The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1835-09-04 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD

/raper tat Parliament.

HOUSE OF LORDS. —MONDAY.
The royal assent was given to the Bristol railway and sonic
other bills.
The stamp duties' bill was brought up from the commons and
read a first time.
The lords' amendments to the Islington market hill,. the
tonnage admeasuremeut bill, the sheriff's (Ireland) bill, and
the savings banks (Scotland) bill, having been agreed to by the
commons, these bills were also returned to the lords. ,
DUBLIN POLICE BILL.
Lord DUNGANNON moved the second reading of this bill.
In the course of the debate on this measure, the Marquis of
LONDONDERRY said that another question was involved In this
bill besides the in.proieinent of the Dublin police, namely, the
question of patronage to an, individual whose :iower was pre-
dominant in Ireland, and, he was sorry to add, in this country
also.

Lord DUNCANNON wished to know whether the noble mar-
quis thought that the bill was introduced merely for the purpose
of placing patronage at the disposal of Mr. O'Connell?
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said he did not hesitate to
declare his belief that Mr. O'Connell had the dispensation of
the greater part of the patronage of Ireland.
The bill was read a second time.
IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT BILL.
Lord LYNDHURST presented a petition from the prisoners
confined for debt in Horsemonger-lane prison, praying the
house to pass the bill for the abolition of imprisonment for debt
during the present session. He was sorry that he could not
support the prayer of those unfortunate persons. Their lord-
ships would be surprised to hear the amount of patronage which
this bill placed at the disposal of ministers. In the first place,
it authorised the crown to appoint a number of commissioners ;
then fifty other officers, to be called registrars for life; -then
fifty other officers, called ushers, besides various other officers.
He ventured to hope that their lordships would think that a bill
which would place such a considerable amount of patronage,
and throw so great an additional burthen on the country, and
which would vary the law of debt& and creditor, required more
consideration than certain gentlemen who were urging the
house to pass it seemed to think necessary. It had been inti-
mated that the late attorney-general approved of the bill. He
(Lord Lyndhurst) had taken the trouble of ascertaining Sir
F. Pollock's opinion on it, and he was authorised to state, al-
though he thought some alterations of the law of debtor and
creditor necessary, he did not approve of the provisions of the
bill. The manner in which the bill had been passed through
the other house was not such as to justify their. lordships in
passing it without the strictest examination.
Lord fitment-last said that he, and not ;any member of the
government, had charge of the bill, and his learned friend would
do him the justice to remember that the first time it was pro-
posed; he candidly admitted that, although a very fit thing to be
done, he did not think the matter was one which called for im-
mediate decision in the present session. Ile had expressed his
regret that it had been sent up at so late a period of the session,
and that it was absolutely impossible that &measure of so com-
plicated and important a nature could could have justicedone to
rt. When the subject should he examined, he pledged hithself
to show that the bill would prevent the property of debtors and
creditors from being squandered, and would effect a saving of
between £200,000 and £300,000 a-year.
Lord Lrsintionsr did not accuse any persons in their lord- I
ships' house of urging the bill forward—indeed, no member of
government had-said a word about it. He, however, saw by the
votes of the other house that their lordships' journals were to be
searched. ( ear, hear.) At whose instance? At the instance
of his majesty's attorney-general, and fir the purpose of found-
ing a charge against the House of Lords for not haying passed
the bill, which his noble friend now admitted to be of such a
complicated nature that it ought not to pass. (Cheers.) The
attorney-general who had thought proper to adopt this proceed-
ing was one of the ministers of the crown, though not a cabinet
minister. He it was who made it a ground of accusation
against the [-louse of Lords that they had not passed a measure
which his noble and learned friend, who he supposed he must
call the associate of government, admitted could not with pro-
priety be passed. (Hear.)
Lord BROUGHAM was ready when their lordships were un-
justly attacked—which sometimes happened though not often—
to defend them. He thought that their lordships very much
improved bills, which were frequently hastily passed by the other
house. He repeated, he did not think their lordships could
have passed the bill which hail given rise to this conversation.
• Lord ASHBURTON thought it extremely unbecoming a person
filling the situation of his Majesty's Attorney-General to in-
dulge in insinuations against the House of Lords. (Hear,
hear.) That learned gentleman had thought proper to say that
no persons who were not influenced by low attorneys and bum-
bailiffs could for a moment hesitate to pass the bill. He ap-
proved of the course taken by the House of Lords, that of taking
time to consider the provisions of the bill. The petitions pre-
sented from a great number of persons interested in and capable
of informing the house on the subject were against, and not in
favour of the measure.
The bills on the table were forwarded a stage, and the house
adjourned at half-past seven o'clock.

• HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MONDAY.
Mr. Evvater reported from the committee appointed to search
the lords' journals, to find what had been done with-the prison-
ers' counsel and capital punishment bills. The lords had deter-
mined to hear evidencein the cases of those bills, thus introduc-
ing a bad precedent, and rendering it impossible that the.bills
could pass this session. Hitherto it had been usual to hear
evidence only in the cases of private bills.

• CORPORATIONS BILL—LORDS' AMENDMRNTS.
A great number of petitions, praying for the rejection of the
lords' amendments, and others praying that the hill might not
be passed without these alterations, were presented to the house,
after which,
Lord JOHN Russc Le moved that the house should proceed to
take these amendments into consideration. [As his lordship's
speech, and indeed the whole debate, is much too long fur con-
densation, with effect, into our limited space, we transcribe au
article from The Times of Tuesday which more effectually ems
bodies what was said by Lord John Russell and Sir Robert-Peel,
who were the principal speakere.l Lord John Russell com-
menced his speech by an allusion to vast irritation and excite-
ment which somebody seems to have persuaded his lordship
prevails in the country on this subject, to such an extent that
it is actually dreaded, that by assenting' to any alterations in the
bill, the commons will be supposed to have forfeited their cha-
racter as representatives of the people. We beg to assure his
lordship, that no such excitement or irritation exists, except in
a few radical coteries, and iu the ministerial prints, that neither
is any more in posse than it is in ease elsewhere, and that his
lordship has been quite right, though he believes that such feel-
ings really exist, to disregard them altogether, and show that
the dread of which he spoke is as unreal as the bugbears that
have. or are supposed to have, caused it. It would, of course,
be idle to say a word about what Lord John Russell supposes
to be the chief cause.of this supposed excitement and irritation,
and consequent dread. The manner of the lords' amendments,
not the matter of them, is, according to 4eoril John Russell, that
cause; and, what is more extraordinary stilt, the most objec-
tionable_part of that matter was receiving evidence and allowing
Sir C. Wetherell to utter at the bar of the House of Lords what
his lordship considers to have been language insulting' to the
House of Commons. Lord J. Russell having declared that he
thought itnecessary to notice these things in vindicatiou of the
character and dignity of the House of Commons (they seem to
be both mightily easy satisfied,) proceeded to state how he pro-
posed to deal with the amendments. He said, we think truly,
that their main object should be to get, for the future, a good
governing body in the corporations; and he added, that to this
end, and for the sake of peace and quiet to the country, and in
order to avoid contention with the other branch of the legisla-
lature, he was willing to forget and to forego all his arguments
in support of the original bill.. Without a governing body of
this character, however, no measure on the subject would be
worth having.
In the first place, then, he objected to'keeping up in any way,
or by any title, the old aldermen. He objected also to retain-
ing the town-clerks and the justices for life in the manner pro-
posed. if the councils chose to retain them, they were at per-
fect liberty to do so by electing them, but be did not think they
should be forced upon the councils by any legislative enact-
ment. Another amendment proposed to make a part of the
council aldermen for life. It was his intention to suggest as an
amendment upon this amendment, that a similar body as to
number should he elected by the council for a period of six
years,—one-half or them to go out at the end of every three
years. With regard to the division of boroughs into wards,
Lord Stanley proposed during the progress of the measure
through the commons, that boroughs with 10,000 inhabitants
should be so divided, but ministers in the house of commons had
compromised the matter with Lord Stanley and fixed the num-
ber at 12.000. The house of lords has rediked it to 6,0(X). Lord
John Russell intends to propose a second compromise, and, dis-
senting from the arrangement of the lords; to make the huniber
10.001) or 9,000 as a minimum. The bill, as sent up to the lords,
authorized the council to recommend a certain number of per-
suns to the crown, out of which the crown was to select the ma-
gistrates fur the borough. The lords have struck out this.clause,
and the crown therefore will nominate the justices without any
recommendation from the council. To this onlieslon Loid John
Russell proposes to disagrees altogether. The arneadmeets of
the lords relative to the boundaries of the towns would, Lord
John '-lussell thought, be inconvenient only, and therefore he
would not resist those amendments The lords, howevee, had
committed the' division of towns into wards to the revising
barristers. This 'he thought was giving too much power to
oung and inexperienced men, for such the revising barristers
might be, and be would propose that they should not make the
divisions therreselves, but report to the crown what that divi-
sion should be, Their report would,-tit course, be acted upon,
uniesiu'ujected to. The important emetidrueut of the lords re-
lative to the qualification, Lord J. Russell, though still of
opinion that there should be no qualification, does not propose
to resist. But the machinery of the proceeding he will alter.
As the clause now stands, the persons having £l,OOO or £5OO
must claim to be registered, and any one may object to them.
The examination of the claimant as to the state of his circum-
stances, the amount uf hie debts, &sc., might be exceedingly dis-
agreeable, and even injurious to parties engaged in trade. Re-
taining,. therefore, the qualificatiou, Lord John. Russell will
amend the. manner of arriving at its establishment in order to
obviate otheee objections. The amendments of the lords, which
.reserveeo freemen their rights of property, will riot be resisted
by Lierd John Russell, except so far as they give hereditary
sights to exemption from tolls, Which lie Will object to. At .the'
same time he complained of, as an unuecessary and wanton re.
election upon the house of commons, the introduction of the
word " uniuet" into the preamble of the bill in reference to de-
priving the freemen ,uf their rights of prOperty, which, in its
original state, however, Lord J. Russell must aemit it did most
sweepingly. The lords have, by another clause, continued to
the freemen their right to vote for members of parliament.
Lord john Russell is disposed to coucede this point. Lastly,
the lords hive inserted a clause to %be effect that none of the
_members of the governing body in boroughs shall present to
livings,onlese they be members Of the church of England. To
this Lord John Russell decidedly objects, and will nut agree to
the clause.
Sir It. Pete.e followed Lord John Russell (who concluded with
exhortations eo concession and eoMpeeinise on' the part of the
Commons)o.auel compliniented the,noble "lord upon the general
tone of his speech. , He, regretted, however, that one or two
passages of it should have been so completely out of harmony
with thereat., For instance—as to the hearing of counsel at the
bar of the House, of.. lcidi,; Lordßrongliamhad strongly
ad-
vocated that course—nay, 'Lord Brougham had al.:1411i selected'
the counsel. If once counsel were permitted to be heard 'oh.lie;
half of parties, he thought that nothing hot a oensorship could
lie so bad; as denying, them
perfect fresdom ef'ipeeele...lndeed,
how cottlel this be denied them?
..Lord Johu Russell Must very.
well recoiled that mined hadappeared at the bap fifths House'
or Lordsagainst certain hilli—sey hilli,ef ;paitisp 4etel • soCnaltieil,
—and even Lord John Russell"'waulel have found it'.
very difficult to make such cuuneel.employ moderate lanenateee
in speaking of those measures oind diger authors. What tte
noble lord had said relative to the intros of the word "un-
just" into the preamble appeased tti hirrieto savour of awed mhj.
vellous sensitiveness. He (Sir lt; Pi4lel however, sumo:geed
that the noble lord had thought it'necelisier'y to direct a few hard
words against the House of Lords', for the sake of soothing the
more ardent of his supporters, and had considered that the
address of Sir C. Wetherell, and the word "unjust" iu the pre-
amble, would furnish the least inappropriate pegs to bang them
upon. We are very much inclined to concur in this view of
Sir R. Peel, especially as we well resaullect that Lord J. Russell

