alluded to the promised measure relating to the Legislature for New South Wales and Van Dieman's Land, and asked whether it was intended to bring it in this Session. He was by no means anxious to press on too early a discussion, as the importance of the subject demanded the most serious attention of Government. He also wished to put a question respecting grants of land in those colonies. It was well known that grants had formerly been made freely to any persons who wished to reside; but it was afterwards settled that land should be sold, and the funds devoted to the promotion of emigration. Since that date two sums out of that fund, viz., 20,000l. and 45,000l., had been applied to gaols and police, and he wished to know whether this was the proper fund to be resorted to for such a purpose?

said, it had been in tended to bring in a Bill to regulate the legislation of New South Wales, but sub sequent intelligence from the colony had rendered it necessary to take the question into further consideration. It was impossible at this period of the Session to introduce a measure of the kind, but application would be made to continue the present Act for one year, under the distinct pledge that the new Bill should not be deferred beyond next year. As to his second question, the hon. Member was not quite correctly informed; the expenses of the gaol and police had amounted to the sum stated, but it had not been charged exclusively upon the emigration fund. He could give no further answer at present, but he might add, that it was the desire of Government to promote as much as possible emigration to the colony.

urged that the interests of the natives ought not to be neglected. Perhaps it would save the House the trouble of going into the motion of which he had given notice for to-night, if he took this occasion to ask a question of the noble Lord, the Secretary of Foreign Affairs; it was, whether it was true that a treaty was now pending with Portugal for the purpose of suppressing the slave-trade?

certainly concurred with those who thought that if there were no rational prospect of obtaining from Portugal ampler means, by treaty, for putting an end to the slave trade carried on under her flag, the British Government would have just ground of complaint; because Great Britain had paid to Portugal a very large sum on a distinct understanding that the slave-trade should be terminated in all parts of her dominions. But he had great satisfaction in informing the House that the negotiations for a new and ample treaty with Portugal for the suppression of the slave trade, had been brought to such a point that there remained only one, and that a collateral question between the two Governments. His Lordship trusted that the same spirit of good faith which had induced the Court of Lisbon to agree to the rest of the treaty, would also lead it to concur in the point to which he referred, and he was in daily expectation of receiving from the British Minister in Portugal official intelligence of the completion of the treaty.

added, that if the remaining question respected the conveyance and removal of slaves in the capacity of servants, he hoped that the British Government would not yield the point, as it would open the door to frauds of every kind. Certain islands in the possession of the Portuguese were at present nests of slave-traders. He begged to know from the President of the Board of Control whether there was any objection to lay upon the table a copy of the despatch sent by the Directors of the India Company to Calcutta, dated Feb. 20, 1833.

replied, that he should prefer not laying it upon the table, A motion for its production had been made in the Court of Proprietors, and there it was, and there the hon. Member, if he thought fit, might consult it. If the hon. Member wanted any assurance on the subject, he (Sir J. C. Hobhouse) had no objection to say, that unless that despatch were properly acted upon, it would be his duty to urge the adoption of such measures as might seem necessary.

wished to put a question to the noble Lord opposite respecting a document which appeared yesterday, and was repeated to-day, in the news papers. It was an order, bearing the signature of the officer in command of the British auxiliary force in Spain. It had some external marks of authenticity, but the internal evidence seemed to prove that it was a fabrication. This general order professed to state that, as the auxiliary legion was acting with the British naval force belonging to his Majesty, on that account all British subjects found in the service of Don Carlos would be treated as rebels punishable with death, and would be dealt with according to law. He presumed that such a document could not be authentic; but as it was in general circulation, and as the noble Lord was possibly in possession of information enabling him to pronounce it genuine or spurious, per haps he would think it important to do so, and would be glad of the earliest opportunity of adverting to it.

The right hon. Baronet must be aware that the question related to the acts of an officer not in the British service, nor under the orders of the British Government, for whose acts the British Government could not be responsible, and regarding which they could have no official cognizance. He had seen the order referred to by the right hon. Baronet, and if he were asked as an individual, and not as a Minister of the Crown, in which capacity he had no information to give, he felt bound to say that he believed an order to the effect stated had been issued. He had been asked the question, and he had answered it, and it was unnecessary perhaps for him to add, that any order issued by a general in the Spanish service could not be considered an interpretation of the laws of Great Britain.

wished to put one very plain question to the noble Lord. Was Great Britain at peace or at war? That was a very plain question, and he thought it must be a very tortuous policy not to give a plain answer to it. The Speaker reminded the noble Lord that in putting a question he had no right to enter into an argument.

the noble Lord, in putting his plain question, need not have gone into any argument on tortuous policy. He had asked whether Great Britain was at peace or war? His answer was, that Great Britain had signed a treaty with Spain, under which she was bound to give to the Queen of Spain the co-operation of a naval force, if necessary, and the British Government was executing fully and efficiently the tenor of the obligation.

