Star.
London, England, 1828-02-26 00:00:00

sidered himself bound to take the course he had taken
that night, in justice to himself, and with a view to
prove the occur icy' of what he had stated on a former
occason, and in which he trusted their Lordships would
concur with him. What he had said was, that. the
Right Hon. Gentleman had declared in the face of the
public at Jaiverpool, that he .knew of no personal
enemies to
,Mr. Canniog—the declaration had even tip•
peared in a public Journal, and was held to have been.
made by the Right Hon. Gentleman, in his character
of Privy Councillor to his Sovereign, in the choice of
his Council ; that declaration the Right Hon. Gentle-,
man had made at Liverpool and in• Parliament; and
• his (the Marquis of Clantiearde's) ths Noble
Lord opposite was, to sshom that declaration had been
made? When first he made a statement on this sub.
jest to their Lord hips, he was followed by a flat con-,
tradiction and considerable censure. He had,. however,'
.soon after, the satisfaction of witnessing an admission
on the part of the Right Hon. Gentleman, however par.
tial and qualified, of the accuracy of his statement, and
that admission was probably made because the Right
• Hon. Gent. knew he stood in the presence of persons
who were acquainted pith the facts, and could correct
any error in his account of them. Was he not. sight,
then, in standing up before their Lordships to repeat
and support the accuracy of his original assertion?
Lord SEAFORD—My Lords, I am indeced to rise
on the present occasion by my regard for the memory
of.a late Right Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Canning)
• Atitith whom I was connected by .ties of the most intimtae
friendship—whose friendship shall ever be the pride of
• my life—nor is that. feeling likely to be abated by the
• fact of his having died. in the fulness of his fame—
soon enough for himself, too soon for his country. jr
is impossible for me
,to allude to this subject, my
Lords, without feelings of considerable pain; and this
feeling, I regret to say, has been made b till more dis-,
tressing by the course pursued by the Noble Relative
of my late Right Honourable. Friend—and the very
circumstance of the Noble Marquis's connection with,
my Right Honourable Friend and his family, renders
it still more painful to me, that I should feel it my duty
to contradict any thing he may have stated, and makes
me most reluctant to enter at all into a conflict with
the Noble Marquis. But as the Noble Marquis has
thought fit to repeat his statements of a former night,
on which occasion I forbore making any comments on
them, I regret that I-cannot now practice the same
abstipence, nor avoid troubling your Lordships with a
. few observations, in justice to my Noble Friend opposite
(the Earl of Dudley), and other colleagues of my late
Right Honourable Friend, at present members of the
existing Administration. And here let me declare to
your Lordships, that having had, in consequence of my
personal intimacy with my late -Right Hon. Friend,
mail opportunities of witnessing the habits of friend-
ship that existed between. my Noble Friend, the
Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and my late, Right
Honourable Friend, and the respect felt by my Noble
Friend for the transcendant talents, and other lighter
but more fascinating qualities of that Right Honourable
Gent!eman—and having also known the circumstances
under which my Noble Friend, took the office of Secre-
tary for Foreign Affairs under my Right Was. Friend,
and the confidence shewn by my Right Hon. Friend in
the Noble Earl's principles, and proved, too, by the fact
of his incrusting to him such an important situati•-m in
the Govetnment—l cannot bring myself to think that
my Noble Friend has lately accepted the same office
under the Noble Duke at tire head of the Government
. with any other than the purest motives. And having
had the same opportunities 4.1 observing the connection
between that same Right Hon. Gentleman and my
Rii..ht Hon. Ft irnd at the.head of the Colonial Depart-
ment—his steady attachment of twenty years to my
late Right Hon. Friend, and the political concord and
priva e friendship by which they were united—it is
(m.fo,sible for me to entertain any doubt of the feelings
by which my Right Hon. Friend was actuated in his
recent accession to office. My Lords, when I see these,
my Noble and Right Hon. Fr tends, made the objects of
meated attacks, neither Parliamentary nor fair, I feel
that I would not act honourably if I shrunk from the
duty of declaring my opinion on the conduct of my
Noble and Right Hon. Fi lends, and of sharing the
obloquy to which they have been exposed. In the dis-
charge of this duty I shall not milieu to every attack
made on my Right Hon. Friends, but shall confine my-
self to one in particular, which :elates to my Right Hon,
Friend the Secretary for the Colonies, and which has
been referred to en a former occasion before your Lord!
ships, and this I do fur the purpo,e of vindicating my
Right Honourable Friend from an attack on him, aris-
• ing from a declaration alleged to have been made by
him of his feelings immediately after the.death of my
late Right Hon. Friend. The declaration my Right Hon.
Friend avowed in his place. An attempt was then made
. to fix that declaration on my Right Hon. Friend; in
- other terms, to other persons, anti on other authority.
What tffe precise difference is between the two versions
„I do not accurately remember; nor do I believe it to be
:important in any point; but in the fact that it has been
converted. into matter of blame against my Right Hon.
. Friend. But, as my name has been used; I feel myself
,called on to declare, ,that.. I. natter used the words, nor

