The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-31 00:00:00

MANIFESTO OF THE PRINCE OF THE ASTURIAS.

9.,720
18,467
13,044
3,423

" Spaniards,--The new situation in which lam placed by the
renunciation which my august father has designed to make in my
favour of his rights to the Crown, imposes upon me the duty of
addrassing you. Do not believe, Spaniards, that I intend to cast
amongst you a brand of discord. Su:Ncient blood and sufficient
tears have been shed. My heart recoils at sole recollection of
strophes, and shudders at the sole idea ot".,
their recurrence.
past nil:
eve,,:s of the last years will, no doubt, have lei.' nrejudices
The
in
some .Y and they perhaps suppose me sn.:mated
against me
with the desire of avengn.old wounds. There is no room in
heart for such a sentiment. It, 000 day, Divine Providence throws
I
open to me the gat( of my countly, will know no party, and
make no distraction between Spaniards,
' '

• -
" During the different phaiefo of the revolution there have been
accomplished serious changes in the political and social organiza-
tion of Spain. There are some which I hare assuredly deplored,
as it became a Christian Prince and a Spaniard. They deceive
themselves, however, who believe that I am so destitute of know.
ledge of the real position of affairs as to suppose that I wish to
accomplish what is impossible. lam aware that the best mode of
avoiding the return of revolutions is not obstinately to destroy all
that has been constructed, and to reconstruct all that has been
destroyed. Justice without violence, reparation without re-action,
a prudent and equitablecompromise between all interests, by utiliz-
ing and turning to advantage so many good institutions bequeathed
to us by our ancestors, without at the same time opposing the
spirit of till age as far as those inspirations are salutary—such is
my policy.
" A question is attached to my family which originating at the
conclusion of the reign of my august uncle, Ferdinand VII.
(Q. S. G. G.), excited a civil war. I cannot forget what I owe to
my personal dignity, nor sacrifice the interests of my august family.
But I assure you from this moment, Spaniards, that it shall not
depend on me if the dissension I deplore be not for ever extin-
guished. There is no sacrifice compatible with my honour and
my conscience to which I am not disposed, in order to put a con-
clusion to civil discord and to hasten the reconciliation of the
royal family.
" 1 speak to you, Spaniards, candidly and from my heart. I
desire to present myself amongst you with words of peace, and not
with the war cry. It would be to me the subject of great grief, if
I find myself ever obliged to deviate from that line of conduct.
Under every circumstance I depend upon your correct sense of
right, upon your love for the Royal Family, and on the assistance
of Divine Providence.
" If Heaven grants me the happiness of again treading the soil
of my country, I wish only to be surrounded by your loyalty and
your affection. Ido not wish to feel any desire in my heart but
that of consecrating all my life in effacing even the recollection
of past discords, and in cementing your union with general pros-
perity and the happiness of all, which will not be difficult to me,
if, as I expect, you will aid my ardent desires with the qualities
which are stamped on your national character,—with the love and
the respect you bear to the holy religion of our ancestors, and that
magnanimity which has ever induced you to give your life when
it became impossible to preserve it without disgrace.
"Bourget, May " CH ARLES LOUIS."

FOOT-RACE IN THE LONG WALK, WlNDSOR.—Yes-
terdav afternoon a foot-race against thne, which excited considerable
interest, came off in the Long-walk, Dent, a private in the 2d batta-
lion of the Coldstream regiment of Foot Guards, stationed at Windsor,
having been backed by the officers of the regiment, to a consider-
able amount, to run one mile in five minutes. The ground selected
(half a mile out aid in) was from the Long-walk gates in the Frog-
more-road towards the double-gates, and back. The backers of time
wore the winners, the man lining the race by only twelve seconds.
The Court of Aldermen met yesterday, but no
busincss of public importance was transacted.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, May 30.
Their Lordships met at Five o'clock.
MAYNOOTH.
Lord KENYON presented 130 petitions, signed by 9,742
persons, against the proposed grant to 711aynooth ; and 62
petitions, signed by 6,523 persons, against the permanent en-
dowment of that College.
Lord FITZHARDING also presented petitions against the
grant.

- The Bishop of SALISBURY presented a large number of
petitions to the same effect, and said he heartily concurred in
the prayer of the petitioners. The measure, he thought, would
have the effect of shaking the foundation of the connexion be-
tween the Church and the State.
The Marquis of CLEVEL AND presented a petition from the
Governors of Christ's Hospital, praying their exemption from
the effects of the Charitable Trusts Bill, at present before the
House.
The Duke of CAMBRIDGE presented a similar petition
from the Foundling Hospital, and supported its prayer.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from mem-
bers of the Free Church of Scotland against the grant to May-
nooth.
LORD CAMPBELL presented a petition from Dudley,
complaining of the working of the 20/. clause in the Debtors'
Bill, and praying its reconsideration.
LORD CL ARE presented a petition from Limerick in
favour of the grant to Maynooth, and
LORD RODEN presented petitions from Armagh, Maiden-
head, Guernsey, Windsor, Gravesend, Belfast, the counties of
Down and Leitrim, and various other districts.
The LORD CHANCELLOR presented several petitions
from Ireland in favour of the grant to Maynooth.
Lord KINNAIRD presented a petition against the grant
from a body of persons who were opposed to State endowments.
The Hishop of St. DAVID'S presented petitions against the
grant, and regretted he could not agree with the prayer of the
petitioners.
The Earl of ELDON presented several petitions to the same
effect.

The Earl of WINCHILSEA presented forty-seven peti-
tions of a similar nature.
The Bishop of CASHEL presented petitions from severa
places in Ireland against the increased grant to Maynooth.
The Bishop of BANGOR also presented a petition against
the grant to Maynooth.
The Bishop of ST. A SAPH presented a petition against
the union of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor.
Lord COTTENHAM presented a petition against the grant
to Maynooth.
The Bishop of LLANDAFF presented a petition against
the grant to Maynooth, and expressed his concurrence in the
prayer.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY and the Bishop of LoN-
BON presented similar petitions from numerous places.
The Bishop of EXETER presented petitions from Clifton,
St. Clere, Kingsbridge, and various other towns in Cornwall
and Devon, against the grant to Maynooth.
The Marquis of BREADALBANE presented 168,petitions,
signed by 22,356 individuals, from various parts of England
and Scotland, against the grant to Alaynooth.
The Earl of DE% ON presented several petitions from
Stockport, Bolton, Manchester, and other places in the north
of England, in favour of the Calico Print Works Bill.
Lord PORTMAN presented a petition, praying the pro-
ceeds of the income-tax to be applied to the support of the
poor.

Lord DACRE brought in a Bill upon the game-laws, and
moved that the second reading be taken on Monday fortnight.
Lord BROUGHAM, in reply to a question from Lord Ash-
burton, said that he would take the second reading of the
Bill to amend the Insolvent Debtors' Act of last year, espe-
cially in respect to the 201. clause, now, and wait for a further
stage any discussion upon its merits.
The LORD CHANCELLOR thought that the Bill should
be read before any further proceedings were taken.
CALICO PRINT WORKS BILL.
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM moved the order of the day
for the second reading of the Calico Print Works Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM protested against their proceeding, year
after year. to legislate in a wrong direction. They were doing
all they could, by their legislation, to injure the working
classes. They were treating them, in fact, with great cruelty,
under the guise, false garb, and outside of humanity. It was
held, by those in favour of the Bill, that if a man worked at
night he did not perform his task so well as if it were performed
during the day ; it was, therefore, not intended so much to re-
lieve young persons, children, and females—which was a very
humane, reasonable, and judicious measure—as to make the
work in which they were engaged better—to make the patterns
better and more accurate than those produced in the ordinary
hours of work. He took the same objection to this Bill as he
did to the former one. In the preamble, which set forth that
it was expedient to limit the hours of labour of children, young
persons, and children in factories, he would substitute for the
word expedient. "inexpedient," as he considered it inexpedient
to regulate the hours which the people should labour, and that it
would be better for the Legislature to regulate its own business
and to let other people's alone, especially where their inter-
ference was no: justifiable. Labour was the capital of the
workmen, and it was contrary to justice and sound policy to
interfere with what ought to be left entirely free. It must not
be supposed that by preventing children working after nine
o'clock at night, they alone stopped the labour of the children,
both men and masters were equally retarded, and the greatest
abuses would be incurred. He objected to the Bill generally,
on principle, but the part which he considered chiefly ob-
noxious was the interference with female labour. If humanity
were to be the order of the day, he would ask, why did they
allow painters to meddle with white lead, which reduced them
to paralytics—steel-workers to pursue a trade from which con-
sumption supervened—or horse-jockeys to lay up for them-
selves the most noxious diseases, in order to contribute to the
pleasures of those humanity-hunters. The Bill he considered
fallacious in principle, and, as such. should protest against it.
The Marquis of NORMANBY thought every dictate of
humanity, morality, and experience contradicted the argu-
ments of his Noble Friend, who, with his accustomed ability,
had opposed the Bill. The testimony of both roasters and
workmen had been satisfactorily evinced as unequivocally
favourable to the measure. Petitions had been laid on their
Lordships' table from every class of factory labourer and pro-
prietors, praying for the interposition of the Legislature, and to
confirm the views of these authmitative parties, he would refer
to the report of Mr. Tremelier, in which the benefits that had
accrued to the female colliery miners had been ably and satis-
factorily established.
The Earl of RADNOR concurred with his Learned Friend
(Lord Brougham) in protesting against the constant meddling
of the Legislature with the private affairs of the people. The
system now to be interfered with had existed with advantage
to the factory population, and he foresaw nothing but evil in
attempting to change it.
Lord CAMPBELL agreed with the general principle of the
Bill, but considered the second clause as unnecessary, if not
prejudicial. There was no analogy between the cases of col-
liery female labourers and those working in factories. The
former custom was productive of immorality, but the latter of
industry. A woman of forty years of age, with a large family,
would, he conceived, devote the hours from which she was now
debarred. to the diselaarge of her duties as a wife and mother.
Nevertheless, he regarded the principle of the measure as
sound, and its enactments beneficial, and should give it his
cordial support.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH wondered that the Noble Lord
opposite (Lord Brougham), after assenting to the preamble of
a similar Bill in 1833, should now enter his violent opposition
to this measure. He had hesrd nothing in the course of the
discussion to change his views, and should, therefore, move
that the Bill be now committed.
Lord BROUGHAM explained that in 1833 he had agreed
to the general principle of the measure, apart from the inter-
ference with female labour.
The Bill then went into Committee, and after receiving a
few verbal amendments was reported.
POST-OFFICE REGULATIONS.
On th&motion for the second reading of the Post-office Regu-
lations Bill,
Lord RADNOR expressed his entire concurrence in theprin-
ciple of the measure—a measure which had been rendered the
more necessary, by the unseemly disclosures made last session
of a system as unjustifiable as it was disgraceful. Nobody
really knew what the law of the case was. Seine thought. the
right of stopping letters was vested in the Crown. But he
was never able to ascertain that it was any part of the preroga-
tive of the Crown to open the letters of individuals. If such
was the prerogative of the Crown it must have been a practice
as ancient as the establishment of the Post-office itself ; but he
never knew that it was authorised by any court of law. It was
a secret mode of proceeding, and therefore no one could set
about disputing it, for no one knew when it was practised. He
could not help also remarking on the immorality of the prac-
tice. He was not one of those who believed that the State had
a conscience, though there were some who kindly gave them
credit for one. It was, he contended, a betrayal of confidence.
They obliged the public to use the Post-office, and that being
the case, they should guarantee inviolability to anything com-
mitted to it. The copying of Mazzini's seals was most disreputable.
It was a farce to talk of the morality of the State after that.
But if anything was necessary to prove the danger and immo-
rality of the practice, it was the ewe of the letter-carriers, who
had merely copied the example which had been set them
by their betters, and had merely been dismissed without any
further punishment being inflicted. He spoke from the re-
ports only which he read in the newspapers of the circumstance,
but he believed they were correct. By a reference to the Acts,
the 9th of Queen Anne, and the Ist of her present Majesty, he
found that the power of issuing warrants for detaining and
opening letters was assumed as vested already, rather than
granted, to the Lore-Lieutenant of Ireland and the Secretary ,
of State for England. The power of indemnifying the Post-
master-general
for obeying these warrants was merely given ,
by the Acts ; but that was a very different thing from i
giving authority to the Secretary of State to exercise i
s oh powers. If the question were tried in a court of
law, he had no doubt but it would be found that no such
mes t'fisted. Whether the mode new proposed to re-
mits%
edy ibis state of things met with the approval of
their Lordahip: it: was not for him to say, but if they ac-
ceded to the main
eatures of it, it would be very easy in Com-
mittee to regulate th: details of the Bill. The Noble Lord
then read extracts from
the reports of the Committees in both
.
Houses which had been em tinted to inquire into the practice
.
of opening and detaining fett,:rs, and commented upon them
two lists of warrants issued
afrsomhethperoHeeoemdeed.o.fficTe.herlenwtehreeirsll.list, embracing a period of
n 2 ttohel7o96Be,rr
fernmhuit.77o
to
1844,
comprising
a and one warrantsrising
and seventy-two
Bha6a
period
rbieoedr years,
oi from
issued. s u e d 1
ll
he considered, very
forty-five years, three hundred
warrants had been issued. Now, that was,
anaroma in_
remarkable. In the first period there had been
cent, Of
warrants relating to
these eight, moreover, only two were .
crease of li per cent., and in the other of 8 per
resented the least
' feeling was not much enlisted as they p
public
sedi-
tion. The rest were criminal warrants, in respect to which
temptation to abuse. .
himself t ffices
esed towo o .
Bill. The Noble Earl had prop
the conditions under
Lord STANLEY felt it to be his public ut to oppose the
State should have the power of opening
which the Secretary of
eA The second office was to
' ' letters at the Post-office.
The first was to define the law and define
or detaining
the exercise of the power. -
alter the law in such a manner as to impose new restrictions
upon Now, he would venture to
say that the Noble Lord, when he attempted to define the law,
: •
left the law just as undefined as he found it. He also imposed
restriction on the exercise of the power, which restriction ab-
solutely.rendered the law itself imperative. Now there were
ne political considerations connected with this question, it only
tended to modify, instead of abolishing the power ; far all they
had to discuss was simply whether it was necessary to confer on
the Secretary of State the power of detaining or opening
letters at the Post-office. It was admitted by the Noble Earl
that the power, under certain circumstances, must still be left
in the hands of the Secretary of State, but they were now
called upon to inquire in what manner that power could be
amended or modified. Now he (Lord Stanley) would nut
enter into a discussion as to the origin of this power, nor
would he venture to say that the power was one of the prero-
gatives of the Crown ; but this he did say, that the Act of
Anne was not the Act which gave the power to the Secretary
of State. The Act of Anne was the first Act which made it a
misdemeanour, and rendered persons liable to a penalty for
opening a letter passing through the Post-office,
without the warrant of one of her Majesty's prin-
cipal Secretaries of State. Previous to that Act
no criminal proceedings could be taken against any
person for detaining or opening any letter passing through the
Post-office, but that Act made it a punishable offence to open
any letters without the person had a warrant from the Secre-
tary of State giving him full authority to do so. Hehadead
certainly
with great attention the Bill of the Noble Earl,
_and
its provisions appeared to:him to be most unsatisfactory.
y. The

