The Principality

THREATENING LETTERS TO THE QUEEN. Last week a mail named John Wardie was charged before the mayor ofWiüdsor and two other magistrates, with hav- in- sent threatening letters to the Queen and others. He had first written to her Majesty on Jan. 18, 1848, when he stated that, unless he and his family obtained their rights, her Majesty should die at his hands. This letter was sent down to the Staffordshire police, within whose jurisdiction the pri- soner was employed, when he was> taken bcfoie the magis- trates, and charged with writing- the threatening letter. The prisoner explained that his reason for so doiiis)- was to obtain £ 10,000 left to his family by the late Duke or Kent. The magistrates sentenced' him to three months'confinement in Station! gaol, in default of his finding bail to keep the peace. On Thursday, the 8th ult., he presented himself at the resi- dence of the Dean of Windsor, and told the butler he was determined to see the Queen, and get his due, even if his neck was stretched for it. He was again given into custody, and after two the case was postponed till the 17th, when the bench adjudged the prisoner to be a dangeious lu- natic, and sentenced him to be confined in the county lunatic asylum at Littlemore, near Oxford, unless his friends could give security for hisste custody. The prisoner is very illite- rate, no two consecutive words being- spelt, correctly, her Majesty being described as Queen Vietorev." The mayor, however, declined to give copies of the letters to the London epo.-ters.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—THURSDAY, MiRcn 29. STOCKPORT MAGISTRATES. Lord STANLEY presented a petition from Stockport, complain- ing that certain local magistrates had been appomted for party objects, and for the pecuniary interests of Mr. H. Coppock, lately town clerk of the borough, and brother to the Mr. J. Coppock. The LORD CHANCELLOR defended his appointments, as made in consequence of representations from Stockport that an increase of magistrates was necessary to facilitate the transaction of the public business of the borough. The matter then dropped, and the House adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THURSDAY, MARCH 29. Mr. J. O'CONNELL withdrew his motion on the state of Ireland. IRISH SAVINGS' BANKS. Mr. REYNOLDS moved for a select committee to report upon the circumstances connected with the failure of the St. Peter's parish savings' bank, Dublin, and into any security or liability that may exist for the satisfaction of the losses thereby occasioned. He went into a statement to show the extent of suffering produced by the failure of the bank in question, and the necessity which existed for so remodelling the law, with respect to savings' banks, as to render them safe places of deposit. The amount. due by the bank to its depositors was about £ o0,()00. The depositors be- lieved that tIle) had the security of the Imperial Exchequer for their deposits, whereas they had not lie, therefore, regarded the 1 reasury as moraily and legally liable to make good their losses. If lie were asked to point out a fund whence the payment fur this purpose should come, he would designate the surplus now in the possession ot the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt. Mr. NAPIER seconded the motion. Mr. H. HERBERT moved, as an amendment, to add to the case in questicfii those of Tïalee and Killarile)-, aid of Auchterarder in Scotland. Those cases, lie contended, were of equal hardship with that of the Dublin Bank. It was the impression of most of the depositors that the deposits were made on public security, and it was high time tiiat some legislation was had which would place the savings' banks upon a secure footing. Mr. F AGA" seconded the amendment. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER expressed a hope that the House would not be led away by its feelings to vote for the com- mittee sought for. The inquiry would, at present, be productive of but little advantage. He hoped to be able, this session, to in- troduce a bill the object of which would be to submit the institu- tions in question to more direct control. Mi. MORHlS (who was very indistinctly-heard) was understood to say that in the case of a failure of a savings' bank in that part of ihe country whence he came. the Lord-Lieutenant of the county of Carmarthen had made up ail ,the losses of depositors under (hear, hear). After some observations Lorn Mr. J. O'CONNELL, Mr. GROGAN, and 1r. KEOGH, Mr. GOULBURN explained the course pursued by the Govern- ment in 18 14, with respect to the savings' banks, a course he con- ten led did not render the public liable for the losses alluded to. The House thenidivi(led- For the amendment 49 j Against it 4'Z— 7 This announcement was received with much cheering by the supporters of the motion. The question then before the House was the main question, with the amendment added to it. I he discussion was about to be resumed, when loud cries for a division proceeded from iNIr. REYNOLDS and his Mr. F. O'CON- NOR observed that there were strangers in the gallery. Strangers were thellordered to withdraw, and the galleries were cleared. The discussion, however, continued for some time afterwards. Lord J. RUSSELL taking part in it. On the division at length taking place upon the main question, the numbers were— For the motion as amended 51 Against it 48—3 The Government was thus defeated a second time, and tne an- nouncement of the success of the motion elicited vociferous cheers from its supporters. The House adjourned at half-past ten.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—FRIDAY, MARCH 30. RECOVERY OF DEBTS FROM MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT. A bill for extending Mr. John Smith's Act. common'y called the 5 J rid of George Ill.. lo. ill insolvent members of the House of Commons, was read a first time on the motion of Lord BROUGHAM.

