The Sun.
London, England, 1850-08-02 00:00:00

LONDON, FRIDAY _EVENING,

But in what position did they place a Prince of the
Royal house? They had passed a law which prevented
his ever founding a family by those means by which
other noble families were established; and that was a
point which ought not to be lost sight of.—(Hear,
hear.) He would take a familiar instance of the posi-
tion in which a prince of the blood was placed. The
Duke of Cambridge was an English Duke. He was the
first of English Dukes—the first of the English
He was a few weeks ago the eldest eon of an English
Duke. Was he allowed to address the electors of West-
minster? Was he permitted as a commoner to enter that
House and exercise the abilities he possessed to improve
his position? It had been said that he was paid more
than a Secretary of State. But was a man in his posi-
tion allowed to try to obtain such a position? He was
shut out from any of these means of honourable ambi-
tion. He could not be Governor-General of India.:These
were ,the sort of restrictions placed on a member of the
Royal Family. Let the House place him in the same
position as other persons, and then there would be some
foundation for criticism; but as they did not choose to
follow that course, they moat consider his position
as a Prince of the blood.—(Hear, hear.) They ought
to recollect, also, that they were voting on this
occasion not half that to the present Duke of Cambridge
which the former Duke:posseassed. Besides, when they
proposed to stop the income of the Duke. in case he
should become King of Hanover, they ought to remem-
ber that these were times w;2en a man might be King of
Hanover ono day, and without a kingdom the next.
They ought to make provisi.en for such a contingency.
After due consideration he felt bound to support that
proposition which had originated with the Government.
Mr. ROEBUCK believed that the Hon. Gentleman
was under a mistake in point of law when he said that
the present Doke could not, when Prince George of
Cambridge, have canvassed the electors of Westminster,
and if elected by them, be a /V:ember of that House.
Mr. BRIGH I' was not surpeised that the Noble Lord
found it difficift to argue this question. A considera-
ble number of Members in that House thought the vote
too much, and out of doors t acre was but one unani-
mous opinion respecting it—namely, that it was extra-
vagant.—(Hear.) As to the Marriages Act to which
the Hon. Member for Buckingham referred, and who
would, be supposed, have voted for 14,0001, he must
declare that it was no argument with him, for it was an
Act of which he did not sperm e, and for which he could
not be responsible. He thoughr it one of the most wicked
and mischievous Acts that had over passed. Notwithstand-
ing that Act, he doubted extra melt', if the Duke of Cam •
bridge proposed to marry re mte person with a large
fortune, that it would be consit lered advisable on the part
of the Crown to refuse its aattent to such a marriage.—
(Hear.) If the late Duke ( Cambridge, out of the
many hundreds of thousands, of pounds of the public
money ho had received, had :;hought proper to provide
fur his children this discussio a need not have taken place.
The present Duke of Cambri age had a private fortune of
his own, he was a general oflic er. and he had a large
official aslary as a colonel of a regizrent, some twelve
hundred or fifteen hundred sa year. and these with those
other matters that were alway s given to a person in his
position, The vote stow proposed by the Government
he believed would be the inc at unpopular of the whole
session.—(Hear.) It was the first step in a bad course,
and it would lead to great emit mrrassment hereafter.
Mr. DISRAELI explained,. The Hon. Member bad
no right to assume that he v eeuld have voted for the
14,0004 It was quite an unteathorised assumption, fir
he had on a former occasion as iludecl to the late Duke of
Gloucester having that sum, sold he had said that he was
glad the reduction had been .made, considering the re-
duction of prices, the conseq Bence of that injurious law
to which he was opposed, an I that had been supported
by Hon. Gentlemen opposite..—(Hear.)
Mr. ANSTEY moved that the Chairman report pro-
gress. Be did so on the g round that an attempt was
about to be made by the Government to sacrifice their
privileges. The question for them now to consider was
this—the question of privilege! before the supply, a re-
dress of grievances before they granted the public
money.—(Hear.) An attemp t was made to get through
the supplies before the resole tiona affecting those privi-
leges were disclosed. The at tempt ho was determined
to resist ; and therefore, witho at meaning anything hos-
tile to the Duke of Cambridge., he moved that the Chair-
man report progress.
This motion was, after a b .Fef 'discussion, with4drawn,
Lord J. RUSSELL promis hig the resolutions should
be submitted to the House: upon the Speaker resuming

