rose to present a Petition from part of the county county payers, in the important barony of Duhallow, in the county of Cork. The petitioners were the cess payers of the northern part of this district, and in which there had been no resident gentry for many years. They stated, they had paid a large amount of county cess, and had never received a remunerating shilling, in the way of presentment, with in the district of their residence, while the other part of the barony, in which the Grand Jurors generally resided, was cut up into ornamental and circular roads. At the same time the charges to which the petitioners were subjected were increased annually by new valuations, and enlarged charges, without the smallest attention being paid to the honest expenditure of the sums raised for the benefit of the barony in general. The petitioners stated, That the applications to Magistrates at the Petty Sessions was a mockery; that their applications were sometimes passed at such Petty Sessions, but were regularly cashiered by the Grand Jury; that the mode of nominating Grand Juries was degrading to the administration of justice, as it led to a corrupt, partial, and wasteful expenditure of the public money; that some material changes ought to be made in the manner of appointing Grand Juries if such persons were to continue to have the irresponsible power of disposing of funds raised for the benefit of the public generally. The petitioners suggested, that if such large sums were to be annually raised, the cess payers ought to have the election of those by whom they were so severely taxed, and that, while the great county and barony roads were maintained by trusts or public Boards, the parishes should have the laying out of their own money; under the control of government engineers. The petitioners proceeded to illustrate the hardships of their situation, by shewing the severe local injuries they had endured, from the corrupt and improvident manner in which their funds were managed, which were so great, to use their own words. "that the neglect, oppression and injustice of the system were calculated to drive them reluctantly to insubordination, and almost to compel them to acts of riot and disturbance." This petition was signed by several hundreds of respectable occupiers of land, and its prayer was fully corroborated by what had been stated at a meeting of the county-rate payers of Tyrone. They stated, "That the Grand Juries of Ireland are nearly permanent, and virtually self-constituted bodies. That in the county of Tyrone the great and influential majority of the Grand Jury now are either the same identical men who constituted the Grand Jury five-and-twenty years ago, or the heirs or successors of such of them as have, since that time, either died or been removed, holding very nearly the same places respectively on the panel, from year to year, to the present time; and that such is the constitution of Grand Juries throughout the kingdom. That bodies thus constituted are altogether beyond the reach of efficient control, and, like all oligarchical and irresponsible bodies, have a natural tendency to disregard trust, neglect duty, blink the public weal, and to co-operate, confederate, and combine with one another, to advance their own interests, and to protect their own creatures, for the purpose of screening their own corruptions. That the Grand Juries throughout the kingdom are generally composed of the second class of landed proprietors, and the agents of the great estates whose principals are, for the most part, absentees. That the parties to a Grand Jury presentment are most commonly the following description of persons: first, the head Overseer, who is almost always the agent for, or owner of, the premises through which any old road has been passed, or any new one is intended to be passed. This gentleman receives the money presented, from the county Treasurer, but makes no affidavit whatever, nor does he otherwise appear ostensibly in the undertaking. The person next in consequence to him, is the accounting Overseer, an inferior person, who is to the road jobbers in a county what the tithe proctor's viewing and valuing Bailiff is to him in the parish. To this man's conscience is intrusted the principal affidavit required by the law. Next downwards in the scale of degradation, are two persons, called by the county treasurers, applicants, and who are, in point of fact, persons still lower in degree than the accounting Overseer, and, generally speaking, his dependants. To these two last-mentioned personages, as the law now stands, is intrusted the initiation of all road presentments, and all other matters and things connected with roads in Ireland. That these two last-mentioned agents are set in motion by the head Overseer and accounting Overseer alluded to, or one of them, is what ought not to be disputed, and cannot be denied with truth. They are the first persons, however, who make their appearance in any presentment, and are supposed by the laws to act voluntarily, and for the public good. They appear—imagine the utility, limit the direction, and estimate the whole expense of every newly-projected road. Each makes an affidavit before certain Magistrates at the road sessions, of the truth of his estimate, &c. Upon this rotten foundation rests all the presentments for new roads made in Ireland. In practice, there is now no inquiry instituted, either as regards utility, expense, or direction, by the Magistrates, at the road sessions; and, if the Grand Jury to whom the application is referred do not throw it out, the work goes on under the inspection of the accounting Overseer, who never fails to swear, that the work has been duly executed according to the estimate, and that all the money presented has been duly expended on the work." Such were the opinions of the landed proprietors of the county of Tyrone, and what was the result of such a system—why, that clubs were actually formed for the redress of local grievances, such as road jobbing, and all other misapplications of the county cess, and the Tyrone Independent Club was compelled to enter into large subscriptions to do what Parliament had evaded doing, namely, to redress the local and almost intolerable grievances of the Irish people. What were the facts disclosed in the appendix to the reports of the Select Committee on the State of the Poor, page 63, and the report of the Committee on Grand Jury Presentments of 1827, page 4. Before the Union, the presentments were 400,000l. annually; in 1810 the Grand Jury presentments were 632,693l.; in 1820, 741,829l.; and in 1829, 888,932l. Such was the enormous increase. To this must be added the great charges on the account of tithes made by the Church. He implored the House to attend to the fact, that previous to the Union, the whole government of Ireland, civil, military, and naval, including local improvements, was carried on by a local legislature, for a million per annum, and part of that was raised by a lottery. At present the cost was double that sum, and the charge was so large, that the industry of the country was wholly weighed down by it. In such a state of things, it was easy to account for clubs, and unions, and associations, when prosperous harvests only tended to aggravate the sufferings of the people. He felt it to be his bounden duty to press these considerations upon the attention of the House, for no Government could ever give satisfaction in Ireland while there were so many grievances arising from local taxation and oppression.

