The Sun.
London, England, 1835-09-01 00:00:00

stTN, LoNDON, tittgDAY, stlfiTEMlltß 1, 181

to rake up more dissatisfaction than by adopting any other
course with respect to it which it was possible to conceive.
He was satisfied that the Right Hon. Baronet would agree
with him, that unless it gave complete satisfaction it would
tifeet no etitiflt: If It did tilt dd tlid!; it ttddld b reeeived
hot as a boon, but as an instalment ; and the whole question
would remain open and undecided. He entreated the Noble
Lord, at any rate, not to yield to the House of Lords on the
question of qualification. As to the aldermen, he ( Mr. Hume)
tared not bs, what mune the members of the governing body
Were td be Called. He dill not quarrel with that ; nut he did qttsr,
eel hitli the ahnidonnient Of a serious principle. He intreated
the Noble Lord, therefore, to tdtriply with the prayer of all the
petitions from popular places on this point.
tenth
enteernetderleiids shoi:
proposed[
te protest agagar,;;,agar,;;,c9ncrilrrin in the amendment
the other House on the subject of qualiticaii,:n lie
tin eourse pursued by such a body of
fltlions as the House of [leers ; a hotly taut fOliteseibte to any
one, utterly regardless of the public feeling, and an anomaly lit
Government: If their powers were great, they ought at least
to eaaritise them justly, fle hoped, also, that his Majesty's
Ciovernment would not re-enact any part of the Test and Cor-
poration Act. Toleration 1 Toleration was a word that should
be excluded from our language. What the country required
*as just and equal rights ; nit toleration. Now, could it be
Mailed a sloe of just and Meal rights that a member of a town
council should be prevented from exercising the privileges
which his brethren enjoyed, because he did not happen to be
a member of the Church of England ? Was that equality ?
No, It wit§ inequality. It was indispensable that that provi-
sion in the Dill as it now stood, and the provision respecting
qualification, should In resisted. The Bill would then be a
beneficial measure. ateuld secure popular elections, it
would secure frequent elections, it wont fecure ii due control
over the ateclunta of a Corporation, and it would enrililg the in-
liaHititttts el tt oepoidtd fotii to determine who ihould super.
intend their affairs. Let the House confider what had tic,;"
the effect of efficient Corporation Ilefordi in gcotland. All
the discontent and ekeiteffiMit which, prerietisly fa that re-
form, had existed between the governors and the goiortiedi had
tensed, There were in England some dozen of Corporations
which already possessed the freedom of election to which he
had adverted i and ir, those Corporations no dissatisfaction
or discontent would be found to exist.--4 Hear, hear.) At any
rate, let them not agree to anything contrary to the principle
of the Bill ; for that Would be merely to sow the seeds of'
Adult contention. It might postpone the matter -for a few
months, but it could not prevent the pedfile of England from
ultimately enjoying an equality of rights, and a just Control
over their property. It was on the ground of the principle:
which it Ceitiyelienged that be had hailed with satisfaction
the Ititredildtidti of this itidaStife bits the House by his Ma-
jesty's Ministers. He trusted that they would Vete:teem
that they would complete the proposed reform in the spirit in
which they had introduced it ; and that having right, jus-
tice, and public feeling Ott their side, they would not surrender
the slightest principle of the gilt. heafs hears)
Mr. GROTE begged to be allowed to say a few; Wdfda. It
gave him great pain to say so, but lie could not help de-
Oaring that he thought the Noble Lord had conceded more
than either the occasion required, or the feeling of the public
would justify. Nor, he must confess, had the Noble Lord,
in his opinion, done justice to the subject under the conside-
ration of the House. Whatever he (Mr. Grote) might think
of the proceedings of the House of Lords in other respects, lid
was bound to acknowledge that they had resolutely adhered
to their independent character: Now he thought it would
not be artiiss if the House of Commons were to imitate the
House of Lords in that particular, and adhere to their lode.
pendent character. (Hear, hear, hear.) It would surely ill
become the dignity of that House—,the assembled representa-
tives of the people of gnipand--to field Important principles
merely for the purpose of conciliating the other House of
Parliament. In so doing they would not consult either their
dignity or their honour. When the people of England were
fully and justly represented in that House, there ought to
be do other power in the state which should be able to stand
against them. He thought also that the Noble Lord, in
introducing the concessions which he proposed to the House
to make with reference to the measure, did not sufficiently
treat those concessions as made under protest. Nay, one or
two of them the Noble Lord actually vindicated on their own
merits ; especially the proposition that a third of the town.
cils should be chosen every six years. Now instead of treat-
ing this and other of the concessions, as bad in themselves, and
as made only from motives of expediency, the Noble Lord
seemed to speak of them as if they were right and good of
themselves. Nevertheless, by these concessions some of the
most important features of the Bill were sacrificed. Nor
could he (Mr. Cirote) give Big onseot to the concession re-
specting wards. It might be recoilectdd, that When the pro-
position on the subject was originally made to the Hodge, he
(Mr. Grote) had stated that in his opinion a population of
twelve or fifteen thousand was too small to be so divided;
and of course the evil must be enhanced when the number
was reduced to nine thousand. He was very much afraid
that if this proposition was agreed to, the town-council
would in many cases be an instrument for corrupt purposes in
the hands of a very few individuals. With regard to the
question of qualification, he shared the feelings of the Hon.
Member for Middlesex. In conjunction with the other pro-,
ositions he was convinced that it would be singu-
larly
unpopular over the whole country, and that it would be
especially so in the city of London, where that principle had
never been acted upon. He differed most materially from the
Noble Lord in his opinion upon the manner in which the prin-
ciple of qualification had been embodied in the clause intro.
duced by the House of Lords, providing that in large places
it should be in the possession of property of the value of
1,0001., in small places the possession of property of the value
of 500/. Why this difference? Why should the possessor of
the value of property of 5001. be considered unworthy of an
office of trust, if he happened to reside in a large city instead
of a small town? At all events, let there be consistency in
the affair ; let the same sum be a qualification everywhere. In
his opinion, however, it was impossible that the clause could
pass that House. He was sorry to oppose his Majesty's Mi-
nisters, for he had a great respect for them ; but with refer-
ence to this point, in conjunction with the other concessions
proposed, he could not allow them to pass without recording
his opinion of them. He was as anxious as the Noble Lord
that the Bill should pass; but he was still more anxious that it
should pass in a sound and entire state. Indeed he would
much rather wait a certain time in order to get a Bill, of which
he should in all respects approve, than barter away the best
principles of the measure for the purpose of obtaining the im-
mediate consent of the other House of Parliament. And
after all, it was by no means certain that the propositions
of the Noble Lord would be satisfactory to the other House.
If not, if they should require still more concession, that House
would then regret that they had made so useless a sacrifice of
the dignity of the people.—( Hear.)
Mr. E WART, owing to the extreme fulness of the House,
and time conversation going on among the Members, was very
imperfectly heard in the gallery. We, however, distinctly
understood the Hon. Gentleman to say that he considered
the question of qualification with reference to its justice or in-
justice ; and that he was so entirely of opinion that it was un-
just, that he could not conscientiously vote for it. In his opi-
nion no qualification whatever was necessary. All experience
bad shown that qualifications such as that which Was now
proposed were not only unjust, but nugatory. If, therefore,
he were called upon to vote upon the question, he should cer-
tainly vote against qualification. As to the rights and privi-
leges of the people with respect to common lands, the sound
clause on that subject of the Right Hoe. Member for Tam-
worth had been omitted in the Bill by the Right Hon.
Baronet's Friends in the other House of Parliament. The
mode of appointing justices also had been altered, so as to re-
turn to that old system under which so much jobbing had
taken place. It might be true that this question ought to be
decided by conciliatory proceedings ; but it was also true that
it ought to be decided in such a manner as should render
the measure not only a good, but a permanent one. The
House ought to manifest a steady resolution on that point.
Although it was certainly desirable that the resistanCe
to the amendments proposed by the other House of Par-
liament should be conducted with a due attention to calm
and pacific feelings, yet that House ought to evince a
steady resolution not to accede to what they considered
unjust ; and for his own part, he could not relinquish
one atom of his objection to those amendments. He only
wished that the manners and the language of the Right Hon.
Member for Tamworth had been adopted by the Members of
the other House of Parliament, who showed, by their conduct,
that even in that respect they had much to learn from that
House. The duty which lie had to discharge was a disagree-
able one, but lie felt that it was due to the people of England
to discharge it. He did hope, however, that the Noble Lord
would not give up the principle of non-qualification. The
amendment made on that point by the other House, Was most
absurd and unjust ; and lie had already said that lie put that,
and all other questions connected with the measure, on the
ground of their justice or injustice ; the only real and sound
ground on which legislative proceedings could be founded.
Mr. ROEBUCK observed that any stranger who had been
in this country a few months would have seen a great and
intelligent body, the House of Commons, after making
every necessary inquiry, after paying all requisite attention to
the subject, frame a large and judicious measure for the re-
form of some of the most important functions of the govern-
ment of the country. lie would then have seen this measure
checked, impeded, mutilated, and treated with scorn by a
small body of persons, time House of Lords, opposed to the
people, and to their rights. He would have further seen
the forbearance with which this attempt to trample on the
rights and privileges of the people had been treated by the
people themselves : he would have seen that they aimed
solely at the peaceful legal acquisition of their wishes. But
there was a point beyond which human forbearance could not
be carried. To that point it appeared to him (Mr. Roebuck)
that we were fast approaching. If the present were an isolated
proceeding on the part of thoir Lordships, that consideration
might, check the indignation which it was calculated to ex-
cite. But it was not a single act. The same spirit animated
all the proceedings of the Upper House. The Irish Church
Bill, the Irish Constabulary Bill, and in short everythii:,g
done in the way of reform during the present session by the
Com-
mons to be callesducht:
Lords. Under
pcoi circumstances, tales
consider
House of Commons, bad been rejected by the House or
n
try
to be not, merely
b.nyr
scLn
ai i
ietn
poor's.
sfiobrl be e at
hrlannt c
teh?o
cDo dn oto
otublids ol tohnegr
(elf!' ee
cs
tt lends(
re
contilme to go ort upon such a system ? To him it appeared
4asl otril shvilioauts e nolifghtb
- ' • hthe efficiency or
non-effiei- of
a question connected with
.ency the Municipal Corporations Bill, but a ques-
tion rAI• to whether the wishes of the people should govern,
or the will of the House of Lords. For himself, he was a
oeniocrat to the uttermost:—(A laugh.) Democracy was
! scorned in the other House of Parliament ; and it appeared
that even in that House there were some persons who en-..
tertained a contempt for democracy. Ho was not one °t,
those.—(Hear, hear..? He was of the people ; he belonged.
to the -people; ; ;;.adto appeared that the w...she
s

