Symud i'r prif gynnwys
Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

2 erthygl ar y dudalen hon



ma majcMv s» government; lor aithollgn wilen HI "that house he had sometimes voted with them, he had frequently voted against them. Mr.Mitford had been offered to remain in etiice with the same emolument, but had chosen to retire. In conclusion .he-certainly considered Mr. Wood a more confiden- tial person than Mr. Mitford. After some observations from Mr. Cobbett, Mr. Splice. Mr. Hume, and Mr. Pryme, the discussion dr Spued. THE BEER BILL. Mr. WILKS rose for the purpose of putting; a question to the noble lord opposite, on a subject on "which he felt intensely interested. A bill had been introduced by the Secretary to the Treasury, on the subject 01 the beer laws, which would ooerate with great hardship on no less than 50,000 licensed vic- tuallers, and upwards of. 30,000 other persons, who in various parts of the country had embarked their capital and established themselves in the sale of beer; he hoped the noble lord and government would see the propriety of not pressing it forward till next session. If they did not accede to its post- ponement, he (Mr. Wilks) could not call the conduct I of government otherwise than indicative of the ut- most harshness and impropriety. Mr. S. RICE said the measure would not in any way affect the licensed victuallers; and expressed -a hope, that as the subject was appointed for con- sideration on Monday,thehouse would not now take up its time in needlesslv discussing it. o COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY. The house resolved itself into a committee of supply. c The sum of 45,8001. was apportioned to defray the salaries of the officers of the House of Lords, and the pensions of retired otlicers of that house. 26,'2001. was voted to defray the expenses of the Houses of Lords and Commons. 39.8001. was voted to make good the deficiency of the fee fund for the Treasury. 10,743'. were then voted to make good the defi- ciencv-iti the fee fund for the Home Department; and 13,40a. for the same fund in the Foreign Depart- ment. After a few observations from Mr. Hume, Lord Palmerston, Mr. Cobbett, and other hon. members, the following votes were respectively agreed to with- out discussion 12,275'. 12s. 3d., to make good the deficiency on the fee fund for the Colonial Depart- ment; 13,500'. for the fee fund of the Hon. Privy 'Council 2,000'. on account of salary to the Lord Privy Seal; 7,500/. for contingent expenses and inessen,ers' bills in the Treasury Department; 6,284?. for contingent expenses and messengers' bills in the Home Department; 39,600/. for contingent expenses and messengers' bills in the Foreign De- partment oG,000/. for contingent expenses and mes- sengers' bills for the Colonial Department; 5,453'. for contingent expenses and messengers'bills for the Privy Council; and 4,3661. for contingent expenses and messengers' bills for the First Lord of the Trea- sury, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, &c. The following sum, not exceeding 1,264/ to de- fray the expenses of salaries and allowances granted to certain professors in the universities of Oxford .and Cambridge was proposed. Mr. EVVART objected to the gran', on account of the exclusiveness of the universities. If Dissenters were admitted they would have much pleasure in agreeing to a much larger sum. Mr. S. RICE said that the admissibility of Dis- senters into those universities was the opinion he could not say of the majority, but of the great mass of the residents at the universities. It was a grow- ing opinion, and there was every probability before parliament met that it would be a matter of discus- sion in the universities. After some discussion between Mr. Potter, Mr. Hume and Mr. Tooke, the vote was agreed to. SECOND SITTING. Lord PALMERSTON, in reply to a question put to him said, he could not state when the Austrian troops would quit the Roman States and to another question, the nobLe lord answered that there was no law which prevented this country sending a diplo- matic representative to the Court of Rome. The house on the motion of Mr. S. Rice, imme- diately after went into a committee of supply. The sum of 1,5837. was voted to defray the ex- penses of the Alien Office. 8,600 was voted for the expenses of the Peniten- tiary at Milbank. 7,0971. was voted to d fray the expenses of the common law commissioners. 13,150'. was voted for discharging the salaries and expenses of travelling, &c. incurred by the Com- missioners of Inquiry into Public Chari ies. 5.5,9671. was voted for retired allowances to public servants. 39,400 was voted for defraying the expenses of secret services at home and abroad. 56,000/. was voted for prinring the acts of a par- 1 lament, reports, and other documents, connected with both houses. 89,6.54!. was voted for defraying the expenses of confining and maintaining convicts at home, and at Bermuda, and for clothing the convicts who were to be sent out to New South Wales. 