.doer, uttered any thing which .could• fix on my Right
Hn., Friend any precise form of expression, or bind him
to any particular course of conduct. I did aot.profess
to repeat the pirticular words used by my Rignt Hon.
)Fiend, nothing in fact more than the general substance
of them—and for.this reason, that .I had no accurate
recollection of them at the time, nor do I now under-

take to say that I remember the ♦ery terms of my Right
Hon. F.itail's declaration. ,But if I used the words im-
puted,to me, I had the satisfaction of learning after-
wards, that I made au erroneous representation of my

Right Hon. Friend's language, and of. knowing that
they were not in fant the words which he.used—nor do
, I take any,shame to myself fur this difference between-
my Right Hon. Friend's declaration and my represen-
tation of it ; to; Lord Grenville sheaved to me. a few.
,days.after I had mentioned .the affair, a letter from my
Right Hon. Friend, in which he confidentially related
to Lord Grenville. the declaration he had made to me
on the occasion alluded to. And here I must declare,
my Lords, that those who fancy that I am disposed to
soften down the sentiments that dictated that letter,do not
know me. If ibis were no* made the subject of eva-.
cial discussion. Ldo.think it. would. be disingenuous in
tut not to own 4with every,respect for tbe.Noble Duke
opposite), that transactions arose, connected with the;
,death of my late Right Honourable Friend, which ex-
„cited in my mind leelings and impre*sions that would
!we made it difficult for me (were I in.the. situation of
;may Right/Jim). Friend.the Colonial Secretary) to unite
.* with those former colleagues of my late Right Hoe.,
Friend, who separated from him on his.actessionto tho
bead of the Government. But I was a.ptivata.m.
iridual. My Right Honourable Friend ands kis.political,
*Wads in the Cabinet were not, and .I: am-of opinion:
. that those, my Noble and my Right Hon. Friends, being
public. men,. were bound to consider their public duties
4, perainonat to private feelings, when an offer. to retain

