The Sun.
London, England, 1835-03-04 00:00:00

FOREIGN GRAIN.

provisions would be rendered as effectual and extensive as the
necessity of the circumstances might require.
Mr. BARING made a few observations in reply which were

wholly inaudible in the Gallery.
AMERICAN BOUNDARY.
Mr. ROBINSON wished to avail himself of the opportunity
which then offered, to ask the Right Hon. Baronet whether,
since the termination of the last Session of Parliament, any
thing had taken place between this country and the
United States, in reference to the question of the North
American boundary line, which had been so long pending.
It was a question of the greatest importance, and trusted
the Right Honourable Baronet opposite would be able to
give a satisfactory reply. The Hon. Gentleman proposed an-
other question to the Right Hon. Baronet, but in so low a tone
as to render it impossible to catch its import.
Sir ROBERT PE EL said the question was no doubt one
of the utmost importance, but from the brief manner in which
it was proposed by the Hon. Member, it was exceedingly
difficult to give it on answer equally concise.—( Hear. )
It was a most intricate and complicated question, relating to
no less important a subject than the settlement of the boundary
line between the British possessions in North America and the
United States—relating to the boundary line in the State of
Maine and New Brunswick. The dispute arose in conse-
quence of the vagueness of the treaty of 1783. By that
treaty a certain boundary line was determined upon, to be
decided by certain high lands on the confines of Maine
and New Brunswick, and the partition was to be ex-
tended from those high lands to the nearest approach
to them of the waters of the river St. Lawrence. These
high lands, as he ( Sir Robert Peel) had stated, were to be
the division between Maine and New Brunswick ; but from the
vagueness of the terms in which this agreement was conveyed,
it was physically impossible to discern where these high lands
were. A convention between this country and the United
States was, consequently, agreed upon, and each party resolved
to refer the controversy to the King of the Netherlands.
These qUestions, it was agreed, should' be proposed for the
decision of his Majesty. On two of them he gave a decided
opinion, but on the third it was impossible to offer
any opinion, as the high lands referred to in the treaty
of 1783 could not be discovered. Under these circum-
stances, his Majesty suggested an amicable compromise to
both parties. Great Britain professed to abide by that
final adjustment ; but the United States decided not to
accept of that arbitration. The United States suggested
a new survey—we offered to abide by that survey, pre
vided certain preliminary conditions were agreed upon, ne-
cessary for effecting that survey, and without which it would be
useless and unsatisfactory to make it. One of these preliminaries
was to decide whether, according to the treaty of 1783, the Bay
of Fundy should be considered a part of the Atlantic Ocean.
No answer has, as yet, been given to this proposal—the negotia-
tion is still pending, the President having refused to produce
the papers that were required. This is the only thing to pre-
vent the continuance of those amicable relations which all
lovers of peace, and of the commercial interests of both coun-
tries, must desire to see maintained.—( Hear, hear.)
Sir JO II N BECK ETT put a question to the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, respecting the provisions made for Educa-
tion in those possessions.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was un-
derstood to say that some decisive measures were in progress.
LAW OF LIBEL.

Mr. O'CONNELL wished to know whether it was the
intention of the Government to bring in any act to amend the
law of libel ? A Committee was appointed last Session to
inquire into the effect of the operation of that law, but nothing
more hadb,!en done.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER referred
the question to his Right Hon. Friend the Attorney-General,
whose attention had been directed to the subject.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it was quite true
that his attention had been directed to this subject, but be
had been unable to come to any positive conelmion as to
the course which should be pursued.—( Hear.) He was quite
willing to admit, that some alterations of the law of libel were
required, and he would heartily concur with and assist any
gentleman who should propose a proper amendment of the de-
fects of the present law.
Mr. O'CONNELL then gave notice, that he should bring
in a Bill for that object on Wednesday next, and should move
on Thursday next for the production of the evidence taken be-
fore the Committee appointed last session.
POST-OFFICE. _ .

Mr. WALLACE enquired what were the intentions of
Government with respect to the Post-office Commission?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied
that his predecessors had appointed a commission for the pur-
pose of inquiring into the state of the Post Office, and that
Commission had made one report of their labours, but he
should feel it to be his duty to re-appoint the Commission
for the some purpose, and to have the report of their labours
laid before the House as early as possible.
Mr. W A L LAC E said in consequence of his Hon. Friend,
Mr. Ward, having a•motion on the subject of the divisions of
the House to come on to-morrow night, he should defer his mo-
tion for allowing the Reporters of the public press to be present
dui leg the divisions of the House.
NATIONAL EDUCATION SCHEME.
Mr. ROEBUCK moved the re-appointment of the Com-
mittee for inquiring into the state of the education of the peo-
ple of England and Wales, and for promoting the erection of
school-houses, &c. •
Mr. D. W. H ARVEY said that he did not rise
with the view of opposing that motion, but the
House would agree with him that there was a necessity
for giving to that Committee all the assistance and
facility that could be given to them in the progress of their
labours. This inquiry was far too limited in its object, and it
proceeded upon a supposition, from which ho differed, that the
resources of this country applicable to the education of the
people were not abundant, and that, therefore, there must
be a distribution of some further grant.—( Hear, hear.)
The property in this country bequeathed for and intended to
be applied to the purposes of national education amounted to
a sum which few persons had any adequate impression of; and
it was a matter of regret, that the Committee of inquiry into
that question had existed for 17 years, at an expense of more
than 250,0001. ; and that, notwithstanding this, it had not above
half terminated its labours, and even what it had done had not
been well done. There was no subject to which the attention
of the Legislature would be more properly directed ; but
such was the amount of the property already bequeathed
for the purposes of education, that no child in the
kingdom ought to be, or would be uneducated, if those
funds were now properly applied. He was the first to
allow that no sums voted by the Legislature—no pub-
lic endowments—should be spared to attain so important
an object. But the House ought first to insist that the
property already left for that purpose, by benevolent in-
dividuals, was applied to the purposes for which it was
bequeathed by them. His inquiries showed that no less a sum
than a million sterling will be applicable to the purposes of
national education, if the directions of the original donors
were most implicitly complied with. ( Hear, hear, hear.)
He was authorized in stating that not one-fourth part of that
sum, strictly speaking, was expended for the purposes for
which it was intended.—( Hear, hear.) When so much re-
gard was evinced for the rights of property and the security of
vested interests among the higher classes, was it too much to de-
mand, on behalf of the neglected, impoverished classes, that the
preperty devoted to their instruction, should be honestly and
justly applied ?—( Hear, hear.) Was the subject of vested
interests and the rights of property merely a matter of division
when applied to the humbler classes? He would beg of his Hon.
Friend whose labours in that field none appreciated more than he
did to give to that Committee all the efficiency of which it was
capable, and he would therefore suggest, as a matter of
amendment, that the Committee should inquire, not only into
the present state of eduCation in England and Wales, but also
as to the amount and application of the various grants
already made for that purpose. He (Mr. Harvey) would take
the sense of the House upon. that amendment, unless the
Government, should deem it prudent, which he was satisfied
they would, to sanction the introduction of these words.
The purport of them was, and he was sure no reasonable
objection could be made to them, that the Committee
should inquire into the name and amount of all funds strictly
applicable to the education of the people.
The SPEAKER having read the motion with the amendment,
Mr. ROEBUCK trusted that the Hon. Member would
not press his motion, as it was the unanimous opinion of the
House that the motion should be put in its original form, and
that the point to whiCh the Hon. Member alluded should be
made the subject of a distinct inquiry. He had been in-
formed that the motion would not be carried if that amendment
had been linked to it, and therefore he hoped it would be
withdrawn.
Mr. BROTHERTON said he would give as an instance
of the beneficial effects of a salutary system_ of education, that
in Manchester there was a grammar school, the funds of which
amounted to 5,000/. per annum. There was- also a national
school, where 1,000 children were taught at an expence
of 6s. Bd. each. Now if the five thousand pounds had
been properly laid out, instead of two hundred persons being
thereby educated, there should be fifteen thousand. It had
been lately proposed to extend the benefits of that school,
and he (Mr. Brotherton) had no hesitation in saying
that the benefits would be derived not by the poor, but by the
rich. He cordially agreed in the motion of his Hon. Friend,
and he was quite convinced that there were sufficient funds,
if properly applied, to promote the purposes of education in
this country.
Mr. WARBURTON hoped the House would not agree to
the proposal of the member for Southwark, and would accede
to the motion of Mr. Roebuck. Mr. Harvey would, if his pro-
position were agreed to, embarrass the committee with labours
to which they could not attend, and extend their enqui-
ries to such a length as that it would be impossible
to bring them to a close during the Session, besides entailing
great expense upon the country. The motion of the member
for Southwark was a subject fit for the inquiry of a separate
Committee.
Sir R. PEEL thought it advisable that they should not
embarrass the Committee moved for by the Member for Bath,
with subjects which it might be well to refer to another
Committee. He held then a paper in his hand respecting
the inquiry of the Education Commissioners in parts of the
United Kingdom, but they had not been yet able to bring their
labours to a conclusion. If the House would grant any Com-
mittee at all, it would be well not to withdraw their attention
from the particular objects of it, and another Committee might
be appointed to which the subject of education could be gene-
rally referred. He hoped, with respect to the constitution of
the Committee (if the Hon. Gentleman proposed naming them
to-night), that the Members would be indifferently and fairly se-
lected, because that was the best way to insure confidence in
their deliberation, and free it from the suspicion of bias on
either side of the question.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.")
There might be all names of the highest respectability on the
Committee, but if there was a great preponderance of opinion,
there would be a prejudice against it. He would have the