17,,393/. was granted for defraying the expenses of the civil establishment in Western Africa. The Factory Bill was read a third time and passed, attei some verbal amendments were agreed to, and a clause added by way ot rider, to the effect that the children should have Good Friday and Christmas- day as holidays, and eight half holidays in the course of the year. STAMP ACT. Mr. HUME moved for leave to bring in a bill for repealing the 60th of Geo. III., one of the Six Acts. Lord ALTHORP objected to a bill of this descrip- tion being brought in at so late a period of the ses- sion. He could assure his hon. friend that he would take an early opportunity of bringing forward the question in the course of the next session. Mr. HUME said that, after the pledge given by the noble lord, he would not press the motion but in the mean time he hoped that the power vested in the government would be leniently exercised. Lord ALTHORP said it was already leniently exercised, and adverted to certain returns in proof of the fact. Sir R. INGLIS said he was sorry to hear this, as there were some publications which ought not to be treated with lenitv. Lord ALTHORP said that this was not a question as to the criminality of the publications, but as to the power vested in the Slamp Ofiice, of instituting prosecutions for breaches of the Stamp Act.—Adj. HOUSE OF LORDS, AUGVST 17. FACTORY BILL. Mr. Bernal and other members of the House of Commons, brought up the Factory Children bill. Read a first time, and referred to the consideration of a select committee.—Adjourned at two o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, AUGUST 17. On the motion of Lord ALTHORP, that the report of the committee of supply be brought up, Mr. WALLACE rose to say a few words on a state- ment made in the other house, the previous evening, by the noble duke, the Postmaster General, in which he was charged with a want of courtesy in bringing forward his motion respecting the Post-office regula- tions. That he was open to any such charge he begged most distinctly to deny—for no statement had he made which could not be proved by documents then in his hand. He believed there was no one in that house, or elsewhere, who could justly term any part of his conduct uncourteous or unkind and with respect to this particular motion, he did not bring it forward until he had written to the noble duke re- questing an explanation-the answer to which might have prevented the necessity of that motion, had any been received by him. Lord ALTHORP had not seen the statement to which the hon. member alluded, and he, therefore, could give no opinion upon it, but certainly on the morning before the hon. member brought forward his motion, his noble friend, the Postmaster General, had told him (Lord Althorp) that he had seen the hon. member, and had an explanation with him after which the noble duke did not expect the motion would have been made. Mr. WALLACE explained. Mr. HUME considered the whole matter originated in a mistake. The subject was then dropped. The order of the day for bringing up the report was then read. Mr. SINCLAIR expressed his surprise and regret that ministers should have deferred the estimates until such a late period of the session, when so very few members were in town. Mr. HUME also protested against such a practice, as also against the late hours at which the Esti- mates were moved, and expressed his determination not to let one shilling be voted, during the next ses- sion, after twelve o'clock at night. The report of the committee of supplv was brought up, and many of the resolutions were agreed to. On the vote of 20,0001. for the purpose of educa- tion, r r Mr. HUME said he certainly should object to this -vote, and should take the sense of the houseppon it. "*> it it was meant that a system of national education should be established, this sum was too small, and without SIlC a system, no grant at all ought to be ina e. Besides, the report of the commissioners on charities showed that a sum of 500.0001. was sppiica- ble to these purposes, and while that was so, he saw no reason tor coming to that house. Lord ALTHORP said that lie had the same wish to forward the system of na'ional education as the hon. gentleman, and therefore the question between them was simply this, which was the best mode of attaining their common object? There were many cases in which local education was prevented from the want of means to make a beginning. Seve- ral parishes would maintain schools, if in the first instance, they could be assisted with money to build the school house. It was to meet such cases that this vote was applied for. Mr. SIIAW objected to the vote, because he did not know what was the system of education to which the ministers meant to give their assistance. Sir R. INGLIS could not support any plan of edu- cation that was not based on the principles of the English Established Church. After some further conversation, in which Lord Morpeth, Mr. Estcourt, Lord John Russell, Mr. Aglionby, Mr. Cobbett, Mr. Murray, and Col. Evans took part, the house divided, when there appeared— l or tne grant 50 Against it 26 Majority.. 