ton. DI u
approve
ep e
their places was made to them by Noblei
was empowered. to form *dmi
.
Noble Friend
thiattiiteheierlpcioannsi3dteor:siorncteo.ifv.r,tdhetbry
spmohilic duties. and
my Right
aclitiottibzre%hbeloe.
4f,11 .th;re'Ec°oreloignniale °..5-7tn;i'etinry4, be such ay
-btt n f°r
part of •the Noble Dukes Admi-
-oirfilM . t called• on to, abandon
the principles on which. they acted under Mr. Carling's
Isat°i!!".4g shall be
Government. Then I say that I think it was their pub-
!leftist,' not to•withhold their services from the Noble
Duke—and .that their private duty also, as friends to
the memory of Mr. Canning, ought to dictate the same
course to them—after the Noble Duke's offer to them
of retaining therosin their important and iefluential
offices, connected with the foreign policy, with the Co.
lonies, and the Government of Mood, without, requir-
ing of them a compromise of their principles.. This
offer of the Noble Duke I conceive to be such a decided
tribute of honour to the memory of my late Right Hon.
Ft iend, that I say they acted mesteTrectly in not object-
hig to join the Noble Duke's Administration. In fact, I
see nothing in the conduct of the N.,ble Duke or of
my Noble Piiend (Earl Dudley) or my Right Hon.
Friend (Mr. Huskisson), as set forth in their several
explanations, but obit is strictly hoiwurable. As to
the alleged differences of opinion between the Noble
Duke and my late Right Hon. Friend, did not the Noble
Duke act with him many years in the same Adminis-
tration—in the time of Lord Liverpool—aye, and of
the Duke of Portland, when my late Right Hon. Friend
filled the office of Foreign Secretary ?—and was not the
Noble Duke more immediately conneced with, and a
consenting party te, his measures of foreign policy,
under the Government of Lord Liverpool? As, however,
the measures of my Right Hon. Friend's foreign policy
have been already discussed, I shall not on this occasion
go over them again, nor reply to those several corn-
mentatois on them—whether to those who, approving
his principles of foreign policy, objected to the time and
mode of their application, or those who disapproved
both his principles and their practical operation—or to
those persons oho approved both one and the other—
or finally to that class of politicians, who declare they
could never know what were his principles of foreign
policy—(A laugh)—to these several rorSONS I shall not
now make an answer, but briefly shew the condition in
which Mr. Canning left the country at the time of his
death. He left her in the possession and exercise
Of that influence which, from her power, she had
a right to assume—he left her at the head of
the Councils of Europe—he left her when the eyes
of all the nations of the New World and the Old
were turned upon her, some with feelipgs of confidence,
some with gratitude, some with hope, and all with re-
spect. (Cheering.) For the proof of this, I need only to re-
fer your Lordships to the sentiment ofliespect entertained
for my late Right Hon. Friend by the liberal and en-
lightened of all countries, and the sensation of dismay
and consternation universally felt at his death ; an event
which, in foreign States as well as in England, was la-
mented as a national calamity. And that this my late
Right Hon. Friend's glorious course of foreign policy
will be followed up by his successor, we have a hope,
.and, indeed, a warrant, in my Noble Friend's retention
of the direction of the foreign policy of the Empire.—
Then, as to the ltight Hon. Gentleman at the head of
the Home Office, his sentiments, and the manner in
which he has expressed them, reflect the greatest credit
on his candour ;that Right Hon. Gentleman has declared,
that there was not one measuie of my late Hon. Friend
in which, he did not concur, with the exception of the
Catholic Question; that he never met a public man
with ,whoni Ire acted as colleague in office with greater
pleasure; nor one under whom, as leader in the Com-
mons, he was more willing to act, or as Premier in the
Administration, but for the Catholic Question; and the
objection which he felt even on that point, arose from
the peculiar sort of auxiliary relation in which he
should stand as Home Secretary to a Prime Minister
favourable to Catholic Emancipation. As to any mew
sutes intended by the late GovernMlnt, or any dissen-
Aims% or discussions that may have taken place in that
'Cabinet, I shall make no observations on them, as they
are subjects with which no person not a Member of
that Cabinet ought to interfere—no more, I say, than
this, that I ern, sure they involved -no personal motive,
no fundamental principle, of a nature which could
render it incompatible for my Noble and Right Hon
Friends to act in concert with the Noble Duke and his.
friends in the I/resent Administration. Their. Lord-
ships will remember the fact of Mr. Canning'' offer-of
office to the Noble Duke and the iriends who retired
with hiaocoupled with his (my late Right Hon. Friend's)
assurance that the Government should continue to be
conducted nn the principle of Lord Liverpool's. Now,
after this, I can see no reason why the Noble Duke
opposite may not consistently make a similar offer to
the friends of Mr. Canning, nor why they should not
as consistently accept it. As to any objections arising
from private feelings, I consider that my Right Hon.
Friends ought to hold them subordinate to their public
duty, and I have no doubt that in the main they will
act on general measures with perfect concord with the
Noble Duke and, his friends. As to the explanations
lately given on matters that arose since the formation;
of the present government, while some persons are of '
opinion that somewhat more express pledges or stipule
tions, or, as the phrase goes, guarantees, ought to have'
been demanded by and given to my Noble and Right'
Hon. Friends, the Secretaries for the Foreign Affairs and
for the Colonies, on their accession to office under the,
Noble Duke. I must confess that I differ from that opi-
nion and whet) 1 heard that my Right Hon. Friend
the Colonial Secretary had said that he received lc,
guarantee from the Noble Duke, I thought he could not
have used the words attributed to him in the papers,
and I shortly after knew that he did not use them ; for,
having asked him on his return from Liverpool, whether
he had usedthem, I was informed by him that he had
not. but that be bast seen no report of his speech but
that in the Liverpool Courier. He then referred to ano-
ther journal.ashen he.declared that he did not use the
words in theiseuse ascribed w him in it. For myself,
do not think that the Noble Duke would first offer them
situations in his Government, and afterwards ask them
to abandon their principles ; and if such an attempt
should be made to induce my Right Hon. Friends to,
compromisealleic principles, they would have the roo
medy in their own hands, namely, the power of retiriag
foam office, and I have no doubt would instantly exer-
cise it.. In.fine, I aro, sure the Noble Duke will conduct
his Administration on the principles of my late Right
Hon. Fr iend ; and in that event I shall be ready to lend'
im my hunablelattordial.suppert.
The Duke of.. WELLINGTON—My Lords, I 'lei'',
not to address, your Loerlaisips with it view to continue
these discussicuair; astoopinion, are unneceo;'
nary, entirely oarsecessery-T4Chevrings)....and which, in;
. °piety atad.good. Lthink ought to have bee
alooso—(Cheennos).--nqro. _my. Lords, do I rise Siu
ingler-to mike. a...perdessitia of thaptinciples on whip
Lin end to conduct the Government, AS those .priod-
plea will be mote dearly seen in the stets of the Governs.
meat, aad.will 12ZOIC.W. be such as, I trust,. shall de-