answered, that Lord John Hay had represented that such a force was necessary, in order to secure his anchorage, and to throw up works for the protection of his Majesty's ships, an undertaking he had not been able to complete with the men under his command. An officer and a certain number of sappers and miners had therefore been directed to proceed to Spain to act under the orders of Lord John Hay, in order to assist him in his necessary operations.

said, that he should avail himself of the opportunity which was afforded him by the conversation that had occurred with reference to Van Dieman's Land, to bring under the notice of the House a subject which appeared to him to be of consider able importance. Perceiving very recently a large placard, of which he held a copy in his hand, exhibited in the window of a country post-office, he inquired how it came there, and was shown a letter from the Secretary of the Post-office in London, directing the postmaster to place one of the accompanying notices relating to female emigration in a conspicuous part of the window, to keep it so exhibited till the vessel alluded to should sail, and to distribute copies of the placard among the clergy and parish officers. The placard invited single women and widows of good character, between fifteen and thirty years of age, to quit their homes by a ship which was to sail in the month of September, for Van Dieman's Land, under an assurance, which he thought was of no very moral or delicate character, that young women were much wanted in the colony [a laugh], inasmuch as the number of such compared with the whole population was greatly deficient, and where consequently all who conducted themselves with discretion and industry might calculate in time to benefit their condition very importantly, A large proportion of those who were already gone out were stated to have married respectable settlers.

interrupted the hon. Gentleman by stating, that it was quite competent for hon. Members to put a question, but not to follow it up by reasons and explanations. Such a course, on account of interfering with the business of the House, must necessarily be looked upon as irregular.

said, that he merely wished to take that opportunity of stating some facts which had been communicated to him. If he could only then be permitted to put a question, he would ask the hon. Under-Secretary for the Colonies, whether the document had been circulated with his authority? Perhaps he ought to ex plain his reasons for putting the question.

replied, that had the hon. Member given him notice he could perhaps have made a more direct answer. He believed that the letter and placard had no official character, but that they emanated from some very benevolent gentleman, who wished to send out females to the colony, and who had devoted much valuable time to the subject, although not a few were engaged in active professions. Certainly they did not deserve that any ridicule should be cast upon their endeavours. If the hon. Member for Berks wished for farther information, he might probably obtain it from the hon. Member for Chichester, who was one of the most energetic promoters of the undertaking.

(on the Order of the Day having been moved for the Committee on the Irish Church Bill) said, he was anxious to bring the subject of which he had given notice under the consideration of the House. In doing so it could not be necessary for him to trouble the House with many remarks of his own, but he feared he must trespass on the attention of the hon. Members for a short time, while he read some letters and other documents relating to those religious ceremonies to which his motion referred, and from taking part in which he sought to have our fellow subjects released. He would first draw the attention of the House to the nature of those requisitions by which our troops were called upon to take part in the religious ceremonies of the people at Malta; and he would ask whether certain expressions made use of, such as the following:—"during mass," "during the procession," "on the eve and anniversary of St. Lorenzo, the tutelar Saint of Vittoriosa," and so forth, did not most decidedly stamp the services in which our soldiers were required to assist as ser vices of a religious, and not of a military nature? Mr. Plumptre read the following documents:—

"Chief Secretary's Office, Valetta,

14th July, 1823.

"Sir,—Application having been made to Government for salutes on Wednesday next, the 16th inst., being the festival of the Madonna del Curmina, at three quarters past eleven o'clock, a.m., during mass, and in the evening, during the procession, I am directed by his honour, the Lieutenant-Governor to request that the necessary orders may be given for carrying the same into effect as usual.

"Capt. Bayley, M.S. (Signed) H. Greig,

A.C.S."

The Application remonstrated against.

"Chief Secretary's Office, Valetta,

Aug. 4th, 1823.

"Sir,—I have the honour to acquaint you that application has been made to Government for salutes, from Castle St. Angelo and St. Michael's Tower, on the 9th and 10th inst., being the eve and anniversary of St. Lorenzo, the tutelar saint of Vittoriosa.

"His honour the Lieutenant Governor has been pleased to grant salutes on the 9th inst, at noon, and on the day following, at half past ten a.m., and in the evening, during the procession, from the Castle St. Angelo, ac companied by the tolling of the castle bell, which his honour requests you will order to be carried into effect: but the situation of St. Michael's Tower being in the vicinity of the naval arsenal his honour cannot allow of any salute being fired from that place.

"I have the honour to be, &c.

"Approved, if customary, H. Greig, A.C.S. by order—C. Bayley, M.S.

"To the Officer commanding the Royal artillery."