clause defining the law made no allusion whatever to the ques-
, tion of special or geeeral warrants, and certainly after the
doubts which had been raised upon this point the Noble Earl
ought to have stated, clearly and distinctly, whether it was
necessary that a general or a special warrant should be issued.
It had been admitted by the Lord Chief Justice that general
warrants cou!d only be used except where a system of espio-
nage was carried on by the Govuninent, and he asked the
House whether they were willing to establish such a system
as this, in preference to at once d fining dist inctly and clearly
whether a special or a general warrant should be used. Now,
let them look to the second clause, but before direetine atten-
tion to that part he must protest against the doctrine laid down
by the Noble Earl, that although the House might have to
alter every word of the Bill, yet if they agreed with the prin-
ciple it enumerated they ought to support the second reading.
Well, then, the second clause enacted that in case any credi-
ble information should be given to the Secretary of State,
that the safety of the Sovereign or the Government was likely
to be endangered, or the peace of the country likely to be dis-
turbed, it shall be lawful for the Secretary of State to issue
his warrant for the detention or opening of letters, &c. Now,
he was at a loss to understand the real meaning of this clause.
Information was to be given to the Secretary of State? What
information? Ought it not to be, "If information shall be
given to the Secretary of State of the acts and proceedings of
any person or persons likely to endanger the peace of the
country. then, &c."
The Earl of R ADNOR—We can alter that in Committee.
Lord STANLEY—Of course they might, but he was dis-
cussing the Bill as it stood, and not a Bill which some other
Noble Lord might subsequently bring in.—( Hear, hear.) He
could not agree with the doctrine that the safety of the Go-
vernment, or peace or security of the realm were the only con-
siderations which should render it necessary or expedient that
this power should be applied. The Noble Earl excluded al-
together the majority of the cases where the exercise of this
power was necessary for the detection or punishment of crime.
—( Hear, hear.) But what did the Noble Earl mean by the
peace or security of the realm ? Did he mean the internal
peace, or the danger of involving this country in foreign war ?
Now he would not conceal his 'opinion upon this part of the
question, and although a great deal had been said about the
rights of hospitality in this country, he did not think, under
existing circumstances, that a foreigner should be allowed
to use our Post-office for disturbing the peace of foreign
States, and thus involving thia country in a foreign war ?
When the Noble Lord said that the information must be
signed, he evinced an ignorance of the spirit of the original en-
actment, which disentitled his counsel to all weight or consi-
deration. Why, a more effectual mode could not be adopted
for preventing the forwarding of all, except perhaps anony-
MOW, communications. With respect to the provision of
sending back the letter with a mark that it had been opened.
a more absurd proposition could not be advanced. It would
tend to give a clue to the operations of Government, frustrate
the object as well as the spirit of the power previously conceded,
and render nugatory the best efforts of the State. As to the
provision for allowing the party whose letter had been opened
to bring his action at law for damages, and requiring the Secre-
tary or Lord-Lieutenant to give up the information, or a cer-
tified copy of it, would be ineffectual to repress any abuse, and
be fraught only with difficulties and absurdities. He would
suppese a wrong letter opened by mistake, an invitation to
dinner, a tailor's bill, or other communication equally unim-
portant.—( A laugh.) Well, the Postmaster was to notify that
the letter had been opened by warrant of the Secretary, and •
that no necessity existed for its further detention. The Secre-
tary was to give up the information, together with the name of
the informant, and the convivial friend or the tailor allowed to
bring his action for the violation of his secret.—(Laughter. )
He admitted that the power vested in the Secretary of
State was obnoxious and open to unquestionable abuse,
but he thought, also, there was a sufficient security in the
character of the country, and in the honour of the individual
Members of both parties in Parliament. Relying on this as-
surance, and wholly doubting the expediency of the Noble
Earl's proposition, he should move that the reading of the Bill
be postponed till that day six months.
Lord DENMAN considered that the measure was of too
vast importance, both as regarded the interests of the com-
munity and the character of that House, to have been dealt
with in the flippant manner adopted by the Noble Lord the
Secretary for the Colonies. He would not pursue that course,
nor adopt the see-saw opinions contained in the report of the
Select Committee—a report evincing only the different views
of each individual member. In 1657 the Post-office was
first established, and in the lath of Charles If. the same in-
stitution was placed on a more satisfactory basis ; but it was
not till the reign of Anne that a provision was made for the
delivery of letters in the universal method subsequently
adopted. He had heard with surprise the Noble Lord state
that the detached suggestions which he had thrown out when
the subject was first brought before Parliament were to be
received as the opinions of the Chief Justice. A Noble
Lord doubted whether every letter which was to be
opened ought not to be described. Why, it was absurd that
every letter could he pointed out ; it was likely that instead of
the particular letter being at once discovered, others might be
opened. Was he, therefore, to be held up as a patron of
espionage, because he gave that view of the subject—because
he said that letters might be opened under the Act of Parlia-
ment, the powers contained in which he condemned as incon-

sistent with the liberty of the people, and which was intended
to cover State delinquencies.—(Hear, hear.) He trusted,
therefore, that the Noble Lord, who could not have heard the
debates which had taken place in that House on the subject,
would not attribute to him that he was an advocate of the sys-
tem of opening letters. It was not fair thus to deal with any
one holding the public office he did, and who, of all men, de-
tested the practice—( Hear)—an odious and hateful practice
which the feelings of all men must especially condemn.
Before they came to a decision it would be well to consider
what would be the course which juries would adopt with respect
to the question of opening letters. They were apt to be car-
ried away by their feelings. The Secretary of State for the
Home Department had stated in the House of Commons that
he had no objection to their regulating the power which the
Act gave him over letters passing through the Post-office. He
( Sir J. Graham) treated the power as a most odious one, and
one which he would wish to get rid of. Then, why should not
the p ractiee be in the hands of Parliament if it was to be exer-
cised at all ? In the time of Charles 11., no Act was in force
giving the Government this power, but a declaration was issued
by the King, giving his Government the power to open the
letter or letters of an individual passing through
the Post-office. When that Monarch was carousing
with his courtiers, nothing could he more entertaining
than to open the letters of the nobility and gentry. But he did
not think it was fair to invest the power of opening letters in
the present day in the hands of an officer of the Crown, over
every other individual in the land. It was a calumny upon
them that such a subject should have been so frequently brought
forward. They had all felt ashamed of the disgraceful pro-
ceedings which were carried on under the system.—( Hear.)
Mr. Mazzini only discovered by an accident that his letters had
been opened. Had he not made this di'coverv, it was not un-
likely that it might have remained in secrecy for a number of
years. One hundred years back the power might be rendered
available for the purposes of obstructing an election, or of de-'
feating by secret means the Government then in power. From
the memoirs of Lord Malmsbury it appeared that the practice
was then in use. In a letter from Mr. Canning to that
nobleman, he expressed his surprise that his letters had
been opened. Mr. Fox, writing at the commencement of the
French war, said he should have his letters directed by an-
other hand, and sealed with another seal, as they would be
opened at the Post-sffice. The same expressions were made
use of by Mr. Burke and Horace Walpole. In the work to
which he had alluded, it was stated, that the Minister of
Catherine 11., of Russia, was in the habit. of writing letters
with various signatures, which he knew would be opened at
the Post-office, and which would have the effect of injuring
his enemies and serving his friends. But he (Lord Denman)
conceived that the power in this country was utterly useless,
and derogatory to the high character of the nation.—(Hear,
hear.) The Committees which had been appointed to con-
sider the subject, had not reported as to any benefits which
were derived from the practice. Information so obtained was
likely to be fallacious, and they were liable to fall into their
own snares. So almost invariably was information obtained
from spies, and the money paid to theta for their information
was as invariably thrown away.—(Hear, hear.) He therefore
called upon them to assent to the second reading of
the Bill which his Noble Friend had introduced.
God forbid that the scenes of 1842 should be ever again re-
peated. They had not, however, been met or put down by the
system which had been resorted to of opening and detaining
the letters of th sse who were supposed to be implieated in
those disturbances. The unhappy men who were engaged in
them were defeated by the firmness of the Government, the
temperance of the police, and the good spirit of the coun-
try. The present Bill might be open to great objections, but
it would prevent many of the abuses which had sprung up
during the existence of the system. If it would only put an
f
end to the hateful practice of interfering in
tbeffeeet It
concernsw of
foreign foreign Governments it would have a beneficial
officers
fo He did net see why
they should lend themselves as policeother
confine the system to our own country.
e o
on
He had no doubtbut the Noble Lord
opposite had been influenced by the best intentions in the
course he
individuals
nraep
(Hear, hear.) r rStates.
opposi
satcactoesi that
account of whom the letters had been opened were shot, he
but when he
ihfetabred
therehad was adoptede o great harm even
thougi:t their interference was extremely dangerous. On the
a grounds, the Pope. the King of Naples, France, and the
se
Emperor of Russia, might claim their interference. They
might even by this means be playing into the hands of their
enemies, and betraying the interests of the country; for in
Spain and Portugal it was not easy to knoss who was in pos-
session of power. He did not believe that Sir Robert Peel,
even, would forget the cheers which accompanied the announce-
ment that the Alien Act was gone. He did not apprehend
that it was necessary to enter into any defence of the
motives which influenced the present Secretaries of State, but
they ought not to forget that very unprincipled men were once
Ministers of State in England, and such men mightagasinfi.
again be
in office. Even if they did not abuse their trust they had
ff
cient evidence during the summer months,
id so. From the
report of an eminent individual, w
no
the
he affair of the
Derby stakes, that their underlings
the Post-office, such persons werewould ne
thrown in their way, and the ex-
the temptations which were
ith respec tto thet proof against individuals
i
employed in
perience which
memorable as being the first
1844 was
statement. The year
opened for a foreign State. It was
he himself had enabled him to confirm that
year when letters weredangerous
and extremely practice—a thing ut-
terly thepeople unknown to
of England. He himself had not
statute on the subject till after con-
known that there was any
difficulty he found that Oliver Cromwell had been the
con-
siderable
i inator of it. It was to this brutal and hypocritical tyrant,
a perfectly new
originator
existence night and day had been haunted by an appre-
hension of the evils which his crimes had provoked, that this
un-English practice was to be traced. The Noble Lord
then read extracts from Hume, desariptive 'of the character of
Cromwell, and hoped that the Noble Duke, whose character
had in every respect presented such a contrast, every one of
whose victories was but a march to peace, would signalise his
career still further by lending his influence to destroy and abo-
lish for ever so disgraceful and unconstitutional a power.—
(Hear, hear.) He would call upon him to add to the mea-
sures which had lately been introduced for the conciliation of
Ireland, a measure which would put an end to this abominable
practice.

Lord BROUGII AM did not concur in the severe attack
which had been made on the character of Cromwell. He con-
tended that, with all his faults and failings, he had proposed
and effected many salutary commercial changes. The Noble
Lord had also been guilty of a misdemeanour, he had introduced
the aerie ?nista jocis, and alluded to the correspondence of
Gramont, in the times of Charles 11., the Merry Monarch.

His Noble and Learned Friend the Lord Chief Justice had

made three charges against the Secret Committee, which
lately sat upon the Post-office. The first was, that the
Committee in their report had not defined the state of the law
on this subject. Now he found, by the first page of the re-
port. that the power had existed ever since the establishment of
the Post-office, and had frequently been recognised, and this
he thought was a sufficient charge. The second charge was, that
the Committee had specified or suggested no remedy or refor-
mation whatever in the lax. All the Committee thought it
was better to leave it for the Legislature to determine what
alterations should be made in the law. The third charge was
that the Committee did not stale what had been the utility of
the power. Now, in answer to this charge, he could only state
that, in one yart of the report the Committee. said that the exercise
of the power had frequently led to detection and_tu. pishment. o
adWfallhenrfre regard to
crime,
tNh'oble Lord opposite, will had certainly made, a most. adm
eBl la itself, sweel fl,l ba toe
ee thetre
entirely
recoveryeeeeerroefd pi
L,r detects
;ratty
b.
he might add, a strictly legal speech against the
Lord CAMPBELL little thought, a few years age, mabelase,earned.,
that he
should have had occasion to defend his Noble ?tie the Chief

