The Sun.
London, England, 1832-03-03 00:00:00

THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—My Lords, I was
not in the House when the Lord Chancellor of Ireland
moved for returns of the emoluments of his Secretary, and
of those of two Noble and Learned Lords who preceded
him in that distinguished situation. I did not hear the
observations with which I suppose he accompanied that
motion, but I presume the Noble and Learned Lord origi-
nated it with a view of giving him the opportunity to
purge himself from the imputations which are laid at his
door relative to the large emoluments he derives from his
position, both for himself and the various members of his
family.—(Hear.) My Lords, I entertain no personal hos-
tilities to the Noble and Learned Lord, and I put the ques-
tions lam about to do in a spirit of candour and of fair-
ness ; but as I was told in a former Session, when I spoke
of the large amount of the Lord Chancellor's emoluments,
that I was mistaken, I wish now to state that my assertions
are confirmed by several newspaper publications in Ireland ;
and I presume that those statements are true ; for if they
were not, surely the Noble and Learned Lord would have,
ere this, attacked the Editors of those Papers for disseminat-
ing such false and scandalous libels.—(Hear.) I have heard
of nothing of the kind, and I hope there is no foundation for
the statement, that the Noble Lord and his family possess 22
places, the annual salaries of which amount to 36,0001.
( Hear.) I think, as the Noble and Learned Lord farms
part of an Administration which gives out that it is so desi-
rous to promote economy and to diminish the burdens of the
people, that he might, for his credit and that of the Govern-
ment with which be is connected, have taken some pains to
show that those charges are ill• founded, or be might
at least have moved, in addition to the return of his Secre-
tary's salary, for a return of the offices and incomes derived
by the Plunkett family under him.—(Hear.) Matters of
so grave a nature should not he allowed to remain uncon-
tradicted in the public newspapers ; and it is proper, if the
Noble and Learned Lord does not think it prudent to pro-
secute the Papers for libel—as I must take for granted that
those charges are scandalous and false—that we should get
information here to satisfy your Lordships and the country
on the subject. —( Hear.) My Lords, I will fairly tell the
Noble and Learned Lord that I do not approve of his con-
duct in Ireland, and I am inclined to agree in what Mr.
O'Connell has said, " that there was not a more pernicious
legislator, for Ireland, or more venal jjthe word was not
heardl than Lord Plunkett."—(Hear.) With regard to the
latter charge I know nothing; but so far as to his being a
pernicious Legislator, I believe there never was a person
whose counsels were more likely to reduce his country to a
lower state. lam sorry to observe the nature of the ad-
vice which tbe Noble and Learned Lord gives to his Ma-
jesty ; and I regret to find him, on a late occasion, sug-
gesting answers on the part of the Crown which must be
prejudicial to the public good. I regret to find him, in
another instance, calling the 2.50,000 subscribers to a peti-
tion to your Lordships, a senseless body.—(Hear.) In-
deed I am of opinion that the policy pursued by the Noble
and Learned Lord in Ireland is only calculated to sow dis-
sension.

The Earl of RADNOR—I beg leave to speak to order,
and 1 ask the Noble Marquis if he intends to conclude with
a motion ?—(Cries of " Hear, bear.")
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—I am going to
present a petition.—(Hear.) My Lords, I repeat that the
conduct of the Noble and Learned Lord is likely to lead
to the most fatal consequences in Ireland. I do not speak
in my own regard, though he and the Administration of
which he is a part have endeavoured, as far as in their
power lay, to deprive me of the affections of the people
with whom I am by natural ties and situation connected.
I can, however, tell the Noble and Learned Lord that be
has failed in that respect, and that I still preserve the af-
fections of my friends in Ireland, and the representations of
their feelings and opinions are on all occasions transmitted
to we. I am, my Lords, entitled to speak with authority
on the subject, and I tell your Lordships, in the presence
of the Noble and Learned ,Lord, that the conduct of his
Majesty's Government in Ireland is fast carrying that
country to destruction..—(Hear, bear.) I repeat that I
had not the opportunity of hearing the Noble and Learned
Lord when he moved for the returns, and I now a.. 4 him
whether he will add to his notice the returns I spealtof ?,
or if he does not 1 will submit a motion myself fot the
purpose. I have now, my Lords, to present a petition on
another subject.—(Loud laughing in every part of the
House, with cries of " hear, hear," from the Ministerial

benches.) That laugh and thoso cries of " hear" are not
very creditable to thoso who indulge in them.—(Hear.)
I have ventured to ask a question—l rose mainly for that
purpose, and I cannot conceive that a jeer or a taunt, or
a cry of " hear," is an answer, and I will trouble any
Noble Lord to find me a better reply.—(The Noble Mar-
quis then sat down without presenting a petition or giving
any explanation about it.)
Several Noble Lords upon the Ministerial side here
rose, amongst whom was Earl RAnNOR, who was generally
called for. He said he again spoke to order. The Noble
Marquis had said when before called to order, that
he was about to present a petition, and so had been
allowed to go on with a serious charge against the Noble
and Learned Lord ; now that he had finished that, he de-
clined to present the petition, but by the rules of the
House that could not be done—he must present it.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY again rose, and
declined at present to present the petition.

Several Noble Lords again rose at once.
Lord PLUNKETT said he spoke to order. He called
upon the Noble Marquis to present the petition, as he was
bound to do by the rules of the House.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY again declined to
present the petition.
Amidst great confusion Lord PLUNKETT said he would
take the liberty of proposing a resolution to their Lord-
ships upon the subject. He would move that the Noble
Lord he called upon to present his petition, or be declared
out of order.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH said the Noble Marquis
had said, at the time when he was called to order, that
he intended to present a petition before he sat down;
therefore he should have done so; but there was one case
in which it was the practice of the House to allow Noble
Lords to change their opinions almost in a moment
—that was, when the House came to a vote.—(Hear.)
Noble Lords were allowed to hand in, first a prtay
on one side, and almost in a moment after, hand in one for
the other side, which might be called a change of the Noble
Lord's opinion ; so it might be with the Noble
Marquis, who might (as regarded the presentation of
the petition) have changed his opinion since he made
the promise. If it was therefore intended by the
resolution to pass a vote of censure upon the Noble Mar-
quis, he would decidedly object to it.
Lord PLUNKETT, Earl GREY4and the Earl of RADNon,
on their legs together.
The Earl of RADNOR—My Lords, it is evident that
the Noble Baron—

Lord ELLENBOROUGH—I rise to order.—(Hear.)
The Noble Earl who has just risen to call me to order is
evidently about to speak to the question, and not to the
point of order.—( Hear, hear.)
Lord TEYNHAM—My Lords, I ask the Lord Chan-
cellor of Ireland to write down his resolution.
The Earl of RADNOR—I rose to answer the observa-
tions of the Noble Baron.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH—It is contrary to our prac-
tice, and it would be contrary to justice, to hear the Noble
Earl again before the Nuble Marquis at the table be heard;
we should hear the Noble Marquis.
Several of their Lordships having risen,
The LORD CHANCELLOR—(Ieaving the Wool-
sack)—Will your Lordships allow me for a moment ? I
am told it is not proper that the Speaker of this House
should interfere in the order of your proceedings, and what
I offer is only in the shape of a suggestion. The conse-
quence of the Speaker's want of authority is, that I have
seen in the course of the last Session, as well as in this,
more breaches of order, and more irregularity, than I ever
witnessed in aoy House of Parliament, or, perhaps, in any
public assembly whatsoever.—(Hear.) That arises from
the constitution of the House, and it may be wise that it is
so; but your Lordships are all aware that, from time to
time, it is productive of the greatest inconvenience.—
(Hear.) I say this, my Lords, to excuse myself for pre-
suming to interfere on this occasion, and I beg of you to
think I only do so as any other Member of the House.—
(Hear.) But I beg leave to tell every Noble Lord who
rises, till this point be settled, whether he rises to order or
not, that he is out of order, because there is no question
before the House.—(Hear, hear.) I got up to put the
question on the resolution of the Noble and Learned Lord,
and I believe the regular course now is that I should put
it to the House in the usual manner, unless my Noble and ,
Learned Friend should think proper to withdraw it.
Lord PLUNKETT having submitted a resolution to the
following effect:—" That Earl Vane (the Marquis of Lon-
donderry) having risen in his place to speak without any
question being before the House, and being called to order,
said he had to present a petition, but not having presented
it, and having refused to make any motion, or to present
the petition, bas been guilty of a breach of the orders of
this House ;"
Lord ELLENBOROUGH—I rise to order.—(Cries of
" Hear, hear," " Order, order.") The resolution, as put
by the Noble and Learned Lord, refers to words alleged to
have been spoken, and to a statement made by the Noble
Marquis at the table ; if they were not taken down at the
time, it will be quite irregular to submit any motion re-
specting them.—( Hear.)
Earl GREY—If there be any thing in the observations
of the Noble Baron, he must see that he should not inter-
rupt the order of the proceedings, as the regular course is
before any observations are made on the resolution, that it
should be put from the Woolsack.—( Hear.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR having read the resolution,
Lord PLUNKETT—My Lords, I rise with your per-
mission to say a few words in reply to one of the most
unjust and most unwarrantable attacks that have ever been
made on any individual within these walls.—(Hear.) The
Noble Marquis began his observations with a declaration,
which I give credit to, as I am bound to believe any state-
ment made by the Noble Lord, that he had no personal
hostility to me ; but I leave it to you, my Lords, to say,
whether his conduct is consistent with that disci timer of
personal hostility.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Marquis,
under the pretence of asking me a question, has not
thought it unbecoming him to go into a recital of all the
falsehoods which Newspapers have collected with regard
to me or my family.—(Hear, hear.) He has made himself
the organ of all the calumnies which have been uttered
against me, and without the slightest pretence whatever
has made an attack as bitter, as severe, and as unwar-
ranted, as the slender abilities of the Noble Lord will
allow him to do.—(Cheers and laughing.) The Noble
Lord complained that he was interrupted and jeered at;
he also complained that I cried " Hear."—(Hear, hear,
from the Marquis of Londonderry.) Why, my Lords,
though the Noble Lord complains of me, he cries " Hear"
hiu.self—(Laughing)—but it is not always we can correct
the faults in ourselves which we impute to others.—(Hear. )
Ile exclaims against me, but I tell the Noble Lord that
I never uttered any screaming " Hear, bear," nor have
I gone beyond the limits of human exclamation, or in-
dulged in sounds calculated to rend the ears, either within
or without these doors.—(Hear, hear, hear, and laugh-
ing.) The Noble Marquis has not attempted to defend
himself ; but what he could not do has been done for him
by the Noble Baron on the third bench, and I congratu-
late him on the ingenious theory by which the Noble
Baron justifies hie refusing to present the petition. It
certainly is quite consistent with the whole proceeding,
that we are to be told that the Noble Marquis has a right
to argue himself out of his own opinion.—(Hear, hear.)
My Lords, we all have been weak enough to believe that
the art and design of oratory were to convince others that
they were wrong, but it is the first time I have heard that
any individual is to persuade himself out of his own opi-
nion.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Marquis is most suc-
cessful in that practice, and I have no doub', if it becomes
the established rule, that no one will have a more emi-
nent success.—(Hear, hear.) He has a talent for con-
vincing, and I know no one more likely than the Noble
Lord—many are the examples he has given of it—to per-
suade his friends and foes, as well as he does himself, how
much he is in error.—(Laughing.) Truly, his experi-
ments have never failed, and we are all witnesses how often
what he has said has been disclaimed by those who have
the misfortune to be his friends.—(Hear, and laughing.)
How often have your Lordships seen him stand alone;
and, I have no doubt, when next he tries his rhetoric or
his logic on them, that he will be as successful as the Noble
Baron says in his defence of him that he has been on him-
self.—(Loud laughing.) 1 will now, my Lords, say a
few words on the subject of the charges brought
by the Noble Lord, not for the purpose of pleas-
ing the
,No.ble Marquis—for to him I will give no
satisfaction L-but for the purpose of satisfying you as to
their injustice. I repeat, I don't seek to give any satis-
faction to the Noble Lord ;, but I tell your Lordships that,
in consequence of calumnies haring been uttered against
me with regard to the appointment of my Secretary, and
seeing that a return of his fees had been moved for in the
other House, I thought it right to more for similar