Extract from the Malta Government Gazette, Nov. 4th, 1823, on the exaltation of the High Pontiff, Pope Leo. XII. to the chair of St. Peter: —

"During the celebration of mass, a guard of honour attended at the church, consisting of a detachment from the 80th regiment of Foot, with their band and colours, two field pieces, and a competent proportion of artillery men. The soldiers were stationed in two lines in the centre of the church, and the guns were placed at the portal. During the chanting of the Te Deum, a royal salute of twenty one guns was fired from the saluting battery of Fort St. Angelo, and also from the batteries of Cita Notabile."

General Orders.

"Adjutant-General's-office, Ionian Islands, Head-quarters, Corfu, Nov. 13, 1824.

"No. II. Major-General Sir P. Ross, K.C. St. Michael and St. George, with all the officers of the garrison and departments off duty, will be pleased to meet his Excellency the Lord High Commissioner at the palace to morrow morning at ten minutes before eleven, to attend the ceremony and procession of St. Spiridione.

(Signed) "G. Raitt, D.A.G."

Extract of a letter from an officer on the staff, June 29, 1833, describing what he had witnessed, and the part he had also been culled to take in the religious ceremonies at Corfu: —

"On two occasions, during my stay at Corfu, the British troops took part in the ceremonies. On the 1st December, 1831, the body of St, Spiridione was shown in state, for what purpose I forget, hut I went to see it; there was a guard of the 28th Regiment, which had to present arms at certain times, when told by the person who kept near the subaltern for that purpose,

"The second occasion was on Palm Sunday, 15th of April, 1832, on which I made the following memorandum:—' At eleven o'clock, Sir A. Woodford and other officers of the garrison, having assembled at the palace, proceeded to the church of St. Spiridione — whence, after some chanting, during which Sir A. Woodford stood with a wax-taper in his hand (the Lord High Commissioner not attending the procession, being ill, as I was told—wax candles were also distributed to as many as liked to hold them), the body of the so called saint was carried out, and a canopy being held over it, it proceeded first to the palace, round the Line-wall, up the principal streets, and so round to the ramparts, behind the Raimond Barracks, where we halted a few minutes, to let the saint bless the country, thence across the esplanade, and round by the palace, when the second salute from the battery was fired, and so back to the church. Sir A. Woodford allowed us to keep our hats on, which Sir F. Adam, had he been well, would not have permitted Two bands attended, and a captain's guard, plenty of wax candles of immense size, banners, sick people, and children, were placed "in the middle of the road for the saint to pass over. The canopy was supported by officers, or any who chose. Some of the people at the windows were weeping and crying bitterly. On the first occasion the crowd in the street was pressing forward to kiss the feet, which seemed to be of wood, and bringing children for the same purpose.'"

Extract of a letter from the Rev. G. F. Dawson, published in the Record, April 14th, 1834:—

"At Zante four processions occur,— 1. Corpus Christi; 2. Dyonisius, the patron, who, along with St. Spiridione, takes his turn to assist the Greek cause; 3. That of Santi Panti, answering, I suppose, to our All Saints' day, when a picture with many hundred heads is paraded (and these saints take their turn too); 4. That of Caro-Lambo; who he is I know not, but he was burned all but his THUMB, which is paraded in a silver tumbler annually. These are the processions our officers attend at Zante. I speak on the information of a Christian, who carried candles there. On the latter occasion, the procession is made through the town to the sea, the thumb is dipped into the sea, a signal is made to the castle at the moment, a salute is fired from thence by our soldiers, and the plague prevented from crossing the sea to the island till the return of the same festival. Do pray draw out this to your mind; a thumb of a dead man, paraded under a canopy held by British officers, followed by the garrison and priesthood together, with lighted tapers, bareheaded, and dipped in the ocean to effect a work I have noticed, saluted by the garrison in the castle. Is this to be tolerated as attention to feelings, prejudices, habits? Can the enforcement of such a usage in Parliament be mentioned, and not be put down?

"At Santa Maura and Cephalonia, processions are carried on likewise."

Extract of a letter from India, published in the Recordof January 18th, 1836, authenticated to the editor:—

"In order to expose the system which now obtains in this presidency (Madras), I propose at present to confine my remarks to some occurrences which have recently taken place at one of its principal stations—the site of a court of circuit, and the head-quarters of a division of the army. By his Majesty's regulations, and by the articles of war, the European troops are required to attend divine service at their respective places of worship on the Lord's Day. Yet, in direct opposition to this praiseworthy regulation, and in daring violation of the Divine command, the whole European artillery were kept from church one of the Sabbath days of Lent in firing a series of salutes in honour of a Mahometan festival. I will only add, that I am credibly informed that this subject was made the ground of presentment to the ordinary, and a representation to the government, of which no notice has up to this time been taken, or any means adopted to prevent a repetition of so extraordinary a desecration of that day; I inform you, secondly that the band of one of his Majesty's regiments, consisting with one exception, of Protestants of the Church of England, were at a latter; period compelled on two occasions to attend a Roman Catholic chapel and take part in the service, especially in that part where the host is elevated. Your readers will wonder how this should be, when his Majesty's regulations so distinctly forbid a Roman Catholic soldier being ordered to attend a Protestant place of worship. They naturally argue that by a parity of reason the Protestant's conscientious scruples should be respected. The religious scruples of the Mahomedan, of the heathen or Christian idolaters, are counted sacred, or even applauded, but not so those of the Protestants."

