House Of Commons, Thursda...
The Times, 1824-02-27T00:00:00

1'etitions agaiast the duty on coals werc presented from Hale, in Cornwall, by Sir *'.. LEM5ON; from the town of Sandwich, by Alir. BoES-iias; from the tow,n of Dorrington, by Sir 1V. lsrqiGLDY; and from tipping, in the county of Essex, by Sir E. HARtVEY.- Laid or, the table. VEST INDIA SLAVERY. Petitions for the abolition of slavery in the West Indies were pre- sented from the town of Bedford, by Mlr. Pv sr; from the town of Spalding, by Sir W. INOtILBY; fromn a town in Yorkshire, by Lord Al ItLTO ; from Ch'fencester, in the county of. (Gloceater, by ANr. CRIpPS; and from the town and neighbourhood of Milborn', by Sir T. LETrIBRIDGE. LICENCE DUTIES. Petitions against the duty on excise licences werc presented from the innholders and licensed victuallers of the following places:_ The city of Coventry, by Mr. P. MiOORE; the borough of Lan- caster, by MAtr. BLACSCntUNE; the town fKnare&bor6figb, by Mr. S. WVORTLEY; the town of Bowes, in thie north riding ef York- shire, by Mir. S. WORTLEY the town of Bradford, by g r. NAL; and the north riding of the county of Yolk, by Mr. H u uE.- Laid on the table. HOUSE AND WliNDOW TAX. Alr. WHITBREAD presented apetition from a Dlr. John Ri. chards, praying for the repeal of the house and window.tax.-Laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. SHIP SURVE]YING. Sir I COFFIN presented a petition from Thomas Brusser, pray- ing for the adoptian of a new mode of surveying all vessels not built by contract.- aid on the table, and to be printed. L,AW STAMPS. Sir J. NEWPORT moved for an account of tlle stamp charges on lavw proceedings for the several courts of justice in Great Britain and Ireland for each of the last seven years, under the several heads or classcs into which they are divided. Likewise for an account of the stamnp duties on the several branches of conveyancing for the same time. The right hon. bart. gave notice, that as soon as the above returns were produced, he would submit to the house a reso- lution for the modification of those duties, for the purpoSC of throw. ing open the courts of law to the great bodyof4he people. (Hear.) FOREIGN FLAX SEED. Sir J. NEWPORT gave notice, that be would to-morrow bring under the notice of the house a proposition relative to flax-seed im- ported into Ireland, with a view to the statement of some informna- tion on that head, which it was fit those gentlemen who were interest. ed in the welfare and prosperity of that country should be put in pos. session of. OLIVE, PRINCESS OF CIMBERLAND. Mr. SCARLETT presented a petition from the above edebrated personage, in which she set forth that she was a lineal deseendrt of George II., and that, notwithstanding her royal birth; he vak at present a nrisoner in the King's Bench prison. She thereforcz:pray'. ed for redress, and to be heard at the bar of that honourablerbuse,' -Laid an the table. LINEN TRADE. Mr. HUME rose to move for a return of tbe numbcr of yards of linen at and under 7d. per yard, exported from Englaat,n Ireland, and Scotlaud, for the year ending the 24tb of January last, and the amount of bounty-paid on the same. He wished tbe bouse to-be acquainted with the bounty paidon. those inferior linens, belicuse he' wasanxiousto show tbat theopenation of theChancellorof trbeExch quer's repeal of the linen bounties woard fall on the boroughs of tij4 part of Scotland which be represented. An hon. friend askedliJ: why he restricted his motio'r to l1iens of this particular value. He aid so. because the bounty on all line4iof' the value of 7d;:xa y?d and under (agreatdealnof which was nsnufacturedin Scottand)1 was to be immediately tte&n away, wbile the bounty on lin&a o 6Pip& rior quality,was to be remoifed tduaiily. lr. BERNAL ss]d, the tffect of the repal o the batbitq 'woi;l sot be felt by Scotlrs albht. Thegreaterparteoft'te c,cli-ne which wcemmher X uo l,yt . hd i dr th s siniton ojf ,0sn&bu6, aK& d .a, -wi Lm-hetaetet in-the north-of this Coklutry. Mr. BRIGRT isda s few wordt as to the effect the repeal would have on vcefitid description ofcheap handkerchiefs. Colonel TRNNCH was of opiinion that taking away the linen bounty was an act which would be destructive of the pros- perity of Ireland. In the north of Ireland, the linen trade was mna state of igour snd manhood; but in the west of Ireland it waYS in its infncy. These who haLd read the reports laid before that houce might 3udge whether, to the iacrease of that trade, they ought not to ascribe the peace and tranquillity of those parts of the sister kingdom where it flourished. Immense mischief would be occasion- ed bt the repeal of this bountv, and that for the paltry tsving of 100,0001. He hoped, therefore; that the Chncellor of the Exchequer could take the-subject into his serious consideration. His Right hon. friend began, he thought, at the wrong end. If the bounty thihe-takennvay at aU, it ought to be from that branch of the trade aes able to bear the haie, and not from that which was yet in its inishcy. aHe knew,? as a general principle, that boundes were bjectionable: but the situation of the west of Ireland was not one that would justify the application of general principles. A report on the linen trade wastnade in 18'22, and Mr.Ogle, inhis evidencebefore the committee, distinctly stated that the removal of the bounty would be destrctmive to the infant trade. If Ireland were to be punished by the repeal of the bounty, it would be in consequence of the roguery of some merchantg in London. The name of one of them was men- tioned in the report to bhich he had alluded. He was in the habit of making up parcels of cotton, on which he forged the name of Mr. Wilson, an eminent linetn-merchant. Here was a double injury. The consumer was cheated, and Ireland was in consequence to be deprived of the bounty. The right hon. gent. had said, that fo- reigniers were as ready to tax the raw material as we were to tax the manufacture by this boanty. But Ireland would soon not want the raw material at all. Ow ing to the exertions of a public spirited gen- tleman, she would Soon produce flax superior to that of Russia or HolLand from her own seed. Ir. YABER[y could say nothing in favour of the principle of proteeting bounties ; but he did not think the arraDgement judi- cious under which they were to be taken off. For Ireland, he hoped that such a course was now taking as would render her, before long, a greatraw producng country. Scotland, he agreed, would be ma- terially affected by the taking the bounty off low linens, which were almost entirely supplied by her. The iemoval of the bounties ge- nerally should bc so managed, as to press equally upon all parts of the kingdom. it would be remembered,that Government had pro. mised a reduction of the duty on hemp; and this reduction became important now the drawback on low linens was refused. The duty on raw hemp was from 25 to 30 per dent-a tax on raw material in contradiction to every sound principle. If this duity were lowered, hemp would come to be worked up in the low linens instead of flax, and so the article exported still cheaper to the West India islands, with as much advantage to the manufacturer as at present. Mrlr. WESTERN presented four petitions from different parts of Essex. against the dut Ioncoals. QTJALlFICATION OF JURORS. AMr. WESTERN brought in a bil to amend the act of the 3d of eo. IL, and alter the qualification for serving on juries.-Read a first time, and ordered tobereada second time on Mondayse'nnight. The bankrupt laws' amendment bill went thro..gh a committce. -Renort to bo further considered that day (yesterday) three weeks. Mr^. DAWS02Y moved for a copy of the 10th report of thecom- missioners of charitsble institutions n1 England and liVales. SCOTCH COMAIISSARY COURTS. The act of sedcruat of the commission on this subject was laid upon the table. fr. PEEL just mentioned that it was the paper which had been asked for last night bv the honourable member for Lanarkshire. Mr. WILINIO r nioved for a copy of a certain proclamation is- suedby John Fergusson, Esq., his Mlajesty's superintendent of AMosquito shore, with a copy of the letter which had accompanied the transmission of that document. Lord ALTHORP gave notice of his motion (we beliere) upon the general state of Ireland for Tuesdav, the 11th of May. SCOTCH AEPRESENTATION. Mfr. ABERCROM BY rose to move for leave to bring is a bill to procure the more effectual representation of the city of Edinburgh in Parliament, and requested, that prior to any discussion the peti. tion which he had presented last session might be read. The petition having been read at length, the honourable and learned member proceeded to bear witness to the high respect- ability of the persons who had signed it. The petition was couched in the most respectful and confiding terms; it was signed by 7,000 householders of the city of Edinburgh; and if it failed, the fault would be in the weakness of the advocate, and not of the cause which he had to maintain. He was awarc of the difficulty which he should have in bringing forward even a limited question, relating to reform-the tmpressed opinions, the recorded votes, the prejudices, and party interest, lie should ihave to cope with; he was sustained, however, by a strong internal feeling of the truth and justice of his case, and by the consciousness that it had on its side the good wishes of by much the greater part of Scotland. The house had already heard that the petition was signed by 7,000 householders of Edinburgh. The general body of householders in that city amounted to 21,000; of whom 10 168 were rated at 51. annually and upwards; and it was by t.is lat ciass only that the petition had been permitted to be signed, in