said, there was one observation of the hon. Member which he felt it necessary to notice, that was, that the amount of tithe had increased of late years; but that evidently arose from the increase of agriculture, growing out of the prosperity of the country. He thought the attack on the Church, therefore, unfair, and he regretted to observe, that such attacks were at every opportunity brought forward.

said, as the manufacturers of Ireland had been sacrificed, that country had now nothing but agriculture to support her people, and he felt it his duty, therefore, to watch with unceasing care, that the charges upon that were not increased unnecessarily to add to her misfortunes and sufferings.

wished to put a question to the hon. Gentleman opposite. During the course of the last Session, a Committee had sat upon the question of the drawbacks allowed to the exporters of Irish and Scotch spirits distilled from malt, and the result of this inquiry was, that the Committee stated, that great frauds were practised with respect to those drawbacks, but they came to no decision as to the course that was proper to be adopted, leaving the whole matter in the hands of the Government. He understood, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had proposed a Bill either to do away with the drawback altogether, or to modify it in such a way as to remove the means by which these frauds were now committed. He wanted to know if that was the fact?

wished, that the question had been put in the presence of his noble friend; the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He, however, had no hesitation in saying, that the matter had been under the consideration of the Ministers, and that they would shortly be prepared, to submit a measure to Parliament growing out of the evidence taken before the Committee of last Session.

was convinced of the expediency of passing this Bill, and he recommended Gentlemen who were at all opposed to it, to read a report of what had passed only two days ago, relating to a suit which had been instituted in the Court of Chancery, the object of which was, to get rid of transactions which had taken place with certain property from the year 1723 down to the present time, in consequence of a flaw in levying the fine in 1723; and the decision of the Court was, that the claimant was entitled to recover, notwithstanding that the property was mortgaged, and had passed through several hands. Bill read a second time, as were likewise the Limitation of Actions Bill, the Courtesy of England Bill, the Dower Bill, and the Inheritance Bill, brought in by Mr. John Campbell.

moved, that the House do resolve itself into a Committee of Supply.

wished to know whether the negotiations which had taken place between this country and France, in consequence of the treaty of navigation of 1826, had been brought to a conclusion.

said, that the negotiations were going on, and that he had every reason to hope that they would soon be brought to a satisfactory conclusion?

begged to ask the right hon. Gentleman, the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, whether the prosecution for smuggling, which had been instituted against a house in the silk-trade in the city of London, had been continued or not, and what was the result?

said, that his right hon. friend, to whom it properly belonged to answer that question, was not present, but he thought he might take upon himself to give an answer to the hon. Gentleman. The prosecution to which the hon. Member had alluded, was a prosecution for penalties for evading the payment of the duty on certain silks. There were others, but one alone was about to be brought to trial, when it was compromised for a sum of 20,000l. Probably the whole amount of the fines to which the parties had subjected themselves, might amount to about 25,OOOl. He believed, that the amount received as a compromise was the largest the Government had ever obtained from such a prosecution. There were goods to be taken back, which might possibly amount to 5,OOOl. So that the offending parties would have to pay a sum of 15,000l., which was sufficient to make them suffer so severely as to be a guarantee that they would not repeat the offence.