Mr. P. THOMPSON rose for the purpose of asking an
explanation relative to a most erroneous statement of a speech
that had been lately published relative to an Hon. Friend
of his. The statement made by Mr. Prescott was, that the
Marquis of Chandos had publicly asserted, and that the state-
ment had been uncontradicted by any member of the late Ad-
ministration or any of its adherents—that far some time past
the Government had connived at the introduction of foreign
grain through the channel islands, duty free; and that it had been
been permitted in such quantities as to produce stagnation
in the price of corn.—( Hear, and a laugh.) When that state-
ment had been pointed cut to him (Mr. P. T.) by the lion.
Member for Norfolk, he observed that he did not believe the
report to be correct, for he felt satisfied that the Noble Lord,
the member for Buckinghamshire would not have made such a
statement without believing it perfectly true, and if he had
believed that it was true, lie should have called down upon the
Government, guilty of such practices, the severest penalties.
He (Mr. P. Thompson) had the pleasure since of hearing
from the Noble Lord that that statement was not true. But
as it was said that the report was uncontradicted, he thought
it due to the Noble Lord (Chandos), to the late Govern-
ment, and to himself, as being at the head of the department
most interested in the subject, to obtain a public contradiction
or explanation, which he was sure the Noble Lord was ready
to give ; and he himself (Mr. P. Thompson) gave a contra-
diction to those rumours, which he knew to be anonymously
circulated in the public papers. He was anxious, at the same
time, to call the attention of the Right Hon. Gentleman ( Mr.
Baring) who now filled the situation he (Mr. T.) lately did to
this "subject, because, if he were correctly informed, that Right
Honourable Gentleman had, on a former occasion, when
he ( Mr. T.) was not in his place, completely acquitted
the Government which preceded him of any want of zeal
or activity in endeavouring to put a stop to such proceedings.
He was the more satisfied with this declaration, because from
something which that Right Hon. Gentleman had said on an-
other occasion, led rather to the belief, that the change in
the Government would cause greater care and attention
to be paid to this particular point.—( Loud Cheers.) What-
ever might be his (Mr. T.'s) opinion respecting the political
consequences arising from the change in the Government, he
must say that as far as regarded te utmost attention that
could be given had been paid by the late Government to the
fullest extent that it could be paid by the Hon. Gentleman
( Mr. Baring.) lie well knew that rumours of this
kind were inustriously circulated, and for the reason that
he held an opinion in opposition to the present Corn Laws—for
that very reason he was anxious that they should be allowed to
work their full effect, and that it would not be said that
he imposed it in any way whatever. When the time
came, ho would move for certain papers, which he believed
there would be no objection to giving, but which would show
the attention that had been paid to this subject, and the
measures that it was in contemplation to take upon it, as soon
as the Parliament should meet. For the present he would be
content with this statement, as it would give the Noble Lord
(Chandos) who he knew was desirous of doing so—an oppor-
tunity of repudiating the speech that had been attributed
to him.

Lord CHANDOS said his attention had been called to
the subject, and he had no hesitation in stating that the re-
port was wholly incorrect—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. BARING rose, but spoke in so low a tone, that we
were unable for some time to catch the import of the Right
Hon. Gentleman's observations. We understood him, how-
over, to say that he recollected the case to which the Right
Hon. Gentleman alluded. He would state in reply, what he
considered to be a case very similar to that of which the Right
Hon. Gentleman had made mention. On one occasion on
which he (Mr. B.) was put in nomination for Essex, he was
accused on that occasion of being President of the Board of Trade,
and the argument then employed was, that any person hold-
ing that situation must be an advocate of free trade, and
unfit to superintend the concerns of agricultural districts. His
answer was, that whatever came before his notice and Par-
liament, would meet with that care and attention which a
sense of duty would create, and not at all to he operated on
by the mere fact of his holding either this or that situation.
He certainly did not impute any neglect to the Right
lion. Gentleman in his explanation of the other evening; what
he had stated was that one of the first subjects which came
under his notice in his present capacity was the fact of there
having been great fraud practised in the introduction of corn,
both in the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands, and he had
thought it necessary to make inquiry into that representation,
and on making the Board of Customs acquainted with his
wishes, he found what he had seen stated to be correct,
—that there had been great fraud practised in introducing
corn from the Isle of Man, and more especially from Guernsey.
A report was at present in progress, and as soon as that paper
was ready, he should certainly have it laid before the House,
upon which he hoped some measure would be proposed to the
House, which would prevent the evil increasing. As he had be-
fore stated, fraud did undoubtedly exist, and it therefore be-
came him as much to ascertain the extent as it would be in-
cumbent on Parliament to apply remedies for its removal. The
reason he had not before introduced a measure for the purpose was
in consequence of the papers being in such an confused state,
that he was anxious to get them into some arrangement, upon
which some general measure might be introduced. He should,
however, take the earliest opportunity of bringing in a bill
on the subject, when he should take cccasion to tell the House
the views which his Majesty's present Government entertained
on the question.

