Star.
London, England, 1831-07-13 00:00:00

reform certainly bad, but the question now under disesssion
was, whether counsel should be beard at the bar. (Loud
laughter, and cries of " No. no.'')
Lord O. LENNOI said, that the Interruptions which
had been complained of to the hon. member for Borough.
bridge's speech could not have taken place, for he had
counted 18 honourable gentlemen asleep during different
pans of it, including the right hon. member for Tamworth,
and the late Chancellor of the Esehequer.--(Laughter and
cheers.)
Sir C. FORBES would not fight under a mask, but would
fight under an able leader, if one could be found. He had
fought to the utmost, and would persevere. He only wished
he could turn ministers out (loud laughter) His object was
to throw out the bill and ministers too.

Dr. LEFROY hoped that he might seize the moment of
good humour to propose that both sides should now consent
to adjourn (cries of " no," and "
Alderman WAITHIHAN hoped that the ministers
would have the firmness to resist the adjournment. (Loud
cheers.) The country could not mistake the true motives
which actuated those who brought it forward. (Cheers.)
What was the use of continued discussion ? He had listen-
ed to all that had passed to-night; he had !wird a most
sudorific speech (shouts of laughter) from the hon. member
for Horoughbridge, and what was the result? Nothing hut
a repetition of what he had heard before.
Mr. G. HAN KES hoped that the di-cession might now
be brought to a close.
Lord INGESTR I E proposed that the member for Ik-
roughbridge should withdraw his motion, on an undeestand.
Ing that no further proceeding should to►e place, as con-
tinuing the present discussion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, as
it was now too late to proceed with the debate, he did not
contemplate any further proceedings, and should agree to
the noble lord's proposition.
Lord STORAIONT refused to be a party to withdrawing
the motion.
Lord J. RUSSELL stated the inconvenience of having
no person with whom an arrangement for facilitating the
business of the house could be made. He had fixed this
day for going into the committee on the reform bill, on an
understanding with the right hon. member for Tamworth
that the house should do so, and he should have fixed an
earlier day if he had not believed that this understanding
would have been adhered to by the right hon. gent.
Mr. PERCEVA L would consent to the motion being
withdrawn, upon an understanding that the debate could
again be resumed to-morrow on the Speaker leaving the
chair.

Sir C. WETHERELL opposed the withdrawal of the
motion.

The house then divided—
Against Sir C. Wetherell's motion .. 235
For

Majority .. ... .. —172
A third division took place, on a further motion for ad-
journment, made by Sir C. Wetherell and Lord Tullamore,
the numbers were 235 to ea

Lord BRUDENELL, seconded by the hon. Capt. Malt.
land, moved the adjournment for the fourth time, and a
lengthened discussion ensued, which lasted till half.past
three o'Clock, when Lord Brudenell withdrew his mo-
tion, which was again succeeded by a proposition from
Lord STORMONT, that the debate should be adjourned till
five o'clock this day. On this the house divided at ten mi.
flutes after four-214 to 44. A fifth adjournment was then
moved again, by Sir C. WITMIRELL.
[The subsequent proceedings are as fully detailed in our
own report as in that furnished by this hand.)