The Hon. Member continued: Of those who took part in the ceremonies so de scribed, some might, perhaps, deride them and treat them with utter unconcern. But if there were any of our fellow subjects to whom attendance on such-occasions was really offensive, whose feelings were hurt, whose conscience was wounded; who was there that would venture to say, that the objections of such parties ought to be disregarded? Was it not greatly to be deplored, that men should be required to assist in the celebration of rites and observances, some of which they might justly regard as absurd and ridiculous, and others as most profane and blasphemous? He (Mr. Plumptre) knew that some excellent officers and soldiers had been deeply pained and disgusted by services of this description. He knew, also, that some had left the army rather than submit to them. Two excellent men, the cause of whom he had more than once pleaded, but, as yet alas, in vain, had been ejected from their profession for requesting to be exempted from such services. He had clung to the hope that the case of Mr. Aitcheson would ere this have met with consideration—that an act of grace, at all events, or, in his (Mr. Plumptre's) view, an act of justice, would ere this have been done towards him; that he would not have been suffered by this free and professedly Christian country (and in this, which is so eminently considered a liberal age, after exposing his life for his country's safety, and giving to her his time, his talents, and his faithful and loyal exertions for twenty of the best years of his life,) now to be reduced (as far, at least, as his country itself is concerned) to want and to the appearance of disgrace. He said the appearance of disgrace, be cause disgraced he was not in the eyes of those who knew his character, and could appreciate his motives. Honoured rather he was by all who participated in his Protestant feelings, nay, he (Mr. Plumptre,) would say by all of every party, and every persuasion, who would rather ten thousand times sacrifice their worldly interests and their very life, than violate their highest and most sacred obligations. It was with that view, that others entering into Mr. Aitcheson's feelings, and at present exposed to trials similar to his, might be exempted from such trials for the future, and enjoy the unfettered exercise of their religious principles, that he (Mr. Plumptre) com mended to the attention of the House the motion which he would read as an amendment on the Order of the Day, "That an humble address be presented to his Majesty, praying that his Majesty would be graciously pleased to give directions that his subjects employed in the civil and military services abroad may be relieved from assisting in religious ceremonies to which their own tenets are opposed."

gave the hon. Member credit for the best motives, but he did not think that the hon. Member had adduced any case or argument which could prevail upon the House to interfere with this subject. The object of the hon. Member's motion appeared to be to prevent our troops while engaged in foreign service from paying any outward marks of respect to the established practices or prejudices, if they might be so termed, of the natives. He believed that, with the exception of the very few cases adverted to by the hon. Member, there were no gentlemen engaged in our naval and civil service abroad who could feel any difficulty in performing those outward tokens of respect to the feelings of foreign nations; and he was sure that if a different course were adopted in reference to those nations which were united to us, it would tend much to shake the grounds upon which that union rested. He should, therefore, oppose the motion; and he did not think the House would consider the practice, which had existed from the earliest time, and to which it had not been the custom or policy of this country to object, except in reference to such particular instances as had been brought forward last year, ought to be interfered with in the manner proposed.

was quite sure that the noble Lord, if he would take the trouble to inquire, would find numerous instances of officers having suffered a violation of their consciences and religious principles on the point which had been stated by the hon. Member for Kent, but they had not made any representations on the subject, for very obvious reasons. It was not strange that persons should feel a strong objection to be called upon to join in ceremonies which were inconsistent with their own sense of duty and religious belief; and that argument was constantly urged upon Ministers from an opposite quarter in reference to other questions. Many officers in the British army were duly impressed with this subject, but they dared not to speak out, for fear of consequences fatal to their future career. It was high time that the practice was done away with.