Mr. P. THOMPSON would just ask the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman one question, whether in the bill to be introduced it
was intiTy4etletotaiiAd its provisions to the Channel Islands,
as weiks** wk. i
; ,
tbA a 7 . -.
kr"
43ARI VP . .f there. was any one part of. the
s iilqrit:3VosiileiikuN , . ther, it was in the detection of
f ' Aitille jilau ~-,:c„, ey—and certainly, therefore, its
'i '-i-,'",..
~.,,

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 1835.

Committee so constructed, that it should be a fair representa-
tion of opposite opinions. But on the present Committee
there was a great preponderance of opinion on one side—there
were eight of that side of the House and only four on this.
He did not want an exact balance ; he only claimed the power to
himself—for there were many new Members.of the present
Parliament whom they ought to initiate into the proceedings
of the House—he only claimed the power of adding
Members to the Committee, though he would not exclude
those who sat before. He owned that though he was him-
self a Member of the Committee, it would not be in
his power to give a regular attendance. He would much
rather do this by amicable negociation, and that they
should agree upon the names. The fairness of the prin-
ciple was admitted, and the House had recognised this as
the true way of constituting committees, so that they should
give a fair representation of opposite opinions. He would
concur in the motion, and he only begged that the naming of
the Committee should be postponed till to-morrow.
Mr. ROEBUCK said, he had no objection to concur in the
suggestion of the Right Hon. Baronet. He would just ob-
serve that there were many gentlemen now on the Committee
sitting on his side of the House who, when the Committee
was formed, sat on the other side.—( Laughter.) Though he
had moved for the committee, it had
,been formed by the Go-
vernment which then existed in office, to his ( Mr. R.'s) wishes.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY said that the intimation of the
Right Hon. Baronet gave him great pleasure, and he hoped
he would sanction the appointment of a Committee to ascer-
tain the real amount of property applicable to the educa-
tion of the people. Though he would not assume that
this intimation was a pledge to this effect, he trusted
that when lie should move for a Committee for that
purpose, it would have the Right Hon. Baronet's sanction.
Without meaning to divide the House upon the subject,
he would throw out a hint as to whether there was not
something in the terms in which the motion was couched, that
would render it inoperative. Amongst other things were the
following as part of the motion—" And to consider the expe-
diency of further grants in aid of education." He could not
understand how they could report upon the expediency of fur-
ther grants in ignorance of the amount of property now appli-
cable to this purpose. In order that the inquiry might not be
rendered co-operative, he would bring the subject at no dis-
tant period before the House.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he agreed with the Right. Hon.
Baronet, that in the constitution of committees there ought to
be as much fairness as possible. He would say that he had
this object in view in the original formation of this Committee.
—( Hear. hear.)
Mr. FINN' rose and said he wished to put a question to the
Right Hon. Baronet, which he hoped he would have no ob-
jection to answer.
The SPEAKER said he was sure the Hon. Gentleman
would desist from the question he was about to put, as lie
must be aware that he was not acting in accordance with the
rules of the House in putting such questions when regular mo-
tions were before them.
THE RATHCORMAC AFFAIR.
Mr. O'DW Y R having been called upon by the
Speaker, said he rose in pursuance of a motion which
he had given some nights since that a report might he laid
before the House relative to the late affair at Rathcormac, as
well as that the troops should always fire with effect. When
he gave notice of this motion, it appeared to excite, owing
to misconception, some decree of ridicule from an Hon.
Gentleman on the other side of the House. If. however, that
gentleman would only consent to listen to justice, he thought
he would be convinced that there was no occasion for
such a display. He had felt it his duty to issue a circular let-
ter to the Commanding-officer, that when the King's troops
came into collision with the people, that they should not be
allowed to fire wide of them, but that practice should
be discontinued ; and that when they are ordered to fire,
that they should fire with a view to deal destruction on them.
—( Heer, hear.) He did not wish to pass any recrimi-
natory observations on the officer who had felt it his
duty to issue that letter—it was not his intention to im-
pute any unworthy motive to the officer in question, for
he knew that he had on all occasions administered his high
duty in a manner the most consistent with humanity ; but he
thought that, if such orders had really been given,
that the House should be made acquainted with them—
( Hear, hear)—whether it was wise, in the present state
of Ireland,. to allow an officer in command to have such full
powers was another question. He again repeated he had no
accusation to make against the officer who had made use of
this exercise of power, hut he had felt it his (Mr.
O'Dwyer's) duty to make the House acquainted with the fact.
The Honourable Gentleman concluded by moving, " That
there be laid before- the House a copy of an order re-
cently issued to officers commanding troops in Ireland,
directing, that in future military parties shall not be
granted to .ssist in the collection of tithes, without special
orders from the officer commanding in chief, and directing,
that in the event of any collision between the King's
troops and the populace, the highly improper practice
hitherto pursued at times, of firing over the heads of the pea-
santry be discontinued, and that tile troops shall always fire
with effect, or words to this import."
Sir HENRY H ARD INGE had heard with great satisfac-
tion the statement of the Hon. Gentleman without at all crimi-
nating his ( Sir Henry's) Gallant Friend who gave the order,
for he was perfectly satisfied that his Gallant Friend was on
every occasion animated by a spirit of kindness for the people.
—(Hear, hear, hear.) With regard to the motion of the
Honourable Member, he did not understand whether in
the terms he had used, he alluded to an order
directing that in future military parties should not, without
special orders from the Commanding Officer, he called upon
to assist, or whether it alluded to any other order ? lie
begged to state to the Honourable Member, that if he alluded
to any order for the collection of tithes, which was
merely in effect a circular order, there would not be the
slightest objection on the part of the Government to lay that
on the table, because that order merely laid down the mode in
which military aid should be granted to the tithe-owner ;
but if the Hon. Member alluded to confidential instructions,
given to the Gallant General, or to the officers commanding
any of the regiments he, (Sir. H. H.) was afraid it would
be his duty to resist the production of any such order,
on account of tho very inconvenient precedent which would
he established by adopting such a course now. With the
permission of the House, he would mention what his Gallant
Friend had stated upon one occasion, which would show that
upon all subjects connected with the military he was always
actuated by a kind feeling towards the people.—(llear. )
He then proceeded to read the letter of his Gallant Friend,
which he said was written in consequence of a requisition,
emanating from the magistrates, for the employment of the
military on the occasion referred to. If that was the order
which the Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. O'Dwyer) desired
to have produced, he ( Sir H. H.) had no objections to the
production of it, or any other circular emanating from the same
source; but if it was required to produce the confidential com-
munications that took place between the commander of the troops
and the officer of the day, he felt it his duty to oppose any
such motion. When the Hon. Gentleman made his motion,
lie ( Sir H. Hardinge) wrote to his Gallant Friend on the sub-
ject, and in reply he stated that he was desirous not only
of having that order laid upon the table, or any other
order that ever issued from him, because he ( Sir H. Hardinge)
was confident that all would redound to the honour and credit
of that distinguished officer. But on principle he felt
himself bound, in order to prevent the establishing of
a precedent, to oppose a motion for the publication of
such confidential communications. As the Honourable
Member (Mr. O'Dwyer) has expressed himself satisfied with
the conduct of his ( Sir H. Hardinge's) gallant Friend, he hoped
he would not persevere in his motion, for, should lie perse-
vere, the most inconvenient results would follow.—(Hear,
hear.) The Honourable Member has stated, that the military
employed on the melancholy occasion referred to, could have
dislodged the peasantry, had they so pleased, without the ef-
fusion of blood. Now he (Sir H. H.) totally dissented from
this proposition, and had the Hon. Member read the evidence
carefully taken before the Coroner's Inquest, he was confident
he (Mr. O'D. ) would have arrived at an opposite conclusion.
Ile repeated, he was, from principle, opposed to the pro-
duction of any confidential communications ; he was willing,
however, to lay upon the table any orderi or circulars that
were of a public nature.
Mr. O'DW YER thought that it might have been possi-
ble to dislodge the peasantry without going to the extremity
of firing upon them. Without divulging the orders which
had been given to the officers employed in that melancholy
occasion, he thought that the Government might have com-
municated to the House and the public sufficient information
to satisfy the unfortunate peasantry, and the relatives of the
persons killed.
Mr. H. GR ATTAN was never more surprised than at the
tone which had been adopted by the Government on this oc-
casion, and at the sneers which he had heaid from the other
side of the House. What did the conduct of Government imply
but to tell the military to shoot the peasantry where they could ?
In one of the battles during the late war it was said that the
two armies being near each other, the first volley laid low
seven hundred men. Now, this was what he called firing
hawhichhaving
listenedo
thedy voiceto give f Majorhnnta n
I)nVya_..l t e7r 2 fulltne n credit
,
point blank ; but on the late melancholy occasion in Ireland—
inmor
close to their victims, and yet, comparatively, little execu-
tion was done. Lately, again, a person. was killed in the
public streets of a populous town in broad daylight by the
Orange banditti. All these things had been occasioned by
the accession of the present Government; and it was, therefore,
absolutely necessary to protect the peasantry and the Irish
people against the consequences of the encouragement which
was thus given to such occurrences by the existence of
a Tory Ministry.—(Hear, hear.) Had the present Ap-
ministration not come into power, he was sure that the pea-
santry killed at Rathcormac would not have fallen; for such
massacres were caused by the impunity which the parties
knew they would experience from the magistracy, from
the Irish authorities, and from the Government here.
He would beg to inquire what was the use of such an order
if it was not published ? The soldiers of course are aware
that whatever orders they receive from their commanding
officers they must obey. But there was another party whom
it was important should know what orders were issued to the
military, as they would then probably keep out of danger.—
(Hear, and a laugh.) The Government, he contended, were
bound to make these orders public, because their publication
would most likely have the effect of making the people guard
against the danger to which their opposition would subject
them. It was not only necessary to make these orders public
in that House, but in every parish and town-land in Ireland.—
Hear.) In illustration of the necessity of such a course, lie
would just mention that in one of these cases of collision be-
tween the military and the people, two men were shot ; and twe
others, naked and unarmed, stepped into the places of those whe
had fallen, so little conscious were they of the danger to which
they were exposed. He would respectfully submit to the in-
dividuals lately come into that House, and more especially ti
his Majesty's Government, to give up those high prejudices and

