observed, that the papers which he had moved for in the last session, relative to the above packets, and which were accordingly laid before the House, had, on the last day of the session, and without any notice or communication on the subject, been ordered to be returned to the General Post-office, on the ground that their disclosure would be prejudicial to the public service; and extracts from the same were ordered to be laid before the House. His lordship said, that had he received any intimation of the proceeding which was to be adopted, he should have stated his reasons for objecting to it, which, from there being no question before the House, he was at present precluded from doing. He begged to ask, what was the nature of the danger apprehended to the public service from the papers which had been produced; and when the extracts which had been ordered were to be forthcoming?

said, that if the noble lord would, after the recess, renew his motion, he had reason to think that the re-production of the papers would not be objected to.

rose, pursuant to the notice he had given, for leave to bring in a Bill for the repeal of the countervailing duties on Irish Bleaching Powder imported from Ireland, which had passed into an Act last session. This Act, he contended, was a direct violation of the articles of the Union. Many representations, he understood, had been made to the Treasury, upon the injurious tendency of an advantage which was said to remain with the Irish manufacturer, in the process of making the bleaching powder; out of these arose, he believed, the prohibitory clause, which formed the ground of his complaint, because it was in direct violation of the 5th article of the Union, which acknowledged the free and uninterrupted intercourse for the transfer of raw material between the three countries, for their domestic consumption. This clause, imposing a countervailing duty, had been introduced on the 30th of July, the last day of their sitting. It crept in unnoticed by those who usually attended to the measures of parliament, regulating the manufactures of Ireland. It went to a direct violation of the Union compact, and must therefore be repealed. If the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer had it in contemplation to propose any remedy for the alleged advantage which those duties were to counterbalance, he could easily state the facts, without involving himself in a violation of a solemn legislative enactment; if an inequality existed; let it be removed, but let not the Irish manufacturer be exposed to the great hardships of this clause, which fell heavily upon his interests. Mr. Ponsonby said, he was willing to hear what was the intention of the right hon. gentleman, at the same time he would not refrain from moving at present, for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal the Act to impose a countervailing Duty of Excise on Bleaching Powder imported from Ireland.

suggested whether it would not be better to move for the amendment, and not the repeal of this Act. He proceeded to explain the nature of the Act itself. This was not the first time it had been considered by the House, nor was it the first when the right hon. gentleman's opinion had been delivered upon the subject, fully concurring in the principle from which the clause emanated. The Irish manufacturer derived a notorious advantage from having his salt used in this powder, duty free. In Eng- land, a duty of fifteen shillings a bushel was paid, in Scotland six shillings, thereby giving an unfair advantage in favour of Ireland. Mr. Lushington here read several minutes of council relative to those duties, all concurring in the necessity of their being met by such a clause as had been introduced last session. He also recited, from the speeches of Messrs. Foster, Ponsonby, and sir J. Newport, confirmatory opinions upon this point. It was a fair and just principle, that where one country paid no duty upon an article, in the manufacture of which another did within the same jurisdiction, the country not paying should be visited with an equalizing impost, to lessen the force of its unequal competition. As an amendment to the right hon. gentleman's motion, he would propose, that the Act of last session be referred to a committee, to inquire into, those duties, and to report thereon. As a proof of the necessity of this preparatory step, and of further information on the subject, he would only advert to one fact. In one statement made to government, it was asserted that one hundred bushels of common salt would make one hundred weight of bleaching powder. In another calculation of the same nature, it was stated, that this quantity of salt was equal to 2,000 lbs. of powder; from these contradictory statements, an inquiry into the real fact was essentially necessary previous to a final decision. He would, however, admit, that the clause was a violation of the Act of Union and with a view of instituting a fair inquiry into the subject, he would propose a committee, to inquire into the state of the laws on those duties imposed upon articles used in the manufacture of oxygenated muriatic acid.