, -- —.-
Justice of England against the attacks of the Learned Lord I NOTICE OF
TIAIOTONS lON—A
ELANDE) CADMICAL INSTlTU-
behind him, once the Attorney-General of Queen Caroline, 1 (IR BILL.
and the Lord Chancellor that supported and promoted him. ' Lord J. MANNERS gave notice that on the motion for the
The Noble Lord had attacked him because he could not answer second reading of the Academical Institutions (l: eland) Bill,
the arguments of his Learned Friend—arguments which, how- he should move that the IEII be read a second time that day six
ever they might be disregarded by that House, would obtain months.
for him from the country still greater admiration than his name ARRESTMENT OF WAGES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
had already attained. But what was the practice now pursued , Mr. T. DUN COMBE moved for leave to bi ing in a Bill
in the Post-office? They had a false seal, they opened the . to amend the law few the arrestment of wages in Scotland.—
letter, they took a copy of it, then closed it again, they Agreed to.
affixed a false seal to it, and thus sent it to its original desti- , Lord PALMERSTON presented a petition from Manchester
nation. This was a custom so abhorrent to all honour and ' and Salford in favour of a Ten
ZEALAND. Hours' Factory Bill.
integrity, that every nation but England had renounced it. M. 1 NEW
Mr. G. H. HOPE said he was desirous of calling the atten-
Guizot had declared that he considered the Post-office sacred, i
and that the practice adopted in this country would be a disgrace ' tion of the House to a statement which he made on the 2d of
to his. If the law remained as it was, an action might he May, in reference to the circumstanees under which a notice
brought against Sir James Graham by Mr. Dnneombe or Mr. ' motion mad by the Hon. Gentleman the Member for
Maszini ; a jury might, under the direction of the judge, 1 of
Liskeard. (Mr.e
C. Buller), was postponed. The postpone-
return a verdict against the Secretary of State, and the ; merit was made by the Hon. Gentleman himself, and not
moist enormous damages returned against him ; and lat the request of her Majesty's Government, neither was it
thus an officer of the Crown, conscientiously discharging the ! the result of any compromise between the Noble Lord at the
duties imposed upon him by lel, might be punished, not for i head of the Colonial Department and the New Zealand Corn-
soy delinquency of his owe, but for the defect of the law. i pany. A report of that Company had been pub-
The practice did not exist by statute until the time of Queen ished, from which different inferences had been drawn.
Anne, but neither that. Act, nor those passed in the subsequent 'He would state in a few words what occurred.
reigns, gave the power to the Secretary of State—when then On the lst of May, having postponed his motion in
did it exist? He held that it did not exist at all, and he be. consequence of some communication with Lord Stanley, he
lieved that common law would so decide. The person isuing postponed the motiou to which he had alluded, but
the warrant was responsible at law, not the person who which, as he had stated, was not the result of
carried it into effect. He admitted that the Secretary of State any compromise whatever. In order that no mistake
had the hewer of issuing a warrant for the opening of letters in might arise, he would read the letter which had
a house or elsewhere, if they were necessary for the ends of been sent by the Noble Lord to the Honourable Gentleman.
justice ; but he had no power to cause letters passing through The Hon. Member then read the letter addressed to the Hon.
the Post-office to be opened. He agreed with Member for Liskeard, requesting to know the reason why he
the Lord Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench postponed his motion, and whether it arose from a previous
that the power did not exist. If the power was to continue, arrangement. 'f o that letter he had returned an answer that
surely some register should be kept of the letters opened. no arrangement had been entered into by the Honourable
He hoped their Lordships would accede to the motion, and and Learned Member. After this, he would leave it to
ensured them that they would carefully examine the measure the House to decide whether they (the Ministry) were justi-
in Committee. fled or not in these proceedings.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said the subject had been Mr. CHARLES. BULLER, who was throughout very
nearly exhausted, and there was so much misconception of the imperfectly heard, so much so, that many Hon. Members
law amongst Noble Lords that he was anxious to say a few repeatedly ealled out, " Speak out, speak out," was under-
werdwwpneerning it. It was impossible not to entertain the stood to say, that it was due to the Right Hon. Baronet op-
idea thlt the law was legal ; and if he could show that it was polite, and to Lord Stanley, that he should make some ex-
sanetioned by law he should be warranted in coming to the planation respecting the correspondence which bad passed
conclusion that it was a part of the acknowledged law of the between himself and the Government, and the circumstances
land. The power was exercised in the time of the Common- which had been alluded to by the Hon. Gentleman, in regard
wealth, and the reports of the Committees of both Houses of to the withdrawal of the motion which he was sorry to say
Parliament bore him out in this view. During that period had been attributed to circumstances that had no existence.
the Post-office was leased to a person of the name of Bishop, It was a mistake to say, that the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir
and a provision was inserted in the lease reserving the power of J. Graham) had entered into any compromise with him for
opening letters to the Secretary of State. Subsequently it the withdrawal of his motion. What occurred was this. He
was leased to a person of the name of O'Neil, and the same had; requested the Right Hon. Baronet to admit of a negotia-
power viaa retained as in the case of Bishop. In each of these tion on the part of the Directors. The Right Hon. Gentleman
cases a proclamation was issued, specifying that the Post- said that he would consult Lord Stanley, but that it was im-
effree had been leased to them, and recognising the possible for the Government to enter into any negotiation so
same right. In the time of Charles 11., a person named long as his (Mr. Buller's) motion stood upon the paper of the
Coleman was put on his trial for sedition, and the principal House. He therefore represented the matter to the Board of
charges were substantiated by letters which had been inter- Directors, and they agreed with him that it would be best to
eepted in their progress through the Post-office. He did not withdraw the motion, and leave the Government free to enter
way that he approved either of the trial or the verdict of into the negotiation. There was no compromise whatever.—
the jury, but neither the judge nor the jury considered ( Hear, hear.) He had thought it his duty to say that there
that the proceedings were illegal. If it had been consi- was no breach of faith on either side.—( Hear, hear. )
Jewel a violation of the law, was it not likely thzt it would Sir J. GRAHAM must corroborate the statement of his
have been alluded to on the trial. The evidence on the trial Honourable and Learned Friend. But he must also state
of Atterburty mainly consisted of letters from the Post-office, his regret that confidential conversation between Members
which were proved at the bar of that House. No objection of that House even though they sat upon opposite sides,
was made by the prisoner himself, or by any of the learned should be allowed to transpire.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
individuals at that time, that the Secretary of State was not The conversations which he had had with the Hon. and
entitled to intercept letters passing through the Post-office, Learned Member for Liskeard were perfectly confidential, and
and to bring them in evidence against a person on his trial. it was with great surprise he received a letter from the chair-
He would ask if that was not the strongest evidence that the man of the New Zealand Company, informing him that the
power was legally exercised at that time by the Secretary of secret committee of the board of directors were possessed of
ehate. Another material fact, in support of his opinion, teas the minutes of the conversations between Mr. C. Buller and him-
ease which caused so much sensation at the time, namely, the self ; that they were about to publish them, and requested him
oposine of the letters of Members of Parliament by the Master to corroborate or correct them. Now, as he had taken no
of the Post-office. A resolution was passed to the effect that notes of the conversations, he could neither correct nor cur-
it was a breach of privilege to open any of their letters, except roborate those minutes. But the Hon. and Learned Member
by a warrant of the Secretary of State. What could be a more for Liskeard had so correctly stated what had occurred, he
illistinct recognition of the power than this, that it was vested could not doubt that the minutes alluded to would be equally
in the Secretary of State for the time being. The'case of Hems- faithful.
worth also substantiated his view of the law. On the trial of Mr. AGLIONBY said that the secret committee of the
Horne Tooke a letter from the Post-office was produced in board of directors had thought it their duty to report the sub-
evieence. Now if that was an infraction of the law would not stance of the conversations to the board. He was glad to hear
those eminent individuals Mr. Erskine or Mr. Gibbs, who were the Right Hon. Baronet bear testimony to the sincerity and
connect for Mr. Tooke, or the judge, or the bench, have taken high honour of his Hon. and Learned Friend.
notice of it? Would they have suffered such an infraction GAVE-LAWS—THE CASE OF JAMES DEANE.
rhea a letter was produced in evidence against their client? Mr. HUME wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet a ques-
He would peas over the Acts of Queen Anne, George the let, tion of which he had given notice last night, in respect to the
end George the 2d, and would come down to 1830. He would case of James Deane. a man sixty years of age, who was sent
direct the attention of their Lordships to the statement of to Reading gaol for four months for stealing pheasants' eggs.
ill. Noble Lord (Denman) in reference to the clause He wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet whether it was his
giving the power of opening letters to Government. intention to lay before the House the documents relating to
The 'Noble Lord then recognised the legality of the power. the case?
By a reference to the Acts from Cromwell down to the present Sir J. GRAHAM said that, in consequence of magistrates
timer, and by the courts of justice during the last century, this having cumulated the punishment by adding one month's im-
power was not only legal, but never called in question. Why, prisonment to the previous sentence of three months' imprison-
shoee who felt aggrieved by the exercise of this power (Mr. ment, he had advised her Majesty to remit the cumulated por-
Mazzini for instance) did not test, the legality of it by a resort tion of the sentence.—( Hear, hear.)
to the courts .f law. His Noble Friend said that it was an Mr. MILNER GIBSON said that it was exceedingly
abominable and disgraceful power, but the effect of the present wrong for a man to be imprisoned and fined both for such an
Bill was to legalise that power. With respect to the inconsis- offence as this. It. was anything but fair for the proprietors to
tencies of the present Bill, they had been so fully pointed out profess a wish to reduce poaching, and then to take the very
by a Noble Lord who had preceded him, that it would be an measures which were likely to increase the evil. There was
idle wa.sth of time to take up their attention any further upon nothing more monstrous than for the preservers of game to
'become the purchasers of it from the public. In the case
-them, and he would conclude by giving his most strenuous
opposition to the present Bill, believing that the power which which had been cited the poor man had been relieved from his
it done away with was one which should be possessed by every imprisonment by the Hon. Member for Athlone (Mr. Collett),
Government. who thought that a double punishment was too much, and
Lord DEN-MAN explained in reference to the opinions therefore paid the fine himself.
which he had expressed in 1830 upon the subject, and which Sir JOHN WALSH said that this man had been con-
had been alluded to by the Noble Lord who had just sat down as victed for this offence without his knowledge, and certainly
favourable to the legality of that power. The question of the without any wish of his. The circumstances, it appeared,
leg '
ality of the power did not then enter into his consideration. were these :—The offender had offered game for sale ; he be-
He never referred to it in a factious manner—it was not a lieved they were pheasants and pheasants eggs, to a young
party question. It affected all parties. and he threw the blame man, who had only been about a twelvemonth in his service,
equally on all. So far from approving of it, he had always and who, from being unacquainted with the game-laws, had
opposed it as most unconstitutional, and the Noble Duke asked the other keepers what course he should pursue, arid in
Alemeite could bear testimony to the accuracy of what he consequence of their advice, he had again seen the man, who
Wetted. He was opposed to the power on constitutional was apprehended, taken before the magistrate, and convicted.
grounds when he was Attorney-General, and as he still ente - He (Sir John Walsh)'was out a the country at the time, or he
tained the same opinion as he did, he could not do otherwise would certainly have interfered.
than oppose the class power now. Perhaps he had done snore Mr. OSBORNE said that a man had been sentenced to one
to obtain its abolition when he was in office than any other month's imprisonment, but had undergone three months, in
Attorney-General would have ventured to do. consequence of his inability to pay the fine, and he certainly
After a few words of explanation {from Lord Brougham, the thought that the Government ought to inquire into the
Lord Chancellor, and Lord Campbell, matter.
The Marquis of NORMANBY admitted having exercised Sir J. GRAHAM said the merits of the case had not been
the power while he was in office, but declared that he never was brought before him, nor did he go at all with them. It was
entrusted with any power which gave him more pain. The quite open to the parties to go into the merits of the case, but
question, however, for them now to consider was, not the pro- they did not go into them.
pekes( of abolishing the power, but the particular provisions of Mr. COLLETT said ho hoped he might be excused for now
the Noble Earl's Bill. When the question for the abolishing saying a word or two, as the matter had reference to himself
elf the power came before them, lie should be prepared to give personally. The
daughter-inda-law of this poor man came to
it his best consideration. He confessed that, before he came his house, and a a statement corroborative of that which
appeared in the Times newspaper. Feeling for the poor man,
into office, he was ignorant of the existence of this power, but
EITUV ,he thought it was known to almost all the world. Ile he sent his servant down to Reading with the money for his
did not agree in the provisions of the Bill, but, nevertheless, liberation. The poor man was obliged to pick oakum, and
he hoped Government would take the matter into their serious had been in solitary confinement. The money was, however,
ceesideration, and see if something could not be done, either to paid, and the man was set at liberty. The Hon. Member
do asvay with the power altogether, or to limit its exercise. then read a letter which appeared in the Times newspaper of
Lard STANLEY briefly explained that the practice of the that day, and added, that as the payment of the fine had been
idoine-office was to preserve the warrants with every instru- ascribed to a person much higher in rank, he thought it but
meet connected with their exercise. right to make this statement. He had, on that day, written
Earl Fl'l Z WILLIAM, while protesting against the ar- to the Times to the same effect.—(Cheers. )
gument of the Secretary for the Colonies, who treated the JERSEY LAW COURTS.
subject as a police question, and that of his Noble Friend Mr. ROEBUCK said he wished to put a question to the
( Lord Brougham) who regarded it as necessary for the Right Hon. Gentleman relative to an appileation which had
well-beieg of the nation, should support the second reading of been made to the Comptroller-General, respecting the eon-
the Bill, although he objected to its framing and preamble. duct of the law officers of Jersey. Application was made to
hill Earl of CARNARVON opposed the second reading of the other law courts, and from them the matter had been re-
tie ferred to the consideration of thee b
Court, which had dv-
The Earl of RADNOR briefly replied in a few words. termined it was a matter of civil action. It was not a concern
The House then divided, when there appeared : for criminal interference. A secret inquiry, which is peculiar
Contents
Non-contents
Majority against the second reading of the Bill —46 language, and it was determined that no punishment should
THE RAILWAY CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION BILL be awarded. The Hon. Member wanted to know whether any
(SCOTLAND.) steps had been taken by the Government to ask for an ex-
This Bill went through Committee, and the House resumed. planation of the conduct of the law officers of Jersey.
Ass" al Bills were then advanced a stage, and Sir J. GRAHAM replied that the law officers had not yet
Their Lordship adjourned at Ten Minutes past Twelve haul an opportunity of making any defence, and he felt satisfied
o'clock, till Monday. the Hon. and Learned Gentleman would not press his question
-nee until the officers haul been enabled to explain.
HOUSE OF COMMONS, Mau 30. QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.
The Sr:sees:a took the Chair shortly before Four "'clock. Lora J. RUSSELL wished to know what step the Govern-
This was the last day for receiving Private Bills, other than ment intended to take with respect to
thequestion of privilege
that had been brought before the House last night. A report
feailwayltills.
Mr. MUNTZ presented a petition from Birmingham, pray- of the Committee haul been presented, and it appeared to consist
hie that the Bill for the improvement of Duddeston &c. of two parts. The first was with respect to delaying the exe-
might 110 t pass into a law. cution on Monday next ; and the second was that, the Court
The Yerit and North Midland Rail ray Bill (Bridlington had come to the decision that it was proper to proceed by a writ
I,:ranrlaA, was read a third time and passed. of error in the superior Court. With regard to the first part,
rev York and Scarborough Railway Deviation Bill was read that of staying the execution next Monday, the House might
go into the subject ; but with regard to the second part, that
a tisal time anti passed. relating to the writ of error, he bogged leave to state that it
h
Lord BARR INIGTON presented a petition from John
was the opinion of the Committee that they ought to meet
Tempte Leader, Esq., a Member of that House, against the
again and draw up a more detailed report, to be presented to
Iliotimond Railway Bill. the House before any discussion took place upon the gees-
thon. it. was necessary, before the House went into the sub-
The reports were received on the Newcastle and Darlington
Ileilway (Brandling Junction), and the Neweastle•upon-Tyne
act, to have the fullest data before them. Tim Hon.
1
and North Shields Railway ( Tjnemouth Extension), and Learned Member for Worcester (Sir Thomas Wilde) and and
ordered to be engrossed. Right Hon. Member for Devonport ( Sir George Grey)
The report was also received on the Newcastle and Berwick
thought this would be the proper course to pursue.
Railway, and ordered to be engrossed. Sir R. PEEL said, as this was a most important question,
On the motion of Mr. MORRISON, the time for receiving It was desirable, before going into its discussion, that they
time leport from the Committee on the Agricultural and Corn-
should have the fullest report from the Committee, along with
reereial Bank of Ireland was ordered to be extended to Wednes- '
the reasons on which their report was founded. Before taking
day, the dth uf June, any other step, such a course, he held, was absolutely necessary.
Sir T. WILDE thought it was desirable to state to the
House that, of the two evils, the taking of the course recom-
mended by the Committee would be infinitely the lesser one.
The allowing the execution to take place next Monday, would
not interfere with the proceedings of the writ of error. The
evil of levying damages, bore no proportion whatever to their
taking a premature step before full and explicit information was
placed before them.
Mr. ROEBUCK thought that, if the proposed levy was
allowed to take place, it would prejudice their case when they
went into another Court to have it heard. He wanted to know
how any difficulty of this kind was to be got over.
Sir 'l'. 'WILDE said that the proceedings in the writ of
error would be quite independent of die others pending against
thiosn. The writ would be unaffected by the execution. When
such a course was taken by the House, with the understanding
that it was to try the question in a superior Court, no evil
could arise from it. Ile was satisfied that no evil could arise
from the execution, if they acted upon the suggestions of the
Com mit tee.
Mr. HUME said that many of their warrants had been is-
sued, but few of them had been carried into effect. The war •
rant ran thus :
" Aecording to the Standing Orders of the House, the
House of Commons in Parliament assembled, these are to re-
quire you to take into your custody any party or parties who
may or shall affect, interfere, or molest the person of Sir Wil-
liam Gossett, our Sergeant-at-Arms ; and also all Sheriffs,
Sheriffs' officers, or other persons who may be assisting in the
same. And for so doing this shall be your sufficient warrant.
" Dated this 3d day of February.
( Signed) "C. SHAW LcFEVRE, Speaker."
Now, this was a powerful warrant, and lie did not think that
they ought to depart from the position they had assumed. They
might, indeed, waive their own privileges, it they only consi-
dered themselves, but they affected the public, and, therefore,
he thought that it was their duty to uphold them. He thought
that they had succumbed sufficiently already. For his part,
he was inclined to propose that the officers of the House
should take intocustody all and every person who
should attempt to carry this judgment into execution, and
imprisonwreapireport,
waiting
and for furtherst,heamkefodrtfioi
rw informationfi,tithr.herThe
delay
before l
foonr .
before
tt:hleeyttchi,,lie),(;siiii,r toad'
lara:tidit.e
don the
,
raaul,k. e
icil; 0,,
-f
thin, but fir this he eaw no necessity. Every Member of
that House haul a right to act as an officer, and on the unhappy
hil:ieua:i°ZwpheerusonMiro. tiiezeei vtahles.vassatli'n't, andt'e as(si'sisr;
nlicuonn'Pve)ylitaigil
him up stairs, and had kept hima
saferthere in custody until the
owtfiase,erwahaprtriiiv,-ertithtiny convey inn toThe question
really hail any not. He thought
they had, and that it aas high tilnvdukg7,4poini.g.
only wished that his Hon. tout Leincrenetodviiih'ilci:;sadtks'etobuelndll'eaanctital:e'
hopedthefultlharteptluiret 110(fiutshe,,w(,,,culd pause
ay'
beforeSirß.
they acted,
N(
l
There were two parts in the report which it was essential Committee.
brought under the attention of the House. First, whethetrothe
House would follow out their decision and seize the Lord Chief
Justice on the seat of justice.
Mr. II [Jill E—" Seize him if he comes to this House."
Sir R. H. INGLIS said, that if the Hon. Member waited
till the Chief Justice appeared at that her attic House his cos-
i
rage was not lii ely to be very soon tested. But though'". here

