The Sun.
London, England, 1835-08-11 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, irtrtsnAv, AUGUST 11, 183'x.

of the value of having public opinion in favour of a Govern-
ment than he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was, but what
was public opinion ? What was popularity ? Beyond the
strict line of his duty, no degree of popularity would ever in-
duce him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer to go.—( Hear. )
To that extent he was ready and anxious to go, and the more
ready if by doing so he could obtain a well deserved popu-
larity. But if he knew any thing of that popularity he was
sure it was not to be obtained by such a course as that re-
commended by the Hon. Member for Bath ; namely, that of
conniving at a scandalous breach of the law, and affording pro-
tection to a class of persons who grievously defrauded and op-
pressed the fair trader who paid large sums to the public re-
venue. He was convinced that that was not the way to ob-
tain popularity.—( Hear, hear.) He would endeavour to do
his duty to the public and to the fair trader by putting down
the smuggler, and he would not be hindered from doing so by
any insinuation, either in the House or out of the House, that
by doing so he was infringing upon the liberty of the press.
As long as there was a stamped press it was entitled to pro-
tection, and it would be base in any Government which refused
such protection. He admitted the importance of the subject,
and thought it right that an opportunity should have been
given not only to discuss the subject and to disabuse the public
in regard to it, but be also thought it right that it should be
publicly known what the views and intentions of the Govern-
ment in regard to the subject were.
Sir SAMUEL WHALL E Y said that the frequent and un-
successful attempts to put down the unstamped press fully
shewed that the public opinion was unfavourable to a stamped
press, and that means ought therefore to be taken to alter the
law in that respect. 400 or 500 persons had been imprisoned
within the last five years for breaches of the stamp laws ; and
when they thought of the lavish waste both of money and li-
berty which that circumstance showed, he hoped the House
would agree with him as to the propriety of altering those
laws. The law had been even a little strained to make it meet
the present case.—( Hear, hear.) He held documents in his
hand which clearly showed that the presses belonged to other
parties in consequence of an agreement made so long ago as
1828, and he therefore contended that the seizure was not only
impolitic but unjust, which mulcted parties other than the real
offenders.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, after what had been
said by his Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, he had but one or two remarks to make. The Hon.
Member for Marylebone said, that he hoped the prayer of the
petition would be listened to ; now what was the petition?
The petitioner stated that he had lent the printing presses to
Cleave and that they were seized. Now he (the Attorney-
General) had no commiseration for Lovett, for that indi-
vidual must have known that the presses were lent for the
purpose of violating the law, and enabling Cleave to commit a
fraud.—( Hear, hear.) The offence of Cleave was as much
a fraud as if he had committed any other species of smuggling.
The Hon. Member for Bath admitted the legality of the
seizure, and he (the Attorney-General) contended that it was
not alone legal, but justifiable. The Hon. Member was mis-
taken in saying that the law was dormant. So far was that
from being the case, that there was hardly a printing presi
within the bills of mortality which was not registered. He
had not been aware of the proceedings till after they took
place, but he felt bound to say that they had his entire ap-
probation, and that he was quite ready to take his share of
the responsibility.
Mr. E. LYTTON B LTL WE R then rose and asked if he
would name a day upon which the discussion upon the stamp
duties could be taken ? (The Chancellor of the Exchequer
was understood to say he could not.) The Hon. Member
then stated that he would endeavour to bring the subject for-
ward on Friday ; and that he could state, that any plan which
would leave a duty of a penny upon newspapers would not
be taken as a compromise.
Mr. HUME said that this was not a question of revenue, but
a question of policy, whether they should go on with a system
under which 500 persons had already been imprisoned. He
hoped that the Hon. Member for Lincoln would bring the
subject forward before the budget was produced. He thought
that the reduction of the duties would be no relief to the stamped
press, and that no satisfaction would be given to the people
unless the whole duty on newspapers was removed.
Mr. BAINES said that he had abstained from taking any
part in the discussion upon the repeal of the Stamp-duty on
Newspapers, often as it had been before the House, from an
apprehension that his motives might be misapprehended; he
had therefore hitherto contented himself with giving a silent
vote for the repeal of the duty ; he might now, however, be
allowed to say, on the petition before the House, that the
petitioner could be no more surprised at his printing presses
and types being seized when they were engaged in printing
newspapers without stamps in defiance of the law, than a ship-
owner would be surprised who, having lent his vessels to carry
on the trade of smuggling, found that the revenue officers
had seized them. In both cases the trade was contraband,
and the consequences might be expected to be alike
ruinous. The Hon. Member for Middlesex had stated, that
nothing short of the removal of the whole . duty on news-
papers would be satisfactory either to the press or to
the people. He (Mr. Baines) was sure that this was not
the general sentiment. If Ministers were not.in a situation to
take off the whole tax, he hoped that they would not, on that
account, be induced by any representations te,the contrary net
to diminish its amount as much as was compatible with the
state of the revenue.—( Hear, hear.) He put it to his Hon.
Friend, the Member for Middlesex, whether
.he would not ra-
ther pay five-pence every morning for his newspaper than
seven-pence, or six guineas a year rather than eight ; and if
that would be congenial to his feeling, so would it to the feel-
ing of the people of England.—( Hear,, hear.) What was the
situation in which the Chancellor of the Exchequer wai
placed? With a surplus revenue of not more than 250,000/.,
lie was called upon to repeal the duty on newspapers, amount-
ing to 450,000/. ; and net only that, but he was told by Hon.
Members, that, in addition to the 450,0001., they would insist
upon the repeal of the duty upon paper, which amounted to
650,000/. more. So that, with a surplus of 250,0001., he was
expected to repeal duties to the amount of 1,100,0001. He
hoped that the Right Hon. Gentleman would repeal as much
of the duty on stamps as his duty to the public and the public
creditor would allow, but no more. He was afraid that there
were other claimants upon the surplus revenue as well as the
press. The agriculturists would expect their share of the re-
duction of taxes—( Hear, hear)—and the manufacturers would
require that the duties on the raw materialsused in their trades
should be favourably considered by the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. ROE BUCK shortly replied.