the people ought to be paramount. What the people de-
sired ought to be law; and no Government should exist for a
day which did not hold that doctrine. When the Noble
Lord brought in his Bill to amend the representation of the
npeople in the House of Commons, it was evident that he
nelleVcd that there could be two co-existent bodies in the
Legislature ; the one representing themselves. After the
experience of the last few weeks, that man must be wilfully
blind who did not perceive that the Lords were endeavour-
ing by side winds to regain what they had lost by the Re-
form Bill. He did not hesitate to say that the interests of
the Lords were incompatible with the interests of the people.
In the course of it week or two they had rendered null and
void all that the Commons had completed after six months
pains and labour. He did not concur with the Noble Lord,
thereftim in the spirit of conciliation which he had expressed
that evening'. it behoved the Commons to be firm—other-
wise the system and spirit of concession might be looked for
*7yeiy year—lnd every autumn would find the representatives
of tne peep)? undo'ng at the beck of the Lords all that they
had commenced in the spring and completed in the summer.
This was a state of things which when fairly and freely re-
presented the people of England ought never to allow:
Already the people of the country bad come to the opinion
that the interests of the Lords were incompatible with good
Government.—(" Oh," and cheers.) If any one doubted the
fact he would say it was folly demonstrated in the state of
Ireland. All of good that the Commons had proposed for
Ireland had been carefully destroyed by the Lords. If the
system at present acted upon by the Lords were persisted in,
it would become duty of the representative body to
appeal to the people, to awake their sleeping energies, and
to rouse them in masses almost to revolution.—( Oh, oh !)
Why would this be necessary? Because daily experience
showed that there was a body in the state, systematically op-
posed to good government. He asserted that the Lords at
that moment were doing all they could to create something
late for Ireland. The Hon. G
Eke, revolution in the country.--( Oh, oh I and hear, hear.)
lie
could not agree with the Noble
repeaters :_hat if the Lords went on as they ci;;I they would
:oncession which he co
In
de,:ermination of
•-•the spirit or
net lon(gilitta4svexent,o
concluded by stating that Pbet:
'that occasion, lie thought to: neople had some-
eLvoierceled
en
thing more to expect from the &millets% and
that House.