factious proceedings by which they had so long governed
that country (Ireland). If the Government made it their prat
tice to return thanks to the military, because their conduct had
met the approval of two clerical magistrates who acted upon the
occasion, and who were interested in the collection of the tithes,
they would stamp their Administration with disgrace. He
would tell them fearlessly that it would be impossible for them
to carry on their Government with security to property, or peace
to the country, if they proceeded with such violent measures as
were in the orders which he had moved for the production of—
measures which were more fitted for the atmosphere of Russia
than of that country.--( Hear! hear.) He called upon all
honest and independent gentlemen to come forward that
night, and protect them from such sanguinary proceedings—•
he called upon them to protect the country and the people of
Ireland from the consequences of such sanguinary proceed-
ings. He would recommend the Government to look to the
years 1795 and 1796, when similar orders had been issued. He
referred them to the dismemberment of the militia in the North
by order of General Lake. At that time there was a man
who objected to those sanguinary orders—that individual was
the father of the present speaker, and whose name the people
of Ireland held in everlasting remembrance.—( Loud cheers.)
Let it not go forth to the world that the accession of ...he pre-
sent Ministry to power was marked by such sanguinary
scenes as those which had been enacted at Rethcormac.
If the orders which had been issued were good, why
should they not be disclosed, and if the contrary,
why had they not been rescinded? He should press the ques-
tion to a division, even if he stood alone, or if his Hon. Friend
thought proper to withdraw his motion.
Sir CHARLES D'ALBIAC said that as a general
officer of the Staff of Great Britain, he could not re-
frain from offering a few observations upon the ques-
tion before the House, though he would not follow
the Honourable Gentleman who had just sat down, through
all the extraneous matter he had introduced. In cases when
the military were called out to suppress riots, the assemblies
must always understand, he supposed, that after the reading
of the Riot Act, and the orders of the acting magis-
trate to do their duty, that to remain on the spot was
to expose themselves to inevitable danger. No duty was so
painful, so distressing, and so difficult, as that of suppressing
disturbances, as the troops must be conscions that they were
about to take the lives of their fellow-subjects, and perhaps of
dearer connections.—( Hear, hear, hear.) But the first duty
of a British soldier was obedience, and if a proper discipline
was not kept up, the consequences would be more injurious
than those of the greatest severity. This :he had seen in the
case of Bristol.—(" Oh, oh," and Question.") Ile declared
that after the full knowledge of the whole of that unfortunate
occurrence at Bristol, he was sure that it had proceeded en-
tirely and exclusively from a mistaken lenity. ( Cries of
" Oh, oh !" and " Question.") A mistaken lenity, he re-
peated, most scandalously and shamefully abused. If the
troops had done their duty by their moving about actively
and keeping the mob in motion, no evil woul have ensued,
like that which did occur, or at least there would not have
been more than half a dozen broken heads.—(Laughter, and
cries of " Oh, oh.") If that day had been such a day as
this, the whole city would have been in flames.—( Hear.)
He begged, in connection with this subject, to say a few words
upon a motion made last night.—( Oh 1 and " Chair, chair.")
The SPEAKER requested the lion. Gentleman to keep to
the question. He could not remark upon the motion of last
night, unless it related to the subject before the House.
Sir C. D'ALBIAC replied that it did relate to the ques-
tion, but he did not pursue his remarks.
Mr. L ITTLETON hoped his Honourable Friend, the
Member for Drogheda, would not press his motion to a divi-
sion, because if he did he would be obliged to vote with the
Gallant Secretary for Ireland. The Learned Member did the
rentleman who commanded the King's troops in Ireland no
mere than justice, that it would be quite impossible to find a
man more thoroughly imbued with the principles of humanity
and benevolence.
Mr. O'C ONN E LL did net like to enter into an Irish question
of great importance by any thing like what. .might be called a
by-path ; but lie would just observe that the people at Rath-
cormac did not expect any firing at all. They had been told,
and he believed rightly, that it was a trespass to enter an en-
closed field for the purpose of levying tithe, and they did not
believe that it was intended to enforce a trespass by means of
the soldiery. He would not say more upon the point at pre-
sent, but he must protest against the doctrine that had fallen
from the Hon. and Gallant Officer on the other side, and he
did so the more readily because it related to this country.
The Hon. and Gallant Officer had said that the first duty of a
soldier was obedience. True, it was so, if the order was it-
self lawful ; but if the soldier was directed to do any thing
against the law, and he were to execute that order to the ex-
tent of taking away the life of another, he would be guilty of
murder, even though he obeyed his officer or the magistrate.
Sir CHARLES D'ALBIAC begged to explain. His
principle was this—that if an officer were ordered by Lord
Hill, or the Secretary of the Home Department, to obey the
orders of the metropolitan magistrates, and he were to refuse
to obey them, he would throw himself open to the laws of his
country for any ill consequence that ensued, and to reprehen-
sion and punishment by his Sovereign.
Mr. O'CONNELL did not mean to say that the Hon. and
Gallant Officer was not bound to obey a legitimate order, but
the Hon. and Gallant Officer conceived that it was his duty to
obey, at all events ; and that the duty of obedience justified the
act on his part.
Sir CHARLES D'ALBIAC—Most unquestionably I say
it is. If the magistrate should give ever so imprudent or ca-
pricious an order, if I were not sensible of any impropriety in
obeying the order of that magistrate, it would be my duty to
obey that order.
Sir R. PEEL must, in the first place, bear his tes-
timony to all that had been said in favour, not only of the gal
lantry and distinguished services that had marked the career
of Sir Hussey Vivian, but also of his humanity. The real
question before the House was, whether it was desirable to
establish the precedent of calling for the production of confi-
dential orders issued from the Horse Guards to the troops. If
the practice had hitherto prevailed of firing over the beads of
the people, and that had led the people to rush in upon the
soldiery, so that a greater loss of life had ultimately taken
place than would have happened if the first fire had been done
effectively, might it not be perfectly consistent with the in-
terests of humanity to give a caution to the troops—(Great
cheering)—not "to lead the people into error by that prac-
tice in future? Might it not also be perfectly consistent
with humanity to specify to the commanding officers, who were
responsible for the result, in what manner they might conduct
the delicate and difficult service in which they were engaged,
that should at the same time ensure the least risk of the effu-
sion of human blood with the greatest probability of restoring
and preserving the public peace? But if those suggestions
and orders were to be promulgated to the world, those who
wished to attack the troops would know the precise course to
be pursued for that purpose. The order in question was made
for the double object of providing protection for the people and
for the military. Both objects would, however, be defeated
by the promulgation of this order.
Mr. HUME : The Right Honourable Baronet appeared
anxious that the officers and soldiers acting under them
should be protected ; but his feelings of sensibility stopped
there—he had no regard apparently for the people.—(Cheers
by the Opposition. )
Sir ROBERT PEEL: I say at once, Sir, that the object
of those who issued the order was not so much to provide for
the security of the troops, as to provide for' the security of the
people.--( Cheers. )
Mr. HUME : No doubt that was the Right Honourable
Baronet's belief ; but what was the effect of the order ?
Could it answer any good purpose to keep those who were
liable to the additional punishment, so to call it, which the
Honourable Baronet hail made out a case why the order ought
to be produced. He would a.;1( the Right Honourable Baro-
net whether, because this was a new and unheard of order that
was therefore a reason why it should not be produced, particu-
larly when it was shown that many lives had been sacrificed
to this unknown law ? The House ought to persevere till the
order was produced; and he, for one, should certainly support
the motion of the Honourable Member for Drogheda.
Mr. CHARLES GRANT szid, one reason pressed upon
his mind in favour of the motion—for it struck him that if the
order was (as he believed it to be) a. humane order, its huma-
nity consisted in its being a public orders—( Cheers.) A se-
cret order would be more in the nature of an act of inhumanity.
Sir ROBERT PEEL—AII he asked of the House was to
leave the matter for the present in the hands of Government.
After a few words from Mr. SHEIL, Mr. SHAW, and Mr.
I le RDY,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL wished if possible to take some
course on the question which would satisfy what he considered
the just wishes of a great portion of the House. He could
feel no doubt when the Right Honourable Gentleman who
first opposed the motion had told them that the production of
the order would be injurious to the public service, that he
must feel there was good and satisfactory reasons for his taking
upon himself the responsibility of the refusal—( Hear.) ()lithe
other hand, he (Lord John Russell), like his Honourable
Friend near him, did feel that it was an order of such a na-
ture that its humanity consisted—almost entirely consisted—in
its being known to and understood by those whose ignorance of
its contents might involve them in a scene of slaughter to
which they would not otherwise be expoSed--( Hear, hear.)
Between these two difficulties he was desirous of offering a
suggestion to the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, which he
trusted would remove both. It was, whether the Commander-
in-Chief, Sir Hussey Vivian, having, as he understood, no
objection to give publicity to the order, some order might not
be issued, or some regulation established in Ireland, by which
this order might be promulgated and made generally known
to the public. If this were done, he thought the House
would be satisfied, and that the order itself, being of a confi-
dential nature, or of a description which it is not usual to
produce, could not fairly be required to be laid before the
Housc.—( Hear, hear. )
Sir HENRY Id ARDINGE agreed with the Noble Lord
( Lord John Russell) and the Hon. Member for Inverness •
shire, that it might be very possible for the Commander-in-
Chief, not only in Ireland, but in England and Scotland also, to
promulgate the substance of the order in such a manner as
that the public might be informed of the course the military
were instructed to adopt, in the event of any of those unfor-
tunate and unhappy collisions in which they were sometimes
involved with the metropolis.—( Cheers.) Under these cir-
cumstances, he trusted it would be satisfactory to the House
that his Right Hon. Friend near him would communicate with
the Commander-in-Chief, and that such an order should be
promulgated, as would remove any doubts or uncertainty that
might exist.—( Cheers.) He hoped this explanation would
be satisfactory, and at the same time he trusted the House
would agree with him as to the inconvenience of laying down
the precedent now sought to be established.—( Question.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL hoped, after what had just fallen
from the Right Hon. Gentleman, that the Hon. Member for
Drogheda would not object to withdraw his motion.
Mr. O'D WYE R was proceeding to address the House,
amidst a general cry of " Question !" when—.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that after the turn the debate I
had taken, he apprehended it must occur to every one, that if
publicity were the object in view, the mere production of a
Parliamentary paper could not attain it. Again he said, leave
the matter in the hands of the responsible Government.
Mr. HUME wished to ask whether the Right,Hon. Gen-
tleman's meaning was, that the order in question should be
cancelled, and another issued by the Commandc,r.in-Chief,
applicable to the whole of the United Kinge.om ? If this
were the intention of Government, nothing could be more
satisfactory.
Sir HENRY HARDINGE explained his meaning to he,
that an older would be issued by the Commander-in. Chief,
which would show to the whole of the United Kingdom what
course would be pursued under similar circumstances to those
of Rathco:.mac.
After a few words from Mr. FINN—
Mr. O'DWYER consented to withdraw his motion, on the
understanding that another order, applicable to all parts of
the United Kingdom, would be issued.
The motion was accordingly withdrawn.
BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS.

