The Sun.
London, England, 1827-03-14 00:00:00

STATE OF IRELAND.

Mr. PORTMAN presented a Petition from Bland-
ford Forum, against any further concession to the Roman Catho-
lics. The lion. Gentleman observed, that it could not be ne-
cessary for him to say that he differed from the Petitioners. It
was to him a matter of exceeding concern, that he could not
agree on this important subject with a large body of his Constitu-
ents, for whom he entertained the greatest respect. Without
pretending to go again into the general question, he would merely
say, that he quite concurred with the great writer who bad said
that when gentleness and harshness gamb'ed for a kingdom,
gentleness was sure to be the winner"—( Hear, hear, hear.) He
was desirous to put a question to the Right Hon. Secretary of
State for the Home Department on a subject of no common im-
portance. It might appear presumptuous in him ; but as an
English Countyry Gentleman, as a representative of the People,
called upon to aise taxes for the purpose of supporting a system
which the Hon. Member for Londonderry had characterised to be
such that in his opinion Ireland was in a state which could not
possibly last, he felt it to be his duty to ask the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman if he had any measure in contemplation to propose to that
House calculated to ameliorate the condition of Leland ; which
condition had been described by every Hon. Member who was
acquainted with that unhappy country, as the most miserable
that it was possible to conceive ? He addressed the Right Hon.
Gentleman, because he believed that he was the organ of that part
of his Majesty's Government which corresponded more especially
with the Executive Government of Ireland.
Mr. Secretary PEEL, in answer to the Hon. Gen-
tleman, begged leave first to state that although his Hon. Friend,
who represented a populous and prosperous County in Ireland,
was connected with him in his official duties, as well as allied to
him in private life, yet that these did not make him (Mr. Peel)
responsible for what his Hon. Friend had said in that House;
nor must it be supposed that he took all his Hon. Friend's state-
ments for granted. He begged that his own opinions might be
judged of by his own speeches. When the Hon. Gentleman
asked him whether lie had any specific measure in contemplation
for ameliorating the State of Ireland, and removing the evils under
-which that country laboured, he (Mr. Peel) thought the Hon.
Gentleman's. own good sense must have induced him to anticipate
the answer which he would receive to his question. He certainly
had not in contemplation at the present moment any specific plan
by which he hoped tome able to remove the evils in Ireland. Re-
specting the nature and extent of those evils he had recently taken
an opportunity of fully stating his sentiments ; and he did not
think it necessary to repeat them: While he was on his legs he
was desiroua of replying to some observations which he un-
derstood had been made before his arrival at the House by an Hon.
Gentleman on the third bench opposite to him (Mr. H. Grattan).
He had been told that the Hon. Gentleman had adverted to the
discharge from prison, in Dublin, of a person of the name of
Sheehan, who had been convicted of an assault on Mr. O'Connell,
and had reprobated the conduct of the English Government in se-
lecting this instance for interfering in the Administration of jus-
tice in Ireland, and sending orders to the Lord Lieutenant to libe
rate this person. In the first place he begged to express his en-
tire confidence that the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland would admi-
nister justice in that country with impartiality. In the next place
be must state, that the general practise was not to interfere with
the Lord Lieutenant in the exercise of that discretion ; and that
froth that practice there load been no departure in the present case.
The petition was brought up and read. On the motion that
it be printed,
Mr. PORTMAN, as an Englishman, could not
help feeling the greatest alarm at hearing the Under Secretary of
State declare that Ireland was in a state which could not possibly
continue.
The petition was then ordered to be printed.
• General HART presented petitions from seven
parishes in the county of Donegal, praying that politic:ll power
might not be given to the Roman Catholics.—Ordered to be printed.
HAYTI.

Mr. BERNAL seeing an Hon. Gentleman in his
place, connected with the Colonial Department, wished to know
whether an authentic copy had been received of the Code Rural
or any other documents throwing a light on the condition of
labourers in Hayti; and if so, whether there would be any objec-
tion to their production.
Mr. W. HORTON said that he could not see any

objection to the production of whatever documents might be in
the possession of his Majesty's Government on the subject.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION.

