bring it under your Lordships' consideration. The subject is one on which, in the position in which the country is now placed, I am bound to say that my wish is in accordance with that of the noble Marquess -that, if it is to be decided by a Resolution of the House, it shall be decided by a Resolution couched in such terms as will have the least possible chance of giving rise to a conflict of opinions among your Lordships. I might not, perhaps, myself have taken very great objection to the terms of the noble Marquess' Motion, because I be lieve that, undoubtedly, combined with other causes, the cheapness of provisions occasioned by recent legislation has contributed to increase the comforts of the labouring classes and of the working classes generally yet, I think it more desirable that we should not raise discussion-invited by these words of the noble Marquess -by going back to the question as to what degree or to what extent that cheapness of provisions has been the main cause of the increased comfort of the labouring classes. Beyond that, however, the noble Marquess assumed that there is a great increase in the prosperity of the country generally. My object is to couch the Resolution in such terms as would recognise to the fullest extent the adherence of your Lordships' House to the principle now sanctioned by the vote of the House of Commons, and which I am bound to say has also been sanctioned by the general opinion of the country; and at the same time to avoid entering on any topic with regard to the past that could by possibility raise any controversy. I apprehend the noble Marquess and those who act with him are desirous most firmly to secure the adherence of this House to that policy which I am bound to say the country has, by a large majority, signified its determination to uphold; and I am satisfied that the noble Marquess' object will be best effected by dealing with the future only, provided the terms of the Resolution are as clear and definite with regard to the future as he has done me the honour to say he considers the words to be which I have suggested. The terms which I propose should be submitted to your Lordships' consideration, and which I will be happy to place in the hands of the noble Marquess, in order that he may, if he thinks fit, move them as a Resolution brought forward by himself are these: "That this House, thankfully acknowledging the general prosperity, and deeply sensible of the evils attending frequent changes in the financial policy of the country, adheres to the commercial system recently established, and would view with regret any renewed attempt to disturb its operations or impede its further progress." It appears to me that this Resolution contains as unreserved and distinct an adoption of the existing commercial policy as noble Lords opposite can desire; while at the same time it is likely to obtain the concurrence of those who doubted the expediency of the recent change in the first instance-who doubted the policy of the measure of 1846-who, even now, if the controversy were to begin again, might desire to see a different policy adopted, but, who, nevertheless, being sensible of the evils which must result from constant changes in our financial system, will readily acquiesce in the continuance of a system established seven years ago. The introduction into the Resolution of unnecessary allegations can have no other effect than to keep alive a feeling of irritation and disquietude in the country. On these grounds, I submit my Resolution to your Lordships, and I am glad to hear that the noble Marquess is not unwilling to adopt it in lieu of his own. It is for him to determine whether he will move it now, or give notice on the subject. I cordially join with the noble Marquess in wishing that, from this moment, the controversy as to the relative merits of protection or free trade may be put an end to, and that no attempt may be made to disturb the system recently adopted. The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDE: I accept the noble Earl's words instead of my own Resolution. Personally I should prefer moving the noble Earl's Resolution immediately; but, looking to the importance of the subject, I do not think it would be right to deviate from the usual course. I therefore give notice that I will move the Resolution on Monday, but I shall not think it necessary to address your Lordships, nor do I anticipate that any discussion will arise. The EARL of ELLENBOROUGH: I wish the noble Marquess would reconsider his determination, and move the Resolution at once. If he postpones it to Monday, there may be a debate; but if he moves it now, there will be none at all. I think both Resolutions equally unnecessary, and would rather avoid a useless debate. The EARL of DERBY: I am not sure whether the noble Marquess has decisively made up his mind as to whether he will move the Resolution now, or give notice for Monday. As far as I am concerned, I think there is a great deal of good sense in the observations of the noble Earl who spoke last. The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDE: I am far from dissenting from the noble Earl's last sentence; but I think it is desirable not to depart from the rule ob- served under ordinary circumstances. I think that on so serious a subject, and one which occupied the attention of the other House for several nights, it would hardly be in keeping with the dignity of the House to move the Resolution without notice. Besides, the proceeding might be drawn into a precedent, and noble Lords, founding themselves on it, might move Resolutions of great importance without previous notice. The EARL of DERBY: As the noble Marquess has referred to precedent, I beg to express a hope that the length of the discussion in the other House may not be taken as a precedent by your Lordships. House adjourned till To-morrow. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Thursday, December 2, 1852. MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS. - 1° Parliamentary PARLIAMENTARY REFORM. MR. HUME said, he would take the liberty of asking the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to introduce any measure for the Extension of the Franchise, the Protection of the Voters, and the Equalisation of the number of Electors to the number of Representatives? to the country in answer to a mere inquiry coming to us from a private Member, without any more formal notice than I have received to-night. MR. MILNER GIBSON: Is it the intention of the Government to submit to Parliament the same measure which they introduced at the close of the last Session, for allocating the four seats now vacant to new constituencies, and which measure the Government then considered to be one of great urgency? The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: I consider that question also to be a portion of the great subject of "progressive reform," and I prefer giving a more formal notice of the intentions of the Government than that which is to be elicited under the circumstances which have just taken place. UNIVERSITY REFORM. MR. PHINN said, he would beg to ask the right hon. Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether, in consequence of the Report of the Cambridge University Commissioners in reference to King's College, Cambridge, Her Majesty's Government were prepared to recommend to the authorities of Eton College to concert measures with the Provost and Fellows of King's College, for the improvement and extension of the two foundations? MR. WALPOLE, in reply, said, that a Copy of the Report of the Commissioners had been sent to the University, and to the Heads of the several Colleges in the University, with the request that they would make their observations upon that Report either as affecting the University generally, or the Colleges separately. With regard to the question to which the hon. Gentleman more immediately referred, it was perfectly true that the College of Eton, as mentioned in the Report, was intimately connected with King's College-he had, therefore, thought it proper to send a Copy of the Report to the authorities at Eton, in the same way as he had sent it to King's College; and when he had received their observations upon it, he should be prepared to state what course he might deem it necessary to take upon the subject. The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER, rising with the hon. Member's question in his hand, said: Mr. Speaker, whenever it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to introduce any measure for the Extension of the Franchise, the Protection of the Voters, and the Equalisation of the number of Electors to SIR DE LACY EVANS gave notice, the number of Representatives," they will that in the event of any measure being inthink it consistent with their duty to give a troduced by the Government for the allocaformal notice to the House of that intention of the four seats now vacant in that tion; but it would not be respectful to the House, he should propose that those seats House, that any intimation of such an in- be given to the metropolitan districts of tention on their part should be first made Chelsea and Kensington. THE MAGISTRACY OF DERBY. MR. HINDLEY said, in the absence of the right hon. Member for Derby (Mr. Bass), he would repeat the question which that Gentleman put to the right hon. Home Secretary on Monday-namely, whether, within the last few days, the Lord Chancellor had placed on the Commission of the Peace for the borough of Derby, Dr. Hilett, Mr. Lewis, and Mr. Henry Fox, all ardent supporters of the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Horsfall)? MR. WALPOLE, in reply, said, if there were any feeling of a want of confidence in Her Majesty's Government, or any complaint to be made with regard to their appointments to the magistracy, let it be expressed openly and directly. He had made inquiries of the Lord Chancellor with respect to the appointments referred to, and the noble and learned Lord had informed him, that, after receiving a memorial from the inhabitants of Derby, he had appointed to the Commission of the Peace there three of the most respectable persons in that town, in lieu of three persons who did not qualify last year when they were appointed by the Government of the noble Lord opposite (Lord John Russell). of January, as required by the Bill passed last year, he did not see any objection to its introduction, though he reserved to himself the right of opposing it on a future stage, should he consider it necessary so to do. MR. T. DUNCOMBE said, he was convinced that the Bill would be unsatisfactory to the country. In fact, he regarded the proposal of the hon. and gallant Member (Sir De L. Evans) as altogether a retrograde movement. The objections of the public were directed against the whole of the ratepaying clauses of the Reform Bill. They contended that Borough electors ought to be put upon the same footing as County electors-that the payment of rates was no condition for the registration of the latter, and that it ought not to be so for the former. He condemned the Bill as a retrogressive. measure, because the measure introduced by the noble Lord the Member for the city of London (Lord John Russell) last year abolished the payment of Assessed taxes as a condition of registration; and the noble Lord was, therefore, in point of fact, in advance of the hon. and gallant Member. The hon. and gallant Member might bring in his Bill if he liked, so far as he (Mr. Duncombe) was concerned; but he must enter his protest on the part of the public that it was only trifling with and frittering away a greater and much more important question. Leave given. Bill ordered to be brought in by Sir