on more than one occasion, ont, of the liouse as well as in it, was
betrayed into some not very good jokes respecting the speech at
which he now finds himselt most seriously shocked. As to the
course which Lord John Russell proposes to adopt with reference
to the lords' amendments, Sir R. Peel, it will be seen, concurs
with them in the main. He agrees that it is not an improve.--
meet to introduce the old aldermen into the governing body,
and he considers Lord John Russell's proposal of electing a
part of the body for six years an amendment upon the lords' ,
amendment, which creates aldermen for life. As to retaining
the town-clerks, Sir R. Peel thought, that as-compensation must
be given them, it would be better to retain. them than pay them
fur doing nothing. This course was adopted in the Scotch Bill;
but he attached no importance to this point. He thought the
lords' amendment, as to the appointment of justices, an im-
provement. The bill originally imposed upon the crown the
invidious task of selecting from a list nominated by the council
a certain number to be magistrates. tie thought it much .bet-
ter that the whole responsibility of the appointments of these
magistrates should rest Kith the ministers. He saw no objec-
tion to Lord John Russell's proposition relative to the division
of boroughs into wards. With regard to the qualification clause
if that qualification were retained, as Lord John Russell hail
agreed it should be, he should have no objection to making a
solemn declaration as to the amount of property sufficient, and
so getting rid of the incouveniencies that might result from ex•
amination into the fact. He agreed with Lord John, Russell
that exemption from tolls ought not to be.pespetuated,
Sir ROBERT PEEL, however, totally differed from Lord John
Russell's view as to the propriety of allowing dissenters to pre-
sent to livings of the church of England. It was imposing no
civil, no secular disability, to sav-that_as dissenters were not
likely to be good j.udges.of the qualifications of ministers of the
church of England, so they should not be allowed to decide upon
those. qualifications. There was a vast deal of talk about tolera-
tion in that house, but in practice their toleration seemed to be
altogether unilateral. Why not have a little toleration for the
church as well as for the dissenters ? What would the dissen-
ters say if it were proposed that he or any other churchman
should judge who was tit to be minister for one of their chapels?
He made this objection before, and Mr. o.!Connell agreed that
it was quite reasonable. Indeed, the lion. and learned member
had even said that he would support any amendment in the
sense of his (Sir It. Peel's) objection. He, therefore, should
certainly support against Lord John Russell this amendment of
the Lords.