The petition was laid on the
THE YARMOUTH ELECTION.

Mr. PEA SE presented a petition from William Prentice,
the individual who a few evenings ago was committed to
Newgate for refusing to give evidence before the Committee
appointed to try the Yarmouth election petition, praying that
he might be discharged from custody, and expressing his
willingness to answer any questions that might be put to him
by the Committee. The petitioner trusted, however, that he
would be protected against all questions the answering of which
might tend to criminate himself.
Mr. NICHOL said that his Noble Friend (Lord F.
Egerton) was more anxious that this witness shouldbe brought
before the Committee for examination, and of course he would
support any motion for the purpose. The petition was ordered
to lie on the table.

Mr. PEASE then moved to the effect that William Pren-
tice, the individual now in Newgate for a breach of the pri-
vileges of that House, in having► refused to give evidence be-
fore the Yarmouth Election Cemmittee, be brought before
that Committee to-morrow in custody of the Sergeant-at-
Arms, and that the Speaker do issue his warrant for the pur-
pose.—Motion agreed to.
DESERTION—SPAIN.

Mr. G 0 UL BURN rose for the purpose of putting a ques-
tion to his Majesty's Government respecting the numerous
desertions which had recently taken place from the regiments
stationed in the garrison town of Portsmouth. From informa-
tion which he had received, and on the veracity of which he
had every reliance, he was led to believe that a considerable
number indeed of the men belonging to the British army, sta-
tioned not only at Portsmouth but elsewhere, had deserted
from their regiments for the purpose of entering the service of
the Queen of Spain, and that these persons had been tempted
to quit the service of their own country for that of a foreign
nation in consequence of offers of considerable advantage
having been held out to them by those interested in procuring
recruits for the Spanish army. He believed that his Majesty's
Government had appointed a ship called the SwYlsure, lying
off Portsmouth, for receiving the persons who entered the
Spanish service, and that, instead of facilitating the recovery
of deserters, the parties in charge of that ship did all in their,
power to prevent a search by giving false information when ay-
plied to respecting each individual concerning whom inquiry
was made. It appeared, however, beyond all doubt that de-
serters had been received on board the Swy2sure and con-
veyed in steam-boats to Spain ; and the question he had to
ask the Government was, whether they had auti.urised the in-
dividuals employed in the recruiting service of the Spanish Go-
vernment to adopt such means of obtaining men ; and, if not,
whether, in case the fact was brought home against either the
parties in charge of the hulk or having command of steam-
boats, any means would be taken for punishing them ?
Lord PALMERSTON said the Right Hon. Gentleman
asked his Majesty's Government whether they had sanctioned
the Swylsure hulk being converted into a receptacle for the
troops raising in this country for the service of the Queen of
Spain, and he had no hesitation in telling him that the Go-
vernment had sanctioned it. Application was made to the
Government by the Spanish Minister in this country for some
place in which the troops for the service of his Government
might be lodged, and the Government, being of opinion that
it would not only be better, but render the peace of the towns
more secure, to have them put on board ship than left on shore,
accordingly ordered that certain hulks should be assigned for
their reception. Those hulks were all open to search, and no
steam-boat being allowed to sail from any British port, until it
was ascertained that there were no deserters on board, he must
believe the Right Hon. Gentleman was mistaken, particularly
as the persons on board had always been willing to facilitate,
rather than to impede, the search.

