of that important measure in an improper manner. Mr. Tierney said, that what his hon. friend had complained of was, that there being two great questions before the House, the right hon. gentleman should fix that for the earliest day to which a postponement was immaterial. Nobody could reasonably expect from him a full disclosure of his financial plan; but it would certainly relieve the public anxiety, to know whether the fourteen millions produced by the property tax were to be in part or entirely raised by a new system of taxation. If not, the effect on the money market must be pro tanto as great as if the money were raised by loan. So far from thinking the meeting at lord Liverpool's nothing more than usual, he deemed it extremely unusual, and thought it highly objectionable in a minister to send for a certain number of leading persons in both Houses and ask them whether, if such a measure were framed in such a manner, he might rely on their support. To him this appeared to be rather an unconstitutional kind of rehearsal. If the object in naming so early a day was to strike while the iron was hot, and to take the country gentlemen at their word, he could understand the policy of this precipitation; but he could not see how it accorded with the acknowledged importance of the subject, and the deliberation due to it. He had by rumour been given to understand from what had passed in another place, that the report of the Lords committee was represented to contain a very complete and satisfactory body of evidence. He had been a little surprised at this, as he recollected, that last year, when the report was produced, the Lords refused to take any steps upon such defective information. He was desirous at present chiefly, however, to know whether it was the right hon. gentleman's intention to propose new taxes, or to raise the necessary supply by other means. Mr. Swan said, he should move an adjournment, if the present irregular and premature discussion of the subject was proceeded in. Mr. Horner was anxious that the present conversation, which was strictly regular, and arose out of the motion of his hon. friend, should not, through the tactics of the hon. member, be terminated without some reply from the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the question last addressed to him. He wished also to know, whether it was intended to take the sense of the House at once upon resolutions which had perhaps been fully discussed, and unanimously carried at lord Liverpool's, but of the grounds of which, or the justness of the reasonings urged in their support, parliament could have no knowledge. Mr. Swan rose to order. The Speaker said, that there was certainly no irregularity in the proceeding. though he could easily conceive that the discussion had gone further than was at first intended by the hon. member who made the motion. Mr. Horner resumed his observations, and contended, that in all great questions it had been the practice to communicate some information before calling upon the House to vote; instead of which a sort of Lords of Articles had been sitting in Whitehall-yard, to determine upon what should be brought forward, and making a compromise of opinions. He certainly did consider that such a proceeding had a tendency to fetter the freedom of opinion in that House. The Chancellor of the Exchequer thought that when a complicated set of resolutions were to be proposed, it would be convenient that they should lie a sufficient time before the House, to enable it to ascertain their propriety; but when a measure was so short and simple as that intended, he did not see the same grounds for delay. When brought forward it would be easily perceived whether it required protracted discussion. Mr. Lockhart contended, that the present state of the agricultural interest of the country, demanded the immediate attention of the legislature. Mr. Baring thought it extremely indecent towards the legislature, that a proposition was to be made to them, on which they were to be called to pronounce without hesitation, which same proposition had required great discussion, and had occasioned repeated divisions in a body previously assembled out of doors to deliberate on the subject. In his opinion, this was a fit occasion for parliamentary jealousy. The motion was then agreed to. HELLESTON ELECTION BILL.] Mr. Swan moved the second reading of the Helleston election Bill. Mr. Giddy said, he would not take the sense of the House on the principle of the Bill, although he thought it had much better be dropped; but if the hon. and learned gentleman would not consent to postpone the further proceeding upon it, and the Bill should reach the committee, be gave notice that he would then propose several alterations, among which would be the omission of the epithet corrupt,' in the preamble of the Bill (the irregularity not having been intentional), a change in the clause by which the corporation were divested of the right of voting, &c. Mr. Swan would not agree to postpone the proceeding on the Bill, which had already been amply considered, having twice gone through that House, although it had not in either case received the concurrence of the House of Lords. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on that day se'nnight, and to be printed. HOUSE OF LORDS. Thursday, February 16. Lord Montford presented a petition from Mrs. Lee, complaining, that from poverty she was unable to employ attorney or counsel to oppose the Bill of divorce prayed for by her husband, and stating that she had allegations to produce, which would prove that he was not entitled to the relief he requested. The petition was ordered to be taken into consideration on Tuesday next. TRIAL BY JURY IN SCOTLAND.] The Lord Chancellor said, he should move the first reading, for the purpose of printing it, of a Bill for introducing trial by jury in civil cases into Scotland. His lordship observed, that on the Bill which he had before introduced great improvements had been made. He should, therefore, withdraw that Bill, with the leave of the House, and move the first reading of the improved Bill. The first Bill was accordingly withdrawn, and the improved Bill was read a first time. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Thursday, February 16. FEES IN COURTS OF JUSTICE.] Sir John Newport observed, that the order of the House of the 23d of November last, with respect to fees exacted by the register of wills in Ireland; also the order of the 29th of November, respecting fees col lected in the Chancery of England; also the orders of the 1st of December, with respect to the fees of the courts of King'sbench and Common-pleas in Irelandthose upon writs of custodium, and the number of specialties issued for sums under 201. had not yet been complied with, notwithstanding the time that had elapsed since the orders were made; and, therefore, he should move that these orders be complied with forthwith. Of the nature of the fees exacted by the register of wills in Ireland, he had already apprised the House. The amount of the exaction and its illegality were, indeed, sufficient to account for that officer's reluctance to furnish the information required; but the delay respecting the fees in Chancery struck him, he must confess, with peculiar astonishment; for it was well known that the return of those fees could easily be made out in three or four days, and yet, after a lapse of ten weeks, they were not forthcoming. The delays in the Irish courts must also excite surprise; but as to the fees upon writs of custodium, the motive of the delay was quite intelligible; for it was notorious that those fees had of late years been illegally advanced two and three fold; nay, tenfold, and in some instances even twenty fold. The right hon. baronet expressed his regret to find, that in every stage of the inquiry upon this subject, he was fated to meet with embarrassment, obstruction, and delay; but still he hoped fully to expose and to cure the abuses complained of. As to specialties, his object was to ascertain the extent of a great practical evil in Ireland, for small debts were thus taken into the superior courts, at a considerable expense to the parties, while such sums might, at a comparatively small expense, be recovered in the inferior courts. For such an evil, some remedy was obviously necessary, and with to such remedy he had brought the subject before the House. The said papers were ordered to be produced forthwith. BANK RESTRICTION ACT.] The House having resolved itself into a committee of the whole House, to consider of the Act 54 Geo. 3, c. 99, to continue the restrictions on payments of cash by the Bank of England, The Chancellor of the Exchequer observed, that whatever difference of opinion might prevail as to the period at which it might be practicable to resume cash payments | at the Bank, he apprehended that all were agreed that such payments could not be resumed by the 25th of March next, and that therefore the Restriction Act must be farther continued, at least until the account of our foreign expenditure could be wound up, and until the state of our exchange, and of the bullion trade, should be farther improved. Circumstances, he was happy to say, had occurred within the last year, which held out the most favourable promise, as the state of our exchange had experienced considerable improvement, and the price of bullion had materially fallen. Still, the further continuance of the Act was obviously necessary, and therefore he moved, "That the chairman should be instructed to move the House for leave to bring in a Bill for the continuance of the Bank Restriction Act for a time to be limited." Mr. Tierney expressed his concurrence in opinion with the right hon. gentleman, that it would not be practicable to resume cash payments at the Bank by the 25th of March next, and the only question was as to the time at which such resumption would be practicable. But upon this point he should reserve the declaration of his sentiments, until the motion for the appointment of a committee of inquiry, of which his noble friend (lord A. Hamilton) had given notice, should be brought under the consideration of the House. The motion was agreed to, the House resumed, and leave given to bring in the Bill. HOUSE OF LORDS. Friday, February 17. PROPERTY TAX.] The Earl of Hardwicke presented several petitions on the subject of the Corn Laws, praying a speedy revision of the same; and among other places from the county of Cambridge, the