For sent mode of cultivation, and the profits | the Church absolutely at the mercy and arising from it; but ten thousand circum-discretion of those who felt conscientious stances would induce the occupier to scruples in opposition to it. It would give up the present mode of cultivation, be most extraordinary if those persons and adopt some other. If land went out who scrupled to pay tithes at all, were to of tillage, and the rent fixed when it was sit in judgment to decide on the amount in tillage was still payable to the tithe- which was to be allowed in all cases. owner, the farmer and the land-owner these reasons he should move-“That must be ruined. If tithes had been com- the Bill be read a second time this day muted for a fixed rent within the last five six months." years, so many farms had gone out of cultivation, that numbers would have been ruined. It appeared by the provisions of this Bill, that a certain modus was to be paid on arable, pasture, and wood land; the first of one-fifth, the second of one-eighth, and the last of one-tenth. Such a system he did not think exactly fair to either of the parties concerned, on account of the fluctuation in the value of produce. He was most anxious that the Church should not reap too much advantage from any great outlay of capital on the improvement of land, and the consequent increase of crops; but, at the same time, he did not see any reason why the tithe-owner should not have his share of such advantage as well as the land-owner. He strongly objected to this measure, because he could not view it as commutation, but as the destruction of tithes. He felt the utmost respect for the opinions of those who differed from him with respect to religious tenets; but still he must say, that he could not, in a question of tithes, allow sectaries of every class to interfere, which, by the provisions of this Bill, they would be permitted to do. Quakers, who, from a conscientious feeling, objected to the payment of tithes, would, by this Bill, be permitted to decide in tithe questions on their affirmation. It appeared also, that where any dispute occurred, an umpire might be nominated. By whom was that individual to be appointed? Not by the Lord-lieutenant, or the Magistrates assembled in sessions, but by the parishioners convened in vestry, where all were to have a right to vote. The whole matter was left in the hands of the parishioners, who had clearly an interest in appointing a partial individual. Then it might be supposed, that there was some appeal from the judgment of this umpire; but there was no such thing-his judgment was to be final and conclusive. He conceived, that this measure was a direct attack on Church property-first, by commuting it for less than it was worth; and secondly, by placing the whole rights of The Earl of Carnarvon expressed his conviction, that if the present Bill were passed, many of the clergy throughout the country would be placed in a most unpleasant situation. The question of commutation, their Lordships must feel, was surrounded with very great difficulties, and ought to be approached with the utmost caution and deliberation. Still, though he did not approve of this Bill, be thought that some measure, tending to calm those angry feelings which the difficulties of the times and the distress which prevailed in the country had induced, ought to be brought forward. Instead of arguing this question at present, he conceived, that it would be better if noble Lords gave their cordial assistance in perfecting the bill of the most rev. Prelate, which, he conceived, was calculated to do much good. Hereafter they might, with calm and mature consideration, adopt some measure of a more permanent nature. He hoped, therefore, that the Bill of the noble Lord would not now be pressed. The measure proposed by the most rev. Prelate, when it was duly arranged, and its principle was clearly understood, would, he was convinced, be most beneficial to churchmen and laymen. If they were to sit to that protracted period which it was likely the Session would reach-if they were called on to decide upon measures of great importance, which must occupy much time, and must demand great and serious deliberation-in that case he thought that, before they were prorogued or adjourned, it would be desirable to adopt some measure to allay those feelings of discontent which prevailed in the agricultural districts. The Archbishop of Canterbury hoped that the noble Lord would withdraw the Bill. If he did not, although the great | respect which he had for the noble Lord would make him take such a step with regret, still he should feel himself compelled to give his decided negative to the motion. The Bill which he had had the timate success; but if his noble friend persevered, he should feel himself compelled to vote for the postponement. honour of introducing, and which had been | read a second time, rendered the Bill of the noble Lord in a great degree unnecessary. The measure now before their Lordships professed to give to the clergy one-fifth, one-eighth, and one-tenth, with reference to different portions of land. But, in fact, it did no such thing, because rates must be deducted out of the amount so paid. Earl Grey also recommended his noble friend not to proceed with the present Bill, until the bill of the rev. Prelate should have been disposed of. He only recommended, that his noble friend should withdraw, not abandon his Bill. He was friendly to the most rev. Prelate's bill, the principle of which, as well as the details, he much admired, and believed that it would produce most beneficial effects. That bill was not intended to make an alteration in Church property · it was strictly a bill of regulation. He thought it was likely, by means of composition and commutation, to remove the differences Lord Dacre, under these circumstances, consented to withdraw the Bill for the present. In doing so, however, he must declare, that he would introduce it again, or some similar measure, if the bill of the