Mr. GOULBURN. said, with respect to the fact that the
persons in charge of the hulks were willing to facilitate the
search for deserters, he was in a situation to give that state-
ment the most unqualified contradiction.—(Hear, hear.)
When application was made on board for a deserter, it was
said, " Oh, true, such a person as you describe was here, but
the instant he saw you approaching the vessel he went Ashore
in a boat." And yet this same person was subsequently found
concealed among the individuals on board.
Lord PALMERSTON (as we understood) said that such
a circumstance could not have happened recently.
Mr. GOULBURN—What I allude to took place on the
28th of July last.
Lord HOWICK said although it was true that some of
the soldiers belonging to the garrison at Portsmouth had de-
serted, and enlisted in the service of the Queen of Spain, still

he did not believe the persons who had contracted for supply-
ing the Spanish Government with troops had used any means
to induce them to desert. He knew that Lord Hill had issued
strict orders 'on the subject, as much with a view to punish the
deserter as those who might be guilty of seducing him from
his duty; and certainly, if the fact were brought home against
any party, a criminal prosecution would no doubt be instituted
against him for the penalties which such conduct would incur.
SPANISH CONVICTS.
Mr. G. PRICE was desirous of knowing from the Noble
Lord opposite whether he had received any information from
the Governor of Gibraltar, respecting the arrival there of a
ship called the Lancer (so we understood), with 150 persons
on board. The brig Lancer had been fitted out at Barcelona,
and 150 men had been forced on board this vessel from Va-
lencia and the coasts of Catalonia and Mercia to be assigned—
he would not say for what purpose—by an authority of the Go-
vernment of the Queen defacto though not de jure of Spain.
—( Cries of " Oh, oh," from the Ministerial benches.) Con-
scious of the fate that awaited them those persons rose against
the crew, and succeeded in carrying the vessel into the harbour
of Gibraltar, where the Spanish authorities demanded that
they should delivered up, and what he wished to know was,
whether such a demand was meant to be complied with or re-
fused ? He had also heard that a statement had been received
in this country from the British Consul at Tangiers that a num-
ber of human bodies linked together, two and two, had been
washed on shore. They were not the bodies of natives, but of
Europeans, and, therefore, what he wished to know was, whe-
ther, in the first place, the 150 men were to be delivered up
to the tender mercies of the Christinos of Spain ; and in the
next, whether the Noble Lord had received any information
relative to the other subject to which had alluded from the
British Consul at Tangiers ?
Lord PALMERSTON, in reply, said that both the Go-
vernment and himself had received information with respect
to the arrival of the ship Lancer at Gibraltar. It appeared
that there was a great disproportion between the prisoners and
crew in point of numbers ;, the one being one hundred and
fifty, while the other did not exceed fifteen or sixteen, and that
the consequence was, as the Hon. Gentleman had stated, that
the prisoners got possession of the ship, and carried her into
Gibraltar. Now, these one hundred and fifty persons, it
should be borne in mind, were, not persons merely labouring
under, suspicion, but who had actually been convicted. He
had been informed by the British Consul in Spain that they
had been regularly tried, convicted, and sentenced to trans-
portation to the colonies. With respect to the question of
their delivery up to the Spanish Government, he believed no
man could entertain a doubt that it never had been the policy
of the British Government to deliver up persons who had
taken refuge on British territory. With regard to the other
wafters adverted to by the Hon. Gentleman, he was ready to
say that Government had received information from the Bri-
tish Consul at Tangiers that some dead bodies had been
washed ashore, and upon this it was deter ined that some
one should be sent to ascertain the cause which had led to
the bodies of persons, not natives of the soil, being found in
such a situation.
After a few words from Lord PALMERSTON and Mr.
PRICE, who mutually explained, the conversation droppcd
I here.