said, the question at issue resolved itself into this was the Act of last session a violation of the articles of the Union? It clearly was a breach of that bond of connection which united both countries; and it would ill befit the dignity of that House to admit the existence of a committee, whose labour would be to ascertain the quality of a compromise between a clause, such as the present Act contained, and the solemn enactments of the legislature. Before the question could at all be entertained of removing any advantage which the Irish manufacturer might happen to possess, it was imperative that this Act should be repealed. Even were its object an extension of benefits to Ireland, the repeal would not be the less necessary. An infraction of the Act of Union was manifest, and it would be highly indecorous, therefore, to allow its continuance during the sitting of any committee for an inquiry arising out of such a breach of obligation. This infraction once admitted, no argument could be listened to on the points. The Act of Union was a sacred bond, which must remain unimpaired; and they might rest assured, that whatever weakened that measure in public estimation, would, in its consequences, be fatal to the public security. The only mode of preserving harmony between the two countries, was to shew an equal anxiety for the interests of both. He contended, that the countervailing duties in this instance, as indeed in most others, ought entirely to be done away. It appeared, indeed, that 100 bushels of salt were convertible into either 1 cwt. or 2,000 lbs. of bleaching powder; it was also known, that this powder could be made without salt at all. Here, then, arose an encouragement for fraudulent drawbacks, highly detrimental to the public service, and of vital injury to the revenue, which it almost might be said to sap. The right hon. baronet concluded by saying, that as to the regulations to be hereafter adopted, it seemed to him that in a manufacture where there was such uncertainty as to the quantity of materials necessary, all drawbacks should be abolished, or the revenue would suffer by it.

suggested the repeal of as much of this Act, prohibiting the importation of bleaching powder, as was a violation of the Act of Union. This would embrace the point urged by the right hon. gentleman opposite. The committee, however, would be useful, to enter into topics highly necessary in the detail.

said, it was pretty plain that a violation of the Act of Union had taken place. His object was to repeal the Act which led to this breach, not to prevent a fair arrangement of placing the manufactures of the empire upon one and the same footing. It would then be sufficient for his purpose, that the part affecting the Treaty of Union would be repealed. He could not see the use of any committee to investigate a subject so clearly supported by justice and the law of the land.

agreed, that all the manufacturers of the united empire should be upon the same basis of encouragement. From the detail connected with the question in debate, a committee would, in his opinion, be advisable; of course it could not be operative until after the recess. He would propose, that leave be given to bring in a Bill, to repeal so much of the said Act as prohibits the export or bringing in of Irish Bleaching Powder from Scotland into England."

After a short conversation, the amendment of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was agreed to.

said, that he rose in consequence of an allusion which had been made to a sum of 100 guineas which had been voted the night before, as clerk of the parliaments. He observed, that the hon. gentleman who had mentioned it was undoubtedly justified in mentioning the subject at the time when it occurred to him, though he (Mr. Rose) was not then in the House; but as he was, therefore, called on to explain the vote, he should, with the permission of the House, state the circumstances under which that allowance was made. There were, he said, many allowances which had been made to the clerk of the parliaments from time immemorial, among which was one of 25 copies of all acts of parliament, which had always been turned by them to their profit. To shew that he had not been over-anxious to make the most of his office, he should state, that there was also a large allowance to the office which he held, for stationary; under which some articles not generally known by that name were included, such as Scotch coals, wax candles, and satin bags. For these articles, his predecessor had received 580l. For this he (Mr. Rose) had never received one farthing in money, merely taking a moderate allowance of paper and pens; although the Speaker of that House, and many other public officers, received allowances in commutation for stationary. As to the item in question, it appeared, by a minute of the Treasury, that the value of the 25 copies of the acts or parliament given to the clerks of parliament, was 132l. a year; and that for this perquisite he had received, as an equivalent, 50 guineas a year. The sum of 100 guineas was the amount of the allowance for two years. As it was important to the public to know how to appreciate the character of its servants, he should trouble the House by stating how he had acted in the office of secretary of the Treasury. When he had first received that office, he found that the emoluments consisted in fees and perquisites; and finding himself uneasy in such a situation, he desired a fixed salary. The average emoluments, in five years of peace, had been 3,440l., and in five years of war 5,100l.; for this he accepted 3,000l. a year only; and when, at a subsequent time, that allowance was thought inadequate, and increased to 4,000l. a year, he had refused to take advantage of the good will of the lords of the Treasury on that occasion. [Mr. Rose read the minute of the Treasury stating this fact.] He had said thus much to clear himself not only from blame, but from the imputation of having done any thing mean and shabby. Mr. Rose concluded by warmly appealing to his life, as a proof that he had never lent himself to any act which could be construed into an acceptance of that which was mean or unbecoming; on the contrary, he had, in every instance, and he hoped successfully, avoided the possibility of incurring so gross an imputation.