town and vicinity of Newmarket, Wisbeach, and Lynn. The noble earl then presented a petition, which, he observed, was of a different nature, and respecting which he felt it incumbent on him to say, that he neither agreed with the petitioners as to the expediency, in the sentiments expressed, or in the view which they had taken of the subject. He could not help thinking the time would arrive when the public would be undeceived upon the subject; and he was of opinion that the kind of tax deprecated by the petitioners was one, if properly modified and regulated, in several points of view less exceptionable than most others. After a few words in the way of illustration, his lordship moved that the petition be read; it appeared to be from Thorney, in the Isle of Ely, against the renewal of the property tax, and complaining of its operation, as oppressive and injurious. The Petition was ordered to lie on the table. SIR JAMES DOWNIE.] The Marquis of Lansdowne said, he had a question to put to the noble earl opposite. He had been informed that an officer of high and distin guished rank, who had been, to a very late period, receiving pay from this coun. try, was employed in the expedition fitting out by the present government of Spain to reduce its dependencies. It was, of course, not the intention of this govern ment to continue that officer in his rank and pay. The officer he alluded to was sir James Downie, who held the rank of a general officer. It was the duty of government, on every consideration of character and policy, to state their intentions with respect to this officer, Earl Bathurst said, that he was not aware that the officer in question was employed on the expedition to South America, and certainly he was not a general officer in the British service. The Marquis of Lansdowne said, that he was aware that sir James Downie was not a general officer in the British army, but that, by papers which had been presented in another place, it appeared, that to a very late period, long since the re-establishment of the Spanish monarchy, he was receiving pay from this country. Earl Bathurst said, that he would inquire into the circumstances of the case. It was, in fact, the first time he had heard of it. tyranny of the Spanish government. [Hear, hear!] He left those who were instrumental in heaping such misery upon the unfortunate individual to enjoy what tranquillity they could after their knowledge of the melancholy consequences of their interference. He hoped sir James Duff, who thought he had acted with so much zeal for the honour and interest of the British government in falsifying his own passports, would be able to justify himself, though he could hardly conceive any circumstances that could constitute a justification; and he hoped, also, that general Smith would be able to reconcile the appeared in his own account, and that of Mr. Puigblanc as to the manner in which the latter entered the garrison of Gibraltar. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, he was ignorant whether it was or was not the intention of any gentleman to make a specific motion on this subject; but he thought it was far more desirable, and far more regular, to submit such a motion, than to make a vindictive and declamatory speech, not supported by any authority. It was true, that general Smith might be called on to explain his conduct; but he knew no mode by which the assertions of a foreign gentleman, who thought proper to make an appeal to the public, could be brought under their consideration. Nor did he think it right, that the character and conduct of individuals should be attacked on mere newspaper authority. preventing those unhappy and virtuous victims of a bad government from effecting their escape by means of the British convoy. Why did Sir James Duff summon the captains of the ships who composed the convoy, and compel them to declare whether any, and what Spaniards they had on board? This was a specific question, which it was expected should be fully answered. This subject involved points so interesting to the British character, and to humanity, that the most satisfactory explanation of it should be given to the country. He could not help remarking, also, that the correspondence which appeared to have passed between Mr. Sted-striking and serious contradiction that now man and sir James Duff, was by no means creditable to the former, who seemed to exult in the opportunity which he had of obliging the government of Cadiz, by giving up the unfortunate individuals in question. He was anxious to know, likewise, whether any inquiries had been made relative to the allegations of Mr. Puigblanc, in which he so distinctly denied the statements made by general Smith, as to the manner in which he entered the garrison of Gibraltar. The thing was altogether so atrocious, and so abominable, that he hoped, although no specific motion should be made, it would be sifted to the bottom, and that no loop-hole, or means for evasion, would be left either to general Smith, sir James Duff, or Mr. Stedman, in their disgraceful combination to accomplish so unworthy a purpose. With respect to another of those individuals, surrendered by general Smith, he meant Correa, he had been informed that he was an officer