most rev. Prelate was not found to answer the expectations of noble Lords. Bill withdrawn. HOUSE OF COMMONS. MINUTES.] New Writs moved for; by Lord KILLEEN, for the County of Meath, in the room of Sir Marcus Somerville, Bart. deceased. By Mr. PRINGLE, for Peebles, in the room of Sir George Montgomery, Bart. deceased. New Members. Sir R. RAWLINSON VYVYAN, Okehampton; JAMES BROUGHAM, Esq., Winchelsea; J. HEYWOOD HAWKINS, Esq., Tavistock; HENRY FREDERICK STEPHENSON, Esq., Westbury. Bills brought in. By Mr. SPRING RICE, to provide the Queen with Dower, if she survive the King. By Mr. MOORE O'FERRALL, to Embank Rivers in Ireland. which so frequently arose between parish- Returns ordered. On the Motion of Mr. MULLINS, the On ioners and their pastors. If those differences could be removed for ever, in the words quoted by the noble Lord on the Woolsack, it was 66 a consummation devoutly to be wished;" but every noble Lord who had turned his attention to the subject must be aware, that these difficulties were of too great magnitude to be surmounted by a single measure. The bill, however, by enlarging the time for the composition of tithes, and by giving security for their being paid, would in some measure remedy the evil. those grounds he agreed with the noble Earl (Carnarvon) that it would be advisable for the noble Lord to abstain from proceeding with the present Bill, in order that the bill of the rev. Prelate might be furthered with the least delay possible, particularly as that bill would be a step towards the attainment of his own object. He hoped, that the bill of the rev. Prelate, emanating as it did from the Church, would put an end to those unjust reflections on the Church, as if its members were always unwilling to make any sacrifices for the good of the community. The most rev. Prelate had proceeded with proper caution, and had produced a bill which was certainly the more practicable of the two, and he should therefore give it his utmost support. He hoped his noble friend, therefore, would withdraw his motion, even with a view to to its ul number of Freemen created in each Town in Ireland, sending Members to Parliament, from the 1st of April to the 28th of July, in the present Year, distinguishing those who were entitled to their Freedom as of Right. Petitions presented. By Mr. ADEANE, from Royston, against the use of Molasses in Distilleries. By Mr. SADLER, from the Cotton Weavers of Haslingden, complaining of Distress, and praying for a protecting duty on the Exportation of Cotton Yarn; from W. Parker, of West Passage, Ireland, for the Home Employment of able-bodied Poor, in preference to Emigration; and from the Protestant Inhabitants of Shivel, to extend the Elective Franchise to Catholics, Galway. By Mr. C. W. WYNN, from the Freeholders and Occupiers of Lands, County Caernarvon, that the Right of Voting may be extended to them, at the same Rate of Qualification as Householders. By Mr. BENETT, from Inhabitants of Chippenham, against Reform. By Mr. COURTENAY, from Ship Owners Trading to the Cape of Good Hope, against any Increase in the Duty on Cape Wines. By Mr. MORE O'FERRALL, in favour of the Embankment of Rivers Bill, (Ireland); from Proprietors and Land Owners of Street, of Granard of Killucan, and the Barony of Farbill. Lord CONDUCT OF COMMITTEES.] Morpeth presented a Petition from certain Subscribers to the Leeds and Manchester Rail-road, praying that the Bill for completing the Leeds and Manchester Railroad Bill might be re-committed. The petitioners complained, that a Committee in the first instance had declared, that the preamble of the Bill had not been proved, it not having paid a due attention to the evidence, which the petitioners were prepared to maintain had fully borne out the allegations of the preamble. But he should bring the subject better before the House by reading the petition than by any other means. It was as follows: "To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled. "The humble petition of the undersigned persons, being subscribers to the proposed Manchester and Leeds Rail-way, "Showeth,-That, on the 22nd day of June last, a petition was presented to your honourable IÏouse, praying for leave to bring in a Bill for making a rail-road from the town of Manchester, in the county palatine of Lancaster, to Sowerby-bridge, in the West Riding of the county of York; being the first step towards the completion of the undertaking. That such Bill was accordingly brought in, and read a first time on the 24th of June last, and was read a second time, and committed on the 28th day of June last. That the Committee on such Bill met on the 4th day of July instant, and sat to receive evidence in support of the preamble of the Bill for several days; and whilst the case of your petitioners was proceeding, the Committee intimated to your petitioners' counsel, that they were satisfied that sufficient evidence as to trade and population had been already given. That the said Committee, after bearing evidence in opposition to the said Bill, came to a vote and decision on the 12th day of July instant, that the preamble of the Bill was not proved. That your petitioners beg leave to represent to your honourable House, that many Members of the said Committee, who were not present on the day when the before-mentioned intimation was given, and who had not heard the whole evidence, as well as some other Members who had heard no portion of the evidence adduced on the behalf of or in opposition to the Bill, remained in the room whilst the votes were taken on the preamble of the said Bill. That your petitioners respectfully submit, that the evidence given in support of the preamble of the Bill fully established the allegations thereof; and your petitioners beg leave to refer to the minutes of the Committee on the Bill, for evidence given in support of the preamble of such Bill, in full confidence that an examination and consideration of such evidence will show, that the evidence adduced on the behalf of the promoters of the