The Sun.
London, England, 1835-08-19 00:00:00

LETTERS-PATENT BILL.

On the motion of Mr. ToOKE, the House went into Com-
mittee on this Bill.

Clauses l to 3 were agreed to without opposition.
Clause 4 being proposed,
Mr. WA RB URT ON objected to the retention of the
clause in the Bill. It lodged the power of renewing patents
in the bands of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council,
where the attorney of the party succeeding had treble costs;
but if this power were confined to Parliament, the parties might
go before a Committee, which would be most desirable.
Mr. TOOK E said that the object of the clause was to pre-
clude the great expenses which were incurred in going be-
fore a Committee of the House, and by way of taking a me-
dium course, he had proposed that the Privy Council should
have the direction of this matter, as it was peculiarly adapted
to entertain this question.
After a few words from Mr. HAwEs and Mr. PEASE, in
support of the objection,
Mr. WARBURTON urged that the question of renewing
a patent was not a judicial one, but one of public policy, and
therefore fittest for Parliament to deal with.
. _

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL concurred in this view
of the question.
Mr. TOOKE yielded to the opinion of the Hon. and
Learned Solicitor-General, and the clause was withdrawn.

Clause 5 was agreed to.
The remaining.elauses were agreed to after a short discussion.
The CHAIRMAN obtained leave to report, and the House
resumed.

Report ordered to be brought up.to-morrow.
TITHES ON TURNIPS BILL.
Captain brought up the Report on the Tithes !on
Turnips Bill.

The 13i11 was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow.
MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
On the motion that the Report on the Marriage Act
I.!ti.64oic!' , .
Mr. DIVETT said he had an amendment to propwe co
the second clause in the Bill, to the effect that a marriage with
the sister of a deceased wife, where there was a child or were
children under 12 years of age, should be exempt from the
operation of the Bill. There could be no doubt that cases
Tl'ig!!t Pceur wlitn't‘ te h"fl4 to
the lather and the children that such a marriage should be
permitted.

Mr. H. TWISS said, that having undertaken the conduct
of this Report in the absence of an port. Friend, he could not
consent to t! liiti'ditietion Of such an atnendnient. that
amendment were admitted, he thou,ht it would endanger the
success of the Bill elsewhere.—(Cries of " Order, order.")
He had only intended this conversationally, and with the
view of inducing the Hon. Gentleman to withdraw his pro-

Mr. MUTT' said, he should certainly not withdraw his
amendment, nor allow the discussion on any part of the Bill
to proceed without first taking the sense of the House upon it,
Mr. PO T.' LTN R did hot object to the principle of the OW,
but felt to gti
LIiStiINGTON was inclined to support the Bill as it
now stood. lie considered that the amendment proposed was
one of very great importance. and so important as not to ad-
mit of being sufficiently discussed and considered at this
period of the Session. He concurred in the hope, therefore,
that the amendment would be withdrawn, and that the Bill
would be allowed to proceed as it was; then the Hon. Mem-
ber might bring forward next Session a short Act upon the
subject of his amendment, when there would be ample time
fully to discuss the question.
An HON. MEMBER then moved that the House be counted.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and there not being
40 Members present,
The House adjourned at three quarters past 7 o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS, AUGUST 17.

The VICE. CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack a few
minutes before Five o'clock.
ORANGE LODGES.