entertained no doubt it was extremely desirable that in the army and navy, as well as in civil life, all restrictions upon religious principles and belief should be removed, and that no man should be compelled to do violence to his own conscience. It was on that ground that he had always objected to the exaction of church-rates, and every other coercive impost affecting the conscientious feelings of those who were called on to pay them. He himself had witnessed instances abroad wherein British officers were made to join in religious processions, to carry flambeaux, and fire salutes in honour of those practices to which they were conscientiously hostile, but it was never considered they were performing a religious duty—they were only acting a part in the show out of compliment to the people of the country. He had never wished to see a man's religious scruples disregarded, however extravagant they might be, and thought, therefore, that it was the duty of commanding officers in the army to be as careful as possible to meet the views of those under them who differed in religion. He certainly did not approve of the course pursued towards the gentle man referred to by the hon. Member for Kent, and he thought the Government would do an act of justice if they rein stated him.

stated, that he had witnessed some scenes of the most extravagantly superstitious nature, such as pro cessions of saints, in Roman Catholic countries in which the Protestant officers and men of the British army were compelled to take part, very much to their annoyance. The sooner the practice was done away with the better.

said, that Captain Aitcheson had been punished, not for re fusing to join in a religious ceremony contrary to his feelings, but for not performing a military duty. He regretted the dismissal of that gentleman, because he believed his character in all other respects unimpeachable. It was, however, necessary to show the army, that discipline must be maintained.

had always supported civil and religious freedom, and, therefore, was anxious to see it carried out as well in respect to the principles of Protestants as Roman Catholics. He did not wish to see people compelled to pay tithes or church-rates against their consciences, and he was equally anxious that Protestants of every grade, whether Episcopalians or Presbyterians, should not be compelled to do violence to their consciences by paying outward respect to superstitions or practices to which they were totally hostile. He could not see how custom or prejudice afforded any good argument in favour of the practice against which the motion was directed. He hoped that England would govern her colonies in a good spirit, so as to produce an union between them and herself, and all such questions as the pre sent might then be very easily settled.

supported the motion before the House, not because it went to revise the judgment of a Court Martial, but be cause Courts Martial were compelled, under the present system, to dismiss officers from the army because they would not violate their conscientious feelings. He trusted that the hon. Member would divide the House, and persevere until he should at last obtain justice from the House.

stated it to be his object to support his Majesty's Government upon the present occasion. Seeing the particular nature of our empire, and the manner in which the British army was scattered over the globe amidst different religions and races, the utmost care was necessary, in order to rule in a manner accordant with the feelings and prejudices, it might be, of those whom we undertook to govern. A gentleman entering into the military service, then, should first reflect whether, considering the peculiar nature of our army and our empire, his scruples of conscience might not be offended. If he thought they would be so, he was not, as in many countries, obliged to enter it at all. Some gentlemen said scruples of con science were altogether to be attended to. Supposing a soldier was to say, the morning a battle was going to be fought, that his scruples of conscience forbade him to fight—that he had turned Quaker—what would you say to his scruples of conscience, except that he had entered into the army knowing that he would be obliged to fight, and that he must abide by his own decision? For this reason the Quakers did not enter the army. He then should be loth to place the positive control of a vote upon the discretion of the Government, but he meant to express a strong feeling as to the caution with which that discretion should be exercised, in the care which should be equally taken to offend as little as possible the feelings of the colonial subject on the one hand, and of the British soldier on the other.

approved highly of the sentiments expressed upon this occasion by the hon. Member for the city of Waterford. It showed a determination on the part of that and other hon. Members to uphold the perfect freedom of con science. In the army he thought that the rights of conscience ought to be as much respected as anywhere else. In the particular case before the House the officer was called upon to discharge not a military but a religious service. The officer was called to do that which he called an act of worship, in firing off a particular sort of artillery—petteraroes, not used except upon occasions of religious ceremonies.

begged to say, in explanation, that nothing could be further from his wish than that British soldiers should be employed in any religious ceremony abroad, at the same time he must persist in his objection to the ad dress, for he could not bring himself to consent that commanding officers should be deprived of that discretionary power which they had hitherto exercised, especially in the colonies, for it sometimes happened that the omission of a mark of respect was regarded as an insult.

considered that the case of this individual was a very hard one. It ought to be recollected that the circumstance occurred before the passing of the Catholic Relief Bill; and it was not extraordinary that at that period per sons entertaining strong opinions on religion should have resisted the doing that which was contrary to their own conscientious opinions. He knew the gentleman in question to bear a very good character, and he thought it would be an act for which the army would be grateful, if his Majesty's Government would take that opportunity of restoring him to that army.

said, Captain Aitcheson was called upon by his commanding-officer to perform this duty—he resisted—and it was as much an act of disobedience of orders as if he had refused to do any other military act which he might have been called upon to perform.

