duct. He begged, however, to be understood as giving no opinion on this point, not being, as he before stated, in possession of the necessary information. Whether Galway, for the Repeal of the Stamp-duty on the admission of Freemen to Corporations; and complaining of an addition made to the last Annual Indemnity Act. By Sir RICHARD MUSGRAVE, from the Inhabitants of Dungarvon Cappoquin, and other places, praying that the Ordnance Survey of certain parts of Ireland may be extended to Wexford. By Mr. PROTHEROE, from Thomas Howell, for the repeal of the Window Tax. the course pointed out by the noble Lord would be the most proper to be pursued, was for the consideration of the Directors REFORM-EXPLANATIONS.] The Marof the East-India Company, and his Majesty's Government; but the noble Lord quis of Chandos said, that he had observed might be assured, that any application for tributed to the hon. and gallant Member in a morning paper some observations atan armed force, if such application should near him (Colonel Sibthorp) referring to ever be made, would be considered, not him. Amongst other expressions was this only with the greatest calmness, but with "He would not stop to characterize the the greatest unwillingness to grant it, un-noble Marquis's conduct." He wished to less the justice and necessity of so doing know whether the hon. and gallant Memshould plainly appear. ther these words were intended to apply ber had uttered that language, and whe Colonel Sibthorp said, that being thus Lord Ellenborough admitted it was quite true, as the noble Earl had stated, that the Board of Control possessed little in-personally to him? fluence over the commercial affairs of the East-India Company in reference to China. called upon, he felt bound to give a clear In point of fact, if the Board did possessing, that the words of the newspaper were explanation. He had no hesitation in sayany right to interfere, it was never exercised; and that was one great reason for his having troubled their Lordships with his present Motion, as it appeared to hold out the only means which he could command to direct attention to the recent events at Canton-events which he very strongly regretted. Having attained this object, he would not, under the circumstances alluded to by the noble Earl, press his Motion; and, therefore, with leave of their Lordships, he would withdraw it. Motion withdrawn. Bill. Brought in, by Lord Viscount DUNCANNON, to authorize the application of part of the Land Revenues of the Crown, for the repair and improvement of Buckingham Palace. Returns ordered. On the Motion of Mr. WEYLAND, the number of Brewers and Retail Beer-shops Licensed under the Beer Act:---On the Motion of Mr. D. W. HARVEY, the number of Persons admitted to the Freedom of those year 1821, with the amount of the Fees paid on their admission:-On the Motion of Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE, the number of rated Householders in the Parishes included in Boroughs which send Members to Parliament, since the the Metropolitan Police Bill:-On the Motion of Mr. HUME, the number of Sinecure Offices executed by Deputy in England, Scotland, and Ireland, and all Fees and Emoluments attached to them, with Reversions, Joint Appoint ments, and Appointments for Lives, and those held during pleasure. Petitions presented. By Mr. HENEAGE, from the city of Lincoln, in favour of a better system of Parliamentary Representation. By Mr. WARBURTON, from James Hitchens, Surgeon of Lincoln, for facilitating Anatomical of that place, for the preservation of the peculiar Fran chise attached to Galway; and from the Free Burgesses of never used by him, although he considered that he had some right to complain that the noble Marquis had irregularly anticipated him in respect of a clause in the Reform Bill, and he had felt some regret in consequence. He was, however, happy to understand that there was no occasion to persevere in the motion, as the provision which they both had the same intention to propose was inserted in the present Bill. The Marquis of Chandos felt, that the explanation of the hon. and gallant Member was completely satisfactory, as he had denied using the words ascribed to him. REFORM.] Mr. Charles Dundas presented a Petition from Richmond, Yorkshire, in favour of a Reform in the Commons House of Parliament. was Lord Morpeth observed, that this petition which was signed by 5,000 persons proved, that the disposition in favour of Reform was not confined to the manufacturing classes in Yorkshire, but equally strong amongst the agricultural community, and he therefore regretted that the right hon. Gentleman, the member for Aldeburgh was not present, that he might make him aware of the fact. He wished to take this opportunity of adverting to a statement which was reported to have been made in that House by the hon. member for Preston (Mr. Hunt). The hon. Member was reported to have said, that the Whig Government Paper in Leeds had excited the populace to shed his (Mr. Hunt's) blood. Nobody in that House had thought it necessary seriously to re-up their hands;" instantly there were fute such a charge; but the Editors of the 10,000 hands held up, that was the feeling Leeds Mercury, which he presumed was among the working classes, and it was from the paper alluded to, had written to him his having proved this to be the case, that (Lord Morpeth), requesting him distinctly he had excited the enmity of the editor of to contradict this statement. The Journal the paper in question, and most assuredly in question was one of considerable circu- he would not retract the expression he had lation, and most respectably conducted. used, as he believed it to be well deserved. He had accordingly to satisfy himself whether the statement of the hon. Member were correct, looked through the copies of the paper published at the period alluded to by the hon. member for Preston, and he was perfectly satisfied that the Editors were quite innocent of the dark design attributed to them by the hon. Member. The Editors of the