SUPPLY.
_ The House then, on the motion of the CHANCELLOR
of the EXCHEQUER, resolved itself into a Committee of
Supply.
The sum of 5,3001. was granted for defraying the salaries
and other expenses of the Royal Dublin Society.
3001. for defraying the expenses of the Soyal Irish Aca.
demy.
3001. for defraying the expense of the Royal Hibernian
School.

7001. for the salaries of the Commissioners of Charitable
Bequests in Ireland.
1,500/. for the Soyal Belfast Academical Institution.
12,300/. (after a short conversatiion) for maintaining public
works in Ireland.
On the metion that 24,2001. be granted for defraying the
salaries of Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland,
and the expenses of printing and other expenses connected
with the government of that country,
Mr. HUME thought the time had come when they should
get rid of the Lord Lieutenant altogether, and place Ireland
'in the situation of Scotland—under the management of a Se-
cretary of State.
Lord MO RPET II said that the question of getting rid of
the Lord Lieutenant was much too large a one to be discussed
at that moment.
Mr. J. GRATTAN thought that if the King wished to fix
himself permanently in the hearts of the Irish people he would
occasionally hold his Court in Dublin.
Mr. O'CONNE I.L thought his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hume)
nremature in wishing to get rid of the Lord Lieutenant.
When Ireland was placed on an equal footing with Scotland,
when Ireland was allowed, as Scotland was, equality of rights
with England, they might talk of getting rid of the Lord
Lieutenant, but not until then.
After, a few words from the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER,
I,
Mr. H. GRATTAN, and Mr. HUME, the vote was agreed to.
The sum of 6,897/. was granted for the offices of Vice-
' Treasurer and Teller of the Exchequer in Ireland.
4,100/. was granted to defray the expenses of issuing pro-
clamations and printing the statutes in Ireland.
On the sum of 21.400/. being proposed for defraying the
expenses of non-conformists and Protestant Dissenting Minis-
ters in Ireland,
Mr. S. CRAWFORD wished to call the attention of his
Maj:sty's Ministers to some gross frauds practised under this
grant. For instance, money was drawn, purporting to be for
three congregations in Dublin, whilst only one of them had
been in existence for the last twenty years. And in a parish
in the county of Antrim a salary had been drawn in the
name of the Rev. Mr. Rice, although that gentleman had
separated himself from the congregation in that parish for
more than twenty years. He rose merely to make these
statements, and not for the purpose of offering any opposition
to the grant.
Lord MORPETH said his attention had recently been
called to this subject, and he would certainly make it a point
to inquire into it.
Dr. BO W RING objected to the practice of requiring the
people of the United Kingdom to pay for the religious
teachers of any portion of the community. The Presbyterians
of Ireland ought to set the example of letting each religion
support its own ministers. Many of them indeed had, and
some of the deity had refused to be pastors over flocks which
consented to receive the Regium Donum.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the Presbyterians of the North of Ireland, so far from ob-
jecting to this
_grant, received it with the greatest gratitude.
Mr. O'CONNELL bore testimony to the excellent cha-
racter of
,the Presbyterian congregations, and would gladly
consent to the grant, though it was double the proposed sum.
Here was a reply to those who denied the existence of a sur-
plus. There were 600,000 Presbyterians in Ireland. Now
if 25,0001. was sufficient for the moral and religious education
of 600,000 persons, what, according to Cocker should be re-
quisite for the 851,000 belonging to the Established Church ?
_ After a few words from Messrs. ROEBUBK, O'BRIEN, and
others, the vote was agreed to.
The sum of 45,0001., for defraying criminal prosecutions in
Ireland, was also agreed to.
On the proposition that 16,000/. be granted in aid of the
fund for defraying the expense of the police,
Mr. O'CONNELL said that he should be inclined to di-
vide the ilcuse giant, but for the confidence which
he entertained that the present Government would devote
some attention to the subject.
On the sum of 15,0001. being proposed for the Dublin
police,
Mr. O'CONNELL objected to the present system of dis-
posing of the sum voted for the maintenance of the police of
Dublin. One third of the sum would be sufficient for the
efficient support of that force. Nothing could be more cor-
rupt than the mode of applying this money.
Lord MORPETH said that the Municipal Reform Bill—
now in progress through the House—would correct the abuse
complained of by the Honourable and Learned Member for
Dublin. Perhaps, however, during the present Session a Bill
would be introduced, for the better regulation of the Dublin.
Police.