Mr. ROBINSON had de'rived sincere satisfaction from the
calm and temperate tone in which the debate had been conducted
by all who had eaken part in it, with the single exception of
the Hon. Member who had last spoken.--( Hear, hear.) That
Heil; Member must pardon him for saying that it was he, and
such as be, tieing language such as he used, who threw impe-
diments in the way cif wholesome and necessary reforms,
greater even than those to whom lfewas politically opposed.
( /leer. ) It was not his intention to detaih the House by mak-
ing more flint a few observations. He agreed entirely with
the Noble Lord ( ilieneell)ehroughout the whole of his obser-
vations. He thought the Lefties' amendment with respect to
town-clerks so highly objectionable, That the House ought on
ntf Setettnt to concede it. As to the question of Dissenters
having a voice in the distribution of Church patronage, he
should agree with The Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel)
upon the point, that it tnight be objectionable to allow those
dissenting from the Church to have anything to do with the
patronage of the Church, generally speaking; but when
those persons were members of corporate bodice, having
Church property in their gift, he thought the Right Hon.
Baronet himself meet see that to draw the line between
Churchman and Dissentefi wool& in fact, be to revive those
old religious distinctions which Of fate years all had been so
'Wilgus to avoid.—( Hear. hear.) He trusted, therefore, that
• the Right Hem Baronet would not press the House upon that
point.
There was Gilt point upon which, he was sorry to say,
he was obliged to differ frail 'the Noble Lord, and that was
the question of qualification. 'When elle Bill was originally
in that House, he opposed the imposition of arty qualification
whatever, because he really did not believe any gillifieation to
be necessary. He had sufficient confidence in the Intelligence
and good sense of the elective body to believe that they
would choose for their town -council tieree persons who pos-
sessed all the requisite qualifications.—( Hear.) But to
compel them to elect for, the government of their towns per-
sons possessing a certain pecuniary qualification, appeared
to him to be not only unnecessary, but, on many accounts,
highly objectionable. But though he differed from the
Noble Lord (Russell) upon that point, so anxious was
he to come to art amicable adjustment of the matter, that
if the Noble Lord thought it necessary to adopt the quail-
acetic:in, he for one would not oppose it. He trusted, al-
though the session was now rapidly drawing to a close, that
the House, before it separated, would allow this measure to
pass into a law. It cOrittl)of4d, if not all the details that might
be deemed desirable, at least the great and leading principles
of municipal reform. If the Bill were thrown out altogether,
he feared there would be throughout the country, and especially
in the larger towns, a spirit of angry debate which would tend
to prevent an amicable adjustment of the question in another
session of Parliament. He for one, therefore, should heartily
co-operate with the Noble Lord (Russell), and he trusted the
House would follow the same example.
Mr. WARBURTON merely rose to express his decided
opposition to the amendment introduced by the other House,
requiring a pecuniary qualification for the town-council. Such
a qualification would be utterly unjust. There were many
boroughs in which large agricultural districts were included
within the limits of the borough. In each of these towns
the farmers will be the 'highest rate-payers, and consee
quently, though wholly unacquainted with municipal affairs,
will become the only persons qualified to act as town-council-
lors. He trusted the Noble Lord would take this point into
his earnest consideration.
Sir SAMUEL WHALLEY contended that the alterations
effected by the Lords had completely changed the character of
the Bill, and rendered it unworthy the acceptance of the Com-
mons. Looking at their Lordships' recent labours, ho thought
they might aptly affix upon their doors the homely inscription,
" Mangling done here."—( A laugh.)
Lefd JOHN RUSSELL said (as well as we could under-
stand, for his Lordship spoke in a tone of which scarcely a
word reached the gallery), that as the debate upon the general
question lied now lasted for some time, he would propose that
the House should go at once to the consideration of that part
of the Bill which related to the aldermen, and that when that
point was disposed of, to proceed seriatim with the other
amendments, postponing only the clause imposing the qualifi-
cation for the town-council.
inaudible,
AAfrrt.eroaO
, M. FOLLETT, which were
collision between both
words from Sir W
vhich had hitherto
CfNNELL said that tn.,:
Houses had commenced. The discussions
taken place had partaken of what was calico constitutional
dissension—the discussion in each House hiad founts a termi-
nation in each House ; but a rebound had now taken piece,
and that was what he called collision.--4 Hear.) It was
manifest that something must occur to place the British Le-
gislature in such a situation that instead of going forward, or
instead of being met by a series of checks, it should be actually
stopped. See what an immense quantity of most useful mat-
ter had been stopped in the other House during the present
session. Take England : What had become of the Executors
and Administrators' Bill—a Bill of the utmost importance, do-
ing away with some of the grossest absurdities of the law ? It
was cushioned. What bad become of the Execution of Wills
Bill ? Cushioned.—( Hear.) What of the Prisoners' Counsel
Bill ? Cushioned.—( Hear.) What of the Abolition of the
Punishment of Death Bill ? Cushioned.—( Hear, hear.) What
of the Imprisonment for Debt Bill ? Thrown out.—( No, no.)
Oh, the same thing then—it was cushioned.—(Laughter and
cheers.) Turn next to Ireland. What had become of the
Irish Church Reform Bill—( Cheers )--the first honest expe-
riment to conciliate the people of Ireland by the Government
of England? It was treated with indignity—(Hear, hear)—
wholesale indignity—(Cheers)—twenty-five clauses annihi-
lated at one breath—not even the common decency of taking
clause by clause—they were struck out by the gross, and
wholesale contumely was cast upon Ireland.--( Cheers.) What
had become of the Irish Marriage Bill ? It was thrown out ;
and what was the result? Why, that in every instance where
illegal marriages had been effected the innocent child alone
was left to be punished. By the law as it stood the parents
were not only held free from guilt, but were even allowed to
indulge in licentiousness--the parson was free from punishment
—nobody suffered but the helpless child.—( hear, hear.) What
had become of the Irish Constabulary Bill? Thrown out on
the most frivolous reason ever heard of—a reason so ridiculous
as to be unworthy of even the meanest association of legisla-
tors.—( Hear, hear.) What had become of the Dublin Police
Bill? He supposed it was at that moment going through the
same process as the others he had mentioned. What had be
come of the Irish Registry of Voters Bill ? He believed lie
need not boast much of the spirit of prophecy to foretel what
would become of that Bill.—( Laughter and cheers.) In
short, as regarded England, the other House had evinced a
determination to stop every thing that was useful ; and as to
Ireland, they treated everything of conciliation or justice with
Contumely and contempt.—(Cheers.) He repeated, the colli-
sion had begun. What, then, was their first duty ? The only
magic in policy was to be right.—( Hear, hear.) Men could
not always
be completely right. The Noble Lord did not
feel himself completely right in all his concessions. —( Hear,
hear.) But next to being perfectly right yourself, the other
great magic in policy was to make your adversary perfectly
wrong.__( Cheers.) What would take place after the conces-
sions proposed by the Noble Lord? If the Lords should hold
out after these concessions, was there any one in the British
dominions who would not say that the Lords were perfectly
wrong ?—( Hear.) If, after all, the Lords should refuse the
B:11, then, indeed, would begin the collision ; and the House
of Commons ought to begin it by being as right as it could—
wrong only when it conceded too much—and making its
enemies perfectly, entirely, and exclusively wrong.—( Hear,
hear.) Well, would the Lords take the Bill as it was sent
back them ? If they threw it out, then they meant a colli-
sion, and were determined to try whether, by another fashion,
they could not recover all that was takea from them by the
Reform Bill. Every body knew that the Lords were dicta-
torial upon the passing of the Reform Bill—Norwich, Har-
wich, Ipswich, and many places of the like kind, enabled them
to have a majority in the Commons, and the nomi-
nees of the Lords really legislated for the country. The
inform Bill had changed that state of things, and had
made the House of Commons an independent body. If re.
mained to be seen whether the Lords appreciated the new
character of the Commons. This would be proved by the fact
of their refusal or acceptance of the Bill when it was brought
back to them. Then came the question for the Commons—
,' Is the Bill worth taking with all these concessions ?" He
was decidedly of opinion that it was—( Hear, hear)—and he
would explain why. In the first place, it swept away all the
old leaven of tine old corporations. He thought somebody
bad called this the tag-rag and bobtail.—( Laughter. ) The
tag-rag and bobtail it would sweep away. Every self-ap-
pointed, self-elected body would be swept away. It would
not cure, but it would cleanse the sore, and take- ont the gan-
eres72o foe: aldermen fn.): -life, the
.jobbing. towe.-
-