A Message from the House of Commons brought up a Re-
solution of the Committee on Orange Lodges, summoning
the attendance of the Duke of Gordon and Lord Kenyon be-
fore them, to give evidence on the nature and extent of Orange
Lodges in Great Britain and the Colonies.
Mr. Sergeant PEREIN and others brought up the Irish Cor-
poration Reform Bill, Exchequer Courts in Ireland Bill, and
several other Bills.
The Tea Duties Bill was read a third time and passed.
Several private Bills were passed forward a step.
The Duke of RICHMOND moved the second reading of
the abolition of Unnecessary Oaths Bill, which was ordered to
be committed to-morrow.
The Marquis of WESTMINSTER presented petitions
from Shaftesbury and Chester in favour of the Corporation
Reform Bill, which his Lordship observed was so mutilated
now that it was doubtful whether it could reach the other
House.—( Hear and laughter from Lord Kenyon and others.)
Lord FARNHAM presented several petitions from Dublin
and other places in Ireland against the Irish Church Bill.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH complained that several
Returns which he had moved for, had not been made up and
produced.
Lord RADNOR brought up the Report of the Limitation
of Polls Bill, which is to he read a third time on Thursday.
Lord MELBOURNE presented a petition from the bo-
rough of Gateshead, praying that certain rights might be pre-
served to them.
MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL and others brought up the con-
sent of the House of Commons to certain Amendments of the
Bankruptcy Estate Bill.
Lord RODEN presented several petitions from Ireland
against the Irish Tithe Bill.
Lord MELBOURNE presented several petitions in favour
of the Corporation Reform Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Oswestry,
praying that the Bill might be passed without mutilation, but
it was already mangled into ten thousand pieces. Also a
petition from Truro, to the same effect.
Lord EL L ENBO ROUGH said the property of Oswestry
Corporation consisted of 25/. a-year, which was expended on
the Constabulary Force.
Lord BROUGHAM observed that a good deal might
be said on that subject, but at present he would not
detain the House.
The Earl of DEVON presented a petition from Exeter
against the Corporation Reform Bill.
The Marquis of WESTMINSTER wished to know whe-
ther this petition was agreed to at a public or a hole and corner
meeting?
Lord BROUGHAM said, that if it had been agreed to at
a public meeting, it was a great curiosity.
The Duke of WELLINGTON rose and said, that he
could treat the Noble and Learned Lord to such a petition,
for he had one from Hastings agreed to at a public meeting,
and against the Hear, and laughter.)
Lord BROUGHAM observed that one curiosity sometimes
brought forward another, and the Noble Duke, as a collector
of curiosities, had been diligent and fortunate enough to

find one of this kind ; but he feared the less its character

was inquired into the better, for if it were scrutinized, like
Cornelius Scriblerus's shield, it would turn out to be nothing
but an old candlestick.—( Laughter. )
On the Order of the Day for bring up the Report on the
Militia Staff Bill being read,
Lord WESTMORELAND protested against the mea-
sure, and entreated the Noble Viscount (Lord Melbourne)
not to press it.
The further discussion was postponed until to. morrow.
Lord BUTE presented a Petition from Argyle in support
of the Church.

Lord MELBOURNE brought up the Peace Preservation
in Ireland Bill, which was read a first time, and ordered to be
read a second time on Monday.
Lord BROUGHAM gave notice, that he should propose
an amendment to give certain powers to the Grand Jury.
It was subsequently agreed that the Bill should be read a
second time to-morrow.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS BILL.

The Order of the Day having been read for going into
Committee on the Municipal Corporations Bill, and the 35th
clause being proposed,
Lord L YND HU RST had some amendments to propose
upon the clause, which were consequential on the amendments
the House adopted the night before. They had reference to
the 96th clause, which empowered the council to recommend
persons to the Crown for the office of justices. By the Bill
all persons at present holding the office of magistrate were to
continue in office until the Ist of May, 1836 ; but if new ma-
gistrates were to be created, he could not see why the old ma-
gistrates were not to be continued. He should, therefore, pro-
pose to strike out the words which limited their duration of
office to the Ist of May, 1836.
Lord BROUGHAM said that his Noble and Learned
Friend had again got the knife in his hand, with which he had
so unmercifully butchered the Bill the night before, and he
was sorry to see that the same slaughtering process was to be
proceeded with again that night. Did his Noble and Learned
Friend mean that all magistrates who now held office in cor-
porate towns were to be continued ? In some boroughs the
two senior magistrates only were magistrates, in others those
only who had passed the chair. Did his Noble and Learned
Friend mean to say that because a man happened to be once
an alderman, he must be always a magistrate. His Noble
and Learned Friend was now placed in a judicial character
over the Bill, and he (Lord Brougham) would humbly submit
to the Court—( A laugh)—that a different sentence ought to
be passed upon it from that which his Lordship had pro-
nounced.—( Laughter.) _ . _