lamented that the right hon. gentleman had not been in his place last night, to make the defence at which he had just laboured so hard. His name had never appeared in the papers before, and it was not extraordinary that he (Mr. Whitbread) should remark upon it nor was it singular, considering the peculations and tricks that were proved to have been practised formerly in the office of the right hon. gentleman, such as including supplies of Scotch coals, wax candles, and satin bags, under the head of stationary, that it should not be generally known that so wonderful an alteration had taken place during the era of purity of the right hon. gentleman. If he (Mr. Whitbread) were called upon to state what he really thought upon the subject, he must say, that he was very sorry that the 50 guineas had stuck in Mr. Rose's throat, and that he should have got rid of the obstruction in the way the House had witnessed. [A laugh.]

said, that the hon. member was the first that had ever made an objection to the sum given as an equivalent for the 25 acts of parliament it was enough for him (Mr. Rose) to hear any man breathing object to it, to induce him to assert, that he never would again touch a shilling of it. [Hear! and a laugh.]

rose, to make his promised motion relative to certain associations in Ireland. Upon a former occasion he had indulged the hope that the sense of parliament, so clearly, and, with a single exception, so unanimously expressed, would have discouraged those associations, and would have led to that total abandonment of their principle, which would have gone some way at least in tranquillizing the internal state of Ireland. It was in vain to look towards this happy consummation, until all associations were entirely extinguished, and, to use the emphatic words of a noble lord (Castlereagh) not then present, "until the people were under the dominion of the law, and not under that of clubs and associations." Although he had known of the existence of those societies when the subject was last before the House, yet he confidently expected that they would have dispersed when the voice of parliament became expressed, and that this system, whose only object was the insult of one class of fellow-citizens against another, for the petty purposes of party triumph, would have wholly dissolved. He regretted he had been mistaken, and this regret was heightened when he had observed, that a right hon. gentleman (Mr. Peel) high in office in Ireland, had considered himself called upon to protect and encourage those societies which parliament had declared were obnoxious to the public peace. It became, then, full time for the people of Ireland to know on what authority those institutions existed. This was of importance, from the fact of their illegality having been proclaimed from high legal authority. With this view he originated his motion, for the purpose of shewing, as had been stated before by a noble lord, the necessity "of re-echoing the wish of parliament by the voice of the country, and of repressing, without ulterior measures, any society within the empire of the law; and that, whatever their origin might be, they had outlived the danger which called them forth, and were exposed to the Act of 1799, which stamped illegality on meetings so composed." Sir J. Newport then quoted the observation of Mr. Canning last year, that, whatever digressions gentlemen had entered into, no man was found to commit himself in the defence of those associations; and that they would, of course, perish, when the sense of parliament became so clearly expressed upon the illegality of their formation. It was, however, painful to find, that this discouragement had been ineffectual, and that a right hon. gentleman had received and returned answers to one or two of those associations—answers which he (sir John Newport) was sorry to say, appeared commendatory of their principles. The right hon. baronet, as a proof of the evil effects produced by the Orange associations in Ireland, adverted to the circumstance of the grand jury of a county in the North of Ireland, who had absolutely defeated the Prison Act, which had been introduced by a right hon. friend of his. By that Act, it was provided that each of the gaols in Ireland should be attended by a Roman Catholic clergyman. The jury to which he alluded did not directly deny a Roman Catholic clergyman to the county gaol; but they appointed a degraded priest to act as chaplain; knowing, from the regulations of the church to which he belonged, that it was impossible for him to officiate satisfactorily. For three years, this was a source of constant dispute between the going judges of assize and the grand jury. He could not sufficiently admire the description which a learned judge, now deceased (lord Avonmore) had given of real loyalty, when members of the Orange faction were represented to him as loyal, who had, in fact, transgressed the laws "I know," said he, "of no loyalty, except that which obeys the laws, and exerts its best efforts to see them carried fairly into effect. I cannot consider him to be a loyal man, who acts contrary to them for the purpose of advancing his own views of riot and violence!" When the great Atlas that had so long supported the fabric of bigotry in Ireland, was tottering—when the fabric itself was on the point of falling—it excited his regret to perceive an attempt made to rescue it from impending destruction. It was, however, utterly impossible to continue the system. The good sense, the increasing knowledge of the people, must operate to overthrow it. The right hon. baronet then moved, "That there be laid before this House, copies of all Addresses from societies or bodies of men calling themselves Orange associations or lodges, and also of all Addresses from grand juries in Ireland, on the subject of such Orange societies, to the principal secretary for that part of the kingdom, with his answers thereto."

