expressed his regret that he did not see any of his Majesty's Ministers in their places on this occasion, as he was anxious for some explanation of the fact why an annual account was not laid before the House of the amount of exports and imports of the United Kingdom. Such an account would be of the utmost importance, as well for the information to which Members would thus have easy access, as also for the great saving of expense which it would occasion. He had no doubt that a saving of some 30,000l. a-year might be made, by having one general account of exports and imports laid before the House every year, at the commencement of each Session. From the want of such account, Members who desired information as to any particular branch of our exports and imports, were obliged to move for separate returns, by which great expense, and often great delay, were occasioned; and then the information was not obtained in that satisfactory manner which was desirable. He had that morning got an account from the United States of America, in which one might find at a glance the amount of exports and imports for any year during a number of years, and he did not see why a similar account should not be published by the Government of this country every year. He did not know what Ministers had to do that they could not publish such an account.

presented a Petition from a person named Robert Thomas Webb, of York-street, Marylebone, Surgeon, stating, that he was what was called an Atheist, and was perfectly indifferent as to what became of his body after his death. He, therefore, had no objection that his body should be dissected for the benefit of Science, but he had a wife and family who all professed the Christian religion, and in regard to their feelings he would object to dissection; he, therefore, prayed the House not to pass the Anatomy Bill.

would take this opportunity of correcting an error as to what fell from the hon. member for Preston, in alluding to the petition from Leeds, which he (Lord Morpeth) had presented last night. The hon. Member had alluded to a person who was instrumental in getting up the petition, and stated that he was a man who had roasted his Bible, and had rejected all religion; but in some of the papers this act had been attributed to a highly respectable individual, Mr. Baines, of Leeds, on whom he was sure it was not the hon. Member's intention to cast any such imputation.

was sure the recollection of the House would bear him out in the declaration that he had made no such charge aginst Mr. Baines, whom, whatever objections he might otherwise have to him, he believed to be a religious man, and incapable of any such act as had been coupled with his name in the report. What he stated was, that a person named Smithson, and others, who had assisted Mr. Baines in getting up the petition, were persons of the character he had mentioned; and it was one of them (Smithson, we understood) who had roasted his Bible. Although Mr. Baines had been in the habit of attacking him behind his back, in his paper, he would not make any charge against him which he did not believe to be well founded, and certainly he had made none of the kind alluded to.

said, that any person who had heard distinctly what fell from the hon. Member (Mr. Hunt) must recollect that he had not used the words imputed to him. The error, no doubt, arose not from intention, but from the difficulty of hearing. No man who knew Mr. Baines could believe him capable of the act which had been erroneously attributed to him. The hon. member for Kirkcudbright (Mr. Cutlar Fergusson) had, on a former evening, made some remarks on Political Unions, and particularly on the subject of the Political Union at Leeds, which the hon. Member stated to be contrary to the Constitution.

in presenting a Petition from the Roman Catholic Inhabitants of the Parish of St. Agnes, in the Diocess of Cork, against Tithes, took occasion to observe, that phrases were sometimes used in the heat of debate which were not intended. He admitted, that he himself often, in the course of debate, used words which, on more cool reflection, he should wish not to have used. He supposed that it was in this way the word "disgraceful" had been applied to his statement as to the Tithe Question in Ireland, by an hon. Member opposite, and had afterwards been repeated by the right hon. Baronet. (Sir R. Peel). He did not think it disgraceful to state important facts which came to his knowledge on this subject, and he thought the disgrace would only lie upon the suppression of such facts. In the petition which he now presented, it appeared that in this parish there were only four Protestant families, consisting altogether of fourteen persons, but there were 2,800 Roman Catholics, from whom the tithe was exacted, though there was no Church, and no clerical duty of any kind belonging to the Established Church performed. The petition further stated, that the tithes, before the Composition Act, amounted to 6l0l.; but that they had since that time increased one-seventh in amount, the whole of which addition had fallen on the petitioners. Was it not natural that the parties in this case should object to the payment of tithes? Could any man reasonably expect that any body of men, no matter of what creed, would be content with such a system? He would beg the attention of the House to the concluding paragraph of the petition, in which the petitioners stated, that 'considering that Church rates and tithes are exacted in a situation where there is no Church, and no duty performed, we have come to this conclusion, that there is no moral obligation on us to pay those taxes.' When a feeling of this kind was avowed, and was every day spreading in that country, he would ask, whether it did not impose a strong obligation on the Government to take the whole subject of tithes and Church property into its earliest and most serious consideration? For his own part, he would say, that if he were in the situation of the petitioners, he would not pay such a tax. He would do what his ancestors did in Scotland—he would resist the attempt to exact such a tax, for which no sort of duty was performed. He thought, that all fair means of redress should be first resorted to, and, in his opinion, the Irish people had resorted to such means, but without effect. Could it, then, be a matter of surprise that they should now resist the payment altogether? Did the House think, that this country would consent to the payment of an immense military establishment in Ireland, for the purpose of enforcing the collection of tithes, and protecting the property of the Irish Church? We had now an army of 20,000 men in Ireland, though in the year 1792, the whole of our military force in that country did not exceed 8,000 men; but at one time, and not very long ago, our force there amounted to 26,000 or 27,000 men. Would the people of England consent to the maintenance of such an establishment, the chief object of which was, the protection of Church property and tithes? He was sure they would not, and therefore he earnestly hoped that Ministers would lose no time in submitting the whole question to the consideration of Parliament.

said, that anything which had fallen from the hon. member for Middlesex would not divert him from the real question before the House. He was not conscious of having used the word "disgraceful" in reference to the hon. Member's argument; but if such a word had been applied, it was to the principle involved, and indeed avowed, in the hon. Member's speech—that the spoliation of Church property was a measure which the Government and the legislature ought to adopt—than which no principle could be more unjust. He would admit, that when the Government determined on the appointment of a Committee to inquire into the system of tithes in Ireland, it must have had in view the question, whether some other mode of paying the clergy might not be devised; but it never was admitted for an instant, that the inquiry had any reference to the spoliation of the property of the Church. He had been all the morning engaged in that Committee, in pursuing the inquiry relating to the collection of tithes, but he would not go into the matter at that moment. The subject to which the hon. member for Middlesex had referred, when he made the statement complained of, was the question mooted by the hon. and learned member for Kerry, that a noble Lord should be added to the Tithe Committee. The hon. member for Middlesex said, the whole Committee was unnecessary, as the Tithe Question in Ireland was already settled. How the hon. Member could make such a statement, when he must have known, what indeed was perfectly notorious, that tithe was paid without objection in many parts of Ireland, he could not tell. He would not say whether such a statement was disgraceful or not, but certainly no man could hear with approbation such a declaration as that of the hon. member for Middlesex—that if he were an Irish Roman Catholic he would not pay tithes. Was it right to encourage the people to resist the payment of tithes, to which the owners had as much legal and moral right as the hon. Member had to receive rent from any tenant on his estate? He did not say, that the present system might not admit of some modification, but he would contend, that the property of the Church was held by as good and as sacred a title as that of any gentleman to his private estate; and if once that property was invaded, there would be no security for property of any kind in Ireland.

did not rise to enter into any discussion of the Tithe Question at present; but after what had fallen from the right hon. Baronet, he could not avoid saying a few words. No one, he was sure, would be disgraceful enough to wish to take away the life-interest of any of the present holders of tithes or Church property, but no one who saw the operation of the system in Ireland, and witnessed its effects, could, in his opinion, come to any other conclusion than that after the life-interest of the present possessors had ceased, a change ought to take place. The subject was now taken up so warmly and by so many, that he doubted whether, unless the Question was considered by Government with a view to some serious change, that sort of property would be worth anything whatever in Ireland. The appointment of the Tithe Committee was a measure which had by no means given satisfaction in Ireland; for the Committee was appointed on a wrong principle. The studious exclusion of Roman Catholics from it seemed to imply that Roman Catholics had nothing to do with tithes, but to pay them; as if they were to be allowed no deliberation whatever on the subject. He would not say, that the people of Ireland had settled the Tithe Question, but there could be no doubt that they had made up their minds upon it; and, though the refusal to pay tithes was not now general, let hon. Members recollect the great spread which that resistance had made within the last year, and they would see, that it might soon become so. The hon. member for Middlesex had alluded to the resistance made by the people of Scotland to the attempt to impose a Church upon them against their will; that attempt was certainly a most complete failure, for the Scotchmen drew their broadswords and took to their hills. The Irish were adopting a different course; the Catholics were opposed to the present system, but they were not alone in their opposition; the Protestant Dissenters and the Protestants of the Established Church were now following the example of the Catholics, and were prepared in many places to refuse the payment of this tax; and if the matter were left to the people, the question would soon be settled. Any provision that was necessary to minister to the spiritual wants of the Protestants of Ireland would never be grudged or withheld by the Catholics. But it was a matter worthy of observation, that those individuals who now usually did the duty were by far the worst paid. There were instances in which gentlemen received 2,000l. or 3,000l. a-year, while the active duty was performed by a curate who received the splendid salary of 69l. 7s. 10½d. There was, he repeated, no party in Ireland who felt any disposition to resist the fair claims of the working clergy; but a general disposition did prevail, and would prevail, to oppose ecclesiastical sinecures.