Lord EBRINGTON presented a petition from the
Catholic inhabitants of a parish in the county of Waterford, pray-
ing for Emancipation. With few exceptions, the individuals who
had biatied the petition were in -the lowest station of life, and
thereforeb could not expect to derive any personal advantage from
the measure. From his personal knowledge of those individuals,
however, he was persuaded that they were as deeply anxious
on the point as if it involved their own dearest interests.—
With every deference for the good sense and discretion of the
Roman Catholic body in Ireland, he was convinced that the present
state of affairs in Ireland was such that they could not remain as
they were.—(Hear, hear.)—He believed that no one who was
connected with Ireland could contemplate the present condition of
that country without the greatest alarm.
The petition was then brought up, read, and ordered to be
printed.
Lord EBRINGTON presented a petition from the
Commissioners of the Somerset Trust, praying for the Reduction
of the Expences attendant on Turnpike Bills in that House.—
Ordered to be printed.
Mr. HI.I.VE presented a petition from the Seamen
of South Shields, praying for the Revision of the Corn Laws.
Mr. W. HARVEY trusted that the persons who
assumed to be the landed interest of the country, would give an
opportunity to those who differed from them to be heard on this
very important question.
On the motion of Mr. HUME, an humble Ad-
dress was ordered to be presented to his Majesty, praying that he
would be graciously pleased to give directions that Returns of the
Population of Upper and Lower Canada should be laid before the
House.

On the motion of Sir J. NEWPORT, Accounts
were ordered to be laid before the House of all sums of money
which had been raised in Ireland by Grand Jury Presentments for
various purposes, during the last five years.
Mr. HANDCOCK presented a petition from a
number of the inhabitants of Athlone, stating that they had
learnt with surprise that a petition had been presented to that
House in November by a person of the name of Flanagan against
the return of R. flandcock, Esq. for the Borough of Athlone,
with a number of signatures, which were forgeries ; and praying
for redress.

After a few words from Mr. Wynn, Mr. Hume, Mr. Calcraft,
tnd the Chancellor of the Exchequer. the petition was ordered to
be laid on the table, and to be referred to the Committee.
Lord G. CAVENDISH presented a petition re-
lative to Agricultural Distress.
Mr. A. DAWSON presented three petitions from
places in the county of Louth, in favour of the Catholic Claims.
Dr. LLISHINGTON rose to bring before the
House irsubject intimately connected with the character and welfare
of one of the principal West India Colonies. He would call the
attention of Parliament and the country to an act of lawless vio-
lence and indecent outrage, perpetrated in violation of every re-
spectable feeling, and instigated by a Clergyman of the Church of
England, against a most unoffending individual. On last Christ-
mas day, in the parish of St. Ann's, Jamaica, the militia were
called out to keep watch and guard over the slave population.—
They had previously assembled to hear divine worship in the parish
church of St. Ann's. On that occasion, a Sermon had been
preached by a Mr. Bridges, the Chaplain of the Bishop of Jamaica.
The House would hear with astonishment the sentiments and ex-
hortations of the preacher. He had thought fit to deliver to this
regiment of militia, a discourse couched in the most inflammatory
language, censuring the establishment of missionaries in that island
and exciting a body of men with arms in their hands to acts of
outrage. Immediately after that Sermon, a company of the regi-
ment was left on guard. Durinj hat time, about midnight, they
made an attack upon the house of a Mr. Ratcliffe, which was
inhabited by that person himself, with his wife and chil-
dren. No less than fourteen muskets were discharged at the
house. They were not casual shots fired by an intoxicated rabble,
or by p.cret incendiaries. They were discharged at consider-
able intervals, by the word of command, by the soldiers of the
regiment, and not merely upon the excitement of the moment.
Nothing had been done by the public authorities for the protec-
tion of this individual, and no officer, civil, or military, had come
to his assistance. He (Dr. Lushington) had not gone to the
length of the accounts which he had received from Jamaica; nor
had he stated the case as strongly as he would have been justified
in stating it, by the accounts which had been published in two
Jamaica Newspapers. He trusted that the House would lose no
time in lending its weight and authority to punish guilt, as they
had in vain attempted to prevent its commission, by passing its
former Resolutions. He brought forward the present measure
not at the desire of any body of men, but he would state that the
person outraged was one of the body of Wesleyan Missionaries.
He had no connection with that body whatever, and he brought
forward the subject because it was an infringement of the princi-
pies of toleration, an attempt to suppress religious freedom.
Would the House believe, that upon the Sunday following, only
two days having elapsed, this very identical Clergyman, Mr.
Bridges, had the confident assurance to mount his pulpit, to al-
lude with satisfaction to the preceding outrage, and to recom-
mend a similar perpetration? He had also held up Mr. Wilber-
force to obloquy ; and had even gone so far, amongst other
topics of abuse, as to characterise him in the old Monkish
rhymes :