papers, iu order to meet any calumnies which might be
used against me here—( Hear, hear)—and I warn any
Noble Lord who rn,y appear as my calumniator here, that
I will, God willing, meet, confront, and oppose him.—
(Cheers.) I moved resolutions similar to those passed in
the other House, extending the returns to the time of the
two Noble and Learned Personages who preceded me in
office. The Noble Lord has, however, thought proper to
a.tsck me, and then to justify his charge on the authority
of a newspaper statement--which, I protest, I never read—
and he says that I and my family receive 36,0001. a year.
—(Hear, hear.) My Lords, this is a gross and extra
vagant falsehood—(Hear, hear)—of course uttered by the
calumniator in the newspaper.—(Hear, hear.) The
Noble Marquis then demands to know if I have instituted
proceedings against these papers, or if an investigation
has been made as to the truth or falsehood of their asser-
tions.—(Hear.) Will the Noble Lord allow me to ask
him if he instituted a public inquiry into the statements
which appeared in the newspapers with regard to the
emoluments Ite has received?—(Cries of Hear, hear.")
Have we been asked to institute such an inquiry, or have
your Lordships refused it ?—(Hear, hear.) As the
Noble Marquis has spent a long public life abroad and at
home, I ask him if he has ever happened to see any ac-
count of the emoluments of the Stewart family ?—(Hear,
•1..ea1.) So fas, as the ehargessia the newspaper regard me,
I need only say that they are founded in absolute false-
hood—(Hear, hear)—and, with respect to my giving an
explanation, I ask you, my Lords, is it consistent with
the usage of Parliament or of society that I should do so?
—(Hear, hear.) And I leave it to the honourable and
gentlemanly feelings of the House, whether it is proper
that I should be called on to reply to statements made in a
newspaper, traducing me and my family.—(Cheers.) My
Lords, I never have solicited favours.—(Hear.) 1 never
put myself into the painful situation of being refused—
(Hear)—and I certainly never have made an application
which compelled any Noble Earl connected with Govern-
ment to raise his hands and exclaim, " this is too bad !"
(Cheers and laughter.) The Noble Lord saes he does not
mean hosti,ity to me.—(Hear.) I do not mean hostility
to him.----(Hear.) But I give him fair warning, if he
chooses to bring these charges and calumnies here, I will
not enter into a course of personal invective, but I will
take care the Noble Marquis shall not be able to put down
a balance, either of hard words or of invective, to the
credit side of his account with me.—(Cheers and laugh-
ing.) The Noble Lord has asked me whether I have been
the person to give advice to the King. lamat a lose
to know what he means, and can only express my sur-
prise at one possessing so much loyalty as the Noble Lord
does,introducing the name of the King into a conversation
like this.—(Hear.) It is not my province to give advice
to his Majesty on this or any other subject. That matter,
therefore, ends there ; but then the Noble Lord says that I
have attempted to deprive him of the confidence of a great
portion of society in Ireland with whom lie is directly con-
nected. What, my Lords have Ito do with the Noble
'Lord, or the confidence of his friends?—(Hear, hear.)
I neither know nor care any thing on the subject—(Hear)
and I do not waste a moment of my existence in thinking
of the Noble Lord.—(Hear, and laughing.) He and his
affairs are a matter of perfect indifference to me.—(Hear,
hear.) With regard to the members of my family, lam
ready to give an account of them, with any reasonable
limits of inquiry. I have a family of six sons, and I en-
deavour—(naturally enough, your Lordships will say)—to
provide for them. One of them is in his natural place in
society, and is no burden to the State, and the others are
engaged in honourable professions, to which, I trust, they
reflect no discredit.—(Hear, hear.); I am not giving this
explanation for the satisfaction of the Noble Marquis, and
I offer it to your Lordships as a cursory explanation of the
weakness of the charges which hare been brought against
me.—(Hear, hear.)
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—My Lords, I am
desirous to explain to you that I was prevented presenting
the petition which I meant to lay on the table solely by
the jeees and taunts which were directed against me when
said a was about to present a petition on a different sub-
ject from that on which I spoke, sad I was determined to I
show that I would not allow any Noble Lnrd to scoff and
taunt me.—(Hear, hear.) If it be your pleasuiv, my
Lords, I will now present it to the House.—(Hear.)
With ,respect to the course pursued by the Noble and
ILearni.i Lord, I must say that, instead of answering my
question, he has chosen to bring forward personalities in
reply.—(Hear, hear.) He has evaded a statement of facts,
but I must tell the Noble Lord that neither eloquence nor
facetiousness can get the better of facts.—( Hear, hear.) I
hold in my hand, I will now read, a document which has
appeared in all the Journals of Ireland, and, as I said be-
fore, if it be untrue, the Noble Lord should have prosecuted
the Papers for libel.—(Hear,lhear,) The statement has
been generally circulated in Dublin. I think the Noble
and Learned Lord should be disposed not to look upon it
with so much indifference, and it may be worth his while
to explain the charges brought against him.—(Hear.)
The Noble Lord, however, does not choose to do so, and
he prefers to calculate what I have received during ten
years of diplomatic service to compare it with his own,
and to draw a large balance against me.—(No, no.)
Lord PLUNKETT—I did no such thing.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—I ask you, my
Lords, if that is a fair way of meeting the charges ?
Lord PLUNKETT—I repeat I did not do so.—(Hear.)
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—The Noble Lord
then referred to words said to have been used by the late
Earl of Liverpool, but that is rather a curious mode of
defence, and I protest I cannot see how the turning on
me can answer the charges which are brought against
himself—(Hear, bear)—for money received by him and
his family.—(Hear, hear.) With regard to that diplo-
matic pension which the Noble Lord refers to, I can only
say it was never asked for myself, but for the profession
to which I had the honour to belong. It was not for me
to decide whether the Government was in a situation to
give it or not, but I felt it to be my duty to advocate the
claim, leaving myself the choice, if it were decided in
my favour, to accept it or not.—(Hear, hear.) I defy
the Noble and Learned Lord to prove that the course of
my life has been avaricious.—(Hear.) I defy him to
charge such a stain on my family, one member of which
your Lordships are well acquainted with; and I challenge
him to disprove this assertion, that if ever there was a
Minister who drew less from the public purse than another,
it was that distinguished relative to whom I allude.—
(Hear, hear.) For myself, I can only say, as an Am-
bassador, I had but the same allowance as any other Am-
bassador, and with regard to the pension, I was bound to
uphold the service. I therefore claimed it, and I think

the decision zigainst me was unjust.—(Hear.) As the
Noble Lord has provoked me to it, I will read what is
stated of him, by which it will he seen whether or not the
Members of the economical and retrenching Administra-
tion with which he is connected don't take care to feather
their own nests.—(Hear, hear.) The first item is the
Lord Chancellor of Ireland 10,0001.
Lord PLUNKE TT—That is the first falsehood.—
(Laughing, and cries of " Hear ! Order, order!")
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—I did not inter-
rupt the Noble and Learned Lord. I hope he will not
interfere with me, and allow me to go on without this
breach of order.
Earl GREY—My Lords, I must interfere for the pur-
pose of saying one word.—(Hear, hear.) There is a re-
solution before the House respecting the breach of order
which the Noble Marquis has committed, in the latitude
of discussion which he assumes to himself, which must be
disposed of.--(Hear, hear.) My Lords, I cannot con-
ceive on what principle it is that a Noble Lord comes down
to the House with a newspaper statement of all the offices
which another Noble Lord ansl his family are supposed to
possess. I do not understand on what principle an expla-
nation can be demanded on that statement, and I don't
think that the valuable time of the House should be occu-
pied at all with it.—(Hear, hear.) For instance, we
have all beard of a certain publication called the " Black
Book," and that every Member of this House has figured
in it, with sums attached to their names, as of the public
money received by them. If the present case be in order,
all this may be brought before the House—(Hear, hear)
—and I don't know how the Noble Marquis, or any Noble
Lord who is named in that book, would like to see it
brought down here, and be questioned as to its gross and
extravagant falsehoods.—(Hear, hear.) Therefore, I 03Y,
the course of the Noble blarquis is most disorderly, and it
ought not to be pursued.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—What I complain
of is, that no notice has been taken by the Noble and
Learned Lord of scandalous libels, as I must conceive
them to be ; and as I have been deprived of my station in
the county, with which I asa connected, by the Adminis-
tration, of which the Noble Lord forms a part...
Lord ELLENBOROUGH..—I rise to order. I feel the

