tion of the country could not exist unless the landed interest were supported. And if once a free trade in corn were allowed, a revolution was effectuated in the constitution of the country.

Their Lordships then divided on the amendment. Contents, 27; Proxies, 7 34. Non-Contents, 24; Proxies, 15-39. Majority against the amendment, 5. ... The Committee was ordered for Monday next. Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-May 2.-Sir R. Ferguson presented a petition from Mr James Gibson Craig, against the Edinburgh Water Company's Bill.

BONDED CORN.

Mr Huskisson brought forward his proposition for admitting bonded corn into the English markets on payment of a moderate duty. He said, that in 1815, all foreign corn was prohibited, whenever the average price should be under 80s. per quarter. The act of 1822 provided that foreign corn should be admitted when English corn had reached 70s. per quarter, upon a duty of 17s. per quarter. This was the state of the law at the present moment. It had occurred to him, and others, that, looking to the high prices which corn had reached, and to the deterioration which corn under bond was likely to suffer, it was desirable that some facility should be afforded to the admission of that corn for home consumption, until the supply which the next harvest would afford should be available. He had fixed on the duty of 10s., believing that amount would be sufficient at once to secure the public, and to induce the holders to bring their corn into consumption; but should 10s. be thought too high, and that it would defeat its object, he was not indisposed to lower it, for it was not a question of high or low duty, but of what regulation would be most advantageous for the public and the consumer. His proposition would be this

that the holder should have the option of bringing out his stock in portions of one-third at a time. There would be three months between the passing of the Bill and the 15th of August, when its provisions were to terminate. During this period, the corn now in warehouse was to be admitted upon payment of a duty of 10s. per quarter, after which the present regulations were again to come into force. The other resolution which he had to submit was relative to Canada corn, of which there was now in this country about 20,000 quarters. Mr H. moved," that all corn and wheat flour, (not the produce of Canada) now warehoused, and which was warehoused on or before the 13th of May 1822, shall

VOL. XVI.

be admitted to entry for home consumption, at the times, and in the proportions following, viz. :—One-third of each of the several quantities of such corn or wheat flour belonging to the respective proprietors, between the 16th May and 15th June, 1825; one other third between the 15th June and the 15th July; and the remainder between the 15th July and 15th August following, upon payment of the following duties per quarter: Wheat, 10s. rye, pease, and beans, 6s.; barley, bear, or bigg, 58.; oats, 3s. 6d. ; flour, per cwt. 2s. 10d. 2. That all duties now payable upon wheat, the produce of, and imported from, the British colonies in North America, shall cease, and that in lieu thereof a duty of 5s. per quarter be laid on importation." After a conversation of some length, in which several amendments to lower the duty were proposed, but withdrawn, the above resolutions were agreed to without a division.

A clause in the Dissenters' Marriage Bill, the object of which was, to remove the necessity of having the registers of Dissenters' marriages made in the usual way, by the clergyman, in the church, and to transfer them to the regular registrar of the diocese, was agreed to.

3. Several petitions, one from Ross-shire, were presented against any alteration in the Corn Laws, and from operatives in different parts of the country, against the re-enactment of the Combination Laws.

5. Mr Maberly made his promised motion, "That from and after the 5th of January 1826, the duty on beer should entirely cease." The amount of this duty was £3,200,000 per annum, and the charge of collecting it £.695,000. Its operation was also most unequal, for whilst the rich paid 20s. per quarter, the poor paid 55s. Mr Brougham supported the motion, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer opposed it, chiefly on the ground, that, to create a sudden deficiency of £.3,200,000 in the revenue, would be a most serious step. The question having been pushed to a division, Mr Maberly's motion was rejected by a majority of 88 to 25.

TRIALS IN SCOTLAND.)