" Mel in ore, verba lactis,
Fel in corde—fraus in factis."
He believed this Mr. Bridges no longer held office; but means of
punishment might be found against the fountain of mischief, as
well as against the actual perpetrators of the outrage. He con-
fessed that, whatever the House might be, he was not at all
surprised at what had occurred. When be recollected the recent
shameful transactions at Barbadoes, and that no punishment had
fallen on the heads of the guilty, but, upon the contrary, the
culprits yet retained their situations, he was net astonished that
their impunity in offence had stimulated others to crime. He was
glad to say that a Colonel Cox, immediately he had discovered the
outrage in question, proceeded to investigate what had occurred.
The result of that inquiry, he (Dr. Lushington) did not know,
but he hoped that it might rescue the island from that foul impu-
tation which at present rested against it. He could not, however,
conceive that the inhabitants of Jamaica were to be considered
on the same low footing as those of Barhadoes. In the outrage
at Jamaica, Colonel Cox had instantly repaired to the spot, and
bad made immediate inquiries into the disgraceful transactions.
He (Dr. Lushington) had, also, seen two of the Jamaica
Papers, in which the violation of the law bad been reprehended
even in terms of stronger censure than he bad ventured to use
in that House. When he contemplated the talents that had been
displayed in the Jamaica House of Assembly, he felt it impossi-
ble that time darkness of superstition, and the degradation of sen-
timent which had given rise to this outrage, could long withstand
their influence upon the society of the island.—He trusted he had
not that night said a single word likely to increase the animosi-
ties reigning in the West India Islands. His desire was to con-
sult all parties, and to pay every proper deference to their senti-
ments. He wished neither side to be checked in its exertions,
hut was desirous that both parties should have an open course.—
The Learned Member concluded by moving for copies of all de-
spatche2 received from Jamaica, respecting an attack upon Wes-
leyan Missionary Meeting and Dwelling Houses in the parish of
St. Ann, in the month of December last.

Mr. W. HORTON said that despatches had not
vet been received which were absolutely necessary to give the
House certain information respecting the subject introduced by
the Hon. and Learned Gent.—With respect to the individual, to
whom the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had alluded (the Rev.
Mr. Brydges), he could never believe, until it were properly au-
thenticated, that that Rev. Gent. bad, in a sermon from the pul-
pit, excited the white population to acts of atrocity. It was not
too much to believe, that a Christian minister, preaching from
the pulpit to his congregation, could not be guilty of an act so
opposite from his sacred calling. He hoped the House would
not raise any unjust suspicicn on the conduct of the local autho-
rities on this occasion, which would have the effect of calling in
question their popularity in the country. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman read an extract from the report of the Missionaries, which
went to show that the Magistrates had rendered them every ne-
cessary support when required —lt appeared to him, that every
inquiry had been made on the part of the local authorities into
the transaction, and that condign ptlnishment had been inflicted
on the guilty. He considered it the safer course to pause till the
official accounts had reached this country.
Mr. F. BUXTON was of opinion that Mr.
Brydges might be guilty of the crime imputed to him, from the
general conduct of the Rev. Gentleman in the island. (The
Hon. Member then read an extract from a pamphlet, published
by Mr. Brydges, in answer to the one published by M. Wilber-
force, in which the Rev. Gentleman states the vast number of
marriages which took place among the slave population in the
parish to which he, Mr. Brydges, belonged.) In the March of
that year all these marriages were forced, not through the exer-
tions of the Rev. Gentleman, by the infusion of Christian princi-
ples, but merely as an answer to Mr. Wilberforce.
Mr. WYNN here interrupted the Hon. Gentle-
man. The Hon. ind Learned Gentleman, who brought forward
this motion, stated that these outrages arose in consequence of a