Leeds Mercury opposed the hon. member for Preston on public grounds, and they were incapable he believed, of resorting to any mode of warfare inconsistent with fair political discussion. Mr. Strickland said, that knowing the severe and unjust imputations which the hon. member for Preston sometimes made, he had doubted the fact the moment the hon. member for Preston made the statement; and his impression was confirmed upon looking through the numbers of the newspaper which were published at the period referred to. He was acquainted with the editors, who were persons of strict honour-had always endeavoured by their writings to maintain peace and goodwill, and who could not, he was sure, on this or any other occasion, have been guilty of so foul a crime as had been imputed to them. Mr. Hunt said, that the newspaper in question spoke of "cracking his skull," and he wished to ask the hon. members for Yorkshire whether that could have been done without shedding his blood. The article to which he referred had appeared in the Leeds Mercury the week before he had entered Leeds. He had been invited to visit that place by some gentlemen who were of the same opinion as himself, that the working classes were by no means unanimous in their approbation of the Reform Bill brought in by the Ministers. A meeting took place in consequence, and he was about putting the question, "that all those who were of opinion that the Reform Bill of his Majesty's Ministers was calculated to work general good do hold up their hands," when Mr. Baines interfered; the question was, however, put, and probably about a dozen hands were raised in its support. He had then said "Let all those who have no confidence in Ministers hold Lord Morpeth said, the words "cracking skulls" might have been mentioned in the paper in question; but that did not prove, that the editor recommended any one to make the attempt on the hon. member for Preston. Mr. Hunt: Will you take upon you to say that no such words are used? Lord Morpeth: I cannot say the words are not used, but I do venture to say, that no such words are used for the purpose of exciting the people against you. Petition to be printed. ESSEX PETITION.] Mr. Western rose to present a Petition in favour of the Ministerial Measure of Parliamentary Reform from the Nobility, Gentry, Freeholders, and other the inhabitants of the county of Essex. The petition was the result of a public meeting, composed, he acknowledged, exclusively of the friends of the Bill, and assembled under peculiar circumstances, the High Sheriff having thought proper to decline calling the meeting, although a requisition had been presented to him, signed by nearly 1,600 persons of respectability. He was not aware how or where the Sheriff's authority was defined, but the practice had usually been, for the Sheriffs to convene their respective counties when requested so to do by a number of influential persons resident within them. He begged it to be understood, that he made no complaint of the conduct of the High Sheriff, who assigned as his reasons for not calling the county together, that there had beeu already two county meetings during the year, besides a contested election, which had sufficiently manifested the sentiments of the freeholders, and there was, therefore, no occasion for a third meeting, which in times of excitement had better be avoided. This reasoning on the part of the Sheriff was not applicable to existing circumstances, for since the last meeting, important events had taken place. The Reform Bill had been rejected by the House of Lords, which rendered it necessary that the people should universally declare their sentiments with regard to that disastrous event. It was a period of hopes and fears, The The petition read; it was signed by Sir Thomas Barrett Lennard, on behalf of the county of Essex. Mr. Long Wellesley supported the petition, and felt satisfied, that in giving his vote in favour of the new Reform Bill, he was in no degree departing from the pledge which he had given to his constituents. Mr. Hunt said, he must call the attention of the House to a remark that had fallen from the hon. Member who had presented the petition, and who had said, that he regretted the conduct of the House of Lords, in throwing out the Reform Bill, because they had played into the hands of democrats and demagogues. The Bill, at least, had given no such handle to radical demagogues or radical democrats, though it would to Whig demagogues and Whig democrats. of conflicting opinions, and much excite- | means of conciliation, and in that point of ment, and the requisitionists, therefore, view they were highly desirable. thought they ought to assemble and de- petition he had the honour of requesting clare their sentiments by an Address to the might be brought up, was signed by the Throne, and petitions to the two Houses of Chairman only, on behalf of the meeting, in Parliament. When that opportunity was consequence of the length of the discussion denied them by the refusal of the High by the introduction of a variety of extraneSheriff to convene a county meeting, they ous topics, so that at the conclusion of the had no other resource to prove that no meeting there was no time or opportunity change of opinions had taken place in their to adopt the usual course. minds, as had been asserted, than to call such meeting under the sanction of a certain number of Magistrates. The meeting accordingly took place, and was respectably, although not very numerously attended for the Conservative Reform party, as they called themselves, having given out they did not mean to attend, many of the supporters of Reform, in the more distant parts of the country, consequently did not come to the meeting, which was therefore composed of part of the Reformers only. Of course the resolutions proposed were unanimously carried, and were embodied in the petition he held in his hands. The petitioners expressed themselves in strong language with regard to the decision of the House of Lords in rejecting the Reform