clerks—these it would abolish. It would make a perfectly
clear stage. It would get rid of all the old causes of abuse.
He maintained, therefore, that if
should succeed by
these concessions, they would be gaining Dee . great and
,n
essential advantage. Any step towards populerity was a
improvement. The Bill, as it stood, gave them universans;
of constituency as far as the rate-payers went. It increrssed
the number of those who were called freemen. Nothing
was more absurd than what was termed the rights of 'free-
men. Those rights, as contrasted with the rights of those
who were not freemen, were an usurpation. They were
rights commenced in wrong and continued in wrung. They
established a monopoly, and placed it in the hands of a
particular class, who obtained the name of freemen. If they
were freemen, then the rest of the community were slaves.
When he was told, however, of the rights of freemen, he
would ask where were the rights of those upon whom those
freemen had encroached? But another advantage which they
gained by this Bill was the extension of the basis of repre-
sentation, by giving every rate-payer a right to vote for the
election of the municipal body. That advantage they would
have, as well as that of clearing out the members of the old
corporations. That advantage was a great one to commence
with ; lie said to commence with, because the talking of
finality was a mere absurdity. The value of this Corporation
Bill, if it should again come down to that House with the
intended amendments approved of, would be, that it would
give them the machinery of purification, and would enable
them to get rid of the incumbrances which Noble Lords
might cast upon it for the purpose of the moment. Another
advantage to be derived from the Bill was, that all the town-
council would be periodically elected.—(" No; not the alder-
men.") Yes ; because whether elected by one process or by
another, they would still be an elective body. There would
also be an extension of the suffrage ; all distinction would be
done away as to the qualification of the electors, except one,
which was preserved for other purposes, and from other mo-
tives. That exception was the difference between the inha-
bitants and the freemen. And why were these freemen
kept up ? The motive was obvious, and be would tell it
once. They were kept up that they might be cor-
„wt.: and bought with two sovereigns each, as at York,
or thiz• as at Yarmouth. They were kept up for the
purposes of iyiiher; and corruption by the poor man's friends.
—(hear, heard who were the hereditary protectors
of the poor. —( Ironical ehes.;,•) Why were these hereditary
protectors of the poor so anxioui> to keep the rights of the
freemen ? Why ? Because their frie2ds and relations might.
hate an opportunity to buy their consme.nees. Was it for
the love of God that they protected the pooi ? Was it for
the working out the salvation of their souls ? 0, Pn. The
pretence was plausible, but it had failed. The hypocrisy
finally betrayed itself; for these hereditary protectors Of
the poor had introduced a qualification clause with respect to
Members of the Council, which showed that their only object
in keeping up the freemen was, that they might be purchased
by men who had the most money. Thus they detected at
once their own hypocrisy.—(Cheers.) It was said that those
whom Providence wished to destroy it first demented. At
the same time that the Lords were so anxious to preserve
the rights of freemen, they had introduced a qualification,
which disabled those freemen from forming part of the Coun-
cil. Might not one of these freemen say—" lam a man of j
integrity and of good character ; my neighbours love and '
respect me, and are quite ready to appoint me one of the
Council—why should I not become one ?" To this very reason-
able interrogatory the hereditary protectors of the poor make
answer, "0, no ; you are not rich enough. What avails
your integrity or your good character, unless you possess suf-
ficient wealth wherewith to purchase the votes and consci-
ences of your fellow-freemen." Who was it that preached
these doctrines ? The friends--the supporters of the poor !
Verily, he was glad that this was the way in which the colli-
sion had begun ; because it had betrayed the most barefaced
hypocricy—the lupocricy of pretending to be the friends of
the poor, when it was the wealthy alone that they regarded.
It was a friendship for the extremely rich, who could afford
to bribe the poor freemen for their votes. The House of
Commons was therefore engaging in this collision with the
great advantage, that of a total want of moral character in the
proceedings of those who withheld the rights of the people. It
was a great advantage to be over-forbearing. It was the bu-
siness of the King's Government to fall short of asserting all
their rights ; let them, therefore, make the proposed cot`
' ces-
sions and then let the House of Lords throw out the Bill ii
they dare. Thcre would no doubt be great excitement
throughout the country, even at these concessions being made.
Some hard words—perhaps some hard blows, at least of the
tongue—would be dealt out in consequence of these conces-
sions; but the indignation of the people would fall doubly on
the heads of those who, after these concessions, should refuse
to be conciliatory, and to adopt this measure in its altered
form. It would then at once be admitted that it was not upon
principle the-Lords had acted, but upon a determination to
stop every meastn-e for the amelioration of our institutions ;
and thus it would be eiomonstrated that they possessed a power
which they ought never to have had, and of which, so exer-
cising it, they ought most certainly to be deprived.—(Cheers.)
But in the present stage of the business, what the House had
to consider, was, whether in the concessions proposed to be
Blade they were not going too far ? He approved of all the
concessions that had been made. Not that he thought them
right in principle ; but because he thought it right to
show that it was not for the sake of an abstract principle, but
for practic.il purposes that resistance wits made to the other
amendments of the Lords. The thing that displeased him
most was the qualification clause.—( Hear, hestr.) As it now
stood it was the most iniquitous thing that over was pro-
posed. It was a most outrageous species of inquisitorial
power in a commercial country to enter into a ,star's pri-
vate circumstances, in order to ascertain his fitness fo' exer-
cising the franchise of a citizen of the State. The
Member for Bridport had shown the absurdity of the qur,:ii•
cation as to rates ; but in other respects there was wickedness
mixed with absurdity. Every shopkeeper and mercantile
man, being a voter himself, might sign a notice and bring
any other person before the public in order to investigate how
much he owed, and to whom be owed anything. Thus a
person might be induced to make an objection against a bur-
gess being on the list in order that he might obtain an admis-
sion of a debt of which be had no legal proof. He might be
asked, if this be so iniquitous a scheme why consent to it?
His answer was, simply and singly, that there might be no
excuse for the Lords to reject the remainder of the Bill. He
would even consent to it for the very reason which he began
by stating, namely, that the enemies of this measure for
putting down old abuses might have no excuse at all. To
the management of this qualification, however, it was
necessary they should direct all their attention. What
ought there to be required from the party beyond a de-
claration of his qualification? Let there be a penalty
against the man who made a false declaration.—( Hear, hear.)
Put it upon the who challenged the qualification to prove
the falsity of the eleche-ation in a criminal court. In that way
they might qualify their ci:spositlon to go as far as they could
in the
am: thus put their enemies so much
ti path of concession,
the more in the wrong. He feh: a melancholy satisfaction at
contrasting the conduct of this „AO that of the House of
Lords towards of Ireland. At the eomt:'encement of a system
of conciliation on the part of the Geyer's.
nent towards that
country, he saw the other House of Parame;".t attempting to
continue the reign of misrule in Ireland. That was the dar-
flood God
ling spot for every abuse and every oppression.
sent an
was it possible that the people of -England could ..on y
longer to be overpowered by a miserable faction ? I,7er!! they
not tired of six hundred years of oppression ? Over mail over
again be had challenged them to tell him of any one advantiaat.''
that Ireland had derived from her connection with England.
Every portion of the page of history had been always stained
with the same crimes towards Ireland. At length lie had seen
an Administration formed upon the basis, to extend the benefit
of British Institutions to that country ; an Administration pre-
pared to make the experiment whether Ireland could be as
well governed by England as she might be by herself; fur
Ireland was not a petty country, or a paltry province. She
was a nation of eight millions. If you did not give her good
government, God forbid she should not seek it for herself !
—( Hear, bear, hear)—but God forbid she should at-
tempt it, so long as she was likely to get it from you,
for her interests were identical with yours ; it was therefore
necessary that she sh„;;Id be identified with you, not merely
in name, but in all your institutions. But was be to be told,
now that they had succeede,2 in having one branch of the
Legislature willing to give good government to Ireland, that
all their efforts were to be stopped, and that even persona-
lities, undeserving notice in common conrersat:on, should be-
come a reason for refusing justice to Ireland r'.--(Cheers.) He
did not think that these observations were uncoseneeted with
the subject before the House. The Lords ought In pause
and meditate before they proceeded in this way. The 111.29,-
her for Worcester had blamed the Member for Bath for
using language of an extreme description. If what his Hon.
Friend the Member for Bath had said was not founded in
fact, it was vain as air ; hut if it was founded in truth—if it
was justified by the conduct of the Lords—if his speech was
one of reason and not of declamation, then the Member for
Worcester might call lit mere declamation if he pleased ; but
did he think that by his calling it declamation the words of
the Hon. Member for Bath would be less appreciated by
the people; or that the facts that they unfolded would not
give to his words wings of fleetness, and weapons not to be
resisted ?—( Loud cheers.) He put it to the Hon. Member
did he doubt the truth of the observations of the Hon. Mem-
ber for Bath ? Let the Hon. Member look at the proceedings
of the Lords—Let him look at the paltry ribaldry poured out
upon them at the bar of that House.--( Loud cheers.) He had
been told, forsooth, that they were not to restrain counsel in
their observations, lest they should impair the freedom of
speech. But were not appeals made before the House of
Lords every day from the Exchequer Chamber, and from the
King's Bench, and did ever any counsel or judge in the Lords
get up and assail the King's Bench, or impute motives to the
judges of that court ? Did they ever hear those judges ac-
cused of villainy, of robbery, of peculation, of plunder, of
the violation of every corporate right, and of the spoliation of
every charter ; in short, of crimes so numerously strung to-
gether that he should not have been able to remember them
if lie had heard them, nor could he by any ingenuity have
coined and linked such extraordinary phrases together? But
all this had happened before the House of Lords. It never
happened but once ; and that once was when the House of
Commons was assailed for passing this Bill of amelioration,
to the principle of which every man of every party in the
House had assented.—( Loud cheers.) He was, therefore, right
when he affirmed that the collision had at length come ; we
bad only now to manage it properly. Let us take care to
put our enemies in the wrong. Let us concede everything
that it was possible to concede. Nay, let us even go further
than what might be strictly deemed right : but when we have
done that let us appeal to tho good sense of the British
nation.--(Cheers from the Opposition, echoed back by the Mi-
nisterial benches.) Yes—to the good sense 'of the British
nation,..-( Renewed cheering from both sides of the House.)
Aad would they be a saalaiblo Im:ion if '-ftkey cemented

