said, it would be in the recollection of hon. Members, that, yesterday morning, after; he resolution of the noble Lord had been put to the House, he had proposed an adjournment of the debate; that motion had been seconded by the hon. Member for Finsbury, and since he had come to the House that evening, he had been told, that the hon. Member for Ashton, who was in the gallery at the time, had also seconded it. Now that motion ought to have been entertained. He had been asked by his hon. Friend, the Member for Kilkenny, to withdraw his motion, on the understanding that at some future time he should have an opportunity of stating his opinions on the subject. What he complained of was, that his motion for adjourning the debate had been disposed of without his consent. The Speaker had never asked him if he would take the sense of the House. The right hon. Gentleman had not put it to the House if they would divide on it. He thought he had a right to complain. It was a question affecting the privilege of his constituents. He thought it probable, that the House might have rejected his motion, but he complained of its having been rejected without a division. His hon. Friend the Member for Kilkenny could bear testimony that he had been asked to withdraw his motion, on the understanding that he should have an opportunity given him, on some future occasion, of speaking on the subject of the previous debate; and he had risen to speak when the noble Lord, the Secretary for the Colonies, had proposed his amendment. He had risen more than a dozen times during the debate to make known his sentiments, but had not been able to attract the Speaker's notice. He did not complain of that. He knew how difficult it was for the Speaker to see every Member who rose. But yesterday morning, between three and four o'clock, he had risen to move the adjournment, as he wished to enter into explanations as to the reasons which would influence him in giving his vote. He had been asked to proceed with his speech, but he refused to do so, and at that hour of the morning it could hardly have been expected. He wanted to know why his motion for the adjournment was rejected—why it was not put from the Chair—and a division taken on the question of adjournment. Before he said anything more, he hoped to have an answer to that question.

felt, that he could give the best answer to the question of the hon. Member, and he could state, that if the motion had been seconded, he should certainly have put it from the Chair. After the hon. Member had put the question, he (the Speaker) asked who seconded the motion, and he paused two or three seconds for an answer. No hon. Member in his view seconded it, and he had then proceeded to read the question to the House. As he was reading the question he saw the hon. Member for Finsbury rise, but he did not understand him to say a single word, or to second the motion. He appealed to hon. Members near him whether he was in error, and they concurred with him that the hon. Member had not addressed the House. He concluded, therefore, that the motion was not seconded, and he certainly did not see the hon. Member in the gallery; he had only heard that since the adjournment, and was not aware of it at the time. If he had been aware of it, of course it would have been his duty to put the question.

could easily understand that the Speaker was in doubt and difficulty as to what was passing in the House. There was certainly noise and confusion in his (Mr. Wakley's) part of the House, as well as near the Chair. He recollected the Speaker asking who seconded it, and he (Mr. Wakley) had risen from his seat, and said, "I do Sir," but he could easily believe that the Speaker did not hear him, for there was considerable noise in his part of the House, and several hon. Members cried "Don't second it."

saw the hon. Member for Finsbury rise, but did not hear him say a single word.

was understood to ask why, when he had risen a second time to press his question, it was not put?

had omitted to state why the question was not put when the hon. Member rose a second time. The hon. Member did not rise until after the voices had been given in the negative, and the hon. Member's motion could not then, according to the practice of the House, be put. He would also state, that when he observed no hon. Member rise and second the motion, he had said, in the hearing of several hon. Members near him, "There is no seconder."

not having had an opportunity of speaking during the debate, would send the speech he intended to make to the newspapers. And he would tell them more, that what he had sent he had written before, and if hon. Members would write beforehand what they intended to speak, they would save a great deal of the time of the House. That would enable hon. Members and the public to see what were his sentiments on the subject.