said, he did not mean to enter on this occasion into a discussion of those very enlarged questions which were connected with the present state of feeling in Ireland on the subject of tithes, nor would he have addressed the House at all, but for the remark which had been made by the hon. member for Kerry, with respect to the appointment of the Committee on Irish tithes. It would have been well if the hon. Member had attended when the appointment of that Committee took place, because he could then have discussed the proposition of his Majesty's Ministers: he might then have made such remarks as occurred to him, either with reference to the principle on which the Committee was proposed, or with respect to the individuals whose names were selected. The hon. member for Kerry had complained, that the Committee was formed on a wrong basis. But let the facts be fairly considered, and it would be found, that the formation of the Committee proceeded on the most unobjectionable principle. In forming that Committee, care was taken that no Members should be sent up-stairs who had expressed, either on one side or on the other, a decided determination on this Question. Ministers did not wish, on the one hand, that those Gentlemen should be placed on the Committee who were totally adverse to any consideration of this subject—who were anxious that the matter should remain just as it stood at present—and they were equally unwilling that others should be placed on it whose minds were closed against all argument, and who would be satisfied with nothing less than the total abolition of tithes. Ministers endeavoured to constitute the Committee, of men who well knew the opinions that were entertained on both sides—of men whose feelings and principles were moderate, and who would carefully and dispassionately hear and decide upon the evidence that was submitted to them. It was not on the ground of any jealousy or suspicion, that Roman Catholics were not proposed as members of this Committee. They thought that it was expedient to abstain from placing Roman Catholics on the Committee, but their determination did not arise from any doubt that Roman Catholics, if placed on the Committee, would perform their duty honestly and conscientiously. If they could have entertained the thought that, placed in such circumstances, Roman Catholics would be likely to swerve from the honest discharge of the duty which was imposed on them, neither he, nor a considerable number of those who now composed the Government, would, for many years, have voted for the Catholic claims, and for the admission of Roman Catholics to take their scats as Members of the Legislature. The object of Ministers in the formation of that Committee was, to convince both sides that fair and impartial justice would be extended to them; and therefore they had not placed on the Committee any persons who were interested or biassed one way or the other. They wished to give satisfaction to the different parties; and they felt, that complaints might be raised if a question of this kind were referred to Roman Catholics. It was a subject which bore immediate reference to the Protestant Established Church, and therefore Ministers felt it to be more delicate and more prudent towards the Roman Catholics themselves, that they should not appear on the Committee. Ministers thought that it was better, when a subject was delegated to the consideration of a committee, whose decision might lead to extensive alterations in matters appertaining to the Protestant Church—they deemed it better, under circumstances of that description, that such alterations should not appear to be forced on the Protestant Church by those who did not belong to it, but that they were recommended by the members of the Protestant Church. If, however, the hon. member for Kerry would look to the list of names on the Committee, he would see, that though no Roman Catholics were included in it, still individuals connected with Ireland were to be found there, who were able to speak the wishes, and advocate the sentiments of large bodies of Roman Catholic constituents. He had thus thought it necessary to state at once, that the omission complained of by the hon. member for Kerry did not arise from accident, but that the Government had adopted this course because they conceived that it would be more generally satisfactory. He did not know whether the hon. member for Kerry meant to bring forward his motion on this subject, but if he did, he should certainly oppose the placing on the Committee Lord Killeen, a noble friend of his. He was extremely glad, that the hon. member for Kerry had selected his noble friend on this occasion, because opposition to him would not leave the least ground for suspicion as to the purity of the cause on which it proceeded; since he believed that no man could be found more completly unexceptionable than his noble friend.

expressed his conviction that the Irish Roman Catholics would object to be represented in the Committee by Protestants, because the omission of members of that religion seemed to imply that they were considered as the Representatives of a particular portion of the people instead of being general Representatives. The Committee, on this account, was not calculated to give satisfaction to the people of Ireland. There were Gentlemen on that Committee who though they would act with reference to other questions in the most impartial manner, yet were likely, on this particular subject, to give way to a certain bias. There was, throughout the people of Ireland, a feeling against the payment of tithes, but in the course of the discussions that had taken place on this subject, the people of that country had been represented to be in a state of more mischievous agitation and tumult than was really the case. He had himself recently come from a part of that country where there was no resistance to the payment of tithes; a circumstance mainly owing to the discreet conduct of the Clergy of that district, of whom it might be generally observed, that they were more kind and considerate in their demands than the lay proprietors of tithes. There was a strong impression, however, even among them that some alteration, or settlement of the system, would be effected by Parliament. Their objection did not go to the right of the present incumbents, but they viewed with jealousy the claims that might be made by their successors. They could not recognize any right in the latter, and they thought that the Church property belonged to the State, and ought hereafter to be appropriated to public purposes. Much had been said about combination and intimidation. He would not suffer his opinions to be influenced by either. He would proceed in his own plain view of the case, and what he would say was this—"Place the law, without delay, in such a state as will remove all cause of combination, and satisfy the great body of the people: do this, and we shall hear no more of intimidation or of combination."

said, that the resistance to the payment of tithes was rapidly extending. Last year it was only manifested in a small portion of the Queen's County, and in a confined parish of the county of Kilkenny. But now the principle appeared to be pervading the country in every quarter from north to south. It should be remarked that the opposition was shown- —not against individuals, but against the principle. Where the clergyman had excited feelings of kindness, the people had not been backward in acknowledging it. He knew one instance where a clergyman, who for several years had been actively benevolent, had recently been refused the payment of tithes. Two Roman Catholic clergymen, however, addressed their congregations, and having shown to them the benefit which they had derived from the conduct of the clergyman, demanded of them whether they would not spontaneously grant to him that which by law he had a right to claim. Those people did subscribe the money required, they gave it to the clergyman as a donation, but they would not give it as tithe. The Catholics in general were disposed to acquiesce in the title of the present clergy to the tithes, but they considered Church property, after their life interest was expired, as applicable to the purposes of the State, and subject to the disposal of Government. With respect to the appointment of the Committee, he would only say, that if his name had been mentioned as a member of it, he would have refused to act—not because, as a Roman Catholic, he did not feel that he should deliver his opinions as impartially as any other Gentleman, but lest any feeling of jealousy might be generated by his appointment to the Committee. When, however, he said this, he was nevertheless of opinion, that some Roman Catholics ought to have been placed on the Committee, in order to satisfy the Catholic population of Ireland.

I did not say all the Protestants of Ireland, and I did not say atrocious.

said, an atrocious conspiracy did exist, and it was fomented by those desperate agitators who were the curse of Ireland. He was sorry to use such strong language, but these were his feelings, and when they were roused he must give them vent. The Protestants of Ireland, almost to a man, were disgusted with that atrocious conspiracy, which was encouraged by meetings held in Dublin, under the very nose of the Government, from whom the Protestants of Ireland had expected protection. If it were not for that conspiracy, the Roman Catholics would be very willing to pay the tithes. The fact was, that under the system which prevailed in Ireland, if the Catholics refused to act as they were commanded, their houses would be burned, their cattle would be houghed, and their property destroyed.

regretted, that the hon. member for Kerry was not present to advocate the propriety of putting Catholics on the Committee appointed to inquire into the tithe system, when that Committee was nominated. It was, in his opinion, an unjust preference to exclude them, and he was sure that not placing Roman Catholics in the Committee would cause great dissatisfaction in Ireland. If such persons were members of the Committee, they would be able to bring forward such evidence as they thought proper, and sift that which was brought forward. He hoped that some Catholic Members might yet be placed on the Committee, as that would give satisfaction to the people of Ireland.

did not think, that the gallant Colonel could have visited many parts of Ireland when he asserted that the Protestants of that country were to a man disgusted with what he called a combination against the payment of tithes. Surely he would not say that the Presbyterians of Ulster were strongly in favour of the tithe system. The fact was, that in every part of the country the impression against that system was hourly increasing. The hon. member for Downpatrick had asserted, that there were no combinations against the payment of tithes in that part of Ireland with which he was acquainted; but that through the whole south of the country there existed a great abhorrence to that odious tax, was a fact that could not be controverted. In the county of Wicklow the Protestant farmers were as much opposed to the payment of them us the Catholics, and he believed evidence had been laid before the Committee to prove that fact. The right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stanley) had stated, that Government had felt a solicitude to appoint individuals on the Committee who were not actuated by strong party feelings, and also that they had, out of delicacy to the Catholics themselves, excluded individuals of that religion from the Committee. Now he thought it would have been as well if they had allowed to Roman Catholic Members the option of refusing to serve on the Committee, instead of thus sparing the nice sensibility of their feelings. The name of Lord Killeen had been mentioned; but he believed that noble Lord participated in the general surprise of his friends, when he found that no Roman Catholics were appointed on the Committee. The right hon. Gentleman had thrown a new light on the subject when he affirmed that none but unbiassed and impartial Members were selected for the Committee. Yet he must observe, that there were acting on that Committee three Members for Universities, and a right hon. Gentleman formerly Chief Secretary for Ireland. For the future, he presumed, under the dictation of the right hon. Secretary, these hon. Members must be considered as men of large and liberal views, and incapable of being biassed by those predilections which were, no doubt erroneously, attributed to them. To this Committee there were two questions referred; the one the collecting of tithes, which was the Protestant department, and the other the payment of them, which was the Roman Catholic department It had formerly been complained that justice was not fairly administered in Ireland, because its administration entirely rested with one party. Might not the same complaint be made here, when on a question of fact, some of those who had most interest in its decision were not allowed to assist in the investigation? That House, however, might be considered the tribunal of the last resort. The Report of the Committee would have to receive the sanction of the House, and on that the Roman Catholic Members might vote; but they must not make suggestions in the Committee. The Roman Catholics, then, would have a power to vote, but not the power to get the information which might enable them to vote correctly. It might be said that justice would be done in the Committee, and he had no doubt that justice would be administered. But the question was, would the people of Ireland be satisfied with this course of proceeding? Like Caesar's wife, justice ought not only to be pure but unsuspected. It would perhaps be alleged that the Irish were a suspicious people—he admitted that they were; but what had made them so? Long continued wrong, and grinding oppression. To dissipate any such suspicious feeling, some Roman Catholics ought to have been mixed up with this Committee. He should like to know how the addition of two or three Roman Catholics could affect the decision of that Committee; surely it would not be said that they would have the power to overturn the legal orthodoxy of the Protestants of England, which was fully represented. in the Committee. He sincerely hoped that Government would not interfere in opposing the intended motion of the hon. member for Kerry, to allow Lord Killeen, and one or two other Catholics, to be placed as members on the Committee. If those hon. Gentlemen were added, a report proceeding from them would be received as emanating from a pure and uncorrupted source; but if the Committee were to consist entirely of Protestants, although some of the members were fully entitled to his entire confidence, yet it would not be considered as calculated to act fairly towards the Catholics of Ireland.

begged to inform the hon. and learned Gentleman, that he was not a member of the Committee.