said, he rose to second the right hon. baronet's motion for the production of the documents upon which he had so strangely commented, though, perhaps, a fair doubt might be entertained, whether they were of that nature and character which would justify the House in calling for them. But, though he had no objection to their production, as he had evinced by seconding the motion, he could not avoid troubling the House with a few observations upon the speech by which it had been introduced. He regretted very much, that the right hon. baronet had not stated more distinctly the grounds upon which his motion was founded, and the object for which it was made. Upon the latter point, it was difficult to form even a guess; but he confessed, that what had fallen from the right hon. baronet, had rather confirmed an opinion which he had before formed upon this subject. It would be recollected, that on a former occasion, the right hon. baronet had complained that his conduct had been misrepresented, and that he had been accused of being absent from his duty. The right hon. baronet, had, indeed, taken an opportunity of exculpating himself from that imputation; but as the right hon. baronet had proclaimed himself upon a former occasion to be descended from one of king William's Dutch guards, and as he had spoken in favour of the Peace Preservation Bill, he might conceive it to be necessary to make this motion, in order to rescue himself from the suspicion of being an Orangeman. [A laugh.] If, however, that was not the motive by which the right hon. baronet was actuated, it was utterly impossible for him to guess at the object which he could propose to himself, by making such a motion upon such grounds.

The speech of the right hon. baronet referred, he believed, to one which he (Mr. Peel) made in the last session of parliament. He wished very touch that the right hon. baronet had been in his place upon that occasion, because it would have saved him the trouble of making the present motion; he would then have been able to judge whether he (Mr. Peel) had given encouragement to societies, most unjustly described by the right hon. gentleman as societies 'illegally formed, for the purpose of insulting and harassing their fellow subjects.' It would, however, have been but candid towards him, and respectful towards the House, if the right hon. baronet, when he preferred such a charge, had stated the grounds upon which it was founded—if he had stated in what manner and upon what occasion he (Mr. P.) had given encouragement to illegal societies formed for such purposes, or to political combinations of any description or character, as had been described. The right hon. baronet had spoken generally of addresses presented to him (Mr. P.) from Orange lodges, and of his answers. Why had not the right hon. baronet, in support of his charge, stated when, upon what occasion, and by whom, those addresses were presented? He had stated that they were published; if they were, why did he not produce them? He had a right, the House had a right, to call upon the right hon. baronet to state, not generally and vaguely, but distinctly and specifically, the grounds of his charge. Let the right hon. baronet, if he thought proper; amend his motion, so as to call for every address that had ever been presented to him, in which there was any allusion, directly or indirectly, to this subject, together with his answers. He would willingly support such an amendment, because he only wished that the charges which had been made, should be put in such a shape as to enable him to meet them distinctly. In the course of the last session, an hon. baronet (member for the Queen's County), presented to the House some petitions respecting Orange societies, but before he presented them, he communicated his intention to him (Mr. Peel.) He thanked the hon. baronet for his courtesy, but expressed his regret, that he should have felt it his duty to bring forward such a subject. The hon. baronet did present the petitions, and he (Mr. Peel) took that opportunity of stating clearly, and without reserve, his opinions upon the subject, in order to remove some misapprehension which prevailed; and he also made some observations upon the petitions themselves; he showed to the House, that though they purported to come from persons of all religious persuasions, yet that many of the signatures were written by the same person; one particular instance he pointed out, where ninety-eight or ninety-nine names consecutively were in the same hand-writing. What he stated upon that occasion, if necessary, he would now repeat. He had never spoken a word, or written a line upon it, which he was desirous to retract. If the principles and conduct of any body of men were misrepresented, nothing should deter him from rising to point out the misrepresentation, and to vindicate them from unmerited charges: persons might disapprove of the principle of all combinations, but they ought, in common justice, to draw a distinction, where a distinction existed, and not confound the associations of the loyal with other associations of a very different character.