wished to put one more question, which he did at the request of the silk-trade generally. They wished to know for what particular reasons the compromise was effected? for they felt very strongly, that it was a most injudicious course, to compromise such actions. They were the more anxious on this subject, on account of the distress which prevailed in the trade, and the facilities which existed for smuggling.

said, he had adverted to this subject last Session, and he then received what he understood to be a distinct pledge that no compromise should take place. He would venture to assert, that three times the amount of silk was smuggled into the country beyond what was paid for, and he knew, that the trade had felt the utmost anxiety on this subject, and had expected penalties to the amount of 50,OOOl. to be recovered.

was bound to state, that this matter had come into his hands without instructions or restrictions as to what he was or was not to do. He believed, that in the pledge spoken of by the hon. member for Preston, his right hon. friend only intended, that the case should be brought into Court, to be there dealt with as might be proper; and so far there had been no violation of the pledge. The fact was, that if every thing charged could have been proved, the penalties could only have amounted to 25,000l. The compromise, therefore, was only for a sum of 5,000l. less than might have been obtained had every thing been fully proved against the parties.

was bound to say, that Government had, on this occasion, obtained a more satisfactory settlement of the prosecution than had ever before been obtained; but the objection to any compromise still existed.

said, that as this case had excited a great deal of attention, he thought it would be of advantage if the papers connected with it were laid on the Table. Those papers would show the way in which the duties had been originally evaded, and they would inflict that punishment which the compromise had enabled the guilty parties to avoid, but which was the most effective that could be employed against them—he meant the punishment of publicity. If the compromise was effected, as he supposed it was, before the trial, of course there could have been no publication of the circumstances of the case, and the disgrace attendant on such a publication was wanting to complete that punishment which, without it, would be hardly sufficient to prevent parties from being guilty of the same offence.

said, the object of Government most assuredly was, to prevent smuggling if possible, and the object of the parties in this case, in agreeing to a compromise for so large a penalty, was, perhaps, chiefly with the view of avoiding the additional punishment of publication, otherwise he agreed with the right hon. Baronet in the principle, that every publication ought to be given to the circumstances of the case, since it was the object of the Government to prevent the recurrence of such offences.

said, that he should take an early opportunity of moving for the papers. The House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply. That part of the King's Speech which informed the House that his Majesty had directed the Estimates for the ensuing year to be laid on the Table, having been read,

said, he begged to be allowed to take the present opportunity, to put a question to the right hon. Secretary for Ireland. It appeared, from the statements in the Irish newspapers, that there had been a regular battle between his Majesty's troops, and some insurgents or White Boys, or he knew not what to call them, in the county of Kilkenny, and that in that battle twelve men had been killed, and forty-six wounded. He believed this statement to be true, because he had received a similar account from a Magistrate of the county. It was necessary, therefore, to put some questions to the Government, and what he wished to ascertain was, whether the right hon. Gentleman had received any report from the Lord-lieutenant of the county, relating to this unhappy transaction, and whether he would lay the papers before the House? If there was no report, he wished to know whether the Government would not institute an inquiry into the matter? He thought it well worth an inquiry, for he asserted, that within the last year, under the present happy system of Government, there had been more blood of his Majesty's subjects shed, at Castle-pollard, at Newtownbarry, at Merthyr-Tydvil, and at Bristol, than had been spilt in some of those great battles that had decided the fate of nations.

had not the smallest difficulty in answering the question of the right hon. Gentleman, and he should the more readily give an answer, as it would be satisfactory to the right hon. Gentleman, since it would show, that his friend, who had given him the information, had made a statement containing a most extraordinary exaggeration of the facts of the case, melancholy as he allowed they were. The right hon. Gentleman had, without necessity, referred to Castle-Pollard, to Newtownbarry, to Mcrthyr Tydvil, and to Bristol. Without, however, answering those observations, he would state, with respect to this particular matter, that the facts of this battle, as the right hon. Gentleman called it, between a portion of his Majesty's troops were these: A small party of police had succeeded in apprehending eight persons, charged with having committed an assault upon a house, and were about to convey these persons to prison, when they were attacked by a body of peasantry, for the purpose of effecting a rescue. The newspapers had, he believed, given as full information as had been received by the Government. The assistance of the military, however, was required, and the result was, that instead of there having been twelve persons killed, there had been three men killed, and three or four wounded. He deeply regretted, that this loss of life should have occurred; but, at least, this was not as bad as the right hon. Gentleman's statement represented it to be. The party of police ultimately succeeded in conveying their prisoners to the county gaol; and from all the information the Government had received, he believed that not the smallest blame was attached to the officers commanding the troops on the occasion. If the right hon. Gentleman required the papers after this explanation, he had not the slightest objection to their production.