Mr J. P. Grant rose, pursuant to the notice he had given, to move for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal the existing laws respecting wrongous imprisonment, and delays of trial in Scotland. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman said, that it was evident it would be much better that all the laws on this subject should be comprehended in one act, rather than spread, as they now were, over the whole statute-book. The objects which he had in view were principally these: First, to throw greater 5 C

responsibility upon the Magistrates in granting warrants for the apprehension of offenders; next, to increase the power of the Judges of the Criminal Courts, for the better protection of the liberty of the subject; next, to remove doubts and difficulties where they existed; and, lastly, to place the poor man on the same foot ing as the rich with respect to his trial. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then moved for leave to bring in the Bill. The Lord Advocate said he would not oppose the bringing in of the Bill. Great caution, however, ought to be observed in meddling with a law which had existed for above one hundred years, and which might be considered as the Habeas Corpus Act of Scotland. He hoped, how. ever, that his Honourable and Learned friend would rather bring in the Bill to amend than repeal the existing law; as the word "repeal" might excite some alarm among the people of Scotland. Mr Grant declared himself willing to adopt the suggestion of the Lord Advocate and others, by framing his Bill so as to amend the act, instead of repealing it. The mo tion was then agreed to in its amended .forin.

The Lord Advocate moved for leave to bring in a Bill, to restrict the punishment of leasing-making and sedition in Scotland. The object of the Bill, the Learned Gentleman said, was to assimilate the law of Scotland to the law of England on these subjects.

6. On the motion of the Lord Advocate, the House resolved itself into a Com. mittee of the whole House on the Scots Judicature Bill. The report was brought up, and ordered to be taken into farther consideration on Monday se'ennight.

The House, on the motion of Mr Brougham, resolved itself into a Committee on the Roman Catholic Relief Bill, Mr James McDonald in the chair. The speaker said, he wished to take that opportunity to state, that after all the discussion that had taken place on the Bill, there was nothing he had heard, nothing he had read, that relieved his mind from the apprehensions he entertained from the passing of the Bill. The several clauses, after a good deal of discussion, and after some amendments had been proposed and rejected, were then agreed to. The third reading was fixed for Tuesday. Adjourned.

Mr A. Campbell brought up the report of the Glasgow Improvements Bill. Agreed to, and ordered to be read a third time.

Mr Brougham presented the report of the Roman Catholic Relief Bill, which, after some discussion, was agreed to.

Mr Littleton moved that the House do resolve itself into a Committee on the Irish Elective Franchise Bill. Mr Grat. tan entered his protest against the Bill, as one of the most unjust and unconstitutional measures ever brought under the consideration of Parliament. Mr Hume opposed the Bill. He declared, that had the substance of this measure been introduced as a clause into the Bill for the Emancipation of the Catholics, he would rather have voted against that great Bill itself, than support for one moment such an enormous invasion of the rights of so large a class of the people, as this Bill for the abolition of the Forty Shilling Freeholders' Franchise went to commit. (Hear, hear.) He begged to move, "That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire what faults and abuses exist in the exercise of the elective franchise in Ireland; and to ascertain whether any and what measures can be adopted with a view to correct the same." Colonel Johnson seconded this amendment.

Mr

S. Rice said, he approved of this Bill because he was a friend to Parliamentary Reform.- It would effectually enlarge the number of real constituents. There was no analogy between Ireland and England as to this subject. The law was the same; the practice was different. The Bill would cure the evils of numbers and poverty. Lord Milton said he should support the Bill, because it would promote the object of the great measure. The question for going into the Committee was carried by 168 to 53. Mr Lambton strongly op posed the Bill. Mr Brougham earnestly entreated his Hon. Friends not to oppose the Catholic Relief Bill, because the present measure had been brought forward in conjunction with it. Mr Lambton replied, that he could not vote for the Catholic Relief Bill, if it were accompanied by a Bill of Disfranchisement. (Hear!) He did not vote from interested motives, but from deep conviction-(hear!) and not even the threatened displeasure of any of those with whom he had long been in the habit of acting, could induce him to abandon his opinion. (Hear!) After some further remarks, the House went into the Committee, when the blanks were filled up pro forma.

CATHOLIC RELIEF BILL. 10.-Mr Curwen now moved the third reading of this Bill, the passing of which he then strenuously advocated.