explained, that the Protestants in his part of the country generally were averse from the payment of tithes, but they did not like to take part in the plan for resisting them.

wished to say a few words with respect to the constitution of the Committee. It was very well known that prejudices existed on both sides of this question, and therefore Ministers had selected none of those who had expressed strong feelings on the one side or on the other. They had selected a Committee, the members of which they believed were well acquainted with the subject, and were most anxious to do justice impartially. If, in selecting the Committee, they had not placed on it men who were well acquainted with the present state and situation of Ireland, and who had deeply considered this question, then the appointment of the Committee would have been open to all those objections that had been made to it. But amongst the members of that Committee there were no less than seven Gentlemen who represented very large bodies of Catholic constituents. Having selected those Members, it did appear to him, that it was impossible for any one justly to say, that the Catholic interest would not be carefully and impartially attended to in the consideration of this great question. On the other hand it should be recollected, that on investigating this subject they had not merely to look to the feelings of the people of Ireland, but to the feelings of the people of England also. It was necessary to keep in view the sentiments of the Protestant population of both parts of the empire. This being the state of the case, he would ask, when the question under consideration of the Committee was one particularly ap- plying to the interests of the Protestant Church, whether great jealousy would not be excited against the settlement of that question, if Roman Catholics had been allowed to take a part in its decision? After the most serious consideration which the Government could apply to the subject, they thought that the mode best calculated for a satisfactory adjustment of the question was, to place on the Committee the names of men to whom the Roman Catholic interests could be safely confided; but not to place on it Roman Catholics, against whom Protestants might feel a degree of, perhaps improper, jealousy.

said, he had waited in the expectation that some other person would have placed the question before the House in one particular point of view, but as no one else had done it he conceived it to be his duty. He had always understood it as a declared and received principle of the bill which admitted Roman Catholics to sit in that House, that they should never interfere with questions relating to the Protestant Church. In the most friendly and charitable spirit he cautioned Gentlemen against violating that principle of the compact if they wished it to be held sacred.

said, he could take upon himself to declare, that some Protestants were as averse to the payment of tithes as Catholics. Indeed, he was acquainted with one parish where the High Churchmen and Orangemen endeavoured to persuade the Catholics to join them in opposing the tithe composition, but the latter refused.

in moving that the petition be printed, took the opportunity to deny that he had ever sanctioned any plan which had for its object the spoliation or robbery of the Church. Some years ago he had laid resolutions on the Table of that House with respect to Church property, one of which directly went to preserve to individuals the right which they might at present possess to any such property.

assured the hon. Member, that he had no desire to make an unfair attack upon him: he had understood the hon. Member to state, that the resistance now offered to the collection and payment of tithes, justified the Legislature in committing a spoliation on that species of property; under that impression, he had certainly said, that such language was unjust. If the hon. Gentleman had not used the language imputed to him, he had spoken under an erroneous impression.

congratulated the right hon. Secretary for Ireland on the change that had taken place in his opinions with regard to the nature of Church property, and the power of Parliament to dispose of it. He should postpone his motion for placing the name of his noble friend Lord Killeen on the Tithe Committee until the next day.

said, that his opinions with regard to Church property had undergone no change whatever. He had always held that it would be must unjust for the Legislature to interfere with the property of the Church, with a view to convert it to purposes that were not ecclesiastical; but he would at the same time always assert the power of Parliament to regulate the property which the Church, as a corporation, held in trust, and for the due management of which it was, like every other corporate body, responsible to the Legislature of the country.

said, the right hon. Gentleman had put a question to him, and if the right hon. Gentleman had not wished to delay the current business of the night he thought he might have done so in much fewer words, and without raking up, as he had done, all the topics he could reach of angry discussions. With respect to the fees paid by the Magistrates of Ireland on the renewal of their commissions, they were not imposed by the Government, but by Act of Parliament. Government had nothing to do with them; and in looking into the Acts of Parliament on the subject, he was surprised to find that Magistrates in Ireland, in taking out new Commissions of the Peace on a demise of the Crown, were subjected to higher fees than the Magistrates in England were liable to on a similar occasion. A Magistrate in Ireland had to pay 2l. 13s. 6d. for such a renewal, while the sum which an English Magistrate had to pay was merely a nominal one. The manner in which the difference of the law in the two countries on this point had arisen was this:—The 1st George 3rd. c. 33, superseded the necessity of suing out new commissions in England on a demise of the Crown, but that Act did not extend to Ireland. By the 1st William 4th it was provided, that no fees should be payable for the renewal of commissions on the demise of the Crown, except for the labour actually done in making out such commissions, and that the Treasury should have the power of determining the amount of remuneration to be awarded for such labour. The fees payable for the labour performed were accordingly reduced more than one-half by a Minute of the Treasury, and thus the Magistrates of Ireland, instead of having to pay 7l.15s. 6d., had only to pay 2l. 13s. 6d. The greater part of the fees did not go to the Lord Chancellor's Secretary, but to the Deputy Clerk of the Crown in the Hanaper office. Although he thought that the labour alone ought to be remunerated, still he did not see what Government could do to relieve the present parties. He understood the documents to be prepared were very voluminous. Labour had actually been incurred, and it ought to be paid for. Since 1760 the attention of Parliament had not been called to this subject, but, now that it was, he would not say that it would not be proper to introduce a bill for the purpose of assimilating the laws in the two countries on the subject.

said, he had been requested by some of the most respectable of his constituents to call the attention of the House to this subject. The right hon. Secretary had talked of the labour of making out those documents. There was very little labour in their preparation. They were a mere bit of parchment, with some printing on it, and one name written with a pen. He knew this to be the case, because he had had one of those renewals in his hand, and examined it, although he had not been fool enough to take up his own. The Magistrates of Ireland had been very differently treated in the reign of George 3rd. The Government of that day did not feel it necessary to exact burthensome fees to swell the pockets of the family of the Lord Chancellor. These fees were not merely odious as an exaction, but they were odious also because they were a tribute to the family of a man who had no claims to any such recompense. He was instructed to ask the right hon. Secretary if it was the intention of the Government to pass a short bill to relieve the Magistracy from this unjust charge? The duties of an Irish Magistrate were not easy or agreeable, and it was rather too much to call upon that body to pay thousands to enrich a family not deserving. A meeting was called in the county with which he was immediately connected, for the 11th of January, and on the 10th of January the different Magistrates received letters, informing them that they must renew their commissions immediately. Nor was that the only ground for complaint. The High Sheriff had required the assistance of the constabulary police, and the police had refused to attend, on the ground that they had instructions from the Government to the contrary. The High Sheriff appealed in writing, but he received a similar answer in writing. That looked as if it was the wish and intention of the Government that those who had acted as Magistrates should be maltreated and insulted; but fortunately they had sufficient friends to protect them. The High Sheriff had written to a Sir Something Gosset—calling for an investigation, and the High Sheriff had afterwards written to the same Sir Something Gosset, tendering his resignation; but in reply he had been informed, that nothing of the kind was necessary. He should take an opportunity of moving for copies of that correspondence, with a view of submitting such a motion upon it as might appear necessary.

said, that his Majesty's Government would not at present promise to introduce any such Act of Parliament. On the contrary, he did not think that it would be just to take away the remuneration from those who had already undergone the labour of making out those Commissions, each of which, by the way, contained more names than the hon. Member had stated; for he believed it was necessary in the Commission issued to an Irish Magistrate to recite the whole Commission of the county. At the same time, as he had already said, he thought it would be a desirable thing to assimilate the laws in the two countries on the subject. With regard to the hon. and gallant Member's statement, that those fees went to recompense a member of the Lord Chancellor's family, he would not attempt to answer such a charge. He was sure the House regarded it at its full value. As to the letter which the hon. and gallant Member complained of, as having been sent to the Magistrates of Sligo, perhaps it would be a full justification for him to state, that the whole of the existing Commission expired on the 16th of January, and with respect to the police and constabulary force, they were expressly prohibited from attending party meetings, but they were assembled and ready to act on all occasions to preserve the public peace.

maintained he was even critically accurate. He had himself been a Magistrate for two counties. The letter respecting the renewal in one was dated December 26th, and that respecting the renewal in Sligo was dated the 9th of January, two days before the meeting. Again, upon the subject of the police, he had a letter from the High Sheriff, containing a copy of the letter from the chief of the police. That letter the right hon Secretary might see and read. The right hon. Secretary was wrong if he imagined he (Colonel Perceval) would make any statement, either in that House or elsewhere, that he was not prepared fully to sustain.

said, as it was not the practice to charge fees on the renewal of the Magistrates' commissions in this country, he held it to be invidious and improper that such a charge should be made upon the Irish Magistracy.

expressed an earnest hope that relief would be afforded. The amount of the fees was not so much as the unfairness of the charges. The right hon. Secretary unfortunately knew little or nothing of Ireland: he never lived there. He believed the right hon. Gentleman had not resided in Ireland more than four days consecutively since he had been in office. If the right hon. Gentleman were better acquainted than he was with Ireland he would soon see its real interests. Looking at the conduct of the Government towards the Irish Magistracy, he should suppose its object was to get rid of the Irish gentry as Magistrates, with a view of appointing a stipendiary Magistracy, of such persons as would be entirely subservient to the Ministers.

said, the present regulations were made by the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Dawson) who now complained of them.

assured the hon. and learned Gentleman that he was incorrect in his statement, as he had no doubt the right hon. Secretary would inform him.

said, the Treasury Minute was made in November, 1831, but the scale of fees, in accordance with which that Minute was made, was settled by the previous Administration.

said, at any rate it appeared that the principle was laid down by the late Government, but now it seemed the good and worthy exclusive Protestant Magistrates were determined to enter into a conspiracy to resist the payment of those trifling fees. It must be admitted, however, that the charge was unquestionably too much; for the only trouble given to the officer was, the insertion of the name into the parchment document, and transmitting it to the party postage free.

in reply to the statement of the right hon. Secretary for Ireland, admitted that it was perfectly true a great number of instruments had been issued by the late Administration immediately previous to their abdication of office, at, however, one-half of the usual rate of fees. But he could not see that the present Government had any right to throw the onus on the shoulders of that Administration, for the issue of any instruments since that period at the same rate, inasmuch as it was competent for them to order a still further reduction.

