inattention, designedly or otherwise, of the rate and
tax collectors; and to misunderstandings respecting dates and
other matters of a supposed confused, contradictory, or com-
plicated tenor, which there was not time enough between the
promulgation of the Act and the periods mentioned to clear
up sufficiently for general guidance.
That the same might be obsiated in respect to the next
election, by substituting in regard to poor rates, the`:.sth day
of December last;' and with regard to assessed taxes, the
10th ilay of October last,' in lieu of the words sixth day of
April last,' wherever the latter date occurs in said Act in re-
ference to boroughs—thus rendering all voters eligible who

who had paid by the '2oth July last their poor rates due at
Christmas, and their assessed taxes due the 10th of last October.
" And that it is therefore indispensable, in the opinion of
this House, that a short remedial Bill be introduced during
the present Session of Parliament to the above or an equal
effect, in order to provide some remedy, at least for the pre-
sent year, against the fatal error and disfranchisement thus
discovered to arise in the working of the restrictive clauses re-
ferred to in said Act."

The SPEAKER, after looking at the resolutions, ob-
served that the third portion of the resolutions declared
that it was indispensable that a short Remedial Bill shout d
be introduced, in order to provide some remedy for the
evils which the previous portion of the resolutions bad ex-
posed. If that resolution should be carried, it would be
declaring the opinion of the House that s Bill of the kind
there described should be brought in, and the House would
in fact be giving leave to bring in a Bill without a title,
and without a formally declared object.
Sir F. BURDETT thought that his Hon. and Gallant
Friend had better withdraw the motion, as he was sure it
was sufficient to call the attention of the Ministers to it,

since they must feel as strong a desire as himself to cor-
rect the error. He understood that the Noble Lord the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had given notice of a Bill to
remedy the evils of which his Hon. and Gallant Friend
had spoken, and truly, if it was intended that the
Bill should be such as to satisfy the desires of those
who had so earnestly called for it at the hands of
the Government, some remedy must be afforded.
He thought the day should be postponed from the
20th of July to the 20th of September; but he thought
further, that the right to exercise the franchise should de-
pend, not on the actual payment of taxes, but on the
liability to pay them, unless it could be shown that the
individual liable would be totally unable under any cir-
cumstances to make the payment. He recommended his
Hon. and Gallant Friend to leave the matter in the hands
of the Government, especially as the Noble Lord had '
already taken up the subject.
Lord ALTIIORP apprehended that his Hon. and
Gallant Friend (Colonel Evans) had much exaggerated
the effect of the restrictive clauses. The fact was, that in
all scot and lot boroughs the voters would not be disfran-
chised, even as the Reform Act now stood. The scot
and lot voter was not disfranchised, unless he had refused
to pay rates when demanded. Poverty, therefore, in that
case, was the only cause of disfranchisement. Consider-
ing the discussion the matter had already undergone,
it seemed very extraordinary that any mistake upon
the point should have taken place ; but a complaint,
and he believed with good foundation, had been made
to him, that in many instances where the rates had
been tendered the collectors had refused to take them. An
amendment to remedy this defect, he apprehended, would
be agreed to by every body ; but he could not admit the
proposition, either of his Hon. and Gallant Friend, or of
the Hon. Baronet the Member for Westminster, as he
should be sorry to see any other alteration made in the Bill
but that to which he had referred. It appeared to him,
that as in law a legal tender was often equivalent to pay-
ment, a legal tender of rates ought to be held sufficient to
give the party the right of voting. To this he (Lord Al-
thorp) could foresee no objection, excepting in point of
form ; in that respect there might be some ground for re-
sisting any alteration, for the Reform Act did not contain
any clause at the end declaring that it might be amended
even in the course of the present Session. There were,
however, three precedents of such a course having been
adopted without any clause to that effect. The first
was in the year 1757, the second in 1765, and the last in
1795 ; the last seemed most analogous to the present case,
as that related to an act for allowing persons farther
time for taking out certificates for wearing hair. pow-
der.—(Laughter.) It was analogous, because in this in-
stance, as in that, the period first fixed was enlarged. At
the same time, he would not press even this amendment
of the Reform Act, unless he could °Train for it a general
concurrence.—(Hear.) He therefore moved, as an
amendment upon the original motion—" That leave b.!
given to bring iu a Bill to allow farther t'me to persons

to pay tnetr poor-rates, pursuant to an Act of the present
Session to amend the representation of the people in
Parliament."

The question having been put,
Mr. HERRIES contended that such an alteration,
however necessary, ought not to introduced at this late
period of the Session, when so many who had taken a
prominent part in the discussions on the Reform Bill had
left London. It was contrary to the law of Parli,ment,
and in violation of the most established usage, to proceed
as the Noble Lord had recommended. Nevertheless, he
was disposed to concur in the fitness of the amendment
ahs!ractedly, only he would rather incur the evil of not
having it made, than the great danger that would result
from establishing so perilous a precedent. If one change
were to be made, how could Ministers resist any others
that might be proposed ? And if the provision imme-
diately in question were anomalous, and disappointed
public expectation, it would be easy to show other parts
of the Reform Act, as it now stood, liable to objections

quite as forcible. He therkfure earnestly entreated the
House to pause before it concurred in the proposition of
the Nob!e Lord.

The SOLICITOR GENERAL regretted to observe

such a spirit of opposition to the amendment of his Noble
Fiiend. The (,o•stion was undoubtedly important, be.