full force of what the Noble Earl said at the conclusion of
his short address.—(Hear, hear.) I will not say one
word about those matters urged by the Noble Marquis at
the table, or by the Noble and Learned Lord opposite;
only I apprehend that the sole object which the Noble
Lord had in proposing his resolution was to give himself
the opportunity of making a regular reply to the speech
of the Noble Marquis.—(Hear, hear.) Your Lordships
will recollect that the Noble Marquis has admitted that he
declined presenting the petition under feelings of excite-
ment; that he had no wish to violate the orders of the
[louse; and that he was ready to present it if such be your
Lordships' pleasure.—(Hear.) Therefore, there is but
one course to be pursued in common courtesy to the Noble
Marquis, and the Noble and Learned Lord must, under the
circumstances, withdraw his resolution.—( Hear.) We are
not, nay Lords, in this House, very close observers of or-
der—(Hear, hear)—and I beg of your Lordships to recol-
lect that the same path has been followed on more than
one occasion. Topics of a painful nature have been in-
troduced into this discussion, and much valuable time has
already been consumed ; and, really, as I cannot see what
good can be done by carrying the resolution, I hope the
Noble and Learned Lord will think proper to withdraw it.
Earl GREY—However unpleasant and painful this
discussion is, I trust it will do good, and go some way to-
wards correcting the extreme irregularity which the House
has lately been led into.—( Hear.) It will prevent the
Noble Marquis from taking the extreme latitude which he
has this evening assumed, by making statements under
pretence of presenting a petition.—(Hear.) Before I
proceed further, I now give notice to the Noble Marquis,
who has given notice of bringing forward a question on
Monday, that I will not answer any questions which d•
not conclude with a 'notion on the subject of what the
Noble Lord calls " the late extraordinary diplomatic ex-
hibition at Brussels."—(Hear, hear.) I tell the Noble
Lord lie must put his motion in a regular shape, or be
will have no answer from me.—(Cheers.) With respect
to the motion before the House, I am of opinion, my
Lords, that we should not proceed to any further severity.
—(Hear.) It is true the Noble Marquis did make a
speech, containing a violent attack on the Noble and
Learned Lord, in which be read an extract from a libel,
calling my Noble Friend venal and corrupt.—(Hear,
hear.) He was brought to order by a Noble Earl, and
then to vindicate himself, he said he was speaking in sup-
port of a petition ; but when he concluded his observa-
tions he declined to present it.—(Hear, hear.) I was
at a loss to know—as no doubt your Lordships were—
what kind of a petition it was on which such a speech
could have been based.—(Hear, hear.) Its contents
could not be guessed from the announcement of the Noble
Marquis that it was on a totally different subject.—(Hear.)
That declaration, of course produced a laugh at this side
of the House; and the Noble Marquis, having made an
attack on a Noble Lord, with a view, I suppose, of
bringing himself still more in order, refused to present the
petition.—(Hear.) How, then, do matters stand? The
Noble Lord who was called to order pleads that he is about
to make a motion, as a justification of the course he is
pursuing, but at the moment of doing so he declines it.—
(Hear.) The House under such circumstances, was
called upon to mark its displeasure, and therefore I think
the resolution of the Noble and Learned Lord well founded.
—(Hear.) Still I am inclined not to press the matter
with further severity; but before the Noble Lord with-
draws his motion—if be should be induced to do so—some
sort of explanation or apology should be given for such a
breach of the orders of the House.—(Cheers.) The
Noble Baron opposite has suggested that course, but the
Noble Marquis has not thought proper to avail himself of
the hint, and he has gone on rather aggravating than
lessening the offence.—(Hear, hear.) However, let the
Noble Marquis at the table say as much as the Noble
Baron has said for him, and I will, in common with your
Lordships, try to induce my Noble Friend to withdraw his
motion.—(Hear.) Unless something of the kind is done
it is quite impossible, in my opinion, that the resolution
should be withdrawn.—(Hear, hear.)
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY (speaking so low
as to be only occasionally heard in the gallery) said if the
Noble Earl thought his statement was irregular, every day
during the Session produced instances of the same dis-
order; and he had heard, on many late occasions, Noble
Lords come down to put questions with or without the
presentation of petitions, to which no objection was made.
.—(Hear.) He did not think it equal justice to him to
pass those cases by without notice, and to press a charge
of censure against him because his statements were not
agreeable to one individual.—(Hear.) Neither did he
think the language of the Noble Earl was of that nature
which should induce him to follow his advice. He would
therefore stand upon his innocence—feeling that he had
done nothing worthy of the severity of the House.
The Earl of ABERDEEN thought the Noble Earl
opposite might have called the Noble Marquis to order in a
tone rather different from that which he had adopted. He
agreed with the Noble Earl as to the breach of order, and
the inconvenience which must ensue if similar conduct
were persisted in, but while he admitted these circumstances
he must express his regret that the Noble Earl, by his tone,
should hare aggravated the feelings of the Noble Marquis,
and thereby prevented him from arriving at the course at
which, before he was called to order, he had almost arrived ;
namely, the presenting of the petition, and the apology
which he would have found it his duty to make. He
hoped the Noble and Learned Lord would withdraw his
motion. The Noble Marquis was not the only Peer in
that House guilty of breach of order. He did not think
the breach in this instance of sufficient importance to war-
rant a vote of censure, and it was hardly just to enforce it
after the opening of the speech of the Noble Marquis.
Lord DOVER said there were two questions in which
the Noble Marquis had implicated himself by the course
he had pursued. He had not only been guilty of a breach
of the order of the House, but had made use of language
grossly insulting to his Noble and Learned Friend. He,
therefore, could not look upon his offence in the light in
which it had been viewed by the Noble Lord who had just
sat down.

Lord WHARNCLI FFEsaid the question was not whether
there had been a breach of order, but whether, under all the
circumstances of the case, their Lordships would act properly
in following up the motion made by the Noble and Learned
Lord. He bad no doubt that the Noble Marquis was swam
that he had transgressed the rules of the House, that he
had committed this breach inadvertently, and that he was
ready to state so to the House. The present discussion,
however, only showed the necessity of having some Peer
to keep order. In that House they were all equal, and
the consequence was that breaches of order were con-
stantly committed. The whole transaction was most it-
regular, and he had no doubt that, as the Nohle Marquis
admitted his error, the Noble and Learned Lord would
withdraw his motion.

Earl GREY said he could not entirely concur with the
Noble Baron in his opinion of the offence committed. He
had no wish, however, to press the motion, but some apo-
logy would be necessary, in order to justify his Noble and
Learned Friend in withdrawing his motion.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said that breaches
of order were frequently committed in that House ; others
had repeatedly offended as well as himself. He felt, how-
ever, that he had erred in this instanee.—(Hear, hear.)
Earl GREY, in that case, had no hesitation in advising
his Noble and Learned Friend to withdraw his motion.
Lord PLUNKETT then withdrew the motion, and the
House adjourned at H df-past Six.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 2.
Mr. CHAYTOR brought in two Bills for constructing
wet docks at Hartlepool, in the county of Durham, and
also for improving the town and harbour of Hartlepool;
which were read a first time.
Mr. GORDON rose to present three petitions from
parishes in Ireland against the system of education proposed
by hie Majesty's Government. In the opposition to that mea-
sure he stated there was a greater unanimity of feeling in
Ireland than there had been upon any subject connected with
the Church, as a proof of which he would state that no
sooner was the letter of the Right Hon. Gentleman op-
posite (Mr. Stanley) to the Duke of Leinster made
known, than the friends of scriptural education in-
stantly held meetings in all parts of Ireland to
record their hostility to it. In Dublin, a meeting had
been held which he might confidently say represented the
feeling of the whole country. The Dean and Chapter o I
Dublin lost no time in recording their opinions, which
were addressed to the Archbishop of Dublin, and the clergy
of the diocese met upon the same subject. The Protestants
of Ireland were in fact unanimous in their opposition to
it. In E❑gland also many meetings had been held upon
the subject, and he did not doubt that in a short time
numerous petitions would be presented from Scotland.
Mr. STANLEY deprecated a discussion upon such a sob-

1210
,lest, upon upon the presentation of pi Lions. He would not
deny that many very respectab `p q* entertained strong
objections to the plan prop &iiislVlajesty's Govern-
ment
4li*
ent ; at the same time it i belief that a Oat.
portion of that feeling was "e#,:pn erroneous itiß
pression of the objects which y:r)Governrnettttn4
cpetition f ors
in view. A Noble Friend of hie,
time upon the same subject fro lipitglif.„9lWls ter,
and upon the presentation of that petition hinioida show
that the object of his Majesty's Government was to encou-
rage, a 4 far as possible, the use of the Bible in scriptural
-education—to give the greatest possible religious instruc-
tion to Protestants which they were wiling to receive, arid
to Catholics which they were willing to receive.
Mr. LEADER advocated the plan adopted by his Ma-
jesty's Government, and said that various attempts were
made in England, as well as in Ireland, to raise a clamour
against that plan. He implored the British public to sus-
pend their judgment until an opportunity offrred itself to
have the subject fairly discntssed.
Sir J. NEWPORT deprecated further discussion in
the present stage of the question.
Sir R. BATESON wished to know when the Noble
Lord opposite (Acheson) intended to present the petition
on this subject which he had in his possession.
Lord ACHESON observed that he would present it as
early as he possibly could.

Mr. STANLEY suegeated the propriety of not present-
ing that petition till the Recorder of Dublin was present.
Mr. LEFROY observed, that he thought there was but
very little prospect of the return of th,,t Learned Gentle-
man to town for some time, in consequence of the ill
health of a member of his family ; be thought, however,
it would be attended with great convenience if Hon. Mem-
bers would bring forward all petitions on this subject in
a body.
Mr. SHEIL, though he admitted that the opinion of the
Recorder might he extremely important on this subject,
did not see the necessity of postponing the presentation of
the petition on account of his absence.
After a few words from Mr. WYSE and Mr. FL GaAT-
TAN, the petition was brought op and ordered to lie oa the
table.