,
F rum this description of last night's proceedings in the House
of Commons, it will be perceived that the lords are practically
admitted by ministers to have done.the state some service by the
larger portion of their amendments upon the municipal reform
bill. Of all the rouitifarthus alterations which 'their lordships
had introduced into that measure, and of which the most jut-
portant—viz. the tiaitintenatice of the rights of freemen, and the
property qualifications affixed to, members of the council—ap-
peered to us from the first to be solid improvements in its pro-
visions, three only of any magnitude have been now finally ob-
jected to by his Majesty's ministers—namely, the retention of
the old aldermen and town-clerks for life, and the election of
others for the same period; 2dly, the debarring dissenters from
any share in the-election of ministers to serve such benefices of
the established church as might be in the gift of corporations;
ally, the perpetuating of the right- of exemption from toll now
enjoyed by the freemen of certain boroughs. All others of the
lords' amendments exclaimed against by the revolutionists as
innumerable and intolerable—as destructive of the Dill—as an
insult to the House of Commons—and such an outrage upon the
march of mind and of the Movement as would not merely justify
the stoppage of the supplies for this current session, but the
abolition of the House of Lords for ever and ever—all.have
been favourably received by Lord J. Russell and his brother
ministers; and so the supplies will be voted, and the House of
Lords will, according to all present appearances, have no worse
a chance than the commons themselves of hearing the King's
speech at the opening of the sessi in 1836.
At the close of the debate, the order of the day was read and
the house proceeded to consider the clauses of the- bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL, for the reasons which he had already stated,
proposed, in page 18, to leave out the words " aldermen for
life." When this was acceded 1,9, he would move the insertion
of "aldermen for six years," and other verbal amendments, in
accordance with the objects and intentions which he had already
declared. He trusted there Would be a general concurrence iu
these amendments.

After a few observations from Mr. Scarlett, Mr. Law, Sir
Robert Peel, and Mr. L. Charlton, the amendment was agreed

Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in the clause relating to town council-
lors fur life, moved that half the town councitiors elected for six
years should go out at the end of each three years.
The amendment was agreed to.
Lord „louts RUSSELL also proposed an amendment in page
34, thinking it was a very absurd thing to acknowledge that
every right and title in existing aldermen should continue.
There were now about 4,0(10 aldermen. The bill only contem-
plated the existence of I,IW. He disagreed altogether with
this clause, and was understood to move that it be omitted.
Agreed to:
Ou the noble lord's motion some verbal amendments in clause
8 were agreed to.
Mr. SCA a LETT thought that at least a portion of the body of
aldermen should be retained. He believed that corporations
generally bad been well governed, and remarked that few com-
plaints against them had been made to the Court of King's
Bench. If appeals to that tribunal were too expensive, a bill
might be brought in to diminish them, and this would, in his
opinion, have worked a safe and gradual and satisfactory reform
lin corporations. A revolution had, he insisted, begun in this
bill. which could only have been carried under a revolutionary
government.
Colonel SIBTHORP quite agreed wi►h the hon. member, and
regretted that their lordships' amendments bad not that support
in the house which they su amply deserved.
Agreed to.
Lord Jou ts RUSSELL, in consequence of suggestions made by
Mr. Wilks respecting the injustice which would be done to lay
preachers of the Wesleyan methodists, postponed some verbal
amendments which he had proposed in passages of a clause re-
lating to dissenting triinistets.
Mr. WtLE s :vas of opinion that clergymen were properly ex-
cluded, and thought that dissenting ministers should be excluded
also.