Lord LYNDHURST said that he had listened with the
greatest patience and attention to the arguments of the
Learned Advocate--(Laughter)—and he could assure the
Learned Advocate, that his only object was to do justice.
There were many persons in those corporations who held
situations under a charter from the Crown, and he did not
see why, in common justice, they should be removed. This
was his judgment, but it was open to his Noble and Learned
Friend to bring his writ of error in the other House of Par-
liament.—(Laughter. )
Lord BROUGHAM had seen his Noble and Learned
Friend preside and give judgment in another place, but he
never decided there without hearing arguments, but now he
was giving judgment before he heard Counsel. Something
after the manner of one of the judges of a certain place, Rha-
damanthus, who presided where he hoped his Noble and
Learned Friend would never go— (Laughter)—Castigatque
auditque, not &dos, for there were no deli in that House.—.
(Laughter.)
Lord LYNDHURST had read the papers, as his Noble
and Learned Friend used to do ; had listened to the argu-
ments ; and then pronounced judgment.
Viscount MELBOURNE said that the evident effect and
purpose of the various amendments which the Noble and
Learned Lord had brought forward, were to preserve every
thing and every person belonging to the old system, which the
present Bill was intended to correct and improve. No mode
could possibly be adopted better calculated to prevent all be-
nefit from the Bill than the course which the Noble and
Learned Lord was pursuing. His amendments went to pre-
serve so much of the abuses of the old system as to render the
Bill entirely insufficient, and prevent its answering the objects
for which it was framed. He did not mean to offer any
strong opposition to the course which the Noble and Learned
Lord was pursuing in the present state of the House ; but
when it should be seen the state in which their Lordships had
left the Bill, it would be matter for the most serious consi-
deration of the Government whether they should proceed with
it any further in its mutilated state.
The Marquis of NORTHAMPTON thought it would
contribute greatly to the efficiency of the new magistrates that
they should have the assistance of the old, and he should,
therefore, support the amendment.
The Duke of RICHMOND said that there were several
Corporations, the charters of which did not appoint magis-
trates, and here at least the new magistrates could not have the
assistance of any old ones:
The amendment was then put and agreed to.
The clause as amended was then passed.
On clause 36 being read, which provides for the division of
boroughs into wards,
Lord E LL ENBOROUGH had an amendment of some
importance to propose upon this clause. He had considerable
objection to the king in Council having the power of appoint-
ing the limits of the wards. The House had already deter-
mined that the limits of the Parliamentary boroughs should
remain as they were at present until Parliament should other-
wise determine, and there was no information before their
Lordships as to those that were not Parliamentary. He was
unwilling to say anything harsh of any set of men who had