Mr. GISBO RN E, in rising to make the motion of which
he had given notice, begged, in the first instance, to set him-
self right with the House, by stating that he had since been
informed that the object he had in view could be effected by
a simple resolution. He therefore simply proposed to move,
" That in all cases where an election shall be declared void
on the ground of bribery or treating, it is expedient that the
expense of the petitioners should be borne by the public."
He believed not only that it was perfectly competent to the
House to carry this object into effect by a specific resolution,
but that it was in strict accordance with the practice which
had been constantly pursued in similar inquiries, even without
any Act of Parliament on the subject. His motion, in its
original shape, proceeded thus : " but that in every case in
which a sitting member shall be declared, on the ground of
bribery or treating, incapable of sitting again in the same Par-
liament, the expenses of the petitioners shall be borne by the
unseated member." It had, however, occurred to him, that
the object of the motion might be effected by the House adopt-
ing a resolution that it be an instruction to the Committee in
all cases in which bribery and treating were proved against

Committee of an act of bribery on the part of the petitioner
—if the question as to his guilt was not gone into at all, how-
ever guilty he might in reality be, still he would be entitled
to all his expenses.—(Hear, hear.) He felt that he would
not be doing his duty it he did not oppose this motion in its
present shape, especially as it pledged the House to a resolu-
tion different to the present practice of Committees. It
might be right that a petitioner in such a case should be borne
out harmless, and without being put to any expense—of that
he would at present give no opinion, but he would warn the
House against giving a precipitate vote upon this or any other
subject, without being exactly aware bow far the resolution
might carry them.
Mr. HUME said that if his Hon. Friend the Member for
Derbyshire were to wait until the matter was settled in the
other House, he might wait a long time ; at the same time he
(Mr. Hume) acknowledged that he could not exactly see his
way through his Hon. Friend's motion. The principle was
sufficiently clear, that as the public suffered by the bribery,
the public ought to pay the expenses ; but while this principle
was admitted, it ought, for the safety of the public, to be sub-
jected to the strictest rules. He thought that his Hon. Friend
ought to postpone his motion for the-present.—( Hear.)
Mr. JERVIS objected to the public bearing any part of the
expense, and thought that the costs should fall upon the party
who was unsuccessful in the petition.
Mr. BARING would put a case to show the Hon. Member
that his motion was likely to fail in the object which he had in
view. Suppose a person who had been guilty of bribery and
corruption in his own person, and who therefore did not wish
to petition, putting a man of straw up as a petitioner : in that
case no bribery could be proved against the petitioner ; but if
the petition were successful, all the advantage would be in fa-
vour of a person who had in reality been guilty of bribery and
corruption, and still that person, according to the terms of the
motion, would be entitled to his expenses.
After a few words from an Hon. Member,

Mr. G I SBOR NE said that he admitted tbe force of a great
deal that had been said by the Right Hon. Baronet, and would
postpone his motion till a future day.
The motion was accordingly withdrawn.
Mr. FOSTER then withdrew the amendment upon the
motion of the Hon. Member for Derbyshire, of which he had
,riven notice, and stated, that whenever the question came to
be again discussed, he hoped that " intimidation or violence"
would be equally guarded against.---( Hear, hear.)
THE RATHCORMAC INQUEST.

the candidates, to report that the petition, on their parts,
was frivolous and vexatious. He merely suggested
this as a point that had occurred to him, but the
form in which 'he would now word his motion was
this :—" That in all cases in which the election shall be
declared void, or the sitting Members shall be unseated, on
the ground of bribery and corruption, and in which it shall not
be reported to the House by the Committee appointed to try
the petition that the petitioners have been guilty of similar
practices, it is expedient that the expenses of the petitioners
shall be borne by the public at large." The ground on which
he brought forward the motion was to afford additional faci-
lities for the prevention of bribery ; the fact being that the ex-
pense of proving bribery and corruption before the House
afforded a positive protection in every case in which a rich
man was opposed by a poor man. Bribery could be committed
with perfect impunity and security in every case in which a rich
and powerful party in a borough were opposed only by less
wealthy people.—' Hear, hear.) He held that in no case
could the public money be better expended than in purifying
the constitution of that House, and that it was its duty to use