94 (ICELAND) BILL. Mr. LI1 1 LETON moved the order of the day for the house going into committee on this bill. Mr. HUME said they were now come to the point of time when they were to see what security had been provided lor ihe house and the country by the government, when it called upon them to grant the money asked for in the bill. As he intended that the people of England should have a lien and a se- curity to be paid at some future period from the Temporalities of the Church of Ireland, he should move that it be an instruction to the committee, To provide for the repayment of such parts of the money to be advanced under the authority of this bill as shall not be repaid by the persons entitled to re- ceive the tithes provided for by this bill, and that any balance of money unpaid, and due to the public shall hecome chargeable on the funds arising from the temporalities of the Church of Ireland. Mr. T. WALLACE seconded the amendment. The only thing that could prevent the bill from being a a great mischief was the amendment proposed by the hon, member for Middlesex. Lord ALTHORP said that he did not withdraw from the declaration he before made, that if there was not a reasonable prospect of repayment, the house ought not to pass the bill; but he thought he should be able to show that there was a reasonable prospect of repayment. What he had to show was, that the parties to whom the advance was to be made would have the means of payment. (Hear, hear, hear.) No doubt if the clergy had to apply to the same parties for payment as they did last year, the same results might be expected to follow but, under the permanent Ti'he Composition Act which passed last session, the clergyman would, in future, have to apply-not to the occupying tenantry, but to the leaseholders and owners of the land-persons in a situation of life well able to pay, and from whom payment could be enforced. It must be remembered that if those parties did not pay the clergyman, a receiver of their rents could be appointed till the amount legally due was paid. (Hear, hear.) He thought the proposed p an would be a very danger- ous one to adopt, and therefore he hoped the house would not accede to it. Mr. SHAW said, as the noble lord had declared he would not call on the house to adopt this motion unless he had the strongest grounds for believing that the loan would be repaid, he (Mr. Shaw) could not but say that he had not the slightest hope to that effect. He did not see how it was possible, under present circumstances to come to such a conclusion. It was unreasonable to suppose that what the govern- ment and the clergy acting in concert could not, on their own admission accomplish, should be effected by the clergy in different parts of the country single-handed and alone (hear) besides, all the arrears had been remitted the grant would ac' in fact, as a premium for resistance. He believed the noble lord to be incapable of practising a fraud on the house but it appeared as if he had shut his eyes to reason and common sense. The Church Re- form bill contained provisions with which he (Mr. Shaw) did not agree, but throughout its pages he saw, he thought, the spirit and disposition of a friend but every line of this bill, he must say, had, in his opinion, been penned in the feeling of the bitterest animosity to the interest of the Church of Ireland. He felt that he stood in a most painful situation, but was compelled to declare his full con- viction that the clergy would never accept a measure so inconsistent with their sense of honour, and so injurious to the interests of the church. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said the bill, so far from being a persecution to the clergy, had been intro- duced to relieve their distresses, which had been brought upon them, not for any fault of theirs, but arising from the agitation that prevailed in that eountry. (Hear.) Mr. AGLIONBY hoped the house would pause before it gave its consent to the measure for should it pass, he had no doubt it would be recorded in his- tory as one of the worst measures that had ever been enacted by a British legislature. On the motion ot Lord Althorp, the debate was then adjourned till Monday.—Adjourned. HOUSE OF LORDS, AUGUST 19. BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. The Bishop of ROCHESTER was anxious to call their Lordship s attention to a report of a vestry meeting, said to have been holden at the parish of St. Nicholas, Brighton, in which was a statement made by a Mr. English, which he would read. That person said that at Bayswater, or Broadwater, in the county of Kent, the Bishop of Rochester had been applied to, to consecrate a piece of ground, and he sent word that he would not do it unless he had 7 00/ (" cries ot shame, shame, shame," in the meeting, added the Right Reverend Prelate) but at last he consented to take five hundred pounds. I speak this from authority." Now he (the Bishop of Rochester) hoped he need not assure their lord- ships there was not one word of truth in the state- ment to which he had just called their attention (hear, hear,) for in the first place, there was no such place in his diocese as Bayswater or Broadwater, and in the next place no fees were paid to Bishops at all for such purposes. The Bishop of HEREFORD vindicated the epis- copal bench against the insinuation conveyed, and added that the bishops had in several instances to pay a large amount themselves in the shape of fees. The LORD CHANCELLOR thought the right rev. prelate was perfectly justified in complaining of the statement which he had read to their lord- ships. The charge, however, was absurd, for no such parish as that was to be tound in the right rev. prelate's diocess, nor from the nature of the case could it be true, for no fees whatever were exacted. No doubt, if any charge had been urged in former times, not quasi member of parliament, but quasi an individual, it was the practice to deal with it as a breach of privilege; but of late years the rule of privilege had been somewhat