ARMISTICE BETWEEN AUSTFJA AND SARDINIA. I The Marquis of LANSDOWNK was sorry that the Parliamentary ;■; •papers relating to the war in Italy could not be L.icl on the table before Easter. The noble marquis also informed the House that the new King of Satdinia had concluded an arrnisticewith the coin, mander of the Austrian forces, with a view to further negotiation* and arrangements that an agreement had been already made by which the duchy of Savoy had ceased to be occupied by the Aus- trian troops, while the important fortresses on the frontiers would be garrisoned by Austrian and, Piedmontese troops; and that plenipotentiaries had been appointed on both sides to conduct the future negotiations, in the hope of their leading to the establish- ment of a permanent peace.. The Earl of ABERDEEN was delighted to hear this intelligence, in which, if true, he saw a fresh proof of the moderation displayed by Austria. After some further discussion the matter dropped, and their lordships adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—FRIDAY, MARcn30. A large number of petitions were presented on various question's. OATHS TAKING. Mr. OSBORNE said it appeared, from a statement in the public journals, that a lady named Warren had last week been com- mitted to prison by Mr. Justice Williams, at Exeter, fur having refused to be sworn before the grand jury. He wished to ask the right honourable gentleman the Home Secretary whether that lady was still in prison ? Sir G UIH'Y said he bad received no official information on the subject. He certainly had seen the statement to which the hot,. gentleman referred, and he believed that the learned judge, having consulted with Lord Denman, was of opinion that he had no dis- cretion m the matter as the law now stood but a bill was before Parliament to obviate the difficulty in future. He might, how- ever, add, that h« had seen a statement in the public papers of that day that the lady had been liberated.

NAVAL EXPENDITURE-EXCESS. On tl e ordt-r of the day for the consideration of the resolution of the Committee of Supply-for this excess in the year 1847-48, Mr. HUME moved the following resolutions :—" That it appears by the report of the luard of Audit that the expenditure for naval services for the year 1S-17-4S, per act of 10th and -1.1 th Vie-toria, c. 107, exceeded the grants (including appropriations in aid) voted by Parliament to the amount of 1323,787, 'ntHt the sum voted by Parliament for the formation of the dockyard battalions, in the year 1847-48, was £ 20,0u0, and the actual expenditure amounted 19. 3d.. being in excess ot the vote £ 52,399 19s. 3d., and forms part of the excess. That this house concurs in the opinion expressed" by the Lords of her Majesty's Treasury, 'that with regard to this large excess (for the dockyard battalions) the expenditure was entirely within the control or the Board of Ad- and that the proper course would have been to have post- pOllcd the enrolment of men beyond the numbers provided for by Parliament.' That 'when a certain amount ot expenditure for a particular service has been determined upon by Parliament, it is the bounden duty of the department which has that service under its charge and control to take care teat the expenditure does not exceed the amount pta-ed at its disposal for that purpose. 1 he hon. member said he would only notice one item, and that was No. 8, for wages of her Majesty's naval establishments at home. The excess under that head was mainly increased in consequence of the formation of the dockyard battalions £ 20,000 only was ,,(I asked tor, but 1:72,399 19s. iJd. was expended. When the excess was reported to the Treasury that board expressed their disappro- bation in the terms stated in his third resolution. It might be true that the Lords of the Admiralty had contemplated that not more than 3, j00 would be willing to be enrolled, but that number had amounted to 9.100 but the proper course in such a case would have been 1, to postpone the enrolment of men beyond the numbers provided for by ParIiament." He did not wish in bring- ing forward this motion to throw the slightest blame on the late noble lord the First Lord of the Admiralty, for whom lie had always entertained the highest respi ct. It was the result of the system, but in order to show that in future -they would keep [jje expenditure within the line laid down by Parliament, he called upon the House to gree to his motion. Sir W. swoiitti seconded the motion. Mr. WARD admitted it was a matter of regret that the Board of Admiralty did not obtain the previous sanction of Parliament; at the same time, there could be no design to deceive the douse, and he recommended Mr. Hume not to press h'.8 motion. Sir F. 13ARING said there was no difference upon principle be- tween Mr. Hume and himsdf; he concurred in the view taken by the Lords of the Treasury, but he after the exinanuty^ Mr. Hume would not think it necessary to interrupt the usual course of public business by pressing the resolution. Sir H. WILLOUGHBY, S,r G. CLERK, and Mr. HERRIBS sup- ported the motion, upon constitu'ional grounds. Lord J. KUSSELL thought, where there was so much unanimity of opinion, it would not be desirable to divide upon a resolution which, if carried, would convey a censure upon the late First Lord of the Admiralty. .Mr. HUME said his only object was to strengthen the hands of Government, and if Lord J. Russell would agree to the resolution being put upon the journals, he would withdraw his motion, and move the resolution immediately afterwards. 1. Lord J. RUSSELL replied, that the only objection he had, was a natter of feeling, with reference to the late Lord Auckland if the object was merely to enforce a constitutional check, he saw no ob- jection to the resolution. Mr. HEIUIIES disclaimed, amidst marks of general concurrence, any censure of Lord Auckland whereupon Mr. Hume withdrew hfe'motion, the vote of the Committee of Supply was agreed to. and the resolution of Mr. Hume carried item. con.