Mr. FE ARGUS O'CONNOR then rose to move for a
copy of the evidence taken before the Coroner on an inquest
held at Ratheormac, in the county of Cork, upon the bodies of
nine persons who lost their lives at Gurtroc on the 18th of
December last : also a copy of the finding of the jury, and a
correspondence which took place between the Government and
the Military Secretary and the Magistrates of the county of
Cork, relative to the granting of troops for the collection of
tithes and arrears of tithes in the palish of Gurtroc. His
present object was not to inculpate the magistracy, and he
should therefore confine the few remarks he should make
to the conduct of the military upon that occasion. The Hon.
Member for Meath had said that there were nine men
killed upon that occasion, and nine wounded. The Hon'
Member was entirely mistaken as to the numbers. There
were nine men killed, on whom an inquest was held, and there
were two more carried away by their friends, and on wham no
inquest was held ; seven were mortally wounded, and thirty-
five more were more or less wounded. In all there were more
than seventy shots fired. It was said that the military bad
endeavoured to intimidate the people before they fired ; but if
he could get a court-martial upon the military, which was his
object, he should be able to establish an absolute want of dis-
cipline on the part of the commanding officer, and of gross
and extraordinary cruelty on the part of the soldiers. Tbe
Hon. Member was proceeding, when he was interrupted by
Sir HENRY HAR DING E, who put it to the Hon. Mem-
ber whether, in the present state of the question, it was proper
to bring torward such exciting subjects; and hoped, after the
feeling previously shown in the House upon the subject, that
he would not persevere in the motion.
Mr. O'CONNOR said, that being Member for the county
of Cork, where the unfortunate transaction took place, and
having been counsel for the friends of the victims at the in-
quest, he thought it a hard case that he was not allowed to
bring the subject before the House.
Mr. SHAW reminded the Hon. and Learned Member, that
the soldiery were amenable to the criminal Hear.) ,
Mr. H UME was understood to agree with the Hon. and
Learned Member for the University of Dublin.
Mr. O'CONNOR then withdrew his motion, at the saints
time stating, that when the proper time arrived he would
bring the case fully before the House.
Sir H. II A RDINGE expressed his conviction that the
conduct of the Commanding-officer, if he were ever brought to
trial, would be found to he perfectly proper and correct.
DIVISION OF THE HOUSE.
Sir S. WHALLEY then brought forward his motion--'
,‘ That as a number of Members, larger than there is any pre"
cedent of, has divided within the present House without in-
convenience, it is expedient, with a view to save time, and to
relieve the Speaker from an unpleasant duty, that all division,
shall for the future take place within the House." He said
that there were great inconveniences from the present manner
of dividing, especially in regard to the loss of time, and from
Members, in large divisions, losing their seats. Another in-
convenience was, that after large divisions there was such coo.
fusion in the House that no business could be transacted.
Mr. WARBURTON said that if means had been taken by
the House to take the names of Members in each division, ho
might, perhaps, agree to the motion of the Hon. Member for
Marylebone ; but as the Hon. Member's motion would add 0
the great difficulty already existing, of ascertaining the name!+
he would oppose any such motion, as long as the House tools
no steps towards regularly taking the names of Members vot-
ing upon each division.
Mr. PR YME recommended the adoption of the suggestion,
that the Speaker should be empowered to direct either side t°
withdraw to the lobby in case of a division, should it be coesi-
dered necessary for either party to do so.
Sir GEORGE CLERK said by one party withdrawing t°
the lobby, there would be less confusion and loss of time, 08,1 s
by any other course that could be pursued. Much inconven'
ence would be found to result from the majority passing °ver
to the seats previously occupied by the minority. At preset!,
the arrangement was, that the party that opposed the Speaker
decision on any question, had to go out; thus it often ban
pened that the majority might be compelled to go into Ow
lobby if they called for a division.
Sir SAMUEL WEI ALLE Y said that after the feeling °I
the House had been so stt ongly displayed, he would not Press
his resolution.—( Hear.) The object he had in view in bring'
ing it forward was solely to promote the convenience of tilts
House. If Hon. Gentlemen had adopted his views upon
this point, he had intended to suggest, with regard to take
the divisions, that the Clerk should accompany the Tellers--:
on taking the divisions—with a printed list, and that k°
should prick with a pin, opposite the name of each Member'
as he voted.
The motion was then withdrawn.
LOCAL COURTS.

every possible engine in its power for 'the detection and pu-
nishment of cases of bribery. He did not know what objection
could be urged against the motion; he believed that the
amount of expense it could entail upon the public would be ex-
tremely small, that bribery would be greatly diminished, and
that it would act as a prevention rather than as a cure. He
would put a case in which such a resolution as the present
would be very beneficial. They all knew that in many
cases in which bribery was committed to a great extent,
no man had an interest in bringing it forward, because, where
both parties had resorted to the same means of corrupting the
voters, the unsuccessful candidate knew he would not benefit
himself by unseating the other Member. But why should not
the honest, uncorrupted, and independent electors have a ready
and unexpensive mode of coming before the house, and showing
that the corruption was so general and extensive, that their
rights were in fact swamped, and rendered of no avail? He
bad been informed that the objection to the present motion
which would be urged on the part of the Hon. and Learned
Attorney-General was, that it was not competent to the House
to impose these expenses on the public by a simple resolution,
and that it ought to be done by a Bill ; now he objected to
bringing in a bill, because it would not meet. the case of the
present Parliament; he wished the alteration to laply to the
election petitions already in progress, of which he knew nothing,
and with the merits of which he was wholly unacquainted.
The present motion had reference to no particular party or
case. He wished it to come into'operation at once, and denied
its being an ex post facto law, because it was merely an equi-
valent to a reward on the detection of bribery, imposing no ad-
ditional punishment on the party involved thin that which
arose from providing greater facilities for its detection. He
merely wished to carry the motion as a matter of principle,
leaving the details to be settled and carried into effect here-