Some verbal amendments, fozsavring up the principle of those
already made, were then agreed to without discussion.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in that clause which related to justices
being appointed for life, as the Lords' amendment made it,
moved, that instead of "for life," the justices should be con-
tinued till the Ist of May, 1836.
Agreed to.
The next amendment proposed by the noble lord was in the
clause relating to the division of towns into wards. By the
clause, as it stood when the bill went from the House of Com-
mons up to the Lords, the division into wards was to be decided
by commissioners appointed by the crown, but, as amended by
the Lords, the settlement of the wards was to be a ranged by
the revising barristers. The noble lord now proposed; as an
amendment, that these barristers should report in the first place
to one of the Secretaries of State, who was to lay the report
before the King in council, and if approved of, the decision to
be final.
An hon. Member asked if the council should disapprove of
the decision of the revising barrister, what would be the result?
Lord JOHN RUSS-ELL said, in that case it would be sent back
to the barrister for revision. -
Mr. C. But.ceit objeeted to the revising barristers being ap-
pointed to this duty. They had already more than they could
do in the time fixed. They had to revise the lists for the coun-
ties and the lists fur boroughs, and also the burgess lists in
towns, and this in six weeks. This in some counties where, as
in the case of Middlesex, there were two objections entered to
almost every elector, would be no slight labour, even if the bar-
rister had nothing else to do. He would as soon leave the mat-
ter to the bishop of the diocess or the exciseman.
Mr. JEuvis concurred in the objection to the revising bar-
risters, as the persons least fit for that duty. They would have
to revise maps and plans which would occupy much of their
time. If, however, it was necessary to have a lawyer, he ought
to be assisted by an engineer.
The gallery was cleared for a division on this amendment,
upon which, however, the house did not divide.
Other amendments were proposed and withdrawn. The fur-
ther consideration of the bill was then adjourned to the follow-
ing day (Tuesday).
• TITHES INSTALMENT SUSPENSION (IRELAND) Btu..
On the motion of Mr. Spring Rice, this bill was read a second
time and ordered to be committed.
On the motion of Mr. F. Baring, a new writ was ordered to
issue for the election of a knight of the shire for the county of
Waterford, in the room of It. Power, Esq., deceased.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of; on the
motion of Mr. Brotherton, the house adjourned at a quarter to
one &clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS,—Tvasonv.
On the motion of the Duke of IticitsioNo, the tithe recovery
bill was passed.
The capital punishment bill, the cruelty to animals bill, the
Sardinia slave treaty bill, and the Denmark slave treaty bill
were forwarded a stage.

THE SPANISH TREATY.
The Marquis of LorsnoNnEnar asked Lord Melbourne
whether he had any objection to lay before their lordships a
copy, in the Spanish language, of the convention negotiated by
Lord Eliot ?
Viscount Ms:Luouttivs; said there was no Spanish copy of the
treaty. A translation had been sent tJnie.
Lord BROUGHAM moved the second reading of the music and
dancing bill: Agreed to.
Lord Mint:Gl-last, after detailing the objects of the measure
and the alterations which -it still required, moved a-conference
with the commons on the letters patent tact amendment bill.

THE DUBLIN POLICE BILL.
The Marquis of LON.HON DEI: Y rose to set himself and their
lordships right resiiecting an observation which he had used on a
previous evening addressed to the noble lord opposite relative to
the Dublin police bill, which he was now prepared to reiterate.
He had seen the Irish constabulary bill and other measures re-
lating to Ireland on their lordships' table, and, when he ex-
amined them, the great object of all those bills appeared to him
unequivocally to be to increase the power of that man to whom
he had yesterday alluded, and of the party to which he was
attached. Perhaps the noble viscount would set him right if he
were wrong, andlarove that he had taken an improper view of
the matter. He Mould ask, what was the language of that
gentleman on the 26th of August last, in answer to an invitation
made to him to dine at Glasgow? That language was of a most
decided character. If their lord Ships would read the statement
made by that individual—if they would consider that every
thing in Ireland appeared to be under his influence, they would
see good reason for minutely scrutinising every measure that
was introduced with respect to that country. For himself, so
long as he had a voice in that house he could neverrefrain from
using it, in order to prevent any further influence from being
extended to an individual who already possessed so much power
over the catholic' of Ireland. His lordship then read two para-
graphs from the letter to which he had alluded ; they were as
follows:

" We'can 'lever remove the taxes off the labmirer and place
them upon property selely until the franchise, the parliamenta-
ry franchise, is extended beyond its present limits, and until the
house, now of hereditary legislators, is so altered in its own con-
stitution and component parts, as toplace it under the fair and
reasonable influence'of popular opinioi, and until the meinbeis
of that house are made to sympathise with the wants and wishes
of the people at large, instead, as at present, factitiously and
opposing.cvery amelioration of our iastitutions—ame-
•lioraons which would 'enable the people to have the control
and 4sanagement of theif own affairs.
, .
• " •ylki -Perceive,. ra. . the conduct of a selfish majority of,
Mel-rause-of 'fortis and;in,nieetingthepeopleof Glasgow, it
• will be my bilisineis to initigate them to a co-operation with all
.sinCete reformers in the peaceable and legal, but determined
mnitartiite; stiuggle in which we are about to be engaged, to re-
fOrresthe House of Lords, and identify that branch of the legis-
lature With the interests of the people at large.
" Until tha.treform,shall take place, no hope can he rationally
entertained of diminishing the burthens which now press so
severely on the operative classes.
" I am, sir, very faithfully-, your obedient servant,
" DANIEL O'CONNELL."
Such were the opinions, promulgated by this. individual; and
this formed one of the many reasons that ioticed him, as an
Irishman and a lover of his country,- neiier:to 'afford his'support
to any bill in that house . the tendency of which was to give
power to the individual to whom he had referred, and .viLio was