Mr. A. JOHNSTONE presented a similar petition from
the Elders of the Scotch Church of the city of Aberdeen.
Mr. J. CAMPBELL presented a petition from certain
manufacturers in London, in favour of t',e Cotton Factories
Regulation Bill. The Hoa. Member also presented peti-
tions from two individuals in favour of the Arbitration

Mr. WALKER presented a petition from a 'wish in
Ireland against the tithe system.
Mr. LAMBERT supported the prayer of the pet;tion.

Mr LEFROY rove, and at som; length entered into a
defence of Dr. Newland, atainst certain charges made
against him on a former day relative to his having sued
some of his parishioners for tithes.
Mr. WALKER, is reply, repeated the charges which
he had before made.

After a few words from Mr. GRATTAN and Mr.
BLACKNET,

Mr. STANLEY gave notice, that on Thursday he would
call the attention of the House to the report of the
Select Committee upon the tithe question. He therefore
hoped that the Hon. Member for Waterford would con►ent
to postpone his motion, which stood for that day.
Sir J. NEWPORT was understood to assent to the
suggestion of the Right Hon. Gentleman.
Mr. SLANEY adverted to an Act which bad passed
last session for the regulation of benefit societies, and
wished to know whether it was int •nded to extend the
time for Members to enrol themselves under that Act.
He had understood that the Hon. Member for Boston in-
tended to bring in a Bill to extend the time of enrolment,
and he wished to know whether that was still his
intention? He also wished to ask the Right Ho-
nourable Secretary of State for the Home Depart-
ment, whether he would object to a Committee to
consider the provisions of the Acts, with a view, if neces-
sary, to their alteration. Great inconveniences had arisen,
though chiefly, he believed, from misconception, and it
was desirable that an opportunity should be *forded to cor-
rect the mistake.

Mr. WILKES said he bad intended to give notice
that on the 13th of March he would more for leave to
bring in a Bill to amend the General Friendly Society Act,
and to extend the period of enrolment for two years,
which Bill, he believed, would meet with the concurrence
of the House. It would be desirable to appoint el Com-
mittee, either this Session or the next, to take jsto consi-
deration the objections to the present Bill. , ot
Mr. PORTMAN said that great alars ,ciNdy pre-
vailed among the friendly societies, whicif&ros, chiefly
from misconception, and sure he was that most
of the objections to the Bill had no foundation
in fact. Ile was anxious that a period of tiro years should
Fee given, which in his opinion, would have tie effect of
dispelling all doubt and alarm on the subject.
Mr. LAMB approved of tke Bill proposed to be brought
in by the Hon. Member (Mr. Wilkes), and was confident
that if two years were given, such explanations would take
place as would clear up all doubts.
Sir RICHARD V YVYAN deprecated such discussions
upon the presentation of retitions, and suggested that
some arrangement should be made either to defer petitions
to the close of the business, or to receive them
all before motions came on, or that those not
disposed of in the usual time, should be placed first on the
list for the following day. He begged to call the Noble Lord's
(Althorp) attention to this subject, for it was pre-
posterous that in a regular debate the Speaker should
only he allowed to address the House once, and
that on the presentation of a petition, Members took the
opportunity of speaking several times. In the present
instance, a petition respecting tithes in Ireland had been
presented, and a discussion raised upon it, and there were
also introduced discussions respecting Dr. Newland and
the Friendly Society Act.
Lord ALTHORP was understood to say that he thought
the suggestions of the Right Hon. Baronet were well
worthy the consideration of the House, for the present
mode of presenting petitions was attended with great in-
convenience.

Mr. HUNT considered the difficulty would be obviated
by appropriating one day in a week to the presentation of
petitions.
Mr. LITTLETON thought, that if the Speaker's list
was allowed to be gone on with till seven o'clock, every
difficulty would be obviated.
Sir R. PEEL said, that in his view the only way to
get rid of the difficulty would be by compelling Members
in presenting petitions only to state the object of them,
and not allow them to enter into irrelevant discussions.

Alderman WAITHMAN thought that the privilege
Members had of presenting petitions had been shamefully
abused.

Sir R. VYVYAN proposed, that instead of closing the
presentations of petitions at five o'clock, they should be
allowed to be presented till six.
Mr. BRISCOE objected to the adoption of such a
course until the Reform Bill bad passed.
Lord ALTHORP, in moving th• order of the day,
made a few observations, which were inaudible in the
gallery.
BOROUGH OF HELSTON.

Mr. CROKER rose for the purpose of presenting two
petitions respecting the case of the borough of Ilehton, in
Cornwall, which a Tote of the I-lottec had placed in sche-
dule B. One of the petitions was signed by the mayor,
aldermen, freemen, and other inhabitants of the borough,
and the other by the local, yeomanry corps. The former
document set forth that the inhabitants of the town were

no way benefitted by the remission of the horse duty on
account of yeomanry service, and therefore expressed their
wish to pay the full rate of taxes, which, amounting to
9511., would remove them from under the operation of
the disfranchising clause. The petition of the yeomanry,
which was signed by all the members of the corps in the
town, when the information of the decision of the House
arrived, with the exception of one, declared their afflic-
tion and surprise that they should have been the uncon-
scious cause of so grievous a punishment as that inflicted
on their fellow citizens. The case appeared to him one of
singular hardship and injustice. In December, 1830, a
period of great disquiet, the Government had called this
yeomanry corps into active service, which exempted them
from the payment of the tax. The Reform Bill was
brought forward in April, 1831, so that the yeomanry
corps being, at an occasion of emergency, called upon
duty for three months, in consequence forfeited the fran-
chise of themselves and their children.—(Hear.) He
submitted to the Noble Lord opposite whether it were
equitable to put such a construction as this upon the Act.
The Right Hon. Gentleman moved that the petitions
be brought up.
Lord ALTHORP said that it was impossible is recant-
l-
imtoeon,ceoothtiel
thediscussionrep
ort
oo
thef the
Committeecase o
was brought up.
Mr. J. CAMPBELL said that Helston should be con-
sidered in the same situation as if the tax had been reall
paid to the Government and repaid to the yeomanry
Mr. BRISCOE called the attention of the House to a
f
o n b otrhoe u gßeform of
B 11e
paragraph, which had appeared in a Morning Paper, re-
specting the division on the question, that Helston should
stand part of scbedule B. The paragraph was attached
to lists of the majority and 'minority, and contained then
words The following Members voted against Mini-
sters Jest night, on a suggestion of Sir Chad*. jiurrell an d
Mr. Miscue, the Member for Surrey, that the oinuoton of
the tax on the yeomanry cavalry, in the amount of as-

used taxes, adopted in the calculation of the Comaiis-
ioners for the borough of Helston, was an imputation
upon the yeomanry of England." Now he begged to
state that that 'Hon. Member who had made the communi-
cation was incorrect in assigning, the motive of his vete.
He had voted in favour of the borough retaining in; privis
not from conceiving that an imputation bad been
casii upon the yeomanry, but on the score of the injustice
or disfranchisement under the circumstances. The Him.
Member complained of the practice of sending thes'e cow,.
municrions to the journals, as being very inconrrnient and
unfair, and expressed a hope that the individual who for-
warded the lists would either discontinue the practice or
discontinue his inaccuracy.ilear.)
Sir R. VYVYAN acknowledged that the paragre,'A
was calculated to convey the impression that Minlitcrs had
thrown an imputation upon the yromanry conntry.
Lori S. RUSSELL said, that certainly nothing had
fallen from him at all disresp.:,tfut to the yeomanry corps.
Mr. CROKER, in refereute to the petitions with whioli
he had been intrusted, zxpressed his regret that ci had
been consignrd to his charge. being an anitginist of the
Bill. He could have wished that tl.- had been placed
in the bands of the Notile Lori Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer) himself, on whosc, Candour and good sense he
would have willingy confided fur doing justice to the
claims of the hormaglN.
Lord VALLE-MR T said, that all the yeom airy of
England must think that a great imputation had been cast
upon them, and every man must consider the case of Helston
an important one coneernic7; them. For those reasons he
would pray the Government to re-consider the loesion.
After a few woods from Mr. HUNT, in abuse of the yeo-
manry cavalry of the country in general, and of the yeo-
manry corps of Frome iu particular, whom he accused of
running away from a trifling mob, the petition was laid in
the table and ordered to b. printed.
MANCHESTER MASSACRE.

Mr. HL'NT gave notice, that on Mtn 'ay next he would
move for the production of a navy of the correspondence
between the Earl of Derby. Lor I Lieutenant of the county
of Lancaster, and the Magistrates of Manchester, immedi-
ately previous to the 16%h of August, 1819 ; for a copy of
the letter of Lord Sidanauth on the sane occasion, and also
for a copy of various other corrtspondence, which he par.
ticularixed, relative to the events of that ever-memorable
and lamentable day.
REFORM IN PARLIAMENT (ENGLAND) BILL,
The Order of the Day was then read for the House re-
solving itself into a Committee of the whole House on
that Bill.

Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Right Hon. Baronet
apposite, in the course of hie speech the other nights had
referred to returns relative to the number ()frets? payers and
houses in the metropolis, which had arstonisleel him (Lord
John Russell) exceedingly at the time, and which he could
not help considering as founded in some inaccuracy ; for he
cou4 not conceive how it could happen the number of
voters should be so much greater than the number of houses
in the metropolis, when the right of voting was confined to
the occupiers of 101. houses. He was therefore certain
that the calculation of the Right Hon. Baronet must have
been taken from some returns with which he (Lord J.
Russell) was unacquainted. Upon inquiry he found that
she calculation of the Right Hon. Baronet was founded
partly upon the report of the Commiesioners upon the
boundaries of the metropolitan districts, and partly upon
documents derived from other sources ; and he trusted that
he shouid be able to explain to the House 'now the Right
Hon. Baronet came to his very extraordinary result, by
referring to the sources from which the Right Hon.
Baronet had derived it. The statement of the Right
Hon. Baronet was, that there being in certain parishes
of the metropolis a certain number of houses, the
voters under the Reform Bill in those parishes would
exceed the number of houses ; for instance, the
Right Hon. Baronet said that in the parish of St. George
and St. Giles the number of houses was 4,450, and that,
deducting from it the uninhabited houses, there remained
only 4,025 occupied houses In the parish, whilst there
were 4,280 voters, as might be seen by the return of ac-
tual rate-payers theta on the table of the House. Now the
present number of houses in those parishes was not, as
yet, in any authentic shape before the House. He found
that the census of 1921 gave the total number of occupied
houses in that parish at 4,456. New if, instead of de-
ducting the empty houses from the total number of houses
above 101,, you deducted the empty houses from the total
varober of occupied houses, you would come to the Right
H 0 Baronet's remainder of 4,025. But it was quite
evidetit that sum could not he made applicable to the
number,. voters created by this Bill. For there was one
earn: cd tititted in deducting the number of empty houses,
not front the total number of houses, but from the total
number of occupied houses, and there was another com-
mittee in taking the number of houses occupied and
empty from the census of 1521. Considering the vast
increase which had taken place in the list ten years in the
metropolis, there was nothing strange in the circumstance
that the number of voters now should exceed the num-
ber of houses which were then in existence. By the
census of the year 1831, it appeared that the number
of occupied houses in the same parish was 4,713, and
of unoccupied houses was 230, making a total, exclu-
sive of those building, of 4 913. Again, in the parish
of Paddington, the Right Hon. Baronet had said that,
by the population return, the number of houses was 1,126,
and that the number of rate-payers was 1,399. To this
statement the answer was equally easy. By the census of
1821 the number of occupied houses was 1,139. From
this number the Right Hon. Baronet had deducted the un-
tccupiesi, being 13, which left the number which he used
—namely, 1,126. But by the census of 1831, it appeared
that the number of occupied houses was 1,933, and of un-
occupied houses was 104, making a total, exclusive of 93
building, of 2,037. Again, in the parish of Sr. Pancras,
the Right non. Baronet had said that the number of in-
habited houses was 8,425, and that the number of voters
was 8,502. Now, to this statement he must give a
similar answer to that which he had already given to the
Right Hon. Baronet's statement respecting the comparative
number of voters in the two other parishes. By the census
of 1821, the number of occupied houses was 8,824.
Froei these the Right Hon. Baronet deducted the un-
occupied 400, which left the number, which the Right
Hon. Baronet used, ,421.. But by the census of 1831, it
appears that the number ofmccupied houses is 12,369, and
of unoccupied is 787. making a total, exclusive of those
building, of 13,156. The Commissioners, however, proposed
to exclude from the borough part of the parish north of the
Regent's-canal, which was estimated to contain about 1,200
houses. This sum, deducted from 13,156, would leave
11,956 houses, which is considerably larger than 6,502,
the number of rate-payers. The Noble Lord then pro-
ceeded to observe, that it was quite evident to him that
the Right Hon. Baronet had fallen into the mistake which
he had unintentionally committed, by referring to the
census of 1821, instead of the census of 1831. From the
statement already made to the House, Hon. Gentlemen
would see that the number of houses bad increased so much
in that time, that no conclusion could be drawn as to the
number of voters now from the returns of the number of
houses in 1821. Indeed, they might as well think of
ascertaining the number of voters from- the number of
houses in those parishes in 1511 or in 1801 ; since which
time the number bad doubled and trebled, if it had not
quadrupled. He thought that he had now said sufficient
to show that the calculation of the-Right, Hon. Baronet
was radically in error. With *aril to the precise num-
ber of voters who would becalled into existence in the me-
tropolitan districts by tfle'Reform Bill, it was impossirde
to state soy thine reganding it accurately. He believed
that it would be best ascertained by reference to the returns
to the house duties. Still it ought to be recollected that
among the rate-payers would be many who would have re-
sided less than a year, others who would be excused the
rates, aed others who had made default in paying them.
He thought that when the number of these three classes of
persons were added together, they would reduce the amount
of nominal voters by one-third. He would not intrude
further upon the House at present : but as the statement
of the Right Hon. Baronet appeared to bins to have made
a great impression at the time upon the House, he thought
it right to make this counter-statement to remove it.
Sir R. PEEL was obliged to the Noble Lord for the
courtesy with which he had endeavoured to- se hint right
as to the error which he supposed him to
~,eve committed.
He wished that he could impress the Houk with his sense
of the necessity of giving further time fur the consideration
of the nature of the new constituency which it was going
to establish in the metropolis by this Bill. With regard to
the calculations which he had made, he had only this to
observe—that he had always referred to the latest docu-
ments which he could find; and the latest document which
he could find relative to the number of houses was the

census of 1821. He was._of opinion, that they ought not

to decide this question without full inform aion as to the
number of houses in the metropolitan districts in 1831.
On the former evening, to wbieh the Noble Lord had
alluded, be had stated his apprehension that, by this Bill,
the House was going to give a right of suffrage to the
metropolis, more extensive than it would give by establish-
ing a scot-and-lot right of suffrage in all householders.
The House was, perhaps, aware, that the number of families
was larger than the number of houses in the metropolis.
In the Tower division, for instance, there were 47,176
houses, and 69,337 families ; and in Christ. Church, Spital-
fields, 2,300 houses, and 4,752 families. Now, as this Bill
permitted two or more occupiers- to vote for the same house,
provided they each paid a 101. rent, it was clear that as there
was a large excess in the number of families above the

number of houses, there would also tit a large eteess in the

number of voters above the number of houses in etch

parish. He would ekemelify his meaning still further, by
referrittg to the parish of 'Mile-end old town. He did not
know what number of houses that paiish 'UM:ltained by
the census of Nal, but by the zens',;s of 1821, it con-
tained 4,284. Nest-, iticording to the report of the
CommiSsiorrert, how many voters were there in that
parish 7 There were 3,017 occupiers of houses rated
above 10/. ; there were 119 occupiers rated `above 10/.
excused payment of taste; the'e ware 62 compounded
for above 101., making a tetra'. of 3,188 occupiers above
101. But If t'.1,2 Lord would only take the trouble
of leetltir at the last column, he would see that t' e 11l
of houses rated under 10/., but .weeth wore, was
2,307; and observe that by, this !I'd it is the value of the
house, and not the "Ltd, which establisbes the right of
voting. In parish then, of Mile-end, there were
2,30r' houses rated under 10/., but worth more ; but the
'occupiers of these houses would be entitled to vote, be-
cause their real value was above 10/. Add, then, to the
3,188 occupiers of houses rated above 101., the 2,30'7 oc-
cupiers of houses worth 10/. a year, and you would have
5,485 voters in that single parish) and yet by the census of
1821 that parish did not contain More than 4484 houses.
—(Loud cheers from the Opposition.) Lo..k again at the
parish of St. Pancras. By a statement in page 18 of the
Commissioners' teport, it appeared that the total number
of hortieS ih that parish in 1831 was 13,673. But the
House was not going to take the whole parish of
Sr. Pancras into the Marylebone bercogli ; for the
northern part of it was morea a rural than a
town character. The t'..ommissioners had therefore
recommended t.O.:t the Regent's Canal should form
the Pot-flrn boundary of the borough in that direc-
tton, especially as there were no legal boundaries of which
they could avail themselves, and the canal formed a very
eligible artificial one. The total number of houses in this
parish, as lie had before sated, was 18,613. llow many
were excluded by this artificial division he could not tell.
There were, however, in the parish of St. Pancras,
south of the Regent's Canal, 7,95/8 occupiers of houses
rated above 10/. ; 1,021 occupiers excused payment of
taxes; 124 rated as lanolads, and 465 houses comruntied
for. Besides theta there were 501 houses rated under