After a few words from Mr. R FRENCH and other Hon.
Gentlemen, the vote was agreed to.
The sum of 7,0001. was proposed for the town land survey,
which, after a conversation between the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER and Mr. O'CoNNRLL, was granted.
The sum of 28,000/. was then voted for the Scotch Univer-
sities.

On the next vote, including, we understood, some estimate
for the proposed temporary accommodation of the Houses of
Parliament—

After a few words from Mr. WARBURTON and others,

Mr. HUME wished to ask whether the sum of 5,0001.
would be sufficient to complete the proposed temporary build-
ing of the House of Lords 1 For his own part, he could
scarcely see the necessity for expending a large sum for such
a purpose. The House of Lords only assembled, in any
strength, upon occasional field days of their own, like those
which were just now going on, and he questioned whether such
proceedings were worth the expense of several thousands to
the country.
Mr. AGLIONBY hoped that some better arrangement
would be made, for the purpose of taking divisions in that
House.

After a few words from Mr. HUME and the CHANCELLOR of
the EXCHEQUER, the vote was agreed to.
2,300/. was proposed for a separate barrack for the Peniten-
tiary soldiers confined for misdemeanours.
Mr. HUME objected to have a separate barrack for the
Penitentiary.
Mr. MACKINNON contended, that the confinement of de-
linquent soldiers with the civil delinquents would have an in-
jurious effect on the military. This he knew as a Magistrate.
Vote agreed to.
6,0001. for compensation for the Inspecting Commissioners
of Excise.
After a few words from Mr. YOUNG and the CHAN-
CELLOR of the EXCHEQUER,
Colonel SIBTHORP should move for a return of the
compensation given to all the new-fangled Commissioners,
including the Municipal Commissioners, than whom he could
not conceive a more worthless or mischievous body. This would
give him an opportunity of showing up the ex-parte statements
of the Commissioners—the dishonest and unfair statements of
the Commissioners--and the inducements held out to them to
make these one-sided statements. —( Cheers, hear, and laugh-
ter.) This would furnish him with an opportunity of exhibit-
ing the expense, and the mischief, of what he always called,
and would call to the death, the workings of the infernal Re-
form Bill—that vile engine of robbery and oppression.--( Loud
cheers and laughter.) Yes, he would have an opportunity of
exhibiting to the community how far the expenses of that ras-
cally measure were commensurate with the expectations enter-
, tained of its success by the people. It was said it would be a

great benefit to the people, but they had not yet shown that
they experienced any great benefit from it. They only suf-
fered a fleecing on its account, in the way of taxation to pay
Whig-Radical Commissioners.—( Loud cheers.) But it was
all fair for Government ; they were only struggling to keep
their places, and they would, of course, support their own
Commissioners.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.)
Mr. BARING said it was thought desirable to pay those
Commissioners by the job, and not by time, and therefore their
salaries were not prescribed at first, lest, if they were to get a
regular annual salary at the outset, they would protract the in-
quiry for their own gain.—( Loud laughter and cheers.)
After a few words from the CHANCELLLOR of the Excns-
QURR and Mr. ROBINSOINT, the vote was agreed to.
3,3001. for criminal lunatics was agreed to.
110,0001. to defray the expenses of the county rates for
criminal prosecutions was moved.
Sir T. FREMANTLE said this vote implied an unfair
compromise.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER defended
the vote.
After a few words (inaudible) from Sir T. FREMANTLE and
Sir R. COLBORNE,
Mr. HUME protested against the grant most strenuously.
Mr. BROTHERTON deprecated the vote, as most un-
called for.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought the proposed ar-
rangement an extremely good one, and felt surprised it should
be from any quarter objected to.
Lord SANDON supported the vote, which he thought was
founded on the best principle that could, under existing cir-
cumstances, be conceived.
After some observation from Colonel Sibthorp, Mr. Tynte,
Mr. Benett, Mr. Shaw, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
The Marquis of CHANDOS deprecated the plan of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, and proposed that the vote
should stand over. It was incumbent upon the House to
afford a greater relief. 80,000/. was not relief adequate to
what was proposed to be granted by the late Chancellor of
the Exchequer.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
he had given more relief than was recommended to be given
by the Committee on agricultural distress, of which the Hon.
Member for Tamworth was a member. He had endeavoured
to ascertain the intentions of the late Government, and, as far
as he could learn, he had carried those intentions into effect.
They had been guilty of no breach of faith.
Mr. WALLACE thought the law should be assimilated to
the law of Scotland, and that the landed interest should be
relieved by the removal of the expense of public prosecutions,
which should be borne equally by all interests.
After a few words from Mr. PEASE, the vote was
agreed to.
113,0001. was then voted in liquidation of the Danish claims.
68,0311. for compensation to individuals, sufferers from the
fire at the Dublin Docks, was then read.