Sir, I give notice that, on Monday next, I will move that the House shall resolve itself into a Committee of Ways and Means, with a view to move the usual annual Sugar Duties therein.

moved, that this House, at its rising, do adjourn to Monday.

as it appears to be the intention of the noble Lord— notwithstanding the division of the other night—to cling with an unparalleled tenacity to office, after the sense of the House of Commons has been unequivocally declared against him, may 1 ask, on what day he intends to bring forward the question of the corn-laws?

On Friday the 4th of June.

rose to bring forward the motion of which he had given notice, relative to the report of the naval and military commission. That commission had sat for two years, at the close of which period they furnished their report. It was not for him (Lord George Lennox), to impugn, nor did he mean to impugn, the report of that commission. But what he complained of was, that the recommendations of the commissioners respecting the officers of the army, navy, and ordnance, had been attended to, and carried out by the heads of these several departments, whereas that which related to the Marines had been neglected. He hoped that the marine officers would soon be put upon an equal footing with the officers of the navy, and that the day was not far distant when a marine officer would even act as a Lord of the Admiralty. He regretted that there appeared a disposition to evade the just claims of this gallant body of men. He formerly moved for the appointment of a committee on the subject; he was met by the objection, that the proper course of proceeding was by an address to the Crown. He adopted the suggestion, and moved an address to her Majesty, and then he was informed that he should have moved for a committee. He confessed he looked for the support of the noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs upon this occasion. That noble Lord had possessed many opportunities of testing the merit of the marines, and had, on several occasions, found them eminently useful when engaged on foreign service. The noble Lord must be fully sensible of the efficient manner in which the gallant corps had discharged their duty at Lisbon, in Spain, and recently on the coast of Syria. Looking to the manner in which the corps had been employed in carrying out the noble Lord's policy, they might not inaptly be called "Palmerston's Own." The noble Lord concluded by moving, that the House should resolve itself into a committee of the whole House, to take into consideration the report of the naval and military commission, as relates to the recommendations relative to the Royal Marines.

having been a member of the naval and military commission, was anxious to say a very few words upon the question. He could assure the noble Lord, and the House, that the members of that commission were actuated by a sincere desire to do justice to that distinguished corps, the Marines, and to further promotion in it. The noble Lord had complained of the small amount of the promotions in the corps, compared with those in other branches of the service; but that, he could assure him, was the result of accidental circumstances. It would be found impossible to equalize promotions by any arrangements. He would only repeat, that the commission was most anxious to do justice to the corps, more particularly after they were deprived of the assistance of a gallant officer of marines who was appointed a member of the commission.

said, he had voted with the noble Lord formerly, when he proposed an address to the Crown upon this subject; but the Queen having been pleased to appoint a commission, he would not concur in doing anything which would have the appearance of sitting in judgment on the proceedings of that commission.

concurred in the view taken by the last speaker. It would be most inconvenient, and contrary to the practice of the constitution, to interfere with the commission. The hon. and gallant Member referred to the report of the commission, to show that great promotions had taken place since the Order in Council in 1837; that officers who were unfit for duty had been allowed to retire upon their full pay; and that the recommendations of the commission had been carried out as respected inefficient officers, every one of whom had been provided for. For his own part, though he should resist the motion, he held the marines in the highest estimation, and would do all in his power to serve them.

thought, that after the report which the commission had made, it would not be advisable to take the course proposed by the noble Lord. He was of opinion also, that a committee of the House of Commons was not the proper tribunal before which such a subject should be investigated. He must, therefore, give his vote against the motion; but he hoped that vote would not be regarded as a proof that he took no interest in the welfare of the marine corps.

said, that while the pay of the other branches of the service had been liberally increased, the marines had remained unnoticed. He believed, indeed, that the recommendations of the commission had been carried into effect with regard to almost every other department, except that of the Royal Marines. Considering the brilliant services which that body of men had performed for the country, he must say that it savoured something of ingratitude, that it should be necessary to drive at those in power continually, in order to get justice done to them. For the first time they had heard of two marine officers having received a brevet rank, those officers having been in the action of the Shannon and the Chesapeake. But this neglect had gone on all through the war. He should support the motion of the noble Lord, unless the gallant Admiral would make some promise that would render a committee unnecessary.