was perfectly satisfied with this explanation at present. If a trial was about to take place, he should not want the papers; but if there was not to be a trial, he should certainly wish them to be produced. It would be satisfactory to the country to see how the new Lord-lieutenants' Bill had operated in Ireland.

hoped he might be allowed to take this opportunity of putting a question to the noble Lord (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), in reference to the measure contemplated by Government for the establishment of a Police. The House was aware that there was a law in existence, which enabled small towns and parishes, with the consent of a certain number of the inhabitants, to establish a Local Police, for the security of persons and property. What he was desirous to learn was, whether the measure contemplated by Ministers would interfere with the operation of the Act to which he had just alluded?

had no difficulty in stating, in reply, that the measure in contemplation, for the establishment of Municipal Police, would not interfere with the Act to which the right hon. Baronet had referred.

asked whether the Estimates for the Military and Naval Expenditure were not to be reduced? He contended that they were now much too large.

replied, that it would be extremely inconvenient at this period to enter into any explanation as to the financial views of Government; but he could assure the hon. member for Middlesex, and the House, that it was the intention of Ministers to adhere to the strictest economy in framing the Estimates for the public service. He must, however, decline stating anything further.

said, he did not ask for the particular account of each separate Estimate, but for information on the simple fact, as to whether the amount of the whole Estimates exceeded or fell short of those of last year. Something ought at once to be known on the subject. Last year the Establishments had been considerably increased. The Army had been increased from 81,000, to 88,000 men, and the Navy from 2 9,000, to 32,000 men—and the expenditure for these services had increased from 16,800,000l. to 17,800,000l. He contended, that before the Resolution was agreed to, some information on the subject ought to be given. If none was now afforded, he should, on the bringing up of the Report of the Committee, move an amendment.

hoped, that some clear understanding would be come to, as to the amount which the public were to be called upon to expend for the building and repairs of Palaces. An estimate ought to have been presented, having this object in view, during the last Session, and he hoped it would be forthwith furnished.

said, he could not exactly say when such a return would be presented; it ought to be made by the Board of Works.

inquired whether the amount named in the Resolution would complete the Palace, including the necessary furniture, &c., or whether it was probable, that another demand would be made hereafter for furniture?

said, the sum now proposed to be granted would complete the building and repairs of the Palace, and render it fit for the reception of his Majesty; but no part of this sum was intended to be expended in the purchase of furniture. There was a large quantity of furniture in store, which his Majesty had directed should be applied to furnishing Buckingham Palace, but it would not, he believed, be sufficient. It would be necessary to provide some furniture.

certainly did not object to furnishing a Palace, the building of which had cost the country above 500,000l.; all he desired was, to know how much the country was to be called upon hereafter to pay for furniture. He also wished, to know, whether it was intended to expend any more money on St. James's Palace, which had already cost the country a very large sum?

replied, that after Buckingham Palace was completed, and fit for the occupation of his Majesty, the recommendation of the Committee had been, that no further outlay should take place on St. James's Palace.

has been one of the members of the Select Committee, by which body it was recommended that Buckingham Palace should be finished, and that afterwards the Palace of St. James should be applied to some other public purpose. The House would be guilty of a dereliction of its duty, if it did not take care that that recommendation was carried into effect.

hoped it would not be understood, that the Committee had unanimously decided, that no more money was to be expended on St. James's Palace. He was one of those who thought that the building must hereafter require some expenditure, if it were only to prevent it from falling into decay.

entirely concurred with his right hon. friend (Mr. Goulburn). The idea of abandoning St. James's Palace had never, as he understood, been decided on by the Committee. It was allowed, that St. James's was not suited for a royal domestic residence, and that, to make it applicable for such a purpose would create great expense. Upon these grounds it was resolved to finish Buckingham House, and keep St. James's for other purposes.

wished to know how far Ministers intended to follow the recommendation of the Committee? for after what they had just heard, it became necessary to understand whether the opinions of the right hon. Gentleman, or those of the Committee, were to be preferred.

begged to explain. He thought his Majesty's Government would not be justified in suffering St. James's Palace to fall into decay. All he meant to state was, that when Buckingham Palace was completed, no addition would be made to St. James's; but there must be some expenditure to keep it from falling into decay.