deprecated the general prin- ciple of demanding fees on commissions, a practice which pervaded all branches of the public service. He had before alluded to a case where the Captain of the Guard had pocketed a sum of 1,350l. by the issue of commissions. If he had known that he should have had such a favourable opportunity for detailing the facts of this case, which he begged to remark he had in a state of preparation, he would have brought down to the House the necessary documents for so doing. He was of opinion that means should be taken to compel persons who had taken fees on commissions to refund them. He implored Irish Gentlemen not to pay the exaction, for he was convinced it was illegal. Why should English Magistrates be required to pay but three or four shillings for their commission, while in Ireland they were called on to pay between two and three pounds?

concurred with the hon. member for Middlesex, that these fees ought not to be paid. The full charge for inserting the name of a gentleman in the Commission of the Peace in England was between 5l. and 6l., while in Ireland the sum demanded for the same purpose was above 10l., and the charge now complained of was merely for a renewal of these commissions on which so much had been said. To demand 2l. 13s. 6d. for such renewals was a gross imposition, and he, therefore, trusted Government would prevent their exaction by passing an Act for that purpose.

said, whenever an imposition was detected, this excuse was immediately made, "Oh, we were not the first to practise it, our predecessors were guilty of similar conduct." He wanted to be informed upon what principle of justice 2l. 13s. 6d. was demanded from an Irish Magistrate for the renewal of his commission, when an English Magistrate had to pay but 5s. for the same renewal.

trusted that the House would believe, that, opposed as he was to almost every measure of his Majesty's Government, he did not bring forward his present Motion as a party question; it was too nearly connected in his mind with considerations of religion to be so degraded. At the same time, while he would not shrink from declaring that he looked upon the situation of the Vaudois as peculiarly deserving the sympathy of this country, on account of their religion, he thought that he could satisfy the House, that they had a right to claim its support on grounds entirely distinct and political. In fact, if they were Jews, Mahometans, or Heathens, their right to the interference of England would be the same; for it was founded on specific treaty. As this was the first time for many years, he believed, that their name had been brought before the House, it was necessary to state something of their history and present condition, as the ground-work of the Motion. The people in whose behalf he now claimed the support of England, inhabited three vallies in the Alps of Piedmont; and they had been known for ages as the Protestants of that region. They are, indeed, part of that great family who, in the mountains of Dauphiné, in the Cevennes, in the Pyrenees, and in these Alpine recesses, maintained a pure faith amidst darkness and persecution. The motto of one of their chief towns (Luzern) Lux in Tenebris, is, indeed, exactly characteristic of their condition; and in a very distant age, from these vallies were sent forth those who were a light to other countries. They continued exposed to alternate violence and neglect till the year 1655, when the persecutions of the Duke of Savoy, their sovereign, threatened their total extinction. Their sufferings and their common faith excited the sympathy of all Protestant Europe. Oliver Cromwell took the lead in their behalf, and the magnificent letters of Milton, in his name, in this cause, ought to be known to every one. But the sonnet of Milton has better familiarised the sufferings of this people to every Englishman:—

• Avenge, O Lord! thy slaughter'd saints, whose bones
• Lie scatter'd on the Alpine mountains cold;
• E'en them, who kept thy truth so pure of old When all our fathers worship'd stocks and stones, Forget not.

Cromwell interposed strongly in their behalf; he authorised a general collection in England for their relief; he summoned every Protestant state to aid him; and said that he would send a fleet to Civita Vecchia, and his cannon should be heard in the Vatican. His policy was Protestantism, and he almost realised his own threat, that he would make the name of an Englishman as much feared as that of an ancient Roman. The result was a cessation of this persecution; and the Vaudois sunk into quiet neglect again. But after the revocation of the edict of Nantes, the court of France roused the Duke of Savoy to the extirpation of his Protestant subjects. Another persecution arose, almost as bloody as the last, and, for the time, more effectual. All of the Vaudois who were not massacred or imprisoned, were exiled; and there was not left one of them in their own vallies. The return of a band of them, the glorieuse rentrée, as it was called, was one of the most heroic military enterprises which an equal body of men ever accomplished; but any further allusion to it would be foreign to the present Motion. It was sufficient to say, that sympathy for their sufferings, and admiration of their gallantry, again won for this people the support of England. Up to that time the support had been founded on feeling; it was henceforth to rest on positive engagement and treaty. King William 3rd in 1690, made a treaty with Savoy, the States-General being a party to it, by which he stipulated, and the Duke of Savoy consented, that the Vaudois should be replaced and preserved in all their ancient rights, customs, and privileges, both as related to their habitation, business, and the exercise of their religion, and as to every thing else. The Ministers of King William and of the States-General were instructed and authorised to regulate the execution of this article with the Ministers of the Duke of Savoy. The noble Lord, the Paymaster of the Forces, must look with peculiar interest to this proceeding, because it was mainly the result of the zeal of Rouvigné, Lord Galway, the uncle of that illustrious woman who had conferred so much honour on the name of Russell. If it were said, how would England have liked that, three years ago, the Minister of the king of Sardinia should have insisted on interfering here on behalf of the Irish Roman Catholics, the answer was easy. The sovereign of these Vaudois had, by solemn treaty with England, engaged that they should be preserved in all their civil and religious rights; and England had, consequently, the obligation of supporting them, irrespective altogether of a community of creed. The treaty of 1690 was confirmed in express terms by the Duke of Savoy, in the treaty signed in 1704 with England. The groundwork of the Motion was thus established. The Vaudois were put under the protection of England; and, if aggrieved, had a right to its interference. That interference was exercised in 1727, and formed the subject of the second part of his Motion. Mr. Hedges, the English Minister, then at Turin, wrote to his Government as follows, in reference to grievances then endured by the Vaudois:— 'I believe, if the Marquis d'Aix (the Sardinian minister in London) perceived an earnestness in England of having this affair remedied, it would very much facilitate it.' 'On another occasion he said (and, with all deference to the noble Lord, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, he (Sir Robert Inglis) ventured to call his particular attention to this quotation; it was dated Turin)—'I cannot but be of opinion, that one great reason of the coldness I meet with here on those subjects, arises chiefly from the little warmth with which it is urged to the Marquis d'Aix at London; and as they are points by no means agreeable to the king of Sardinia, I do not doubt but he informs his master we have them not so much at heart as to oblige him to make many alterations in either case; for the treaties are so express with regard to the Protestants, that they cannot possibly have any thing to say in defence of their present behaviour to them.' There was another passage, to which he begged the noble Lord's attention, as showing the way in which only the subject ought to be treated:— 'I can assure you that talking firmly to them, and that by persons of authority, and who they think are able to make good their words, is the only way of obtaining the most just and reasonable demands at this court; and nothing but great steadiness on our side, and insisting strongly on our treaties and the king of Sardinia's promises, can preserve the Protestants of the vallies from sure and certain destruction. The inveteracy against our religion is incredible, and if it be not supported with some warmth, since it is attacked with so much, it must give way to superior power.' He now came to the third part of his Motion. In the course of the French revolution, the vallies of Piedmont were annexed to France; and the Vaudois enjoyed, with the other subjects of the French empire, a perfect equality of civil rights, and the free exercise of their religion. By the treaties of Paris in 1814 and 1815, and by the Congress of Vienna, the states of the king of Sardinia were restored to him, but they were restored on condition that none of the inhabitants should be molested in person or in property; and it might well be asked, how far the circumstances to which the Vaudois were on this restoration exposed, could be considered as other than a molestation. By a decree of a few lines, the king of Sardinia revived, in 1814, all the laws which for four centuries his predecessors had enacted, including all against the Vaudois. At this day, a Vaudois could not be a physician nor an advocate; he could not purchase property out of his vallies. The Vaudois stated their grievances in two petitions to their authorities. He held these petitions in his hands. They stated, in 1814 (and the fact continued), that they could not establish schools, and could not print books of their own faith. And here it might be observed, that independently of their religious character, they might claim the sympathy and support of those who were called the liberal party of the world; because, two centuries before the establishment of a national education in Scotland, these people had in. every commune a school. They were now forbidden to introduce any system of mutual instruction in their schools; and a college opened at La Tour, only so late as March last, was in a fortnight closed by order of the government. It had been re-opened, indeed, lately, but under great restrictions. In their municipal councils, the majority must always be Roman Catholics, though the aggregate of the Roman Catholics scattered among them was not more than one-eleventh of the whole, and, in the place where they were most numerous, was only two-sevenths, and, in the principal place, was only one-fiftieth. If it were said, that all this was turning the old pro-Catholic arguments against those who now urged the cause of the Vaudois, it might be replied at once, that the rights of the Vaudois were secured to them by specific treaty, to which England was aparty; and, whether any other people ever suffered the same grievances or not, the duty of England to interfere and remedy these was clear and obvious. One of those grievances remained to be mentioned; it existed in law at least, whatever might be done in the matter. The penalty of death was enacted against such as would dissuade a Vaudois from turning Roman Catholic. Thus if a Vaudois pastor attending one of his flock in the last sickness, should find him yielding to the inducements of another to exchange his own faith for that of the Church of Rome, he would be liable to the penalty of death for an endeavour to rescue him. It was an old edict, revived in 1814: 'His Royal Highness inhibits those of the pretended reformed religion from diverting or dissuading any, whosoever he be, of the said religion, who would turn Catholic, under the same penalty of death; giving it in charge particularly to the ministers of the said pretended religion, inviolably to observe the above said, upon pain of answering the same in their own persons.' Under these circumstances he had made out his case. He had claimed the protection of England in favour of this people on the ground of specific treaty. He had proved those treaties. He had proved the intervention of England in 1727, under those treaties. He desired to obtain the recognition of the same obligation on the part of the Government now, and he wished to see how, since the year 1814, that obligation had been discharged. He could not sit down without acknowledging the obligations which he felt, in common with all who took an interest in this subject, to Mr. Gilly, who having, with many other good and pious men, visited these vallies, and excited the sympathy of England in their behalf, in relation to their condition and their faith, had collected those materials, particularly in reference to the treaties, which had furnished the largest part of the authorities on which the present Motion rested. He begged to move for copies or extracts of the treaties of 1690 and 1704, so far as they related to the Vaudois, the correspondence of Mr. Hedges on the subject in 1727, and any correspondence on the same subject since 1814.