RAILWAYS.
The Ely and Huntingdon Railway Bill was read a third
time and palsied.
On the motion of Mr. 11. HINDE it was ordered that there
should be laid before the Ilous,, the evidence taken before the
Select Committee on the Newcastle and Berwick Railway
arrd the Northumberland Railway Bills, relating to the
atmospheric principle of traction, and that the same should be
Finted at the expense of the promoters of the Newcastle and
Berwick Railway.
On -the motion of Mr. DIVETT, the Bristol and Exeter
Railway Branches Bill was read a third time and passed.
'The Dies, Beccles, and Yarmouth Railway Bill Has read a
second time, and ordered to be committed.
Th, hull and Selby Railway ( Bridlington branch) was read
a thiixitime and passed.
Mr. SIL\ RMAN CRAWFORD presented a petition against
the Liverpool and :Manchester Railway Bill.
Mr. MA i'rEli.lllAN presented a petition against the West-
minster Improvement Bill.
Mr. W. PATTEN postponed the third reading of the
Blackburn, Darwen, and Bolton Rail,vay Bill until Monday
next.

On the motion of Sir G. GREY, it wag ordered that the
proccodings on the consideration of the report of the
Syston and Peterborough Railway Bill should be resumed.
On the motion of Mr. GROGAN, the time for receivin4
the report upon the Dublin Pipewater Bill was extended to the
6th of Juno.
The Sheffield and Tinsley Canal Bill was reported, as was
ati.o the Brighton, :Lewes, and Hastings Railway (Keymer
Is-obeli).
Captain PLTZNIAURICE presented a petition against the
Brighton Railway Extension Bid.
Mr. SPOONEIt brusgbt in the Birmingham and Glouces-
ter Railway Bill, which was read a first and ordered to be read
a second time.

GOOLE AND DONCASTER RAILWAY.
The Goole and Doncaster Railway RAI was read a second
time.

PETITIONS.
Mr. FELLOWES presented petitions from various places in
Huntingdonshire against the proposed alteration in the law of
settlement. Alr•o a petition against the union of the Sees of
St. Asvh aryl Bangor.
POST-OFFICE ABUSES.

petition. stoned by
Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE presented a
or merchants of the City of London, complaining of the
exaction of fees by the officers of the General Post-cffice,
under the pretence of an early delivery of letters ; also, com-
plaining of the abuses of the Post-office generally, and pray-
lug for inquiry. He had already given notice of a motion
fur a Committee of inquiry. Also, a petition from an
• individual, praying for the inclosure of waste lands for the
benefit of the poor.
BRADFORD, LONDON, AND BIRMINGHAM
RAILWAY.
The Bradford, London, and Birmingham Railway Bill was
NEWSPAPEIisead a third.time, and passed.
Cr-''''- MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
. ~...,;.--',4:- 'gem flow the Lords brought down certain Bills.
-q4....,fi-- -:- r ..MAYNOOTH.
ING.L:IS presented petitions from Dundee and other
diaatutoying of the Maynooth grant.
17. 11.1....- .

7 :;~`'
arc
7\~;

TETE SAN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 31, 1845.

were, he was aware, many Hon. Members who were ready to I
make speeches, though they were not quite prepared to imi-
tate the gallant bearing of the Hon. Member for Montrose, yet
still he thought that the best decision to come t• on the sub-
ject, was to wait for the report of the Committee.
Lord HO WICK thought that the wiser plan would cer•
tainly be to follow the advice of his Hon. and Learned
Friend, and reserve the discussion until they had the full report
of the Committee before them. Supposing, as it was stated,
that the levy should be made, and the damages taken, it was
better to allow this, than to take an inconsiderate step. It
would still be in their power to compel the parties who had
received them to refund, and to punish the parties who had
been in any way instrumental in carrying the execution into
effect. This would, in his opinion, be a much better course
than to take any inconsiderate step. They would then Nava
the advantage of waiting for the report of the Standing
Orders Committee, and avoid being committed at present to
any specific motion.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL thought that it would cer-
tainly he better to postpone the discussion until they got the
full report of the Standing Orders Committee, and they would
then see what would be the better course for them to adopt.
The Hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) seemed to
think the the full report of the Committee ought now to be
laid before them ; and doubtless, if they had had the
advantage of that Hon. Member's industry, intelligent dili-
gence, and business-habits, it might perhaps have been ready,
but circumstances had occurred that had rendered it impossible.
The members of that Committee had been mast indefatigable,
for in the midst of numerous private engagements they had
closely attended to their duties. He should move that when
the order of the day were proposed to be read, that it be post-
poned till Monday next.
After a few words from Sir T. WILDE and Sir R. PEEL,
Mr. HUNIE said that he should move a resolution to the
effect, that it should be a breach of the privilege of the House
to levy money on any servant of that house executing a war-