Bill-language in which, however, he completely coincided, for he thought with the petitioners, that the conduct of their Lordships was extraordinary and calamitous. The majority of the Peers were decidedly opposed to public opinion, and such a position in one branch of the Legislature was fraught with dangerous consequences: the events that had occurred since their decision, would be remembered with pain, and their effects for a long time deplored. By their rejection of the Bill they had completely played into the hands of democrats and demagogues who had not failed to profit by the advantage given them. The meeting was decidedly of opinion, that no measure of Reform less efficient and comprehensive than the late Bill would be satisfactory to the people in general, or adequately restore their just and legitimate rights in electing the Members of the Commons House of Parliament. In that opinion he most fully concurred, and should not be satisfied with any measure less comprehensive than the Bill which had been lost. He believed the Bill which had been now introduced was of that character, and therefore he was determined to support it. He wished, however, not to pledge himself to all the details, some of which he did not consider as amendments upon the former Bill, except they were considered as the Mr. George Dawson said, he had been requested by several gentlemen of the county of Essex, to state to the House, that this petition was not the petition of the county, but only that of the 600 or 700 individuals who had attended the meeting. He did not wish to depreciate the petition more than it deserved, for he was ready to acknowledge, that amongst the number who did attend, were many very respectable persons, and he was glad to observe the tone of moderation with which the petition had been introduced, arising, no doubt, from the consciousness of the hon. Members, that it was not a declaration of the sentiments of the county at large, and that the inhabitants had not responded to the call which had been made upon them. There had been great skill and industry employed in getting up the meeting, and even a public breakfast provided, but only 300 or at most 400 persons attended, to the mortification of those who had planned a trap baited with all the delicacies of the season, for the advocates of the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill. Taking these circumstances into consideration, he did not think the petition entitled to the weight that was generally attached to county petitions. Moreover, as it had been declared to be the petition of the friends of the Bill, if the county of Essex, which contained 300,000 inhabitants, could muster only 600 friends of the Bill, it was not a very clear manifestation of the feelings of the county at large in favour of Reform. As to the High Sheriff, he thought that gentleman had exercised a very sound discretion in declining to convene the county, after a former meeting on the same question, and the thinness of the meeting showed, that his refusal had not disappointed the county. He thought, also, that the High Sheriff had much reason to congratulate himself on not being present at a meeting where the Established Church was held up to execration and obloquy. He alluded particularly to the language made use of by the hon. member for Colchester (Mr. Daniel W. Harvey); that hon. Gentleman was a Dissenter, and might not be greatly attached to the Church of England, but he understood the attack he had made upon it, was so gross as even to excite a feeling of abhorrence in the auditors. He trusted, that the detestation then manifested would be re-echoed throughout the kingdom. It was time, that Gentlemen should see, that under the colour of Reform, an attack was to be made upon all our established institutions, and more particularly on the Church. He trusted that those hon. Members who were attached to that venerable establishment, would be prepared to act as the advocates of its rights, and if no check was put to the propagation of similar sentiments to those uttered by the hon. Member, who, he believed spoke with sincerity, then an occasion would arrive for seriously defending the Church sooner than many hon. Members expected. vote, that the religious and political institutions of the country ought to be disconnected. The prevailing sentiment at the Essex meeting was one of deep regret, that the conduct of the Bishops, in the decision of the House of Lords on the Reform Bill, had strengthened a feeling of hostility to the Church. The right hon. Gentleman had rated those who attended the meeting at between 600 and 700 persons; whereas there were at least 1,000 or 1,200; and one reason why the attendance was so limited was, that the county felt satisfied in the declaration of Ministers, that the Bill which they intended to bring forward, should be as efficient as the Bill of last session. Was it to be concluded, that all who did not attend the meeting were Anti-reformers? The truth was, that the county was unanimous for Reform, and he doubted whether an opponent of the measure could be found, beyond the Corporation of Harwich, which had such solid reasons for opposition. Those who were called Anti-reformers showed no want of tact upon this occasion, for they issued a counter address on the morning of the meeting, in which they set forth the necessity of Reform, arising out of the state of the public mind, in terms to which no reformer at that meeting would have refused to subscribe. His principal object in rising was, not to repel an attack, for he believed the right hon. Gentleman did not mean to make one, but simply to assure the House, he had not been heard with execration, but the same feeling was manifested there as was general throughout the country, and that was, a feeling of deep regret, that certain Members of the other House should have given the real enemies of the Church such a prodigious advantage. Mr. Lennard was surprised at the statement made by the right hon. member for Harwich. He had hoped that the