of distinguished gallantry in the Spanish army, that he had fought bravely in defence of Ferdinand 7, that he had two sons, who were at this very moment prisoners in France, one of whom had been wounded eleven, and the other seven times, in the cause of that same Ferdinand. [Hear, hear!] And what was his offence? His sole crime was, that he had written a most temperate letter, recommending the adoption of some of the regulations promulgated by the Cortes. For that crime, and that alone, he was brought to trial and convicted and let general Smith, and all who co-operated with him in the odious transaction, know, if the knowledge could possibly give them pleasure or comfort, that that Correa had been sentenced to ten years hard labour in the gallies at Ceuta, where he now was, not expiating any. offence, but a victim to the jealous Mr. Whitbread said, that his authority for making the speech he had done, which the right hon. gentleman had characterised as vindictive declamation, was to be found in the papers laid on the table of the House. With respect to Mr. Puigblanc, whom the right hon. gentleman seemed to think he had not seen, it was very true, when last he mentioned the subject, that such was the fact. But, since that period he had had an interview with that gentleman, and he had stated, in terms the most unequivocal-terms that left no doubt on his mind as to the truth of his assertionsthat the allegations contained in his letter were strictly true. That gentleman was ready to appear at the bar of the House. He was willing to attend at the office of the noble lord, and to substantiate every statement he had made. The right hon. gentleman thought it would be better if a specific motion were made on these papers; and perhaps it might be so. He * had departed from the promise given on a former evening by a gentleman connected with a minor department, who had agreed that the truth of the statement made by Mr. Puigblanc should be investigated; and, as he seemed to think, that the honour of the country was so little implicated in this affair, as to render it unnecessary to have it cleared up, he (Mr. Whitbread) would, at no distant period, move that those papers should be taken into consideration. In that event, he was sure, the right hon. gentleman, to whom an opportunity would be given to declare his sentiments, would find it impossible to screen the individuals concerned from the just indignation of the House. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that sir James Downie had formerly held a commission in the British service, from which he passed into that of Spain. Whether he was now about to embark for South America, he could not say. Sir John Newport demanded whether he was now, being in the Spanish service, receiving pay or allowances from this government? He was, it appeared, so lately as the 26th of July last. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, the question of the right hon. baronet would be answered in a few days, when the return to the motion of a noble lord, for an account of all British officers, in the Spanish service, who received pay or allowance from this government, was made to the House. SPANISH SUBSIDY.] Mr. Bennet observed, that, in the months of July and September last, two sums, of 100,000l. each, had been granted by this country, binson moved the order of the day, for STATE OF THE CORN LAWS.] Mr. Roto the Spanish government. He wished the House to resolve itself into a comto know for what purpose they were paid?mittee of the whole House, to consider of Was it in the nature of a boon to the royal virtues of the Spanish Monarch? was it to procure some petty commercial advantage? or was it, as he believed it to be, for the purpose of fitting out the expe dition to the New World ? The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, he had already had more than one occasion to state to the House, that this money had been paid in consequence of a regular stipulation with the Spanish government. It was necessary, after the conclusion of peace, that the Spanish troops should be afforded the means of returning to the different districts to which they belonged. It was on this account that the two sums alluded to were granted. SIR JAMES DOWNIE.] Sir John Newport observed, that an allowance of 3,400 dollars had been recently made to this officer, who was now in the Spanish service. He should be glad to be informed, whether the Mr. Downie, who formerly went out to South America with general Miranda, for the purpose of revolutionizing the people, who returned to this country, and was employed in the commissariat department was the same individual who was now about to embark under general Murillo? If so, he was going out to subdue those very South Americans, whom he endeavoured, a few years ago, to spirit up to rebellion? He should also like to know, whether, while we abstained from giving any assistance to those South Americans, we were justified in affording aid to Ferdinand to subdue them? the state of the Corn Laws. The several Mr. William Smith rose, for the purpose of saying a few words on the order of their proceeding, as the matter before the House stood in point of time. Last ses His sion he argued against the consideration |