been engaged in the fulfilment et A,„i,7r,...,14t dvity, r,s those
Commissioners had ; but still he must say that it;e: t.'/v!dtret of
the Commissioners did not appear to him to be at all satisfat,'-:
Lary, aid he. had a great objection. to the King in Council
ttieir 46p'Oft.. The. Commissioners would have the
fisw krrotktb. into wards, but also
power 01 no -`t, • -
of allotting the office of eodot'Ortiiin *t.4 ttri7.party they thought
proper. Now, he was of opinion that such d pv,ri2r as this,
ought only to be placed in hands free from all suspicion, and
he th,ontfht 000 lit, above all others, to be given to the present
menibcrs Yft.P:Octfo,ttetictri!, Ile should propose to have this
authority vested in the the adjoining district. He
objected also to that part of the eltit.44 doh says that no bo.
rough towns shall be divided into wards tthh.4.F; it bits apopula-
t)er ,of 19,090 -inhabitants. Now, the object of dividing into
wards Wiis ci fla-F iiitscsts of the town repr,sentell,
and therefore he was desiroii !..:'trrOrui the system of warns
as far as he possibly could. He would, toi :t.,!0 reason, assiorrn
wards to towns with a population of 6,000 and upWar6..v. He
would give two wards to each town with a population of feam
(1,000 to 9,000; three ll'ar& to towns with from 9,000 to
16,000 and so on, in the same pi'OpOnion, so that a popula-
tion of from ab,noo to 70,000 would have eight wards. The
question then was, how were the councilmen to be apportioned
--Whether with regard to property or to number, or to both.
He thought it ought fn have regard both to property and
numbers, as it was in ManeheiteF, was divided into 14
wards. It would be highly desirable tO rithipt this principle, of
uniting property and numbers, if it was wished to make the
measure permanent and useful. Those who returned Mem-
bers to Parliament ought not to he overriden, the more parti-
cularly as they were also the persons who paid loG;il taxes.
He, therefore, moved that this clause be omitted altogether, for
the purpose of substituting the amendment he should propose.
Viscount MELBOURNE was by no means surprised at
the Noble Baron's want of confidence in his Majesty's Minis-
ters, but he was at a loss to know why the Noble Lord wanted
confidence in the Commissioners. He could sec no reason for
it. The instructions which the Commissioners received were
to divide the wards as closely as possible in equal proportions
of rich and poor. They could not be better mixed than this.
Each ward in fact was a small town in itself. The object was
to combine, in an equal ratio, property and numbers, and this
had been properly provided for by the instructions to the
Commissioners, as far as it was practicable. The powers
which the Noble Baron was not disposed to confide to the
King in Council he was very willing to give to district Ma-
gistrates. This he (Viscount Melbourne) did not think was
wise or discreet. He did not think that powers of so delicate,
important, and difficult a nature, to be exercised impartially,
ought to be placed in the hands of persons who could scarcely
fail to be mixed up with the local politics of the town. He
thought it would be much more prudent to vest such powers in
the Commissioners than in the Magistrates of the districts.
The Noble Baron also wished to have towns of a less popula-
tion than 12,000 divided into wards, but he (Viscount Mel-
bourne) could not see any good purpose that would be an-
swered by subdividing small communities. He confessed he
did not understand the Noble Baron's mode of apportioning
Councilmen, except that the object appeared to be to give
the Bill a still more aristocratic character. He, viewed the
proposition of the Noble Baron with doubt and suspicion§
The Earl of WINCHILSE A supported the. amendment,
and said that the country was heartily sick of agitation, and
wished for peace and tranquillity.
The Earl of RIPON thought that 12,000 was a population
too great to be made the minimum, and 6,000 he thought too
low. But as too what the Noble Baron proposed, of giving
to the district magistrates the power which the Bill gave to
the King in Council, he did not at all approve of it. He
thought that 10,000 would be a proper point to start from, as
to population, and to a town with this number of inhabitants,
he would give two wards.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH—That would exclude fifty
boroughs.
The Earl of RIPON thought 6,000 too small.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH, in explanation, said that if
the Noble Earl would suggest any other hands in which he
thought the power of dividing into wards would be better
placed than in those of the magistrates, he (Lord Ellen-
borough) would give up his own proposition.
The Duke of RICHMOND hoped that the Noble Lord
would withdraw these clauses, which would interfere with the
administration of justice ; and that he would not attempt,
merely to get out of a difficulty, to adopt a course which would
attach to the magistrates anything like political bias.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said that the Noble Duke
seemed to have forgotten that he was a member of the Go-
vernment which introduced the Reform Bill, which empowered
the magistrates at the quarter sessions to divide the counties
into districts.

