moved the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Industrious Classes Bill, for the purpose of having the Order discharged, it being his intention not to proceed with the measure this Session, but to introduce a similar bill next Session.

begged to make some inquiries of the right hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer, as to the present state of the Excise laws, affecting parties who had made advances on the security of consignments of exciseable goods. As the law now stood, exciseable goods bonâ fide sold and delivered to a purchaser could not be afterwards taken by the Excise in satisfaction of any duties which might be in arrear or owing by the manufacturer of such goods. This provision of the law did not extend to the case of exciseable goods in the possession of a factor who had made advances thereon. He wished to ask whether the Government had considered the propriety of extending the protection now given to purchasers of exciseable goods to those persons who made advances in cash, or by acceptances, on the security of such commodities? In short, whether the Government were prepared to place a factor as far as the extent of his lien went, under advance in the same position as a purchaser. It seemed reasonable that it should be so; for if the maker of exciseable goods could offer them for sale exempt from all liability to claims upon them, why not also offer them as a valid security for an advance of money? The other evening, he presented a petition from Mr. Michael Trueman, of Manchester, corn factor, who having made an advance of 2,380l. on the security of certain malt, was deprived of such malt then in his possession, in satisfaction of a claim for duties which the Government had against the maltster in respect of other malt—not the malt which had been consigned, but other malt. The petitioner stated that the advance had been made to the malster in the ordinary course of business, and that it was the universal custom for corn factors to make advances in cash or to give acceptances upon security of consignments of malt. He knew it might be said that Mr. Trueman was bound to know the law, and that he made the advance with a knowledge of the nature of the security and of the priority of all claims on the part of the Excise, for duties due from the maltster; and, therefore, he had acted at his own peril, He (Mr. Gibson) begged to say, that the law was not easy to be understood, although the last Excise bill might be as intelligible as acts of Parliament generally were. The Board of Excise did not appear to know the law themselves, for, when application was made to the Excise in the first instance, the Board answered that Mr. Trueman's claim should be paid out of the proceeds of the sale of the malt, and a letter was also received from the secretary to the board, Mr. M. Hutch, by Messrs. Croker, Dublin, in September, 1841, in which it was distinctly laid down as a rule of the Excise, that where a factor has fairly and bonâ fide received goods, and made advances on them, those advances would be allowed, but that in case of suspicion of fraud, the parties would be called on to prove the correctness of the transaction. No one had attempted in the slightest degree to hint that Mr. Trueman's conduct had not been perfectly straightforward and bonâ fide, and yet, notwithstanding the declaration of the board in favour of the claims of factors under his circumstances, Mr. Trueman had been deprived of his security, and was threatened with the loss of his money. The Court of Exchequer had been appealed to, the Treasury had been tried, nothing now remained but an application to Parliament, and he (Mr. Gibson) hoped that the Government would find out some mode by which Mr. Trueman would be prevented from losing the advance he had made, and which he had a right to make in the ordinary course of his business.

said, that the complaint of the hon. Gentleman was founded on this—that an individual had been subjected to pay a sum of money which he had been adjudged liable to pay by the sentence of a court of law, and it was to get rid of that grievance that he had come to the House. The hon. Member now asked the Government to alter the ' law, which rendered persons who acted as factors for those who dealt in exciseable commodities liable to pay the duties of those for whom they acted, or in other words, to put factors in the position of bonâ fide purchasers. He could not consent to act upon such a proposal. He was quite ready to admit, that in the particular case referred to, the officer of Excise had made an erroneous statement, but he had done it on the authority of a case recently decided, which he supposed to have application to the matter under consideration. The question, however, had been referred to the law-officers of the Crown, who had declared a belief that the case did not apply, and therefore Mr. Trueman had been held to be liable ill law to re-pay the money in which Mr. Armitage was indebted to the Crown. Mr. Trueman would have gained nothing if the sureties of Mr. Armitage had been proceeded against; because they, in turn, might have demanded the process of the Crown against him.

then rose to ask the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Home Department (Sir J. Graham), whether it were the intention of her Majesty's Government to remove from their professorships in the Universities of Scotland, those Gentlemen who have adhered to the Free Presbyterian Church; and also whether he had any objections to lay on the Table a copy of any memorial addressed to the Government from the colleges of St. Andrew's, relative to the removal or disqualification of the Principal of that University, in consequence of his having adhered to the Free Church.

would give all the information to the hon. Gentleman which he possessed. With respect to certain professorships, it appeared that many of the persons who held them had, upon conscientious grounds, and not in consequence of their being removed by her Majesty's Government, voluntarily surrendered their appointments, thinking that to retain them was inconsistent with their own views and sentiments. He was unable to give a general answer to the question of the lion. Member, because various professorships were held by peculiar tenures, and particular charters. Some of them need not be held by Gentlemen of the established religion: the right hon. gentleman the rector of the University of Glasgow (Mr. Fox Maule) was aware that the Greek Professorship of that University was held by an Episcopalian. The duty of the Government, in the cases of Dr. Chalmers and Dr. Welch, had been first to decide whether it were consistent with the charter under which they held their professorships that they should retain them. With respect to the second part of the question, respecting the memorial addressed to the Government from the college of St. Andrew's, relative to the removal or disqualification of the Principal of that University, in consequence of his having adhered to the Free Church, be was aware that Sir David Brewster, the gentleman alluded to, had ceased to be a member of the Established Church of Scotland, and it would be a question to determine according to law whether it was, therefore, consistent with the charter of the University that he should continue to hold the office of Principal. The matter had recently come under his cognizance, and he had referred it to the law-officers of the Crown in Scotland, for them to give their opinions on the subject.