RATE-IN-AID (IRELAND) BILL. The adjourned debate on the second reading of this bill was re- sumed by Mr. NAPIER, who opposed the bill, arguing the subject, first, as a question of rating; secondly, as a question of taxation. Mr. Napier concluded an effective speech with an examination of the scheme of Sir R. Peel. pointing out some of the practical difficulties it would encounter. Sir H, PEEL, after paying a very high compliment to the able and temperate speech of Mr. Napier, said it was because he wished to make some observations upon the general social condition of Ireland, rather than upon the measure under consideration, that he rose at that moment. Having explained the motives of his former vote upon this question, and stated the position of Ireland with reference to the obligations she had contracted towards England, and the injustice which, in some respects, had been done to her, giving her credit for the fidelity she had shown generally to her allegiance in the recent outbreak, he laid down the broad doc- trine that it was the manifest interest of this country to mitigate the afflictions of Ireland and to provide a remedy tor her evils. 'He drew a picture of the social condition of the provinces of Con- naught and Munster, and the county of Donegal, at the present time, and, going back to the year 1844, before the famine, and during the system of protection, compared it with a corresponding description in Lord Devon's report of the miserable state of tne labouring poor. lie then read documentary evidence of the pro- strate condition of landed property and of nominal proprietors in Ireland in the same year—a state of things, he observed, which could benefit neither the landholder, the encumbrancer, nor the country. These evils had been fearfully aggravated by the famine, combined with the operation of the Poor-law and he showed the oppressive weight with which this law had fallen upon certain unions, whole baronies being alleged to be waste, and solvent estates becoming responsible for insolvent ones. What was to be the result of this state of thing,;? Every acre of land thrown out of cultivation exasperated the evil. A prosperous potato harvest would afford only a temporary relief, but would ultimately per- petuate the evil, which could only be cured by the gradual intro- duction of a cereal crop. By what means could this substitution, which must be a slow and difficult process, be effected P It was the interest of Great Britain, if Ireland manifested a disposition to make great exertions, to bear her portion of the cost of a vigorous effort to relieve the landed property of Ireland, especially that which was under the superintendence of the Courts of Chancery and Exchequer. He had, the ot her night, suggested a commission, and subsequent reflection had induced him to think this the best course. He would advise that the commission, to be appointed by the Crown, composed of men upon whom the Government could rely, should examine the state of the distressed unions on the spot, which would enable them to suggest practical measures of ame- lioration and he would place under the charge of the commis- sioners public works and all measures proposed for that object, and recommend to their consideration the policy of diminishing the pressure of distress, where there was a congestion of popula- tion, by a wholesome system of emigration. In his opinion, how- ever, all measures w< uld be ineffectual unless the monstrous evils arising from the condition of landed property were cured, and that it would be of inestimable advantage to Ireland, to the nominal owner, to the encumbrancer, and to everybody except the