serve your Lordship's approbation ; but I rise to &fen,' I
myself against the imputation that. I ever entertained
a feeling of personal hostility against, the Goveroment
of yireilibinning. On a former occasion I stated to your
totdstiips the reason why I could ;not reinain fin.sui.
Atinsiaistration conducted under theSuperiUtendetsce of
thitcltight Honourable Gentle Man. ' Now, mr.Lsirdi;
.iiihirin thnsc.re.wns or. in .the wt hien AOMMlattiell•
dons that passed between me and that Right Honotit:
able Gentleman, and which unfortunately were pub-
lished at the time, either in those reasons or those come
munications, I dstyany person to shew me the sign on
my part of a ,feeling.. o( ,personal] hostility against Mr.
Canning. It is,ttne chat at the,, nme.tinsethat I thought
.it necessary. to withdroviT myself .4om the, Cabinet.
on account of the assumption tf the chief place in the
Government.by that Right. Hon, Gentleman, I, also r
tired from the military office that I held under the_G •
vernmeut; but, as I said at the time, I did not retie ,
from either office through a personal feeling Of Oppos
lion to Mr. pinning, and if. ever I met,,him aPerwardi,
it should tie:with the feelings and habits of friend,hip-;.
(Cheering). Nor, my Lords, did I entertain even any
political hoitilitY against Mr. Canning. True,.in re'a-
tion to a measute'brought before your Lordships in the
time of that Right Hon. Gentleman's Administration, I
proposed that a certain clause should be introduced into
the Bill—a proposal which induce.] the government t"
abandon the Bill altogether; but I eali upon you-
Lordships to hear witness for me, whether I did lot
then ask the Government to take my cause into their
own hands, or adei.t some measure similar to it ? TI en,
my Lords, I repeat, that I had uo personal hostility, nor
political hostility, against the Government of Mr.
Canning ; and I, therefore, claim a i ight not to be consi-
dered among the number alluJed to by the NobleLotd
opposite, of the, enemies of Mr. Canning—(Cheering).
In conclusion I have only to express a hope that, for
the sake of the public business, and of the character of
public men, we may have no more discussions on this
unfortunate subject. .
Lord MELROSi!: briefly exrpressed his concurrence
in the Sentiments of his Noble Friend (Lord Seaford), and could
not let this opportunity pass without &elating himself satisfied with
the conduct at Mr. Canning's friends.
Their Lordships then adjourned at a quarter to seven.
HOUSE OF COM DONS.
Sir George CLERK took the oaths and his seat.
ST. PAUL'S, COVENT GARDEN.
Sir F. BURDETT presented a Petition from several Inhabitants
of St. Paul's, Covent Garden, praying, that as the Standing Orders
of the Honourable House were not agreed to, that the Petitioners
should be heard against the Bill for a Select Vestry.
Lord W. RUSSELL said a few words which were wholly inau-
dible aft.ir which the Petition was referred to a Committee.
Ma% HUME considered that the Petition should be referred to
the Standing Order Committee.
The SPEAKER observed, that the usual course was to appoint
a Select Committee, of whom five were Members of the Standing
Order Committee, to investigate into the merits of the Petition.
NAVIGATION. _ _

Lord A LTHORP presented a Petition from the County of
Northampton, in favour of the Ayr and Calder Navigation Bill.
Laid on the table.

ISIPIRIAL OAS COMPANY.

Mr. F. CLINTON brought up the Report of the Committee
on the Bill for establishing the Imperial Gas Company—they agreed
to several Amendments.