order that Parliament might perceive that the indi- viduals who addressesl it were persons universaUy of some propertv and education, and such an had a stake in the tranquility and wel being of the country. Allowving then, for householders who were females, absentees, and parties who occuipied two dwellings, it would be seen that the petition before the house came from more than three-fourths of the householders in Edinburgh, rated at 51. annually, and above; and he now came to the grievance of which It complsined_thc actual state of that city as regarded its representation in Parliamez,t. Edinburgh contained, upon an average, more than 100,000 inhabitants; and the Persons in it entitled to vote for the election of members of Parliament were nominxay thitty-three, and practically nineteen. (Hear, hear.) The righ t of choosing members forParlisuient was vested in the body caUed the Town Councile which consisted of 33 persons; 17 being, therefore, a majority. The members of this council were chosen by what was called " lf election ;" the effective course being, that the party coining in bought his coming in at the price of his vote at go. ing out ; or, in other words, a man who was going out elected his successor, upon an understanding as to what should be done by that successor when he went out himself. The Town Council consisted of thirty-three persons, of whom nineteen formed a control. ing majority, and this was, in reality, the only elective body. There were 14 deacons, who were chosen to represent the 14 incor- porated trades. But how were these elected ? Each of the trades in the first place chose six names, which lists were called the long leets. These were returned to the town council, and thc members of that body struck out three, and returned the list back again for the trades to elect one person from the remaining three. So that the 19 who modified the long leets niust be censidered to all intents and pur- poses as svlectint the 14 deacons, thereby holding an arbitrary control over all the proceedings of the town council, when joined by these deacons-a system which wcnt to the exclusion of aU the intelligcncc and public spirit of the neighbourhood. He knew not on what argument they could pretend to maintain such a system. They could not pretend that it was out of favour or in the spirit of conciliation to the interests of property. The town council was sur- rounded by thousands of persons who were as opulent and respectable as themselves. The corporators could not pretend that they were better gifted than their neighbours-that they were mnore disinterest- ed, more likely to act with a singie view to the public good-less subject to the influence of-considerations of selfish interest. To set up that pretence for them would be to hold up those worthy inagis. trate.s to the scorn and ridicule of their fellow.citizens- -an object whici he deprecated ; and t3herefore he would not, even for the cour. tesy of argument, concede so much to them. Why then their onlv defenec would bc, that this constitution of an elective body must be favourable to the conmposition of the House of Coimmons; or else the defence would be the ordinary one_ that bad as the town council were, it would be highly dangerous to alter it. He, on the contrary, thought that the altcration should be made as specdily as possible. Was this a system rcally likely to improve thc composition of the house ? They could only arrive at a just cenclusion upon this question, by considering what was the real nature of this system, and to what consequences it was likely to lead. Was it likely that such a body of persons would on every occasion throw aside all considerations of personal feeling-that thev would act from asense of the publicgoed,without giving theslightest attentien to any selfilh motives? ',Vould they on every occasion be peculiarly careful to clect for mcmbers of Parliament, persons of good intellience and independent principles-or would they show a prefercnce for those who were likely to have the readiest access to the Treasury and tohavethepowerof procuring tortheselect party those benefits which contributesogreatlyto the ease and comfort of those who enjoy them'? It was nonsensefor any onc to affect adoubtupon this subject. In thenatureof things there was only one event which could happen; and that was so plain, that it would be wasting tle time of the house to specify it more particularly. In fact, the town council had no sympathies whatever w ith the people of Edinburgh, who well knew that the council wrce sure to be found in opposition to them upon all questions which strongly excited the country at large. Their whole history showed that for years past they had been-continualy fosnd-in'ofllietwiththegeneral feeling. Whenever there was any new appointment or institution,or business proposed,the first recomumendation of every man, he he a Whig or a Tory, let him hold what opinions he might upon sal other subjects, uniformly con. curring in tbis, was" kor God's sake, take care that the business does not fall in;to the hands of thc Tow Council !" (Hear, hear.) Why should they persist in withholding this chief privilege of the choice of representatives from all the moral, opulent, and intelligent pcople, to secure it for the exclusive advantage of nineteen persons ? ould they feel any otherwise than discontented? Mlust they not consider themselves as insulted and degraded, to know that they had nothing to do with the representationi of the place in which they resided, and were to be for ever excluded upon the strange, capricious, and unaccountable reason that the pri- vilege might be secured to the exclusive advantage of 19 persons? They knew nothing of the representatives of Edinburgh, except frenm the Gaz-ell. So that these representatives were backed hythc 19, t4cymight set t4ewishes of the general body at.defiance_they had nothing to fear from the feelings and opinions of the great majority. It w as not possible thatavvholtpeopleconldcontinuetobear this state f things-with tranqillity. Witesscs of the continual mismanage- mcit and abus. of g.l kinds, could they look to the superior wisdom and principle othe town council in the election of the representa- tive,s? Therewas nothing new under the sun and he had a docu- msent connected with this su~,cct which tended to strenzthen that sentiment. It was a resoluton passed as long ago as 1658 by the town council themselves, for an alteration in their constitution, and in which the very same gronnds of general security were adopted. He went on to the next point; in quesdon, which was that of the probable danger to be dreaded from any change. He ought rather to put the question the other way, and inquire what were the proba- ble advantagesto be expected. from a change? It would open the electiohs tothke merbers of -the learned professions, of whom there -wasa consider.ble,number about the capital city. It would give ac- ceas to those who wreaCo the profession of the law, of which class Edinburgh containc many men of highly deserved eminence. TI'lire wa? - distinguisred University, there was a vast population of persona of independent property which was kept up by corn. AU throngong to the chief city, anQ there was besides a large and .reskecgabo~l>by.f rfio`uiehio' et. Was it .ot an object worthy of the gravatci attentiosr to conciliate the feelings of so -snantcbllghtetThd, opulent, and- reapectablo people? UWhat d ti~-. vZd.;tlete-be in tri g people of.the best property 'mid edtrecti6ii s'"th tbe care aino protection of their owIn rights? \+s,theQ ,ordnomtro?-?aslla ent indeed so rotten, that ' t ' htsre*tri was likely to.endaisger the i,nt' -of ih'6'voutftuti6n '. !ik cQould'the wiCst and most 6titotiatatiim urge, foretean-wagainrtthis great and striking net~&itJ fior.Simprovement?P It -Was in vain to coitend the iaatter'; ther abut neopinion prevalent in all Sco'tland; it bad taken dtep rotst;.ithid spreaditself most extensvely. WVas it! Safe to leave~th misef.u 'ienation and. ,slcontent remaining 'anPongt so l.rgf aic lloxi' !Iley must ie diasatisfied. It wasn mioriotis tliatk tber yi4 tle ediequal 4iindtan of power; they considered its ,- 0I <iitfi4b tas e fiblvh pw4d&eet cvil iu vr ..s~b4 ; . . , v:. .,* r...y tbis4the salecties ofi~ -certain Very limited nuiner of p*ams to sere in Parliam-ent, which numitber was Selected by. very limited oligarchy, to the exdlusion of all the wealth, intelience, aud re. asper.tability of' the zountry. The peolple were utterly excluded, as it they had no interet in the welfare of the countrv. He would, in. stead of seating particulars, lay out a case of comparison, whicb would be striking to a company of English gentlemen. He would suppose that London andNV estminster returned their members-by t6e sufifrages of a very f'ew persons, as Edinburgh did. He would suppose the chief Ionso the kingdom to be without any, except a rev very close corporations. He would Fuppose the sutllrages of the coantiex, instead of the frecholders, being in a few lordships, which, by the greediness of thae successive members, had been thered up into a few flamilies : he would suppose, instead of e. ntral iht of sitting in Parliamnent, that the peers were chosen in avery imitxed auiber from that Yery aristocrasy, which hatd usurp- ed the elective right in thecounties. Whrat would anv entleman say to such a tate of representation? Urhatwould hett"Ik of asystemn which excludedl freehoiders of 10,00-01. a year from any share in the elections ? Would they not say that such a representation o ffecred a cheap meanis of influence to the M'inisters of the Crown ? This was the real state of the representation of Scotland. There was no instance known throughout all Scotland of any thing