vileges which meant, if they meant anything, that the House
should possess an unlimitable and irresponsible power.—( Hear,
hear.) The conclusions and dogmas meant, if they really
meant anything, that all power and authority should be
concentrated in that House. He would ask, was
that the view which they believed to be acceptable to the
peopleof this country? He (Mr. D'lsraeli) would say the people,
but the public was lately the Parliamentary phrase. He observed
no disposition on the part of the public to take part with the
proceedings of that House on the present question.—( Hear,
hear.) They sympathised with the courts of law, and they
looked upon them as the protectors of their rights and liberties.
—( Hear, hear.) It was a profound sentiment in the mind of
the people to support the law of England. They had asso-
ciated the law of England with the security and welfare of
public liberty.—(Hear, hear.) The feeling out of doors was
one of satisfaction at the decision of the courts of law, and he
had only risen to repudiate the idea that the people of this
country had any wish to curtail, or war against the just privi-
leges of the House. He exposed the assumption of such pri-
vileges because he considered them inimical to popular liberty.
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman would " suppose a corrupt
judge—suppose a corrupt court presided over by one who had a
dark design against public liberty." The same might be said
respecting the House of Commons, and the real question was,
whether the House of Commons should be invested with a su-
preme irresponsible power, or whether the dignity of the law, as
administered by the judge, should not be respected, upheld,
and supported ?—( Hear.)
Mr. F. KELLY submitted that the only course for the
House to pursue, was to agree to the motion of the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman the Solicitor-General, which he had pro-
posed at the express suggestion of the Hon. Member for Lon-
don. That suggestion was agreed to, and then the Hon.
Member for Montrose proposed his amendment. 'The Noble
Lord the Member fur Sunderland also had an amendment, by
which he sought to postpone the consideration of the question
till next Monday week ; but the question was, should the dis-
cussion also be postponed till the same time. Having briefly
stated the facts of the Howard v. Gossett case, the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman proceeded to say that it was now their
duty, and one of transcendent importance, to decide what course
should be adopted by the House, by which, on the one hand,
due respect would be manifested for the law, and the Courts
which administered that law ; and, en the other, by which the
undoubted privileges of the House might be maintained. The
question ought not to be prematurely discussed, nor without
careful deliberation. The question had been referred to a
Committee, that Committee had thought it best to considerthe
question fully in all its bearings—that Committee had expressed
an unanimous wish that it was necessarythat the question should be
postponed, and therefore he considered the House ought to
postpone the discussion till the time proposed. He considered
it was the duty of the House to accede to this request of the
Committee. The discussion could be as well taken next Mon-
day week as to-night. It was necessary that they should ven-
ture upon no course without due deliberation. They should
not act prematurely, but take the proper and reasonable course
suggested by the Noble Lord the Member fur London, and
moved by the Hon. and Learned Solicitor-General.—(Hear.)
Sir T. WILDE said that he considered the course recom-
mended by the Noble Lord the Member for London the
proper course to take. On a former occasion, when the ques-
tion of privilege was under their consideration, he had opposed
the course then taken. Proceedings had been instituted against
the officer of that House, and the matter was brought before
the House. A vote was come to, the House agreed to appear
and plead, and the consequences were well known to all the
Hon. Members present. But now the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman said, let the execution take place. He regretted
the subject had not received in that House the benefit of the
talents of his Hon. and Learned Friend. His absence had pre-
vented that. He (Sir T. Wilde) might say, that when he
was consulted on that occasion by Mr. France, his Hon. and
Learned Friend took some interest in the question. He ( Sir T.
Wilde) advised Mr. France to petition, and drew up
a petition for the purpose, when his Honourable
and Learned Friend being consulted on this subject advised an
exactly opposite course.—( Hear, hear.) 'the part he had
taken had been less disinterested than that of his Hon. and
Learned Friend, for he (Mr. Kelly) was the volunteer counsel
of the House of Commons. He trusted that the House would
give them each an unbiassed hearing. If he thought his 11%m
and Learned Friend could carry his resolution, he would second. it
with all his heart, for, in his opinion, it was a very
er re-
solution to be moved ; but when the House was, did,
ST)
p
was not competent to proceed, and that
we';:ul d laced in the
not suppose
that power of the Court of Queen's Bench, h
that any such power could exist. Th.
answer to his resolu-
tion,
would be what the Hon. Mere :este for Oxford had stated,
that that it would be ridiculous, afte",.
talk any more about it, and fe.is fine had been levied, to
post-
ponement was, that it reason for suggesting the
stayed, and hinder the 'essuld prevent the execution being
alternative. of bringing a writ of error.
He admitted it we
:
4.-scl step to take to levy the execution.
He considered th,t
the questio" the present was the last occasion on which
could be discussed with the advantages
it, r°7 .acs 'House
if a future great occasion arose
was intercepted in its proper functions it
"'Act cut through all that had been accomplished as the
det,sthe levels the standing corn. It appeared to him that the
method hitherto pursued was highly discreditable to the House.
It was a surrender of the constitutional privileges of the House
and with it a yielding up of the great principles of the Consti-
tution itself--( Hear, hear.) He trusted he should convince
the judgment of every Hon. Member that the decision of the
Court of Queen's Bench was false in every particular, and that
the warrant that had been issued by the House was good.—
( Hear.) The judgment of the Court was contrary to law, and
compromised the honour and privilege of the House. The
warrant, on the face of it, was direted to the Sergeant-at-
Arms, to take into custody a certain individual, and was per-
fectly correct. But whether the Queen's Bench was right or
wrong in its decision, the question to decide was, did it pos-
sess the power to interfere on a Parliamentary warrant. He
would say and maintain that Parliamentary powers were only
amenable to Parliamentary rule;—(Hear)—and he thought
the Court of Queen's Bench had greatly overstepped its autho-
rity in endeavouring to set aside the warrant that had been is-
sued. He would say that when his Hon. and Learned Friend
told the House that it would sustain no injury by levying the
execution, it would sustain greater evil by refusing to
sustain a writ of error in prevention.
Mr. KELLY rose, and said he wished to explain. The
question had been put to him whether, if the sheriffs were to
submit to the House of Commons, and refuse to levy the writ
issued by the Court of Queen's Bench, would they be protected
by the House of Commons ? His answer was, that if the
sheriffs refused to levy any writ they would he liable to attach-
ment and imprisonment until the writs were levied. His Hon.
and Learned Friend had accused him of having been the volun-
teer counsel on the argument that had taken place, but he
would tell his Honourable and Learned Friend that:he had a re-
tainer in that case, and he argued the case as he would have
argued any other case, and there was nothing inconsistent in
what he had done.
Mr. DUNDAS expressed his surprise at the observations
that had fallen from the Honourable and Learned Gentleman
over the way. He felt persuaded that he of all men ought not
to have tied his hands and have fettered himself as a Member
of Parliament, by receiving a fee in such a case. The Hon.
and Learned Gentleman had said if his advice was required on
the question he would willingly give it, notwithstanding the
retainer he had received, but he would have the House to be
cautious how they received his gratuitous advice. The
House of Commons had acted right when they availed
themselves of the only legal measure of letting the Court of
Queen's Bench know what and how great were their privi-
leges. The law officers of the Crown had been instructed to
defend the action ; but he would deny that at any time the House
of Commons yielded to the decision of the Queen's Bench
those privileges to which they were constitutionally entitled.
It might, perhaps, be a matter of regret that the Court of
Queen's Bench had ever, in any way, been allowed to inter-
fere ; and ho would contend that no Court in Great Britain
should ever be permitted to decide on their privileges.—
(Hear, hear.) It was now known that the Committee of In-
quiry had reported as their opinion that a writ of error should
be issued into the Court of Exchequer. Now he could not
imagine how the Hon. and Learned Member could even con-
sent to an appeal to the Court of Exchequer ; but the appeal
would he made if his motion were carried. He (Mr. Dundas )
would advise a bold step, and let us remain as we are—(Hr ar)
—end abide by the loss, if any shall accrue. The public would
stand by us in the position we assumed, and our honour and
hi part, regrtte.oduh thati privileges would remain untarnished and undiminished. It
support}i
o then .
mo-
tion
would be advisable to follow the advice of the Noble Lord the
Member for Sunderland, and depend on ourselves for relief
a sto
o r anti ronly
and
Learned Friend should have proposed so ungracious a resolution.
ofthtehediNffiocbulletyL. He, fo r
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said it appeared to him
inconsistent with the privileges of the House to allow this
matter to remain in its present position. He would entirely
coincide in the view which hit Hon. and Learned Friend had
taken. Was the execution of the writ to be averted by pro-
ceeding to extremities? If the House intended to interfere
further it would be proper for those who suggested this mea-
sure to state how far they intended to proceed in that course.
It would not satisfy the honour and privileges of the House if
they rested merely with the punishment of the irresponsible
subordinates. All persons, no matter what their stations
were, ought to be proceeded against, who interfered with
the privileges of the House.—Hear, hear.) The public feeling
would be carried with you in the prosecution of such a
course. Public opinion would sustain them if they did not
flinch from maintaining unreservedly the dignity of their
rights. When a warrant had been issued against the Speaker
upon a question where the privileges of the House had been
concerned, the House had allowed the Speaker to appear and
plead against the action. From the year 1810 until the year
1836, no occasion had arisen in which it had been necessary for
the House to decide whether it was right or wrong
to pursue a similar line of proceeding. In ISA
the question arose to which all their difficulties might
he traced. This was the direction to plead to tire action of
Stockdale against Hansard, which had itself been occasioned
by the publication of Messrs. Hansard of the Reoort of the In-
spectors of Prisons, part of which report had
been published by Stockdale himself ; to that
action the Attorney-General had pleaded the general issue.
He had pleaded the general issue under the orders of the House.
It hail happened unfortunately on that occasion that the Lord
Chief Justice had expressed a strong opinion on the right of
the House to enforce any such order, or to express any opinios
of the conduct of their fellow-subjects which might not be ex-
pressed by any person out of that House. That eminent per-
son had, it is true, in the most generous manner, on another
occasion, lamented the warmth of expression into which he bad
been betrayed at a subsequent opportunity. when he gave
judgment in the case of Stockdale. After that time a Com-
mittee had been obtained, and that Committee came to a ,sgedoe
of resolutions, which were reported to the House on the Stn of
May, 1837, and en the 30th of May the resolutions were
adopted. By the law of the privileges of Parliament, it was
agreed that the House had the right of carrying these resolu-
tions into effect to their utmost extent; and they would render
any party contravening them amenable to the displeasure of
the House, and liable to punishment for so doing.—( Hear.)
Only two days after that time, the Attorney-General ,had
taken an active part in the debate, and had expressed himself
very strongly on the subject. On the Bth of June, after that
period, the Attorney-General had come down to the House
from the Messrs. Ilansard, and requested, on their behalf, per-
mision to plead to the action, and he had recommended the
House to come to the decision of allowing them to do so. By
the resolution, it was decided that any person would commit a
breach of privilege by commencing any action in a court of law.
After this, in 1813, this action was brought in consequence. of
what had taken place :in 1840, notwithstanding it had been
said that any one going into a court of law would be guilty of
a breach of privilege. The resolution come to on that occasion
was that the Sergeant-at-Arms should plead to the action.
Now, when the !louse came to this resolution, it was impos-
sible to say to the House when they went into the Court •f
Queen's Bench, what view that Court might adopt.
It was, therefore, impossible that the House should
know what view the Court would take at that time
of the case of Stockdale anti Hansard, or whether they would
take the question of privilege into consideration at all. The
Court had refused to be fettered by the question of privilege,
Anil had entered into the whole question. Strong expressions
from the Hon. Member for Worcester had induced them to
suppose that such would be the case, arid his Right lion.
Friend at the head of the Government had warned the House
that the court of law might not enter into the whole question,
and he (the Solicitor-General) thought, therefore, that he
could not consistently give his support to the proposition of
the lion. Member for Montrose. They had evidently gone
into a court of law with the impression that tire court of law
might take or have a particular impression of the case, and
come to an unfavourable decision. The Court did come to
that decision, and he thutedit that if the hionse were now to
endeavour to carry their resolutions into force, they would do

ran,.
Lord HOWICK trusted that the lion. Member would
delay his resolution.
Lord JOHN MANNERS hoped that the Hon. Gentleman
would persevere.
Mr. HUME said he was anxious to proceed, and he would
now move that it be a breach of the privileges of the House to
levy any sums of money on any servant of that House executing
a warrant.
Mr. ROEBUCK seconded the motion.
Lord HOWICK thought it would be better that the House
should not pronounce any opinion on this matter, but that it
would be more expedient that the debate be adjourned, which
he moved accordingly.
Sir R. PEEL said that it would amount to the same thing
if the Noble Lord would not put his amendment, for the House
would not in either case come to any decision on the subject.
Mr. LABOUCHERE agreed entirely in the amendment of
the Noble Lord, and thought the House should in some 'degree
consult the impression which would be made upon the public,
who at. this moment were under a great misapprehension re-
garding them, and which would be much strengthened by the
course which the Right Right lion. Baronet who had just sat
down proposed. ?le could not help expressing his entire assent
with the lion. Member for Montrose, though ho could not sup-
port his motion that if the threatened proceedings were perse-
vered in the parties who promoted and abetted them would be
guilty of a gross violation of the privileges of that House.—
( Hear, hear.) They were now about to be engaged in a con-
flict to which they should not lightly commit themselves, but
upon which, when once entered, they should act firmly and de-
cidedly.—( Cheers. ) He would support the amendment of his
Noble Friend.
Sir R. INGLIS said, though unaccustomed to concur with
the Hon. Member for Montrose, he agreed with him In think-
ing that it was more desirable that the House should now come
to a decision on this important matter. Now was the time for
them to decide, for it would be idle further to talk about the
inviolability of their privileges after they had been violated.—
( Hear, hear.) For his part, he did not think they had been
violated, but if they were to take up their stand against the
law of England, now was the time.
Mr. ROEBUCK was not at all influenced by the observa-
tions of the Hon. Baronet the Member for the University of
Oxford, When Hon. Members talked of haste and the
necessity for deliberation, he begged to ask them how long had
this measure been under consideration? Every individual
Member was now as well prepared to come to a decision as he
could be on Monday night. The question went far deeper
than it would at first sight appear.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon.
Baronet and the Noble Lord opposite were opposed to the pri-
vileges of the House, and he could not wonder at it. So long as
the House merely represented the aristocracy, none could be
more chary of its privileges than the High Tory party ; but
the moment it became, in part, at least, a House in which the
people were represented, that moment they abandoned them.
lie saw the Noble Lord opposite shrugged his shoulders when
he said " representatives of the people," and he (Mr.
Roebuck) had no doubt but the Noble Lord re-
garded such representatives in a very contemptuous light.
(Cries of " Oh, oh.") lie would not dwell further on that,
but would tell those Hon. Members that he for one was pre-
pared to pit the House of Commons against the Queen's Bench
from the first hour of its exissence to the present moment. Th,
Queen's Bench had always been opposed to the liberties of the
people, and had often been the abettor of wicked and ty-,sesilicat
monarchs.—(lronical cries of " Hear, hear.") Ad they
deny this—he was prepared to prove it from the h.*ary of this
countrv.—( Hear, hear.) Might he not refer. to the days of
Hampden, and to cringing favouring judges; chief justices, too,
who were willing to gratify the propens;;cies of the Sovereign
at the expense of justice. In those days the Queen's Bench
abetted the King in his assaults upon the liberties of the coun-
try, whilst that House manful:Ay stood by them and resisted
such encroachments. He he.si no doubt but the Hon. Baronet
the Member for Oxford would have been very anxious for the
privileges of that House in the days of John Wilkes—he would
then have fought as seanfully as anybody for their privileges,
not because they mere the privileges of the House of Commons,
but because he could contend for them in opposition to the
liberties of the people. They must now make a stand for their
privileges or give them up altogether, and permit the House to
become a mere secondary authority—inferior to the meanest
court of justice in the kingdom.—t Hear.) Within the last
four weeks a gentleman had appealed to the British law for his
liberty, but the Court of Queen's Bench yielded with perfect
acquiescence to the Royal Court of Jersey, told him he must
submit to the constituted authorities of this realm, and sent back
the unfortunate man to be dealt with as the 'Royal Court of
Jeraey might think properr. But if the House of Commons
dared to interfere, even for the protection of its own privileges,
then the Queen's Bench stepped in and treated as waste paper
their rules and privileges. " Who is the House of Commons ?"
said the Queen's Bench ; " what are we to know about the
House of Commons—the Court of Jersey is a constituted au-
thority; but who are they—why:should they bring the man to the
bar ?" He was brought here by the warrant of the first
officer of that House ; a warrant, worded with all formality and
regularly prepared, and to say that such a warrant should not
be valid, was to forfeit ail their privileges as representatives of
the people of England. He (Mr. Roebuck) was prepared to
carry the matter out and abide the consequences.—( Hear. )
Suppose there should be at a future time a chief justice who
would be the pliant tool of a despotic sovereign ; and supposing
that House to come into collision with the Queen's Bench,
what would be the result—how was the House to guard against
the precedent which Hon, Members opposite were so anxious
to establish ?—( Hear, hear)—The Queen's Bench would
persevere in its course, and it might come to pass that the
Sergeant-at-Arms, having no domicile—(The Hon. and
Learned Member here let his voice fall to so low a key that
several Hon. Members, unable to catch the last word, asked,
" No what ?" The Hon. Member replied, in nearly as low a
tone, " No domicile." The question was repeated by Hon.
Members in a distant part of the House, upon which the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman, with a voice loud and irascible,
shouted out, " No domicile," which occasioned roars of laugh-
ter from all parts of the House. ) The Sergeant-at-Arms
having no domicile, the Queen's Bench would issue a warrant
against his person, and the catchpole might seize him by the
neck—no, he would not say in that House—they would not
tiara to venture so far—but in its precincts, whilst executing
the business of the House, and drag him before the Court.
Where, then, was the great bulwark of the liberties of the
English people? They would no longer be in a position to be
their protectors. They would have lost their independence,
and could not be thereafter designated what they were now
proud to assert, the representatives of the commonalty of
England.—( Cheers. )
Sir JOHN HANMER agreed with the Noble Lord, and
would support his amendment.
Mr. WARBURTON would support the motion of his Hon.
Friend the Member for Montrose.
Mr. DISRAELI weld the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
had described those Members on the Ministerial side of the
House as opposing the privileges of the House of Common,,
be;ause the House now represented the feelings of the people
of England ; and then the lion. and learned Gentleman in
describing with extraordinary inconsistency those privileve, so
important to the public interest, and so indispensable to the
liberties of the public, turned round and said—" Where would
you have been if a Hampden had not arisen and vindicated
the privileges of that House." But that lion. and Learned
Gentleman (Mr. (Roebuck) appeared to have forgotten that
at that time it was an aristocratic assembly that supported the
privileges of that ilouse—,an assembly not elected by the con-
stituencies so numerous as those represented by the pre-
sent House of Commons. He could not understand why the
lion. and Learned Gentleman should impute to Members on
his (Mr. D'lsraeli's) side of the House, a desire to give up or
repudiate the privileges of the House, because that House repre-
sented the people of England to a greater extent than it had
done before the recent alteration made in its constitution, and
at the same time appeal to the times of Hampden, when the
House of Commons had asserted its privileges.—( Hear hear. )
It might be true that judges had been and might be
corrupt, but the Hon. and Learned Gentleman should have
been the last to assert that Parliament had not been corrupt also.
He was sure the people of England would be able to distin-
guish between the Parliament of England and one branch of
the Legislature. In dealing with this subject, he did not
dwell much on what the House of Commons might have done
in former times ; hut he might state, that every case of tyranny
that could be brought against the Court of Queen's Bench,
might find its parallel in the proceedings of the House of Com-
mons. He agreed with the lion. Gentleman opposite, that it
was necessary to try and settle the great issue so long pending.
—( Hear, hear.) lie wondered that any one should say that
there had not been sufficient time allowed the House to de-
cide upon the course it should take. It could not be asserted
that the subject came upon them suddenly. Ever since he had
held a seat in that House, the question had iron often mooted,
and lion. Members had always evaded the difficulty—had in-
variably procrastinated the evil hour.—(Hear, hear.) Let
the lints. and Learned Gentleman and his supporters try the
case, sod send the Lord Chief Justice of England to the
Tower, and then it would be seen with whom the
affections of the people of England res'cl.—( Hear, hear.)
He was of opinion with the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, that
the time was come when the House should stand forth
and try the question between the privileges of that House
and the authority of the courts of law, but he ( Mr. D'lsraeli)
could not conceive how any one could stand up in that House
and assert that they required time to consider how they should
ti eat this question ; or could assert that it had come suddenly
upon them—that it had fallen like a star in the serene at-
mosphere of Parliamentary discussion—or like a comet, the
course of which could not he ascertained, and the appearance of
which was altogether unexpected. It was by this continual
system of pi oerastination that they were now brought to the
extreme point—like a man in difficulties who had always put
off the evil hour. After the judgment of the Court of Queen's
Bench had been vindicated under eircnmstances the most igno-
minious, it was quite impossible for the nous' to offer the pre-
tence that the opportunity still remained to try the justice
Of that decision. The Right lion. Gentlemen the Member for
Taunton ( Mr. Labouehere) dwelt strongly on the advice which
he eases in reference to the public opinion out of doors. He
(Mr. Disraeli) wanted to know what public opinion ? The
judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench he hound
was vindicated in the property or person cf the
chief officer of that Court, and the people of the country
would not sefine much upon the question. They would un-
der-tend that an humid, subject of her Majesty had hail the
daring to put himself in collision with the House of Commons,
secartiabsetdrowoeireearlileuedeesdsarty.
and haul gained the decision and authority of the courts of law
in his behalf. There was not a man in the country that would
believe that the alleged privileges such as they had been de-
ofthe subject, but. on the
contrary they would look upon them as injurious.—( Hear,
tlo)ythtehelibleirotny .
hear.) He (Mr. Disraeli) should not at all deplore the
champions of those privileges,
pri-
vileges which the Ho Gentlemen opposite, the
Ateb but he considered those m
er. for Bath declared necessary
for Ihe liberty of the ' '
1 Igentlemen. people—pnvile e,i „ which (how,-,ver, like
at of his school, he might avoid • . ' •
dennitions)—pri-