thought, it would be very bad economy to abandon St. James's Palace, on which a large sum had been expended, and which contained some of the finest apartments in England.

could see no sufficient reason for continuing to occupy St. James's Palace, when Buckingham Palace was completed. It was not without precedent to pull palaces down that cost much in construction, and he mentioned Kew and Carlton Palaces as instances. He had heard it asserted, however, that his Majesty preferred the old Palace, and he wished to ascertain whether the King proposed to five in Buckingham Palace if it was completed.

said, he understood his Majesty intended to reside in Buckingham Palace when it was made habitable and fit for his residence.

said, he had understood that the Committee had come to no decision respecting St. James's Palace; they had left the point to be determined by Parliament.

hoped, that the Report of the Committee would be soon printed, that the House might be in possession of sufficient information, before it decided upon these matters. He had understood that the state apartments in St. James's Palace were gradually falling into ruins, and if so, the sooner they were pulled down the better.

knew that it had been the wish of the Committee that much money should not be expended at St. James's Palace—no more, in fact, than was necessary to keep it in repair.

said, that his hon. colleague appeared to have started a fresh hare. He was afraid, by what he could understand, that the plan of the Committee would not be attended with any decrease of expense, if they were to keep up the State apartments of St. James's Palace. 78,000l. was required for Buckingham House alone, and it would probably be better to have new state apartments built at the latter palace, rather than be at the expense of keeping up two palaces.

begged to say in reply, to the hon. member for Preston, that all that was intended by the vote at present before the House, was to make Buckingham Palace a fit residence for the Sovereign, but no further expense would be incurred without a direct application to Parliament. There was no doubt, that very splendid state apartments already existed at St. James's Palace, but if their condition was so bad that they would soon fall down, it was evident some measures must be taken to supply their place. For the present, however, he would assure the Committee, that it was not intended to expend more money on them than was sufficient to keep them fit for use.

rose to move for leave to bring in a Bill for uniting the office of Surveyor General of his Majesty's Works and Public Buildings with the office of the Commissioners of his Majesty's Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues. He thought it necessary to give a brief explanation of the views of his Majesty's Government in proposing this consolidation. It was the intention of Ministers, that for the future the Surveyor-general of Public Works should be one of the Commissioners of Woods and Forests; they proposed also to retain the services of the Deputy Surveyor of the Board of Works, who was an architect; in other respects considerable changes would be made in these departments. A great number of subordinate officers would be dispensed with, who were now employed at a considerable expense. It was intended for the future, that all articles furnished to the public buildings should be supplied by competition and contract, with the exception of the smaller articles, which would be furnished, as at present, by the Board of Ordnance. To some of the officers who would be thus displaced—namely, those who had given up the whole of their time and services to the duties of this department, and who had been employed in it for a considerable period, it would be necessary to give compensation. But that allowance was not to be given to those who had only been employed for a short period, or partially. He trusted this course would meet with the approbation of the House. In carrying this arrangement into effect, it was found necessary to apply to Parliament, because the accounts of the office of the Board of Works were audited by the Commissioners of Public Accounts, and those of the Woods and Forests by the Auditor of Land Revenues. It was proposed, that both should henceforward be audited by the Commissioners of Public Accounts, and that the place of Auditor of Land Revenues should be abolished. But, as the latter was a patent office, it was necessary that compensation should be given for its loss, and on that point the Government required the sanction of the House. He should move for leave to bring in a Bill for that purpose, and should propose, that the consideration of the proper allowance to be given as compensation should be decided by arbitrators, one to be chosen by the Commissioners of the Treasury, and the other by the patentee. The only other point to which there was any necessity for him to allude at present, related to the valuable documents in the custody of the Land Revenue department, the preservation of which was alike important to the public and the Crown; and it would, therefore, be expedient to make some provision to take care of them. He believed, that the arrangement contemplated would be useful to the public, and he hoped, that there would be no objection to his bringing in a Bill to effect the proposed objects. The noble Lord concluded by moving for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Acts, 10 Geo. 4th, c. 50, and 54 Geo. 3rd, c. 157, and for the purpose of uniting the office of the Surveyor-general of his Majesty's Works and Public Buildings with the office of the Commissioners of his Majesty's Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues.