Lord BROUGHAM must really protest against this mode
of proceeding. The Bill now before the House was a great
legislative measure ; but a principle had been repeatedly re-
cognized by the Noble and Learned Lord opposite, whose
amendments he considered as absolutely fatal to the Bill, to
which he should call the attention of the House. That prin-
ciple was, that their Lordships were to stand stock still, that
they were never to benefit by experience, and that they never
were to depart from a principle which they had once recog-
nized. This was most absurd—even ridiculous. Undoubt-
edly in the case to which the Noble Baron referred there was
great difficulty. The provision was agreed to under a pres-
sure. He (Lord Brougham) was exceedingly against the
provision which gave to the Judges the appointment of the
Revising Barristers, and he since had had reason to believe
that those Learned Judges had not exercised their patronage
in this respect as they ought to have done. If wards were
multiplied, the effect would he, as any body conversant with
elections would know, to split votes, and a house list would
have to be made out by the election clerk. He objected to
the principle of the magistrates apportioning out of the num-
ber of councillors. Such a power would create jealousy and
discontent. He did not see the defects of the present Go-
vernment, which struck Noble Lords opposite so forcibly, but
he thought his Majesty's Ministers were at least worthy of
having this power entrusted to them.
Lord SK ELMERSD AL E would suggest to the House
that the Magistrates at the Petty Sessions should be spe-
cially called on to make the allotment, and that they might
proceed or not, as they chose ; but that those who acted
should make a report to the King in Council, who might
or might not act upon their recommendation.
Lord SEGR AVE thought that the principle of the Re-
form Act, which had been alluded to, was not at all similar
to that on which these clauses were founded.
Lord HAT HERTON knew that differences existed in
many counties with respect to the operation of this clause
of the Reform Act, but he thought that it had no analogy
to the present subject under discussion.
The Duke 'of RICHMOND said the suggestion of his
Noble Friend appeared to be worthy of consideration. He
only suggested that the Commissioners should report to the
King in Council, and that the Report for the first election
should be valid, but not hereafter until it should have been
sanctioned by an Act of Parliament.
Lord ELL ENBOROUG H said that the first election
would be more important than all the others, for of three
parts of the Council only one-third would annually go out.
Lord FE VE RSII AM thought that the suggestion of his
Noble Friend below him (Lord Skelmersdale) was worthy
of the consideration of the Noble Baron.

After an observation from Lord ELLENBOROUG H,
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE thought the Magistrates
would rather withdraw themselves from the responsibility
which the amendment would fix upon them ; but, at the same
time, he thought there was no foundation for the imputation
that they would be influenced by political considerations.
County Magistrates were always indisposed to interfere with
the concerns of a neighbouring town, for they knew that such
interference always created suspicion and animosity.
The Marquis of BUTE was understood to oppose the
amendments.

The amendments were then put and agreed to, without a
division.

The clauses from 42 to 52 were read summarily ; and, after
a miscellaneous conversation across the table, of which no-
thing could be heard in the Gallery, we understood that they
were postponed, on the understanding that Lord Lyndhurst
was to propose an amendment in a future stage of the
.Bill relative to providing a compensation to town clerks for
the losses they might suffer under the present measure.
The succeeding clauses of the Bill were postponed until the
Chairman arrived at.clause 65, which affects the licensing of
public-houses.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE thought that the present practice
of licensing public-houses was so preferable to transferring the
power to town councils that he should move the total exclusion
of the clause.

Viscount MELBOURNE said that the existing system of
licensing had been found objectionable in every respect, and
that the system proposed by this Bill was preferable.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE explained.
Lord BROUGHAM said that the House was so adverse
to the Bill that any Noble Lord on the other side of it was
sure of carrying any motion for the expulsion of any clause,
or for any amendment that vitiated it. He would not therefore
divide tho House. He would as soon think of taking the
whole House on his back and carrying it with all the Members
in it to the other side of the street.—(A laugh.)
Lord ASHBURTON acknowledged that the system of
licensing public-houses at present was objectionable, but if
Noble Lords should set their wits to work to disarrange the
state of society in small towns they could never produce a more
effective plan than the adoption of the clause before them.
The Earl of RADNOR supported the clause.
The Earl of WINCHILSE A supported the amendment.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE would stand up for the old law,
and oppose the proposed new one on the ground that the former
was more efficient than the latter.