that two hundred individuals, I care •
should have the absolute power, at the
for their caprice, or at the suggestion.
passions, to control a nation of twenty-fe.
a nation to he checked, controlled, and go
dred individuals ?--(Tremendous cheering
therefore, let us appeal to the good sense , .
kngia.7l. They will understand when their re
support. Let us likewise, and I ti
deserve the;.-
an‘:ction and confidence to the Monet,
great cheering)—to whom, having
appeal its all
the first step of Reform,it wits
reigns over us—( Vey;
n to consummate.th' at work
great honour of sanctionti
nional manner, by be the pride and glory of his :el;
.constitution of this coup_
a peaceable, quiet, and constis:
render-
ing perfect the arrangements of the r
pee.e..e.nt the possibility
try, and giving to the public voice, in a2l the ramifications of
that constitution, such power as hall
of an unjust and selfish Oligarchy having any longer a control
over the unanimous feelings and opinions of the ieeople.
Mr. G A SKE LL was at a loss to reconcile the whole te-
flour of the speeches which be had heard from the opposite
( Ministerial) side, with the slightest regard for the eoostitu-
tion of the country—consisting of Kings, Lords, and Com-
mons—which, happily, had not yet been abrogated. Ile was
glad, however, that those speeches had been made, bec.'suse
it made the tactics of the party to which those Hon. Mem-
bers belonged no longer doubtful.—( Opposition cheers.) He
was induced to address the House, because, if this debate
were to be confined to the speeches of Hon. Gentlemen who
held such opinions as had been this evening advanced, a
most unjust inference would be drawn, not only of the gene-
ral opinion of the House, but of the people of England.--(Op=
position cheers.) The Hon. Member for Bath had talked
about the people of England; and the Hon. and Learned
Member for Dublin had told them that it was monstrous that
200 persons should control the opinions of 24,000,000. But
he would venture to ask them whether it was to be borne that
the people of England, who sent a majority of their represen-
tatives who held opinions directly the reverse of those just ex-
pressed, were to be slandered and maligned by those geotle-
men ?—(Great Opposition cheers.) It was in vain to tell the
people of England that they had got a reforming Govern-
ment, who were entitled to the support of a reformed Parlia-
ment. The people of England knew what a reforming Go-
vernment was well enough. They knew the zeal which that
Government had expressed to serve them; but they knew also
that this pretended zeal had not effected anything for them.
—( Oh, oh ! and Opposition cheers.) Every measure of sub-
stantial and practical reform, which would by this time have
been the law of the land if the Right Hon. Baronet had con-
tinued in office, had been prevented, while the reforming
Government had originated no Bills, except those which
they well knew at the time they had not the power to carry.
Was it meant to be said that the other House of Parlia-
mee! was to have no controul ovor the measures of the
Legislature ? If this monstrous doctrine was to be as-
serted, let it now be openly avowed. Let Hon. Gentle-
men hasten on a collision. He was not afietid of it. The
people of England would have no great difficulty in determin-
ing the rclatiae merits of those who held such tsnguage, and
of- the men of rank, property, and intelligence of the country.
( Opposition cheers, and ironical cheers from the -Ministerial
side.) It was an easy matter to extend the democratic func-
tions of that House beyond its just and natural boundaries.
But, if they did, they would rue the hour; and the people of
England would rue the hour when they consented to transfer
the power now held by the three co-ordinate branches of .the
constitution—King, Lords, and Commons—into the hands- of
the agitators of Ireland and the agitators of England.
Mr. CHARLES BULLERdid not wonder that his Hon.
Friend should be quite shocked at any intemperate language
that might be used ; it was, however, fortunate that there ex-
isted some temperate and sage men in the House.—( Laughter. )
But he could not understand the extraordinary scruples about
one House of Parliament speaking of the other. Three or four
years ago the House of Lords spoke of the House of Commons
in no measured terms. But God forbid that any one should
think of upsetting the House of Lords. All that he wished to do
was to call the attention of the House to a subject which had al-
ready engaged the attention of the people—he meant the ne-
cessity of a reform of the House of Lords.—(Cheers.) It was
well to consider whether it was possible that an unreformed
House of Lords could go on with a reformed House cc Commons
—(Cheers)—whether it was possible, after having done away
with the irresponsibility of this House, they could go on with
an irresponsible House of Lords, tempered as it was with very
I:ttle respect for this House? A collision had taken piste.
It` was not a collision of a moment ; it was a perpetual col-
lision between two irreconcileable branches of the Govern-
ment; sand it became wise and constitutional men to set them-
selves aboOt devising a wise, moderate, and constitutional re-
medy of a permanent nature for an otherwise permanent evil.
With regard to the amendments, it was said that they had
left the principle of the Bill intact. They had done so in
words, but they ;sad violated the principle in fact. The
whole of the amendneents were hostile to the principle of the
Bill. The Hon. and ,Learned Gentleman then enumerated
the various alterations mace in the Bill by the Lords, which
he contended were all detrimental to the original measure as
passed by the Commons. The House, therefore could not
doubt the animus with which the amendments were made;
nor would the House be taken in by the paltry and odious
pretext that they were made from a feeling of sympathy to-
wards the poor ; a pretext which he .never heard but he was
sure the man who used it did so for the purpose of making
these poor the degraded instruments of the corrupt designs of
the rich.—(Great cheering.) Though he was perfectly con-
vinced of the utter impossibility of working with the House
of Lords, still he agreed with Mr. O'Connell, that it was
their duty, considering the important interests confided to
them, to proceed as peaceably and temperately as possible ;
and never put themselves in the wrong, but put their opponents
in the wrong in the eyes of the country. He would therefore
abandon his own, and adopt the concessions of the Noble
Lord; but he did so from a paramount motive, and not be-
cense he did not entertain very strong objections to many of
tires.n concessions.
bars BROTH E R.TON offered a few remarks to the
!louse, ,'gut they were not audible in the Reporters' Gallery.
Mr. N.:712,K S expressed a wish that the House should pro-
ceedto „,;•eteler the Lords' amendments, without any further
general discuears'n•
Mr. T. ATT POD entered his protest against what he
considered a compecenise with the Lords. If his Majesty's
Government and this House made themselves the rampants
between the House of Los .
ds and the public feeling, the con-
sequence would be that ban the Government and the blouse
would be contaminated with nn,' odium that now attached to
the House of Lords. The Gov,`lminent would contaminate
itself, and this House would contane; fiats itself.—( A laugh.)
1 n his opinion the House of Lords W01...1d reject every attempt
to conciliate them—by adopting their ameodments they would
throw out all the amendments made by this House, and com-
pel us to take all their amendments or none. He therefore
would not consent to take the whole of the Amendments.
In his opinion, such a course would give the House of Lords
such influence, that they would throw out the Bill entirely—
they would then throw out his Majesty's Ministers—and then
they will throw us out.—(Great laughter and cheers.) They
will send us before our constituents with all our blushing
honours upon us.----( Great laughter.) I believe that many
gentlemen, when they go before their constituents, will rue
their votes this night. I believe, in my conscience, that his
Majesty's Ministers and the aristocracy know little or nothing
of the feelings of the people. They look at the late elec-
tions, and judge that because there was a nearly equal fight
between the Whigs and the Tories—they judged that the
people are apathetic, and do not regard tile great question
al" British libert Never were men more deceived,—( Lotad
cLeek's7) The people did regard British liberty, and they
e„ end always did, but they did not regard the Whigs.—
( Hear, ht.'ir.) Thei:. efforts were dioa2ted against the Whigs
as much ae ;Tainst the Tories, and the consequence was, that
the great ne'ss of the British people left the fight at the late:
election in the hands of the two great parties.—( Hear, hear.)
If the Whirrs 111.4 pot contaminated thernselve: with the Irish
Coercion Bill- (lwar, hear)—and other measures of a tyran-
nical and unjust natu..t., in my opinion the late elections would
have shorn a very different. result.--( Cheers.) 'Trio mass of
the people tvould have been excited, and upon rho stream
of their enthusiasm, the freehoiLlers of England wouid have
been carried away by the public excitement, and I am sure
that if his Majesty's Mini3ters wilt now pull op—( Cheers and
laughter)--if they will fight manfully, and insist upon carryieg-
the Bill ir, al[ its integrity, without any alteration in the sligirt-
est degree, they will be the most powerful Ministry that ever
existed.—( Cheers.) I therefore most respectfully urge the
the Noble Lord to send back the Bill to the Lords
as we sent it a month ago, and most neglectfully urge them to
reconsider their 150 abominable impro, ements or amendments,
and to adopt the Bill as we sent it to them a month age.—
' Lurid cheers.) If the Noble Lord will tike this course, I
shalt b' very grateful to him, and I will give him every sup-
port in my flower ; bet if lie persevb..-es, it will 1.,e very painful
to me, butt. mower
give him my most decided, but I fear very
humble and ineffeettell, opposition.—( Cheers.)
Lord JOHN RUSLL then referred to clause E. page
18 of the Bill, which enacts " That the mayor, aldermen, and
councillors to be chosen in each borough together shill consti-
tute the council of the lorourrh," and moved that the weeds
" which aldermen shall hold their offices for life," be struck
out. The principle involved in tln: amendment was whether
aldermen should continue for life et- for a. limited period, and
as no Hen. Member on either side or th,, House had :,aid one
single word in favour of time continuance* Of aldermen for life,
ho expected that he should meet with a geeeral concurrence
in the course which he proposed.—( Hear.)
Mr. SC AR L ETT said, that this itmendinetV- would have
the effect of abolishing dignities and offices which had been
secured by the charters of the boroughs. This he did not
consider proper. He thought that aldermen ought he for life.
--(Oh, oh.) He thought also that the House of Lords had
gone further than they did go.—( A laugh.) The Bill Mg
founded upon improper principles from the beginning, and his
opinion was that the House of Lords would have been justified
in rejecting it altogether.
Mr. LA W could not disguise from himself the utter hope-
lessness of any further struggle upon this subject, after the de-
claration of the Right Hon. Baronet. He thought the abo-
lition of the privileges and dignities now existing in cer-
tain individuals, was the greatest possible injustice to those
individuals. It was not to be thought that those privileges were
worthless, for lie could assert that they were great and valuable.
He only wished to record his opposition to this amendment,
and to state that the grossest misrepresentation bad been raised
as to the conduct of the persons who at present hold offices
under the corporations.
Sir ROBERT PEEL said the proposition objected to by
his two Hon. Friends who spoke last, was not that to which
he had objected, nor would he have been prepared to support
such a proposition as they had advocated.
Mr. CHARLTON said that if the principle of popular
elect ion micro once agreed to. thee was no ;.:aviog where they
w:..uld:-.top. The principle of hot amendment might nett 1:0