sermon preached by the Rev. Air. Brydges, and his Right lion.
Friend had stated to the House, that nothing was known officially
respecting these transactions. The Hon. Member proceeds to
show that Mr. Brydges may be guilty of preaching the sermon
alluded to, by proving to the House, that the statements in the
Learned Gentleman's pamphlet are false ; but the Heise was not
now discussing the statements of Mr. Wilberforce respecting the
West Indies, or whether those statements be well or ill founded.
Should a distinct motion be brought forward on that subject he
had no. objection to the discussion, but it could not come before
the House under the present motion.
Mr. P. BUXTON explained. If the Right Hon.
Gentleman had allowed him to proceed fur a few moments longer,
it would not be necessary for him (Mr. Wynn) to make so long
a speech to interrupt him. He would not now make any further
observations on the subject.
The motion was then agreed to.

COURT OF CHANCERY.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY rose "to bring forward the
motion of which he had given notice, for the returns of the ac-
counts of fees received in the various stages of bankruptcy, from
the Ist of October, 1825, to the lst of October, 1826. His ob-
ject, he said, was to separate the jurisdiction in bankruptcy from
the Great Seal. The Hon. Member for Corfe Castle (Mr.
Bankes) had given the family information that the Lord Chan-
cellor received no more than 8,0001. a year from bankruptcy.
But it was said on the other hand that the Chancellor received

_
20,0001. a year. He therefore thought that this subject was
well worthy of inquiry, and ought to be dearly ascertained. He
had shown the paper which he held in his hind to several gentle-
men capable of giving information on this subject, and he had
reason to believe that it would be found when the papers were
laid en the table, that the Lord Chancellor received from bank-
ruptcy alone, from the Ist of October, 1825. to the Ist of Octo-
ber, 1826, no less a sum than 30.0001. However, it appeared
that 10,0001. of this sum was given to the secretary of bank-
ruptcy and other officers connected with th•it branch. He would
now move. " That returns be made to the abuse of the amount

of all fees on the striking of 3,549 dockets, from the lst of Octo-
ber, 1825, to the Ist of October, 1826 ; the amount of fees on
the issuing of 3,272 commissions ; the amount of fees on the
issues of 276 writs of supercedeas ; fees on 1,281 certificates ;
fees on 823 petitions ; the amount of fees on 832 orders on peti-
tions ; also the amount of the fees on private galls or commis-
sions of supercedeas during the same period ; the fees paid for
office copies of affidavits by the parties in support of and against
such petitions ; an account of the total amount of fees receivad
at the Bankrupts' Office, not particularly stated in the foregoing
account ; together with a return of the specific appropriation of
. .

the fees for the same period."
Mr. HUME seconded the motion.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that the
Hon. Gent. who brought forward this motion, had said that the
Hon. Member for Corfe Castle bad made an unfounded statement,

...
by asserting that the Lord Chancellor received only 3,0001. a year
from bankruptcy. The Hon. Member did not appear to know
that a portion of the fees under the consideration of the House arose
in consequence of the Lord Chancellor being connected with the
commission of inquiry. He did not rise to make any objection to
the motion, but merely to state that it was not fair to move for the
return of fees of auy one year. It would, in hl, opinion, be the
proper course to move for returns since the last return was ri .1k•
to the House in the year 1811, and not to single out any one par,
_ _

ticular year. It was asserted that the Hon. Member for Corfe
Castle bad made an erroneous statement ; but he believed that the
whole amount of fees did not exceed 4,0001. a year, and the whole
emoluments of the office from the time of Lord Rosslyn to Lord
Eldon, did not exceed 15,0001. a year. His sole objection to the
motion of the Hon. Member was to the singling out of one parti-