like a popular election. Those who opposed reform in England, did so, they said because, however the members were elected the people oDf England were represented in the Parliament. WVouid they say soif theirrCe. presentation were lik-e that of Scotland?P The anti-reformers of Eng- land were bound to vote for the reform of Scotch representation on their own assumption. Seotland was not represented in Par. liameiit-no, not even as England was said to be. He should like to see the man who would be bold and daring enough to say, that if the representation of England were like that of Scotland, there ought not to be reform. With what tace could they continue to withhold this first privilege of free citizens-the right of choosing their own representattives ? But then it wras said, that the people of Scotlanid were represented by the Parliameat of England. Pilerhps they were as well,or betterrepresented by tle English gentlemen than their own members. But were there no interests separate from those of the people of En land to be lookedl af"ter ? Was therenot a difference in the laws and hurch,.esta-blishments ofthe two countries, which re- quired the attention of their ownx mpresentatives? He contended that as the disease was pressing, so the remedy was safe,and the danger of suffering it toremain to grow and swell extremre. The diseontent wa general. It would not tend to allay it if a general impresion. went abroad that the house had resolved to allow no al- teration. Tinie would sooni be, that greater danger would manifest itself than any which could be dreaded from a ready and prompt al- teration. In a conflict between the two parties, which Was likely to gain-the house or the people ? WVould not a direct refusal be tae for a sign al to all parties opposed to embody themselves agist the house? The hon. gentleman followed tsp his address, whih wasi loudly cheered to the conclusion, by moving "1that leave be givert to bfing in a bill for the more eff'ectual representation of the city of Edinburghi in the Commons House of Patisment." Air. S. WORTLEY expressed the most profound respect for the talents and ingniyo he hon. mover; but, with great sub. mission, he had not offered to the house any adlequate grundis to in- duce them to consent to any alteration in the repseentation of Scot- land. He ought to have made out some grave case of miisconduict in the town council o' Edinburgh ; whereas he did not impute any thing to them but what was Perfectly just and constitu. tional. Trhere was another case uipon wvhich he might have shown grounds of serious comnplaint, couldl he have succeeded in proving some usurpations of powers which did not belong to them, in time rear to or distant from the present. But there was no such grievance Edinburgh h ad been Edinburgh ever since it had the name-the same rights always existing, the same mode of election prevalent atali titnes. (Hear, hear, hear.) If he had laid good grouds, h7 houl the stp hee? f E.inirburgh was not properly suplie wtn lecor, hvin oly 3,what must be the state of Glagow whch ad~ qartr o thsevotes? Wlhy should they sto attherepesetaton f Sotlnd?Was not the alleged evil as gret i th cosecorortios o Egland? Did not the cities of Lndonand estinstr reurnrepresentatives, to the ex- cluionofa lrgemaoriy c' hos wo residled within those two citis? Why houd te poulaionof Liverpool, whichl was lOOO00hae a eectve od cositin ofnomor tan 3,WOO ? The rigt o voingwas inevey cse.limtedto orprations, which consste, sme f mre nd sme f lss umbrs.But as to the representation, li could not see the least reasn for the motion. Edinbur,Fh was unquestionably filled with an enlightened anid mo- rel popu ation : but of all cities that a stranger could enter within the British dominions, Ednbuirgh presented the fewest objects for dissatisfaction and the miost for admiration. He was himtself of Scotch parentage, but brought up in Eng-land. He had never seenl a sight like ithe city of EdinbUrgh. Such comfort, such order, such decency in all its regulations and thetse were the regulations of the town council. If this city were taken as an example of the defective nature of Scotch burghs, it was badly chosen. But, grant. log that it wiere otherwise, was thie Parliamenit empowered to break in upon the system of representation, the security of which was pledged by thearticles of thieScottish Union? He would show from debates, what hiad been the general sense of Parliamient upon the right in past times--.in those tiMes which were near enough to the event of the usion, to enable them to judge witit accuracy. A debate occurred in the House of liords resectin the riot of the Porteous mob in the reign of Queen Anne-pehas he hon. member meant George ll.)_-an event which hadbens elo- quently treated by, the great person " whom we do not know." The question in the Lords was that of punishing the provost, demolish. log a gate called iNetherbow, and of miaking some'alterations in the town council of Edinburgh. Upon that occasion the Duke of Ar- gyle used the following expressions :-" I was in the.parlia- ment of Scotland when that part of the treaty of union re- latiiag to the privilegecs of the royal burghs was settled and, rin' lords, these priv;ileges were put utpon the samne footing with religion-that is, they were not alterable by any subsequent parlia- ment of Great Britain. It is true, some miov-ed that they should be submitted to such alterations as the parliament of Great Britai-n should in time coming, foT good reasons, think fit to snake. But, my lords, after a full debate, it was carried that they should not be sub. jiect to any such alterations. The nation of Scotland, in all the pro- ceedings at that time, treated writh England as an independent and tree people; and as that treaty, mny lords, hadi no other guarantee for the dlue performance of its articls, but the faith and honour of a British parliament, it would be both unjust and ungenerous, should thts house agree to any proceeding thait has the least tendency to in- fringe it" Lord Hardtwicke, who opposed the Duke of Argyle, vet found it necesary to agree to his gra-ce's general proposi- tions, wlichl he acknowledged in the following terms :-" As I very much respect the noble peer who spoke last, I shall be likewise far from doubting of the truth of what he has advanced with regard to the tenderness which the last parliament of Scot- land expressed for the right of the roy-al burghs in that kingdomn. I say, I shall be farfroni doubting it, because the noble lord advances it fromi his own knowledge. But theb piiles must he always looked upon as privileges whbich the citizens of Einburgh immemo-n . rially enjoyed, and of which they could not be deprived without in. juring themi not only as ciVzens of Ediziburgli, but as sutbjects Of the kingdlom, hiad a bill been broughit into I arlianient for breaking their charter, disslving their corporation, or taking from themi their right of sending a representative to parliamient; t-hat, indeed, had been striking at essentials, and there would have been great wegh t in whiat was objected by the noble lord." He admitted. tht the representation was a trust held for the benefit of the peo- plc; but when once it was vested, it was one whichi should not be chianged upon slight grounds. This was an attempt to begin a systeni ofreform ; and lie for one thought that the Houise of Coin- moo, a a prset cnsttued,wa sufiient for the government of hiscoutry li ha sen te Huseof Conimons c-arry the coutrythrughgoo an thoug evl,through war and throughi peae; ndat as evn he enleuenopposite acknowftdgd that we erein n iproingsititin. ore especially had Scotland thrvenin nannr wsic culdscacey be coniceived by Per-sons notintimately acquainted with hier fornmer state. lie did niot believe that the hionourable and leaned gentleman (Mr. Albercromby) had aniv republican feeling, but suich was the teindenicy of these s,ort of m-otions, which eff'ected nothing, anid served nio purpose but vitupera. tion of all existing institutions. L-ord JOHN' RU6SELL said, lie was quite astonished Ito hear the honourable uienuber quotc thec report of a debate 'in Parliamient in answer to a petition froiii the inhabit;&nts Iof the city of Edlinburgh. That Scotland should have sti- pulatedat'the union that 1ii pertsons should h-ave the right of electing tlieir representatives, was such tin absurdity as one wrould hardlly, expect to hear debated. There wecre sonic propositions so ex- traordnary, that they were only brought f'orwarcd at public meetings, whereithe osit ignorant prsons were, the aud itors ' and there were other propositions of the licke nasture, whiich were onily to be heard in that house. Of this class was the to osition oif the honourable memiber-thiat the people of 'otand should have made sutch a stipulation at the union. The honourable member had laddth oseo omons for having carried thle country thjrough good and evil, in peace and in war; but would any body have the: presunmption to say, that our rising out of tue difficulties with which we had been surrouded, was at all at- tributable to.the wisdom of that house ? (Hear, hear.) During the period when the distress of the agrcultural interest was at the high- e4st, did ministers venture to say that they, had any proposition to make to remnove that distress ? On the contrary, was it not asid by gentlemen on his (LordJ.Russell's )sideof the house,and at lastacrcd- ed to bythe gentlempenon the otlieruide, thatthiere could be norelief given, except byrelieving tliecountryfromi taxation ?Wasnotthatpro- position at first treated with scorn, anid was it not said that the na- turil course of events, secondedl by the energy and industry of the peo- ple of England, would relieve us from