after. It might be objected that the resolution would give rise
to frivolous and vexatious proceedings. In the first place, the
parties must run all the risk of a great outlay of money, and
considerable expense—an inconvenience to which they were not
likely to expose themselves unnecessarily and without cause.
The Hon. Gentleman concluded by making the motion, which
was seconded, and the question was then put.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that his attention
had only been recently called to the subject, and that he had
consequently been unable to give it that consideration which he
was anxious to bestow on every subject, whatever its individual
importance might be. As he understood the Hon. Gentleman,
he had appealed to him whether there was any difficulty in the
resolution he proposed. It certainly appeared to him that, with
respect to the second part of it, there was very great difficulty.
The Hon. Gentleman disapproved of the existing law in this
respect. He really thought the resolution he proposed would
make the matter worse. To fetter the judgment of an election
gommittee, who are to decide upon their oaths according to the
evidence, to declare that in certain eases the petition should be
considered frivolous and vexatious, whether the committee
thought so or not, did appear to him a very inconvenient and
somewhat awkward mode of proceeding to put down bribery
and corruption. He had no intention whatever of opposing
the spirit of the resolution—ie could have none. He was ready
to cancur with any Hon. Member on either side of the House
in any measure having for its object the correction of bribery
and corruption, or of violence and intimidation at elections.
He could assure his Hon. Friend that if he would adopt the
more legitimate course of introducing some bill for that pur-
pose, he would give him the best assistance in private, and also
by his vote in public, by supporting the measure as far as he
conceived it calculated to produce beneficial results.—( Hear.)
He thought this a very inconvenient mode of introducing the
subject. In the first place, he did not know, supposing the
House to concur with the Hon. mover of the Resolution, how
it could be carried into effect. Undoubtedly the House had the
power of voting a sum of money for this or any other purpose, and
of including it in the Appropriation Bill at the end of the session,
and by that means obtaining the consent of the Lords and of
the Crown ; but he did not apprehend that a mere resolution
of that House would have the effect of a general law, declaring
that one whole class of expense's should be paid out of the
public purse, without the slightest reference to the individual
circumstances or urgency of each particular case. He con-
ceived that though it was in the power of the House to vote a
sum of money for a"particular discovery, arid to include it in
the Appropriation Bill afterwards, it would scarcely be com-
petent to them by some general resolution to award a sum of
money to every petitioner without reference to the merits of
each case, and thus give the resolution the effect of a general
law. It would be necessary in every case to adopt a different
resolution, and the House would thereby bind itself to deter-
mine upon the merits of each. He would conclude by again
recommending the Hon. Gentleman to adopt the more regular
course of introducing a Bill to adapt the regulations he thought
necessary to cases of bribery and corruption ; and he had no
objection to add—adverting to a notice of amendment he bad
seen—to cases of violence and intimidation.
Mr. WYNN expressed his entire concurrence in the opinion
expressed by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who had just
sat down. He considered it decidedly against every rule of prac-
tice, and the whole spirit of the law, to withdraw the consi-
deration of every individual case from the authorit, of the
House, and• to decide every case that might arise by Act of
Parliament. The Act fixed the payment of costs in certain
cases on the sitting Members : a resolution of the House had
no power to impose it on others. He thought the motion, if
it were carried, would give rise to an incalculable quantity of
frivolous and vexatious 'objections; and that in almost every
case of a contested election, they would have petitions pre-
sented complaining of the return.
Sir J. CAMPBELL was understood to say that the motion
only applied to petitioners who were successful. If the peti-
tioner succeeded in unseating the Member, then be was to
have his expenses, and not otherwise. He thought that this
was a rule which might very properly apply to all cases.
Sir ROBERT PEEL was satisfied that the House would
never consent to affirm a resolution,. pledging the public to pay
all the expenses of successful petitioners who might not them-
selves be found guilty of bribery, and that without there being
any limit or restriction as to those expenses. In the present
instance, however, the Hon. Member for Derbyshire had given
notice of a motion, which the House had met to discuss, but
that motion the Hon. Member bad chosen to alter, and they
were now called on, withotit having received any notice, to
agree to another motion, which called upon the House to
pledge the public to pay the expenses of petitions in all cases
where the elections shall be declared void on the ground of
bribery, and that without limitation or specification. He ( Sir
R. Peel) hoped that the House would not agree to a motion
of this nature, without having received notice of it. He stood
there as the guardian of the public funds, and he should be
unwilling that the public should sustain any injury, without
his standing up in defence of it. The resolution as it now
stood stated—" That in all cases in which the election shall
be declared void, or the sitting Members shall be unseated
on the ground of bribery and corruption, and in which it shall
not be reported to the House by the Committee appointed
to try the petition, that the petitioners have been guilty of
similar practices, it is expedient that the expenses of the pe-
titioners shall be borne by the public at large." This
assumed that there was no other petitioner but the candidate.
But a petition might come from voters. Another view of the
case was, that according to the present practice of Election
Committees, it is not usual to go into the case of the peti-
tioner at all. But the Hon. Member by his motion said, that
in case the Member was unseated, and no bribery was reported
by the Committee to have taken place on the other side, then
the expenses of the petitioner were to fall upon the public.
He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) said, that it was not
sufficient that the Committee should make no report. lie
would say that the Committee ought specifically to report
that the petitioner was not guilty of bribery or corruption.
Ought the Committee not to examine into the question of
whether the petitioner was guilty of bribery or not 2---( Hear.)
But the Hon. Member said, that if no report was made by the