A NOBLE LORD, whose name we could not learn, supported
he amendment.

The amendment was agreed to without a division.
On clause 67,

Lord LYNDHURST said it was quite necessary that Par-
liament should come to some arrangement respecting charitable
trusts. What he (Lord Lyndhurst) should propose in the
clause before the House was, that as the Bill made the trusts
in the hands of the present possessors terminable on the Ist of
January, 1836, that date should be altered to the Ist of August
of the same year.

Lord BROUGHAM pledged himself, should the House
adopt the amendment of his Noble and Learned Friend, to
bring the subject forward in the next Session of Parliament.

Tile amendment was agreed to.
Clauses 68 to 72 were struck out of the Bill.
Clauses 73 to 76 were ordered to stand part of the Bill ; the
latter with a proviso added thereto by
Lord ELLENBOROUGH, to the effect that, in reference
to the rights of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, no
majority of the local trustees included in the clause could have
power to transfer any rights appertaining to these bodies with.-
out the consent of the Chancellors, Vice-Chancellors, and
-
Masters of the several Colleges.
On clause 77,

The Duke of R ICHMOND wished to know why map s-
trates and constables of boroughs were to have jurisdiction
and authority in counties—at least, within seven miles of the
borough ?
Viscount MELBOURNE—To keep the peace.
The Duke of RICHMOND had no objection to it; but he
thought it would be only fair if the Bill gave the county magis-
trates an equal power in the boroughs..
The Marquis of SALISBUi:Y said it was essential that
there should be a r...eiprocity of power and jurisdiction be-
tween counties and boroughs.
After a few words from Lord L YND HUR ST the discus-
sion on the subject was underst..n to be postponed, and the
clause ag.ecd io.

Clauses 78 to 85 were agrocd to

O. clause 85,

Lord ELLENBOROUGII ,roposed a proviso to this
clause, to the effect that, in boroughs where no fund was sct
.wart for the purpose of police, 1;?k, Watch Committee should-
•
1..11(0, from time to time, to the Secretary of State far the
Ho= 61).;rtment every matter etting to the peace of their
district.
The proviso was h!lopted..

Clauses 86 to 92 wb.re then agreed to, as was also clause
93, with an amendment, Clauses 94 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, to
100 were agreed to.
On clause 101 being proposed,
Lord LYNDHURST moved, as an amendment, that re-
corders of five years' standing as barristers should be exempted
from the operation of this Bill.
After a short conversation this amendment was agreed to•

The clauses to 133 were then passed.
On clause 134 being proposed,
Lord L YNDH UR ST had an objection to this wholesale
issuing of charters to these boroughs newly-enfranchised by'
the power of the Crown. Charters were not trifles to be dealt
with tet lightly. There should be good reason for giving these
charters.