lot., but worth more. Add these together, and you will
find the; you will have 10,122 voters in this part of the
parish alone.—(Hear, hear.) So far was the Noble Lord
from having removed the. impression which these calcula-
tions had made upon his mind, by the speech which
he had jest delivered, that he declared that the Noble
Lord.', statement had actually increased the anxiety and
apprehension with which he had previously contemplated
the numerous constituency of this Bill. Now, did the
House know what the right of voting was in the metro-
politan districts by this Bill ? The substance of the
enactments of the Reform Bill, stripped of technicalities,
was as follows :—ln every borough, every r..ale person
occupying as owner or tenant, any house or shop, of the
clear yearly value of not less than 101., shall be entitled
to vote, if duly registered. But no person shall be re-
gistered in any future year, unless he shall have occupied
the premises one year before the last day of July, nor
unless he shall have been rated to the relief of the poor
during his occupation ; nor unless he shall have paid
before the 20th of July, all the poor rates and assessed
taxes which shall have become payable from him previ-
ously to the 6th of April. Joint occupiers may vote, if
where there are three occupiers, the yearly value of the
house is 301. Every occupier may claim to be rated
whether the landlord be liable to be rated or not, and upon
paying the amount then due of the rates, if any be due,
his name shall be put upon the rate. If the landlord is
liable to the rate, and if the tenant, after chiming to be
rated, shall make default, the payment of the rate
of the landlord shall still remain liable. Here he would
pause, in order to call the attention of the House to the
different manner in which the occupiers of 101. houses
were treated by this Bill, and by the general law of the
land. The general law of the land looked upon their sol-
vency
with a suspicious eye, for it held the landlords of all
such tenements responsible for the rates and taxes accruing
for them ; and in the metropolis, the rates of such tene-
ments were generally compounded for by their owners with
the parish ; and yet it was to persons placed thus pointedly
under suspicion by the law, that this Bill was going to
intrust the elective franchise. But to proceed. The voter
must occupy premises within the parish of the clear
yearly value of not less than 101., and being duly re-
gistered within the provisions of this Bill, by which it
was further provided, also, that the premises must be
rated for the payment of the pours' rate during the period
of his occupation. In this respect the 29th clause of
the Bill was most material, from the provisions of
which he supposed that it the landlord of the premilies
be liable to be rated or not, the occupier might clain
to be rated, and on the tender of the amount due up (to
the Gth of April might have a claim to and be entitled to
vote. The clause did not say one word as to the rate
which had been actually paid by either the tenant or the
landlord. He called upon the Noble Lord opposite to
consult some of the local Acts, and compare their provisions
with regard to the regulations and qualifications for the
right to vote on parochial concerns, and for the election
of vestry. He would refer the Noble Lord in particular
to the Act which regulates parochial elections in the
parish of St. Giles, and compare in that Act the right of
voting for parochial bfficers compared with the right pro-
vided by this Bill in voting on the choice of Members of
Parliament. By the Act to which he had referred the
House, no man in the parish of St. Giles was entitled to
vote fir vestrymen who occupied any House, shop, or
premises, and was rated at leas than 251. per annum—
( Hear)—and not to vote at all if the rates bad been com-
pounded. On the contrary, the House of Commons,
in the present Bill, now said that they might compound
for the rates either by themselves or their landlords, and
be entitled to vote for a Member to serve in Parliament.
And so jealous had been the vestry of St. Giles's in ob-
taining their Act, and so conscience were they of the ad-
vantages which would otherwise be afforded to in-
solvency, that, as well as in the instances he had
already named, their Bill had also negatived the right to
vote on parish affairs in any party who paid their rents
less frequently than quarterly ; but the provisions of the
present Bill went the length of saying, that if the occu-
pier was a weekly tenant, and his landlord had compounded
for the rates, he had only to tender before the 6th of April
the rates due, and he would he entitled to vote for a Mem-
ber to serve in Parliament for these very districts where
the reverse existed in the case of parochial concerns. These
facts were established by the report of the Commissioners
appointed by the Government, every line of which was im-
portant. The Commissioners in their report also said
further, that the landlord of property below a certain
value compounds with the parochial authorities for the
several rates to which his property may be liable, and the
parish consenting to receive a sum considerably less than
that which could otherwise legally be levied on the same
property. It was thus manifest that the amount of rate was
a most uncertain means of getting to the number of vote+.
The Commissioners go on to state, that this compostion so
made may bear to the real value of the property com-
pounded for, a proportion varying from one-half to four-
fifths ; so that it appeared a house might be compounded
for at the rate of 5/., and would still entitle tbs. oc-
cupier to vote,—being really of the value of 101. When
he saw that by the provisions of this Bill many per-
sons occupying the same premises might be entitled to
vote, lie could not feel surprised that the number of voters
should exceed the numher of houses. He could not think
such a system would be advantageous to the districts of the
great metropolis of the country, if these were to be the
qualifications to vote for a Member to represent the inha-
bitants,—qualifications which he bad shown had been re-
jected with scorn by the parishes themselves, even in the
regard to their parochial affittre.—(Hear.) He was borne
out in his statement by ttaireport of the Commissioners
appointed by the Goverment for the purposes of this
Bill,—a document which the more he considered the inure
was he convinced that it was proposed to commit an im-
portant trust into the hands of those in whom it could not
safely be reposed ; and he felt satisfied that when the House
of Commons was about to give to one constituency 20
Members, they ought to consider well the qualification of
that constituency. That the Noble Lord had convicted
him (Sir Robert Peel) of any misrepresentation as to the
nature of the constituency, he begged most respectfully and
humbly to deny..-(Hear, hear.)
Lord ALTHORP would not follow the Right Hon.
Baron though his statement, but lie thought that the
Right Hon. Baron was mietasken in the effect of the two
clauses of the Bill, the nth and 29th, to which he had
referred. The two el: he conceived to be explicit
and distinct ; the on't sting, that in every borough re-
turning Members e in Parliament, every occupier,
as owner or tenan any premises within such borough,
of the clear year ue .of 10/., should, if duly registered
for twelve eaten. onths, be entitled to vote in the
election of a rep .'"c tative in Parliament, provided that he
be rated for the relief of the poor. The 29th section
was a provision for the right of the occupier to claim to
be put upon the rates himself, notwithstanding that the
landlord might be liable to rates on the same property or
otherwise. On the effect and intention of these two
clauses he could not think there could exist any doubt.
Sir E SUGDEN thought the latter clause was not
only multifarious, but created a great enlargement of the
law, as well as an extension of the general rule, as to the
right of voting. He concurred in the view of the ques-
tion taken by big Right Hon. Friend (Sir R. Peel), and

he felt strongly impressed with the opinion that nobody
could read the report of the Metropolitan Commission 4,4
without being struck with the observations it contained.
It was manifest that 22 Members would be given to me-
tropolitan districts (for he included the two Members for
Middlesex, whose election was mainly affected by the town
constituency), and this was eanted to a constituency
created by thiis tne..sure, occupying hou,es of the lowest
desription, possessing no weight of properti or stake in
the country. The House ought to hesitate before it put
so great a power into such hands'.
Lord ALTHORI. said a few wtA•ds in explanation, which
did, not reach
C. W. WY NN conceived that the 101. qualifira-
tion would be calculated to increase bribery and corny.
tion at future elections, and he thought it was well worthy
of the attention of the Noble Lord opposite to consider
how far it was possible to introduce sonic measure for its
prevention. He hoped the Noble Lord would bring in a
Bill for that purpose as sotm as possible, as it would be ad-
vtntageous that it should be done during the discussions
on the present
Lord J. RUSSELL thought that the Bill now before
the House was as likely to prevent bribery and corruption
as any which had ever come before Parliament.—(Hear.)
It was, however, his intention to bring forward such a
measure as that alluded to by his Right Hon. Friend: in-
deed the Bill was at present under revision.
Mr. S. I)ENISON thought the present Bill would
overthrow the provisions under the local Acts for the re-.
gulation of rates. He begged to ask the Noble Lord if any
alteration would be made in the amount of the qualification.
Lord ALTHORP said that it was not the intention of
the Government to make any alteration in the qualification
clause, and he should not now discuss it.
The House then resolved itself into a Cotnroittee on the
Bill.
The Chairman (Mr. BERNAL) put the question—that
Finsbury, in the county of Middlesex, do stand part of
schedule C, which was agreed to without any observa-
tion. Marylebone (Middlesex), Lambeth (Surrey), and
Great and Little Bolton (Lancashire), were also put, and
agreed to stand part of schedule C, without a comment.

- On the nurstcon being put, that Bradford (Yorkshire:
etand p in of schedule C.

Lord G. SOMERSET (lid not wish to oppose this
town receiving representatives, but he was desirous of
asking on what grounds Bradford was to have two repre-
sentatives, when Huddersfield and Tynemouth, both of
which exceeded Bradford in the number of houses and the
amount of assessed taxes, were only to receive one Member.
With respect to Huddersfield, he was ready to admit the
selection of its Member would be much influenced by the
interest of one individual ; but he could not imagine why
these towns should be excluded from this schedule. He
c'euld not but think it had originated in caprice.
Lord J. RUSSELL said, that with reference to the
number of 101. houses, Br edford had the superiority over
Tynemouth and Huddersfield. With respect to the Noble
Lord's second observation on the propriety of taking the
assessed taxes as the ground of representation, it would
be found to be incorrect. The amount of assessed taxes
by itself would not form the best criterion of the im-
portance of great manufacturing towns—of those towns to
which representation ought to be given. Very wealthy, en-
terprising, and intelligent persons resided in those towns—
hut sti:l they were not of that class who swelled the amount
of the assessed taxes. To prove the correctness of his
principle, be would direct the attention of the Noble
Lord to two places. There was Birmingham, a place
which it was allowed on all hands ought to be represented,
paid 28,350/. assessed taxes, while at Brighton, against
granting any representative, to which strong objections lead
been started, the amount of assessed taxes was 31,8001.,
being a difference in favour of the latter place of upwards of
3,0001. Now the Noble Lord would see the inconsistency,
if instead of Leeds, Alanchrsfer, and Birmingham, Minis-
ters bad, on account of the superior amount of assessed
taxes p till by Brighton, inserted Leeds, Manchester, and
Brighton, to the exclusion of Birmingham. Besides, it
could not be overlooked that population was generally the
great test of the wealth and importance of manufacturing
towns.

Lord G. SOMERSET—If the Noble Lord rests on the
principle of population, then there is no reason why Tyne-
mouth and Huddersfield should not be placed on a footing
with Bradford.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. J. HOPE wished to know, if population were to
he the basis of representation, why Ministers had not taken
into consideration Aberdeen with a population of 58,000,
Dundee 42,000, and Paisley 37,000 ?—(Hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL answered that the rule was not
founded on the strict principle of population alone.
Sir G. CLERK said, if it were the determination of
his Majesty's Ministers that the House of Commons should
still consist of 658 Members, apportioned to 'isa different
parts of the empire as they were at present, then it would
become necessary for all those who thought that the share
of representation which was given to some portions of it
was insufficient, to come forward and state their opinion,
before a decision took place with respect to all the places
to which it was proposed to grant represtation.a,...
(Ifear, hear.) It was right that they should state their
sentiments and feelings, before all the seats were given
away. There were 140 seats to be disposed of under this
Bill, and it was proper to inquire how many of ,here ought
to appertain to Scotland. The population of Scotland
amounted to 2,300,000, being considerably more than a
1-6th part of the population of England and Wales. He
contended, then, that the proportion of these 140 seats
which Scotland ought to have was 1-7th, in addition to
the 45 Members which that country at present sent to Par-
liament.—(Hear, hear.) That would give to Scotland 65
Members. If his Majesty's Ministers held out to him
and others the expectation that the total number of Mem.
hers would not be limited to 658, but that, while England
received the full portion of representatives which her popu-
lation and wealth demanded, they would also grant to
Scotland such a representation as she was entitled to, then
he certainly should be sorry to provoke any discussion on
the Scotcls Reform Bill. But if no such assurance were
given, he thought it would be right for the Scotch and
the Irish Members, though they were in the midst of the
Committee on the English Reform Bill, to put forward the
claims of their respective countries --(Hear, hear.)