seconded the Motion, upon the ground that, whatever might be the stipulations of treaties, it was our duty, as Christians, to interfere for the protection of those who suffered simply for the sake of religion; and he complimented the constancy of those sufferers, whose persecution was disgraceful to the nominal Christianity of those who inflicted it.

meant, in conformity to the wish of his hon. friend who made this Motion, to have seconded it, but thought it right to abstain when the hon. and learned member for Kerry rose to do that, in a manner honourable to himself; but having felt it his (Sir George Rose's) duty, when the Vaudois, in their utmost need sought the aid of England a few years since, to take a prominent part in the adoption of measures for their relief, he deemed it imperative on himself to give his aid to the present Motion. He would be very brief; their virtues, their industry, their peaceable and orderly conduct, their resignation, their loyalty, and their many excellent qualities, had excited a very strong feeling of interest in their cause; and although it was his intention to rest their claim on Great Britain on political grounds, he would not dissemble the deep feelings of religious sympathy with which his heart was filled towards those sufferers under oppression. He did not mean to have adverted to the origin of religious opinions, but after what the learned member for Kerry had said, as to that of their Protestant faith, he would inform him, that, according to the results of the most recent, elaborate, and deep researches, it was made perfectly clear that there was no trace to be found of their having separated from any Church, and that they had unquestionably held their present tenets unchanged from the highest antiquity. These tenets were essentially the same as those held by the Church of England; and they had a form of liturgy. As to interference on their behalf, there was not a Member of the House more incapable of taking part in any endeavour to lead it to measures of undue intervention on the part of his Majesty's Government with that of any foreign State, with respect to its relations with its own subjects, than he was. He sought merely to ascertain whether England had any right to interfere in behalf of the Vaudois, and whether she was called upon to exercise it. Their virtues and unmerited sufferings, and a strong and national feeling of religious sympathy, had long interested the British nation in their behalf; Cromwell, even Charles 2nd, though he robbed them of their money, William 3rd and Queen Anne, all took their part against their sovereign; and the grounds of this interference were so strong—it was so natural, and so long acquiesced in, in point of fact, by Piedmont—that England might be said, in fairness, to have acquired a prescriptive right to exercise it, especially as Holland did the same; the Sardinian government, indeed, never appeared very jealous of such remonstrances, so that they might, in all probability, have been ventured upon with little risk. Prussia, also, through her envoy at Turin, exercised lately a most active intervention in behalf of the Vaudois without its having produced any inconvenience in the relations of the two governments, as far as he could learn. But still he would not argue upon this ground, but upon that of a positive compact between States alone. There were now before the public, extracts of a secret Treaty of l690 between the king of England and the Duke of Savoy, confirmed by one of the year 1704 between the two States; but they were printed in a private work, which, though of unquestionable authority, was not one on which the House could proceed, as their official authenticity must be previously established. It was impossible, moreover, to judge of the effects that treaties ought to have, by mere extracts, which might not contain the most important points; and it must also be observed, that subsequent treaties, or other diplomatic acts, might modify or annul the whole or parts of any treaty, and it was, therefore, indispensable that official copies of treaties should be produced. But here it was material to state, that the secret stipulation in the Treaty of 1690, in favour of the Vaudois, confirmed by that of 1704, was bought by Great Britain, for a valuable consideration, of the Duke of Savoy. It might be said, that a difficulty arose as to their production, because that of 1690 was "secret;" but as far as it regarded the Vaudois, it was, in point of fact, the secret of the comedy which every one knew; moreover, it was scarcely possible that the stipulations of that treaty could, after such a lapse of years, affect now, in any degree, the honour or interests of either of the contracting States; but if this was not so, and there was still anything in this compact unfit to be submitted to the public eye, it would be right to let that part of it be kept from it. But, if England had by treaty a right to interfere in behalf of the Vaudois, would it be asked whether or no Great Britain was for that reason, required and called upon to exercise that right? In his opinion, the mere act of a nation, in taking the unfortunate and the oppressed under her protection, and acquiring a right, admitted by their Government, to intervene in their behalf, in all justice, as well as according to all high and honourable feeling, gave the sufferers a distinct claim to her good offices—one which could never be questioned by a high-minded people; and if such due interference was called for, and was honourable in proportion to the suffering on the part of the oppressed, and their extreme need—then, indeed, would such intervention redound eminently to the credit of Great Britain, as exercised in the behalf of this excellent and interesting people—deplorably trodden down, and vexed, and humiliated.

assured the hon. Baronet, that the Government shared fully the sentiments of interest and sympathy expressed for this class of persons by the hon. Baronet, and those who supported his Motion. Neither had the Government any indisposition to exert every interference, that it could legitimately employ, for the protection of the Vaudois from ill usage or persecution. It did not appear, however, from what had been urged by the hon. Baronet, that he had established the fact of any injury being suffered by these people at present, as his statement referred only to the year 1814, and since then he had not heard that there was any reason to complain. The laws to which the hon. Baronet referred were probably obsolete. The treaties of which copies were now asked for had been secret at the time they were made, and a difficulty might have arisen in that respect; but, from the length of time which had elapsed, he should not now make any objection on that ground to their production. As to the correspondence that had taken place more than a century ago, it could not be supposed to have much application to the present day; and he presumed the hon. Baronet would not press for that. With respect to the correspondence from 1814 to 1829, that part of it which he had looked over led him to the result, that there was no oppression now practised towards the Vaudois. In that, too, which had passed between our Minister at Turin and the Government still later, it was mentioned that deputies from the Vaudois had been well received by the king of Sardinia, and that no complaint was made by them of the Government. He would, therefore, suggest, that it would be enough for the hon. Baronet to take copies or extracts of the treaties referred to, without putting the public to a great expense in printing a correspondence, the chief part of which was more than a century old, and the latter part of which, from 1814 to 1829, having reference to proceedings under a former reign, might revive unpleasant recollections. He, however, assured the hon. Baronet, that if there were any infraction of rights respecting which this country was entitled to interfere, he (Viscount Palmerston) would be ready to take such steps as might be requisite, whether for the restoration of those rights, or for the security of any privileges the Vaudois were entitled to.

said, that he had been misunderstood. The noble Lord had assumed him to admit that no present grievances existed. On the contrary, though the state of the Vaudois might be improved, grievances still existed; for instance, at this moment the College of La Tour could not admit more than fifteen students, and theological lectures must not be given; all the books must be submitted to the inspection of the Roman Catholic Intendant of the province; the masters must be approved by him and he was the visitor of the College. A Vaudois could not at this day purchase property out of the vallies, and could not be a physician or an advocate. As the noble Lord had recognised the general obligation of England to secure their rights to this people, and had stated his willingness to interfere, if there should be any infraction of those rights, he consented to withdraw so much of his Motion as related to former instances of interference on the part of this Government.

said, the present Bill was rendered necessary by the anxiety of the hon. and learned Lord's predecessor to reduce the judicial establishments of Scotland as low as possible, so much so, that it appeared that the temporary indisposition of a Judge stopped the whole business of his division of the Court, and compelled the adoption of a plan to procure the assistance of another Judge to dispose of that business. This Bill was rather a curious commentary upon another bill which had been brought forward by the learned Lord, and which proposed to abolish the Court of Exchequer in Scotland, and transfer its duties to the Court of Session, although it appeared, by the present Motion, that that Court was unable to get through its own proper duties. While he was speaking on the subject, he would express a hope that the learned Lord would, at the same time, apply himself to placing the Scotch Judges on a footing with their English brethren on the score of remuneration for their labours. At present, the Scotch Judges did not enjoy one-half the salary of the English Judges, though their duties and acquirements were at least equal.

said, the late Administration had augmented the duties of the Court of Session, without increasing, in a corresponding ratio, the salaries of the Judges. Although the late Government had neglected that duty, he hoped it would be taken up by the present one, and that it would see the justice and necessity of placing the Judges of Scotland somewhat more upon an equality with those of England than they were at present; the former had only 2,000l. per annum, while the latter had 5,500l.

agreed with both hon. Gentlemen as to the justice of increasing the salaries of the Scotch Judges. The Administration of which he had been a member, had brought in a bill for the purpose of carrying this increase into effect, but, in consequence of the abrupt termination of the Session, owing to the demise of his late Majesty, the bill was not passed into a law.

said, if the number of Scotch Judges was not sufficient, they could easily spare three from the new Bankruptcy Court. He hoped, that whenever there was a question again about increasing or diminishing the number of Judges, more attention would be paid to the subject than was shewn in the late creation of four new Judges, where one would have been quite sufficient.

did not rise to oppose the Bill, but, on the contrary, to support it. He should be glad to see greater reductions made in the Courts of Scotland—he should be glad to see the number of Judges reduced from fifteen to eight, who would be quite sufficient, and capable of getting through all the business of the Court. By simplifying the judicial proceedings, seven or eight would be quite enough. He was not surprised that all the learned Gentlemen rose, one after another, to condemn the insufficient salaries, but he must protest against the intention of the late Government to increase the salaries of the Scotch Judges. With the present salaries, there was no want of able men in Scotland to accept of situations on the Bench. He wished there might be a deficiency in the Revenue for the next four years of 1,000,000l. a-year, because that would impose a necessity of reducing all salaries. He should be better pleased to hear a proposition for reducing the salaries of English Judges, than for increasing those of the Scotch. He agreed with the hon. and learned Gentleman, that one Judge would have been quite sufficient for the new Bankruptcy Court.

said, he could not but express his surprise at the haste with which the noble Lord (Lord Althorp) hurried a bill through the House at the close of last Session, appointing four new Judges, at a salary of 9,500l., when it was proved, that the whole business which could come before them might be disposed of by one Judge, at a salary of 6,000l., in the course of thirty-five days. He did not know what the salaries of the Scotch Judges were, and, therefore, could not say whether it was too much or too little. If the noble Lord was so ready to squander thousands in legal appointments, he should not be surprised to hear, that the salaries of the Scotch Judges were increased before the close of the Session, if a proposition were made to diminish them.