De BUDDHISM-CEYLON. PARLIAMENTARY ELECTORS BILL. SIR DE LACY EVANS moved for leave to bring in a Bill to extend the period for payment of rates and taxes for the Elective Franchise. By the Bill of last year on the subject, as it passed the House of Commons, it was provided that the payment of the rates should be made as enacted by the Reform Bill, on or before the 20th of July in each year, but that the rates so to be paid should be not those which had fallen due on or before the 5th of April previously, but those which had fallen due on or before the preceding 6th of October. In the House of Lords, however, the period was altered from the 6th of October to the 5th of January, and with the date so altered, the Bill was eventually passed. The Bill he now asked leave to introduce was to ex-portance, and his (Mr. Hume's) anxiety tend the period backward from the 5th of January to the 10th of October. The principle of the Bill had been repeatedly affirmed by the House. MR. WALPOLE said, that if the object of the Bill was still to require the payment of the rate on or before the 20th of July, but that the payment then made must be in respect of rates due in the preceding month of October, instead of the month MR. HUME said, he rose to move for Copies of the Correspondence respecting Buddhism not printed by the Committee on Ceylon Affairs in the Appendix to their Reports. The question put by the hon. Baronet the Member for the University of Oxford (Sir R. H. Inglis) a few nights ago upon this subject was one of great im was to prevent the evils that might follow from the violation of any treaty with the natives of Ceylon. He wished these documents to be laid before the House, so that hon. Members might have time to consider how dangerous it would be if any individual, however zealous he might be for promoting Christianity, were to interfere with the religious ceremonies of the natives of Ceylon. produce them; but he appealed to the hon. Member to do him the honour of remembering the announcement he made a few evenings ago, that he had given his anxious attention to the subject with the view of putting an end to the differences and unseemly excitement that prevailed in Ceylon with regard to it, and that he was now about to communicate with the Colony in the sanguine hope that a plan might be suggested which would do no injustice to the Buddhists themselves, whilst it would maintain our treaty obligations, and satisfy the just scruples of the Christian portion of the community in the island. He put ing, as he did, what were the contents of these papers, whether their production at this moment might not tend to revive excitement both in this country and in the Colony, and thereby do much to mar the attempt he was making to effect a complete and final settlement of the whole matter. He should have no objection hereafter to produce the papers; but he trusted after what he had stated, the hon. Gentleman would not press for them now. Motion made, and Question proposed "That there be laid before this House Copies of all the Correspondence respecting Buddhism and the Buddhist Priests, laid before the Select Committee on Ceylon Affairs, and not printed by the Committee in the Appendix to their Reports.' SIR JOHN PAKINGTON said, he fully concurred in what had fallen from the hon. Member (Mr. Hume). He had stated, in answer to the question from his hon. Friend the Member for the University of Oxford (Sir R. H. Inglis), and he had thought it right so to state from what he knew had been stated to the contrary in Ceylon and in this country, that he felt we were bound by treaties, and that what-it to the hon. Gentleman, therefore, knowever course might be taken out of just and proper consideration to the feelings of the Christian part of the community, we were bound to recollect our treaty obligations, and to carry them out in a fair spirit. The hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hume) had expressed his anxiety as to the danger of interfering with the Buddhist people on the subject of their religious ceremonies; and he agreed with the hon. Gentleman that, if there was to be any interference, it should be exercised with the greatest care and caution. But, as regarded the immediate object of the hon. Member, namely, the production of the particular papers for which he had moved, he begged to state that he had felt it to be his duty to make himself acquainted with the contents of those papers. The hon. Member had been a member of the Ceylon Committee, and he no doubt recollected the grounds upon which the Committee drew up their Report and withheld these papers. He (Sir J. Pakington) had not himself been a member of that Committee, consequently the hon. Gentleman must be more conversant with the circumstances than he could possibly be; but he would remind the hon. Gentleman that it was because of the events which had then recently occurred, and the state of excite. ment which prevailed upon the question, that the Committee thought it prudent not to publish these papers in their Report. The state of things which had induced the Committee to exclude the papers from their Report had now, however, passed away, and, so far as that was concerned, there was no obstacle in the way of producing them. Generally speaking, he was always anxiously desirous of furnishing information to the House to the utmost extent in his power; and with regard to these papers he should entertain no objection to MR. HUME said, he had to express his perfect satisfaction at the frank explanation of the right hon. Baronet the Colonial Secretary. The right hon. Baronet having distinctly stated that the solemn treaties entered into with the Kings of Kandy would be respected by the Government of this country, he (Mr. Hume) had attained the only object he had in view, and would, therefore, withdraw his Motion. Motion, by