receivers of the Court of Chancery and the lawyers, if. consistently with equity, estates could be relieved of their encumbrances, by facili- tating their voluntary transfer to men of capital, within the just principles laid down by Lord Cottenham, by authorising the commissioners to sell estates in heavy arrear for Poor-rates. Sir Robert sketched, with more distinctness than he had before done, the outlines of his plan, and with respect to the Poor-law, he strongly recommended recurring to the wise principle of the Act of 1H38, restoring the local guardians and substituting the only effective test of destitution, that of the workhouse. Mr. It. A. S. ADAIR supported the bill. If he thought the rate would be extended beyond two years he would not support the measure; and he thought the country was entitled to all assurance that measures should be forthwith introduced that would mate- rially diminish the evils of Ireland within that period. Captain BATESON protested against this most unjust, impolitic, and unconstitutional measure. Ireland wanted a firm, vigorous, and honest Government, security for life and property, and a just Poor Law. w.th a law of settlement. Mr, GHATTAN opposed the bill, it being in evidence that the Poor Law had totally failed, and that this rate-in-aid would not meet the case. On the motion of Mr. BRIGHT, the debate was again ad- journed. The House adjourned at a quarter after twelve o'clock until Monday.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—MONDAY, APRIL 2. After a lengthy explanation between Lords HAHROWBY and EGLINTOUN respecting the sanitary and moral condition of the Poles domiciled in England, The Marquis of LUisDüwNEmoved the third reading of the Mutiny Bill. Lord BROUGHAM thought that he should be in order if he asked whether the Polish general who had acted as Commander-in-Chief of the ex-King of Sardinia's army had been recommended to fill that office by the British Government? The Marquis of LANSDOWNE replied, that neither the Polish general with the unpronounceable name, nor, m f ct, any one else, had ever been so recommended by the British Government. The Earl of ABERDEEN, considering the manifest partiality which had been shown for the King of Sardinia by the British Government, was not surprised that such a notion as that referred to by Lord Brougham had got abroad. He hoped that the Government would leave matters as they now tood, and run pro- long the war by any lurther attempt at mediation. Let the French Government interfere if it pleased but, for its to interfere, who had to complain of pledges unredeemed and treaties violated by Charles Albert, was an idea too monstrous to be seriously enter- tained, unless we intended to eiitel-taifi the wild notions oi M. Le- martine, that the treaties of lbli3 were for us no longer m ex- istence. The Marquis of LANSDOWNK repelled the charge of partiality towards the Sardinians brought by Lord Aberdeen against the Government, and begged the noble earl to wait until the papers relating to Italy were laid before the House. The Ea I of ABERDEEN warmly repeated his accusations against the Government. After some further discussion, in which the Earl of ELLEN- BOROUGH and End VITZWILUAM took part, Lord BROUGHAM reminded the House that they had wandered far from the order of the day, which wai the third reading of the Mutiny Bill. The order of the day was then read, and the Mutiny Bill, the Marine Mutiny Bill, and the Indemnity Bill were rtad a third time and passed. Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MONDAY, APRIL 2. A number of petitions, in favour of arbitration and various other subjects, were presented.