any difficuxlties ? and, that in fact was the case. What man of common sense was there but must see that it was so ? We had the advantage of living under some good laws, and it was owing toD the security derived from the knowledge thjat thtose laws could not be violated, that the country flourished, even in densp ite of tie corrupt manRer in which that house was chiosen. The boo, mensber seemned apprehiensive thaLt the gentle- meni on his (Lord J. Russell's) side of the kouse wee going to form a republic ; but he (Lord J. Russell) could not concu in that apprehension. From the constitution of isome rePublics (that of Hollasnd, for examnple), such a motioni as this could not safely be en- tertained ; but in this country, where thete existedl a house of lordIs vith great indepentlent priNieges, no danger need be appre- headed. Thbe hon. gentleman was afi-aid that if this motion were conceded, it would be followed by similar applications on the part of Glasgow and other places; and he (Lord J. Russell) would say, that if a strong case were made out for Glasgow he should be willing to concede it. His hon. and learned friend liir.. Abercromby) had made out a strong case for Edinburgh, and therefore he (Loid Russell) thought the hou$e should agree to his motion, though thby might not at present be willing to extend it to other cities. Ther6was. no city (and he spoke from some personal knowledge) in whldhreform would be so useful as in Edinburgh;, the people of that city were remarkable for their loveof? order, and for the interest which they now took in political qucstions; and they had for-leaders men who, if they had seats in that house, would be reckoned the ornaments of it. Looking at the subject in this view and thinking that, if the house wished for any reforii, there couldu be no better opportunity than this motion, (hear, hear,) it had his approbation. - Even if the house didi not wish for reform, they would, by refuting this motion, marsbal against themselves' such X body of ability and inteligence as would be sure in theiend tq-on- quer. If, therefote, he were against'reform, be slaffXtbiinkit the wiser way to gmant- the moLion, rather than array such aforce i opposition to him. Lord BINNING had the stronest objection to these motions for reforni .piece by piece-; for the geptlemnen oppohite_well knw, -if granted in-one snstance, that would be folowed up -by others. In,] reas of proved cnrruplion and milverstion, tlehouse bhadsnwn] itself ready to apply a corrective; but to ettend to.co fordiats i; which the right of voting had been long vested the ssuni meza. sure, was a step in which he wa st peepa?eA to accompanv the noble lord. Certiunly neither the Mike of Argy,le nor l,oti Hatdwickecould. havc mrent to eonteudasy di 3 th lie"gb-l and privileges of the people of Scotland * they hid ahoyrhat Weir Imeali* *ai ba a disinct refcrecee to tie i nesle Pid the nhadtorthaderent WMni s P h tlepsen opposit toet rid of the p ain ineanbiof the wor of h article of union. lhty b op by begirng the questioea ;. uyjm ' i for the benefit of the people of Stetland4 but there had been thing shown to 2tisfy him that the measure would be foi their i nefit. Why, he would ask, was Edinburgh seleete_,j- had not Glasgow the priority; it wvas more populous ti r Edinbargh, and was, as regarded manufactures, the secondty-;-f the empire. He did not t,ink the pele of that city would blc r, obliged to the honourable and learned xentleman for thu' .ha' left them in the lurch. The honourable member for had not intended to confine to the House of Conratot the merit of having brought the country out of it 5-' culties; but what the House of Commons must be asp ed for was its complete accordance with the sentinuae of d ple of this country. 'ihehon. andleanmed gent. had con enaP stadng, that great pains had been taken to exclude firtn the Eitionw ail person who were not rated at 51. rd Binning) thought this a pretty strong proceedig part of these popular Whig leaders; but how was it efeeda: they ask the question to each person, and if the reply was '- N, do not pay 51., only4L 10s."_" Then, Sir yoat can't sign it" was what had been done by the Arietocraticpopulaire. Tht 21,000 persons in Edinburgh, they could have only got one-thirid sign thepeeiron, was to him (Lord Binning) a mnatter of sau ,, touh trom tbtnidmbergreat deductions ought to bemodefr sons who, cut of wantonness, might have signed twice. But petit,,' more numerously signed than this! had been presented 'il various unrepresented places in England, yet the pra, not one of those petitions had -been granted. (Hear,C There was another place, too, which no one had meudoai, l which nevertheless was as welt entitled to be remembered u occasion as any other place in the cobtry_-he meant the ,r and m-edicinal city of Bath, which contained 36,000 inhtb among whonm there was at least a fair proportion of charact intellect. In that dty, the corporation was, lhe believed, dto ; composed of members of the learned faculty of medicine. no objectiQn that it should be so, but he thought, with the insta,- Bath staring him in the face, it was too much for his hoal, , learned frieud to come to the house asd talk as he had done Edinburgh. His honourable and learned friend had on fot, occasions adopted the same tactics as he had made use of to.f* He did not mean to say his hon. and learned friend was not a fectly sincere in the statement he made; but the house woula I forget, that on the questions relating to the boroughs as well as the counties of Scotland, he had always called upon it to pvt out its view the question of parliamentary refbrm. His honourable a learned friend had said the same thingto-night. (Mr. Abercran said he had not uttered a word that bore out this aaeta; of the noble lord's.) His lordship was going to explain. , h the question of parliamentary reform was debated, the obj' had always been stated to be the support of the mnixed nonular cc- stitution. It was now said there was no such thing in Scotland that it wa impossible not tO see that if the present motion were to - carried, the consequences of it would be, notwithstanding the ass tien that was made, to carry the question of parliamentary refom- reards Scotland. This might be nrenious-it might be good polb;' but hehoped that at all points gen emen would not beled into t. error of Scotland as separated from England. It was no .sid cO, i not beaso. The debates in the house were influenced 'Ithe pFbt dpinion in Scotland; 'and whatever might be the differences a5si.- from the variations in the church establishment, and the forra laws, the feelings and the interests of the people of England a: Scotland must always be the same. The flourishing state of the c of Edinburgh was the best answer that could be ma4e to that pan: his hon. and learned friend's speech, in which he.said that the p sent system did no good. That Edinburgh was one of the ra prosperous cities in the kingdom, he wes disposed to attribute to t itufluence of the town council, who, he tbought, ought not to treated like the corporation of some little borough *vho thought nothing but eating and drinking. He would appeai to any one , had an opportunity of judging upon a late memorable occasion._, meant the visit of our august Sovereign to that city-whet'oer a- thing was then apparent which should imply that the TVo'wn Coals S of Edinburgh was a close petty corporation. He believed thna- close sympathy always prevailed between them and the inhabitaO of Edinburgh, snd he was sure that they had not deserved all tl.' had been said of them in the course of this night's debate. Sir JOH N NEWPORT had lived long cnouh to remember tliN the same enconmiums which had been pronounced to-night on tbir; as cey are-the sanme assertion that the debates of the Parliame echoed theyoice of the people-had been heaped upon the IrishHot- of Commons to its very dose; and he knew that it was by listening ' such flattering praises that the Irish paIrliament was separated frc: the people, and aecelerated and sealed its owa downfall. This- collection it was that caused him now to doubt the truth of the eu ' giums he had heard1. It had been said, that the petition did I fairly proceed from the people of Edinburgh; and yet, if it were i:n so, how did it hap p en that there was no counter petition from the who entertained different sentiments on the subject? After this Id tition had been before the house for two years, it waS fair to presur that it was that of the people of Edinburgh. Former pettic had been objected to because they were said to proceed ofily fr rabble: and it was said this sbould not be considered as proceedi ftron the people at large, because it was signed by persons of sol wealth ann consideration. He called upon the house to adopt sol; measure favourable to reform, as the only means of preserving t constitution. Alr. KENNEDY couid not refrain from expressing his ourpn that the right hon. gent. (Mr. C. Dundas), the member for 'di burgh,had not tbought it worth his while to make any observation the presentmotion. He (Alr. Kernedy) should nothave addressed t house, but for the application which had been made of the arguEs drawn from the union. The opinions ofthe Duke of Argyle and Li. Hardwicke had been quoted; and though he professed for the lax all the respect to which it was entitled, he wished to call tse sam don of the house to the fountain-l,ead-to the art of union self. The 22d article of the union pwovided for the election of t 16 representative peers, and 45 members, as by a subsequent should be settled and declared. That subsequent act directed at one member should be returned by the city of Edinburgh, but ( not say one word about the corporation. Could it.therefore, be said