believed that every one of the recommendations of the commission had been carried into effect. The number of promotions given by the Board of Admiralty to the marines in proportion to the amount of the force employed was unexampled. He looked upon the motion of his noble Friend as totally uncalled for, inasmuch as the Board of Admiralty had complied with all the suggestions made by the commission, except on the single point of prize-money. It was impossible to do more in the way of increasing superannuations and retirements, without forcing to retire men who were every way competent to do the duties of active service, which would be impolitic in the extreme.

thought that no complaint could be brought against the Government the course it had pursued with reference to the marine corps. Formerly he had thought this branch of the service much neglected; but since the appointment of the naval and military commission, it seemed that full justice had been done to them. There were, however, one or two recent instances in which he thought promotions should have been made. He alluded particularly to the case of Captain Spry and another old marine officer, who had served together in Commodore Napier's ship, the Powerful, during the late hostilities on the coast of Syria, and had partaken of all the glory which attached to the British arms on that occasion. These old officers, one of whom had served for thirty-five years, were left without promotion, although most of the naval officers who served in the Powerful had been raised to higher rank. He thought the case of these veterans highly deserving the notice of the Admiralty.

cordially agreed with the hon. Member, as to the propriety of rewarding Captain Spry and the other marine officer of Commodore Napier's ship. He trusted that his noble relative would not press the motion to a division, as he hoped the notice taken of the subject would be sufficient to induce the Lords of the Admiralty to do their utmost to benefit the service.

was understood to state, that all the marine officers who served on the coast of Syria had been promoted, but that some delay had arisen in the case of Captain Spry. It was, however, fully in. tended that he should be promoted.

was ready to support the noble Lord in any motion which would benefit the corps of Royal Marines. He would, however, recommend him to withdraw the present motion, in the hope that what had been said would influence the treatment of that body.

replied, and intimated that, as the House was then so exceedingly thin, he should not put it to the trouble of a division.

rose to call the attention of the House to the petition of Samuel Cousins (presented 23d March), and to move,—

"That under the provisions of the Act for amending the representation of the people of England and Wales, it is incumbent on the clerk of the peace of every county to write or print the register of electors annually, and to furnish copies of the same at the most reasonable price. That by a return made to this House on the 4th day of May, 1840, it appears that the register of electors for the county of Hertford is charged at 89l. for each of the years 1837 and 1838, and that, by the same return, it appears that in counties where the register is printed the price charged for the same, where the number of electors vary from 4,000 to 6,000, is from 4s. to 10s. each. That the omission hitherto to print the register of electors for the county of Hertford, and to furnish copies at a reasonable price, has been productive of great inconvenience, and is an infringement on the rights of the electors of the said county in the exercise of their franchise to return Members to Parliament. That a copy of the register of electors for the county of Hertford, for the year 1840, ending 1841, be forthwith laid before this House."

The hon. Gentleman stated, that finding there was no objection to these resolutions, with the exception of the second, which he should not press, he should not trouble the House with a discussion, but would merely move the resolutions, omitting the second paragraph.

moved for returns of the number of inspectors appointed under 2 and 3 William 4th., c. 75, commonly called the Anatomy Act, and the districts under their separate inspection. Of the amount of salary paid to each inspector, and allowance for travelling expenses in each year from 1836 to 31st day of December, 1840, inclusive. Of the number of visits made by each inspector, to the several schools of anatomy within his district, specifying the name of the school, and date of each visit, from 1833 to 1840, inclusive. Of all subjects sent to the several colleges and hospitals, and schools of anatomy; specifying the number to each, and the date thereof. Of each inspector's report to the Home-office, of all contraventions of the Anatomy Act by teachers or students, from the year 1833 to 1840, inclusive; and also (if any) what proceedings have been taken thereon.