Bill did fully and satisfactorily establish their case. That your petitioners respectfully beg leave to object to the vote and decision of the said Committee, upon the ground, that such vote and decision are in direct opposition to the evidence given before such Committee. Your petitioners, therefore, humbly pray, that the said Bill may be recommitted, or that a Committee of Appeal may be appointed upon the said vote and decision of the said Committee on the Bill; and that your petitioners may be heard by their counsel or agent against such vote and decision before such Committee of Appeal, or that they may have such other relief in the premises as to your honourable House may seem meet." The House would see, therefore, that the petition contained imputations on the character and conduct of one of its Comcall the attention of the House to the fact mittees. He wished, most respectfully, to of Members voting in the Committee, who had heard none of the evidence. It was at all times irksome to him to throw any reflections on the character of any Gentlemen, particularly Members of that such a proceeding as deciding an importHouse; but he could not avoid saying, that ant question without hearing the evidence, was most improper. Rail-roads were coming most extensively into use, and a vast deal of capital was employed in constructing them. The noble Lord was proceeding to discuss the merits of the petition, when Mr. C. W. Wynn suggested, that no further discussion should then take place. The petition ought first to be placed in a printed form in the hands of Members. Petition to be printed, and considered on some future day. CORN LAWS.] Mr. Evans presented a petition from the inhabitants of Leicester, for the repeal of the Corn-laws, which the petitioners characterized as productive of distress to the artizans and working classes, and, consequently, very injurious to the trade and commerce of the empire. In this opinion he fully concurred. Mr. Wynn Ellis supported the praver of the petition, in conformity to the wishes of his constituents: at a more convenient opportunity, which he hoped would shortly be afforded, he should offer his opinion of the impolicy of these laws. Sir F. Burdett said, that as the petitioners had requested him to support the prayer of this petition, he would state, that he considered the existing system of Corn-laws to be as disadvantageous to the landlords as they were to the people at large. The petition to be printed. REFORM PETITIONS.] Mr. Hunt presented a Petition from 6,000 inhabitants of Huddersfield, praying that they might be Represented in Parliament, that the system of Preston, or Universal Suffrage, should be adopted, and that the suffrage should be taken by ballot. The petitioners were much pleased when the noble Lord first brought in the Bill, but finding that it did not extend to them, they thought they should be wanting to themselves not to petition for the extension of suffrage to them. Sir E. Sugden called the attention of the House to this circumstance, that Ministers called their present Reform Bill a final measure, and that petitions were daily presented to the House from large masses of the people complaining that they were excluded under it from the elective franchise. Mr. O'Connell said, that though these petitions might be against the measure, there were twenty to one of the people throughout the country in its favour, and one hundred to one opposed to the present system. stated, but feeling deeply interested in the success of the question, he had taken the liberty of throwing out a suggestion to the King's Government, of the absolute necessity of coming to some such arrangement. Mr. C. W. Wynn submitted, that it was quite impossible that any such arrangement as that which the hon. member for Westminster had just suggested, could be carried at present into execution. There were many election committees now sitting, and the Members who were ballotted to serve upon them were compelled by law to give their attendance at ten o'clock in the morning. How, therefore, could such Members be present at a discussion of so much importance as that on the Reform Bill? Lord Althorp assured his hon. friend, the member for Westminster, that the Government, seeing the length to which the discussions in the Committee on the Reform Bill were likely to run, had taken this very suggestion into consideration. He thought that nothing had, at present, occurred which would justify such an extraordinary departure from the customs of the House as the sitting at ten o'clock in the morning. Still, he would say, that if any delay were to be so wilfully created as to make it likely that this all-important Bill would be defeated by the lapse of time, it would be the duty of the House to take measures to expedite the progress of business. With regard to the Committees sitting on election petitions, he admitted, that if those Committees were to be ballotted for, the objection which his PROCEEDINGS ON THE REFORM BILL.] Mr. Hobhouse, on the motion being made that this petition be printed, rose to ask the noble Lord below him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), whether it would not be advisable to extend the hours of the House's sitting, in order to expedite the important business then before it. Could not the House meet at ten o'clock in the morning, as the House of Lords did during the continuance of the Queen's trial? It would be impossible, he was afraid, to go on without some measure of this nature; for notice had been already given of twenty-three or twenty-four Amendments to be proposed in the Bill, which, if no debate were to take place upon the clauses, must occupy at least three weeks in the discussion. That being the case, and wishing for a full deliberation of this great ques-right hon. friend had just raised to the tion, and not wishing for the occurrence of any delay that the country could justly complain of, he thought that the House ought to depart from its usual rules, and to meet at a much