THE IRISH CHURCH. Mr. B. OSBORNE gave notice that lie should move shortly after Easter for a committee of the whole House to consider the tempo- ralities of the Irish Church.

COLONIAL POLICY. Sir W. MOLKSWORTH gave notice that immediately after Easter lie should submit to the consideration of the House a mo- tion on the subject of the colonial policy of the British empire (hear).

COLLECTION OF THE MALT-TAX. 10 answer to Sir E. BUXTON, who stated that there was great misapprehension respecting the cost of collecting the malt-tax, one journal having estimated the expense of collecting it at £ i ,5o0,' 00, The CHANCEI.I.OR <if tbeExCH gQUER stated, that according to the iast financial accounts the expense of collecting the whole ex- cise revenue of the country did not exceed £ 900,000. As far as could be a certained the estimated expense of collecting the malt- duty was .botit jCl88,000, certainly under 1:200,000. The net proceeds of the malt-duty for the last, tiiree years were, for 1846, 45,084,000 1^47, £ 4,450,0 JO 1848, X,5,225,000.

RUSSIA AND TURKEY. Mr. ANSTFY gave nouce that he should ask to-morrow whether any menaces had been uscd to obtain the admission of the Pussian fleet into the bus, horus, and whether the Government were pre- pared to I-esis- o gi,eat an ii-,t'i-action of e-xist i!ig ti-eai it s ? Lord PALMEUSTON said he might as well amwer the question now. Her Majesty's Goyernnent have the hest reason to fieliel-e that no such demand has been made by the Russian Government, and that the Russian Government have not demanded permission for a Russian squadron to pass from the B!ack Sea to the Medi- terranean.

PUBLIC BUSINESS. Lord J. RUSSELL, in moving a resolution with a view of acceler- ating the progress of public business, announce(1 the course wluch the Government intended to pursue with reference to various mat- tel's IIOW before the House. He proposed to take the Parliamen- tary Oaths Bill on the 30th of the present month. He should hope that the House would agree to the retort on the Navigation Bill that evening the third leading might then be taken immedi- ately after the Easter holidays, so that it might be fixed for the 23rd instant. He proposeu that the third reading of the Naviga- tion Bill should be taken on the 23rd of the piesent month. If the report on this bill did "not come on t)-iiiglit, he proposed to take it on Wednesday next, and be hud no doubt that this stage of the bill would be got through so as to enable the Government to take tiie third reading on the 23rd instant. With respect to the Rate- in-Aid Bill, he proposed to get a vote on account. The motion for the large grant of which he lwd given notice might give rise to very considerable discussion. One hon. gentleman had given notice of his intention to propose an alternative of an income-tax for Ireland. Such a proposition was likely to give rise to a debate, and it would be vpry inconvenient that this question should le proposed until after the Easter holidays. He should tnerefore pro- pose, if the bill were read a second tune that nigot, that tins alter- native of the income-tax should be taken oil going into committee on the 16th instant. WITH regard to the immedia-e relief given to Ireland, it was desirable it should be settled as soon as possible. Of course, he should wish these questions to be disposed of before he proceeded to those other measures which himself, or other mem- bers of the Government, might desire to produce after Easter. After an animated discussion, in which several members a part, tlie motion was agreed to.

SUPPLY. The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, and a vote of £;)0,000 for the new Houses of Parliament having been moved, Mr. OSBORNE said, he wished to draw the attention of the Chan- cellor of the Exchequer and the House to this vote. Already itus hid exceeded the estimate by £ 800,000. He hadjieard that these Houses of Parliament could not be finished under less than £ 3,500.0 0. Mr. HUME thought it exceedingly desirable that, before thf-y proceeded any further, the House should be provided with an esti- mate of the probable expense that would be required for complet- ing the works. Mr. GHEJBNE said, it was the earnest desire of the Commis- sioners to reduce the expenses as much as possible 'I lie expet;("I;- ture oil the building at present was about £ 4.000 a mouth, lind there was a sum of about ;CS,O(jo now due to the contractors, which oughttobepaiatorthwith The discussion was continued by Mr. SPOONKR. Sir H. WILLOUGHBY, and the CHANCELLOR, of the EXCHEQUER, and the vote was then agreed to. as was also a vote of £ i0,00.0 towaras defaying law charges, £5,0,)0 towards defraying the charge for consular establishments abroad, and towards the dLrge fur civii contingencies.