On the motion that these Amendments be agreed to,
Mr. HUME begged the attention of the House to this
subject. This Company had already two Acts passed for their re-
gulation, and by the 77th Clause of the first Act, the proprietors
agreed to deposit one-eighth of their entire net' profits in Govern-
ment Securities, in order to cover any just demands made against
them. Now he asked, was this engagement kept with the public ?
Ile answered, certainly nut. He would not, therefore, grant the
Company further privileges, until they had fully performed their
promise. There were other Gas Companies who had no charter,
although each of the members of which were individually liable for
all demands against them ; whereas in the Imperial Gas Company,
no one was liable for more than the sum he subscribed. The object
of the Chartered Company was in the long run to injute. if not ruin
Companies which were not chartered. So unjust did he think the
demand of this Company, that he would move that the Amend--
menus should be-further-considered this day six months: •
Mr. ROBINSON was disposed to-concur with the
Honourable Member for Aberdeen. Tht•se companies were estab-
lished for the public convenience; but he further thought that their
prayer 'should not be complied illtii-had violated their con-
tract. They agreed to place oneaeigtigs of their profits in the public
funds, but they did not pertorm their contract= And he ,nought no
further privileges should be granted to' tfiem. He had another
objection to this company, which was, that many of its directors
were members of the flagrant Arigna Mining Company.
Mr. F. CLINTON said, the great question here was,
did not the Committee put such guards in ti-e Bill as would secure
the public and the proprietors from any further misapplication of
the Cotnpany's funds? A clause was introduced calling upon the
Company to lay an account of their stock, and the -general nature
of their business, every Session of Parliament before the House.—
The contingent fund was formerly under tie management of the
directors, henceforth it would be altogether in the hands of the
prorit tors. The Company asked no new privileges or powers, but
to enable them to raise a sum sufficient to carry on their work with
effect. Fur himself, be knew nothing of the Company until this
Session of Parliament. lie agreed with the Hon. Members as to
the mi,applicatii,n of the money—(heat., hear!) But his object
was to introduce clauses to prevent their recurrence for the future.
Ile hoped the matter would be regarded entirely on its own inetits.
Mr. CALCRAFI' would not entrust larger powers
to a body who, on the two former occasions, abused the powers
conferred upon them. They had twice before violated the law,
and he would not tempt them to violate it a third time. Under
all the circumstances of the case, he should give his support to the
Amendment of his Honourable Friend (Mr. Hume).
Mr. Alderman WAITH MAN objected to the prin-
ciple of this measure, as well as to the originators and concocters
of the first measure brought before this House. They would not
have wanted more money it they had not gambled in many of the
late bubbles and public cheats. The Directors of this Company
had fraudulently abused their trust, and therefore he hoped the
present application would be rejected.
Al r.MABERLY said, it this Company were to receive
new powers, it would be conferring on them a monopoly injurious
to the public service. lie hoped the House would mark its de-
testation of such conduct by voting for the Amendment.—Stran-
, gets were then ordered to withdraw, when a division took place :
For the Amendment . . . . 81

Against it

Majority .

. -7.5

On our return to the Gallery, we found that Mr. 13. Ccantit
obtained leave to bring in a Bill for inclosing Lands in the neigh-
bourhood of Calla), county of Kiikenny.

Sir JAM ES GRA H ASI presented several Petitions in favour
of the Ferry-bridge Canal.—Ordered to be printed.

LIYERPoOL DOCKS.

General GASCOYNE moved for leave to bring in a
Bill to amend the Act for making the Liverpool Docks. The Hon.
and Gallant Member admitted that the applicants had omitted to
comply with'the Sending Orders of the House relative to private

Bills, but contended that the
present object was virtually of a pub-
lac character, and that in such a case the Standing Orders might be
dispensed with. Part of the purpose of the Ihll was to enable the
Corporation to take certain lands by Valuation for the extension of
the Liverpool Docks ; and the rest was to authorize their raising a
sum of money to prosecute various works already commenced, and
to be hereafter undertaken,:
Sit J. YORKE opposed the.reriiission of the Standing
Orden. lie tholight that the town of Liverpool was too far ag.
grandized already at the expense of other' plasm The extent of
their docks warat present five miles.
Mr. HUSKISSON could not agree that the trade of
Liverpool ought.either to be restrained or regretted. The fact was,
that the Corporation were acting in this work for the public advan-
tage—they had not a shilling's worth of private interest. He
I thought that the Dill might be allowed to pass, and the Standing
Orders be remitted, as far as regarded the raising of money, al a
vast extent of sea works were actually in progress, which would '1
fall into dilapidation if any delay of funds prevented( them from i
'being' prosecuted. • •
' iMr:tALCßAFT'agreed. to suspend the Sta..ding
diedera'as far as regarded the power to raise money. •
Lord ALTHORP thought it would be a dangerous
precedent to dispense with the orders of the House.
Leave was eventually gives to bring in the Bill.
TUT Ara COVORATiOII ACT.r.
Petitions, praying for the repeal et there tlct.t, we vrtsetf