After making the statement which, upon that occasion, he felt it his duty to make, he would ask the House, whether it was of such a nature as to warrant the right hon. baronet in the language which he had used upon this occasion? He would ask every gentleman who heard him upon the occasion to which he referred, whether the sentiments which he then expressed were such as were likely to come from a person who wished to encourage and promote party feeling and religious animosity. Upon his return to Ireland, at the conclusion of the session, he received from the grand jury of the county of Fermanagh, an address, expressing their approbation of his parliamentary conduct, and a confidence in him, with which he was highly gratified, and which he should be ever anxious to merit and retain. To that address he would read his answer, as it was for the present purpose the most important; and he begged that the House would recollect, that the right hon. baronet had grounded his motion upon what he stated he had seen published in the newspapers. [Here Mr. Peel read his answer to the address.] This was the document, for there was no other upon which the right hon. baronet thought himself warranted in making, in the face of the House, the statement they had just heard. He would now ask the right hon. baronet, whether he thought his assertion was well-founded? He firmly believed there was no other document in existence upon this subject, and that he had never received and answered any other address of a similar nature, except one from the corporation of Dublin, which contained a remote allusion to the same subject, to which he would read his answer. [Mr. Peel here read the answer.] The House was now in possession of all the documents upon which the right hon. baronet had founded his charge. There was not another document in existence that he could recollect. If, however, he should turn out to be mistaken—if he should, upon a minute search, find any paper relating to this subject, he promised the right hon. baronet it should be produced; but he was as confident as he could be of any one thing that depended upon memory, that no such paper existed. As to addresses from Orange lodges, with answers from him, he most positively denied the fact; and he again called upon the right hon. baronet to state the grounds upon which he made that assertion. But he begged distinctly to be understood, that while he denied the existence of every such documents as those to which the right hon. baronet had alluded, he by no means wished to retract a single sentiment, or a single word, which he had uttered at any time upon this subject. It was one upon which, for obvious reasons, he did not wish to create discussion the only time he had ever referred to it was, when the hon. baronet (sir H. Parnell) presented the petitions last session; and he then felt it to be his duty, publicly and distinctly, to avow his sentiments. Whether he had had recourse to any secret and unworthy means of supporting privately what he did not avow publicly, he would leave the House to judge from the whole of his character and conduct.

He could not help observing that, when the nature of the office which he held, and the number of transactions in which he must necessarily be engaged were considered, and when the right hon. baronet's vigilance and activity of investigation was also considered, it was most singular, that not one single act of the Irish government was produced, to give countenance to the motion which the right hon. baronet had thought proper to make. He most sincerely wished (if it could be done consistently with propriety) that every document existing, public or private, relating in any manner to the administration of justice in Ireland by the government with which he now acted, or to any subject upon which party feeling might be supposed to operate, could be laid before that House; they would afford the best answer to the insinuations that were sometimes thrown out. He would defy the right hon. baronet, or any other gentleman, to produce any one act of the Irish government, to which the imputation of unfair prejudice or partiality could fairly be attached. He wished the right hon., baronet had brought forward his motion in some more tangible, or to speak more correctly, in some less ludicrous shape.

The right hon. baronet had stated, that for some time after a very strong opinion had been expressed in that House respecting the illegality and impropriety of Orange societies, their ardour had abated; but after what passed towards the close of last session, it had again blazed forth with new vigour. Now, the fact, he believed, was directly the reverse; for if he was not very much misinformed, and he hoped he was not, the societies, called Orange societies, were no longer confederated together by any oath, not even by the oath of allegiance. The right hon. baronet had adverted to the conduct of the grand jury of Fermanagh, respecting the appointment of a Roman Catholic chaplain, and had asserted that they acted contrary to law. He had reason to believe that that subject would have been brought forward in the last session, and had then looked into the particulars of the case, and was prepared to enter upon the discussion. He believed the fact was, that by the Act of 1810, the grand juries were empowered to appoint Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Presbyterian chaplains to the county gaol, and that, in the case of Fermanagh, a difference arose between the titular bishop of the diocese and the grand jury, respecting the individual appointed by the grand jury. But here again he wished that the right hon. baronet, instead of general assertions, had stated in what manner it was that the grand jury of that county had acted contrary to law. He would not now trespass upon the House any longer; he had felt it necessary to say thus much in answer to the charges preferred by the right hon. baronet, but he begged to repeat, that he did not retract one word he had ever uttered respecting those societies of which the right hon. baronet had complained. He should now sit down, expressing his hope that the right hon. baronet would feel himself bound to state more distinctly what were the grounds which induced him to prefer such charges, and to make such a motion.