RATE-IN-AID (IRELAND) BILL. The adjourned debate on the second reading of this bill was then resumed. Mr. BltIGHT sad he had voted for a rate-in-aid in the committee and in the House, and he was prepared to justify that vote not only on the ground of a great emergency which must be met but chiefly Oil the ground that tha rest of the United Kingdom'had during the three last years, paid its own rate-m-aid for Ireland to a tar greater aniountthanthts rate would levy noon the rate- able property in Irelantl-tirst, from the general taxation of the i t, s empire; secondly, in the shape of large subscriptions from pri- vate sources and, thirdly, in very heavy local rates for the sup- port of pauperism which had cunningly escaped from Ireland to England. Tile Irlilladies of IreIard were not, howewr, to be cured by a Poor-law or a rate-in-aid. It the people could be set to work, they could support themselves if not, they must jjc sup- ported bytaxation,or left to starve. Land, labour, and capit. I were found m Ireland but the lalld was held under circumstances which required capital and labour, and con.equently that great raw material was bound up. Here was the great evil; what was the leiuedy ? 'I fie Government had proposed none. Sir K. Peel had suggested a p'an which, so far as he had developed u, ap(..erlnd rather vague and impracticable. The true remed es were, the re- moval by Parliament of every obstacle to the free sale and irmisfV r of land by prompt ard speedy process, a modification of ii,e landed tenures, and a judicious disposal of waste lands. The Maiquis of GUANBY opposed the measure, g between a Poor-rate as levied in England and one levied in Irp*- land, and showing the unequal operation of a rate-in-aid wltlluJt a lhw of settlement alld uuder a valuatiun so variable. Mr. C. KORTESCUE opposed the rate-in-aid because he preferred an Income-tax. This was a great national emergency, and every kind of property should contribute. Mr. DISRAELI said, he and his friends had always beeD rCIHIY to assist the Government in dealing with the Irish question, but they had required, as a primary condition, that they should come forward with some plan that would give an assurance to the coun- try that these temporary pruposals should not be continued fur ever. He addressed himself to the proposition before the llou e for what was called a national rate-in-aid. The first question was -is it an adequate proposition? It was avowedly inadequate. It was, moreover, impolitic, for it tended IO reduce capital in a country where capital was deficient, it lessened the stimulus-to selt-exi-rtion where self-exertion was essential, and it aggravatl d the unequal burdens under which lauded property was sinking. Besides oeing inadequate and impolitic, the measure as iilusoiy and essentially deceptive. He then criticised, in no favourable spirit, the revelations" of (Sir ltobert Peel, which he thought were not remarkable for novelty. He pointed out the fallacies which lurked under the scheme and the dangers which menaced it on every side, He then made a powerful attack upon the Irish Poor Law, which, as he showed, operated to prevent the outlay of capital upon the improvement of the land. He acknowledgt d that Ireland was bound to make an exertion on her own behalf, and lie was ready to support an income-tax, but in conjunction therewith, the workhouse test must be lesoited to, and the area of taxat,ulI under the Poor Law diminished. Lord J. Rossi LL, repeating that this was a temporary measure to cu.e an acute temporary evil, replied to the charge ofinjust.ee ob- jected to the rate by Mr. Lhsraeii, that it would not have been unju-t if the (jovermncnthad proposed to assimilate the taxation of Ireia d to that of England but it had appeared to then, that a rate of 6(i. on rateable property was the lighter buiden. If an income-tax were proposed, the Government would have no insuperable olree- tion to it. He vindicated the Government from back win d ness in br,nglllg forward remedial measures for Ireland, and by analogy with the cases-of Engiand in the (Uth century, and Scotland in 17th. he showed that. beneficial changes must be wrought, not by r any specific measures, but by giadually making men feel that itu'y were living in security, and by leading Ihein by easy and natural courses to seek their own prosperity. he described the depend state into which Ireland had been brought; and he jllstilied tJ; Poor Law as a step to improvement, it being a measure not only of humanity but of justice and he stated the changes he proposed to make in the law. He then approached the plan proposed by Sir R. Peel. A-commission, he observed, must either have compul- sory powers or be of a voluntary character. Sir Robert had re- ferred to (he Ulster plantation, but there was an obvious difference between the two cases. In the Ulster case, the land wa^ at the disposal of the Govet-iiiiiezit, iud people were not on the land in the presetil case, the land wits not in our power, and the were on the land. The noble lord entered at some length luCo an examination of the other parts of Sir Robert's plan, and with respect to the laws which encumbered the transfer of lauded property, he thought Parliament might deal with them but Uins must be done with due regard to the rights of propeity, or the measure would defeat its own object. Measures were in contem- plation for the relief of Ireland, but no general plan w ould satisiy those who asked lor "large and comprehensive measures," by which the evils of Ireland could be cuied. Many of ti.esc 'evils such as the cultivation of the potato in small patches, were beyond the reach of any Government; and he recommended the Ho lit*, with reference to this bill, to consider that the two kingdoms were' one united kingdom, aud not to forget that no nii,,f rlulle cvuid happen to one without being a deep calamity to the other. On the motion ot iir. J. O CONNELL, after some opposition, the debate was again adjounn d till Tuesday. The House adjourned at half-p^t twelve o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—TUESDAY, APRIL 3. After the Royal Assent was given by Commission to the Mutiny Bill, the Marine Mutiny Bill, the Indemnity Bill, the Larceny Acts Amendments Bill, and Waldo's Divorce Bill, and the trww- action of some unimportant bujiuess, the Hoiue adjourned" w Tiiursdaj, April 10th.