earlier hour of the day. As the Bill had now got into the Committee, there was not the same objection to this proposal as there might have been at another time. By having one Chairman to sit in the morning, and another to sit in the evening, the business now before the House might easily be disposed of. By this arrangement, the Speaker would be enabled to devote his valuable time to the other business of the House, as he would only have occasion to take the Chair in the morning, until the House went into Committee. He would not make a motion to the effect which he had just House commencing its sitting at ten o'clock in the morning was perfectly insurmountable. There might, however, be circumstances which would render it desirable to make an alteration in that respect. He repeated his conviction, that nothing had yet occurred in the House which would justify him in acceding to his hon. friend's suggestion; still he would not go the length of asserting, that circumstances might not occur which would induce him to accede to it. Colonel Davies thought, that the proposition of the hon. member for Westminster was one which the House ought instantly to adopt. Judging from the little progress which had been made in the Bill during the past week, he would say, that, instead of three weeks, six months would not see them at the close of the discussion upon it. Though he felt no less willing from inclination, than from duty to his constituents, to remain at his post in that House, he was afraid that many Members would be wearied out by the vexation and the delay. Besides, the country would grow impatient, and would think, that the parties who had the management of the Bill were not sincere, if they always kept moving without making any progress. He hoped, that his noble friend would take this suggestion into his consideration. The decision on the election petitions might be postponed without inconvenience or expense to any person, except in one or two of the earliest cases, in which the witnesses were, perhaps, in town. Sir E. Sugden asserted, that what had just fallen from the noble Lord (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had the appearance of a threat to the House, which he had not expected from such a quarter. The noble Lord had said, that circumstances had not yet occurred which rendered the adoption of such a course necessary; but he had suggested, that if the progress of the Bill were further delayed, such a course would be followed. He did not wish to misrepresent the noble Lord, but he understood him in that sense. The noble Lord had said, that nothing had yet rendered the course suggested by the hon. member for Westminster necessary; but that, if any thing did render it necessary, he would unquestionably adopt it. One word as to the observation of the hon. member for Worcester, that despatch was necessary in order to satisfy the people of the sincerity of the parties who joined in the discussion of this Bill. Now, if there was one thing more to be deprecated than another in the discussion of this measure, it was the introduction of haste, and of any thing like a pressure on the House from without. That House, as at present constituted, how it might be hereafter constituted was a very different question, but the House, as at present constituted, consisted of individuals of all classes and professions in the country. There were many members of the profession to which he had the honour to belong, who were also Members of the House. They could not attend at ten o'clock in the morning. Was it intended to disqualify them, and others in similar situations, from attending their duties in Parliament? or was it intended to compel them to give up all their other occupations for the performance of their public duty alone? It appeared to him that the measure was proceeding through the House with all possible haste. It had been proposed, that they should have, in future, two Speakers, one to sit by night, and the other to sit by day. Were they, then, determined to sit by day as well as by night? If so, that would be a novelty as great even as the existence of a reformed Parliament; and to enable them to go on with it, they must get, not a new Constitution for the country, but a new Constitution for themselves. Or were they to have two sets of Members? If they had not, he did not know how the work which the hon. member for Westminster had cut out for them could be got through. He, for one, had not strength for it; he could not sit in the House any longer than he did at present; he came in at its first meeting, and remained till its rising, from a wish to perform his duty honestly by his country in this important crisis. With a view to the favourable reception of the Bill in the country, the noble Lord could not inflict a greater injury upon it than by forcing it precipitately through the House. Instead of exciting and agitating the people more and more every day, let the House and the Ministers pause, and give them time for a fair, a calm, and a dispassionate investigation of this measure. Lord Althorp appealed to the House whether he had said any thing which could justify the extraordinary speech of the hon. and learned member for St. Mawes? He meant no threat, nor had his words implied a threat. He had said before, and he would repeat the observation, that he had not seen any such loss of time yet occasioned to the Committee as required the application of the suggestion made by his hon. friend, the member for Westminster. He had, however, added, that if such obstruction should be offered in the shape of delay to the progress of this Bill, as would render it impossible to get it through the House in any reasonable time, it might then be necessary to resort to such a measure. He was well aware of the inconvenience of meeting at ten o'clock in the morning; but he must nevertheless remind the hon. member for St. Mawes, that it had always been the doctrine of that House, that the first, and by far the most paramount duty of a Member of |