wished to set the House right as to the facts of the case. Mr. Dawson, in the first instance, was called upon to perform the duty, and resisted, and Captain Aitcheson undertook to fire the guns. In consequence, however, of some representation made to the commanding officer, he was led to believe he did not intend to do it. The commanding officer went to the fort, and Captain Aitcheson placed a written remonstrance in his hands, stating his reasons for refusing to perform the ceremony, and the consequence was, that the commanding officer was obliged to give orders to a gunner, who was standing by, to fire the guns. A general Court Martial was ordered, and the seventeen officers composing it were unanimous in their sentence, which sentence was approved of by the Duke of York and by the Duke of Wellington, on its arrival in this country, as it was, he believed, generally by the military authorities. He contended that by performing this duty, the individuals did not participate in a Roman Catholic ceremony; it was a military ceremony; and under the engagements entered into between Great Britaiu and the Maltese, as well as the inhabitants of the Ionian Islands, it was agreed that all these ceremonies should be observed.

must say, if the conduct of Captain Aitcheson was, in fact, a gross breach of duty, as it had been described, then what became of the argument of the noble Lord below him, who founded his opposition to the address on the ground that a discretionary power ought to be given to commanding officers as to the refusal or non-refusal to discharge such duties? There was a great principle involved in the motion, which, if carried, and it should go forth to the army, he was sure military discipline would not suffer from it.

should, if the motion were pressed to a division, vote for it. As regarded private soldiers, those of the Roman Catholic persuasion had enjoyed religious liberty for many years. He remembered one case where a private soldier was sentenced by a Court Martial to be flogged for refusing to attend a Protestant place of worship. An application, however, was made to the Court of King's Bench. That court immediately granted a habeas corpus; and from that time the Catholic soldier had enjoyed the same liberty of conscience as the Protestant. The same liberty of conscience ought to prevail in the army as out of it, and the men would not be the worse soldiers for it.

considered that cases might occur in the Colonies in which it might be necessary, in order to preserve peace and harmony, to observe these ceremonies, and he thought it would be very injurious if the address were carried.

said, the question of military discipline ought by no means to weigh down the higher claims of conscience. [Hear, hear!] Had the address involved an approval of the conduct of Captain Aitcheson, he certainly could not, after the statement of the right hon. Member for Leeds, have concurred in it. But the motion proclaimed a true, a generous, a philanthropic, and a Christian principle. It respected, and forced others to respect, the religious scruples of their neighbours. He thanked the hon. Member for bringing forward the motion, were it only that it had led to the expression of so much of charitable and really catholic sentiment, in which none had more strikingly participated than the Roman Catholic Members who had taken a part in the debate. Something was gained for the cause of general religious freedom when the rights of conscience were so ably advocated by men of different persuasions; and the asperity of sectarian controversy would soon be softened, if the disposition to respect the opinions of others, which the motion recognised, were more generally diffused.

felt great pleasure in being able to support a motion proposed by an hon. Member to whom he was so frequently opposed. The Sepoy would not wear a pig-skin to make part of a show. Why then, he would ask, was not the con science of the English soldier to be respected as much as the conscience of the Hindoo or the Mahometan soldier? He hoped the hon. Mover would press his motion to a division.

rose for the purpose of moving certain resolutions of which he had given notice, expressive of the regret experienced by the House at the conduct of the House of Lords, in rejecting the Bill for the Reform of the Municipal Corporations in Ireland. He thought it highly incumbent upon every Irish Member to express the indignation with which they had viewed these proceedings.

interrupted the hon. Member, and urged him not to press his motion.

said, that although he was as sensible as any body could be of the in dignity offered to the people of Ireland by the House of Lords, he did not think that the course proposed by the hon. Member would be the right one to give expression to that feeling.

said, if the general feeling of the House was against the course he was about to pursue, he would consent to withdraw his motion.