relinquished or con- fined, As he had before said, the right rev. prelate had acted most properly in bringing the matter be- fore their lordships. Lord WYNFORD said that the right rev. prelate could not have acted otherwise than he had with respect to the charge that had been made it was one of those infamous attacks which were so re- peatedly brought against some of that reverend bench. JAMAICA. The Earl of BELMORE, after some observations which were imperfectly heard in the gallery, begged to know whether there would be any objection to produce the copy of a despatch addressed by him to Viscount Goderich (the Earl of Ripon) dated 9th of April, 1832, together with certain papers annexed; also the copy of a despatch addressed to the Go- p vernor of Jamaica of the date of February 18, 1832 signed by Viscount Goderich, together with the reply, dated the 30th of that month, signed by him- self (Lord Belmore.) The Earl of RIPON said with respect t0 the despatch named by the noble earl, there was no ob- jection to its production he had not, however, had an opportunity of looking through all the indisuses. He would, however, give an answer to -morrow. With respect to the other despatches, he hoped the noble earl would not press for them. He (the Earl of Ripon) bore testimony to the zeal and ability with which the noble earl had carried on the government during the period that he was in that important situ- ation in Jamaica. SEPARATISTS' AFFIRMATION BILL. The Earl of GOSFORD moved the order of the day for the third reading of the above named bill. The Bishop of HEREFORD objected to the mea- sure. If the 23 congregations holding these tenets wished such a bill as the present, he saw no reason wiiv a measure should not pass of a more general character. He would move an amendment that the bill be read a third lime that day three months. The Bishop of CHICHESTER differed from his right reverend brother. He could not see upon what grounds their lordships could deny the measure, and he should therefore support it. Lord SUFFIELD supported the bill. The parties did not object to an oath, but they objected to the lonn prescribed by law, especially the latter part of it. Lord ELLENBOROUGH doub'ed whether, from the words of the bill, the Separatists could obtain 1 hat relief they sought. The Earl of GOSFORD thought the bill would lully answer the object sought. The Earl ot WlCKLOW said as there appeared to be doubts and difficulties respecting the probable operation of the bill it would be be better to post- pone the consideration of it, in order to amend it. The Marquess of CLANRICARDE supported the bill. The*?',ke °t WELLINGTON we unders'ood to support the bill. Lord PLI-TNKETT hoped their lordships would a-u •Vj,e,']) i*° Pass; not so much for the sake of the individuals themselves, as for the sake of public jus ice. It was impossible to compel those persons to take an oath, and their refusal was highly preju- dicial to public justice. Lord WYNtQRD thought that the question was surrounded with difficulties. He would be anxious ,0r 0,rrDrvParatists every relief in his power. • iffi • 'hough it was with regret he differed with ns right reverend relation, yet his sense of iinpera. lve duty compelled him to give the bill his most cordial support. A division then took place, when there appeared for the third reading- Contents 35 Non-Contents .16 -n Majority —19 'I'tie bill was ttiell read a third time. THE FACTORIES' BILL. The Duke of CUMBERLAND presented several petitions in favour of the Factories' bill. On the motion of the Marquess of Lansdowne, after a few words from Lord Auckland and Lord Eilenborough, the bill was read a second time, and was ordered to be referred to a select committee. THE CHINA TRADE. Lord ELLENBOROUGH, presented a petition from the merchants of the city of London concerned in the China Trade, complaining of the clause which inflicted a tax of 27,000/. annually for the support of consular officers in India, for a public service which would be well paid for at 5,0001. annually. The noble lord concluded by laying the petition on the table. Lord AUCKLAND said that he thought the most proper time to consider the clauses in the bill was when it had gone into committee. He therefore would move that the bill should be read a second time and committed to-morrow. The Marquess of LANSDOWNE then moved that the East India Charter bill should pass, according to an understanding upon a former day. ° The bill accordingly passed. GRAND JURIES (IRELAND) BILL. Upon presenting the report on this bill, The Earl of WICKLOW hoped that the qualifi- cation of magistrates, which had been the subject of recent amendments, might be withdrawn, and that the bill might be received as it came from the Commons. Lord MELBOURNE consented to this proposi ion. The report was then received, and the bill ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. COLONIAL SLAVERY BILL. The report of the Slavery bill was then taken into consideration. After some observations from Lords Eilenborough, Wynford, Ripon, Suffield, the Duke of Welling.on' and Earl Grey, there was some alteration made in the 10th clause, as to the removal of slaves from one estate to ano her, and agreed to. Lord SUFFIELD moved the introduction of a clause for the immediate aboli;ion of the whipping or indecently punishing female slaves, upon any pretence whatsoever, over the age