Mr. ROBINSON opposed the grant, on the ground that
the country was not in justice obliged to compensate the loss
occasioned by the negligence of a revenue officer.
Mr. O'CONNELL supported it. The claim was made
under the express provision of the statute 6 Geo. IV., and
the verdict of the Jury who had tried the case bound the Go-
vernment therefore.

Mr. CHAPMAN opposed the vote.
Mr. F. SHAW supported it.
Dr. BO WR ING would not oppose the vote ; but he
wished to call attention to the awful responsibiiity which
would be cast on the country if the principle on which it
was supported should be adopted. He trusted that some-
thing would be done to avert the evil likely to ensue from its
adoption.
Mr. P. THOMSON said that the Government could not
do otherwise than they had done. He was glad to hear the
opinions which had been expressed on the subject, and he could
assure Hon. Members that the attention of Government should
be directed towards it immediately.
After a few words ftom Mr. R. SCARLETT,

The ATTORNE Y-G ENER A L said that the question
had been tried in that way in which only it could be tried,
and they had the very best opin'on upon the subject, viz., the
decision of the Judge at the trial.
The resolution was then arced to.
6,0001. was voted for the Museum.
22,5001. for the expenses of Revising Barristers.
10,0001. for the expense of erecting normal schools.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in reply.
to Mr. Gladstone, said that the principle upon which this vote
was grounded had already been discussed.— Agreed to.
25,0001. for providing in the colonies moral and religious in-
struction for the negroes.
Sir G. GREY said that it was intended to advance sums in
proportion to sums advanced by benevolent societies, for the
purposes of moral and religious education. No distinction
was to be made between persons who applied on the part of
the Church of England, and those who applied on the part of
Dissenting congregations—Agreed to.
8,0501. for the expenses of Special Magistrates in the West
Indies.—Agreed to.
70,0001. for the Civil and Military Establishment in St.
Helena.—Agreed to. •
The C HAIR MAN then reported progress, and asked leave
to sit again.
IRISH MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS BILL.

On the motion that the Order of the Day for the second
reading of the Irish Municipial Corporations Bill be read,
Mr. SHAW objected to the second reading, and said that
it would be impossible that the Bill could be discussed this
Session. _ _

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would
postpone it only on the understanding that the discussion would
be before going into Committee.
Mr. SHAW again objected.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
should move the Oi der of the Day.
Mr. GOULI3URN objected to the Bill being pressed
forward.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would not
object to a postponement on the ground of the lateness of
the hour.

Mr. SHAWsaid the necessary documents for enabling them
to discuss the Bill were not printed.
Mr. RUTH VEN said that after the vile abuse applied to
this Bill by the Hon. Member for the University of Dublin—
Mr. SH A W rose to order.

The SPEAKER submitted to the good sense and discre-
tion of the Hon. Member for Dublin if such terms as "vile
abuse" were of a character that ought to be used in that
House ?