tt this furnished a sufflcient reason for refusing the object of the pmf don ? Hle thought it wras too much for the noble lord to und' value the petition on accounatof the manner in which it had beenI - stp, instead of pursumng the more manly course of meeting it up ltS merits. He (Mr. Kennedy) did not propose to enter anto a. lengthened discussion on the subject, but he could assure the hoea ther if some concession were not made, the dissatisfaction alrea experienced would be likely to proceed to an injtrious and alarmi extent. (Loud cries of* Question." Srangers were ordere4 withdraw.) Mlr. ABERCROMBY rose to reply, but the noise made by! strangers in resumin their seats prevented our catching the ee art of his speech. \"hn the no se had subsided, we undeasto sim to say he rejoiced that no one had been hardy enough to ataer in the course of the debate the vindication at'the co:poration Edinburgh as it was now constituted. No one had undertaken excuse the cepresentative syster; of Scotland as it now existed. T hon. incmber for Yorkshire sart. that all reform tended towards t establishment of republican principles. If he (Dlr. Abercroinb were anxious to avert the establishment of such principles, t best means that he could devise would be by the gradi reform of the re resentation of the people. In this a nion lie was confirmed, because be saw, that as educa3 advanced, the desire for reform advaisred also and he believed would continue to do so. The admissitns which had been madetI evening would not be lost upon the intelligent and reflecting part the people,.who -wouldlearn from there. that they had no paet the representationt. Did the house suppose theyv would evert quiesce in this doctrine. It should be rt4e first object of Parliens to conciliate the confidence and esteem of the people by the usa. tenauce oftheir rights, but the means new pursued were nuchast calculated to lose that confidence. 'the house be knew, ' apt, in admiration of its self-love, to consider that the pea was beholden to it for cvery valuable ad useful measure was adopted; but let members consider more deeply, and tl: would find that it was by public opinion that tbey were swa ( Hear fron the ministerial side.) Iho led in every great questior NVas it the house or the country? (Heaw.) Did the lion. gel (Mr. S. WVortley) think lie did not know the use he meant to mass of this admission ? As far as bis (M5r. Abercromby's) experier went, the people had decided on aU main questions; but it wasa ing to that progress in cducation to which he had before alludt and whiCh would teach them that they had at length, and af the efforts of many years, obtained only tthat to which they -a justly entitled. (Hcar, hear.) The popalarity of the right li( gentlemen now in offlce, arose from their having adopted papua: measures, and thus admitting the superior intelligeace of tlie pub]l From the result of elsianiglme'adebate, thepeop3e of Scetland waor learn, first, that they werc to have no interest in the choice of rey sentatives, and secondlv, that the housedeemed it better thea tonsioamld be mnade by 19 suspected persons, thnan by thensoelt Thc effct of this would roll back upon the house. and they shot all probably live to atd the day, when niizorities smaaHer *.hen at of to-nirght, wo'uld, by the force of public opinion, make their ?PI nents give way to their-clainm He was convinced that it was t interestand policy of this house, when the great body of Rublice nion was growing as it wa S now, to conciliale that pubhieop:nion, a to extend the basis upon which the Government rested. It ceu rest upon nothing else, and the larger the proportion of it wasaw the Ninisters, the firmer would be their possession. Bie leftsI iesrion in the hands of the house, satisfied that in its decision t feelings of the people werer deeply interested. The house then divided, when there apoeared_ For the motion 75I Against it, 991 lajority against it, 24. CRUEL,TIV TO ANIMAJS, On our return to the gallery, we found Alr. R. MARTIN addressing the house, purssaro- lc not. hehadgiven, tomoveforacommnittee to inquire Obb cant cruel sports,if persevered in, woul tene' to the der6i6iation the peeple. In consequence of the noise made by' tre return strangers we could not hear the first part of the hon. member's? mnarks. e understood him at length to say tbat it was a propo tion whicht nO man wouldt eoTltrovert that the indulgemice of ipC, by whicht animals were most cruehy tortured tended to debr and demoraRlize the minds of those who frequented'-them. this, by any fair argument, could be proved to be erroneoI he would not hesitate to withdraw his motion; but he appi hended no such ar,ument could be supportpd. It was ' fair objection to his proposition, to 4ttemjpt to esiablish an ar logy between fox-hiisting and shooting, n (nd the cruel sports of bs ger and bear-baiting. There was, be contended, no just comp f son between them; and itD defence of the aristocracy of England t would assert, that there were some of the most humEa.ne men k the country, who laudably, he would say laudably, indulal' in the sports of the field. No man, however, could spy any th for thenmoral character of the constant frequenters of that scene cruelty, the lVestninster-pit. Ile understood, also, that Fom vicinity to W-estminster-school, it wss much complained of by masters of that, establishment. The hion. mepMber then gave a det,z of someof the giruelties practised towards animals in the Westtiie Ater-pit. Argtongst other things, be stated that-an unlucky bear P! continued the victim of this cruel sport for two yeats; its eyesbir in the course of. that time, beet, torn out, and the whole flesh of( utder jaw completely tom-away; and the ke'pei'at length conat o kill hiun, lleging as the ground'fo-tShis only act fluenity wards the wretched-brute, tbht it hFanotsmuch of teliyt as a -dog could fasten upon. It might be said in answer to hitft tion, that it would not be pmpsr to interfere 'tith the sports 0 people. It would, however, be a libel upon. the ,reat b of the people> of 'England, to say that they -were fend such aposts. These werethe sports of onlv the very lit ode thper.eIf t wersereany doubtthat tebe-entimn softlsC? body I `1tbeptpe lwereagainst sucth'crelties, that dodbtn; ,oail shotetisisnebe rex~oved-?bj the,Xiff r of titws iti tesa of e thoumftry, pty3igi*' di tolitionof-hei4 hPt HeIhad nawi dija i:o pridaes"ta'ition frQniisMtebeter ?t! *eliidit-w ugsed@ iO itdi tdb';avssgnpt whors s sieftes f f X iiibtw .The hot able lnembr, aiter ,owac odbeq ,axrs-bm sauppose gf th obj CX his MnOtiON Clll)uw1A by rctviag-" ThaLt ai sohc cWram1ttet b- pOnted te inquire how 'far the_ amusement of bear-baiting and. Other cruel wprts Wea a vnisehievloug effect on the raorash of the people.". Sir R. HERON rose to oppose the motion.- He could never sa%ne- tion in any way, such a poor, trumpery, byper..pathetical,, and he 'wcould add, bluntlering made of legislation (hiear, and a lauigh) as chat which had been adoptcd by the honourable member. In the ourse ef the l.at session, the hionourable memnber said he would not touch upon bull.baiting, because he thought he was likely to be op., p-sed in it, and yet the other evening he gloried in the attempt to pt it down. This he would call ablutndering mode of legislation; foIria honosrable muember to glory at one time for having attemiptedl that wliich a short time ago he dleclared he did not ir.tendO. Perhaps Isebhadlntended to give the house onmtinll instead of anothier. Z-le woultl oppose this motion, because he &4 ,u.lht it went to, trenchi upon the sarusements of the people. ana lie did n6t think that they ougtLtto be trenched upon unnecessarily. The legislatur-ehad not shiown itself very fav'nerableto the %ports of the people. He could not believe that the higher orders were crnAel in their sports, or-hat the lower orders, who i-itatea those above, .gere cruel in theirs. The hon. member who brought this forward had gone too far, or did not go far enough on this occasion. In his4 (Sir R. Heron's) opinion, he went too far ; but on the hon. member's (Mr. R. M1artin's) own principle, hc would ask him what he thiought of cock-fighiting ? or what he thought of another kinid of sport, in which he did not know whether the hon. memnber indulged-namely, that of torturing an orster by eating it alive? What did he think of fox-hunting ? lie (sli- Robert Heron) was not a badiger-baiter, but hie thought that there was just about ats much cruelyitourn fox to death as torturinig a badger. The honourable member, after abolishing those %ports motst not rest even there. He should carry his protection to anim,as still farther, and move for an bumble asd- d1ress to the throne, prying that his' Majesty miglht enter into a convention with the King of Franice, for the puirpose of abolishing the tortutre of frogs in that country. He should also, upon the prin- ciple of this motion, endeavour to do away with the manufacture of the " Strasburg-pie," which, as was well known, consisted of a certain part of a goose (the liver) af'ter that animalibad been kept in torture for a considerable time, Looking at the tendency of this mnotion, he could not support such a petty and trumpery modle of le- -.islation. and should therefore oppose the motion- Mlr. WILLIAM PEEL asked, with what reason or equatlity could the rich, who themnselves daily indulged in sports which ended in cruelty, to animals, abolish the sports oF the lower classes ? Ile himnself was not an admirer of bear or badger-baiting, but if we should abolish these on the grouind that the~_tended to immoralily, upeon what principle if fairness cou,ld they- refrain frmpeventing rherch from going to thecopera on Saturday ngt,adetrn into the