_
he chair.
The amendment of 5,0001. vr,as then negatived withou

a division.
The Committee divided on, Mr. Hume's amendment
fur 10,0001.
For the amendment . . 76
Against it ... ... 105
Majority ... —29
Mr. HUME put it to tl to Noble Lord whether it
would be proper for him, afte r this division, to persist
in the vote of 12,0001., fir, ta Ling from the Noble Lord
those who were obliged t) vote with him, the opponents
to so large a grant were ixt the majority. There
were some Members, too, on the other side who did not
approve of the vote, but who voted for it from peculiar
circumstances.—(Laughter.) 2e did not like ta ana-
lyse the motives of individual 3, but there were in that
House two classes of expects nts—those who were in
office, and those who were out but expected to be in.
Mr. BRIGHT asked the Secretary at War to answer
a question which he had to pu t to the Noble Lord, but

luit he was unable to ans-wcr, and that was as to the

fact of the vacant regiment being given to the Duke of
Cambridge. He hoped there would be no quibble in the
answer to so plain a question.
gr. F. MAULE replied, t bat he bad happened to put
the question to the Military Secretary two days since, as
to whether any arrangement had been made as to the
disposal of the regiment of Guards. The answer be
received was, that there wma no appointment to that
regiment. _ _

'Mr. BRIGHT asked the fSearetary at War whether
be did not know that the Duke of Cambridge was the
person that it was decidod upon should have that
regiment?
Mr. F. MAULE replied 13,3 t that he bad heard of.
Mr. STANFORD would riot have risen upon this oc-
casion but for the itnivitation cast upon Hon. Members
sitting upon his side of the House.
Mr. HUME assured the Hon. Gentleman he did not
allude to him. _ _

Mr. STANFORD continued by saying that he was
very glad no improper motiv e was attributed to him;
but such an imputation shou2d not be cast upon any
of the Honourable Members who had supported this
vote. They who aupprted it were actuated by prin-
ciple. He could discover no principle amongst its
opponents, who were shiftiny, about from 8,0001. to
5,0001., and then to 10,000/., and who, not having any
'principle, merely show( d their animosity against the
Royal Family.—(Cheers, and cries of " Oh, oh.") In
giving his vo:e he was sure he had done that which
would be popular. fur the People of this country desired
to maintain the Royal Fataity with proper dignity.—
(Hear, hear.) The people of this country saw that the
late Duke of Cambridge, though possessing a large in-
come, had died a poor ain't, and this solely because he
was so benevolent, so generouts, and so gracious in his
patronage and support of their several charities.—
(Hear.) He had a right to express his reasons for
giving the vote he had done on this occasion; and in
addition to the other argnmei its that had been brought
forward in supporting it, he could not avoid adverting to
the fact that their aristocracy bad large fortunes, that
their merchants had large fortunes, and even their
tradesmen were able to clear Isom 12,0001. to 14,0001. ;
and that therefore 12,000/. a 'y ear to a Prince of the
blood, with large demands upon him, such as none of
those persons had, could not he considered too large a
sum to grant him. It certahly could not be callelex-
travagant, and in supporting such a vote he certainly
could nut be called an expectant, for he did not partici-
pate in the Royal Family outman inments—(Hear)—and
he believed his constituency would consider that he had
given a right vote.
Mr. ROEBUCK said that as to the imputation upon
those who opposed the vote, that they were animated
with animosity to the Royal Fatally, it was unworthy of
the Hon. Gentleman to make, and it would be unworthy
of him (Mr. Roebuck) to ansys-et it.
After a few words from Lord G. HAMILTON, which
were inaudible in the gallery,
The vote for 12 000/. was agreed to without a division.
The House having resumed,
BARON L. ROTHSCHILD.
The ATTORNEY-GENER AL said that, with per-
mission of the House, he begget I, before any other order
of the day was proceeded with, to give notice that on
Monday he should move the two following resolutions:—