Mr. RUTHVEN had a right to speak of the Hon. and.
Learned Member in his official capacity mixing himself up dis-
creditably with parties upon this subject.
Mr. SHAW should not submit to such observations as that
he had mixed himself up with any discreditable proceeding.—
(Cheers.)
The SPEAKER said that the question was, whether the
words that had been used by the Hon. Member for Dublin were
intended to be applied to the Hon. and Learned Member for
the University of Dublin. The House had a right to know if
those expressions were still intended to be so applied.
Mr. RUTHVEN said that it was rather curious that certain
Members agreed that everything bad that was said was intended
for them.—( A laugh.) Was the Hon. and Learned Member
to suppose that he was to be whitewashed or relieved from
everything he had said or did before he came a Member of this
Parliament?—( Cries of " Order.")
The Sr-2 A t..a good leeling of the Hon.
Member if he could proceed in this course of observation ?
If such a line of debate were pursued it would not be possible
to conduct the proceedings of the House with any degree of
regularity.
Mr. RUTHVEN said that after what had fallen from the
Chair he withdrew entirely all and every words he had used or
applied towards any Member of the House that were inconsis-
tent with order.—( Hear )
The SPEAKER then put the question on the Order of
the Day that the Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill be
read a second time.
Mr:`BROTHERTON moved that the further discussion
on this question be adjourned to Wednesday next.
Mr. H. GRATTAN said that before the question was put
be wished to call the Hon. and Learned Member for the Uni-
versity of Dublin to account for some words he had used. He
had said that this Bill was brought forward for party purposes.
Mr. SHAW had only said that it might serve party pur-
poses to urge it forward.
Mr. H. GRATTAN held in his hand Saunders's Dublin
paper, which was the organ of the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman, in which his speech was given at full length. In that
speech the Hon. and Learned Member said that the Irish Mu-
nicipal Bill was not to pass this Session, and that it was only
brought forward for party purposes. The Hon. Member had
denied the correctness of that speech, as published, but Mr.
M‘Crea had stated that the report from which he (Mr. Grat-
tan) quoted was perfectly correct, and this report was full of
vituperation and vulgar and saucy remarks.—( Cries of " Or-
der, order.")
The SPEA KER really must call the attention of the Hon.
Member to the impropriety of using such exceedingly offen-
sive terms, which must tend to the injury of the character of
their debates.
Mr. GRATTAN now asked the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber for the University of Dublin if he used these words :
g, This is a question of safety for our property and our lives, of
liberty for our wives and our children. It is supported by
those who are infidels in religion and revolutionists in politics,
and by all who are desirous of change. I have always made
my
judicial duties subservient to every other ; but I do regret
my absence from Parliament on account of this measure." He
(Mr. Grattan) had never indulged in abuse against any Hon.
Member.—( Oh, oh.)
Mr. YOUNG rose to order.
Mr. SHAW should answer very shortly the inquiry of the
Hon. Member. He should confine himself to the terms " in-
fidels in religion and revolutionists in politics." He denied
that he had ever used those terms in the sense in which he had
been stated to have used them. What he had said in sub-
stance was this, that those who supported the measure would
have with them all who were infidels in religion and revolu-
tionists in politics.—( Cheers.) All the other parts of his speech
as reported he had no fault to find with : it was as he had
spoken it substantially correct.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER looked
upon the interests connected with the passing of this Bill as
far above all party considerations, and he hoped it would be
discussed with temper and discretion.
The further discussion of the subject was then adjourned to
Wednesday next.
Mr. SHAW begged to say a few words with reference to
the future proceedings upon this Bill. It was not his inten-
tion to take any further part in the discussions upon it, but he
would then enter his protest against the progress of so im-
portant a measure at this period of the session. He would not
offer one word in opposition, and he hoped no Hon. Friend
of his would, upon any future stage of the Bill. There was as

yet no report from the Dublin Commission of Inquiry, and
without that report he looked upon it as impossible to legislate
with justice or prudence.
Mr. BORTH WICK made an observation which was in-
audible.
After a few words from Mr. PRINGLE and Mr. W. S.
O'BRIEN,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was ready
to postpone his motion for a Bill to promote the better naviga-
tion of the River Shannon. However, as he believed it was a
good measure, he would move for leave to introduce a Bill on
that subject.
Lord MORPETH moved for leave to bring in a Bill to
alter the police force in Ireland.
Mr. HUME moved for the re-appointment of a Select
Committee to inquire into Orange lodges in the British army.
Mr. NICHOL said that if the Hon. Member persisted in his
motion he should move the adjournment of the House.
Mr. PRINGLE did not think that the majority of the House
would be satisfied with the Hon. Gentleman's motion, and
therefore he hoped that he would withdraw it.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER considered
that the re-appointment of the Committee was a question that
the House could not refuse to assent to.
Mr. SHEIL said that the disclosures connected with the
army were so important, that an immediate inquiry should be
instituted.
Mr. WALLACE said that the Duke of Gordon belonged
to an Orange lodge, and as he considered that those institu-
tions went to subvert the succession to the throne, he was
prepared to support the motion of the Hon. Member for Mid-
dlesex.
Mr. HUME had in his hand the minutes of the proceed-
ings at a meeting in which the Duke of Cumberland was in
the Chair, and at which he had signed warrants for privates in
several regiments.
Mr. NICHOL would persevere in his motion, and he
thought that the appointment of the Committee was not pro-
per at this late period of the session.
The SPEAKER then put the question, that this House do
now adjourn.
Lord SANDON said that the discussion ought not to have
been brought forward at that late hour of the night, but
ought to be introduced when there was a fuller attendance of
Members.