. -
cause it was whether the public was to derive from the
Reform Act the benefits they had a right to expect.—
(Hear.) If the great mass of the intended new constituency
were thus deprived of their franchise, the people would
lose the fair fruits of the measure. The franchise had
been given that it might be exercised, and if Ministers did
not take care that it should be exercised, they would be
guilty of little 1 than treason against the people.—
(Cheers.) The point to be considered was, whether Par-
liament ought not to grant a reasonable time for the pay-
ment of rates and taxes? It was, of course, merely acci-
dental that the defect had occurred, and it would be highly
unbecoming in Parliament not to remedy it. The object
seas not to vary the principle of the Reform Act in the
slightest degree ; and if there were no rule of Parliament
to render the course impossible, nothing could be more
just and necessary ti,an that the alteration should be made.
Uriless the Reform Act were to be a dead letter—to ex-
pire in its birth—the House which had adopted that Act
was bound to make it perfect.
Sir E. SUGDEN had never heard of a single case of
tender where the money had been refused by the collector
of taxes. If a case was made out of a mistake, he would
go as far as any man in rectifying that mistake. If the
Noble Lord would state, of his own knowledge, that a
number of persons had offered their rates, and they had
been improperly refused by the overseers, be (Sir E. Sug-
den) would readily agree to support this measure with all
his heart. He would agree that every voter who had
made a bona fide tender before July 20, should have a
full claim to the franchise; and he would even go still
further, and agree to a heavy fine being imposed on the
oversee' who should have dated to refuse such a bona fide
tender. Now that the Reform Bill bad passed, no one was
more ready than he was to give the full benefit of it to the
people for whom it was enacted. But, at all events, he
wished to proceed on principle; and it would be a monstrous
thing to let in all by this Bill, whether they had made a ten-
der previous to the2oth July or not. The Solicitor-General
had seemed to argue that this Bill was necessary on account
of some mistake. But he contended that there could be
no mistake. The electors were fully apprised of the last
day on which the rates could be received ; and every news-
paper in this great metropolis I ad repeated, over and over
again, the date of the day which, according to the Reform
Btll, was the last on which rates would Ise receivable.
Surely the Solicitor-General did not mean to insinuate
that there was any mistake with respect to Mary-le-bonne,
to represent which his Learned Friend intended to aspire
in the reformed Parliament ; because that parish, in addi-
tion to the metropolitan newspapers, had constant reform
meetings of its own, in order fully to inform the inhabi-
tants of all the particulars connected with the Reform
Bill. He trusted, at all events, that so important an
alteration would not be attempted during the absence of
the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth. If such a step
as this was once begun, where was it to end ? It was
surely too had to attempt to introduce so important
a change when there were perhaps not more than
fifteen Gentlemen present representing those impor-
tant interests which had been consecutively opposed
to the principle of Reform. If the Noble Lord
had originally proposed the 20th of
wouldlere
ve been a is
b
of the 20th July, there would not
date was fixed by the Government—
there could be no mistake about the matter ; and it was a
a August, ea
nd .
dinsste
tient voice ; the
little too bad now to come again to this House in the
same Session to ask for this extension of the day. He
did trot hesitate to say that he looked upon such a course
a
hopedof faithth thetowards
Noblethose
L Lord
who
were
he content to confine this Bill to those whose tender had
beets rejected by the overseers.
Lord ALTHORP said, that of his own knowledge he
could trot state many cases of rejection by the overseers;
assen an
t absolute
; he
therefore tirea cll
but he had been credibly informed that a large number
of persons would be prevented from having their votes,
from not having paid up to the 20th July ; and that of
these a large portion had tendered their money, and
been refused acceptance : the natural result of which was,
that this refusal would act en many others, and prevent
their making the tender at all. If it was true that this
Kill was to he regarded as a breach of faith towards
those who were absent, and en that account to meet with
considerable opposition, he did not think that it was worth

his while to press it upon the House, and he certainly,
under these circumstances, was not disposed to press the
Bill upon the House.

Sir F. BURDETT thought that this supplementary
Bill was nothing more than carrying into effect the inten-
tion of the original Reform Bill, and that without this Bill
the public would find that they were not really in posses-
sion of that franchise which they had been euaranteed.---
He did not see how any one could contend that this was
any alteration of the Bill ; it appeared to him only to be s
furtherance of the proposed effect of the Bill.
Mr. HtJME wished to ask the Noble Lord whether he
had withdrawn the Bill ?
Lord ALTHORP said that he bad ;—first, because it
would be impossible for him to pass the Bill if opposed is
the present state of the Session ; and secondly, because he
did not wish to pass the Bill, if it was held to be a breach
faith that the Reform Bill should not be altered.

..,....—..
Mr. HUME said that if the Bill only went to franchise
those whn had tendered, he did not care much about it,
because he believed the number of those tenders to be very
few ; but if it was intended to be a Bill for the general
extension of the time to the 20th of August
Lord ALTHORP—I intended the Bill to embrace both
these objects.
Mr. HUAIE—Then he did hope that the Noble Lord
would not withdraw the Bill, because such withdraWei
would give very great dissatisfaction in the metropolis.
Mr. C. ROSS did not object to a Bill to franchise those
who had tendered payment; but he thought that, with
respect to the others, ample notice had been given them,
and, therefore, there was no pretence for any extension of
time in their favour.
The House then divided on Colonel Evans's motion
For the motion 2
Against it
Majority —64
Mr. STANLEY said, with reference to the notice of
his which stood on the paper, for leave to bring in a Bill
t 3 amend the administration of justice on the trial of of
fences in certain cases in Ireland, that at that hour of the
night he could not think of bringing it forward in oppoli'
tion to the wishes of any Hon. Member ; and therefore, if
he could not then obtain leave to bring it in without a dig'
sentient voice, he should postpone it to the following day.
Mr. LEADER would certainly oppose even the intro'
duction of a measure so deeply affecting the rights and
berties of the subject.—Motion postponed accordingly. j
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, an
the House adjourned at Two o'clock.