lesson the right hon. Gentleman had received at the Sussex meeting, would have prevented his future interference with counties with which he had no connexion. He regretted, however, as the right hon. Member would Mr. Daniel W. Harvey was convinced, that in making these statements, the right hon. member for Harwich (Mr. Dawson), was merely reporting facts that had been conveyed to him. But if the right hon. Gentleman meant to assert that his observations had been received with execration, by the persons present at the Essex Meet-persist in interfering, that he had not been ing, he would say, in return, that this statement was as erroneous as that which referred to the numbers present. The right hon. Member only did him justice in asserting, that he sincerely believed the opinions he uttered. It was the opinion of the best friends of the Established Church, in that House, and out of that House, and he would second it by voice and present at the Essex meeting, for he was sure the hon. member for Colchester had much underrated the Members present. In his opinion at least 2,000 persons attended the meeting in question. The weight to be attached to it was not, however, to be derived from the numbers present, but from the circumstances that called it together. The requisition had been signed by between 1,500 and 1,600 of the most respectable persons | present, had confounded the sentiments of in Essex, and there would have been an the meeting with those expressed by the overwhelming display of numerical force, hon. member for Colchester (Mr. D. W. had it not been expected that the Resolu- Harvey). Such a mode of inference was tions would pass without opposition. The unfair, and the meeting at large ought not right hon. Gentleman had alluded to to be considered responsible for individual remarks which had been uttered at that opinions. The House, he trusted, would meeting, relating to the Established look to the petition as the index of the Church. The allusion could not apply to opinions of the meeting. Certainly many him, but he suspected that the right hon. observations were made at the meeting not Gentleman had received his information as relevant to the question of Reform. The to what had been said respecting the Es- hon. member for Colchester had delivered tablished Church, from an incorrect source. opinions upon several most important Perhaps he had derived it from the reports questions, in none of which he agreed, and in the London papers, which, on this occa- he was conscious the feelings of the meetsion, were not distinguished by their usual ing were not with the hon. Member. If accuracy. He said this, because he knew he thought otherwise, if he believed the it to be the case with what he had said opinions of the freeholders of Essex were so himself at that meeting, as well as the different from his own on these subjects, he reports given of what other Gentlemen had should no longer desire to represent that said on the occasion. With respect to the county. Church, he must say, as a friend to that establishment, that there would be no safety for it, unless some of its own friends undertook a revision of its laws and condition. He would ask the right hon. Gentleman, what was the moral to be drawn from the feeling which had been exhibited towards the Church at the different Reform meetings which had lately taken place throughout the country? Was it not evident, that the Legislature must shortly turn its attention towards such methods as would allay the angry feelings which now prevailed towards the Church, and endeavour to conciliate the people? This was a measure which must be undertaken by Ministers, and he did hope, that so soon as they had leisure for so important a task, the opportunity would not be lost. With respect to the petition now before the House, he trusted he might be permitted to bear his testimony to the strong feeling in favour of Reform which pervaded the whole county of Essex. This petition was adopted in the full confidence that the measure of Reform to be brought forward would be found as efficient as the last. POST OFFICE TAX ON NEWSPAPERS.] He was happy to say, the petitioners On the Motion by Lord Althorp, that the would not be disappointed. He was of House should resolve itself into a Comthe same opinion as his hon. friend,mittee on the Lottery Ticket Bill. with regard to the new Bill, and while it Sir Richard Vyvyan begged to take that was calculated to conciliate many opponents, it was, in all material points, quite as efficient as the last measure. Mr. Wellesley could assure the right hon. Gentleman, the member for Harwich, that the members for the county of Essex had no need of profuse expense to keep the reforming interest together. As a proof of the spirit that prevailed on the subject of Reform, he must adduce the fact, that his colleague and himself had been returned free of all expense at the last election; and a balance of the subscription still remained in hand. With respect to the public breakfast which the hon. Member had been so severe upon, it had been given chiefly to his tenants, as a mark of his attention. No exertions were made by Reformers to get up the meeting, but great exertions were made by their opponents to prevent it. It was no less singular than true, that though a variety of influential places in the county were held by persons who did all in their power to traverse the views of Ministers and their supporters, the feeling in favour of Reform was still general and strong. Petition to be printed. opportunity to ask the Secretary of the Treasury certain questions relative to the management of the Post-office. It apMr. Western trusted the House would peared from certain statements which had permit him to make a few observations, in recently got into circulation, that a tax reference to the remarks which had been was levied at the Post-office, by what made by the right hon. member for Har-authority he knew not, on all Newspapers wich (Mr. Dawson), who, although not sent from abroad, and on all British papers |