so without the benefit of public opinion ; and without the •
advantage of the assistance of that public opinion,
he thought that it would be unwise to carry that
resolution into effect.—( Hear, hear.) He did not
therefore think that this was the proper moment for the
House to stop the execution ; and he therefore felt that it
was impossible to adoptthe course recommended by the Hon.
Member for Montrose. He did not think that they would
have public opinion with them in endeavouring by force to
carry these resolutions into effect, by the imprisonment of the
plaintiff in this action. What, then, were they to do? Were
they to postpone the question and allow the goods of the Ser-
geant to be levied upon ? and were they to suffer him to be
the victim of their own supineness? But he did not think that
this would consist with their dignity, nor was it any more
wise to postpone the decision of this question, and expose
their officers to the consequences of their neglect. 'they could
of after this use force to commit the parties who were thus
offending against their privileges. The House, therefore,
should come to some decision on this point to-night, for, unless
they interposed, the execution must take place.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL wished to state what had been
the course pursued on former occasions. In the particular case
referred to by the Solicitor-General, the House had directed
their officer to plead to the action. That was the course on a
former occasion, but on that specified occasion the House did
not plead. The question was now whether the damages should
be levied, and the House should or should not pay the damages.
The House had been advised by the Attorney-General to
plead to the action. He (Lord John Russell) had proposed to
the House that Howard and all those who acted with him should
De summoned to the bar of the House. The House had not
agreed with him at that time and this was the consequence.
fhe motion of the Hon. Member ,for Montrose could not
i• his opinion he acceded to, and unless the House interposed
the execution must be levied. The Solicitor-General had
read the resolutions adopted on a previous occasion, yet the
question was whether they were right or not, and it was an im-
perative duty on the part of the House to come to a decision,
and agree whether they should allow Mr. Howard to levy for
the damages under this judgment or not.
Sir R. INGLIS ruse only to say one werd on the observa-
tions of the Hon. Member for Sutherland. He observed, that
that portion of his speech in which he had spoken of the
Hon. Member for Cambridge having taken a brief on this suit
as a breach of privilege, was loudly cheered. Now he (Sir
R. Inglis) thought if that were a breach of privilege, it was
equally so for the Attorney and Solicitor-General to have taken
briefs on the other side.

••••••=••••••••••••••••••••••••••••1100.................." .
rate, as indicated by the Learned Gentleman opposite. man
that hinted at by some Gentlemen on that side of the Houe.
He, for one, agreed in the opinion that the days of ascendancy
of all sorts were numbered. What ascendancy could there be
in giving, one college for Protest nt; and another for Catholics?
Education ought to be free, and the divisions of the day 30
politics and religion should la least be excluded from the lecture
room,—( Hear, ) He preferred a separate system of education
to such an education. They would write for them the history
of their country.
An How. MEMBER—Who will read it ?
Mr. ROCHE—The people of Ireland would read it. They
refused to give them a free and unshackled education, and they
woAuildr.rßefoussestoexrepclaeiinveeda. scheme filled with such imperfection.
as the present.
Sir R. INGLIS said he would repeat what he had alrea2
said, that the present was a gigantic scheme of G -
en.c
oirgoetwitithlastup dish al
Cacho
less education; but in doing so he begged to says in a,n__.
swer to the charge of the Right Honourable Gent 7
man the Secretary of State for the Home Departnulits
that he regretted the Right Hon. Baronet had declared h,l!
determination to stand by the whole of this Bill—that shore,
have been left for the Committee. The Right Hon. Baronet
who
nailed his colours to the meat, and. therefore, every one ,i
voted for the second reading of the Bill voted for Governme?tt,
io)ower, Governmental nomination, and Governmental di
wfeor
offi
tcaeur so
taesd they toblo,pu,gsliitti
opor otpoe
aril
oHi
oeccaotiuolnd, naeot
d hale
he
rie.:ni
avowed he would rather see the people of I 110
thrown upon their own resources. He believed they
the same view of it as he did. He never said there we,,,sl:.
thing aggressive in the system, but it was a negative of renlir.,
He would wish that in any scheme of education for Irela O_L'ie
colleges in that country should be based on the same pr.ofrt
as that of Oxford, where Protestantism was made an.eietwthat.
in the education of youth. He was quite ready to ad '
°is
differ-
between religion nd
;tabcerin schemes of education. that the
enee might be observed at he should be glad to find "
ct &to 10
same systems were established every where. ..e h- ind bias
agree with the proposition of the .Noble Lord behind for
( Lord J. Manners), that there should be separate on pae,
Presbyterians, Roman Catholics, and Church a Enrtioc, •
did not ta
Sir J. GRAHAM explained, but hi so low and to
a_ io.
tone that it was impossible to reduce his statements into .'
telligible form. mt pro'
Mr. REDING TON was in favour of the Governt%clioa
cation,
ofanad
position, but he thought that the principle of mixedruAect it.
theological
oltohgei
cuagi
was of great value, and the Legislature ought not to eda•
Ile would support this Bill as a measure of ,_odo
meet Catholic.
that had been said both by Protestants and 110001 w , abet
htchaitir
on this question, he should say that his opinion 0 s,' For
there should be Roman Catholic professors es we rsofe.Pr;
tcstant. He approved of the appointment of the !oar.
being vested in the Crown for the present, for he
i conesalt.4ooo6l
wiseop to leave ttneo,:na 0
instancesi of abuse of the power vested in the •°- u., '
He thought that in Ireland some scheme for the _nie
done to Ireland.—( Hear. ) Trinity
the people was required. He considered that the Prel'a-ii bit
sure was only a small reparation f • iniustice the'„ 041
i:. the was lep oho'
was, the door of that College was still closed to .goica t
lies, and, until it was opened, they would net tio 3 • dehlti
people of Ireland.—( Hear. ) , s the
Osi the motion of :.Ir. MON CKTON MILO t .
to
was then adjourned to Monday. a;g3
The other orders of the day were then lisp licaf'i.
to
House adjourned at half-past Twelve o'clock
P l