Sutnday miorning ? t would not be contended that these graCtiCesl tended to improv-e mnoralitv. He could noit support the ~ocourable member's mnotion, but hie would haye no ohiection to any measure which would so far regulate those amusemients as to prevent their beinz riotous and disordlerly. Mlr. J. SMITH said, he had not heard any atrgument against the bonourable mnember'- motion. What hand been argued against it came en this-.tbat because we were cruel ourselves, we therefore shbould not pevent cruelty in othen. N\ow he would use no such argument, be cause he would not admit that he was cruel. The question before the house was this-_did those sports of bear and bad2er baiting tend to demoralfze those who Irequented themn? lie had not witnessed any such sports, but fTom the account he got of them, he had reason io believe that thev were frequented bv ilhe ve~ry lowest and worst of the population. '['hey were parties whiolly without education-he meant without any nii'ral knowledge. lie was not an enemy to the sports of. the pooi, provided they were no't such as were calcualated to injure themselves :when they were of that character,undoubtediv they ought to be put down. Thebegt andsurest mPeans of preventing thos,elcruel sports would be to improve the edu- caition of the people, so as. tos make themn abstain, from principle, from such crn,el sports ; but in the mean time he would su port the mnotion of his hon. friend (Mlr. R. Al artin), which woul1 prevenit that which hadl such an immoral tendency. Mr. PEEIL said that the obscrvations of the hon. member who spoke lnst did nor touich the question before the house. if only the uneducated attended those cruel sports, that mighit be an argumient for extendinc the benfilts of eduication. He agreed withi cte hon. mrover that aill animnals were entitled to the protection of man : buit why should the hon. member select only one class of animals? W"'ty the bear, and the badger, and the monkey ? Thie bear was strong, and the buill had, at 'least, a good chance of protecting hlin- self against his assailant. Whly wvere these alone to be pro- tected, and the animnals not so well provided excluded ? On what sort of application, even of hiis ow-n priniciple, could the hon. gentleman e'ccuse the fox-hiunter, while he would punish the badger-baiter ? Surely the house could not proceed to legislate upon these subjects, on the melancholy details; of this or that ease of ufeig, howeve-r much individlual membecrs mighit feel for the tor- tures to witich thie unhappy aninalls hiad been expose. (hlear.) But those who followed field'-sp'orts Must very well know that even they could not be pursued without the infliction of consiAerable suffering on the object, of thn,e ,zports ; an(i if 000 cases of'such crueltv on the piart ofr thne sportsmen, and sufferiniz on the part of the gam'e, co)uld b-e shown, surely the house wouild not he required to make therm the subject of Jlegislation. How of'ten might it occutr that a man of large fortune, particularly attached to that part icular sport, should challenge all England to) a grAnd cock--fight ? The hon. gent. (31r. 'Martin) said, he would put down cock-fightingr. TI,is was jus4t -hat he (h11r. Peel) appreh,endeLd. The hono'urable gentlenian wouild come to the house, session after seseicn, now with sonie tale- about a cock, and row with one about a buill (laughter), and rall for new enactments on each occasion. 5,i'hy did he not at- tack horse-racing ? (Hear.) The hon. gent. seemed to say that he 011r. Peel) desired him. But he did -not desire that hon. gent. to do an"Ysuch thing. Wlhathede-siredofliim was, that he woaldlforbear legislating on iuch subject altogether. ( Hear.) '('hey were too mni- Itute, too muich the proverty of local custom and. regulation, to be fittir'g matters for legislation. It wvas not that he mneant to sav the people might not be betcer wititoout them, but even up~on that 'con- sideration it did not follow that chs enactment which the hon. gent. desred OfOzlt ro take'plce. Mfuch 'mighit be said (pursuing this ri6cple) ir.fvour of' a more eytenlded and vigilantt system of pe, t`c. sewhch by perpetuiallsy communicating between one towni and village and a'notlher, might greatlv tend to diminish crimes and to p:aOteet properts': but he~ had no )ieaitptioti in saying lie liked the ex, isting system valth its imperfections better; he preferred England as it 'wasq, to what it might be undeg such an alteration. of her police, (Cheers.) He liked even the wild luxuriance of the plant ; sntil would be the last to cut and trim it down to the prinll precire st-ndard. whichi the hon. gentleman's propositions would go to esta- blish. 'l'hc fac-t was, h owever. that cruelty war bY nio treeas the 'vice of England, eeneralIly. (Hear.) As to what his holi. friend had instanced about the scenes that took place in the neighbourhoodl Af Westminster, hr thottrhnt himt in error upon that point alsio ; for he ( 3r. Peel) would punish the- educated, and not theuneducated in. dividuals who attended on suck occasions, upon the principle that if ntischiefiit were crest ii, thev were attributable to those who shouldi have been aware of the fact; and that the habits and morals of the poo;r ever follow the course of the morals anid habits of the richl. With singular inconsistency thie hon. gentleman stated that those scenes were attended only by the rabble ; and In his very niext sien- tence lamented thle evil example thiey afForded to th'e p2tri ian scholars of WVestminster who were to be seen there. L;oulde the honourable gentleman doubt who wvere the proper objects of his censure ? But It was evidlent that all this time the thing could flotbe preventead; for nothing would justify aitae ndses irng a crowd tisembled to witness a sport th.t was not illegal. even if the cxihibition of that sport w'as likely to lead to some bad acts. On wvhat, principle did his hon, friend iorbear putting down Ascot anid Epstorn races, to which, however, he annually witlidrew hiint. self, and many other memnbers of the hnouse ? All the world knew that races were scenes of constant riot and confuision, hut wvere in- vaziablyl attended by people of the highest rank and character, as Well as'lsy the rabble. (Hear.) It was, mnoreover, a. very objection- able attempt to take away any sports which forned the relaxation of the lower classes after the labour of the dav was over. There were mnany virtues that could not he enforced by'legislation ; and c;ueltv was a vice that there seemed to e%iltt no necessity in England for puf- ting down by an enactm,ent. The house would do well not to give the world occasion to say, that the rich, in putting down the sports of the poor, preserved their own ; or that they "COMPOUnd for ' sports' they tire inclined to, "By damning those they have no mind to." (Cheers) They would do well to take care, that in legislating for the abolition of cruelty, they did not introduce new vices amiong the people. Hie would like to ask his honourable friend, whlether he reallybelieved tliatthero uere20 bears kept f`orbaitiingoall England?9 [M r: Mtartno seemed to expre%s an assent. 1 If the honourable gent. could p~rove that there were 20, be ( Mr. Peel) did not think it -would alter the case, as to the necessity of putting them within the protec. tioncof astatute. Nor cold heunderstand how it happened that the hen, gent. proposecd to apare our alien-oneniv, the bear, and to leav,e out of this amnnestY those natural-born subjects, the hare and the partridge. (Laughter.) The powers of inquiry whiich this house Possezsced were notorlinsly great ; and indeedi they had been not on- aptly compared to the proboscis of tile elephant ; which, pus- aesingz sufficient strength to tear up by its rots the oak of the forest, had yet a caPaCitv to select and( lift up tite Minutest thingis. On the Present occasion, he certainly did not tihink lthat tho'se powers could be exerted by tlte hiouse with dignity advantage, or propriety. There was one specics of cruelty to which his bon. fric-nd had rot adverted, It wais, however-.anc he saidI it with sin- ceritv-but too commton; he me'ant thie spinning cock-ehaffers upon a pn, suspenided at the eatl of asetting. in conimon consistenicy his Isolourable friend should bring in a bill to prevent children it, future fromnspirmningcock-cha&irs. (A laugh.) Because bethought that On such; a sRubject legislation was not ntcessary-would do nio good, anld would not consult the interests Of the brute creation-he shouldI rfuse his consent to such a legislatZive enactmuent as his hon. friend ?asked for. (LauAid cries of question.) "I r. Ri 'VIRTIN, in explanation, really thouglht that the kceeper of the pit at IlTcstminster (a ,laugh), when bV should learn all that hisIisiteht o, friend had said to night, wouldl erect for him a box to his own accom,modationn' anddmrark out awliite dayfor the ex. Ihibltion of the sports. (A laugh.) He knew his eighit hon. friend wa~s laitdably addicte to devotion, and 'was sure that in his constant sasendanice upon church duties he must have repeatedly h,eard fromn the pulpit, ~charity preached to all. This doctrine, included the brute crealtion, wbilch oueht therefore to b"e indlu~d.e'd in s.onile-s .yst of protection. He should not press his nmotion to a division (hear, hear); and his reason for this course was, tenderness to the house, tcnderness to his right honoarable friend, and tenderness to those bonourable genalemen who, though they had not articulated any opinion (hear hear), had sufficiently evinced the one they enter- tamed upon t se question. I1robably' upon a division there mizht be a majority against it, and lie should be sorry to see any list of a majority againbt such a motion given to the public. 