Sir R. Inglis opposed it, contending that the Catholic spirit was as intolerant, as ambitious, and as dangerous as ever. Mr Horace Twiss maintained quite an opposite opinion, and urged, that all the original causes for enacting the present

restrictions had ceased to exist; the vindicators of those laws, therefore, stood just in the same position as though they had expired, and they were demanding to reenact them. Mr Hart Davis contended, that the constitution of England being essentially Protestant, no concession of power should be made to the Rotnan Catholics beyond that which they possessed at present. Mr C. Grant argued strongly in favour of the measure. We had, he said, hitherto been legislating for the people of Ireland, as for men quite passive not as for a nation of sensitive beings, who had feelings and passions like other men, and who were more bound by feelings of attachment for kindness conferred, than by coercion; we lost sight of the moral in fluence of the penal laws, which were calculated to degrade those on whom they operated; and when it was objected to any enlightened foreigner, that the Government had not accommodated itself to the more liberal spirit of the age, his ready answer was, "Look at the state in which you keep Ireland." From such degradation he would wish to have Ireland emancipated; he would also wish to see the English nation freed from the stain which had so long rested on them by the con tinuance of the penal code. He main. tained, that wherever a good and enlightened Government prevailed, the Roman Catholics were as tolerant as the Protestants. This measure might be delayed for one or two years; but that it must pass before any great lapse of time, was the conviction of every man who paid the slightest attention to public affairs. He therefore called upon the House to render that boon which the progress of know. ledge and of religious charity showed must ultimately be granted, delightful and acceptable to those on whom it was to be conferred, but not postponing it to any distant period. (Hear, hear!)

The Solicitor-General opposed the Bill, as well as the measure respecting the Irish Forty Shillings freeholders.

Mr Huskisson said, he thought that the argument had ran too much upon the question of establishing a Roman Catholic Church, instead of the question of tolerating one which was established. With their spiritual tenets and doctrines he had nothing to do. In the practices and intentions of the Romish hierarchy he could see nothing to dread, were they even wickedly inclined. He owed it to justice to vote for the removal of every enactment against the Catholics, or any other body of men who remained exposed to pains and disabilities long after the evils and dangers anticipated by those enact ments had ceased. It was on this ground

that the Catholics were entitled to his vote, to which his country had a heavier claim. Mr Peel observed, that his opinions on this most momentous subject were already on record; and it would be trifling with that indulgence which the House had shown towards him on other occasions, if he were merely to repeat now what he had so often advanced to them before. He merely wished to take this opportunity of re-stating, that the opinions he had formerly held on this matter remained still unaltered. When he looked at the numbers of the Roman Catholics, and at the circumstances under which the transfer of Church property from theirs to Protestant hands took place at the Revolution, he could not feel satisfied or convinced that it was either wise or expedient to remove those barriers, which he thought much better calculated to protect the Protestant ascendancy in this country, than those ecclesiastical securities which it was now proposed to substitute in their stead. Mr Brougham rose amidst some cries of "Question," and began by assuring the House, that after twelve nights discussion, it was not his intention to trespass on the House at any length, when there could not possibly be any novelty of argument, and when the question had been over and over again exhausted. Mr Peel still appre hended danger, it seemed, to the Protestant Establishment both in Church and State, if the Roman Catholics were to be allowed access to the offices of the latter.. The very same alarm, on the very same accounts, had been experienced in England one hundred and twenty years ago. But as no harm had happened, he had a right to anticipate, that, a hundred and twenty years hence, our posterity would laugh at our fears, as we did at those of our ancestors. When the Scottish Union was to introduce into the House of Lords sixteen Presbyterian Peers at once, the Bishop of Bath, the venerable predecessor of one of the most vehement oppo nents of the Catholic Claims at this day, earnestly besought the Lords to consider that they were, by such admission of the Presbyterian Peers, exposing themselves to a danger, the greatness of which no tongue could speak. (A laugh.) He had heard a great deal about the Jesuits of the Church of Rome. But what would they say to a Protestant Bishop, an ene my to the Catholic Claims, if, when you signed the Thirty-nine Articles, he said, (he, be it observed, hating Jesuitism)