cular year more than another.
Serjeant ONSLOW supported the commission of
bankruptcy and the Lord Chancellor.
Mr. BANKES, jun., asked whether the Hon.
Member wished only to procure a return of the fees payable to the
Chancellor, or the fees payable generally in bankruptcy?
Mr. D. W. HARVEY answered that the object of
the concluding resolution was, to state the appropriation of the
fees. The return would ascertain the fact, whether 5-6ths of the
fees were not received by the Lord Chancellor.
The SPEAKER put the question.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved for an
account of all fees in the different branches of bankruptcy from
1811 up to the present time, distinguishing the amount received
during each year. The fees were not received by Lord Eldon
alone, but by other individuals. Of the 21. Is. paid on the issuing
of each bankruptcy commission, only 1/. went to the Chancellor.
The utmost he derived during the year from bankruptcy foes was
4,0001. ;—it was less thaii that on the average.
Mr. HARRISON said it was the opinion of the
profession, and of commercial men, that the jurisdiction in bank-
ruptcy ought not to be taken from the Chancellor.
Mr. BARING thought the motion should be ac-
ceded to, that the House might know who were the persons de-
riving such large emoluments from this disgraceful system. If it
was felt to be a matter of such absolute necessity that the Law
Judges should have fixed salaries, how much more applicable was
such an argument to the Lord Chancellor—a Judge, who, sitting
by himself, by his own fiat, disposed of the properties of the
suitors. When it was recollected that there were forty millions in
the hands of the Accountant-General, some idea might be formed
of the judicial power of the Chancellor. He thought it derogatory
h done, e Lords,l
lors hip as
washe hadthe great hear
prized it
to the office to have it debated, night after night, how much
the Chancellor got from the suitors; or whether he 'got 10/. for
tHheous Chancellorship
walkingstated.
Considering
to the ba -
of
that the
of the profession, he thought that Judge was not overpaid by
what he stated himself to receive. It had been said, could
it be supposed that those exalted persons, the Masters in Chan-
cery, who derived their incomes from the number of sheets con-
taining the proceedings in their office, would augment business
and litigation to increase their fees? He answered such questions
by saying he believed they would ; he had no doubt about it.
Judging from human nature in general, he had no hesitation in
saying that that mode of paying the Masters was productive of
mischief. He thought it a matter of imperious necessity that all
Judea should be put upon a fixed salary.
After a few observations from Mr. W. Smith, Mr. Herries,
and Mr. Banker, jun., the motion was altered to the following
form :—" An Account of all Fees received in the different
branches of Bankruptcy from the year 1811 to 1826 inclusive,
distinguishing the appropriation thereof."—Ordered.
EXCHEQUER PROSECUTIONS.

Mr. HARVEY, in bringing forward the motion of
which he had given notice, observed that, among the abuses of the
law, none more required investigation than those relating to the
Excise. In comparison with the Excise, the abuses in the Cus-
toms were few in number, and, in oppression, light. There had
been 719 informations tiled under the Custom Laws from 1820 to
1826 inclusive. They were filed to recover penalties due to the
Crown, amounting to the sum of 580,186/. The fees were
23,789/.—(Hear.)—The House would surely be disposed to sub-
ject this system to some rigid inquiry, when they heard that in
one case to recover a penalty of 11/. 11s. (which, by the way,
was only recovered by selling the last of the defendant's property),
the Government expended in costs an amount of 1501. In ano-
ther instance, a prosecution was, instituted for a penalty of 6001
The costs incurred by the Government were 200/., and after they
were incurred, the defendant was compromised with for a sum of
60s. Was it not, then, of the first importance that the country
should see who were the parties that originated and controlled
these prosecutions, and by what motives it was probable they were
actuated? He concluded by moving for copies of the Bills of
Costs incurred in the various informations filed under the
Customs' Laws to recover penalties for a violation of those laws,
against certain persons.
The names of 20 defendants were appended to this Resolution,
the bills of costs in whose cases the Hon. Gentleman desired to see
produced.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said that it was extremely difficult for him to say off-hand whether
or not the particular cases specified in the resolutions of the Hon.
Gentleman were such as ought properly to be produced. He saw
no grouud generally for resisting the call to make a return of such
documents, but the only reason that induced him to hesitate was,
that he thought it a little singular that a selection should have
been made of cases which, when produced, would be found to
suit only some particular object.
Mr. W. BURRELL wished to call the attention
of the House to the evils, as he thought them, of the present
mode of carrying on Exchequer prosecutions. Suppose a man
had been charged with running goods on some part of the coast
of Sussex ; and he did not mean to say that goods were not some-
times run on the coast of Sussex—(a laugh;)---but suppose him
charged with such an offence,—the Attorney-General became
prosecutor, the offence was alleged to have been committed in
Middlesex, the defendant was told he must stand a trial, but
when or where be was left in ignorance. At length the trial was
fixedtocom(eanodn, iniuLtohnedocnas;e of a poor man, the trouble and the Sussex man must be brought up
to Loudon
ex-
pence of doing so were by no means small ;) the defendant knew
nothing of the defence be should use. He meant no personal re-
flection on the Attorney-General, he was stating facts ; but he
s thought that the proceeding was extremely hamming to a poor