'he motion was then withdrawn. COHURCII IATES, (IRELAND.) Mr. GOULBURN stated that an act was passed last sessions one of the provisions of which, the bill lie now moved for leave to brng in was meant to extend. That provision vested in the Lord Cnancellor of Bnglandca posver to vest certain sums in the tank of England; but it having been doubteaupon high legal authority howr faree l,ord Chancellorof Irehand]3ad atnimilarpower with respect to thatcountry, it was now wished to enable him to exercise such a power. Hgp anticipated little opposition to such a ipotion, which was *' for leave to bling in a bill to amend an act passed in the 4th of ets. IV relative to the collection of church gates in Ireland." Sir J. NEWlPORT, adverting to the-opinion he had fornerly express-el on the existing act, said, the same ofinions still possessed him. A fndre dangerous gct; or one pore unfair and oppres. sive to the ncoDle it was to oagrate dmoflg3 was not to be found in the Statutte goo-1 He shWul propqse- certtin amendmeitts in the committee,-which would be-of- gome 'length. Mir. GOULBURN said, that if tile-'j'l,ht honourabre baronot meant to bppos in conimitted a bilL*lifeb With q:siogle alteraiion, would be tne sanne as that passedIasit iissoui, after continited post- pojents, to-meet the rigbt osabsWo bayonet's conyVnienace he ou.d ieb reAdy io meet him. He sbplsd -alsd be read, y lfMc isim on tsosw protinds 'upon which -itih -T-kt hiotiourabe gentIbman ob- 5ectwd tc it as an oppressive act; thoumh anz ons whp rould term it oppresaive, rmugt either have minseouctived i.ts puxret,? or 6t l have read oer its enactments. (Hear.)I Sir 3. NEWPORT was much obliged for the lecture of i the right honouirable Secretary (hlealr) about his ignorance of the laws of a coantry whiclh his long experience gave him (Sir J. Newport) some right to aisxppose that he un.derstood qusite as well as thie right lion, gentlemnan. (Hear, hear.) To those laws he first addressed his carefuil attenti6n, before that right bons. gent. was born (Hear, her Mlr. G IBURN repeted hiis conviction that either the right hion. baronet misunderstood, or had not read the clauses: and leare wras given to bring ini the hill. AUSTRIAN LiOAN. Mir. HUM1E wrished to obtain some: explanation aboutt a tr&nsac. tiors zhat seemed irreguzlar. Why hadl his Ma1ijesty's Government recentlv come to an agreemnent in respect of a very largesaim of mo- neypau, ad afurhersumto e pid o tiscountry, without hay- ingsone witen ffe orcotrat? Hea.)The Treasury letter datd i Ocobe, 123 saed,tha anoffr ad been made by cer- tai cotrator topa~to he ritsh overnment 2,500,0001. on ac- coun ofAusria Newhe ske (ld Government possess atny cop oftha dcumnt..4 th ~ferwas a written one ? He was not aware, that on any occasion of equal importance. the Treasury had ever given answers to offers verbally made. (Hear, hear.) ~'he parties negotiated with seemed to have been the contr'actors, and the Emnperor of Austria. Was there any, anid what written offer on their parts ? If the Emperor or Austria pro- pose'd to pay the sum in) question, but subject to a certain dis-count, thien ministers had not received that suni,but very many thousands less. He therefore maoved that there be laid before the house a copy of the offers made by Messrs. Reid, Irving, and Co. ; Messrs. Baring, Brothers, and Co. ; and Messrs. Rothschild, and Co., to pay the skum of 2,500,0001. into the Exchequer on account of the Emperor of Austria. (Hear.) The CHIANCELLOR of the EXOHEQUERhad flattered him- self tuat recent discussions, had satisfied the mind of the honourable gentlemnan, that nethingz took place in the transaction in question Of a secret or! objectionable nature; atnd ho still hopedI that what had been alreatdy said was satisfactory to the house generally. If the lion. genItILesan wanted a pirecedent for the transacti-'n he could not gratf hi Im; for upolo con suiting thereodoftersuy,h (hChancel1or of the Exchequer) hadl not been able to findl any relating to a matter of at all a similar chaoracter. The hionour- abe gentleman did not seem to understand this business, which had proceeded briefly- Ithus-The [Austrian Govemment proposed to give us a certain fimount of Austrian stock ; but that would have been a mOst unsatisfactory mode of settlement ; for if this Govera- ment had taken stock, they mnust have gone into the market with it. WVhat they could have (lone in that case, he rtally did not on- dttand, thoughhbe had no doubt they would have mnade but an in- difrn agin. This Government would have been liable upon its sales to all the fluctuations to whichi the sto,;ks were exposed. It was, therefore, thought the better platn to ascertain in what manner they could Fet at somne mnoney instead. The Austrian Government agreed to thts proposition; but having no mneans of raising the re- qulisite amiount of money within their'own territories, they employed certain capitalists in this country. This Government then de- sired to know what proportion of money those capitalists could afodt ie for this stock ; andI it was perfectly true, that ir thebeginninig of the transaction, and before a'n offer was finally, mde some ,vritten communtnications passed between the co tracor and the Treasury. The contractors, at lengfth, oni behalf of Austria, produced their zidtinetatim; and it did seem to Governnsent nsucli better to takce what was offere-d titan to say, lf we cannot have all we want we will have nothing." He really thought there was no nlecessity ?'or producing all thiose written documnents that in a preliminary stage of the business mnight have passed on this subject between Government and the contractors; and not conceiving that the slightest blamne could possibly attach to Government for its share in the transaction, he could not feel himself justified in acceding to the motion of the hon. gentleman. Mr. HUME, in explanation, thoughit that if such a patper as he spoke of was in existence, he muist endeavour to compel the Go- vernment to produce i-. WVhat he complained of was, that with this stock in thieir hands they did not go to the Bank or Ex- change, aiid ask how much the puablic wouild give themn for it. This was the usual practice. Governmenit ougKht to have pro. ceededi as it would with a loani; and to hatve said, "1 W1e have got 30,000.000 of florins, or whatever the sum was, in Austrianl stoek w-ho will give us most for it -" He thought the Chancellor of the Exchequ5r was not warranted in consadering the supposed amouint of 2 mnillions and a half, equal to that specific sum of m-oney ; or in granting the contractors a discount of 51. per cent., when money was at 41. per cent. ,and even less all Over the country. Mr. BARING wished to7urnish that information whichbhis lion. friend, in all discussion,s upon this subject, seemed not to bein pos- session of. Undoubtedly, the off'er the lionoutable gentleman had alluded to, didi not exist ai a documnent. There was no written pa- tiers of the kiriic. (IHear. hiear.) It was, on the part of those gen-. tlemen who were intereste-d withi him 0Sir. Baring), a sptcific prop,osal in whichi tie Treasury finally acquiescedl. After cons,ideiable dis- citostonR about the termns of paYment, before the offer was madle, it was at last made verbally, not *by himnself, bitt bv one of the other paxrties. Tlierefore nosuch p3per existedl. In the first place he wvould observe, that he fully concurred with the hon. genitleman in that ge- neral principle whic hne (Mr. Baring) had as of'ten advocated-that transactions of thia kind sliould be public. But, in the pres,ent case, there was no puiblic operation to he performed, because the Austrianl itlinister of Finance had mnade up his mind to give onlv a certain amnount of stock ; and the Government of this countrv det'rsnined to iaccept it. Int the next u)lace, the Austriani bankers at Vienna became, Iin the mean while,mrixed up ivith the transaction. They liad granted a loan themselves to their Government, and it wvas understooll there shiould he no other without their consent. They necessarily became Parties to the tranisactionl, and nothing couldl 6e done without their consent. Their Govemnment,again,.couldr.ot send their stock here, thirough any other channel hut the Englishi Goverinient; nior would it have beeni d!cent in the latter, unaer the circumistances, to treat their stock in the public war that would have been, then requlisite. The hon. genitleman concluded by saying, that the contraCt6rs saw Lorsd Liverpool andl the Chancellor of the Exchequier in the first in,. stance ; andI the transaction becamne in its completion merely a verbal one. idIe then expressed his entire readiness toans,wer any questions, and to give everyinflormation cortoecctd with tliesubject. (Hear.) .