satisfactorily carried out in Ireland? Had they not seen that
it would not be deemed a measure of real benefit to the Ro-
man Catholic people of Ireland ? That it should have the sup-
port of the Protestant people of Ireland would appear to him
a most unnatural proceeding. To think that those who heti
opposed the present National System of education, should
support this proposition, would be a thing he could not be-
lieve. He had no doubt it would be looked upon as an evil
of far greater importance to Ireland than even the Maynnoth
Bill. These were his reasons for taking the rsourse he
had in regard to this measure—a coarse which he
had felt it his imperative duty to pursue. He would not weary
the House with any further observations, and in the few he
had offered he hoped he had endeavoured to be as calm as
the nature of the subject permitted.—( Hear, hear.) If he
could consistently support this measure he would; but he could
not help saying that he felt justified in his opposition by all that
he had heard in that House upon the subject, as well as by the
expressions of the leader of the Irish people in reference to it,
anti in which he, as well as the Protestant people of England,
fully concurred. These expressions were to this effect, that a
system of education should not be enforced unless it had the
father's sanction and the mother's blessing—(Hear, hear)
—that religion should be the basis of all education, and if it
were not it would corrupt more than it would en-
lighten. The same authority proposed a scheme
of education which he (Lord Jelin Manners) con-
sidered far preferable to the Government Bill, and that
was, to have separate colleges' for the Roman Catholics, the
Protestants, arid the Presbyterians; and as for Trinity Col-
lege—and here let him request the attention of the Right Hon.
Member for Dungarvon—as for Trinity College, he could see
no reason for any change in that. Now, that was the plan
which he (Lord J. Manners) would wish to see carried into
law, and if it were, all objections of a religious nature would
be obviated ; but if they separated secular from religious edu-
cation, it would ke worse than useless, and prove not a blessing
hut a curse. It would be a measure which future statesmen
would tremble at, and future ages deplore. He would beg to
move the Bill be read a second time that day six months.
Lord ADAIR seconded the motion.
Mr. ROSS said, he cordially approved of the measure pro-
prosed by the Government, and he could not see upon what
grounds the Noble Lord opposite assumed that it would prove
a curse instead of a blessing. In approving of this measure lie
(Mr. Ross) could not shut out from his mind the fact that up to
this time it had always been the practice in Ireland to set one
day of the week apart for religious instruction in all the schools,
and he had yet heard no reason why that should not be continued.
He believed that Mr. O'Connell did not represent the Trials
people.--( Hear, hear.) He believed that he had greatly ex-
aggerated matters, and he felt assured that the Roman
Catholics of Ireland viewed this measure, not with dislike, but
approbation. When Mr. O'Connell characterised the Bill as
iniquitous, and that education apart from religion had led to
crime in France, he answered by a denial of the fact. He
asserted that where education had existed crime had diminished.
He called upon the Government, in conclusion, not to give
way to the clamour that had been raised against the measure
in Ireland.--e Cheers. )
Lord ADAIR thought it would be better to establish
Catholic Colleges in the south of Ireland. He was opposed to
the measure altogether, and one of the material grounds of
that objection was that it gave to the Minister of the day the
power of the appointment of the professors.
Lord SANDON could not think that voting for the second
reading of the Bill pledged any Hon. Member to adopt its
details. •He was anxious to see the Bill go into Committee, in
order that such alterations might be made in it as were re-
quired. He believed that it was a measure in the right path
for the future legislation of the people of Ireland.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM, who spoke in so low a tone of
voice as to render it difficult to hear him at all, said that he
was one of those who thought that no personal question of re-
ligious feeling or belief ought to be discussel in that House.
His Noble Friend had truly stated, that under the
present circumstances of Ireland it was impossible,
with the least prospect of success, to propound a mea-
sure generally acceptable to the people of that
country for the endowment by the State of the clergy of a
portion of the people. He could well understand a scheme
such as that which had been suggested by his Noble Friend the
Member for Newark, who advocated a scheme of separate edu-
cation for the different sects prevailing in Ireland. He could
understand founding a Roman Catholic College in the South
of Ireland, and he could understand founding a separate College
for the Presbyterians in the North of Ireland, but, for his own
part, he for one very much feared that, so far from removing
religious differences, no scheme could be propounded more
certain to produce the effect of perpetuating those differences.
The Noble Lord the Member for Newark had referred to the
proviso at the end of clause one, which had reference to the
formation of the proposed colleges. Now, the principle which
that proviso went was that upon which the University of Lon-
don had been established. Considering the great diffi-
culty which attended this question, it was absolutely
necessary that they should be perfectly explicit upon it.
It was the intention of her Majesty's Government, in pro-
posing these colleges, that no religious tests should be applied
either to officials or to students. There was no novelty in this,
none whatever. Let them look to Scotland, a country respect-
ing which no disrespect for religion could be alleged. There
was no country in the world where religion was more venerated.
In the colleges of that country no religious tests of any kind
were imposed. Attendance at Divine worship was not re-
quired, nor upon theological lectures; and yet the parents and
guardians of Scotland sent their sons and young men to the
colleges of Edinburgh and Glasgow, perfectly satisfied with the
system that was pursued. Two Noble Lords who sat opposite
would bear testimony to this. What then was the course pur-
sued at Oxford? When he was a member of that University,
a student matriculating there was not examined as to
what he knew (Hear, hear) but he was called
upon to subscribe to what he believed. He was bound to say
that for the two years and a half that he was a member of
Christ Church, Oxford, he never was called upon to attend any
lecture on theology or on divinity. He never received any re-
ligious instruction whatever, and he did believe that through-
out the whole time that he was at the University he never
heard one sermon.—( Laughter.) The Noble Lord the Mem-
ber for Newark himself must know that this was a cammon
thing, although ho (Sir James Graham) did not know what
the taste of the Noble Lord was when he was at college.
The effect of this would be an interference with the election of
the professors. Something of the same kind had occurred with
respect to the appropriation of the regium donum, and the
appointment of the professors at Belfast. There were at that
place a congregation of Unitarian Presbyterians and of Or-
thodox Presbyterians, and in that case there had been felt to
be a necessity for the appointment of two professors. If he
were to follow the same plan. there would have to be a profes-
sor for philosophy, theology, and anatomy, of different opi-
nions ; and then he would have to meet the difficulty by the
appointment of three professors of divinity, to obviate the in-
convenience. Now he thought that the introduction of such
professors would destroy the very utility at which
these academic institutions aimed. There ought to
be every care taken that parents and guardians
sbould have the power of securing the principles of those in
whom they were so deeply interested, for he believed that no
greater evil could occur than that the spirit of proselytism
should be let loose. It had always been an opinion of his that
great injury would arise from the alienation of the Irish
people from their national religion, for he feared that it would
only end in that infidelity which was worse than any other evil.
The supervision of the parents and guardians would be one
means of security, and the power of removal which was held
by the Crown, or, as it was, in fact, the removal under the ad-
vice of responsible Ministers, who held seats in that House,
would be a complete guarantee that these means of education
would not be perverted. The visitorial power co! the Crown
could not, he believed, by the prerogative, be delegated to any
one but the Keeper of the Great Seal, unless it were by statute.
This facility was liable to abuse. According to the rules
which ho believed were observed in Trinity College, he be-
lieved that no attendance was compulsory on the Divinity Lec-
tures, and he thought that some provision ought to be made
for religious instruction; he therefore intended that oppor-
tunities should be allowed for the residence of teachers within
the colleges, though he would not provide balls or other facili-
ties for the teaching of any particular theological opinions.
There were several Gentlemen opposite who received their early
education at Trinity College, and, from their principles
and appearance in that House, he felt assured that
no test of religion had been enforced on entering the college, ei
on taking the honours which the college conferred. He would
now refer to the petition of the professors' chairs. A memo-
rial had been presented, requesting that certain chairs should
be held by Roman Catholics. The first chair referred to, was
that of history. He saw no reason why there should be any
restriction or exclusion, and, therefore, he should not agree to
any departure from the principle of the Bill. The next chair
was that of moral philosophy and metaphysics. He saw
no reason why any rdvantage should be given to any particular
creed. The same rule applied to logic and geology ; he did
did not conceive that any rule of the kind should be permitted.
Then came the question about the removal of professors. He
considered it the best to place the power cf removal in the
hands of a responsible Government, riot under the authority
of any other power. While the Government had the
power of removals, they had no objection to allow
a visitorial power, vested in parties in whom con-
fidence could be placed.—( Hear.) While they objected to
favouring any religious party in the appointment of the pro-
fessors, they had no objection to allow halls and lecture-rooms
for the use of lectures, providing poetics were found who would
endow them for the purposes of religious instruction. To that
extent he had no objection to go, and that in Committee pro-
vision should be made to that effect. He did not think it neces-
sary to add more at present, as he had referred to the leading
objections urged against the measure. Great advances had been
made in the education of the lower classes of Ireland within
the last few years, attributable to the influence of that excellent
establishment, the National System of Education. Great
social and educational progress had been made, and the pre-
sent measure was only an extension of that plan. The Hon. Mem-
ber for the University of Dublin had objected to that system,
but against his objection he ( Sir J. Graham) could place the
authority of the Hots. Member for Belfast, who had stated that,
so far from evil having resulted from that system, it had been
of the greatest benefit to the people of that country. The
children of the National Schools of Ireland, if placed in con-
trast with the National Schools of this country, wont.' appear
in a very advantag, ous position. The best possible effects had
been produced upon the poor of that country by the system, and
the present measure was only to extend to the upper classes
what had been already extended to them.—( Hear, hear. )
This Mealitire ivduld be found the only measure calculated to
satisfy the claims of Ireland as regarded education, and was
attended with such principles as would realise the most happy
results.—( Hear, hear. )
Mr. ROCHE said it was incumbent on bite to join with the
Noble Lord the Member for Newark to oppose the tecond
reading of the Bill. It would be Unnecessary for him to say
that the proposed measure of education was s difficult subject
for any Irish Member to deal with. He would be ready to give
his assent td it tratasiire fot *hat WO tailed a mixed
question of education. He would go as cal II dtly MAO in the
desire to spread proper notions of religion and education among
the people. He considered that religion should be a Main ques-
tion in carrying out any mixed system of education. The
Right Hon. Gentleman had said you must lease to us the ap-
pointment of the professers) because I am determined there
shall be nothing savouring of proselytism intrOdeeed into these
colleges. I will not permit any professor to remain in otlice
who endeavours to prosel3te any of the pupils under
his care. The Right Honourable Ilarotiet did not
understand what was very with apprehended in Ireland
that he had fixed the teeing ef his holding there. He contended
that if the ;44,-ht nos. Gentleman carried out ills tiwit tittestion
114 ITtitla be carrying out hie own rroselytism. They requited
in Ireland that those professors Oioxi)Vlet !se the mere
nominees of the Gr;vernmen't. s to be ree
Tensible to public opinion in Ireland, and not to any Govern-
ment in England--ti, be exposed to the prejudices and the ideas
of the Government of the day. lie would be most anxious to
lend bis tissislant6 to the §tipport and spread of
information and education in Ireland, but he was
determined that there should not be any means of poisoning
the fountain from whence the youth of Ireland drew their
first draughts of knowledge.—(llear, hear.) lie would con-
tend that the power should not rest with the Ministry to dismiss
a man because he should not meet their views on an abstract
pess:oo f I against alnagstnet
b
iqnu elreland
o f wereo l i t i
• when it was
offered in the shape of 500/. or 8001. year.—( Hear,
hear.) They might be tempted, for they were noet.
If you give us these colleges the profeseeee
proof against temptation, any more than general
eei:areesdpeetoutisiyay that people
I ium an naitnudre.
i-
pendent as the professors of Oxford and Carnbridg U
and
in-
versities were ; and if they are not to be as unfettered
i
dependent, then, he would say, let Oa grants e refused
id
be
gether, and, in do' 1 curse w°il
ing so, nothing awe ()teen d tion
must be as
witaeld- He would. rather have a. v /stem of e ;

Sir R. PEEL said that it was only postponing the evil day to
defer the decision of this question, and he thought that it
would only be increasing the difficulty by deferring their deci-
sion till Monday night; and if they were disposed to resist en•
croachments, this was the day. He did not understand that
what they had done, or the allowance of this judgment, was in
any way a recognition of the jurisdiction of the Court over
their privileges. He had been a party to the resolutions
respecting their privileges. On the previous occasion they had
acted under advice, and, after eight days, had consented to
plead. This they had done when Lord Campbell was Attorney-
General, and he would say that the privileges of the House
had never had a more zealous or able advocate.—(Cheers. )
He had been quite inclined to exert the power cf the House,
and it was by his advice that they had pleaded the general
issue. It was on this high authority that they had consented
to plead, and hedid not understand the doctrine that this was an
admission of the jurisdiction over the privileges of the Hou7.
It was a :doctrine and a distinction which he could ;sot ac-
knowledge. If they went to the ulterior fact, and 'ame to the
resolution of allowing the Sergeant to pay, the-- l would be un-
able to go further; but he thought the
most advisable plan
would be to give a distinct notice to '.ne parties not to carry
their execution into effect. By P..ns means they would relieve
themselves from any false position, and then they would
be able, if they , th' - t.
eget proper, to commit those
who were guilty 'of any breach of their privileges.
He (Sir R. Peel), objected to the motion of the Hon. Member
for Montrose, 'ter he was not prepared to enter intoany contro-
versy on tt'.e subject. He thought tte Consequence of his mo-
tion w"..suld be to increase the di.: culties by which they were
',rounded. But while he Admitted that he was not prepared
to enter upon this disec.asion, he was fully prepared to vindi-
cate the privileges of the House.—(Cheers) And if the
House intended io uphold those privileges, he would tell them
that it was ebsolutely necessary that they should make up their
minds not to deal with subordinate officers merely. That
cesnse could give no satisfaction. They were, on the
one hand, dealing with mere agents—sheriffs and other
officers; and, on the other, with the Court of
Queen's Bench. He said that they must deal
with higher personages, they must deal with the Court of
Queen's Bench itself. The Mouse had, by a resolution passed
at a former period, determined to uphold and maintain their
privileges—privileges which were given them not for their own
benefit—not that they might be capriciously exercised—but for
the interests of a free people.—(Cheers.) If they were pre-
pared to uphold and exercise those privileges, they must take a
different course from that adopted in 1840. They ought to be pre-
pared to go to the utmost extremity in vindication of their privi-
leges, but before they did so,they musticonvince their own minds,
their own consciences that such a state was absolutely necessary,
and that no other resource was left them. They must not only
conceive themselves that such was the case, but they must im-
press the same opinion on the minds of the people of England.
The prominent feeling was at present in their favour. Fortu-
nately the period had not yet arrived when extreme measures
were necessary. He should recommend that for the present
the defendant should be allowed to try his case at bar, to appeal
from the decision of the Queen's Bench, and to carry the ques-
tion before a Court of Error. He trusted that he had con-
vinced the House that he himself had shown no disinclination
to vindicate the privileges to which:they were justly entitled, but
as they had a powerful minority in the House to contend with,
he was not willing that they should press the question to an
issue. But still, if no other means were left them, if no'other
resources were at hand, he should be prepared to proceed with
the question in that House, and to maintain privileges which
he believed were essential to the rights and liberties of a flee
people—privileges which were now invaded by a decision of
the Court of Queen's Bench—a decision which he believed to
be unjust, and which ought, in maintenance of the rights and
privileges of that House, to be set aside.—(Cheers.)
Mr. BERNAL was free to confess, from what he knew of the
constitution of the House, that any report emanating from
the Committee at any future period, could not put the House
ina better position for deciding the question than they were,
in at that period. He thought that, in the course of the dis-
cussion, much matter had been introduced which had no re-
lation to the subject, and he should, therefore, very shortly
recal the attention of the House to the real matter at issue.
He thought that where there was a choice of difficul-
ties they should adopt a mild before they pro-
ceeded to an extreme course, and, therefore, he entreated
his Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose to give way to those
whose opinions in that House were entitled to some weight, and
not to place himself in a situation which he would afterwards
regret—a situation which would effectually prevent him speak-
ing again in that House.
Mr. HUME said that the Hon. Member who had just sat
down had cautioned him against putting himself in a position
which would prevent him opening his lips in that House, yet
the Hon. Member had admitted that be (Mr. Hume) was right
in bringing forward his motion, and yet, that Hon. Member had
not the moral courage to support him. —(Cheers. ) The
Learned Solicitor-General had shown them the evils, explained
the difficulties of their position, and, after all, he had sat
down without telling them what to do. Were they to allow
themselves to go on in error, to get deeper and deeper into dif-
ficulties until they would eventually find themselves inevitably
and irrecoverably committed.
The House then divided. The numbers were—
For the adjournment
Against it
Majority .
ACADEMICAL INSTITUTIONS (IRELAND) BILL.
On our re-admission to the gallery we found the House in
discussion on the subject of proceeding with the Irish Acade
mical Institutions Bill.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM replied that he could say
that the Government did not propose any material altera-
tion in the Bill in consequence of the memorial of the
Roman Catholic Bishops, which, however, they thought
worthy of a full consideration, but the Government were de-
termined not to depart from the principle of the Bill.
Lord JOHN MANNERS begged leave to suggest that the
discussion of so important a measure might be postponed, with-
out inconvenience, to next week.
Sir R. INGLIS objected to proceeding with the discussion
at that late hour.
In answer to a question from Mr. S HEIL,
Sir R. PEEL said that it would be left open to the Catholic
cdmmunity to provide professors if they pleased, but there
would be no interference on the part of the Government.
Mr. OSBORNE said that as an Irish liberal Protestant he
would support every measure which would promote the educa-
tion of his countrymen, but he greatly regretted to see in the
memorial of the bishops a demand that the professors of
materia medics should be Roman Catholics. He deeply re-
gretted that whilst he laboured himself to enlarge the liberties
of his Catholic fellow-countrymen, he could see on their part
a disposition to restrict the liberties of others.
Sir W. JAMES would like to know if this Bill advocated
what Mr. O'Connell called the voluntary principle.—(Cries
of " Oh, oh," and " Order.")
Sir J. GRAHAM said he had had some experience in Par-
liamentary business, but he should say he had not heard any-
thing like the course pursued in reference to this Bill.—( Hear,
hear.) He had every disposition to answer questions, and he
had answered several, and all he could say now was, that this
Bill had been framed with a view to establishing a national
system.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. B. HOPE—This had been called a system of acade-
mical education, but not religious. Now, he would wish to
know if this was to be a system of academical education, or
such a system as Ireland could afford.—(Cries of " Oh, oh,"
and " Don't answer.")
The question was then put that the Bill be read a second
time.

