suggested, that it should not be at the discretion of the Grand Jury to make presentments for the salaries of the medical gentlemen, &c., and that it should be compulsory on them to present for these salaries and allowances, inasmuch as the discretionary power led to many very unfair proceedings. Instances were not unfrequent where Grand Juries, from particular motives, had refused in cases where duties had been fully and fairly performed. Strong political feelings arising out of an election had produced such unhappy consequences. The power ought therefore to be withdrawn.

moved, an Amendment to the effect, that it shall not be lawful for a Grand Jury to withhold a presentment for the payment of the salary of a physician at a dispensary.

presented a Petition, signed by 960 of the electors of Coventry, complaining of the conduct of the returning officers of that borough at the last election. The hon. and learned member also said, that he felt it his duty to call the attention of the House to the Report of the Select Committee which had been appointed to inquire into the transactions at the last Coventry election, and more particularly to refer to the conduct of there turning officers of the borough, the Sheriffs, on the same subjects as were complained of in the petition which he had just presented. He would do this with a view to those officers being called to the Bar to be dealt with according to the pleasure of the House. The election at Coventry, to which he referred, took place in December last, when Messrs, Ellice and Bulwer were the successful, and Messrs. Thomas and Fyler the unsuccessful candidates, and such violent outrages were committed on the occasion, as to make this one of the grossest cases of the kind which had ever come before any Committee, either in this or any former Parliament. The hon. and learned Member then proceeded to detail several circumstances on which the complaint was founded. The day of the election being on Monday, the 11th of December, on the Saturday previously, a large mob of men were collected from the adjacent country, who were hired by a Mr. Randall and another person at 5s. per day, and on the morning of the election they were, in parties of from twenty to thirty men each, paraded about the town, and by them several of the inhabitants were assaulted and most tremendously beaten, so much so as to be saved only by getting quickly into their houses. Another fact was, that the Sheriffs had not allowed the polling to begin till twenty minutes after the time fixed by law. The hon. Member quoted from the evidence given before the Committee, the instructions given by Mr. Randall to the different bands, as to how and when they were to fall on the supporters of Messrs. Fyler and Thomas, whom they were directed to beat until they left them hardly alive; and to prove that those instructions were fulfilled to the letter, the supporters of Messrs. Fyler and Thomas were beaten, and, as one of the witnesses added, "beaten handsomely." The hon. Member next proceeded to show that the Corporation, to resist these desperate men, had armed their constables with osier twigs only; that the constables so adorned with osier twigs, were seen during the day gin drinking with the mob. He took that opportunity of giving notice, that early in the next Session of Parliament he would move for a Committee to inquire who had paid these men 5s. a-day, or 1l. a-man, for thus assaulting and maltreating the electors of Coventry. The House being apparently unwilling to hear the hon. Member, he appealed to it whether it was fitting to treat a question of this importance with so much impatience and neglect. For himself, he disclaimed all party feelings upon this occasion, and he hoped that he was addressing a House of Commons equally free from them. He then proceeded to complain that Robert Randall, who had acted as the leader of these bullies at the election, had since the election been appointed to a corporate office under the Corporation, and that one of his accomplices, Hamilton, known in Coventry by the vulgar name of "the chicken butcher," had been subsequently appointed to a place in the Customs. It was his intention to follow up his present Motion by moving for information as to the person or persons who appointed Randall to the corporation office, and Hamilton to the place in the Customs. There was a clause in the Reform Bill which gave the returning officers power to postpone the election de die in diem in case of riot at the poll; but although all this rioting, fighting, and beating of some of the electors took place in the polling-booths, and in sight of the Sheriffs, they had not postponed the election nor adjourned the polling till all was quiet. The hon. Member concluded by moving that the Sheriffs of Coventry, Mr. S. Crabbe and Mr. J. White, do attend at the Bar of that House on Tuesday next, to be dealt with as the House shall think fit, after hearing what they may have to allege in their own defence. He should also move that Messrs. Fyler and Thomas do also attend at the Bar, and give that evidence which they could not give before the Committee as to the riotous proceedings at the election. He should also move for the warrant appointing Robert Randall—

informed the hon. Member, that he could only make one of his Motions at a time. With respect to his first Motion, the latter part of it was unnecessary, for if the Sheriffs once appeared at their Bar, the House would, of course, deal with them as it thought fitting.

then altered the terms of his first Motion, and confined it to the mere calling upon the Sheriffs to appear at the Bar of the House on Monday next, but expressed his willingness to withdraw the Motion for the present Session, intending to bring it forward early in the next.

objected to having the question withdrawn, or to have it deferred to the next Session. The inquiry by the Committee had been productive of much good, and since then, there had been one peaceable election in that town, the only peaceable one that he had ever known there. The present Motion was therefore unnecessary, and certainly there could be still less necessity for bringing it forward next Session.

, as Chairman of the Committee which had sat on this subject, could bear testimony to the good which had resulted from its labours. He was passing through Coventry during the late election, and from the agents of both candidates he had learned that the best effects had resulted from the inquiry which had been gone into. He thought, that, under these circumstances, such a motion as the present was wholly unnecessary.

thought there was no ground for the Motion. The parties who complained had been the aggressors, and had been very properly treated as they deserved.

seconded the Motion, and contended that his hon. friend had not been well treated, by not having received greater attention from the House.

said, that it was his intention to bring forward this subject early in the next Session; and it was with that view that he now moved for the copy of Randall's appointment.

proposed a Resolution empowering his Majesty to grant out of the Consolidated Fund a sum not exceed- ing 60,000l. yearly, in aid of the parochial rates for the support of the Metropolitan Police force. The effect of the Resolution would be to authorize the Treasury to contribute a sum not exceeding 2d. in the pound towards the maintenance of the Police, so as to reduce the Parochial Assessments to 6d. in the pound, as originally intended.

opposed the Resolution. The country ought not to be called on to defray a portion of expense incurred for the protection exclusively of property in the metropolis.

observed, that, upon the general principle, undoubtedly the metropolis ought to support its own Police, but the peace of the metropolis being of the utmost importance to the country at large, and the police being made available in various parts of the country, as well as in the metropolis, he thought it not unfair that a small portion of the expense should be borne by the country at large.

looked upon the police to be like the guards, and thought that they ought to be paid by the whole country.

also considered, that the police of London was a national force, and ought to be paid by the nation at large.

thought the northern counties might as well be called on to pay for the police of Manchester and Liverpool, as the whole nation to pay for the police of the metropolis.

said, that the principle on which the grant was proposed had long been recognized in the case of Ireland.

opposed the grant. The inhabitants of London should provide for their own security.

reminded the noble Lord, (Lord Althorp) that whenever the police were required out of London, they were paid by the districts requiring them. He should take the sense of the Committee on the subject.

proposed a Clause to prevent Catholic or Dissenting ministers from celebrating marriages between persons not belonging to their own flocks, rendering such marriages, if celebrated, void, and constituting the act a misdemeanor on the part of such ministers.

said, that the present Bill was intended merely to repeal certain odious acts, and upon that ground alone he would oppose the introduction of the proposed clause into it. When the general measure on the subject of the Marriage Laws, of which notice had been given, should be brought forward next Session, it would be then for the hon. Member to propose that or any other clause relating to the general law of Marriage. The present was only a particular measure to remedy a particular evil.

opposed the clause.

also opposed the clause, on the ground that the Bill now before the House went to mitigate the penal code, and that this clause, if adopted, would aggravate it, as it would make that criminal which might be at present innocently done by Protestant Dissenting clergymen in Ireland.