Lord BROUGHAM—Do you object to all or to any?
Lord I. YNDIIURST said in certain cases he would not
object to the charters, but he did to the extent proposed. The
charter should give the Council the power of appointing a po-
lice, and where the power was not given the charter should
not be granted.
Lord BROUGHAM said it might so happen that in
some cases the population might be adverse to the appoint-
ment of a police force. A majority at a public meeting
might be got up against it ; then why extend a charter to such
a town ?
Lord ELLENBOROUGH thought the Noble Lord
right if a meeting could be got up by the application of
strong Radical stimulants, to resist the introduction, of a force
among them to defend property and keep order. The very
party who would have the majority against the introduction of
the police would have a majority in the election of the
Common Councilmen, who would take care to obey the man"
date, and refuse to have any police at all ; then why charter
these little democracies of the Noble Lord ?—( Hear.)
Lord LYNDHURST would suggest that the charters
to be granted by the Bill should have the same effect as all
charters granted by the Crown heretofore.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE would beg at this star
of the Bill to make a remark or two. The Noble Lord, ut
the amendments that he had carried, proposed a certain qua"
lification of property for the exercise of the franchise. Noir
he wished to ask the Noble Lord what he meant? Did be
mean that this qualification should be general, and should 113-
ply to the life tenant corporators, whom he would protect L.°
Was
the new authorities, that were to be periodically elected? °
the privilege of retention of office to be conceded in the 00
case, even without the possession of the qualification; and b°:(
denied in the other, with this possession ? Was it to be an
extensive or partial qualification?
Lord LYNDHURST said the clause was general inv its al);
plication, that there should be a qualification for the propose"
councillors. It did not trench on the modes of applicatiOn_.,l
the details might be reserved for another time. TNer:
would be an opportunity of revising the clause at anotilei
time.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was glad to hear the
clause would be revised, which would have the effect of dis-
qualifying one-sixth of the governing body of the town if theY
did not possess property to a certain extent.
Lord LYNDHURST meant to re-consider the provisions
and application of the clause. There was nothing said at ths
time the princiiple of the qualification was established of its
bearings in ind vidual cases. It was open to further colt'
deration. On the re-committment of the Bill those distil
and specific questions would lead to other and long discussions*
and they were at the present time premature. At the proper
stage of the Bill, and after due consideration, they would he
s .tisfactorily answered.
Lord BROUGHAM said his Noble Friend's qualifies'
Lions ought to be extended to existing Corporations as well as
to the proposed councilmen. By tau present principle of till
Bill if a man happened to be a pper, and took the benen"
of the Insolvent Act, cheating his fellow-townsmen, or if net"
cheating them beforehand, incapable or unwilling to render
them sustantial service after, should he happen to have been
elected to the council, would go out in three years, or one
year, as it might be, and if his fellow-townsmen did not re-'
spect or trust him he would be disqualified from exercising
authority over them again. But the clause proposed by Ws
Noble Friend would saddle the town with pauper Aldermen
and Councilmen for life. Perhaps his Noble Friend would
provide against this latter evil,—(Hear.) He would beg t°'
remind his Noble Friend of a correspondence from Glasgoe4,
which his Noble Friend read the other night, to show the bill'
materials of which the Council there was composed, and a.
this as an argument against the establishment of similar
„
bodies under the Bill. He told his Friend that before Friday'he could procure full contradiction of this averment. 1.11.-
day (Tuesday) he received a letter from a well-known in
vidual in Glasgow. He would mention his name, fir'
Douglas, a member of the town council of Glasgow, a sae);
tor of great practice, who had formerly been a candidate f°
the representation of Glasgow, and had obtained 100 votes.
The letter stated that there never was a more unfounded state',
mentthan that made by the Noble and Learned Lord's cornea"
pondent--that paupers were appointed members of the town
council, men who were not rated to the poor rates, and 01)°
were bankrupts. There was one member of the town counc,,:
a man of highly respectable character, who had been a !)an'
rupt ; but the letter stated—
The Marquis of WE STAIEATH rose to order. Ile 048
travelling entirely out of the proper and legitimate line of dis-
cussion ; the Glasgow correspondence was not the subject be-
fore their Lordships. He respected the Noble Lord's talents'
though he lamented their lamentable perversion. He not only
introduced irrevelant matter in the debates of the House, h)t11.
usurped the unwarrantable privilege of dictating to theia
Lordships what course of argument they should pursue, all
when they were to speak, and what. His Lordship's eon"
duct was a check and burlesque on their discussions,'"
(" Order," and " Hear.")
Lord BROUGHAM said the Noble Marquis could not ea!!
him to order, as he was about to move that the House reps,"
progress. The Noble Marquis had unnecessarily called hi'
to order twenty times in the course of the session.
The Marquis of CL ANR IC A R.DE begged to call the I•lo,_bi,:.
Marquis himself to order. He was eternally calling Nou'a
Lords to order which he was himself violating. He had caller
his Noble Friend to order at least forty times._ce Hear'
from the Ministerial benches.)
The CH A IRM A N thought the Noble Marquis was not.P3r
tified in his interruption.
Lord BROUGHAM—" Well, you see the Chairman gait
you were out of order, and that I was in order. I was about
to conclude until you needlessly interrupted me." He had al-
ready ready stated that notwithstanding the use of the plural numb%
by his Noble and Learned Friend's correspondent, there 08.,
but c,e member of the town council of Glasgow who had bee;
a bankruct. The individual who was alleged not to be rate:
was not rates because he was a member of a firm, and it WBl
thought better to rate the firm There was a third individna
referred to, who was said to be a pauper. Now, he had a sa,
la)/ of 600/. a year. Having got into difficulties he was offere;
300/. a year by the count,:il, which he refused, and such a coati
could not be thought a paup,sr.
The Marquis of WESTMi:ATH repeated that hem crclYt
interrupted the Noble Lord, for whose talents he had gr:_ae.
respect, though he could not appr.ave of his dictatorial t -
and manner, because he thought he was about to read a ec'r
respondence from Glasgow.
Lord DEL A WARR (as we understood) said that
Douglas was a notorious Radical, the head of that 005
msking- the most inflammatory speeches. On one occasion,
a meeting he hoisted the red cap of liberty on the top 01