Lord PALMERSTON said that he saw nothing stated by
Hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House that went
as an argument against the motion. He therefore thought
that he was justified in supporting it. No friend of the
illustrious Duke who was implicated in the motion could wish
it to stand over for another year ; and he hoped that the Hon.
Member would not have recourse to that vexatious way of op-
posing motions by moving the adjournment of the House.
Colonel SIBTHO RP contended that Orange Lodges had
always promoted loyalty towards the Throne.
Mr. SHAW said that the illustrious Duke who had been
alluded to was not aware of the existence of Orange Lodges
in the army. The illustrious Duke had informed him that no
such lodges existed, and that he had not issued any warrants
for any soldiers. He therefore could not allow this motion to
pass, and he thought that the House of Commons ought not
to grant an inquiry without a proper discussion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the subject under discussion was not a new one, and if it was,
the Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite might have a right to
ask for its postponement. The question of an enquiry into
Orange Lodges had been conceded by the late Government.
That inquiry was incomplete, and the only question now was,
whether there should be a continuation of it.
Mr. AGLIONBY said that if a charge had been made
against an illustrious individual, it ought to be immediately
inquired into.
Mr. SC A RLETT contended that the effect of this mo-
tion would be directly to interfere with the discipline of the
army, and therefore he was opposed to it. —(Cries of "divide,
divide.")
The House then divided, when there appeased—
For the motion for adjournment .
Against it
llajority
On our re-admission to the Gallery, we found
Lord SAN DON addressing the House, objecting to their
proceeding with a discussion so important at such an hour in
the morning. He moved that the further debate be adjourned
to some future day.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion for the adjournment
Against it
Majority
On our return to the Gallery, we found that Mr Nichol
had moved the adjournment of the debate until to-morrow
night.
Mr. SHAW supported the motion for adjournment.
Lord PALMERSTON did not think Hon. Members were
aware of the question before the House, or they would not
resist the motion in this way. The object was to extend the
Committee on Orange lodges to England and Scotland as well
as Ireland, and unless it was allowed to be brought in now it
would be hopeless to expect that it could be brought forward
again during the present session.
Lord SANDON said that the course they proposed tak-
ing was wholly inconsistent with either reason or justice, and
could redound little to the honour or character of the House.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would
have no objection to the postponement, provided its object
was not to get rid of the matter during the session. He
feared, however, that this was the intention.—( Cries of " No,
no.") Well, then, if that were so, be only desired that they
should come to a fair understanding, and agree that no objec-
tion should be made to the bringing it on to-morrow night,
and with such an understanding he and those on his side of
the House would be content.

Mr. SHAW said that although he might have no objection
to such an arrangement, it might so happen that others would,
and therefore he thought no such understanding could well be
come to.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
as it was clear the object was, as he had stated, to defeat the
inquiry altogether, he could not consent to the motion for
adjournmont.
After some further observations from Mr. Shaw, Mr.Borth-
wick, Lord Sandon, and Mr. Nichol, the House divided.--
The numbers were—
For the motion for adjournment l3
Against it .
Majority
When we we were re-admitted we found

Mr. SHAW stating that no difficulty would be thrown in
the way of the motion to-morrow night if the postponement
were consented to. AU that he or those who acted with him
desired, was a full and fair discussion, which such a matter
ought to receive.
Mr. HUME said that, with this understanding, he would
not object to the postponement.
The further debate was accordingly adjourned until to-
morrow (this day), and the other Orders of the Day having
been disposed of, the House adjourned at half-past Three
o'clock.