In answer to a question by Sir JOHN CAMPBELL, ,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL stated that he intencie.ll
to give notice of his intention of moving for leave to bring.ij
a Bill to facilitate the administration of justice in Loc
Courts.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. FINN said that he was nnxious to put a question to
the Right Hon. Baronet ( Sir R. Peel) on a subject whico
seriously affected the peace of Ireland. He wished to lo°.
whether the statement which he had seen in some of the nowl
papers was correct—namely, that his Majesty had receice?
certain addresses from an illegal and unconstitutional sociotia
It was stated that the Orangemen of Fermanagh, Cork, 6,_112.
Down had presented addresses, and he wished to know whet
his Majesty had been recommended by his responsible adviser
to receive them ?
est
Sir R. PEEL recommended the Hon. Member to roll 0
his question when the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland W
in his place. He was himself unable to give an answer. re
Mr. FINN said that he would put the question on a fue"'
occasion.
Mr. HUME asked whether any steps had been taken riels:,
tive to the pension enjoyed by Lord Dunglass. onuiebe
stood that the late Government promised to investigate `
subject. to
Mr. J. A. MURRAY said that shortly before he ceas of
hold the office of Lord Advocate, he knew that the matter's
undergoing investigation.
Mr. HUME expressed his determination to press the Idle
ject on the attention of the House. It was a matter that Ow
not to be suffered to rest.
,bleb
Sir G. CLERK presented a number of returns, Ix., 11
had been ordered.
'teal
Mr. G. F. YOUNG trusted that the present Goverik7
would fulfil a promise made by their predecessors in u—the
namely, to take care that the Estimates should be laid 011
table at such an early period, that there was ample ti'
their examination. s et'
On the motion of Lord EBRINGTON, a return Ws fet
dered of all the fees levied under the statute of last session'
the regulation of weights and measures. Meer/
Mr. HUME asked upon what principle the maritime e-
of the East India Company had been ordered to receive
tain pensions
F. bYOUNG
the House? 1306
Mr. G. replied that she regulation took Po
under an Act passed last year, and which was discussed . t
House.

The House adjourned at a quarter past eight o'clock,

BIRTHS.
Lately, at Hinton St. George, the Countess Poulett, of a s°lo.l 0
On the 3d inst., at East Sheen, Lady Charlotte Penrhr'
daughter, still-born. of
filo!
Qn the Ist inst., in North Castle-street, Edinburgh, the .
Andrew M. M'Crae, Es of a son
On the 2d inst , in Mount place,. Mrs. James Goldie,2lll!--""°°'
MA It It Its D. ileiji
On the 3d inst. at Enfield, the Rev. James Sherman, ofb
ing, to Martha, only daughter of Benj. Tucker, Esq., of 1741tosij
On the 3d inst., at St. Giles's, Camberwell, Mr. James riest
J '
to Rebecca, youngest daughter of the late Mr. William °
Hornsey-road. zislei'
On the 3d inst., at St. Andrew's, Holborn, Mr. ThornaL odeif
of Alangersbury, Gloucestershire, to Mary Jones, late a Pr°
Kent.
__..."'

DIED. nA fest'
On the 23d ult., at Frankfort-sur-Maine, in his 3'"
eet
Stephen, second son of the late Captain Cumberlege, ,f the
East India Service.
set
On the 24th ult., at Ashdowne House, Sussex, at !-n
„ht
age, the Hon. Mrs. Fuller, only daughter of the iiie-be
George Augustus Eliott Lord Heathfield, and sister of RlB,
be
and mother of Sir Trayton Fuller Eliott Drake, Birs' t
lady was lineally descended from Sir Francis Drake, the
cumnavigator.

• --- 14-
TO °
London : Printed and Published by MUIIDO YOTIN ~ to ti
ti°
112, Strand, at The Sun Office, No. 112 i
, Strand, n toe
of Middlesex.

00

'h vi

C 41.1
41110„.

PO4tanr
tkrri
20 •

ri.ri
kj 1

Stow
Fine
Goo
Supe
Very

~od
Ditt
, °
qeP,e,

\