at the,head of a political party. He- should look with great
suspicionlu every bill introduced by that party, or under their
auspices, in the House of Commons. Their connexion with
that party was j.,,reapest, if not the only stain of the present
government.
Viscount DUNCANNON denied that the person alluded to had
any thing to do with the introduction a the bill in question, al-
though he believed he had suggested an alteration in the Regis-
tration 13ill. He could riot understood the grounds upon which
the noble Marquis came to the 'conclusion that those measures
were brought forward to confer power on Mr. O'Connell. There
was no foundation for such an apprehension. The country re-
quired those measures, which would have been brought forward
if Mr. O'Connell had not been in existence. He could not un-
derstand why the noble-Marquis, upon such a supposition as be
had stated, should determine to oppose the bills, the object.' of
which were to s.cure peace and tranquillity to Ireland. Mr.
O'Connell had not, he repeated, interfered in any way with
those bills.

At the close of the conversation, the Earl of Glengall pre-
sented a petition from Ireland against the Irish Corporat►on Bill.
On the motion of the Duke of Richmond, the Commons'
amendments, to the oaths abolition bill were agreed o. The
house then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS. TuRsoAY. •
A great number of petitions reipecting the mun,cipal corpo-
rations bill were pi*seuted to the house.

SCOTTISH CHURCH COMMISSION.

Mr. Stsict.AtaVouglil ihiilsullecT;;;Ferthe consideration
of the house, and concluded by asking Lord John Russell first
—Whether he could have any objection to lay before the house
a copy of the remonstrance which, by an overwhelming majority
of 90 to 3, had been addressed by the General Assembly of the
Kirk of Scotland upon this subject to his :Majesty's govern-
ment ; and, secondly, whether in consequence of the objections
urged against the terms of the commission, and the names of
those appointed to conduct the inquiry, it was the intention of
the noble lord in either of these particulars to defer to the wishes
and consult the feelings expressed from so respectable a quarter?
Lord JOHN Rossal.t. said he had received the remonstrance
from the General Assembly of the church of Scotland, but must
also state that he had received another remonstrance from the
central body of the Dissenters of Scotland. who thought the
commission too favourable to the church.. He was not disposed
to alter the commission upon either of these representations.
He thought no candid person could find fault with the compo-
sition of the cominissiou. The only powers given to the com-
missioners were to inquire into the religious instruction and
pastoral superintendence afforded by the church. They were to
make the' same inquiries respecting dissenting congregations,
but were not in either case to interfere with doctrine,. discipline,
or ecclesiastical arrangements. The terms of the commission
had been misunderstood. It would be his duty to address a
letter to the Earl of Minto, who was
.at the head of the commis-
sion, pointing out. the duties of the commissioners, and stating
what were the intentions of government in appointing them.
He should have no objection to lay a copy .of that ietter, to-
gether with the remonstrances he had received from the church
and from the Dissenters of Scotland, before the house. He
hoped to have them ready before the last day of the session.
CORPORATIONS BILL-LORDS' AMENDMENTS.

The anienrl;neit proposed by Mr. JEttvis, respecting the re-
vising barristers was agreed to.
Lord JOHN ltossEtt. then stated the course he intended to
pursue respecting the qualification clause. He was disposed to
take £l,OOO as the qualification for counsellors in boroughs with
four wards, end £5OO in boroughs with less wards than tau. He
should propose no other security than that contemplated in the
original bill, viz.—that the person should make a declaration
that he possessed such a qualifiqation, and that he should be
subject to a penalty if he acted without possessing it: He
thought it a great advantage to get rid of the list of one-sixth of
the highest rate-payers, and the counsellors' roll.
Sir ROBERT PEEL did not think that the selection of one-
sixth 10 rt of the highest rate-pavers was a good test. He would
propose to superadd to the test of possession of property rating
to a certain value or amount. He would propose that in the
first class of terin9, parties rated at £39, and in the second class,
parties rated a't £l5 a year should be eligible as town coun-
sellors. _ _

Before coming to a decision on this clause, Lord J. RUSSELL
went back to the 25th clause, and proposed substituting for the
words " preacher or teacher in any dissenting congregation"--
" regular minister iu any way."
Mr. SPRING R lc); observed, that the clause as it now stood
would exclude quakers, who were all preachers, but none of
them devoted themselves exclusively to the duties of the
ministry.
The amendment was also put and agreed to.
QUALIFICATION CLAUSE.
Lord Joins RUSSELL moved " that no burgess shall' be
eligible as town counsellor, unless he shall be possessed of a
real or personal estate to the amonnt of £l,OOO, in towns divided
into four wards, or of £5OO in towns having less than four, or
which have no wards." This amendment did not include the
suggestion of Sir Robert Peel, but he would leave him to add it
if be considered it best.
Some discussion as to the amount of qualification, and whe-
therany qualificati,;n was necessary, then ensued. Eventua►ly
Sir Robert Peel added his amendment to Lord John Russell's,
upon which the house divided.
For the amendment proposed by Lord John Russell
and Sir Robert Peel . 273
For the £lO qualification proposed by another
member .. 37