from the Protestant Dissen!eta of Wellingisorotso, Winington,
Chepstow, 11r.-cen, bursley, Werrington, Boom, Bamford, Abe.
rystwyth, Shepton Mallet, five congregations in Bristol. Chipping
Norton. Brompton, Devizes, Springfield, Rye, Battle. Hytbe, st,
Leonard's (Shoredich); Scotch Presbyterian congregation Welk.
street ; Bakewell, Chichetter, Trowbridge, Salisbury, Warminster,
Bath, North Curry, F.mlbourne, Liskeard, hlidelleburgh ' • Lewis.
bun-street Chapel, Westminster; Mayfair, Rochdale. Chick's.
ter, High and Low Harrowgate, Cranbrook, Chatham, Cited.
Ashwater, Ashburton, Hull, Reading, Shrewsbury, Lted:N2
'near Hertford, Chester, Blackburn ,the City of Gloucester, Wee
aster, Truro and St. Austel, &Miran; Anglesey; the hide.
pendent Congtegation at Lincoln; Barrbeneum.Repton..Dertty.
shire; Alceiter; Birmingham; from five parishes in Caiwaroso.
shire; Boston; 'Lincolnshire; the Association of Protestant Din.
*enters in London : the Protettant Dissenters of Catiterbiry; S.
Asaph; the Congregation of Hunter-street Chapel, Liverpool; tha •
Clergy and Laymen of Rotherham; Huddersfield, Great Drilleig,
Leeds, Halifak, and Bradford ; Marston, Arnoldswick. and a part*
hear Bradford; Gosport, Newport, and Mortimer West, in the
Isle of Wight; Farnham, Winchester, and Ringwood; Bury Se
Edmund's; Aylesbury; the Vicar, Onirchwardens, and Parishioneti
of Wingrive, Bucks ; Devizes; Within, Denbigh, Liangonee;
LLn ye, Glensyrrial, Ross, and iltidport ; sad Several Mime plates:
—)lost of them were ordered tube printed.
Mr. s Nrmi pre.ented a Pethion, signed Ity 2,000 Rama
Catholics bt Liverpool, also praying fol a repeal li the Test awl
Cotporation Acts. It gave him, he said, Mimi pleasure to present
skis Petition, as it showed that those who had endeavoured to raise
doubts between the Roman ,Catholics and disseinert were not si
successful as they wished.—The Petition was ordered to be printed:
Mr: RASTHOPIE said, that of the Petitioni which be presented
for the repeal of the Test Acts (from CltiPpitig gor on •and Bronap
ton), the former was signed by the Clergyman (of the Church of
England) of the parish, and hy several CathoTies, Quakers' and some
members of the Church of England; and the second was also
signed by the Clergyman of the parish, and several respecteble
members of the Church of England.
Mr. CU RTEIS, in presenting several Petitions from Susses,
expressed his determination to support the motion of the Noble
Lord for the repeal of the Test Act.
Mr. PENDARVES, in presenting the Petition from Liskeird,
said it was from the friends of religious liberty—that it was mow
respectably signed, and at the head of the signatures was that of
the clergyman of the parish.
Mr. FERGUSSON, in presenting the Petition from the Mien.
ters and Elders of the Scotch and Presbyterian Chapel of Wag,.
street, objected to the principle of making that most sacred a,sl
solemn act of taking the Sacrament of the Lone's Supper a test d
political qualification. It must be extremely painful to the retinal
of the Clergy of the Established Chards to have to administer
in that way.
Mr. STANLEY presented two Petitions from Nenagh, et*
against the Sub-letting Act, and the other praying for Cathulic
Emancipation.
Similar Petitions were presented from Wexford and &mime.
thy, by Mr. CAREW.
Mr. LITTLETON presented a Petition from the Mobsters of
Burton upon Trent for a Repeal of the Malt Tan.—Laid on the
tahle.—The Honourable Member then moved for several Return
connected with the Malt Trade—the number of Maltsters—the
fines inflicted—and the mode of their application.—Ordered.
Mr. M. A. TAYLOR presented a Petition from the Miyor
and Coporation of Durham, praying that no receipt for any sum
under twenty pounds should be liable to a Stamp Duty.—Ordered
to be printed.
Mr. BRIGHT moved for a Return of Receipt Stamps issued
for the last five years, the number of Informations filedond Imes
levied during the same period, distinguishing Loudon and the dif.
ferent Country Towns.—Ordered.
Mr. C ALCR AFT expressed his hope that the Hon. Member
bad spoken to some one in the Government to know whether the
Returns could be granted, and that be had ascertained that some
benefit would be derived from these voluminous Returns.
Mr. BRIGHT said that the subject was important, and that tin
full Returns would be necessary; but that he had no objection to
submit them to the Hon. Member, or any one who wished to see
them, before they were ordered.—Motion withdrawn.
Mr. W. ShIITH presented a Petition from Norwich, in foveae
of Free Trade.—Ordered to be printed.
Sir C. OWEN presented a Petition from certain Mobsters of
Sandwich against the Malt Tax Regulations.—Ordered to be printed.
The LORD ADVOCATE moved for an Account of the number
of Licenses granted, under the Act for Licensing:lliad Houses,
within the City of Edinburgh since the passing of the Act.
Mr. CAREW presented Petitions from Enniscorthy, Wexford,
and other places, praying (or Catholic Emancipation, and the Rend
of the Subletting Act, and the Vestry Act.
Air. F. CLINTON presented a Petition from the Inhabitantsat
East Retford, not being Electors, praying that the Bill for disfrao.
ebbing that Borough may not pass into a law, and that the right al
returning Members may be continued in the Borough, with suck
modifications as the House may think fit.