" That the Baron Lionel Nathan de Rothschild is not
entitled to vote in this House, or to sit in this House,
during any debate, until he shall, take the oath of abju-
ration in the form appointed by ?taw.
" That this House will, at the earliest opportunity in
the next session of Parliament, take into its serious con-
sideration the form of the oath of abjuration with a
view to relieve her Majesty's subjects professing the
Jewish religion."
—(Laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh".)
RAILWAYS ABANDONMENT BILL.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he proposed to
adopt the Lords' amendments to this Bill rather than lose
itrheelan Feesd Court of Common
Bill, Went through
this session, and should fix Tuesday, at Twelve o'clock,
for further proceedings on the Bill.
PC
loema Thesm tGNt eor ea. , n2ad)s
Bill
The The Sheep and Cattle Contagious Disorders Preven-
tion
y thatee s so
f
tion Continuation Bill was read a second time.
COPY OF DESIGNS ACTS AMENDMENTS BILL.
On the order of the day for the second reading of
this Bill.
Colonel SIBTHORP wished to know how far this
Bill was to extend. He took :the opportunity of calling
attention to the discrepancy iu the opinions of the late
and of the present Attorney-Gmeral, as to the right of
the public to the parks; and gave notice that he should
at the earliest period take the sense of the House not
only against the salaries of the Commissioners of Woods
and Forests, but also against the salary of the First
Minister of the Crown.
Mr. GROGAN asktd if the Bill had any reference
to the exhibition of 1851?
Ihr
its'iebtoi.
Mr. LABOZTCHERE said the Bill had a double ob-
the
jdel
etat
at the
tethlhaeet epedrxothtoei
bcdit eti no
ion fs
of i
nsnue
egxhet nyeerertaai
rel
eaosnr a
sdb
yi tmoaitlgshhoe
trhbpaeadbeflxoi
c
exhibitions.

After a few words from Mr. SPOONER and Colonel
DUNNE,
Mr. NEWDEGATE thought the object of the Bill
was totally inconsistent with tho advantages attached to
the exhibition of 1851, which was eaieto be the im-
provements of our own &signs and manufactures.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that unless per-
sons were secured their inventions they would be chary
of exhibiting them. The Bill, therefore, would promoto

improvement, by encouraging such persona to exhibit
their designs.
Mr. HENLEY hoped that time would be given to
discuss the Bill in Committee. He thought that protec-
tion was to be given to thii foreigner against--his design
being pirated, but that no protection wal given to the
Englishman against his
inventions be in pir ted by the
foreigner. The present was a one-sided measuie.
The all was then read a second time, and ordered to
he committed on Monday.
g .l
LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND, No. 2)
BILL.
On the motion for the adjourntd debate on the second
reading of this Bill. -
Mr. HAMILTON said he proposed to strike out all
the clauses, except those relating to the cutting and
carrying away of crops by night or on Sundays,
and to
alter the title of the Bill to " A Bill to prevent the
fraudulently Cutting and Carrying of Crops to evade
Distress for Rent."

Mr. MOORE proposed the debate be adjourned.
Colonel DUNNE said the Secretary for Ireland had
told them that unleas a Bill' of alb; sort was passed ho
could not answer for the peace of Ireland another year.
Mr. J. O'CONNELL supported the ~mended BLII out
of consid-ration to the tenantry of Ireland.
Mr. REYNOLDS opposed the Bill.
After some further dtscussion the House divided. The
numbers were—

For the adjournment of the debate ••• 6
Against it
75
Majority against the, adjournment —69
It was ultimately suggested by Sir G. GREY that the
Bill should be read a secen:l time, and that it should be
committed pro forma on an early day, in order that the
House might se,: Vie nature of the alterations made in it.
whenOn itthta' appeared being
question
nthat tlae put,num
were—
For the second reading ••„. ..• 70
Against it
..• •• ••• ••• 6
Msjority in favour of the spend reading —64
theber s I
House again divided, ou
The Bill was awl read a second time.
The Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill went
through Committee, and was ordered to be read a third
time to-nicrrow (this day).
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned at Half-past Two o'clock.