was of opinion, that an address from a grand jury to a member of that House, thanking him for his conduct in parliament, could not be considered an official document, more especially after the explanation which had been given. The dignity of the House required it to be perfectly understood, whether papers of that kind could, with propriety, be called for; and to arrive at this information, he should move the previous question.

agreed, that the papers related, not to the official, but to the parliamentary duties of his right hon. friend; still, however, he should vote for the original motion, since the production of the documents would disprove the assertions of the right hon. baronet.

said, in taking the course he had done, he was entirely influenced by his duty as a member of parliament. He wished to know, whether it was fit to call for such documents, or whether it did not go to shackle the privileges of a member of parliament.

said, that in justice to his right hon. friend, who said there was not a title of truth in the statements of the right hon. baronet, he thought the papers ought to be laid on the table, that the public, particularly in Ireland, might have an opportunity of deciding between the parties. When a gentleman, who had as much knowledge of Irish affairs as any person in the kingdom, made a grave statement of the misconduct of an individual high in office—when he accused him of having, for a long period of time, endeavoured to inflame those party animosities, which every good man must desire to see removed, the only proper mode of proceeding was, to examine fairly all the evidence that could illustrate the question.

wished to inquire of the right hon. baronet, whether he was satisfied with the explanation given by the right hon. gentleman? or, if not, whether he knew of any documents of the description stated in the motion, which had escaped the recollection of the right hon. gentleman Neither of the addresses mentioned by the right hon. gentleman purported to be transmitted by Orange lodges; one was from the grand jury of the county of Fermanagh, the other from the corporation of Dublin. Unless the right hon. baronet stated his firm belief that other documents did exist, he thought the House ought to rest satisfied with the explanation that had been given.

said, he had already stated that he had seen, in print, addresses of the nature to which his motion related. He did not take upon himself to assert that they were bonâ fide addresses; he had no opportunity of ascertaining that fact; but, such having appeared in the public papers, he conceived it to be his duty to bring the matter before the House. The right hon. gentleman complained that he had not stated his object in making this motion. This was not the fact; he had stated his object clearly. He wished the House coolly and deliberately to consider the nature of the proceeding to which he called their attention, and to pronounce on the legality or illegality of it. The answer of the right hon. gentleman to the grand jury was nothing more than a disclaimer of protection to the Orange association, as a political society. But, in his opinion, the system was objectionable on a variety of points, which, though not political, were nearly connected with the peace of the country. After the assertion of the right hon. gentleman, he had no hesitation to declare, that he had far too high an opinion of his veracity and honour to believe that such papers did exist; and that if he were now to persist in the belief of their existence, he should be ashamed of himself, and ought to be considered as too prejudiced a man to have the honour of a seat in that House. The right hon. baronet then repeated his opinion of the illegality of all such associations as those in question; admitted that he had only seen the address of the grand jury of Fermanagh, and the secretary's answer, in a newspaper, and that he had cut them out and mislaid them. He concluded with hoping that the House would agree to the original motion.

admitted, that some abuses had arisen from these associations. It appeared now, that the right hon. baronet rested his motion entirely on a paragraph which he had cut out of a paper, and afterwards mislaid. The business of secretary in Ireland was so great, extending to all the departments of the state, that it might be possible that some address might have been sent to him, which had escaped his recollection. He would, however, expressly declare, that he did not recollect any address that was ever sent to him from any Orange association in Ireland. He was ready, however, to make every search; and would promise, that if any such paper could be found, it should be produced. He remembered that there was a volunteer corps in the north of Ireland, mostly Orange-men, who, in the exuberance of their loyalty, committed some excesses on the 4th of November last that corps had been since disbanded.