.emy and navy—(oh)—and for aught he
a he proposed that the election of the King
submitted to the same ordeal.—( Oh, oh.)
2nt was then agreed to.
RCS SE LL then moved the insertion of words
(as we understood), that one half of the aldermen
,o out by rotation every three years.
. GROTE could not allow this amendn,..ent to pass,
~,pout protesting against the principle of ":,ection for a cer-
tain number of years. Whether one-C.-Jurth or one-half went
out the principle was the same, ar., in his opinion was highly
objectionable.

-Dr. BALDWIN consid.ered that this amendment was, in
fact, giving in to the r rinciple of self-election, and he there-
fore protested agair-,t it.
Mr. PHILIP HOWARD supported the amendment.
The amend".nent was then agreed to.
Lord RUSSELL then said that the next clause
(Clause H) enacted " that the Mayor and Alderman should,
durinr, their respective offices, continue to be members of the
CoK‘ncil of the borough, notwithstanding anything hereinafter
contained as to Councillors going out of office at the end of
three years." He disagreed with this clause altogether, and
Le therefore moved that it should be struck out.
Mr. SC ARLETT thought it important that they should
retain some of those who knew the manner of transacting the
business of the borough. He was not one of those who
thought that the present councillors had mismanaged the
corporate affairs; for, on the contrary; he thought they had
conducted them well.—( Oh, oh.) it reform of Corporations
bad been necessary, it might ha•-,e been done as effectually,
and with greater justicegby Court of King's Bench. He
contended that with this n:masure revolution had commenced.
(Oh, oh, and a laugh.)
Colonel SIBTH Ott P hoped the amendments of the other
House would be received with that respest which they de-
served,—The clause was then agreed to.
Lord JOI-IN RUSSELL then moved, that in the 21st
ci.ause, which enacts, " That no person being in holy orders,
or being a preacher or teacher of the gospel in any dissenting
congregation, shall be qualified to be elected, or to be a
Councillor in any such borough," the word " licensed" be in-
troduced. He thought there would be no objection to this, as
he supposed the word had been unintentionally omitted.
Mr. WILK S said that the proper distinction to be made
was this--that no one who was a clergyman, and had no other
calling, should be eligible. It was known that many of the
clergymen of the 'Wesleyan Methodists were not only
preachers, but farmers, merchants, &c. He therefore thought
that the words ought to be " No clergyman of the Established
Church, or regularly establialted clergyman of any Dissenting
congregation."
Lord JOHN RUS ..JELL said he would consider the
clause, and for the present postpone it.
Several verbal antendments were made in different clauses,
following up the 'principle of the amendment agreed to, as to
the aldermen.

Lord JOI-IN RUSSELL proposed the restoration of that
part of cla•ase 35, relating to justices of the peace, to the
state in -,chick it was before the amendment of the House
of Lord,

restoration was agreed to without discussion.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL proposed an alteration in the
clause which gave power to the revising barrister to decide
upon the division of corporate towns into wards. He proposed
'that as these gentlemen might be in some cases inexperienced,
that the decision should be sent up for the approval of the King
in Council, and if his Majesty did not approve, that then the
matter should be sent back for revision.
Mr. C. BULLER objected to any proposition tending to
throw additional labour upon the Revising Barristers, who
already had their hands full. He was convinced that those
gentlemen who had been appointed for the present year,
would not be able to get through their duties within the six
weeks, to which they were limited. Let Hon. Members only
imagine what, for instance, would be the work of revision
for the Runty of Middlesex, and then judge whether Revising
Barristers could possibly, in addition, undertake the labour
now proposed to be cast upon them ? For his part, he would
rather throw; the duty upon the Bishop of the diocese, or the
excise offir,er.