said, that in the late Convention entered into between France and this country, agreeing to a mutual right of search, it was provided, by the 7th article, that vessels taken with slaves on board should be delivered over to the jurisdiction of that Power to which they belonged. This was quite a new regulation. He wished, therefore, to know whether the effect of it would be to take away from the captors of slave-vessels the usual remuneration?

observed, that the point was to be matter of future arrangement.

said, he was still as much opposed to the Bill as ever. It was going down very fast in the opinion of the country. The greatest apathy was felt about it in the county of Lincoln. He heard it reported, that the supporters of the Bill were determined to remain silent, and let those on his side have all the talk to themselves. Let them do so; let them but pay attention, and he did not fear that they would be able to unsay all that had been said in favour of it. Much was said about the support of high personages. He believed the very highest was not so favourable to it as some persons wished to persuade themselves. He heard so at Brighton. He again asserted, that there was a great and comfortable re-action. He heard some of the farmers say, that they expected no good from the present Administration. He never saw a more raw, unsightly, unfinish- ed set of Ministers. They never could come to any maturity. He rose, however, to ask if the Ministers intended to retain in the Bill the clause giving the franchise to tenants at will renting a farm of 50l. a-year; to that clause he laid some claim as his own, though it was fathered by the noble Marquis (the Marquis of Chandos), and feeling much interested in its fate, he felt it necessary to ask this question, particularly as the hon. Baronet, the member for Peterborough—for Whiggish Peterborough—had given notice of a motion to erase it from the Bill.

wished to know whether the noble Lord (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), intended that the Committee on the Reform Bill should sit on Wednesdays?

in answer to his hon. friend's question, could only then say, that Ministers saw no reason for taking the Committee on Wednesdays. They intended that the Committee should sit on four days in each week, hoping that the same courteous understanding which obtained last Session—namely, of hon. Members giving way to Ministers on those four days when their motions were not of urgent necessity or immediate interest—would be acted on during the present Session. He did not expect, that it would be at all necessary to take the Committee on Wednesdays. Indeed, that day was now so universally understood to be devoted to motions not likely to give rise to protracted discussion, and the attendance was, consequently, so invariably thin on that day, that it would be almost hopeless to expect to make any progress in the Bill by adding Wednesday to the Committee days. He, therefore, would that evening move the adjournment of the Committee over to Thursday, taking his chance for being able to make some progress after the motion which stood for that day should have been disposed of.

on moving that clause 7th stand part of the Bill, said, that he would take it upon himself to have the Amendment proposed on a former day by the hon. and learned member for Bishop's Castle—namely, that the present Bill shall not operate as law till the bill for defining the boundaries of the boroughs and towns mentioned in it should have previously received the sanction of the Legislature, carried into effect.

would, on that understanding, willingly leave the matter in the hands of the noble Lord. The blanks in the 7th, 8th, 9th, and 10th clauses were then filled up, and the clauses agreed to. The 11th clause read as follows;— "And be it enacted, that the persons respectively described in the said schedules C and D, shall be the returning-officers at all elections of a Member or Members to serve in Parliament for the boroughs in conjunction with which such persons are respectively mentioned in the said schedules C and D, and that for those boroughs for which no persons are mentioned in such schedules as returning-officers, the Sheriff for the time being of the county in which such boroughs are respectively situated, shall, within 'two months' after the 'passing of this Act,' and in every succeeding respective year, in the month of 'March,' by writing under his hand, nominate and appoint for each of such boroughs, a fit person, being resident therein, to be, and such person so nominated and appointed shall accordingly be, the returning-officer for, &c."

said, he found no provision made for identifying the nomination, which might remain a private document in the custody of the Sheriff, incapable of identification; this ought not to be the case. The amendment which he intended to propose to remedy this defect was a very slight one, and he trusted, therefore, that the noble Lord opposite would not object to its introduction. It was, that after the word "had," in the eighteenth line of the clause, there should be inserted these words—"to be delivered to the Clerk of the Peace of the county within one week, and to be by him filed and preserved in the register of the county."

called the attention of the House to that part of the clause by which it was enacted, that "for those boroughs for which no persons are mentioned in such schedules as returning-officers, the Sheriff for the time being of the county in which such boroughs are respectively situate, shall, by writing under his hand, nominate and appoint for each of such boroughs a fit person to be the returning-officer." He objected most decidedly to such an enactment, which would give the Sheriff a power such as was given to no other person in the country. If the Sheriff was inclined to do so, he might abuse the power thus put into his hands, by appointing as returning-officer any person whom he wished to prevent from being a candidate.

admitted, that there were some objections to the clause, but there were still some difficulties in making other arrangements. It was not intended that the plan now proposed should be permanent, as it was the intention of the Government to grant charters to the new boroughs, when the returning-officers would be provided in another way.

observed, that in framing a new Constitution, it was to be expected that the Ministers would fall into a great many difficulties and anomalies. He did not mean to deny, that the naming of the returning-officer would be a matter of difficulty. The Sheriff might abuse his power to prevent a man becoming a candidate; therefore, the mode of appointing the returning-officer, as it was provided for in the clause, was, in his opinion, most objectionable. If the returning-officer was appointed by the Crown, there would be some check upon him, as the Government would think it below their character to act in such a manner; but individual cases of a different line of conduct might easily be anticipated. Again, the Sheriff was not responsible, but the Government would be responsible for the manner in winch the deputy exercised the duties of the office.

said, that the objections of the right hon. Gentleman would apply as much to the giving of Representatives to large towns as to the making of what he called a new Constitution; it would apply as strongly where the right of election was given to a few places as to the enfranchisement of whole districts. Whoever attempted a Reform in Parliament, would have to contend against this difficulty, and, on the whole, he and his colleagues thought that it would be better to vest this appointment in the Sheriff, for the present, than in the Crown.

complained, that it was a complete innovation to allow the Sheriff to appoint the returning officer in the boroughs with in his bailiwick. No Sheriff of England had ever such a power bestowed upon him before; and when this was pointed out to the noble Lord, all the answer he gave was—"It is a matter of great difficulty." It by no means followed that the Sheriff would appoint men whose local knowledge fitted them for this situation—such men as, under the present plan, exercised the duties of returning officers. The persons appointed to the office must be residents within the borough, but no time was specified as to the term of their resid- ence. They might be domiciled in the place for the express purpose, by the connivance of the Sheriff. It was forbidden that the Churchwarden or Overseer should be appointed to the office, although those persons were the best qualified, from their local knowledge, to execute its duties, and generally had the confidence of their townsmen. He should prefer seeing the returning officer appointed by any other person rather than the Sheriff. The Ministers of the Crown, too, would have an influence over the election; for, as they appointed the Sheriffs, they would exercise an influence over them, and, through their means, over the returning officers, and might then appoint their partizans to the office, and in that manner influence the elections. It appeared, however, from what the noble Lord said, that this was to be only an ad interim Constitution, and that the new boroughs were to get charters, which would remove the difficulty. He should not be surprised to see the new boroughs before long deprived of their charters as easily as the old. This Bill, in fact, would not be complete and final in any one of its parts. He, therefore, begged to ask the noble Lord, or some of his supporters, why the Corporations for these newly created boroughs could not be manufactured at the same time with the Bill which went to create them?

said, the existing returning officers were not of so very superior a character as to make it adviseable to advocate the mode of appointment that was now practised. Until something better was proposed he should support the present clause. According to the principle of the present constitution, the Sheriff was bound to execute, by himself or his deputy all writs that were directed to him as Sheriff. For that purpose he appointed officers to preside at the election, and he appointed, too, the Assessor, who determined on the votes. As to the influence of the officers, it was folly to talk of their influencing the election, for that House would know how to deal with either of them who abused the power intrusted to them. The Bill now before the House proposed only to do that which would enforce the Common Law, and compel the Sheriff to do what, by the present duties of his office, he was always called on to perform.

never heard a lawyer assert a proposition more in the teeth of the Constitution, and of the statutes of Parliament, than that which had been pronounced by the hon. and learned member for Kerry. When a parliamentary writ was sent to the Sheriff of a county, he had no option but to issue his precepts to the several Corporations and recognized authorities in his bailiwick, and in no case was he invested with the authority of selecting the returning officer. The Sheriff never appointed the deputy to whom the execution of writs for the election of Members for a borough was intrusted. Such a practice would be as contrary to various Acts of Parliament as it was to many decisions of that House. It was not, therefore, true, that the present Bill was a following up of the old Constitution; on the contrary, it was a direct and positive breach of that Constitution. If the hon. and learned Member had candidly admitted, as the noble Lord had done, the difficulties that had induced such a course to be adopted, there could be no objection to him, but when he spoke on a legal point, he should do so logically, accurately, and legally. He believed there was not, in the whole country, another lawyer, but the hon. and learned Member, who would venture to state such a proposition as he had submitted to the House.

said, he had only affirmed that the general duty of the Sheriff was to execute all writs directed to the county over which he presided. He was quite aware that within those counties there were separate and particular jurisdictions over which the Sheriff had no direct authority; but the constitutional doctrine was, that the Sheriff was responsible for all writs that were not specially directed to persons within his county who were appointed by other high authority.