The original motion was then carried.

took that opportunity to express his high approbation of the efforts of the hon. gentleman, who, if he succeeded in getting these last accounts referred to a committee, would do more good to the country than any person who had gone before him. He had already stated, and would now repeat, that the abuses in the commissariat department had been of the grossest and most enormous description, and the extent of which could not appear by any mode of auditing the accounts. It was his intention, very early after the recess, to move to refer the accounts of the army extraordinaries to a committee up stairs, to examine and report their opinion thereon.

The motions were severally put, and carried.

moved, "That the several Acts for setting the price and assize of bread, and for punishing persons who shall adulterate meal, flour, or bread, or who shall sell, or expose for sale, bread deficient in weight, and generally for regulating the trade of bakers, and the sale and manufacture of bread, might be read;" and the same being read, he next moved, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to repeal the Acts now in force relating to bread to be sold in the city of London and liberties thereof, and within the weekly bills of mortality, and ten miles of the Royal Exchange; and to prevent the adulteration of meal, flour, and bread, within the same limits."

had never heard of a Bill being introduced for altering a law on so important and generally interesting a subject as the present, without some reason for the alteration being assigned.

stated his object to be, in the first place, to prevent the adulteration of the flour and meal used in making bread; and also to render bakers more generally liable to punishment for selling bread short of weight. At present, an inquest could not convict without seizing the whole contents of a shop thus the bakers who supplied the chandlers shops, at which so great a portion of the lower orders were the purchasers, might daily send out bread short of weight to such shops, in every direction, and escape any material penalty; it being impossible to detect them in this nefarious practice through all their connections. There was also no positive law respecting the use of alum. He wished to have the Bill referred to a special committee.—Leave given.

, as the motion of an hon. and learned friend of his for papers respecting the naval conduct of the American war, which stood for Thursday, might cause a long debate, desired to know if the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have any objection to postpone, for one day, his motion for the adjournment of the House? He thought no inconvenience could result from postponing the adjournment to Friday, and he conceived this would be a great accommodation to all parties.

saw no reason for postponing the adjournment. He did not know that the motion of the hon. and learned gentleman must necessarily occupy so much time as to interfere with the discussion of the question of adjournment. If gentlemen opposite were of a different opinion, he thought one of the motions might be anticipated.

did not think either of the motions could well be brought on before Thursday; and on that day, the length to which the discussion on the motion of his hon. and learned friend might possibly go, would prevent their debating the various subjects which the question of adjournment would bring under their consideration, so fully as they could wish to do.

could see no objection to his moving, to-morrow, that the House, on its rising, should adjourn to the period which had been mentioned as that to which it was proposed the recess should extend. This he conceived would be perfectly regular.

thought it might be unnecessary to prolong the debate on the motion of the hon. and learned gentleman, as the documents for which he intended to move might be given by ministers. If, however, it should occupy the House till a late hour, it would then lie in their discretion to postpone it, if that should appear desirable. He wished the two motions to stand as they did for Thursday, subject to the discretion of the House.

would not pledge himself that the papers would be given; but he knew no document that the hon. gentleman was likely to call for which the Admiralty would not be as ready to give, as he could be to ask.

desired there might be a distinct understanding that his motion should take precedence on Thursday. ["Certainly, certainly," from the Treasury-bench.]

was willing to give the gentleman opposite the benefit of the alternative he had proposed. If an objection was made to the adjournment being moved before Thursday, he should certainly press it on that day, even though the motion of the hon. and learned gentleman should preclude him from bringing on his motion at an early hour.

said, it was irregular to accelerate motions of which notice had been given. It was inconvenient for this reason, that having been fixed for one particular day, if brought on before that day arrived, many members who had heard the notice might be taken by surprise.

hoped, if the papers to be called for were to be granted, the hon. and learned gentleman and the House might be spared the trouble of a debate on his motion. If he were to give in a list of the papers he wished to see produced to his right hon. friend, he would probably receive an answer in the course of to-morrow.

said, he had given in a list of them to one of the lords of the Admiralty some hours before.

observed, that notices had, in some cases, been accelerated; and instanced the celebrated motion on the Orders in Council in 1812.

did not wish to do that which was irregular or unusual, and should not, therefore, move the adjournment till Thursday; on which day it was his intention to press the motion.

The Report was then agreed to.