SUB-LETTING ACT. •
Mr. HUME presented a Petition, which he.desCribed
as being signed by all the most distinguished and
wealthy Catholics of Ireland, praying for a repeal of
the Sub-letting Act. The Petitioners stated, that the
Act was depopulating large districts, and must drive
a million of people to •agrancy if allowed to-continue
in operation. The Hon. Member enforced the necessity
of giving an immediate attention to the subject, so ass to
prevent the serious evils which the continued operation
of the Act threatened.
Lot d MILTON expressed his htitie,..%S.riihateiee
alterations might be made in the details of the Acx,•the
principle would never be abandoned. The evil of utr•
der-letting land, Which it went to remove, he consi-
dered to be one of the greatest with which Ireland had
been afflicted.
Mr. BROWNLOW contended that. the evils de-
" scribed by the Petition, such as the depopulation of
particular districts, were not the consequences of the
Act against which it complained. The Petitioners
stated this was a law for the benefit of the few agais.t
'the many, but he maintained -that it had greatly im-
proved the condition of the occupiers or the land, and
that it was a wise and salutary Act of Parliament. It
would then naturally be asked, how it came about that
so good a law had encountered so much discontent and
clamour ? The answer was to be found- in the state of
the country. In England there was a peaceable well-
' governed population, whose interest it was to preserve
order, and who knew that labour and capital must be
regulated, and applied in just proportions in order to
make their employment mutually beneficial. In Ireland
there was a directly opposite interest. The people of
that country felt that it was their numbers which made
them formidable, their famine and misery which made
them terrible. He believed he could see a connection
between this feeling and the discontent in which the
Petition originated, and he called upon the House to
look upon the matter as one of the utmost importance.
The Irish people knew that their miseries were their
strength, and if the House did not interpose, he feared
that it was their rags and wretchedness before which
must fall the wealth, the rank, and the education of
this country. He was confident that if Catholic Email.
cipatioa were granted, they should hear nothing, more
of the Sub-letting Act. That was the measure which,
by quieting men's minds, would revive industry, and
,give that security to the use of capital which would
create employment at home for that miserable portion
of the population who had now to seek it elsewhere of
starve.
Mr. DAWSON concurred with the Hon. Member
who had just sit down in declaring, that this law Nall
most unjustly misrepresented by the Petition upon their
table. The measure was adopted alter the most deli-
berate caution, and it was in operation during the last
year without the House having heard a word upon the
subject. Since that it had been discussed in another
place, and the consequence of the discussions to Much
he alluded was the Petition now before them. In fact, this
was the Petition of the Catholic Association—(Heir,
hear). He believed that it did not contain one signa-
ture of a person who was an occupier of land in Ireland.
Those" who had signed it were chiefly the persrm
against whom the law was directed.—He was not beie
speaking of them as members of the Catholic Associa-
tion, but upon other g►ounds he would declare that tlgi
were principally the greatest oppressors of Ireland--
I e midOltaren, v l o g-i und the tenantry of that avow

I

'tty into the dust, and who
dcr and outraxe,liaay
this Act, as they predicted.
printed...and copies sent to
and i- contained this warni
the Act was not repealed :
-esl4tors, emesnplate
hOrriSr and affright ?"'
'consequences would result
the House would never he:
subject from the real o'ci.
Ahem it was a law of proti
upon the House not to b
presentation such as the Pt
i*gtiided by the tease);
)abich the Honourable Mr
.611p3ained the real nature
'that its principle was good,
Teets in detail, they could
)sit (allow the Hon. Mernl
lit Emancipation, only o
fallen from the Hon. Mit
that the evils of Ireland
'to that source alone.

Mr. NORTH entirely
from the. Hon. Member

there was not a reflect*
land who did no.capPrin
There was some of its di
Member suggested oaten(
clause o,lglit to be repeal
Wigs .the proper am-2udmi
A43l"the most beneficial r
tolreland..
.Ilr. F. LEWIS said; 41
could be conferred onlrt
ter establiihMen t.t. and le;
When Gentlemen visited It
. than the
tenantry of this country
• existed epos the land there,
sident-lindlords Fit [rely
ratans that, the should
tenantry, able to perform
connected its different c 7
amongst the whole? Hi
where there was not a rei
place was suppled by r
yeomanry, from whom
• protection and support.
Ireland was the object of
that- whatever improves
require in detail, the prix
would not be departed fi
Mr. R. COLBORNE
the House, whether it w;
tialdiscussion of an imi
.presenting of a Petition
to hint that the titne of
spent in such discussions,
in it to proceed with the
ofenteiing into them. If
of baying the merits of
had. been said, discits,ed,
would be to bring thesubk
Mr. Sect etary PEEL
_ _ _