of 12 years. After some remarks from the Earl of Belmore, the Earl of Ripon, the Duke of Wellington, and Earl S Vincent, Lord SUFFIELD agreed to withdraw the penalty in the clause. On arriving at the 53d clause, the intervenirtg clauses having been all agreed to with a few verbal amendments The Duke of WELLINGTON moved the omission ot the clause on the ground that it was altogether objectionable. Their lordships divided, when there appeared- Contents 20 Non-contents 31 n (U Majority for the clause —11 u re-admission of strangers, we tound- Lord WYNFORD declaring that from and after e 1st of August, 1834 no coffee, sugar, rum, or er produce raised in foreign colonies where slavery existed, should be admitted into any port of Great biitain. He thought such a provision was necessary for the protec ion of the West India colo- nies, where slavery was to be abolished by the bill. Earl GREY resisted the clause. The House of Commons would not he was convinced, agree to such an amendment. The Duke of WELLINGTON supported the clause. Their lordships then divided, when there appeared contents 17 Non-Contents 38 rn.. Majority against the clause —21 lie IHU was then read a third time, and passed. ^<s .^if. r8|^<ir.ti committee on the Royal Burghs (■ t an ) bill was brought up and agreed to.—Adj. HOUSE OF COMMONS, AUGUST 19. Mr. Alderman WOOD presented a petition, signed by upwards of 300 freeholders and electors of Can- terbury complaining of the dismissal of Mr. Charles Sandys trom the office of clerk to the visiting magis- trales by Sir Edward Knatchbull. The petitioners stated their belief that Mr. Sandys had been dis- missed on account of a difference of opinion between him and the committee of Sir Edward Knatchbull. Sir E. KNATCHBULL denied in the most positive terms, that Mr. Sandys had been dismissed for any electioneering purposes. All the facts of the case had already been fully detailed to the house on the presentation of a petition from Mr. Sandys by an hon. member, who was so convinced that the state- ments were not founded in fact, that he withdrew the petition. The whole allegations of the present pe- tition were wholly without foundation, and he trusted the hon. alderman would withdraw it. Col. EVANS concurred with the observations made by the hon. baronet, and firmly believed the case of the petitioners was founded in error. Mr. Alderman WOOD said he could not withdraw this petition, but leave the house to deal with it as it thought proper. The Marquess of CHANDOS hoped, after the satisfactory statement of the hon. baronet the wor'hy alderman would withdraw his petition.' The question was then put that the petition should lie on the table, and negatived without a division. Mr. K. TYNTE presented a petition from Chard, agreed to at a public meeting, for the establishment of courts of local jurisdiction; also one signed by 782 persons in the county of Somerset, praying for the repeal of the malt tax. ? r J b The Marquess of CHANDOS, in reference to the latter petition for the repeal of the malt tax, said he entirely concurred in its prayer. He had a petition in his possession from 2 000 farmers of the county of Bucks for the repeal ot the malt tax Mr. COBBETT said the malt tax had the effect of trebling the price of corn it brought in only about four and a half millions to the Exchequer while it caused the people to pay 13 millions. He hoped that the malt tax would be taken off very early in the next session. Colonel EVANS presented a petition from Hud- dersfield, respecting the case of Joshua Dobson of Huddersfield, who had been convicted of publishing a penny unstamped newspaper, called The voice of the West Riding ot Yorkshire," and thrown into prison in default of paying a penalty of 201. His hair had been cut off, he was compelled to wear the prison uniform, and he was refused (although in bad health) to be allowed the assistance of his friends or that they should send him food in'o the prison.' He had also been classed with felons and persons convicted of unnatural crimes. After some observations from the Solicitor- General, Sir E. Knatchbull, and Mr. Cobbett the petition was laid upon the table. Colonel EVANS then presented a petition fioin the inhabitants of St. Paul s Covent garden com- plaining of the operation of the land tax and its un- equal assessment. Mr. COBBETT said he had 18 petitions to present, the first was from Oldham, in which was expressed the grievous disappointment of the petitioners at the little good which had followed the Reform Bill. The remaining petitions referred principally to annual parliaments, vote by bailor, taxes, liquida- tion at the national debt, and matters of individual merest. The pefitions led to considerable discus- sion which produced no result. NJ I-. TOOKE presented a petition from Mr. Oxen- ham, a solicitor of Taunton, complaining- that a parcel of deeds which he sent by the mail had been opened and detained because there were two letters inside, which related to the deeds and other business between him and hisagrent. The hon. member read an opinion goat from Ilr. Follett, the barrister, stating that such letters might be sent if they only related to the busi- ness of the parties. He gave notice that early next session he would introduce a deiaratory bill to amend the 5th Geo. IV. chap. 20. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said there was no necessity for such a thiug. Mr, STANLEY said this case was one certainly ot great importance, and therefore he begged to make an explanation which had been furnished him by his nobl" friend, the Postmaster-General. It came to the knowledge of the Postmaster that many of the princi- pal coach-office bags were made up every day for the purpose of forwarding by coach paper parcels full of etters. Several ot't hese parcels had been stopped and sent to the Postmaster. One parcel was found to con- tain 42 letters, and another as many as 200. It was ascertained that a bag had been regularly made up at \T *J'oucester ai'd Bristol mail offices, on the 31st May, the day when the petitioner's letters were found; that bag containeJ sixty letters, and on the following day forty-two. They were in parcels of two, five, or six letters. On the 31st of May two let- ters were put into a parcel with some deeds by Mr. Oxenham, the petitioner, addressed to his corres- pondent in London; only one of the letters referred to the deeds, and the other to some other business. He could not see that the post office department could do fairer than select this case of Mr. Oxenham upon which to try the merits of the question but the house must bear in mind that this case was now in course of trial. Mr. O'REILLY trusted that parliament would never sanction the breaking open of letters, which, in hiM opinion, amounted to an infringement of private rights. It being three o'clock, the Speaker left the chair. SECOND SITTING. The house resumed at a quarter past five o'clock, when not above 20 members were present. WAYS AND MEANS Lord ALTHORP moved that 6,000.0001. be granted out of the consolidated fund for making good the deficiency in the ways and means. The Chairman having put the question, Lord ALTHORP, ill reply to Mr. Herries, said that the 12,000,0001. taken from the Consolidated Fund would be amplv met by the amount of revenue before the 5th of January next. The million to be granted to the Irish clergy was to be provided for by the issue of Exchequer Bills. In answer to questions from the same right hon. gentleman, the noble lord stated when he brought forward his budget that the income of the last year was 45,438,1881. The taking off of the house tax would however reduce it to 45,038,1881. The charge on the consolidated fund he estimated at 30,300,000/ The amount of supplies at 14,620,487^ making a total of 44 920,487l. leaving a surplus of 117,7001. He admitted that such a surplus as this in ordinary years would be too small, but he was satis- fied that from the saving effected this year, there would be no deficiency in the revenue. He said this from the returns made up to the 5th July. The grounds upon which he rested his statement respect- ing this surplus arose from the returns of the two quarter days, ending 5th of April, which gave a return of 1,487,1431. whilst the same return up to the 5th cf July, gave a return of 1,501,9331. making a difference of increase in our favour of 14,7901. Now bringing the matter to the nearest point up to which the revenue returns could be made, namely, the 11th of August, it appeared that the whole amount of supply in 1832 was 20,298,837/. and in the year 1833, 19,953,5371. making a difference in this year of 34,5,5001. But the income last year was 15,458.2321., whilst in August, 1833, it was but 15,220,2481., there was therefore a falling off in this department of the revenue, a circumstance which he attributed to a diminution of taxation; and a!though there was upon the face of the return a loss to the extent of 147,9841. there was yet an increase in point of fact to the ex- tent of 217,3161., a circumstance which he attributed to the lessening of the expenditure in the latter year as compared with the former. After a few observations from several hon. members the resolution was agreed to, and the report ordered to be received on Tuesday. BANK CHARTER. On the motion for the third reading of this bill, Mr. COBBETT said that as he believed that this bill would be injurious to the country, he rose to move that it be read a third time this day six months. His objection to the bill applied to the legal tender clause, because it placed a Bank note upon the same level as the current coin of the realm. The noble lord would have no control over the Bank as to the issue of Bank paper, and the result of all this would be to lower the value of money, and to raise prices. In the same degree that this bill would give relief, it would also produce great danger. It was an effort to relieve the people-but it was only making the oppression still greater. The bill would also facilitate forgery. Mr. CLAY seconded the motion, and said, that he agreed generally with the view taken by the hon. member for Oldham. If the noble lord persevered in that part of the bill which went to make bank notes a legal tender, he did not doubt but it would bring on the country wide spreading distress bv the increase of importations, and the consequent fall of prices. He was quite certain that no secure advantage was to be enjoyed from a large paper circulation, without an instant convertibility. He should give his decided support to (he amendment. Mr. FRYER should advise his Majesty's govern- ment to issue a large quantity of silver money in crown pieces to be prepared against the withdrawal of gold. If notes were to become a legal tender, the corn laws ought