Majority
The declaration as to qualification was then agreed to.
On' the 47th clause, which enacts a penalty against those who
should take office in any borough without a qualification,
The ATTORNEY-GENERA I. moved an amendment to the effect
that the penalty should not be sued fur, provided the party was
qualified at the time of making the declaration. The further
consideration of this amendment was postponed.
The discussion on various amendments made by the lords was
continued for some time, and several verbal and other altera-
tions were proposed and carried. By one of these, town-clerks
will hold office "during pleasure," instead of "during good be-
haviour." The clause restricting dissenters who may be mem-
bers of a corporate body from interfering in its church patronage
was postponed. Mr. Spring Rice proposed that all church pa-
tronage of this description should be sold, the proceeds appiied
for the benefit of the town: in that ease the patronage mould be
exercised in the usual manner. Sir Robert Peel undertook to
prepare a more unobjectionable proviso.

MILITIA PAY BILL.
On the motion of Lord HovrtcK this bill was passed through
commit tee.
The Shannon navigation bill was read a third time and
pas:ed.

TITHES INSTALMENT SUSPENSION BILL.
The house went into committee on this bill. Before the bill
was read an animated discussion arose of a personal character
between Sir Henn. Hardinge and Mr. Spying Rice. In the
course of it Mr. H. Grattan said that Sir H. Hardinge was an
instance of the absurdity of the notion that good soldiers make
good statesmen. Sir Henry replied that it. was not necessary
to defend himself from the charge of absurdity made in a speech
so truly absurd. To which Mr:Grattan replied that he might
be absurd—but for his part he preferred being polite rather than
impertinent.. Mr. Bernal, the chairman' called upon Mr. Grat-
tan to explam,—he bad used language which he could not justify
as consistent with parliamentary usage or the ordinary customs
of society. He hoped be would say that lie did not mean to use
an offensive expression. Several members spoke on this sub-
jeet, which ended in mutual explanations.' The bill was then
passed through committee.

APPROPRIATION CLAUSE.
Mr. S. RICE moved that the report on the consolidated rand
bill be brought up.
Mr. Hound objected to the motion, and hoped that the recep-
tion of the report would be postponed until to-morrow. He
had understood that the appropriation clause was not to be
brought in until Wednesday, and yet he found that at a late
hour last night the appropriation clause had been introduced
and considered in committee_ He conceived that such a step
ought not to have been taken without notice.
Mr. S. Rica would not object to the motion for postponing
the receptiod of this report, in case any hon. member had nuy
objections to urge to it.
The bringing up of the report was accordingly postponed un-
til to-morrow.

GENERAL DARLING'S CONDUCT.
Mr. TOOKE brought up the report of the select committee ap•
pointed to inquire into the conduct of General Darling.
Sir H. HaantNoE moved that it be read by the clerk at the
table.—Ordered accordingly.
The clerk then read the report of the select committee,
which was of considerable length. We understood it to contain.
a statement that, upon the examination of evidence tendered
them, the committee were of opinion, that under the existing
circumstances of the colony of New South Wales, the conduct
of General Darling towards the two soldiers ( Sudds and ThotnP"
son) was entirely free from blame, and that in his report. of that
transaction to the government at home he had not misrepre-
sented the circumstances under which they were punished.
The committee also stated that Lis evidence had been tendered
to them in support of the other charges contained iu the peti-
tion referred to their investigation.
Sir H. H A [MINCE hoped that this report would be printed
and circulated with the votes, as General Darling's conduct
had been exposed to the most severe imputations, and it was
now declared by is committee of the house to be entirely free
from blame. It must be highly satisfactory to the friends of
that gallant officer to know that he had done nothing incunsist-
ent wi:h his character as a soldier and a man of honour during
his administration in New South Wales. It was only en aerof
justice towards GenerUl Darling that the imputations cast upon
him in that house should, if possible, be obliterated; and the
best mode of obliterating those imputations, as it appeared to
him (Sir H. Hardinge), was to print this report along with the
votes. He concluded by making a motion to that effect.
The Serie K s:a said that the course proposed by the right hou.
and gallant officer was a deviation from the general practice of
the house. lie would give orders that this report should be
printed as speedily as possible : when printed it would be easy
to circulate it in the usual manner. He saw no reason for de-
parting from their ordinary course and for putting the report on
the votes of the house.
Sir 11. 11 A RDI NGE did not wish the report to be inserted in.
the votes; lie only wished it to be printed separately and circu-
lated with the vote.