man,—(Hear.)---But let the House see what happened subse
quently to the trial of the poor man, whose supposed case he had
stated to the House. Being brought up to London for trial, he
was advised to allow judgment to go by default. He was sent
back to Horsham gaol, where, he (Mr. B,) was sorry to say,
there was a very great crowd at present of that description of of-
fenders, to be imprisoned, and then to be enlarged on finding
sureties. But who would become security for such a man ? No
one. And the consequence was, that the judgment to fine secu-
rities amounted virtually, in several instances, to a sentence of
imprisonment for life. The course of proceeding (the bringing
the accused up from Sussex to London particularly) was incon-

sietent with justice.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that the
course of proceeding against which his lion. Friend's complaint
was directed, namely, that the smuggler who offended in Sussex,
was tried, not in Sussex, but in London, had been frequently
mooted by those who had at heart the introduction of any changes
that would improve the administration of the law. The point had
been over and over debated, and when it was said, " Why do you

not give the smuggler who has attempted a contraband trade in
any part of the coast round Sussex, the advantage of being tried by
a local Jury?" the answer was, that it was a consideration
somewhat germain to the subject, whether or not a jury, com-
posed of Sussex farmers, was that description of tribunal likely to
give an impartial judgment in the case of a Sussex smuggler. He
knew it to be the opinion of the best informed men that a Sussex
Jury was not the proper body to do justice in such a case. The
best-informed men deprecated any change of the present mode of
trying such cases (so far as the venue was concerned.) The
Kentish yeomen deprecated a change as to their county ; in short,
all men of judgment opposed an alteration in the course of pro-
ceeding which would let in the operation of local prejudices and
passions. But his Hon. Friend's complaint embraced another al-
leged grievance—namely, that the Sussex smuggler was kept in
ignorance of the time and place of his trial. But the habit of
trying such cases in the Court of Exchequer was of long standing ;
every person connected with the service knew it—every ordinary
smuggler knew it. He saw no objection to the motion ; but he
was anxious to remove the unfounded imputations cast upon one
of the Officers of the Board of Customs. Whatever opinion the
Hon. Gentleman was pleased to entertain of the labours of the
Law Officers of the Crown in Exchequer prosecutions, he would
only say, for himself, that they were labours which they would
consent to undergo for no private individual whatever. The very
last case he had been engaged in, he succeeded in getting a pretty
thumping verdict of 2.0001. against an established offender from
Essex. He would challenge the Hon. Gentleman to an inquiry
into the utility of these prosecutions, convinced that their expe-
diency would be easily demonstrated.
Mr. BERNAL said, that the whole of the evils
existing under the Revenue Laws might be immediately traced to
an extensive system of informations. What might be the dispo-
sition in high quarters to cherish and encourage such a system, it
was not for him to say. When he cast his eyes over the returns,
and saw so many defendants described as yielding nothing in the
way of penalty, and when he saw the amount of costs incurred in
those cases, he could not avoid thinking that there must exist a
disposition somewhere to multiply the number of Exchequer
prosecutions.
Mr. WYNN asked, in surprise, if the Hon. Mem-
ber meant to say that it was for the actual money which might
be brought into the coffers of the Exchequer, as the result of the
convictions of the defendant, that a prosecution was instituted:
and that if money were not so produced, the prosecution ought
to be deemed an unwise one? He should have been astonished to
hear that the Hon. Gentleman had expressed himself to any such
effect ; for, surely he must know that the primary purpose to be
answered by the proceeding, was the protection of the revenue,
and the holding up an example of punishment to deter from the
repetition of crime.
Mr. MABERLY considered the answer of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, as to the imputations against the
Solicitor of the Customs, complete.
Mr. J. SMITH was led to believe, from much that
he had heard, and what he witnessed himself also in Hastings
about a year ago, that there was in some quarters of the revenue
a disposition to connive at smuggling.
Mr. HERRIES defended the Solicitor of the Customs.
Sir J. NEWPORT observed that nothing could
be worse than the way in which the Excise Laws were