to be repealed. Mr. HERRIES said if the clause in the present bill was intended to grant the power to establish banks under the sanction of parliament, consisting of more than six partners, within 65 miles of London, then the question would arise whether or not this was not a sanctioning of joint stock companies. If the clause bore this construction, he certainly thought it would be an interference with the existing law, and he hoped it would be altered so as to avoid such interference. Lord ALTHORP denied altogether that the effect of making bank notes a legal tender would be to de- preciate the value of the currency. He was sorry to be obliged in any way to detract from the value of the prophecies of the honourable member for Oldham (Mr. Cobbett), but he thought he had read somewhere a prophecy, that whenever the Bank of England came to pay in specie, the prophet would submit to be broiled upon a gridiron. It did not at all strike him that the making notes a legal tender would extend the circulation of the bank, nor did such appear to be the opinion of the Court of Directors themselves. The ATTORNEY GENERAL said the 6th of Ann recognized the existence of private banks of issue, con- sisting of any number of persons, and therefore it was that Parliament then interfered to stop the issue of paper by a bank, when there were more than six partners. It appeared clear to him that there was nothing at any time to prevent those joint stock com- panies being formed, and the Bank of England could therefore have no right to claim such an enactment now. Alderman THOMPSON said that he thought the house ought to have acted in accordance with the opinions of Sir James Scarlett and Sir E. Sugden, and to have protected the rights and privileges of the Bank rather than enact a clause declaring that no such privileges existed. Mr. G. WOOD said a few words in support of the clause. Mr. M. ATTWOOD said, that by altering the legal tender of the country this bill went to disturb all the contracts that had been subsisting for years. The only excuse for those who had introduced this measure was, that the multiplicity of business with which they were overwhelmed left them no lime to bring such a measure as this to it proper maturity. The effect of the measure of the uoble lord would be to create finan- cial confusion, and commercial distress and difficulty. But he should vote for the third reading of the bill, not because he approved of the measure, but because he felt that bad as it was it would be better to pass it rather than leave the question in an unsettled state. After a few words from Mr. Hume, Mr. Pryme, and Mr. Hawes, the house divided, when there appeared, For the third reading Against it 23 Majority • • —?2 Mr. G. WOOD moved for a clause to guard against any claim for compensation on the part of the Bank, if at any time during' the continuance of the charter, Parliament should think fit to repeal or modify the enactment making the Bank of England notes continue a legal tender, also that so long as the Bank of Eng- land notes continue a legal tender, the Bank shall b.: required to continue branch banks for purposes of business, at convenient stations, in different parts of the kingdom. Mr. COBBETT seconded the motion. Mr. P. Thomson, Mr. Alderman Thompson, aud Mr. M. Attwood opposed the clause The house then divided when there appeared— For the ciause 19 Against it 98 Majority. -79 The bill was then passed. Mr. LITTLETON moved the order of the day for the adjourned debate on THE TITHES (IRELAND) BILL. Mr. HUME moved that it be an instruction to the committee that such sums as should be left unpaid of the million advanced to the Irish clergy should he made good out of the temporalities of the Irish Church. The house divided, when there appeared — For the amendment. 42 Against it 69 Majority —27 The house then went into committee on the bill. On the motion that the 19th clause should be agreed to, which refers to the repayment of the money advan- ced by government to the clergy, Mr. JONES moved a proviso to the effect, that no landlord-who had agreed to any composition should be liable to the instalment set forth in the bill, Mr. LITTLETON had no objection to the proviso, which was agreed to, and the clause passed. The other clauses of the bill were also agreed to, the house resumed, and the report was ordered to be received this day. Upon the motion of Mr- P. Thompson the Cholera Prevention Bill was brought up, and read a first and second time, and ordered to be committed to-morrow. HOUSE OF LORDS, AUG. 23. The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a petition from Lancashire against the Factories Bill. SLAVERY ABOLITION BILL. On the motion of the Earl of Ripun this bill was read a third time and passed. On reading the order of the day for the second reading of the Irish Catholic Marriage Bill, Lord Wynford and other noble lords opposed the bill, which was read a second time. On the motion of Lord Auckland tbe China Trade Bill was referred to a committee, after Lord Eilenbo- i-ough had opposed the proposition for the house doing so. The several clauses were agreed to, and the bill ordered to be read a third time 011 Wednesday. The other business having been disposed of the house adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, AUGUST 20. On the further consideration of the Irish Grand Juries bill, Mr. O'REILLY said