The SPEAt(E;,.---The ordinary course would secure that point.
Sir H. HAN DING E.—Th'en throbject will-be attained.
The house adjourned at twelve o'clock.

HOUSE Or• LORDS. -WEDNESDAY.

On the motion of Lord BROX:6 II Am, the arrestthent of wages
(Scotland) bill was read a third time.

PRI‘ON DI3CIPLINE.

The Duke of ItictrmoNobioU;hi,4te fifth report of the
committee on prison discipline. The repor; was ordered to he
printed, and sent to the keepers of the various prisons of the
metropolis. OHANGELOUGES.
Lord PLUNKETT, seeing an illustrious duke. in his place,
begged to allude to a report of a statement attributed to the
illustrious duke (Cumberland) in a newspaper of yesterday, at
an orange lodge at which the illustrious duke bad presided.
The statement attributed to the illustrious duke was, that he
had been subjected to attacks of the most violent and virulent
chatacter, and that a noble and learned lord, meaning himself,
had taken the liberty on the occasion of a petition having been
presented from the University of Dublin to charge hint (the
Duke of Cumberland) with tampering with the heads of .the
University, and establishing an orange lodge therein. The
`reporeport ftirther stated that the illustrious duke said he:shoed
rt
with contempt, that'the conduct of the,
noble and' leained lord :was Ungentlemanly, and that he (the
Duke of. Cumberland), would not submit to be bullied, if such
statenlents were .made lie .regretted the noble nuke had nit
made it before his (Lor,d'P.'s) face in that house, and however
great the-difference of their respective ranks might be, neither
that illustrious duke, nor any man'alive, had a right to state
that he had been actuated by violent or malignant feelings—
that his couduct was ungentlemanlike—or that he aas autho-
rised to treat him with contempt.
The Duke of CUMDERLAND.—I never said so. (Hear, hear.)
If' the noble and learned lord will allow me, 1 shall state llhut
did say.
Lord PLUNKETT.-With the greatest pleasure.
The Duke of CUMBILL LAND proceeded to state what bad
occurred on the occasion of his presenting a petition from the
Unii-ersity of Dublin. lie had felt it his duty to call a meeting
.01'4Ise grand orange lodge a few days ago, and had then alluded

to the charge brought against him, of haring established an
orange lodge in the • University of Dubliu. He stated there
might or might not be a lodge, but he was not aware of it. He
then stated, and he appealed to the noble and learned lord if I
such was not the fact, that he had been most cruelly maligned
and attacked. That statement had been made generally, but
without any reference to the noble and learned lord, (hear,)
aud-no one could deny that he had not been so abused, because
t,he.hadi, adhered to Ins principles firmly, manfully, and boldly.
I (Hear) Ile had further said, that no man, whoever he was,
should attempt to bully him (the Duke of Cumberland.) That
statement had no reference to the noble and learned lord,
(hear, hear,) but it was a geoerarstateinent with respect to his
determined adherence to those principles which he believed to
be the salvation ot the country and the support of the protestant
religion. (Hear, hear.) He had never said anything of any
man- behind his back that he should not be ready to say to his
face. ( Hear.)
Lord PLuNKErr expressed himself perfectly satisfied with
I the statement of the illustrious duke, and should be sorry that
an erroneous impression should be abroad of his having made
1 so improper and unjustifiable an attack upon the illustrious
duke. REGISTRATION OF VOTERS (IRELAND.)
Viscount DUNCANNON, in bringing up this bill, entered ilsto
some details of the measure, which, he observed, would tend to
assimilate the Irish to the existing English system.
The Earl of LIMERICK opposed the introduction of the bill at
so late a period of the session. It was full of novel legislation
and difficulties, which he feared could not be got over in the
short inns that- remained to their lordships fur the despatch of
publichusiness.

Lord PLoN KETT defended the bill, and urged the propriety
of allowing it to go into committee, unless their lordships wished
to thiow out the bill altogether.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-WEDNESDAY.

The speaker took the Cllairat four o'clock.
Lord iNfoaPaTit presented a petition from the freeholders and
others of the West Riding. of Yorkshire, praying that the
amended corporations bill might pass.
A similar petition was presented by Mr. CLAY, from the
Tower Hamlets.
Both petitions were ordered to lie on the table.

REMOVAL OF THE BISHOPS FROM THE HOUSE OF LORDS

Mr.:C. ave notice that early in the next session he
should move for leave to bring in a bill to remove the arch-
bishops and bishops from the House of Lords; and also a reso-
lution that deans and chapters were useless, and that it was
proper to place the property of such bodies in the hands of
commissioners, regard being had to existing rights and in-
terests. ' "..