then said, that it was with great satisfaction he thought that with respect to this Bill the amendments which had been made were not likely to create any difference of opinion between the two Houses of Parliament. The Bill had originally been so framed as to avoid giving any offence elsewhere, and the House of Lords had returned the Bill, which contained, as amended, only two or three points to which it was necessary to call the attention of the House. It was his duty to call the attention of the House to two amendments only with respect to which he thought they ought to disagree with the Lords. The first of these related to the manner in which the election, of aldermen and mayor should be carried on in boroughs where the town-councillors were equally divided. In two boroughs at the last municipal election the town-council was divided nine against nine; they could not agree upon the election of aldermen, and sat till twelve o'clock, after which no alderman could be elected under the Act. By the Bill sent up from the Commons it was provided, to remedy this inconvenience, that the councillor who had the greatest number of votes should preside at the election, but should not give the casting vote, and that where the council could not agree in their selection of aldermen and mayor, the election should be referred to the constituent body. This seemed the wisest course that could be pursued, because the constituent body having elected councillors so opposite in sentiment, were likely to choose the aldermen from both parties also. The House of Lords had, however, thought that a different course ought to be adopted, and had referred the election to mere chance, which was, to determine whether the majority in a corporation should be Reforming or Conservative, for they pro posed that the councillor who was to pre side at the election should be chosen by lot, and that he should have two votes, his own and a casting vote in case of an equality. Now, to this amendment he could not ad vise the House to agree. He should move, that if the town-council could not agree in their selection of aldermen and mayor, the election should be referred to the constituent body, and he thought that if the town-council found that if they continued obstinate they would not have the power of election at all, they would most probably compromise their differences. The second point to which he had to call the attention of the House was the clause relating to charitable trustees who were left by the English Corporation Act in the same situation as they were before the passing of the Act, till November 1, 1836, and if Parliament did not make any provision respecting it in the meanwhile, the Lord Chancellor, who was at the head of the charitable institutions of the country, was to take them under his care. Now, the House of Lords had prolonged his clause for another year, and that amendment he could not recommend the House to agree to, as the operation of the clause had been found to be very inconvenient, and a Bill had been introduced by his hon. Friend, the Member for Northampton, relating to charitable trustees, by which the rate-payers were to elect, but each rate-payer was to vote for only half the number of candidates, so that each side was sure to be fairly represented. Their Lordships were probably not aware that this Bill had been introduced into the House, which they would no doubt find very fair and equitable, and therefore he should recommend the House to dissent from that amendment of the House of Lords. There was another clause which had been pointed out to him by his hon. and learned Friend the Member for Exeter, relating to small courts in the different boroughs. Now, as the clause came down from the Lords, the recorder was only enabled to sit four times in the year, but it was essential that many of these courts should sit from week to week, and he therefore should propose that the recorder should have a right to appoint a deputy to sit for him, who should receive such remuneration for his services as the town-council should appoint. With respect to the last clause of the Bill, which affected the rival jurisdictions of the town and University of Cambridge, and was to settle the dispute between town and gown, as the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for the University of Cambridge, was not then in his place, he would not proceed with it in his absence, but would propose that the further consideration of it be postponed till the right hon. Gentleman was able to attend in his place, and then the right hon. Gentleman, and his right hon. Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, being pre sent, the claims of town and gown might be satisfactorily adjusted.

was anxious to know whether it was the intention of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer to continue the existence of the drawback allowed to the King's printer and the two Universities. The reason he put the question was, because he knew it was looked upon as no slight grievance that in the present state of these drawbacks, the printers to whom he had referred were enabled to compete with unfair advantages in their favour.

replied, that it was his intention to let these drawbacks remain as they now were. This measure was one for the reduction of the duties on paper; but he did not think it right to discuss a subject such as that referred to by the hon. Member for Durham incidentally.

said, he hoped to be able to prove to his hon. Friend, the Member for Middlesex, and the public, as he had already done to the parties interested in the adjustment of the question out of doors, that to go beyond what this Bill provided for would not be expedient. Whenever a reduction in duty was made, and at what ever period it commenced, it was clear, without making some legislative arrangements, those who held stocks on hand at the time the reduction was effected, would meet those who laid in stocks which were subject only to the new and reduced duty with some disadvantage. Various modes had been acted upon for counteracting this evil, and amongst them was the obvious and mechanical one now advocated by his hon. Friend, the Member for Middlesex, namely, to make a reduction or allowance on the total amount of stock there might be on hand when the reduction came into effect. If that could be attained without inconvenience to the public, it followed, that all traders would start on an equality, and enter into a competition on fair terms. Amongst the attempts made to adopt this proposal was that which took place when a reduction was made in the duty on silk. A draw back was then allowed on the amount of the stock in hand and the consequence was, that the Government had to pay back a much larger amount of duty than was ascertained to be paid by the silk proprietors. This, besides being productive of an enormous burden to the country and fraud on the revenue, had this effect also, that whereas a fraud was committed, and there existed an amount in the stock which had not paid duty, the parties claiming the drawback were benefited by receiving not only a sum for duty which had never been paid, but by being enabled to enter into competition with their honest rivals in trade on unfair terms. It should also be recollected, that when at past periods the duty on paper had been raised, it was never levied on the stock in hand; so that when the rise in price took place (which followed from the imposition of the additional duty) the trader received a considerable benefit; and the reduction in duty being now pro posed, whatever were the disadvantages under which the trader was placed by it, they formed but a counterbalance to the benefit which he had received by former measures. He would endeavour to explain in a very (few words, what it was his intention to effect by the present Bill. He must, in the first place, say that he did not object to the principle of a draw back, if fraud could be guarded against by it. The plan which he had devised would effect its object without giving an opportunity for the commission of fraud, and he should explain it in as short a time as possible. First, he intended, under the provisions of this Bill, to postpone the commencement of the repeal of the duty to the 10th Oct. The effect of that would be, to allow parties to work off their existing stocks before the alteration was effected. This period, he thought, would be fully sufficient for the purpose which he had mentioned, particularly when it was considered that these parties had quite sufficient notice of the intention of Government—first by the Report presented by his right hon. Friend, Sir H. Parnell, next by the discussion which took place when the noble Lord, the Member for South Lancashire (Lord Egerton) presented a petition on the subject, and finally by his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) notice of it on the Budget Speech. But it might be said, that if things were left in that state, no purchase would be made from the manufacturer. Now to obviate that objection, he contended that it should be open to parties to take from the mill paper to any extent they pleased, which should bear not only the Excise mark, but be so identified and distinguished as to exclude all attempts at fraud. They might take this paper into their stock; and on every portion of it that remained on band on the 10th of October a draw back would be allowed, and return made of the amount of duty upon it. That was the way in which he proposed that relief should be afforded; and he did not think it would be just or expedient to go further. He called on the Committee, if they wished that the system of reductions of duty should be persevered in, not to encumber such questions as the present with those of allowances and drawbacks. He trusted his statement had given satisfaction to the Committee. He could inform them of this, that when a deputation had lately waited upon him, and when he had told them what he meant to propose, they expressed a hope that he would adhere to the plan which he had then described—" Because, "they said," if, after making this communication to us, you should think fit to change your resolution, all we can say is that you would effect more injury by passing, after the announcement which you have made, measures which we proposed at first, than you will by persevering in your determination".