admitted, that as a general rule, the Sheriff executed all the writs that were sent to him to be executed in his bailiwick, but he did not execute all the writs for elections of Representatives for boroughs situated within his bailiwick. The Sheriff did not appoint, and could not appoint, a deputy to execute a precept for an election within the borough. He must say, that he thought the appointment of the returning officers by the Sheriff was more objectionable than by the Crown itself. Another course might surely be pursued: why could not the Government ascertain who were the superior civil officers of the boroughs to which they were about to give Members, and then appoint those officers the returning officers of those boroughs? He did not object to the principle of giving these large towns Represent- atives, though he must say, that the Government was, in his opinion, now carrying that principle too far; but he thought that at least care should be taken to give the power of a returning officer to such persons in the new boroughs as exercised it in those already in existence. He recommended the Government to make these new boroughs corporations for the sole purpose of electing Members of Parliament; for to make them Corporations in other respects, was the right of the Crown, on which he should say nothing at present. If they were made Corporations for the purpose of electing Members, there would be these advantages—first, that the new boroughs would be thus assimilated to those already in existence; next, that the returning officer would be appointed in the usual way, and the difficulty which they were now discussing would be got over; and lastly, the registration of the voters would be rendered unnecessary, for the officers of boroughs always kept a list of the freemen of their respective boroughs. Under these circumstances, he thought it would be desirable for the further consideration of this question to be postponed for a couple of days, till the Government could have time to inquire who were now the superior civil officers of the boroughs about to be enfranchised, and could ascertain whether such officers could not advantageously be appointed returning officers, and whether these boroughs could not be made Corporations for the sole purposes of this Act. He thought that a short clause for making them Corporations for the purposes of this Act might very easily be drawn without in any manner prejudicing the rights of the Crown to make them Corporations for other purposes.

wondered that the hon. and learned Gentleman, who had just now so ably treated the subject under discussion, had not gone a step further, and said how the returning officers were to be appointed in the new Corporations. He merely said, they were to be appointed in the usual way. That usual way meant, he supposed, that they were to be elected by the people, of course, as they were now appointed by the freemen of London, Bristol, and other places.

observed, that if the hon. and learned Gentleman were to endeavour to draw a short clause, making the newly-enfranchised towns Corporations for the purposes of this Act, he would find that he had undertaken a task of no very slight difficulty. Another hon. and learned Gentleman had spoken as if he thought the appointment of Sheriffs was a favour conferred upon the persons appointed, and as if the Sheriffs, when appointed, were under the influence of the Crown. In both cases he was much mistaken. In making that supposition, they were paying but a poor compliment to the gentlemen of the country who served the office of Sheriff. The hon. member for Preston was much mistaken when he supposed that the returning officers in the large proportion of boroughs in the country were elected by the people; and if the Government had recommended the adoption of such a mode of electing the returning officers, they would only have involved themselves in difficulties. A number of difficulties had occurred to the Government on this point, and the Sheriffs naturally suggested themselves as the persons to whom most properly the duty of appointing returning officers could be intrusted: and there was the less objection to the plan, as it was not intended to be permanent.

said, the simple question before them was, what necessity existed for vesting the Sheriff with the power of compelling an individual to accept the situation of a returning officer. This Bill proposed, that the Sheriff must find a person to undertake the duties of his deputy at different places during a county election, but for borough elections he could compel any individual to accept the office. The noble Lord, seeing the difficulties and consequences likely to result from the compulsory system, excluded that class of men who were best calculated to discharge the duties of the office fairly and impartially, by providing that no man should act as returning officer, who possessed more than 3001. a-year landed property. Did the noble Lord think, that he would find many individuals willing to undertake an office which exposed them in case of misconduct to a penalty of 500l., and to actions on the part of the voters? Whoever undertook so onerous an office would expect remuneration either by influence or money, and therefore the question resolved itself into this—was it proper to confide this power to the Sheriff?

said, that the plan recommended by the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite (Sir James Scarlett), was not a new plan, for it had been recommended six or seven years ago by Mr. Serjeant Merewether, who had ever since been endeavouring to gain over advocates for it. With respect to the observations made upon the statement of the hon. and learned member for Kerry, he would only beg leave to say, that that hon. and learned Member never had asserted that the Sheriff executed, by himself or his deputy, all the writs or precepts which were issued for the election of Members in the boroughs within his bailiwick, or that he appointed the returning officer for those boroughs. But how had the returning officers become so in many instances? How, but by the habit of the Sheriff to send writs to those officers to be executed within those boroughs? That habit, arising from the fact that they were originally supposed to be the Sheriff's deputies in the boroughs for the execution of writs there, had, at length, confirmed them in the office, and made them the persons to whom the execution of parliamentary precepts was intrusted. The habit had at length been converted into a right. In many of the boroughs in schedule C, the returning officer was especially pointed out, as in the case of Manchester, where the duty belonged to the Boroughreeve. The Sheriff would have the power of selecting the proper individuals, and the law would cast upon them the necessity of discharging the office, even at their own personal inconvenience.

denied, that, by the ancient law of England, the Sheriff had the right or power of selecting the returning officer. By the form of the writ, as long ago as the reign of Edward 1st., the Sheriff was required to return two Knights for the county, and to send his precept to boroughs for the election of Burgesses; but he did not, therefore, appoint the returning officers in boroughs.

contended, that the proposition of the learned Serjeant (Wilde) was in the teeth of all law and all history; for the Sheriff never had possessed the power of naming the returning officer in boroughs, not even in those of comparatively recent creation, such as Banbury, which was created in the reign of James 1st.

concurred in the spirit of the observation which had been made by the hon. and learned member for Newark, and which he thought had not been fairly represented. He understood the hon. and learned Member to say, not that the Sheriff had the power to nominate returning officers in existing boroughs, but that, when new boroughs were to be created, and the writs were sent to the Sheriff, he must perform the duty of returning officer by himself or deputy. With respect to the Sheriff, he considered that that officer was naturally the person to whom the power of conducting the election in new boroughs should be given. It had been objected that the Crown might exercise an influence over the conduct of the returning officers, through the means of the Sheriff, who was appointed by its favour. It was, however, ridiculous to suppose, that the Crown could make a job of the creation of Sheriffs. It was no favour to country gentlemen to nominate them Sheriffs, for that appointment was almost the highest penalty which could be inflicted on them. If, however, the power of selecting the returning officers for the new boroughs had been reserved to the Crown, he was quite sure, that that would have been even more strongly objected to than the present proposition. He did not think that the suggestion thrown out by the hon. and learned Gentleman (Sir James Scarlett), with respect to the incorporating the new boroughs for the purposes of the Bill, would have been any improvement. He begged further to be permitted to remark, that he hoped they would not fall into the practice of last Session, and waste the time of the House in frivolous discussion, on matters which it was evident had been arranged in the most unexceptionable manner.

concurred in the greater part of the observations which had fallen from the learned Attorney General; and, under all circumstances, he was of opinion that the Sheriff was the fittest person to have the power of appointing the returning officers: but he objected to the present clause, because the appointment of the Sheriff was made compulsory. He thought it would be an improvement, if, in certain cases, an appeal could be had from an appointment made by the Sheriff to the King in Council.

expressed his disapprobation of the clause. It had been said by some learned Gentlemen that the Sheriff had the power, according to the common-law, but that was denied by others, but certainly not a single case had been shown where that authority had been exercised, although the contrary had been shown. The principle must therefore be considered as wholly applying to the future.

must be permitted to say a few words upon the mooted point, whether the Sheriff was the fit and constitutional person to have the selection of returning officers. He was fully of opinion, that both the hon. member for Kerry (Mr. O'Connell), and the learned Serjeant (Serjeant Wilde), had laid down, a mistaken and unsupported proposition. Without arguing the particulars of what the law was or is at present, supposing Sheriffs had the power which the learned Gentlemen affirmed they possessed, but which he denied, still he was prepared to contend, it ought not to be exercised without limitation. For instance, in a county like Middlesex, the clause would give the Sheriff too great power, as his deputies would be returning officers for the districts of the Tower, Finsbury, and Marylebone. Within the memory of man, and, indeed, for many centuries, Sheriffs had not had the selection of returning officers in any boroughs. It was inexpedient to select an individual merely that he might be returning officer, and he ought, for the sake of greater responsibility on the part of the Sheriff, to hold some recognized appointment—such as Head-borough, or High Constable. He was persuaded that, as the clause at present stood, it would become a job in the hands of the Sheriffs and their Under-sheriffs, who were almost invariably attornies, and well knew how to avail themselves of advantageous opportunities.

said, he did not rise to oppose the clause, but to protest against the language of the Attorney General, who had said the object of certain hon. Members appeared to be, to waste the time of the House in frivolous discussion. That might be a clap-trap for the Press, but it never should deter him from doing his duty with respect to this Bill.

said, Lord Holland, or the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, for the time being, had the power of nominating the Sheriff of Lancashire, who would appoint no less than six returning officers. There would be six Under-sheriffs in the new boroughs; so that the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster might be called the greatest boroughmonger in the land. This was a power he could not consent to delegate, and he should be strongly disposed to take Lancashire out of the operation of the Act. His hope was, that the noble Lord would see the inconsistency he had pointed out, and propose the remedy required.

said, if the hon. and learned Gentleman would inquire, he would find the Shrievalty of Lancashire was not considered a very desirable office at present, and he did not believe the power of appointing returning officers to the newly-created boroughs would make it much more popular. At all events, he did not apprehend that the effect of the appointment of returning officers by the Sheriffs would produce the dissatisfaction described.

said, the great object of the clause was, to appoint places where it would be most convenient for the electors to assemble. With that view he should move, that the Court for the election of Members for the North Riding of the county of York should be held in the city of York, for the West Riding at Wakefield, and for the East Riding at Beverley. He believed these towns were, on the whole, best adapted for the purpose.

thought, that Beverley was not well calculated for the purpose—it was very inconveniently situated.

approved of Beverley. It possessed every facility for holding elections. The Quarter Sessions were held there, and it was a large and well-built town.

was of opinion, that the ancient division of the county should not be departed from. He could see no reason why Ainstey should be separated from the North Riding.

though he thought it more reasonable that Ainstey should be annexed to the East than to the North Riding, as the former was the least extensive in population, still conceived it better not to alter the division of the county.

was in favour of the city of York having a share in the elections, and was of opinion that Ainstey should remain as it was.

said, as the county was to be divided into three separate districts or counties, the best course to pursue for the convenience of the electors was, to select those places which were most centrical. Northallerton was best adapted, therefore, for the place of election for the North Riding.

was of the same opinion with the hon. Member; if the elections were held at York for the North Riding, many of the voters would be more than forty miles from the place of election, and, in the East Riding, the same would be the case if Beverley were selected.

said, he begged leave to move, that the first blank of the clause be filled up with the word "four," and with respect to the places best adapted for the elections to take place, he begged to move, that the election of two Members for the division of Lindsey, be fixed to take place at Lincoln, and of the two others, for Kesteven and Holland, at Sleaford.