pole.—( Hear.)
Lord BRO IJG HAM said that as to the Noble Marquis
had great respect for him. He might say anything of
(Lord Brougham), to him, or about him, he pleased. "0
would not mind it, but would still take his own course, either
forgive him or disobey him.—( Hear.) As to Mr. Dougai'
he did not care what he said or did, he only looked to l'_s
reputed respectability. Gentlemen should he very cautiou_
in using their privileges as Legislators in attacking the c,11'.:0
ratter of a man who was. as respectable as any Noble Lora
that House. ed,
After some conversation across the table the Home revue
and
Thee th Chairman reorted progress.
Bill, with ampendments, was then ordered to be fc'

printed.
PEACE PRESERVATION (IRELAND) 811-J4Ol
On the motion ofthe Marquis of LANSDOWNE this '''

was read a second time.

Adjourned at 12 o'clock.
(ADVERTISEMENT.)—T. COX SAVORY, Goldsn'leo
&c., 47, Cornhill, London, informs the Public, that he „offs
SILVER WATCHES, on the celebrated PATENT 1.5 con
CONSTRUCTION, (the most accurate on which a watch jar
be made) for SIX GUINEAS EACH, with all the latest pg,
provements, e. the detached escapement, jewelled in four Win,.
capped, hand to mark the seconds, hard enamelled dial, and Ina
taining power to continue going while winding up. Old
N.B. If in Hunting Cases, 10s. 6d. extra.—Second'h
Watches purchased in exchange.

B 11 8.
On the 18th inst., in Audley-square, Mrs. Baillie, of a o.n:f
the
On the 16th inst., in Park-crescent, Worthing, the lad)
Rev. Charles Griffith, M.A., of a daughter.

MARRIED.
On the 18th inst., at Marylebone Church, Sir Waltcr
Stirling, Bart., of Faskine, to the Hon. Caroline Frances P.'iece
youngest daughter of Lieutenant-General Lord Stratford, and
of George Byng, Esq., 11I.P. for

_ _
DIED. •fr Of
On the 18th inst., in Upper Harley-street, Jemin-ia, lb AV' -
°
Sir Joseph de Courey Laffan, Bart

1,4 C
London : Printed and Published by MURDO YOU NG , ny
112, Strand, at The Sun Office, No 112, Strand, in the c—
ot Middlesex.

ONE
the Rei
Esq.,
Six in
the 29f

Exceller

(By altt

At the
Augu,
?rope,
Lot 1.

Tyv—
Aer„j
tables,Q./AN(
This
4rot, the
41.e.erne
t
1361.7m0r