Colonel CONOLLY was anxious to call the attention of
the Irish Members to the subject which had been intro-
duced by the Hon. Baronet. If Ireland did not receive
that justice, which under the existing Bill was so palpa-
bly denied, he thought that the Irish and Scotch Members
ought to join for the purpose of asserting the rights of
their respective countries.—(Hear, hear.) This should
be an " imperial measure" doing justice to all sides, and
not proceeding on a principle of partiality.—(Hear.)
Mr. C. FERGUSSON said, if Ministers declared it
to be their intention to adhere to the proposed distribution
of 658 Members, it would, from that moment, become the
duty of the Scotch and Irish Members to make their stand,
in order to prevent representation from being given to
places that did not deserve it, while it was refused to others
where it was most needed.—(Hear, hear.) Ministers
themselves admitted that they had continued representation
to places where it was pernicious. Why, then, might not
that representation be extended to the great and populous
places in Scotland or, Ireland ?—(Hear, hear.) Ministers
hid taken four Members from schedule A, and placed them
in schedule B. Why might nut those four Members have
been given to Scotland and Ireland ?—(Hear, bear.)
Again, they had taken four Members from schedule B,
and placed them in schedule C. Here were eight Mem-
bers—a number that would satisfy Scotland ; and where,
he would ask, could they find more wealth and intelligence
than in that country ? In a plan of general Reform, where
they were removing some old representations, and creating
new, he contended that no distinction ought to be made,
either with respect to England, Scotland, 'or Ireland.—
(Hear, hear.) To each justice ought to be done, and he
would never cease to declare that, under the Bill as it at
present stood, justice would not be administered in Scot•
land.---(Hear, hear.)
Mr.44UME !bought the fairest course of proceeding
wool to divide the country into " electoral districts"—
(Latter)—and if such a proposition were made, he
hoped he should have his Hon. Friend (Mr. C. Fergusson)
with him.—(Hear, hear.) They were told that Scotland
was not sufficiently represented, and that the metropolis
had too many representatives. Now the population of
Scotland was 2,300,000, and it was proposed to give her
53 Members ; and the metropolis, which contained a po•
pula'tion of 1,500,000, was to have 16 Members. Was
it not evident, then, that Scotland was more fully and nu-
merously represented than the metropolis ?.._(Hear, hear.)
Look to the amount of population, taxation, and property,
and it would be found that the district of the Tower Ham-
lets was able to buy 50, nay, 100 of the boroughs about
which, night after night, there had been so much useless
debate.—(Hear, hear.) The Bill did not, he confessed,
entirely please him ; but he would support it rattler than
go on as they had done.—(Hear, hear.) He must say the
whole Bill was an anomaly.—(Laughter and cheers from
the Opposition.) Aye, but was the representation of the
people never an anomaly before ?—(Hear, hear.) Cer-
tainly the Bill was an anomaly, but they might, perhaps,
make it a little better.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposi-
tion.) In his opinion, if Ministers had had reasonable
men to deal with, they would have produced a much bet-
ter measure.—( Hear, hear.) He believed that it was the
wish of the Ministers to make the best bargain they could
for the public, and, therefore, the Bill should have his
constant support.
Sir. C. WETHERELL said, that if the principle on

which Members were to be given to the metropolitan dis-
tricts—a principle to which he would never accede—were
to be adopted, he could not see why Scotland and Ireland
Should not participate in it, and why additional Members
should not be given to Edinburgh and Dublin, as well as
to the metropolis of England; The old proportion be-
tween the three kingdoms appeared to him a most just
one, while he would maintain that the nets prOportion to
be established under this Bill would be a most unjust and
unfair or.e.
Mr. Alderman WAITIIMAN said that the Hon. Gen-
tleman had deviated altogether from the question imme-
diately before the House, which had nothing to do with
Scotland or Ireland. It would he impossible to carry the
Reform Bill, if it had omitted to give Members to the
great, populous, and wealthy disti lets of the metropolis of
the empire. One fact would suffice to demonstrate the
justice of their claims to repre3entatives, and that fact was
this,that the greatest number of voters that had ever
polled at any general election fir all the boroughs in sche-
dules A and B did net amount to the number that bad
pulled at the last contested election for the city of London.
Mr. BRUCE spoke against the giving Members to the
metropolitan districts, and contended that Scotland had a
better right to them
Sir G. MURRAY begged to say that lie agreed en-
tirely with the Hon. Meibber for Kircudbeight, in think-
ing that if his Majesty's Ministers intended to persist in
their determination of keeping the numbers of the House
exactly as they were at present, now was the time for the
Members from Scotland and Ireland to urge the claims of
their respective countries to a larger proportion of Mem-
bers, and that if they did not do so, they would neglect
their duty towards those whom they represented. They
had heArd to-night from the Hon. Member for Middlesex,
as indeed they had heard before on a former occasion from
the Noble Lord, the Chancdlor of the Exchequer, that this
would not be a final measure.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord ALTHORP—Wben did I say so ?---(Hear,liear.)

Sir G. 'MURRAY considered that the lion. Member
for Middlesex was not a light authority on the subject, for
though not precisely the author of the Bill, he was one of
its most strenuous supporters.—(hear, hear.) He could
not recollect at this moment, the exact date of the debate,
but had it distinctly in his recollection having heard the
Noble Lord say that it was as far his Majesty's Ministers then
deemed it expedient to go.—( Hear, hear.) The expression
made a strong impression both upon the House and upon
him (Sir G. Murray) at the time ; and he was per-
feetly convinced that it would turn out to be the
case.—(Cheers from the Opposition.) The measure was
obviously too strong for Ministers; they could not restrain
it, and it would inevitably go far beyond the limits within
which they wished to confine it. He quite concurred with
the Hon. Member for Middlesex, in the opinion that this
measure of Reform was but a stepping stone to other mea-
sures of that descriptiou which he had not the least doubt
would follow in succession after it had been passed. The
Right Hon. Gentleman proceeded to contend that the
principle of enfranchisement upon which this Bill pro-
ceeded, as regarded England, was that of population,
but the Noble Lord opposite, when more Members were
asked for Scotland and Irel ind on the same grounds, most
inconsistently resisted the application, and asserted that
it was nut on account of population that additional Mem-
bers were given. Now, lie (Sir G. Murray) would main-
tain that the same principle should be exactly applied to
England, Ireland, and Scotland, and that no unfair dis-
tinction of this description should be made. The discon-
tent with respect to this Bill was becoming as strong in
Scotland as it w is in England.
Lord ALTHORP was not going to give any opinion
respecting the Scotch representation, but only to express
his surprise that the Right Hon. and Gallant Member
should have stated that he (Lord Althorp) had declared
this was not a final measure, when he must know that he
could not have made such a statement. In the hurry of
the debate he might have said, " under present circum-
stancest"—(Cries of " You said from the present.") Un-
doubtedly not ; he now remembered that he said "at
present." He (Lord Althorp) did not believe that there
was a single gentleman in the House that could think he
meant to say it would not be a final measure. The Right
Hon. Gentleman said, that he did not mean to say he enter-
tained such an idea, and he complained of his imputing to
him those words.

Sir G. MURRAY undoubtedly did not mean to impute
to the Noble Lord any such idea or intention, that this
was not a final measure ; but the Noble Lord entertained
some peculiar opinions on the question of Reform, such as
in favour of the vote by ballot, though he acquitted him
of any wish to introduce his own opinions into his mea-
sure. At the same time, the Noble Lord had expressed
himself to the effect, that " at present he could not go
further."

Admiral ADAM declarvd that Scotland was perfectly
satisfied with the present measure.

Gdonel LINDSAY denied that Scotland was satisfied.

Sir R. FERGUSSON observed, that those persons who
now declaimed against the small number of Members for
Scotland were the very persons who had said that Scotland
was properly represented under the present system—
(Hear)—and that it had grown up to its present flourish-
mg state under its former representation.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. KEARSLEY said, that the Noble Lord had de-
clared that he was incapable of making such au observa-
tion as had been imputed to him ; but he (Mr. Kearsley)
knew that gentlemen on that (the Treasury) bench were
capable of making any observation, and of saying any
thing.—(A laugh.) One of them had said, that for the
sake of the Reform, he would say black was white.—(A
laugh.)
Admiral ADAM declared that his only motive for sup-
porting Ministers was their conduct in bringing forward
this Bill, which he should support.
Mr. CROKER said that the Hon. Admiral seemed to
be content to vote for a Bill which he could not have
read. He would state the way in which the debate on
Bradford hail been raised. Bradford had now two re-
presentatives ; in the former Bill it had but one. Some
gentl-men thought, that according to the scale of repre-
sentation originally adopted, it should have but one, and
that it the present opportunity passed, and the House
sanctioned the removal of Bradford and other places
from schedule B to schedule C, they would be completely
blocked out, and would not be able to add a single. Member
to Scotland or Ireland. This question was not raised
unadvisedly—(" Hear, hear," from the Treasury bench)
—nor improperly—(A laugh)—for there would be no
other opportunity for such gentlemen to express their sen-
timents : this was the only time in which it was open to
them to enter on this discussion with reference to the in-
terests; of Ireland and Scotland. It was impossible that
the rule of the Noble Lord could be satisfactory to the
country. Blackburn, with a population of 27,000, with
4,800 houses, 600 101. houses, and 2,300/. assessed
taxes, was to have two Members ; whilst Salford, with
50,000 inhabitants, 9,500 houses, 1,300 101. houses, arid
9,000/. assessed taxes, was to have but one Member.
Blackburn, Bradford, Macclesfield, and Oldham, with
123,000 inhabitants, 3,900 10/. houses, and 9,244/. as-
sessed taxes, were to have eight Members, whilst Chelten-
ham, Salford, Rochdale, and Tynemouth, with 118,000
people, 5,500 101. houses, and 35,9001. assessed taxes,
were to have but four. It was impossible that anomalies
Ike these in the Bill could be satisfactory to the country.
The principle ought to be clear and intelligible, and it
was impossible for the Noble Lord to show that there was
a principle of any kind. In the former Bill there was a
principle, but now they were all at eea, and towns of
19,000 souls were placed on an equality with towns of
180,000 souls. If the Noble Lord believed that Liver-
pool would be content with the same number of Members
as were given to Bradford, he would be deceived.
Sir J. JOHNSTON said, that Scotland was perfectly
a itisfied with the number of Members given to it. There
might be some points in which improvement might be de-
sirable, but as a whole they were satisfied with the Bill.
_ . .