~lr.MIABER1LY undiers-tood the ques%tion ,fliis lion. friend(M1r. Houmie) to relate, net so much to a bargaini im Austria stock, as Ito the discoupt allowved by this Goverrimenz upon that bargain. life must sav thait, likce the right hon. the Chancellor of the Ex-t chiequer, lie 1oice upon, the mioney that was gained in payment of the Austrian loan as'a complete God-send ; and that, like his -rlgltt hon. colleague thie Secretary of State for tie F'oreigni Department, he thought that the Emrperor ofAustria Might have got rid, wvithl fair. nless and justice, ev-en of the payment which he hadi now consented to make!. At the treaty of Paris thie Emperor of Austria had tranferred to another power hIls donminions in the Netherlands, for tIhe dtbiefce Of which this loanI had been contracted. lie would, therefore, 'have had a right to say to the Gt-vern,inent of this countay, " I have part- ed with the Netherlands, andi the debt which I contracted for them mustgo longwit thecedd prvines." In not usinig that lan- guae, e cnceve tht ese mpeorof Austria had acted like a Mr. ANNNG,aftr rpeainghisformer eulogium on the honorabl conuctof te Emerorof ustria in cthe tvhole of thlis tramsacion proeedd t sho tht te wvhole motion of the hon. member fr Aberdeen was founded on a mistake. That hon. rue;nber seemed to hinti to iniagine, thtat the British Government hadl been in possession of the stock before there lhad been any inter- vention of the British bankiers, and that it could thierefore hiave gone into the market, andi asked who would give tie. mos, money, for the stock it hiad obtained. Now this had niever been the case. The Auistrian Government had wished to pay in a quantity of stock, and the Britishi Government to get paidl in a determinate'sumn of' money. When ttis becai-e evident to the Austriani Government, it becamre a question teith Austria, flow site should change hier stock 'Into money; and ttie imoney question in the first case arose withi the Austrian hankeris. It was not -until the Eniglish houses had placed them- selves in the situation of representatives of tIme Emperor of Austria that ant' negotiation had been commenced with theni by tlse British Goverr?men t, and durinig no part of thtat negotiation had they ever been considered as parties proposing to advance a loan to it. The point of information, theretore, at whiichl thne hon. mneniber wishied to arrive, was founded uponi sit assumption of facts that never had any existence. Mr. H'JBHOUSE asaled a few questions relative to the net amnount that was tobe psid into the Excheqyor on account ofthisloan. The CHiANCEL,LOR of the EXCHIEQUJER was, understood to reply, that the niet amount would be about 2,200,0001., owing to somie per centages to be paid oni it, of which the dletails wvere not audlible in the gallerv. The motion was then negatived. POSTAGE, RATES. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER mroved, that die order of the dlay he read, for the hiouse resolving itse'f into a com-. mittee ot the irhole house on th,e postage rates. It was read accord- ing]lv, and tIme house subsrquently resolved itself into the said coin. mnittee. Jn the committee Mtr. BERRIEss proposed several resolutions that were sorted to withnout discussion. On hiis proposing a resolution relative to the rate of postage to the colonies, .'tr. H-11ME rose to iiiqjuire whiy newspapers were notsent as free osf Zstage to the colonies as they wvere to the Isle MXilan anti to fre~ard? The highirate of'Postage at which they wer'ech)arged lire- vented a free disst-trination of knowledge between, the parent state and the colbnies. By returns whiich hiad been laid on thie table, heob- served that for sonic timne past the nuttiber of newspapers sent to ouir colonial dependencies had beeim regularly dlimini,shing. In 1810, the nluntier of daily PaPers sent to them arnounted to only 383; in 1817 they had ditninishedto 271, and inl182tto 206.This iwas attri-. butable to thle high rate of'postage cbarged upon themi. A daily Paper wa- charged 121. I4a. ; a paper printedi three da-ys a weekc, 71. 14s. 4d., sod a weekly patper about 21. 4s. He was authiorized to state by mnore than one newspapef proprietor,that it was their dleridecd opinlion, thlat if newspapers , ere alltowed to go f?Lc of expense to tIme colo.. nics, the loss whiceh would accrue tD tie reve-nue from such a ineaseire wotuld be more thian con-pensiated by the increased nuiniber'of btamrps, whlich wouldi then be used. Hie couLld find no act of Parliamnent ait. t,morizu h Government to levy postage up n niewspapers going abrod adif thlere was such ass act, he should lilke to kniow tehere ittas ob found. The lion, member concluded his observations by - moin a reouin of whc th efec ws o en The CIIANCELLOR of the EX CHEQUER observed, that as he had not expected this question to conite on this evening, he had fitiled to bring down with him a ineuorandum which wouild have en. abled hin to inform the hon. member fbr Aberdeen, vhen the act of Parlfament was passed by which this postage was enacs-edl. It was however, an act of old date which imposed this postage, and which authorized certain officers of the post-office to receive it to their own use. He was sure that all who heard himn would agree, that there were no public efficers who deserved a liberal remuneration so well Ias the gentleraen engageed in the Post-office. M r. Freeling twas one of the most useful publicofficcrs in the country, and tvas tlherefore en- titled to be miost liberally dealt with. He had some circumstances to relate, which he thought would cpnvince the honourable member that he would best consult the public conve:tience bv withdritwing this rnotion. It would be Tecollected 'that in the Tast vear the cotim. msisiiners of inquiry, had received powers to' iniiulire into the various fees and emoluments received by the tlfferent 'clerks in the; Post-offite. They wered now engiged upon that; inquiry, and lie thought it would be greatly irnpfied, if thie housg should come to a resolution to repeal those ats. Ile therefore trusted that the ho. nourable memnber-would .it-draw. his motion. If'h- .s.did not, t' must inset it with d'dedided tmtgave.e Mr. W*UIE obsefved, that he was never anixious to pres s tion wo'en.bc saw-that the subject of it had attracqeeltheat)A. tion of (3d4evnmezn. He cil t5c^htat-the Tight honourab le ng. tieotim oql pm)sllo-ite esiont~pas.i over witlmotq3..tajdng the sobjger. hltg s~enioiss~ considgratlo.'l.' Persh,.' ie x h 't i nourable genthema -would have no sbjcrio toavc aOS tive clause intmdoded into the present bill, to -mett- tllo recomi mendation of time comtoissionets. whatz the report o! stb co mmnssli. might~ v t though-t that it M ould be W.tter-to Cotmt dowfr tb she bous Wli.h in exrneu bil toatry.their reeonendatons -into efc, th , ?eercouee into the bill a prospective clause, which nright probably niever come into Mfr. HUMIE-W i1 the commihsoners mnake their report this session ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUERL-I cannot say that they will; but I have no doubt that they will use all due dili- gence in their inquiries. ltlr. HUME then withdrew his mntion. NEW POST.OFFICE. lMr. JO HN MIARTIN said, tbpt as the postage rates were stili before the house, he wishedl o ask a question relative to a Project which existed some yearr ago of building a new port-office He be. lieved that 140,0001. had been expended In purchasing land for the site of it. Now, wl. the idea of building it abandoned ? If it were, the land ought to be sald, and the proceeds paid into the Treasurr: if it were not, what had become of the plans, and when were tbey to be carried into execution? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER admitted that this project had for some tir. e past appeared to be in aecyance. By the act for build ng a new post office, the city had beeh cornelled to ada vance a certain sum ot money, and had advanced 80,0o. on the security of two city bonds, In the course of last year, the proce.ds of one of those bonds had been paid into the consolidated fund. and the other was now in the hands of the Post.master (ieneral- It had been submitted to him by some individuals in the city, that as the city na(l furnished so large a sum of money, it ought to have something te show for it, and therefore that some mea- sures ought to be taken for carrying tke projected plan into execution. The consequence was, that he took the subject into consideration; and upon the best attention he could give to it, he de- cided, that the interest f the public would be best promoted by pro- cceding with it with as little delav as possible. Plans had been sub- mitted to him, which appeared fuly equal to the purposes tor which they were intended. end orders had been *ince given to competent persons to execute ther. Though much money had alreadv been spent en this project, it woulti not be necessary for him to call apon Parliament at present for more, as there was a bond of the city for40,0001. nQw in the bands of the Post- M Iaster General. If any hon. gent. was desirous of seeing the plans, and also the estimates for executing them, he could have no objec- tion to showing himi them at any moment. Mr. BARING wished to know whether the city had given the sum which it had been originallv agreed that it should contribute. He had unlerstood that the wholeof the money voted for this build- ing had been expended. as was predicted in the Committee, in buy- ing and clearing eround for its erection. Was this so or not ? 'Ihe CHANCEbLOR of the EXCHEQUEt-The city haLd complied with all the terms which had been demanded of it. He was sorry to observe, that a large sum had been expendod in obtain- ing the objects which the hotp 4member had just mentioued. Mr. Alderman WOOD added that the city had not merclr com- plied with the terms exacted from it, but hd also been 30,001. out of rsocket by this proiect. The subject here dropped. Al r. HUMB said, that therewas another point to which he wished to call the attention of the right hon. gentleman. On Saturday Sunday, and Aonday, no foreign post left Lendon. This was found very inconvenient by several merchaits. It hed been suggested to him, to ask whethersome alteration could not be made in the pre- sent practice, so that the foreign post should go out on alternate days throughout the week, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER gave no answer to thia question. The resolutions proposed by Mr. HERxtiEs were then agreed to. The house then resumed, and the report was orderel to be received to-morroW. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the house adjourned at half past 10. HIOUSE OF COMMONS. TinnlnAvl. Fr. 9f;. COAlI-TAX.