stered in Ireland.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
assured the Right Hon. Baronet that the fault was not with Go-
vernment.
Sir J. NEWPORT exculpated the Right Hon. Gentleman.
Mr. CpIi.TEIS admitted that some cases of hard-
ship had occurred in the dispensationof tfie ""Eichecilier Laws,
but of late the severity of the system had been greatly relaxed,
and in some cases within his own knowledge the Treasury had
remitted the fines altogether.
Mr. THOMPSON (of- Dover) condemned the
whole system of prohibitory duties, as wholly insufficient to sup-
press smuggling.—(Hear.)
Sir C. BURR .ELL was fully of opinion that after
all that had been said, it was high time to place some efficient
controul over the bringing of Exchequer actions.

Mr. Alderman WOOD spoke against these prosecutions.
Mr. HARVEY, in his reply, complained of the
language applied to him by the Chancellor of the Exchequer.—
The Right Hon. Gent. might rest assured, however, that no of-
ficial chastisement would shut his (Mr. H.'s) inmith, or deter him
from doing his duty.—(Hear).
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said the Hon. Member for Colchester seemed very "sore" upon
the subject.
Mr. HARVEY.—" Not at all."—(A laugh).
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
contended that he had a right to defend men whom he thought
unjustly attacked.—(Hear, hear!).—With respect to his " offi-
cial dignity," as it was called, he (the Chancellor) was not
aware before that he had laid himself open to the taunt of be-
ing particularly tenacious about it.—(Cheers and laughter).The motion was then agreed to.
Mr. H. GRATTAN postponed his motion re-
specting the Dublin Richmond Penitentiary till Tuesday next.
GENERAL TURNPIKE ACT.

The Order of the Day for the Howie 'zing into a Committee
on the General Turnpike Act being read,
Mr. HUME put it to the Hon. Baronet whether,
at that late hour of the night, he would persist in bringing so im-
portant a matter under the consideration of the House?
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE had been in the House
from half-past six o'clock, and it was unreasonable now to ask
him to postpone the measure further.
The House then went into a Committee.
Alderman WOOD had a clause to propose, of con-
siderable importance to the poor.—namely, to secure the for
ma.
tion of a footpath on the side of the roads, within four miles of
every market town or city.
Lord MILTON spoke of the importance of the
clause, and expressed his willingness to render it all possible support.
Mr. CRIPPS spoke of the difficulty of enforcing
such a clause where the roads were already formed.
Alderman WOOD, from the intimation that had
been given respecting this Bill, would withdraw his clause.—
Clause withdrawn.
After some remarks from Mr. SLANEY and Mr.
GORDON, the Bill was ordered to be recommitted on Monday.
On the motion that the Distresses in Ireland Bill be read--
Mr. GRATTAN thought, as the measure pro-
posed to introduce quite a new system regarding the mode of levy-
ing Distresses in Ireland, that it ought to stand over for a short
time so that it might be duly considered by the Irish Members.
Mr. S. COOPER said that it met with the appro.
bation of Irish Members ; but he had no objection to postpone the
committee on it till any day that might be desired.
The se:ond reading, was Postponed till this day se'nnight.
SINKING FUND.

The Report of the Ways and Aleans, continuing the resolutions
continuing the Annual Duties on Sugar, Pensions, &c., having
been presented,
Mr. HUME could not have a better opportunity
to inquire whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer still intended
to go on purchasing stock, and putting the country to the expense
of pretending to keep up a Sinking Fund, when it was notorious
there was not a shilling for such fund? He wished to know
what course the Chancellor of the Exchequer would pursue?
which, if continued, only tended to increase the gambling on the
I,Vere they still to go on with the farce about the Sinking Fund,
Stock Exchange?
Mr. HERRIES regretted that such an inquiry and
observations should be made in the absence of the Chancellor of
the Exchequer.
Mr. HUME said, that the importance of the sub-
ject must be his excuse for putting the question now.
Report agreed to, and Bills ordered to be brought in.
Mr. TENNYSON moved the second reading of
the Bill, prohibiting the use of spring guns.
Sir J. SHELLEY wished the Bill not to be

pre=sed forward now. teed a second time, and ordered to be
committed on Monday, on the understanding that the debate
on the Bill should be taken on that day.