said, he was anxious that the principle of consolidation should be carried into effect wherever it might be practicable, as he was convinced such a practice would lead to a considerable saving in the public expenditure, but he thought that it would have been better in this case to transfer the whole duties of the Board of Works to the Ordnance department; and that he was satisfied, might have been done without any increase of expense. It seemed to him, that the Commissioners of Woods and Forests could know nothing of public buildings, while the Board of Ordnance was fully in possession of all the necessary knowledge, and quite equal to the duty of taking care of them. That Board had a number of engineers attached to it, who were in full possession of the requisite knowledge, and the increase of their salaries, to allow them to perform the additional duties, would bear no proportion to the expense of a whole establishment of such persons, who would be required by the Commissioners of Woods and Forests to carry these new duties into execution. He therefore hoped his noble friends would take this subject into their further consideration, for he was convinced their great object was economy in the expenditure of the public money.

said, that the Board of Works was designed for the purpose principally of attending to the public buildings which were connected with Crown property, and his Majesty's Government thought that, as in the management of private property, the same individual should attend both to the land and the buildings upon it, so it ought to be with respect to the Crown property and the buildings upon it. For this reason they proposed the incorporation of the Board of Public Works with that of the Woods and Forests, and he did not think, that this alteration would materially increase the expense of the management of the latter department, while a considerable saving would be effected in the office connected with the Land Revenue. Besides this advantage an individual responsibility would be secured, in the management of the business, by which he hoped the works undertaken would be better performed. He did not think, that the duties of the Board of Ordnance were analogous to those connected with the palaces belonging to the Crown, and he considered the arrangement proposed by his noble friend much better than that suggested by the hon. Gentleman.

said, that as the Board of Works had the superintendence of public buildings to the amount of 40,000l. or 50,000l. a year, including that House amongst the rest, he thought it would be better to transfer these duties to the Board of Ordnance, which Board, there were good reasons for believing, would be able to perform the duties most effectually, as it had already had the management of barracks, and other public buildings connected with them, and was provided with engineers and all necessary officers. That Board had the superintendence of the public buildings in Dublin, and he was at a loss to know what difference there could be between the repairs of palaces and other public offices belonging to the Government. No man approved more than he did of consolidation, but he hoped that no superannuation or compensation would be given until it had been first submitted to the Treasury, and by them submitted to that House.

said, that the only reason he had for objecting to the arrangement was, that he thought a permanent officer more likely to do the duty effectively than a removable officer, as the Commissioners of the Woods and Forests were, although he admitted that there was no reason to complain either of the present or the last persons who filled that office. He thought, that if the buildings now under the control of the Lord Chamberlain were placed under the same office, it would be a great saving and benefit to the public.

merely rose to observe, that the arrangement proposed, relating to the Lord Chamberlain's department, by the hon. member for Bridport, had been carried into effect some years ago.

gave notice, that he should, on Monday, move for the appointment of a Committee to consider of the expediency of abolishing the office of Auditor of Land Revenue.

expressed a hope, that, no compensation would be given without ample proof that the office was a patent one, and therefore he trusted the patent would be laid upon the Table, in order that he might be satisfied if the holder was entitled to compensation.

did not think, that the present temper of the country was at all favourable to giving large retiring allowances to officers holding places of emolument. He trusted the precedent afforded by the cases of the Commissioners for Lotteries would be avoided; these persons had received large allowances on giving up places which had no duties attached to them.

wished to have some understanding on the subject of an arrangement which was proposed last Session, for making Wednesday an order day. He was not aware that that was intended as a permanent regulation, but that it had merely been adopted on account of the particular circumstances of the last Session. If it were permanently adopted, the result would be, that Wednesday would be the only day on which Gentlemen not connected with the Government could bring forward business; for, without meaning to impute any want of courtesy to Ministers, he thought he might safely say, that they would not allow Gentlemen unconnected with them to bring on business on Monday and Friday. From this a great impediment to the public business would necessarily arise.

said, that the arrangement of making Wednesday an Order day had been proposed as an experiment, but there never had been an opportunity of trying the experiment, owing to the Reform Bill. The right hon. Gentleman said, that his Majesty's Government would never allow Gentlemen unconnected with them to bring their business on, either on Monday or Friday. He could assure the right hon. Gentleman, that he should not wish to take advantage of the courtesy of the House, when Wednesday was an Order day, any more than when it was not. He was sure the Government would not prevent Gentlemen from bringing on business on Monday and Friday, when it could be made convenient. But he could give no specific pledge on the subject, further than to say, that on Wednesday the Government would not ask precedence.