leave, withdrawn. THE IONIAN ISLANDS. MR. HUME said, he now had to move for Copies of the Correspondence between the Secretary for the Colonies, and Sir Henry Ward, Lord High Commissioner of the Ionian Islands, since February, 1852. He thought the right hon. Baronet the Colonial Secretary could have no objection to the production of these documents, particularly as, on a previous occasion, he expressed his readiness to afford every information on the subject. Within the last three years no fewer than sixty-eight persons had been " relegated, as it was styled, but which meant "banished" by the police from the Ionian Islands. He had felt it his duty to move for these papers last year, but they were never produced, until after Parliament had been dissolved. Since then a new Parliament had been assembled, and prorogued by the Lord High Commissioner of the Ionian Islands. In fact, no Government whatever existed in those dependencies, save the will of one man. When these papers were produced, he would be prepared to show that acts of most brutal absolutism and ferocious tyranny had been perpetrated by Sir Henry Ward, which were more atrocious, and reflected more discredit upon the character of the British Government, than any conduct pursued by the Austrian Government towards the Hungarians. The Ionians had a free constitution when they were placed under the protection of this country by the Treaty of Paris in 1815, and it was unjust to deprive them of it. He was anxious to have these papers laid upon the table of the House, so that every Member might have the papers in his own hand, and not take the facts contained in them merely upon his statement. It would be his duty upon an early occasion to call the attention of the House to those papers. Motion made, and Question proposed "That there be laid on the table of the House Copies of the Correspondence between Sir John Pakington, baronet, Secretary for the Colonies, and Sir Henry Ward, Lord High Commissioner of the Ionian Islands, since February, 1852, when Sir John Pakington assumed office, including the Correspondence with the banished Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Ionian Islands respecting the terms proposed to them for their liberation from exile: "And, of the Protest by the Members of the Legislative Assembly respecting the Prorogation of the newly-elected Assembly at its first meeting (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 567, of Session 1852)." SIR JOHN PAKINGTON said, he heard with very great satisfaction one statement of the short speech of the hon. Member for Montrose-and which he hoped the hon. Gentleman would not forgetnamely, that on obtaining those papers he was determined to bring the question before the House. He was perfectly ready and willing to produce the papers moved for, and had the hon. Gentleman asked him for them privately, he should have been just as ready and as willing to have placed them at his disposal. The hon. Gentleman, however, could not forego the opportunity which the Motion gave him of repeating those attacks on Sir Henry Ward and the Government of the Ionian Islands which he had already made on two occasions, in language equally harsh and equally unjust with that which he had chosen to employ that evening. It was but justice, however, to Sir Henry Ward to state that upon one occasion, when the hon. Member made an attack upon that Gentleman relative to his conduct in the administration of his Government, he had only found thirteen Gentlemen to support him. He (Sir J. Pakington) had brought down to the House some of the Correspondence to which the hon. Gentleman alluded. With regard to the banished members of the Legislative Assembly, he wished, in common justice to Sir Henry Ward, to read one or two extracts from the Correspondence, in order to show the real character of the conduct of Sir Henry Ward towards them, and how far it was from meriting the character of absolutism which the hon. Gentleman, in so off-handed a manner, ascribed to it. Signor Domeneghini was one of the gentlemen so banished. To an interposition in his favour, on the part of his wife, what was Sir Henry Ward's reply-that of the ferocious tyranny imputed to him by the hon. Gentleman? Let the House judge: "I shall be ready and happy to release Signor F. Domeneghini, whenever he thinks proper to comply with the conditions which I have felt it to be my duty to propose, by giving me his word that he will abstain from seditious attempts for the space of twelve months." So that if he only promises to be a good boy for the space of twelve months, he will obtain his full liberty. In the next despatch Sir Henry Ward then wrote with regard to the relegated members generally :— "I took advantage of the farewell visits paid to me by all those members who have any pretensions offer to the gentlemen now in confinement under the high police power at Cerigotto, through the medium of Count Lunzi and Signor Corrianiti, two of the members for Zante. I was sincerely in hopes that the Session would not have terminated bled me to put an end to all questions connected without a law being passed that would have enawith high police. But as this expectation has not been realised, I must now decide what course to take respecting these prisoners, and I have resolved to propose, once more, to release them, provided they will give me their word to abstain from taking an active part in politics for twelve months." to a character for moderation to make a fresh Next, there was the case of Signor Montferrato; and here he (Sir J. Pakington) would state to the House not only Sir Member, but also the answer which that Henry Ward's proposition to the banished Gentleman thought proper to return :— islands, I had the honour to inform you that I had "Before I set out on my visit to the southern directed my secretary, Mr. Fraser, to acquaint |