...._ ,
Lord J. RUSSELL said that as the Members for Scot-
land had been satisfied with the present number of
objection as to the number now given. If Scottish repre-
sentatives,Mem-
it was scarcely competent for them to raise an
of Bradford, he had no objection ; but he did object to their
Mem-
bers chose to take up the question of Scotland and not that
doing so without some notice, and wearing out the night
with unprofitable discussion.—(Hear.) The Right Hon.
Gentleman (Mr. Croker) had taken a peculiar mode of
getting at his result, by combining various'places which
were under peculiar circumstances. Salford was desirous
of being considered a separate borough, and from its proxi-
mity to Manchester it was not con4dered expedient to give
it more than one Member. He bad before said that po-
pul ttion was the principle of the measure.
Sir G. CLERK said that the question had not been
raised for the purpose of unnecessary debate. It was
shouldttpb) heaerri
tu ogofl
fl decided,
t t
hbee
as Scotland.
Members
of
convenient,
when the question of the whole num-
ber the House was to consist was to
that the number of Scotch and Irish Members
considered at the same time. There was no
empire which needed so much additional re-
presentatives Mr. SCOTT said that justice had not been done to
Scotland.

Mr. SHEIL could not understand why the advocates
for Scotland took their position in Bradford.—(Hear.)
He thought that the proper time for Caledonian energy
to show itself was when schedules A and B were under
discussion.—(Hear, hear.) In the last Reform Bill, the
number of boroughs in schedule B was 41, in the present
snly thirty; and those gentlemen who called themselves
the friends of Scotland and Ireland would have taken a

better opportunity of showing their regard to those couo-
tries, if, instead of attempting to deprive the large town of
Bradford of representation, they had moved that eleven in-
significant boroughs should be added to the present sche-
dule B.—( Hear, hear.)

Colonel PEEL was a representaiive of one of the elev,n
boroughS which were excluded from schedule B of the
present Bill ; and be thought that there was a vast diffe-
rence between disfranchising a county town, and enfran-
chising new places.
Sir G. CLERK said that the reason why the Scotch
Members did not urge their claims during the considera-
tion of the schedules A and 13 was, because the Hon. and
Learned Member for Louth had himself preoccupied the
ground; and he must soy that on that occasion the 11,.n.
and Learned Member acted with great inconsistency ; f
after making a statement which must have convinced every
candid mind, the Hon. and Learned Member thought
proper to withdraw his motion, lest it might embarrass
his Majesty's Government.—(Hear, hear.)

Mr. SHELL said, that if be had been inconsistent with
respect to the case of a pirticular borough, the reason way
that he might be consistent in his adherence to the great
principle of Reform.—( Hear, hear.) He had been de-
ceived, however, in supposing that the Scotch Members
opposite would support his proposition, and the Right
Hon. Gentleman himself was one of those who on that
occ sion preferred his party to his country.—(Cries of
" Hear, hear," and " Oh !")
Mr. HUNT declared his opinion that the present Re-
form Bill would not he a final measure.

The question was then put and carried, that Bradford
Yorkshire stand part of schedule C.
The same question was put and carried with respect to
the following places :—Blackburn, Lancashire; Brighton,
Sussex; Halifax, Yorkshire; Macclesfield, Cheshire; Old-
ham, Lancashire; Stockport, Cheshire ; Stoke-upon
Trent, Staffordshire; Stroud, Gloucestershire.
The list of the new boroughs contained in schedule C.
having been thus gone through,
Lord J. RUSSELL proposed that the Committee should
now return to the postponed case of the borough of Dart-
mouth. He therefore moved that that borough sand
p irt of schedule B.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY asked the Noble Lord whether
he had made any new calculation as to that borough.
Lord J. RUSSELL was very imperfectly heard.
understood the Noble Lord to say that the case urged on
behalf of the borough was, that the taxes p mid were of
greater amount than what was stated in the assessment
delivered by the collector of the Commissioners. If this
was the fact, a fraud had undoubtedly been committed by
the collector ; but the importance of the borough had
been calculated from the assessment which it was legally
bound to pay. If it could be proved that the assessment
on which the calculation was made was not the proper
assessment, there would then undoubtedly exist some
ground for removing the borough from the place it now
occupied ; but, as the case stood, Ministers could not,
though Dartmouth might appear to suffer some hardship,
break thromzli the general rule laid down for all boroughs.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY contended that Dartmouth
ought to he taken out of schedule B. There were evi-
dent mistakes in the papers on the table respecting this
borough. By Lieutenant Drurnniond's return, the num-
ber of houses was stated to be 632, and the borough had
been accordingly placed in schedule B. But if the calcu-
lation had kern made on the actual number of houses,
which was 767, the borough would have escaped altoge-
ther from disfranchisement. He contended that upon the
principle of the Bill, Dartmouth ought to be allowed to
retain its Members. He had taken some trouble to ascer-
tain the number of the 101. houses, and he fund that it
was 211. It was pretended that Dartmouth was not en-
titled to have two Members when tried by the test of the
amount of the assessed taxes; but the fact was that the
collector of Dartmouth had, for several years, been carry-
ing on a system of embezzlement, arfil the inhabitants of
Dartmouth really paid 2001. a year more than the amount
returned to the Tax-hffiee. Considering th it Dartmouth
was faitly entitled to retain its Metnhers, he should op-
pose the motion that it stand part of schedule B.
Lord J. RUSSELL said, that he had made inquiries on
the subject, and he found that Dartmouth would not under
a new valuation, pay a sufficient amount of assessed taxes
to bring it within the operation of the principle upon
which Ministers had acted. The collector to which the
HAI. Baronet had alluded had defrauded the inhabitant,
of D irtmouth, not the revenue.

Mr. HOLDSWORTH maintained that there had l,t—n
no new survey of Dartmouth, and therefore it was imps.
sible to say what amount of assessed taxes it would pay.
He thought a caw had been made out for allowing the bo-
rough to retain its Members.
Captain BASTARD said, it would be very unjust to
disfranchise the borough merely because a dishonest tax-
collector had made f dse returns to the tax-office.

Mr. CROKER thought it was quite apparent that
it was the revenue. and not the inhabitants of Dartmouth,
hat bad been defrvided by the collector, for the later
never would have paid for windows, servants, houses, aad
other things, if they had not possessed them,
Lord ALTHORP said that upon consideration he could
not consent to exclude Dartmouth from the schedule.
The Comittee then divided, and the numbers were—
For the question 2,05
Against it l, 6

Majority for Ministerg --99

Before the gallery was opened, the Chairman had put
the questio❑ that the borough of Totness stand part of
schedule B. When strangers were admitted we found—
Mr. CROKER giving notice that on the bringing up
the report he would move that the yeomanry cavalry ex-
emption duty be included in the amount of the assessed
taxes of Thetford.

Colonel DAVIES complained that a number of Hon.
Members voted in the last division who had not heard the
debate. He had voted in the minority on that occasion,
because, according to the principle of the Bill, Dart-
mouth ought to have been preserved. No doubt his name
would appear in certain prints as " one of those Mem-
bers who usually supported Ministers," but had on this
occasion voted against them. Ministers were acting Incon-
sistently in allowing Totness to retain its Members, when
it did not contain near as many 10/. houses as Dart-
mouth ; but he had heard it whispered that Totness was
to be made a close borough.
Lord ALTHORP expressed his surprise that the Hon.
Member should indulge in insinuations. -He ought to
have known that he and his colleagues were incapable of
acting from unworthy motives.
The question that Totnesa stand part of schedule B, was
then put and negatived.
After a long conversation concerning the propriety of
proceeding with schedule D,
Lord ALTHORP moved that the Chairman do report
progress, and ask leave to sit again.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned at One o'clock to Monday next.
(The Member who spoke after Mr. Baring, in answer
to Mr. Heywood, on Lord Grosvenor's motion for a Select
Committee to inquire into the state of the silk trade, was
Mr. E. J. S,anley, M.P., for Hindon.

JOURNAL or A NOBLEMAN.--This amus-
ing work, a Second Edition of which, we understand, is
already called for, contains the Narrative of the Author's
Travels in Poland, Turkey, Wallachia, Transylvania, and
Hungary, with an Account of his Residence at Vienna
during the Congress, and of the distinguished personages
there assembled. From his rank and fortune, the author
possessed every facility for obtaining access to the first
circles in every place he visited, and he must be allowed
to have used his advantages 'well. Considered as the
progresses of a man of fashion, visiting and conversing
with the people of fashion of other lands, these volumes
are extremely entertaining, and will be certain of obtaining
the attention of a large class of readers.
In the course of a recent discussion in the
Chamber of Deputies, it was stated that the number of
horses in France amounts to 2,500,000,0ne half of which,
or 1,250,000, are mares. Of these 600,000 are adapted
for brood mares, but in fact there are rarely more than
200,000 foals born per annum.
o was theo c sittingu
ped of
with theh CA most singular incident occurred on Mofi-
day duringrtcused of theft it was disturbed by loud cries " A thief .
a thief !" from the audience, and immediately two of the
brothers Ws
h at
the Cu
Municipal Guards brought forward a man, about fifty
te trialo Court
o off A
two i
lz)th
years of age, wearing the riband of the Legion of Honour,
u
who was accused by one of the audience of stealing a hat.
The Court immediately exercised its privilege, and
ceeded to put the accused upon his trial. Upon being in-
terrogated, he said his name was CLAUDE AcausTe
ESDEZAR, and acknowledged the theft, but pleaded ex.
treine distress as the cause of it. On being questioned as
to his right to wear the Order of the Legion of Honour, he
staid that it was given to him during the Hundred Da)s,
Cr having followed the Eurzeoft to Elba as Surgeon.
major. An attendant of the Court deposed that be had
frequently observed the prisoner in the witness room,
whence several hats had been stolen, but he imagin-d
him to be a witness, and had no supicion of him. The
Court pronounced him guilty, and sentenced him to a
year's imprisonment. The Advocate-General reserved
his right to prosecute ESBEZAE for wearing the decoration
of the Legion of Honour without being legally ataho-
rized....French Paper,