THE MARQUIS OF CLANRICARDE.

Mr. CHICHESTER suggested to the Hon.
Member (Mr. R. Martin), who had a notice of motion for Thurs-
day, respecting alleged interference on the part of the Marquis of
Clanricarde in the Galway Election, whether it would not be ad-
visable to postpone such notice till after the Committee ors the
Galway election had made their Report ?—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. R. MARTIN replied that the Hon. Mem-
ber's objections would be more properly urged when he should
bring forward the motion.—(A lao:;b.)—His motion had nothing
to do with those merits of the elev;.:3a which were to be inquired
into by the Committee. The conduct which he imputed to the
Noble Lord, at that time an Under-Secretary of State, had
nothing more to do with Mr. Lambert and his election than
had the history of the Trojan war—(a laugh)—it had nothing
to de with Mr. Lambert's means of turning him (Mr. M.) cut
of the House, if he possessed such means ; and as be threatened
charges against the Noble Lord, lie thought it would be more
becoming in the friends of the Noble Lord to challenge him to
the proof. He would only add, that he desired to be considered
the foulest accuser if lie did not prove his charges.
Mr. CHICHESTER had only desired that post-
ponement should take place, for the purpOse of the more orderly
conducting of their proceedings. As to the charges, he was quite
sure that the Noble Lord would be able to justify what he might
have done.

—•----
Mr. C. W. WYNN observed, that the Hon,
Member (Mr. R. Martin) might be correct in his statement, that
the question for the Galway Election Committee was different
from the charges to be preferred against the Noble Lord ; but if
the wording of the Hon. Member's notice were to be taken as the
guide, it would be quite impossible, in discussing the motion, to
avoid bringing up the question of the Gal way Election. The
notice run thus—" That it is referred to a Committee of the
whole House to inquire into the unconstitutional conduct of Joins
Alick, Marquis of Clanricarde, at the late election of Represents,
tives to serve in Parliament for the county of Galway, he being
then an Un'ier Secretary of State for Foreign. A ffairs."—(Hear.)
How could they evade discussing the question of the Galway
Election on such motion? Ile therefore thought that nothing
might occur to prejudice the proceedings before the Election Com-
mittee, that the Hon. Member ought to postpone his motion till
after the decision of such Committee.
Mr. R. MARTIN repeated that the conduct of
the Marquis of Clanricarde had nothing to do with the question
to be investigated by the Election Committee ; that he would be
content to be termed the foulest accuser if he did not prove his
charges; but that if he proved them all, they had nothing to do
with Mr. Lai bert's case. He should prove that at the time when
the Marquis of Clanricarde went into the county of Galway, he
....-(Cries of Order, order, Chair, chair.)—Well, then, he had
only to say, he should certainly, on Thursday, bring forward his
motion.
Mr. HOBHOUSE said it was impossible that
such motion should not affect the question which an Election
Committee would have to try ; and unless it should be shown that
it would suffer by delay, he did not see how the Hon. Member
could avoid postponing his motion. But if he says he won't post-
pone the motion, why, then, there was an end of the subject.
Mr. MARTIN bowed, but made no reply.
Mr. LITTLETON said that the Galway Election
Committee was to be ballotted for on Tuesday; and as the mo-
tion was avowedly touching conduct at such election, it was so
unconstitutional, that he trusted the House would resist its agita-
tion till the Committee had came to a decision.—(Hear.)
The SPEAKER said it was certainly competent
to the Hon. Member to urge his motion when he pleased ; but
if he meant that it had nothing to do with the election, and
therefore could not influence the Committee, the wording of the
notice must bo altered, for, at present, it was a motion respecting
the Marquis of Clanricarde's conduct at the late election for Gal-
way.—(Hear, bear.)
Mr. R. MARTIN persisted in declaring that he
should bring forward his motion on Thursday. •
The Duke and Duchess of Clarence's Annuity Bill was post-
poned to Thursday ; and the other Orders of the Day being post-
poned, the House adjourned at Twelve o'clock.