Lard JOHN MANNERS said he never in his life rose in
that Howe with greater reluctance upon any question than he
did in rising to propose the rejection of the Bill now before the
Home, as proposed by her Majesty's Government; but the
nature of the measure was such as obliged him, however pain-
ful to himself, or wearying to the House, to oppose it, 2nd
state his reasons for doing so. He had heard this 'salted a
measure for giving education in Ireland, Now, he should say
he thought education a very different thing. He never could
call this an educational measure so long as it contained such
a clause as the one he now held in his hand, and which was to
the effect that no religious test should be applied to any of the
pupils, or any of the candidates for the privileges or offices of
the colleges. He knew not what might be the feelings of
Hon. Members on this or the opposite side of the House,
on this part of tho 'subject ; but this he would
say, that lie was as anxious as any Member
of the House to see ample justice done to the
people of Ireland; but he felt bound to say, after the de-
claration he had heard from the Right Hon. Baronet the Se-
cretary of State for the Home Department, of his determina-
tion to adhere to the principle of the Bill, he had no other
course open to him but to move the rejection of the Bill. He
knew he would be met by the assertion that the measure was
founded upon the systems of education in force in foreign
ceuntries ; but he would contend for it that nothing could be
more mischievous than the systems that had of late obtained in
France and in Prussia. In fact, the volcano on which France
at present stood ought to warn this country in time not to imi-
tate the example of that country. He would ask was he not
warranted in opposing this mca•ure when he saw the names of
fifty of the bishops of the Anglican Church express their oppo-
sition to the measure, because they looked upon it as a system of
education which threatened to rend the country to pieces.
Whatever might be the effects of such a measure in this cram-
try, he would say, that it would produce results far worse, and
more deplorable, in Ireland. Ile had heard of one ins,',,ance of
a person being promoted to a high office for end^;,vosssing to
alienate the Roman Catholic people from their religion in Ire-
land, and of another instance in Spain, where the Order of
Isabella was conferred upon an indivihal for doing the same in
the Basque Provinces. Now, he would be far from advocating
such acts, but he had no doubt, that it this Bill would not have
that effect in Ireland, it would prove to he worse than useless
as an educational measure. He well knew in what the diffi-
culties of Ireland consisted, and he was aware how religious
differences in that country had compelled many to take parts
in them that they could have wished to avoid. He might
be told., that before Honourable Members rose to
oppose this measure, they might to be prepared with a
better one. Now he had no objection to say lie was prepared
with a ; but before he submitted it to the House he
would say, that however it might fail in attaining the object
in view, he could not conceive any measure so bad or ineffec-
tual as the one now before the House. Ile would like to
know what probability there was of this measure ever being

MIE„DRFT:cAT _ -----
TOO
rADVERTISEUENY.I A •NTD _
iv,-, 00f
CONFER ON THEIR 11OLDERS•v 50. , moo
MEDICAL
)INSTILITY 141 11 11
TO THE EDITOR OF ril orobereliiit
t(
hl
iaSktenthc,ta--odeSt(T)oratsll
eßoibietlalhai
nandeydaaanddkinpTioa:mwieeald,lg,aient
dowf_i.,,lll3otheiritil;ol.faivens.sidool
is itu.bile,or!
wasqer
question
willevu sel
jointdsi
o hna
sa
Messrs.
ale
cannot
absbnse
orne
:on.
yt
Morisonimpossible
d
e by virtue of their diplomas neither r!,,sl'a truly Orb, pi;
o or
ut
to
btuihntetehxapot public,saiing
tar!
b'',,,r......,,,11,0ri0ge5mine1:01 „
se,e:
ri1id.4.b,t:67,0
clans who cure, and therefore do not make li!' jog to lig,oo,
nature and character of medical diploma's. A fil , sea 1
Ike. . ...the,' °ll belt'
Hygeists deny that poisons are raedicinos!..„4 shoe
support the worst of monopolies. All oi'
hibited.
op.emaxerm...... 4....e.15, IT C.°.
MARKET INTEL , IlfsiOr
Prices per ton atCtnaelLoser, trl-4eot.:-.,lPi:lolkll\''6gestil
14s 6d; Carr's Hartley, 17s 6d ; Chester ,65; '15f,(01, VP t,
Hartley, 17s 6d ; Ord's Redheugh,,,,,'D t", WY i- , g elo on,
Haswell,.ll
ote tu tro
onni ,: e 17s
Tees,
sfis
ssl9679ddsd;
Hartley, 14s ; West Hartley 17s 3d ; "1 1436" 1659",/,,
Wylam, 15s ; Wall's-end, No'rthuinberlsO..,t gettoo,oolll,
17s 3d ; Braddyll's Iletton, 18; 6d ; L''' 1s 6dltreoghal
;sHhoettttoonn,, 18s 6d 6; 1, IC , 131...1.4
17 ; Brown's Deanery-, 17s 6d • Eden gar Tee& 1°
°A)
' ---
orrent, of
'.ere 00_11 by
;6cHl;artSle)uyt,ll7sl).—'ll_____rSliharaip's 1t...._74VeC1:204.9y .-- ~ of
(From the London New Price C there `‘``-' beck.' 0
SUGAR.—For West India Muscovado°
__wildly
.ntity to
buyers for all purposes, but business was %At. the 4714 lel'
the small and inferior assortment at osier; 7 for the
.„4„ 4
amounted to 200, making the total o.
es is per "001:14
ds; 411voarrritso,nt,:espo3d0:,.3.,:;
1.1 e,,,
hhds and tierces, and the adsenee,airicsvere e°lllPe 040
REFINED.—To.day the home sra.s.e r cater for $
oa
lumps,; 7os for brown, and 7ls to 7O
I pepurchssed•
sr'
p all offered has been e
• have agelu `an the '
M A u arriu s. —The deliv
disposed of nearly
Crushed Sugar is held for a
eries to 3sBgse;dYPer_enteeded title
diceh
rivals. Some merchants have
they had.
EAST INDIA.—A further gUaathose of this of
bbilt,g
which rule 6d to is per cwt on
. vef 750 bets'
a cargo o 0 0
POREIGN.—This afternoon a tioatin, for
_40,0
..,
02s Der ewt. ry hare,Proit
200 brls Porto Rico were sold at s, 1,/ Antigua, at!
soldlsAi:atL
tA1.98 ssl6Et
oso.; —2
BO Sse, !el Demerara 16 Iplf6e sr66en ode htita co lit a 7.
~ks e'
Se:: alfc:r
te
,escie 1:118:b 5L1....
COFFEE.—This afternoon Mochalwbase :100750,0ratefj:keed:fic,"
nesTsxwAa.s_chlnecipkoerdt.ers Wheasytelmndainaifesltdedatfithroe :6-1:
assireb; I°l
ati auctionia sold at steady prices.
Indio are wanted, but owing to the adviteeem, 011'1'1
market is firm for Ceylon. s°
0
i the 11 too be:ii
refrained from offering any at public sale, oms.,.ehas:riee!'_,;et
shovt n on the part of the trade generally to Polo irt .10;00
BUM, BRANDY, AND HOLLANDS,--
green, but we have still no improvement t 0 olden 1, the
full ratellyl ote or
manifest firmness, and will not sell but at is 0 'riot
id to
are held with firmness, and for proof 19 ' 0 WIPP" of
rates insisted upon, but only a limited busioe_d, ore ctsolo,4l
acted. Demerara has met with a fair deroviihe relaittee„oo
2s 6d to 2s 10d. Calcutta is wanted, bo.t
e'ss. An et so
holders to sell at former rates checks bus's' assedy,4 as!, to
desire has been manifested to purchasefd of. 't Is .1 to
former terms large parcels have been disPs:tation, 'Q. sob,
several parcels have been taken for Or_ /4010,900 coal
Is 9d, and fine fit for home consumpind ter g 0 it 00
2s 9d per gallon. English Corn Spirits lueicet'oe titter
SPICES.—This afternoon Pimento at
eserolost,
to,
rates, at a decline of I. per lb. China lir they I°oo
all taken in at Is per lb. Cinnamon wa9 rttoninet rste' g*l
CocoA.—This afternoon British Planta,. 4 60 . do ,c
tion, and 342 bags at public sale were all snlalopeoi 500;4
Fite rr.—ln Currants there hasjbeen more
_ndipg, ils 06,11
last week's quotations, but importers dcais foOSI off O._ re,
has checked further operations. Of Galen. baskets gs beePoiss
have been considerable at 40s ; DeDiEg 1,0 in hrts 0, IP
at 30s ; for Chesine Raisins 393 pens en red Sal sfteli
fused. For the common deseriptem,..,,ing. „toe yr
there are buyers at 38s, and very littl 07;
loci' :10iiet 00
IR ic E.—This afternoon Bengal Bigetr eh
at ,„.,
._,
but further advanced rates being asked :,. Ol3 - 4e,
3,410 bags at public sale were all taken I. .110'..0
former rates of 6d to is per cwt. .11 a gill
sea
.1 rr de:
SALTPETRE.—The market has still lot P. betL ~,e
Rough, and prices are drooping. has .50 anega;ion 61; Itsfe ' J
reduced rates having been taken hos
feral Farce 000;
mane, and at 27s 6d to 28s per COt se Dist ia
,s:
disposed of. Ce I°ll Ce°Al'Eltes' Ili;
OlLS.—This afternoon 100 blids /
souther° #•fer r- per; ,01
at 28s 3d to 28s Gd per cwt for auction; sold at 05 elleS.oll, P-
cellent request, and 100 tuns at ~, speroVor 00'
..th
at 26/ to 301 lOs for low to fine 441 t° 15s ' ofsSso
tuns at public sale selling at 841 .5 pkifir sto to
851 15s for Ileadmatter. sale 4o refl-
. „,oblic and io .09, 6ai
TALLOW.—This afternoon a. svs 34, po Or
syj
American Tallow went at 37s 64 to
9uins °f, 36, t!lf 5j
t 0 36s ; 13 casks of African, 405; d. se i‘ielteTiorelle
40s 6d ; 50 casks of North Anler'en 40s' 'la'
3'7.9 casks of New South Wales 375 t 0 ffs:
to 36s 6d per cwt. ---- sZilg oiOD`J,
• _.--- ----- 31A6, gLI 05e
andy gill er (I,i,
COLEURN'S NEW MONTI intere.,Ageo
gi,
JUNE is one of the most varied
ei,e telly) ‘':-rcbrlett
of this favourite periodical that,%, ~Ivinitniel; 01,Po'ipt'of
It opens with one of Ingolds4f j3rotbslisS ritsle° 0f
full of wit and whim, called ;I-, '_,,et, ci CO, flltl,,er
ton," a lay of St. Thomas A lier.,,e 01) rotitio, i 0
.1.4
contribute 3 an article on the c05,1;.71. be 'rste4,4.llo,
the Court of George II , which(
_lr.lo.` inte ;01 ;,,fioyf
The
bell', o eoltri'fig tbr:,'"l„ l'eto'f
desirable in
for all wito),..iteritri rise afortl,,,,
'Majesty's Bal Costume.
Reminiscences of Thomas CoroP ropec,.d. ..,otie,,,,
of the most interesting particuloorfloto filo' oticiroa, ;it
Hope, from the pen of an i t' orld :0 Pr poa ,
• cleve i'° tall Oa°
into the Royal .AcademY is a ier's horlti OS hf
the present exhibition. ttCheriviit c of I.,o,_ction 0
the Hon. G. Sydney SlBYthe, ` DiVest ,atisl9'..ter, 054,
rsarlers ; and the " Sketch of tn,,_ area lie lat,fit 0)12,4
and Stovvell" will be perused tv.,,y;.,fof '_, to tP,., ret'.,
all who ha'e read Mr. Twisss 1 lw,oitio",,etell 1,,400!,
• , and st . a alt 1 0 coPwthcl,
contains many correction- ~;rite ~ tee 3 ~11 ~,
Besides these paioors we have Vb,al,crts uoia,d,c,jv
Priggins," callud " The `Steep 0. 0 131-,_Dt9 an of
Gun of Mrs. Trolloids anic!;"-' ~ Dig',D Brody° of
Travels," and Mr. Maxwenb
inters ° °Olt 0,
with the completion of the i,, # ace ,rs l'
bee
tin 0 Ilt- 0 Cu"
Excursion up the Oronooko.
__The _.,,, ~ _a 0,0,
BELL'S LIFE ix J...
the four days' sports at Erooln ‘v,l. „ way 11,°ile_ sisll3iis•
accompanied with a portrait ra
of Fed's
0;0011, 7-
-
graving of the Surrey Cop.
r ri
raturds9 efte__-----
oND°llgi be e'en 3507013.1 -..j;e• 19'
, It'
liehed in time to send by all the .
larpment of Bell's Life is in pragr&_" - ---- iv VAlliet+
r Of ' pa
On the 28th of MaV, at Clifton, ore'vedf ° toe,
Ac
13181.11Silie "'ifs twill 04'
Clutterbuck, vicar of 'Xeinpitt.orL7,,. _ear
_. 401)9
the one still-born, the other li:vs'avi. villa, "of sotal, of J
Oa th® 28th of /tlaY, at •Abcry, EST' 00 lad, if, of
T Ar• (-)le° • hburYt
diesel, the lady of • , ~,,,, tile 11
f golt fJOP
08th °
Forster, Vsri , of a dau gill ecre.
on the _ of the b
At Hampton Court I..'a a
0;. n &night% ,3dy i 11,1
Alfred Montgomery, I'sqqt ilrighloll, tn '
_. j......c;./
On the 28th of MoY,t et " .
On tile 28th or l‘lay, , Sil*
Aare,
Alfred Spalding, Aill ai'
-, s leotta' 1 6°.'r
°f a s°''..-----1‘,1)•„ eb.c3 peoP 'lto'
1 at the oiat3,lciotri
ofvtiitoue
late
oi
On the 28th of
On the 314 of Mareis,l;
sistant-
Surtliter lnto'
Hobert Noyes. M.D.,
r0t11,4 ilaNrtllerY'o,ute, hrs '
to Catherine Alotiat, y . 5t,17,,,,e0
jzo.
e., 0
late A
liencral .. . 131g4V. et :. e i•in"ci::,e)l,ter oof it'll
f
On the .27th of May, ,:."-e6t dolt" F.,:oter• ea
Frances, vottliF,.;.,,,ii _
~ar . ht
Liverpool, to , ..co.toa s 111 ,_.f..l'-----"' joilh ~,
°ll.l:l,7tni Illoornsbtill ,- ~...
too
r • of AlPhn ,-, ___________; AO ,Kae., otu
Tozer' '2:1!---------- of
P- , nott, °l' 'Po' 1;00
fay', El'z'' bri,ig° iOP
1, of (-11"' boo' ' 'AV'
Mr. NV. C. Tidy, Sur.4l-:°' ~t, canoo late j
t 1 00
Ou the 25th of ay, , tof sec
, relic 1,
Rhea Foisiek. , ribetu, _ieb ,rsoce ._,r
oa the 25th of Nay ' t Green" ovo, .1' oleo'
On the 25th of 1%
f Lonclon-stree ~.. _iticti-t .„,5... ..
Richardson, o ....a__ at can, .04, 1. (Igo A
On the `26th of
ei;i();:lar , ,„ ~_„,i,,,
ileri9c.ter,
_5(l.
daughter of the lat 1 . ‘4l,i-roli,f`..:ei,iiall
rii tr,
Oa the 27th of M:l7l,,etin'te jerem
youngest daughter 1 the , . ' heti' 31,') I
_boo, ,
is . ,

fOtiet'l
gi-JgDO $O, - 0
I,w-rion: Printed and Published bi ,_, ofiCePpooti
N. 112. Strand. Printer, at q'fte '!..7 ; a 00 I°
ytren, in the "4'rocinct of tk/ ;'a fop 1
1114400, Saturdsp bloy frlt 1445.

•,,t,_-"H:7:::Fr4:> e"el
S