had fallen from the Hon.
and said that after
.Ifon. Prie'nd (Mr. Lamb)
that any desultory con
question would have been
His Right Hon. Friend h
.wady to give the subject
'te thread to any informal
be- made to him. He (
better course could be
his Right Hon."Friend.'
the appointment of a Col
With respect to the Pea
• only say tins—without
motives of those who
'Which the Petition was
the most dignified reveng4
be, seriously to reflect upoi
tn'eptke such alttirationt
'deemed likelyl6 be benl.
. sure particularly concekns—,
Mr. H. GRATTAN

' Members to rise and say
did not offer a proper 'Ol
enter ing• into the Merits
• a different opinion. He
his consti.trents, and he'
occasion of endeavouri,
they complained of, and
He maintained that thi
ignorance, and had ha,
sth and 6th sections v.(
and it was impossible fol
to reconcile the differes
that a Committee won'
the time at which it
known the better. Th,
terested would then. ha\
seasons for being discen
The Petition was then broil,

Mr. HUME presen

Roman Catholic Inhabitants
derry.

Mr. DAWSON sai,

contented with the Sub.ktt
certain, that considerable t
Association to create a feeling
of money levied by that Body
bad been spent in having I,'
so bad been made a mattes
(ceded from the Cithulic /
Mr. HUME should
Catholic Association had
Irishman be should feel proud
there express his opinions
laugh, and hear)—ani he
Association down, or to tht
an intemperance in language
—The Petition was then ord,
Mr. H. GRATTAN
Romata Catholic Inhabitant!
—Ordered to be printed.
Mr. V. FITZGERAL7

Parish in the county of Clare.
Mr. V. FITZtiiERALL
Catholic Inhabitants of. two
favour of the Catholic. Claims.
FAZAKEILLErY•pr
•for a Repeal of the Duty en
Lord MILTON present

Yorkshire, praying for a Repeal
Mr. WARBURTON prey
Mahaters of Britiport.—The '
On the motion of the CV
the Hollis resolved itself

NAY'
Sir GEORGE CLI
tention then to go ino
meant to move for sui
the Government to'ct
the Estimates were bl
sideration of the Hot
been piirsittdAiitlV
E timates, arid he'di
bking followed on the

io would b'
PAP wed •
ted. The
to every M
ning as to
:—" Can y
no million
He was co
Lilt from th
hear any,
"ccurying t
rotection.
listen to
Petitioner;
asoning an .1
lember, wh
e of the m-
xid, and if
d easily be
mber into t
r observing
limber to
I were cert
r fc: Arma;ncurre
ng and in
ove of the
details up
mdments,
!aled as sp.
intents, he •
LI measure
that the g
[reboil wa
Institutions
lreland,n
milaris y be•
r and the
here. If, t
land, was i
d have a re
7m those t ;
chose-, and
He knew•
resident Gv.,
an intelti
3 the poore
To raise
)f the preset
ernent or
rinciple of s
from.
E put it to
was desirabl
taportant qu
on— (Hear,
)f the Hon
is. and that
be business
If 'Ho& Gen
of the Act,
,ed, their t -
tbject prop:
concurred
Dn. Gentlens
• what had
b) the tither
InversatiOnj
en deemed.
i had eaves
.ct his most
nation or sty
(Mr. Peel) ti
s devised th
I,And Meld
:Olicnittee a
tition before
ut stopping
petitlobed
trartsed;•6.
mge {he
upon the At
ns as shall
tefiCial' to
!kns—(Hear
said, it wa
ty that the p
br a cativo
is of any qu
le had a dut
e felt bound
ring to set
nd so to proc
:he Sub-letti
tad a sery i
mere at vari
for any lawy
rence betwc
uld be appo
was to be
Chose who
ave an °pp()
:ontented wi
brought up and
,nted a simi
'no of the Cu
rid that ther
rtting Act. I
trouble had
cling of uppoait
kitty fur what
1,000 copier u
.ter of boast
: Association.
i like to kno
l not a right to
proud of bet
is as freely as
he thought tha
brow contemp
iage, was p.akr
ordered to lie
tsl presented s
ants of Kilken'
LD Presented
Clare.
LI) presented
two Parishes •
rpresented a P
NEI Receipts.
toted a Petit',
. Repeal of she
SI presented a
The Petitions
:.:HANCRLL
into a Comnai
AVY ESTikIA
LERK'said,
nto the Navy
Loch a vote of
carry on th
brought ie.;
ouse. That
likard to
lid not antici
.he &sent •