that until the time should arrive that the house could prevent the packing of Juries in Ireland, the bill would be worse than useless. He therefore proposed that the bill should be further proceeded with this day six months. This amendment, after some discussion, led to a division, when the numbers were— For the Amendment 6 Against it 41 Majority -35 After some further conversation, the several clauses of the bill were agreed to, the bill ordered to be en- grossed, and read a third time this day. The Cholera Prevention bill was forwarded a stage. The Appropriation bill was brought in and read a first time. The Tithe Suits' Suspension bill was read a second time and committed. A return of the pensions granted by the East India Company to officers belonging to their commercial marine was presented to the house, and oadered to be printed; and, it being three o'clock, the Speaker quitted the chair. SECOND SITTING. Lord ALTHORP presented a petition from certain debtors confined in the King's Bench prison, praying 'hat the privilege of granting the rules should be taken from the Marshal and placed in the hands of the Secretary of State. On the report of the Irish Tithe bill being brought up, Sir E. KNATCHBULL expressed his opinion that the money to be taken from the people of England by this bill would never be repaid. Mr. LYNCH W8 of opinion the money advanced under this bill might be said to be the purchase money of peace for Ireland, for a titne at least- Mr. COBBETT supported the grant. The question was whether money or bayonets should be sent into Ireland. Mr. RUTHVEN reminded the house that the se- curity for the repayment of the money was the lands of Ireland, but those lands were in the possession of eight millions of men, who considered the grant as extravagant, wanton, and unnecessary The report was agreed to, aud the bill ordered to be read a third time on Wednesday. The Irish Grand Juries bill was read a second time. On the motion for the second reading of the Sale of Beer Licenses Bill, 0 Mr. WARBURTON opposed the bill, and moved as an amendment that it be read a second time this day six months. J Aftersome discussion theamendment wasnegatived, the bill read a second time, and committed for that day month.-LThus the bill is in fact lost for the present session.] r Colone4 WILLIAMS moved for leave to bring in a bill to repeat the Royal Marriage Act. Lord ALTHORP urged the advanced period of the session as an objection to so important a bill being brought forward. & The gallant Colonel consented to withdraw his motion for the present. T, JfJPP 0F LORDS, AUGUST 21. The LORD CHANCELLOR delivered their Lord- ships' judgment in the important case of Hullett v. the King of Spain. j1u^^raent °f the house affirmed the decision of the Courts below. The Lord Chancellor gave limited costs, not exceeding 260/. The Cholera Preventive bill was read a second time, and went through a committee. The other bills before the house were forwarded a stage. HOUSE OF COMMONS, AUGUST 21. Mr. LITTLETON moved the third reading of the Irish Trial of Offences bill. Mr. O CO RNELL opposed the measure, and con- tended that there was no necessity whatever for its adoption. He moved that the bill be read a third time this day three months. Mr. LITTLETON defended the bill. After some discussion, the house divided- For the Amendinant 15 Against it 01 Majority —46 The bill was then read a third time. The house went into a committee on the Irish Jurors bill. The clause which gave power to the Sheriff to insert the names and residences of persons qualified to serve as jurors, was strongly objected to by Mr. Wallace, Mr. O'Connell, and Mr. Sergeant Perrin, on the ground of its giving too great a discretionary power to the Sheriff, and Mr. LITTLETON expressed his readiness to ex- punge the clause altogether from the bill (loud eheer- iug from the Irish members). The remaining clauses of the bill were agreed to, and the report will be brought up this dayT. On the proposition for the third reading of the Irish Tithes Arrears bill, Mr. HUME asked whether there would be any ob- jection to making church property liable to the repay- ment of the money to be advanced by the public under this bill. Mr. LITTLETON replied that he could not consent to the introduction of any such provision. Mr. HUME said he would then move that instead of now, the bill be read a third time this day six months. The amendment was seconded by Mr. Sinclair. Mr. O'CONNELL supported the bill, for which he offered his most hearty thanks to the Ministry; he hailed it as the commencement of pacification for Ireland. Sir R. INGLIS said he feared it was calculated to do more harm than good. Mr. SIIAW thought the bill was calculated to do great mischief to the church of Ireland- Mr. W A RB URTO N said that the most convenient mode would be for the member for Middlesex to withdraw his opposition to the third reading of the bill, and divide the house upon bringing up his proposed clause. Mr. HUME consented to this arrangement, the bill was read a third time, and the hon. member then proposed hIs clause for making church property liable. Upon this the house divided-tor the clause 27, against it 47, thus negativing *he clause by a majo-ity of 20. The bill was then pas3ed, and the several other bills before the house having been forwarded a stage, the house at four o'clock adjourned until Thursday.