said, the question de- served the most serious consideration of Government; and, if they acted in the illiberal spirit of the memorial from St. Andrews, it would lead to the most serious consequences.

moved, to leave out the words "and sixpence." The committee divided, on the question that the words stand:—Ayes 59; Noes 48: Majority 11. Bill went through committee with amendments. The House resumed—bill to be reported.

moved for a return of the names of the different corps of Yeomanry Cavalry which have been or are to be re-established on permanent pay and allowances, under the estimate of the present year. The right hon. Gentleman reminded the House that under the late administration the Yeomanry corps had been reduced to the advantage of the country. The present Government had increased the yeomanry and he thought, without any necessity. At least, whatever might be the necessity in the manufacturing districts, there was none whatever for re-embodying the yeomanry of Mid Lothian, for there was no disturbance in Scotland. He considered that, under the present circumstances of the country, when economy was so desirable, and the people were in such a state of distress, that the additional expense of 25,000l. expended on the yeomanry, was uncalled for and ought to have been avoided. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by moving for the returns.

had been ready to enter upon the subject when he moved the estimates, had he been called on, and he had no intention of opposing the returns moved for by the right hon. Gentleman. At the same time he was bound to remind the House of the circumstances of the country when the augmentation took place. It was found necessary, on account of the disturbed state of the manufacturing districts. But he could not do better on the subject than read to the House a letter which he had received from the Duke of Wellington, and which had been written by him when he no longer required the services of those corps. The right hon. Baronet read the following letter:—

" Sir—I have the honour to inform you that all the corps of Yeomanry Cavalry, placed at my disposal, and which, in consequence, have been acting under the general officers of the districts where the public peace has been disturbed, have been relieved from permanent duty, and have been permitted to return to their homes. The readiness with which both officers and men turned out for the service of their country, at a period of the year when it must have been very inconvenient to most of them to quit their usual avocations and business, merits the warmest commendation; and 1 must add, as especially deserving of praise, the activity, gallantry, discipline, and forbearance, with which they have performed the duties it became necessary to submit to them, in order to support the magistrates, and enable them to restore and maintain the public peace, protect property, and preserve to every individual of the community the right to labour, as lie himself might be inclined, upon the terms to which be may have agreed with his employer. It is a great satisfaction to me to be able to report thus favourably of this most efficient body; and so sensible am I of the merits of the yeomanry, and of the value of the services they have rendered on this occasion, that I deem it my duty to request that you will lay the letter before the Queen, with my earnest recommendation that I may be honoured with her Majesty's commands to express in general orders her most gracious approbation at their conduct, and her Majesty's confident reliance on their zeal, loyalty, and devotion whenever it may be necessary to call again upon them for assistance. I have the honour to be, sir, your most obedient servant,

"(Signed] WELLINGTON.

" The right hon. Sir J. Graham, etc."

It was not necessary for him to add one word to that letter, to show the efficiency of the yeomanry corps or their utility in supporting the civil power, and restoring the public peace when that had been disturbed. With respect to the augmentation, he had the high authority of the Duke of Wellington for saying, that last year, with a view to support the civil government, his grace had recommended in the circum- stances of the country that the yeomanry should be augmented to the extent of 1,200 men; and he had advised that they should be raised in different localities. That recommendation had been carried into effect. He would not enter into further details, and he did not mean to oppose the motion.

did not dispute the high authority of the Duke of Wellington, but his Grace had recommended that the yeo- manry should be embodied in the districts where the disturbances arose, and the right hon. Gentleman had called a body of yeomanry cavalry into existence where the country was very peaceful. He referred to the yeomanry of Mid Lothian, who had been called out when there were no disturbances whatever, either in the metro-polis or in any part of Scotland. The right hon. Gentleman had stated no ground why that corps should have been raised, nor were there any circumstances which made it necessary to revive them in order to pre-serve the public peace. The only consequence was that the right hon. Gentleman had saddled the country with the expense of that corps, which, since 1819, had never been called on to perform any public service. Under the circumstances of the case he thought the services of that body were not required.

begged to remind the House that the Midlothian Yeomanry were in the neighbourhood of the metropolis of Scotland, and that in general there was only one regiment of cavalry in Scotland. If any circumstances made it necessary to employ them—if any disturbance arose, more cavalry might be required. It was that circumstance which made the Duke of Wellington recommend that a body of yeomanry cavalry should be organised in the neighbourhood of the metropolis, and justified the restoration of the corps to which the right hon. Gentleman alluded.