was prepared to assent to the motion, with the exception of that part of it which called for a return" of all subjects sent to the several colleges and hospitals, and schools of anatomy; specifying the number of each, and the date thereof." That part of the motion, he should oppose.

was willing at the present moment to take what he could get; but on a future occasion he should move for the whole of this information, and for the appointment of a committee to consider the subject. He would not now press that part of the return which was objected to.

believed, that the Anatomy Bill had worked well, and that no complaint had been made against it from any of the schools.

begged to correct his hon. Friend who had just spoken. It was due to the medical men, whose petitions he (Mr. Duncombe) had presented, to state, that very great dissatisfaction existed as to the operation of the Anatomy Act. He was only sorry that the Undersecretary of State (Mr. F. Maule) did not feel it consistent with his duty to give the whole of the returns for which the hon. Member for Oxford had moved. Some of the petitions stated that certain hospitals carried on a regular trade in bodies, and he thought that the time had arrived when some inquiry ought to be instituted into the working of the Act.

said, it was a mistake to suppose that the secretary had power to direct the distribution of subjects under the act, neither had the inspectors, unless upon an agreement with the lecturers on the science of anatomy. Such an arrangement had been made between the profession and the inspectors, and therefore the former had no right to complain of the act, which had nothing whatever to do with these arrangements. If any complaint could justly have been made, such complaints would have reached the House. But this was a subject which could not with advantage be mooted in this place, but whenever it might be so, he hoped it would be discussed with temper. He thought the act was one of the greatest boons ever conferred upon London, for it had put an end to the nefarious system of body snatching and worse, and he was sure, that if anything happened to cause the repeal of that law, the horrid scenes of which everybody had heard would be renewed with all their atrocities.

said, he had taken this course in consequence of the petitions which he had himself presented on this subject, containing complaints which he believed to be correct. He concurred that if this act was effectually carried into effect it would be a considerable boon, in. putting a stop to the scenes which he had spoken of. But if it were not carried out in true sincerity—if private arrangements were made which ought not to be made, dissatisfaction would be produced, and the best way to put an end to that dissatisfaction would be by the production of the information he sought for, in consequence, he repeated, of the information which had reached him. He therefore hoped no time would be lost in laying the particular return now objected to upon the Table of the House.

said, he would be happy to give every information in reference to the appointments under the act, and as to the salaries of the officers who had to carry it into effect. He would also feel happy in laying before the House such general information in regard to the number of complaints as it was in his power to give; but he could not give the hon. Gentleman opposite either the returns in regard to the operation of the act as connected with the science of anatomy, or those specific complaints made against individuals for the infringement of the act. He thought that the act had worked admirably, especially in one respect; for no one could deny but that the practices so frequent before the passing of the act had since then totally ceased.

said, that there certainly had been suggestions made to the Government in regard to the carrying the act into effect; but he believed that he left the Home-office immediately after these suggestions were made, and had not consequently given them his consideration. He agreed with the hon. Member for Fins-bury, that it would have the worst effect on the operation of the measure, if they were at the present time to institute an inquiry of the nature proposed by the hon. Gentleman opposite. He hoped, therefore, that the hon. Gentleman would refrain from taking this step, as it might for the future prevent the act from being carried into effect in the mode in which it was at present; and it would also interfere with the adoption of any further suggestions which might be given.

trusted that the production of the necessary documents would put it out of his power to bring the question again before the House; but unless this was done, he would consider himself bound to renew his motion.

moved a clause to empower tenants to enfranchise.

opposed the clause, on the ground that it was inconsistent with the principle of the bill.

hoped his hon. Friend would not press his amendment, as it would endanger the whole bill.

was happy to find that the principle of his clause met with the general approbation of the House, but finding that if he were to press it to a division it would endanger the passing of the bill itself, he begged leave to withdraw it.