thought, that all attempts at fraud might be perfectly guarded against by appointing to each town, some one place and one day where an examination should take place, for the purpose of pre venting any forgeries. He was of opinion that every ream of paper might be traced from the mill to the warehouse, and to the shop of the dealer, so as to prevent all possibility of fraud. In the case of stamps now issuing, there was an understanding that the duty on the portion not consumed, at the periods of the Bill passing, should be returned. Why should not this precedent be adopted in the case of paper. The hon. Member concluded by intimating, that he would persist in his proposition.

said, that great frauds had been committed upon the alteration of the silk duties, in consequence of the adoption of such a proposition as that urged by the hon. Member for Middlesex. He would, however, recommend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to consider whether, by the adoption of additional pre cautions, the suggestion might not be rendered practicable.

ob served, that nothing would be more easy than to cheat the revenue, by placing within marked excise covers paper which had not paid duty. He feared, therefore, he could not consistently, with his duty, adopt the hon. Member's proposition.

thought the more just course would be, to allow a drawback on all paper on hand, at the period of the Act passing. It was unfair to deprive the honest portion of the paper trade, because a roguish trader might, by possibility, commit an isolated case of fraud. He thought, that means might easily be devised to make the parties prove they had paid the duty.

observed, that the par ties had full notice of the course Ministers intended taking, with regard to the question raised by the hon. Member for Middlesex, from the Report of the Excise Commissioners, and yet it was not objected to by them when the Bill was submitted to their consideration. Again, in the finance exposition of April last, the matter was mentioned, and then not protested against. It was, besides this, notorious that the stationers had been of late considerably reducing their stock of paper, in anticipation of the present measure. His great objection to the proposition, however, was the opportunity it would afford for fraudulent practices — practices, by the way, which no foresight could guard against.

did not see how the allowance of the drawback could open the door to frauds. The dealer could just as well commit fraud now, as after the Bill passed with the proposed proviso. If the hon. Member pressed his proposition to a division, he should feel it his duty to support him.

supported the proposition of the hon. Member for Middlesex, which he contended would do justice to the trade without exposing the revenue to the smallest risk of fraud. He was anxious to know what arrangement the Government had made with respect to the allowance of the drawback on the paper known as "press boards." This class of paper was much used by his constituents, who, under the 42nd Geo. 3rd chap. 94, were allowed back the entire duty, on a certificate being forwarded to the proper office of its having been used in the woollen trade. Was this arrangement, he desired to know, to be continued?

re plied, that up to the 10th of October next the present arrangement should continue in force, but that after that date the class of paper alluded to, would be charged three-half pence duty. This arrangement would be rendered necessary by the impossibility of making a distinction between the several classes of paper after the passing of the Act.

said, that although he felt it an act of gross injustice not to allow a drawback on the stock in hand, yet he did not think it worth while to press this amendment to a division, but would con tent himself with entering his protest on the subject.

ob served, that whoever had stock in hand on the 10th of October, would obtain the difference between the new duties and those which he had paid on that stock.

complained that a million a year was assessed upon the people by grand juries, who were irresponsible bodies. He proposed that a system of fiscal representation should be adopted with reference to parishes and baronies, for the purpose of checking the evil. The hon. Gentleman moved an amendment to that effect, which was negatived.

moved a proviso, that the clause should not have a retrospective effect.

objected to the motion, that it would prevent the cess-payers from acquiring habits of business.