Mr. J ERVIS thought that if a lawyer were selected for
this w ork, he ought to be associated with an engineer.
Mr. WARBURTON said there was no provision in the
clP.use for the possible case of the Privy Council referring
tne question back to the Revising Barristers, and their ad-
hering to their former opinions.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that there was a great objection
entertained in the other House to the Commissioners as ori-
ginally provided by the Bill. He did not think the difficulty
suggested by the Hon. Member for Bridport WP.S likely to arise.
Mr. HUME considered the clause as it originally stood far
preferable to the clause as now amended. He would ask even
the Right Hon. Baronet opposite whether he did not prefer
the adjudication being left to the Commissioners, to the new
arrangement of referring it to the revising barristers and the
Privy Council, and he was willing to be bound by the Right
Hon. Gentleman's decision.—(A laugh, and " Hear.")
Sir IL PEEL said he believed this was the first time the
Hon. Member had ever honoured him by placing so much de-
pendence on his judgment—(A laugh)—and he was sorry that
he could not encourage him by concurring with his views.
Under all the circumstances he thought it better to accept the
amendment of the House of Lords with the addition suggested
by the Noble Lord.

Mr. HUME had expected a different opinion from the Right
Hon. Baro-act, and was much disappointed.—(Laughter.)
Mr. S HEIL thought that some standard might be laid
down for the regulation of the revising barristers in their
decisions.

Major BE AUCLERK was certain that the division into
wards would make the boroughs close corporations. He con-
sidered the amendment so objectionable that he felt it his duty
to take the sense of the House on this question. He should
move that clause " I " be omitted, his object being to sub-
stitute the original clause for it.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, but we under-
stood that the amendment was negatived, and th House did
not divide. On our return to the gallery we found
Mr. WARBURTON speaking on anothor of the Lords'
amendments. He said that this one was founded on the prin-
ciple adopted by the Kings of Rome dividing the city of
Rome into wards. "Ne quisque in tivitate privatus suffragio
esse videretur—sed ut apud primores potestas remaneret."
The barristers were to be govern ed, not by the number of the
population, but by the population and their wealth jointly.
This he considered opposed 'to the principle of popular election.
lie should, therefore, propose to leave out the words. " And
in assigning the number of councillors to each ward, the said
barrister or barristers shall, as far as in his or their judgment
he or they may ri:eem it to be practicable, have regard as well
to the number. of persons rated to the relief of the poor in
such ward as to the aggregate amount of the sums at which
all the sal.l persons shall be so rated."
After a few words from Mr. BROTHERTON,
Mr. GROTE said he saw nothing to prevent such a di-
vision into Wards, under this clause, as would create so
wany rotten boroughs. He repeated his protest against the
clause.

Mr. WARBURTON said he was sorry to trouble the
House to divide, but he considered it his duty to press his
amendment, that he and his Hon. Friends might record their
opinions.

The Gallery was again cleared, but this motion was, we be-
lieve, also negatived without a division.
On our re-admission to the Gallery, Mr. JARVIS was about
to make a motion, when he was interrupted by
Lord JOHN RUSSELL, who said he would not aslz. the
House to go further into the consideration of the Hill to•
night, but would postpone it till to morrow. He proposed
that the House, at its rising, should adjourn till t-vrelve o'clock
to-morrow.

TITHE INSTALMENT SUSPENSION (IRELAND)

BILL.

The second reading of this Bill being moved,
Mr. HUME expressed doubts as to whether the House
ought to piss this Bill, the Clergy of Ireland rot having peti-
tioned for the relief which it afforded, and their friends being
the parties who had rejected the measure of settlement which
ha..l been proposed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER referred
to the grounds on which he had moved for the introduction of
the Bill on a former day, and pointed out the inconvenience
and hardships which would ensue without it, the Government
Lying obliged to enforce the re. payment of the money ad-
vanced to the Irish Government.

Mr. HUNIE asked if it were the intention of the Govern-
ment to employ the military and police in the forcible col-
lection of tithes for the future ?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the question was an important and difficult one, and he -%vislied
it to be put to his Noble Friend the Secretor) I,:r the Home
Department.

Sir. HUME said that he would so to.morrow.
Sir R. PE EL could not cone-j,„ a question to which it
was more difficult to give a definitive answer.
Mr. BROTHERTON mriverl that the House adjourn.
The Bill was read a second time, and the other Orders of
the Day having been dispo? ed of, the House adjourned at a
quarter to one o'clock.

HOUSE Dr LORDS, Auausr 31.
ROYAL COMMISSION.
The Royal A",sent was given to-day by Commission to the
Exchequer EV,,ts (13,521,5501.) Bill—Slavery Compensation
Bill—Spiri% Licenses and Wine Duties Bill—Wcod Duties
Bill-13'1,minica Relief Bill—Agra Goverinnent Bill—Clerk
of the' Crown Bill—lllegal Securities Bill—North American
Av.ociation Bill—Special Constables Bill—Peace Preserva-
ti,m (Ireland) Bill—lnsolvent Courts Bill—Court of Exche-
quer (Scotland) Bill—Marriage Act Amendment Bill—High-
ways Bill—Turnpike Acts Continuance Bill—Great Western
Railway Bin—Tormohan Improveme,it Bill—Port Dundas
Road Bill.—Earl Nelson's Estate Bill.
The Commissioners were Lord Denman, the Earl of
Shar.tesbury and Lord Duncannon.
The House then adjourned during pleasure.
Lord DENMAN resumed his seat at five o'clock.
Mr. STANLEY, and other Members of the House of Com-
mons brought up the Duties on Stamps and Assessed Taxes
Bill. The Messengers also reported that the Commons had
agreed to the amendments of the Lords, on the Islington
Market Bill, and other private Bills.
The Duke of RICHMOND moved the third reading of the
Tithes on Turnips Bill.—Agreed to.
The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a petition from
the Dean and Chapter of St. Patrick, Dublin, in support of the
Church.

Earl RODEN presented two petitions from Ireland to the
same effect.

DUBLIN POLICE BILL.
Lord DUNCANNON moved the second reading of the
Dublin Police Bill.

