The Sun.
London, England, 1842-05-31 00:00:00

rHE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY!' MORNING, MAY 31, 1842.

causes of complaint with regard to the mode of electing
the Members of this. House shall be first redressed."
Mr. O'CONNELL Seconded the motion.

Sir ROBERT PEEL hoped the lion. Gentle-
man would not charge him (Sir Robert I eel)
with treating him with disrespect if he de-
clined entering into the discussion which his
motion and his speech seemed calculated to provoke. —,
(Hear, hear.) The 'Hon. Gentleman had brought
forward a motion of a somewhat similar character a
few nights since ; that motion had been fully discussed,
and on that occasion he (Sir R. Peel) had stated the
reasons which had induced him to come to a conclusion
diametrically opposed to the conclusion which hail
been come to by the Honourable Gentieman. The
present proposal' of the Ron. Gentleman went even
unt further until his former proposal had gone. The Hon.
Gentleman now contended that the 'House of Commons
was absolutely disqualified t om performing any of its
constitutional functions.--(Hear, hear.) If it was not at
liberty to propose an income-tax ; it could surely hardly
be at liberty to refuse the taritf.—(liear, hear, and
cheers.) It was disqualified ,from performing any
constitutional functions, and an immediate close ought to
be put to the business of the session. But there was
one question, which even those Who %%ere most anxious
i'or Parliamentary Reform ought to • ask themselves
before voting for the present motion. If the }louse were
thus disqualified from the performance of all its consti-
tutional function,, had it the power to reform itself?
lie thought, considering all the circumstances, that there
were good grounds for opposing the motion of the lion.
Gentleman, and those grounds had been fully stated the
other evening Be hoped he should be excused.
From entering into the discussion on the pre'.
sent occasion, as it appeared to him that the motion rather
related to larliawentary Reforrn than to the Income-
tax. The lion. Member professed a great regard for the
Working classes, and he (Sir R. Peel) would remind the
Hon. Gentleman that the financial measures of the Govern-
ment, more especially this one of an income-tax, were cal-
culated to atfbrd those classes great relief, by transferring
the burden of taxation front them to the upper orders of
society. lie trusted the lion.' Member would not•con-
:Sider that he (Sir Robert Peel) was treating him
(Mr. Sharman Crawford' with any disrespect if he
declined entering anew into the discussion of the
question of Parliamentary Reform.—(Loud cheering.)
• Mr. O'CONNELL admitted that the best mode of

discussing the question brought forward '''''''
Honourable Friend, would be as a distinct n4O-
- ; but if the Government did not do
justice to lion. Members, if they refused extension of the
suffrage, Hon. Members might find themselves bound
to offer more obstructions to the Government*than they
had hitherto done.
Mr. HUME had no hesitation in agreeing with Hon.
Members that the House did not represent Ihe people
of the country, or the Members who sat there their
opinions ; but he thought they were placed in this dif-
ficulty, that they were not able to get a direct
negative or affirmative to the question. lie could
nc.t agree with the Income-tax, and was desirous of
giving a direct negative to that, as he believed that other
measures might be proposed. Every hour brought
new proof that the measures proposed were only
palliative. The people wanted employment and
food, which they might have, if they could get
employment. The House by the laws it had passed,
and which were now to be continued, had placed a whole
community under the ban of starvation, till there was .ti
revival of trade, which never could take place till they
could have a free exchange with other countries. The
House had no feeling with the people, and all its acts
were in support of monopoly. He should support
the motion of his Hon. Friend, and he would oppose the
third reading of the Bill in every way he po.sibly could.
Lord J. MANNERS opposed the amendment. He
believed it originated with the Society for the Extension
of Parliamentary Reform.
Lord J.'RUSSELL said that the resolution would in.
capacitate the House from entering into any legislation
whatever. He should certainly vote against the amend—
ment.

Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
House divided, when the numbers were—

For the motion
Against it 156
Majority
THE ATTEMPT ON HER MAJESTY'S LIM

Mr. BARING here rose to bring forward the motion
of which he had given notice, when

of the successive annual additions to the body of the
clergy, ought to be not only sound in doctrine, but free
from suspicion. A statute was accordingly r.zssed
unfavourable to the Rev. Gentleman's appoinkineii:.
His case was a difficult one; he could not retract
Opinions which in truth he never held, and the same
inexperience which led him into equivocal expres-
sions in the passages of his sermons objected to, pro-
bably disabled him from explaining
,them ; if even a
remnant of human pride would permit him to explain,
in answer to a charge which. he knew to be un-
just, and which he believed to be hasty. Under
these circumstances Dr. Hampden assumed the ply,-
fessor's chair, with the manly resolution, as it appears
of setting himself right with the University and the
country rather by his conduct than by explanation or
apology. For six years lie has occupied that chair to
the entire satisfaction, as we have heard, of the Uni-
versity, and to the great advantage of the young
men whom it was his duty to instruct. The Heads
of the University have, therefore, resolved to do
themselves and Dr. Hampden the justice of
repealing the statute of 1836, passed while
he allowed himself to be misunderstood. One
would think so plain an act of justice. would be
received with satisfaction by all generous men. A
party has,-however, arisen to obstruct thegeneral har-
mony, and that.party is the party of Doctor Pusey
and. Mr. Newman. There can be no doubt what will
be the result of an attempt to prove Doctor Hampden
an unfit' lecturer, without being able to adduce even
one doubtful sentence from his six years' lectures.
But it is not against Doctor Hampden, it is against
the Church and the Protestant religion that the pre-
sent movement is directed.

I COURIER.—If ever a public man had reason to
exclaim " save me from my friends," it is the ex-
Member for Bridport, and present pretender •to
purism, after the disgraceful disclosures made on Fri-
day night, and all of which he brought upon himself.
Truly he must have been in the hand's of very injudi
dons friends, else he would, at all hazards, have avoided
publishing to the world his own shame, and pro-
claiming to the nation at large the hollowness of his
pretensions to political purity. It is in vain that Sir
T. Wilde exerts all his powers of special pleading in
behalf of his friend, Mr. Warburton—in vain that he
endeavours, by means of his forensic skill, to gloss
over the transactions in which that ex-Honourable
Member (for we beg to assure Mr. Warburton that
he now stands in the position of a man who has for-
feited more than his seat) was engaged, and of which
he appeared to be the prime mover; in vain that that
able, though not we believe very scrupulous, debater,
twists and tortures evidence with the view of white-
washing the immaculate and bribery-hating Mr. War-
burton, as sufficient has already appeared to fix on
him not only the knowledge of, but a participation
in, most discreditable proceedings. Without presum-
ing in any way to prejudge the merits of the dispute,
as affecting the respective parties thereto, or in any
way to anticipate the course the inquiry may take,
enough in our opinion was stated to show that, from
beginning to end of the negotiation which ended in
this open rupture, Mr. Warburton's conduct was
marked by disingenuousness, hypocrisy, and intrigue.

ELECTION COMMITTEE.
LYME REGIS.
CLOSE OF THE INQUIRY.
The Committee met yesterday at twelve o'clock, accord-
ing to the adjournment of Saturday.
Shortly after the opening of the business the Counsel
for the sitting Member stated that Mr. Penney declined
continuing the contest. The decision of the CoMmittee
on the last votes that were inquired into has led to this
resolution.

The protracted inquiry on this petition, which has
lasted twenty days, caused great dissatitfaction
he witnesses, who found their detention in London e\-
remely inconvenient.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
ROLLS' COURT, May 30.

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. THE MERCHANT 'VENTURERS'

SOCIETY OF BRISTOL.