must again object most strongly to any division of the county of Lincoln, the only effect of which would be, to throw it into two close boroughs, one of which, including the hundred of Lindsey, would be under the control of a noble Baron, whose name he had no hesitation in mentioning—Lord Yarborough, whose property was situated in that part of the county. He would move, that all the words after the word Lincoln, be omitted.

said, the question was, that the first blank be filled up with the word four.

said, his surprise and disappointment were great, now that he found that the noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had deviated from the course that on the former occasion he pursued. The noble Lord had then consented to postpone the question of the division of Lincolnshire, till the clause relating to the division of counties had obtained the sanction from the House. Now, he precipitated the local question, in which little interest would be generally felt, and thereby gained an ad- vantage over those who continued to defend the ancient unity of Lincolnshire, and who deprecated the innovation, unfavourable to its independence and honour, which this clause would effect. Since, however, the noble Lord would so exercise his authority, he must again protest against any division of counties, and especially against a division of one of the fairest, wealthiest, and most populous counties, and to which peculiar objections existed. As to the division of counties generally, nothing had been discovered to obviate or diminish the objections which a large party of tried and staunch friends to Reform irresistibly urged, in which the enlightened and independent Press of England universally concurred—and which the lovers of freedom throughout the country felt and approved. Who, that dared to think for himself, did not retain his opinion, that the tendency of the measure was, to create landed instead of borough nomination; and to give to the Aristocracy that preponderating power in the Commons House of Parliament, which it was the professed object of Reform to uproot and destroy? Indeed, the noble Lord conceded on the former occasion that such was the expected result; as he expressed his hope that the Opposition in the other House would be propitiated by the arrangement—as they would be gratified by a discovery, that they would retain a supremacy which, for their personal advantage or the power of their order, though to the prejudice of the people, they had already exercised too long. But, in that case, the noble Lord might have been taught that principle ought to be preferred to expediency; and that great objects were more likely to be gained by manly bearing and resolute adherence to right, than by a subserviency that encouraged denial and awakened contempt. In this matter he yielded, and sacrificed county independence to lordly power. But were the Peers propitiated? No! And yet, untaught by experience, the noble Lord attempted now to renew the compromise which the Aristocracy had disdained and the people had condemned. For this division of counties, no adequate reasons could be given. By the existing system, the freeholders of extensive counties were compelled to assemble in their county towns—the distance was inconvenient—the trouble great—the expense oppressive; but, as one of the great objects of the Bill was, that the poll should be taken in various places in divided counties, the shadow of an excuse for the division of them was swept away; as, even for the largest counties, the elections might be conducted without any of the objections for the removal of which alone division could be endured. If such were the objections to the general division of counties, they applied to Lincolnshire with peculiar force. It could not be denied, that by the division proposed, the interest of the noble Lord mentioned by the gallant Colonel, would, in the division of Lindsey, completely prevail; and that any effort by an independent candidate to resist his nomination would be vain. Two Members out of the four for the county, therefore, one Peer would return. He believed that aristocratic influence would have great weight in the return of the remaining two, and would only be controlled by a number of small independent yeomen, who existed in those parts of the county. He was fully persuaded the county of Lincoln, from its importance, deserved four Representatives; he, therefore, trusted, if the gallant Colonel proposed to divide the House upon the clause, that he would allow him to suggest, that he should not object to that part of it which allotted four Representatives to the county, but should object to the remainder of the clause by which the division was decreed, and the places appointed at which the elections for these broken and dissevered portions were to be held. On that subject, also, he must express his dissent and regret. The noble Lord and the House were aware that he had always contended that, should the division be made, Boston was the town where the elections for that division of the county in which it was situated ought to take place. Its importance and situation deserved that distinction, as the returns which would have been presented to the House, in consequence of his motion to that effect, would have proved, had the noble Lord condescended to wait for them. But it appeared that he must have yielded to some local influence, and had recommended Sleaford. In the county, that selection would produce disappointment and surprise, and he was determined to resist it if the question was carried to a division.

said, that if Lincoln had been the only county to suffer division, he should have been sorry to see its consequence lessened by such an operation, though he must confess that his opinion was, that it afforded the fittest occasion for division of any of the counties after that of Yorkshire. He must also take that opportunity of denying altogether the allegation of the hon. and gallant Member, with respect to the county of Lincoln becoming two close county boroughs after this division was carried into effect, for no such consequence would result from it, unless tenants at will were to be allowed to vote, in which case, a very considerable influence would be obtained by certain parties. He had long been acquainted with the county, and he was firmly of opinion that the freeholders were perfectly free from any domination.

observed, that if the discussion were persisted in, he must beg to move that the Chairman do report progress.

expressed a hope, that the hon. Member would not persist in his motion.

said, that it had already been settled, that the Committee should not proceed after twelve o'clock, and he observed an Order of the Day which would require some discussion.

said, that he was determined to take the sense of the House on the question.

asked the hon. and gallant Member, if he objected to the addition of the number to the county Members, as that was the question before the House?

withdrew his amendment.

said, the next question was, that the other blank be filled up with the word "two."

expressed his determination to oppose the Bill in every stage, particularly with regard to this part of it; for he had not the slightest idea that the Bill would be again altered, as he now found to be the case. The Bill was not yet printed, and the public money was, it appeared, to be voted away without any notice being given.

said, he was sure the Bill could not properly be discussed as long as the Reform Bill was before the House, and he was determined it should not be passed pro formâ.

requested some provision might be made for the decent interment of the remains of bodies after dissection. He considered a provision of that sort would do away with many objections to the Bill.

would be very happy to lend his assistance to any legislative enactment which might have the effect of appeasing the public mind on this subject; and, more especially, might tend to check those horrible and disgraceful crimes which had taken place in the metropolis of late. He should also be most willing to do anything that would promote surgery and the cause of science; but he nevertheless felt strong objections to many of the provisions of this Bill. He could never give his consent to create a property, by legislation, in the remains of the dead: this was the first time, at least, that the House had been been called upon to invest a legal property in the living of the remains of the dead. He never heard of a law which gave a power to the executor, or next of kin, to dispose of the bodies of their deceased friends and relatives. Nor ought such a power to exist, unless the individuals had, during their lives, either by writing or orally, in the presence of two witnesses, expressed their consent to their bodies being so disposed of. In reference to the proposition made by the hon. Member this evening, to give salaries to certain inspectors, he could not see how that scheme could follow out the object of this Bill. But what were to be the duties of the inspector? That which they were intended to do was a thing in no way practicable to be done. He should, at least, like to submit to the House whether provision ought not to be made that no places should be allowed to be open for anatomical dissection which were not previously licensed for that purpose by the Secretary of State for the Home Department. In France, and in other countries, it was true, schools were expressly provided by the Government for the purpose of teaching anatomy. Such ought to be the system in this country. These places might still be subject to inspection; indeed they ought to be both licensed and controlled by the Secretary of State for the Home Department. He had no wish to continue this discussion, but being called upon to vote that the Bill should go into Committee, without any debate having taken place on the second reading, when it was the usual course that a discussion of the principles and merits of the measure should be taken at that stage, he could not help thinking that it was desired to carry this Bill without any discussion at all. He had hitherto purposely abstained from urging on the discussion, entirely in deference to the motives and intention of the hon. member for Bridport. But he should take every possible step to oppose this Bill, unless he could be assured that it should not be brought forward at one o'clock in the morning, when it was impossible that the subject could receive that full, fair, and ample consideration and discussion which its importance required. He should never consent either to what he considered to be, in this enlightened age, too barbarous a provision to form part of the Bill, the clause which went to revive the custom of hanging felons in chains, exhibiting them in the common highways dangling in the air. This was, of all the provisions, perhaps, the most objectionable one; although he entertained very strong objections to many other parts of the Bill, and hoped to have an opportunity of expressing them fully, before the Bill was allowed to pass, however anxious he might be to have a subject of so much importance, and of such excitement, set at rest.

said, this discussion had already lasted too long; and he would merely state, that the object of his hon. friend was to have the money clause passed pro formâ after which the Bill could undergo in Committee a full and fair discussion. He was quite sure, that such was the wish of his hon. friend, and that he would not treat the House unfairly.

wished to offer only one word on the subject, which was, that in times of excitement like the present, they could not do better than leave the people, in matters of this sort, to themselves. The hon. Member was proceeding with this measure, without affording Members the opportunity of considering it fully. He protested against proceeding any further with the Bill, until it had been carefully discussed, and more information should have been obtained. Here a Bill had been read a first and second time, and, on both occasions, at a late hour in the night, without any discussion, and now Members were asked to vote for its going into Committee at the same late hour, and without any previous debate. When reforming the Parliamentary Representation of the people was talked of, he would say—"Reform yourselves." He had assured his constituents the other day, that this House wanted more reform in its proceedings than in its constituency. Instead of being a grave and deliberate assembly, the House passed laws of the greatest importance pro formâ, forsooth, and without discussion, and yet was deluding the people with all kinds of promises of good to accrue to them when the Reform Bill was passed. "There will be no taxes," it was pretended, "all will be prosperous and happy." This was the substance of what was said—just the same as what the people of Ireland were told when the other Reform Bill was passed. But he would, in that House, say, that the Representatives of the people were deceiving the people, sitting in that House from day to day doing nothing at all.

said, he had no wish to prevent the Bill being fully discussed at the proper time, but the object at present was, to have the money clause passed pro formâ, that the House could go into a Committee.

said, that the whole expense of the Inspectors for England, Scotland, and the Provinces, would cost no more than 500l. a-year. Many Gentlemen were willing to perform the duties of the office gratuitously; but he thought that the House ought rather to pay small salaries, say even 25l. a-year, than leave duties, however easy, to be performed gratuitously. He then moved a resolution, that it was the opinion of the Committee, that his Majesty should be empowered to grant salaries of not more than 100l. a-year to the Inspectors under the Anatomy Bill now in progress through the House, and that the expenses of those officers should be paid out of the Consolidated Fund.

opposed the Resolution, and called for a division.