Lord FARNHAM objected tcs the Bill, as giving too much '
authority to the Chief Secretary of Ireland.
Lord PLUNK E Tr thought it would be a very advanta-
geous rneasnri to Dublin.
Tb-
Duke of WELLINGTON thought, that this Bill
would establish the police in Dublin on a different principle to
that in London.
The Earl of WICKLOW supported the second reading.
Lord El AT E R TON also supported it.
The Earl of RODEN thought that before this Bill was
introduca some communication ought to have been made with
the Corporation of Dublin. Their Lordships were called upon
to give their sanction on the very last day of August to a mea-
sure which was so circumstanced.—( Hear.) This, he must
say, was what he cauld not assent to.
The Marquis of WE STME ATH came down to vote in
favour of the second reading, but, after he had heard what
had been just now stated by the Noble Lords with regard to
the Corporation of Dublin, he could not assent to such a
course.—( Hear.)
The Earl of ['ADDINGTON was not prepared to state
that the system of police which prevailed in Westminster might
not be beneficially transmitted to the capital of Ireland ; but
he did not wish to be driven to give his vote on the present
occasion, without having an opportunity of knowing what the
opinion of the Corporation of Dublin was, as to the provisions
of the Bill. The Bill, he understood, had come upon the
Corporation by surprise. He thought the practice could not
be defended of bringing forward important measures like the
present when their Lordships had not time to deliberate—
( Hear, hear)—respecting them.
Lord PL UN K ET thought that if the Corporation of Dublin
had any objections to urge to the Bill, they would have found
Members in the other House of Parliament to state them.—
( Hear.) There was the Recorder of the city, for instance.
The Earl of RODEN (across the table). The Recorder
had gone to attend his duties in Dublin before the Bill was
discussed,
Lord PLUNKETT thought that the Learned Recorder
had not left ; but his Noble Friend ( Lord Morpeth) had
opened the Bill more than a month back in the House of
Commons.
The Earl of LIMERICK assured the No and Learned
Lord that the Recorder bad left Lond
before the measure
was brought forward.
Lord FARNHAM expres:sed a confident hope that the
Noble Viscount would
Bill, for if he 7.0 t press the second reading of this
he (Lord Farnham) should move an
amendment "*..inat it be read a second time that day three
months. ",....( Hear.)
Ds:, Earl of WICKLOW said if it turned out that the
Corporation of Dublin had not been communicated with, as
respected this measure, he should, on that ground alone, vote
against the second reading, although he might conceive the
l well adapted to alter the present police system of Dublin.
Viscount DUNCANNON defended the provisions of the
Bill against the objections made, and could not withdraw his
motion for the second reading.—( Hear.) With respect to
the observations made as to the period of the session being so
far advanced before the Bill came to be discussed in their
Lordships' House, Noble Lords must be well aware that all
important measures could not be brought forward at one and
the same time. The House had been occupied very much of
late with other great questions.
The Earl of H ADDINGTON must complain with his No
ble Friends of the Session being too far advanced to discuss
such measures as this with that deliberation befitting their
subjects.
Lord BROUGHAM did not rise to complaiu of the one
note chaunted forth as to the late period of the Session, but he
did think that an improper conclusion was drawn from it, for if
their Lordships were well persuaded that the present Bill was
beneficial.—that the system of police in Dublin required to be
materially altered, it behoved their Lordships at whatever in-
convenience to pass the measure.—(Hear, hear.) It appeared
on all hands that the present police system was bad, and it
ought to be improved. " Let the Ministers be blamed if you
please," added the Noble and Learned Lord, " for not bring-
ing forward the Bill earlier, but do not let the people of Dublin
suffer. I hope your Lordships will allow the Bill to be read a
second time, and then the motion of the Noble Lord can be
renewed, if he be dissatisfied with the information which is re-
ce,lved from Ireland. Let us off for a week, rather than your
Lordships may have to say now, ' We have defeated his Ma-
jesty's Government !' "_( Laughter).
The Earl of WINC HILSE A said that their Lordships had
no information whatever as to the existence of the evils of the
police of Dublin, nor of the advantages to be derived from the
Bill. Now he was on his legs, he would add, that something
ought to be done by their Lordships to prevent so many Bills
of importance being brought at so late a period of the Session,
when it was totally impossible to give them that proper consi-
deration which the subject demanded.
The Duke of RICHMOND urged their Lordships to as-
sent to the second reading now, and if, when the Bill came
before the House in its next stage, information from Dublin
was received by Noble Lords that reasonable objections existed
against it on the part of the Corporation, then the Noble Lord
might move to have the Bill committed that day three months.
—( Hear, hear.) His Majesty's Ministers had brought in a
Bill for Coercion, which had received the sanction of the
Legislature, of a milder description than had previously passed,
but they were responsible for it. For his own part, as to this
Police Bill, which was intended to preserve the peace of Dub-
lin in a better manner than heretofore, he would not take upon
himself the reaponsibility of rejecting it.—( Hear, hear.) Mi-
nisters thought it beneficial, and he hoped the House would
allow it to be read a second time, at least. If their Lord-
ships permitted it to be read a second time, they might throw
it out on going into Committee, if they were dissatisfied with
Elie communications they received from Ireland respecting it.
He had examined and read the Bill, and should vote for the
second reading. He felt persuaded that their Lordships could
not make this a party measure, but if it were for the good
government of the country they would sanction Hear,
hear)—and if their Lordships did not like the present Govern-
ment, the only way to treat them was to turn them out, and
not reject their Bills.—(Hear, hear.)
After a few words from the Earl of GLENGAL, the Earl of
LIMERICK, and Lord CARBERRY, the substance of which did
not reach the gallery.
Lord BROUGHAM suggested that the Noble Lord who
had proposed the amendment should withdraw it for the pre-
sent, and on Friday, if he were not satisfied with the answers
which he might receive from Ireland, he might renew it in
another shape.—( Hear.)
The Earl of WICKLOW inquired whether the Noble Vis-
count would consent, if the amendment was now wit'adrawn,
to give up the Bill on going into Committee, s'erovided the
answers from Dublin given to the communications were not
satisfactory ?
Viscount DUNCANNON would fix Friday for the Com-
mittee, and the Noble Lord would be I.;ast then in the same po-
sition as regarded his amendment •ss at the present moment.
Lord FARNHAM was not. 'satisfied with this, for, in point
of fact, nothing was conce_„d but if the Noble Viscount
would undertake to witl-..draw the Bill on Friday, provided the
information was such, as spewed that the Corporation of Dub-
lin objected to it; lie would withdraw his amendment.
Viscount DUN CANNON would undertake to place the
Noble Lord Pr eeisely in the same state as he stood at present.
Lord BT:.:OUGHAM thought this a most fair offer, and
if it we ee found on inquiry that the heads of the Bill had
been drawn up by the Under Secretary for Ireland, with
91's knowledge and consent of the heads of the Police, their
Lordships could have no objection, he apprehended, to pass
it. If, however, the House would now throw out the Bill,
and it should be found on inquiry that no objection was
made to it, but that it was a beneficial measure, their Lord-
ships would have placed themselves in an awkward position.
A PE ER said—Suppose Parliament should be prorogued
in the interval ?
Lord BROUGHAM—Why then, of course, the Bill would
be lost.
After a few further remarks from the Earl of LIMERICK,
Lord FARNHAM, and the Marquis of LONDONDERRY;
The Marquis of L ANS DO WNE ruse and said—" My
Lords, here is a Bill admitted to be of great importance; it
is also admitted on all hands that the Police of Dublin is most
inefficient ; and the only objection to the Bill is, that the
Corporation of Dublin has not been consulted in the matter,
which it ought to have been 'it is urged. Now all that my
Noble Friend asks your Lordships to do is, that you give the
Bill a second reading ':iow, which will enable him to communi-
cate with the Irl-sts Government, to ascertain whether the
Corporation of. Dublin has been consulted in the matter. If
that body ',las not been consulted, most probably the Bill will
not be -pressed—( Hear, hear)—but if it shall appear that the
Corporation has been consulted, then your Lordships will be
justified in passing it.—( Hear.) This is all that my Noble
Friend has proposed."
On the question for the second reading and the amendment
being put formally from the Woolsack,
Lord FARNHAM said that the Noble Viscount had pro-
mised nothing more than this, viz.—to communicate the intel-
ligence he received hereafter from Dublin, and had not con-
sented, in the event of the Corporation not being consulted, to
withdraw the Bill.
Lord HOLLAND objected to transferring the legislative
functions of that House to the Corporation of Dublin.
Lord FITZGERALD and VESCI, though anxious to
support any measure for the improvement of the police of
Dublin, was not disposed at so late a period of the Session.
upon such slight information as the House possessed, to pass
the present Bill. He disclaimed the charge of being opposed
to this measure, or to any other Government measure, for the
purpose of embarrassing his Majesty's present Ministers.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY thought the Bill was
introduced for the purpose of creating patronage to be dis-
posed of by Mr. O'Connell.
The Bill was then read a second time.

IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT BILL.
Lord L YNDHURST presented a petition from the pri-
soners in Horsemonger-lane Gaol in favour of the Imprison-
ment for Debt Bill. His impression was that this Bill could
not be passed during the present session. He begged to re-
mind their Lordships, that by this Bill there would be vested
in the Government the appointment of 50 registers, of 50
commissioners, and of 50 ushers. Now here was a measure
throwing a very great burden upon the public—materially al-
tering the relation between the creditor and the debtor, and
throwing a very great deal of patronage into the hands of the
Government, and such a measure, he submitted, could not be
passed at this late period of the session. It had been said that
the late Attorney-General had approved of this measure.
Now he had made every inquiry upon the subject, and he was
enabled to say, that though Sir W. Follett approved of the
general principle of the Bill, he was yet opposed to many of
its provisions. The Bill bad not been discussed in the other
House of Parliament, and was passed when there were scarcely
40 members in the House.
Lord BROUGHAM said the Noble and Learned Lord was
arguing under a misapprehension ; for he had more than once
expressly stated that there Was no hope of carrying this mea.