Though you sign the Thirty-nine Articles, you do not agree with them separately; but in the lump, you admit of their propriety. Your belief with respect

to some of them is an overflow; with reference to others, it is an ebb tide; and so far as certain other points are concerned, it is nearly a spring-tide. You, therefore, can make a sort of average statement of your belief; and you may take your living, for having swallowed the whole of the Thirty-nine Articles in this manner." (Laughter.) He had, in the course of the debate, heard something of persecution; and it was said that the principle of persecution was inherent in the Catholic Church. Let not those who used this argument be too nice in its application. He called on the House to look at the scenes which, at no very remote period, had been acted in our own country. He alluded to those infernal tor. ments, which one hundred and fifty years ago were inflicted on the people of Scotland, under that tyrant, who, alike contemning the law of God and the sacredness of the Constitution, sent his people to die the death of martyrs on account of the Covenant. In arguing this question, he put all mention of heresies, Jesuits, and persecutions, out of his view. Such violent language was unsuited of such an occasion, and he hoped they should have no more of it on the one side or on the other. If they wished to secure the happiness of the empire, if they wished to complete its safety, let no foreign country have the opportunity of looking with a malign as pect towards Ireland. Every thing that passed in Ireland found its way into fo reign newspapers. In the Vienna Gazettes, not a word was said about our improvement in arts and sciences-not a syllable about the strides which education was making-not the least notice was

APRIL.

taken of the liberal policy which distin. guished our commercial arrangements. These matters were all carefully concealed; and, with one exception, our domestic affairs were passed over wholly unnoticed. Unfortunately, the history of Ireland formed that solitary exception. Without arrogating to himself any vain spirit of prophecy, he would say, that were this bill carried by a large majority through that House, he would be one ready to answer for the thorough pacification of Ireland; because he could then answer for its becoming a law. But if it did not become a law in that manner-if it were not carried by such a majority, and that at the present moment, in this very reign-in the reign of his Gracious Majesty the King who now sat on the throne-then he could only say, that he had exonerated himself from any blame that might attach to future consequences, by calling on the House to be wise-by imploring them to act while it was day... by entreating them not to wait till the dark night shrouded them, when no man can tell what will come! (Cheers.)

Sir F. Blake rose amidst tremendous shouts of "Question," which continued during the whole of his speech. He supported the Bill; and declared that he would always be at his post.

The House divided: For the motion, 248; against it, 227; majority 21. The announcement of the majority was receiv ed with cheers.

The Bill was then read a third time, and passed.

The other orders of the day were disposed of; and the House adjourned at two o'clock.

CIRCUIT INTELLIGENCE.-Glasgow, April 26-John Cain, or Kean, was arraigned at the bar, accused of “discharging loaded fire-arms, with intent to murder." The Indictment set forth," that the prisoner did, as actor art and part with others, way-lay John Graham, a cotton spinner in the employ of Mr Dunlop, on the thirtieth day of March last, on the Barrow. - field-road, and did there discharge at him one or more pistols, loaded with powder, and a number of small shot, by which the said John Graham was severely and desperately wounded in or near the back, to the great effusion of his blood, and the imminent danger of his life."

The unfortunate victim, John Graham, was brought into the Court on a litter, or

bed, and laid above two of the boxes in front of the Judges. He was pale and wasted; his voice was weak in the extreme; and it was with painful difficulty he could hold up his hand during the administration of the oath.

The sentence of the court was, "That John Cain, or Kean, be taken to the front of the Jail, on Wednesday, the 11th of May, and there receive the usual number of stripes on his bare back, from the hands of the common executioner, and thereafter be transported beyond the seas for life.

Perth, April 21.—Alexander Adam was charged with an assault and robbery on the person of Joseph Watt, James Hutcheon, and Wm. Peter, of a very aggravated nature. The prisoner's counsel objected to the indictment, on the ground of a