The Principality

d 4U -u-(. POPULATION AND P JOlt HATF.S.—A return moved for by Sir n. Ferguson, M.P., shows that in England and Wales, with a population of 15,906,741 the annual, value of the property rated to the Poor rate in the year ending 26th of March, 1848, amounted to £ 67,320,387 the expenditure for the relief and maintenance of the.poor, to £ 6,180,765 the rate in the pound of the expenditure for the relief of poor, &c., on the annual Value of the property rated to the Poor-rate, to Is. IOd., the total number of paupers relieved, Including the casual poor, to 1,876,541 'the proportion p,r cent. of the number of paupers relieved to the population, to 11.8; and the rate per head of the expenditure on the total number of paupers relieved, to £ 3 5s. 10id. In Scotland, with a population of 2,620,216 s a ids, the annual value of the property rated to the Poor-rate was £ ),320,784; the expenditure for the relief and maintenance of the poor, £ 544,334; the rate in the pound of the expendi- ture for relief on the annual value of the property rated to the Poor-rate, Is. lOd; the total number of paupers relieved, 227,647; the proportion per cent. of the paupers relieved to the popula- tion, 8.6 and the rate per head of the expenditure on total number of paupers relieved, £2 7s. Sid. In Ireland, with a population of 8,174,563, the annual value of the property rated to the Poor-rate was L13,187,421 the expenditure for the relief and maintenance of the poor, the rate in the of the expenditure for the relief, &c., of the poor on the "nuual value of the property rated to the Poor-rate, Is. lOjd; the to: d number of paupers relieved, including casual poor, -,457,194; the proportion per cent, of the number of paupers relieved to the population, 17.8 and the rate per head of ex- penditure on the total number of paupers relieved, 16s. 8 jd. The sum given as the annual value of the property rated to Poor-rates in Scotland shows the annual value of the real pro- perty only. That of the means and substance liable to assess- ment for the poor in certain parishes cannot be aseertamed. f TISIV, hv will you endure it? it III ,y be rennrkd by those who are suffering from this most painful disease, that they have tried almost every remedy with- (d: deriving any 11 Almost every remedy!" But it may be asked, have you tried that which has never been known to fail when fairly tested, namely, the Vegetable Restorative Pills, prepared by Jomr KAYE, Esq., of Dalton Hall, near Kudrlersfield? Because those who /utve' tested their merits n.-ioak in the most unequivocal terms in their praise. Three or four cases may be adduced as examples:—Jir. Nicholas Taylor, -3Atclidon-street, Barnstaple, was for many years afflicted with Rheumatism, attended with excruciating pains on the nerves a. i .muscles, and could scarcely ever dress himsclt without assistance. Af;cr taking one box of Kaye's "Worsueli's Pills lie was freed from pain, read by occasionally using them iio lias continued so ever since. — Catherine Clarke, oi Little- town, Durham, was cured by the use of these Pills, after being i), afflicted with Rheumatic-fever, as to bo rendered quite helpless. —John Mitchell, near Teathiicld, Sussex, had violent attacks of Rheumatism for several months. Though an ucJ. man, he was speedily cured, and enabled him to follow his o; ■ upation with easel—John Williams, Pembet, near Rhuabon, after being afflicted widi Rheumatism for twelve weeks, was completely restored t-) the enjovmeat of health by the use of Lay" :s Worsdell's Piils. i-ilizil Dickinson, of Lockington, was dreadfully afflicted for four years with Tic-doloureux, and applied to several.medical gentlemen without --Silo was completely cured by the use of Kaye's pi-lls.—Sold in boxes, at Is*. I .id. 2s. 9d. 4s. 6d by Barclay's, Farringdon-street; Sutton's, Bow-churchyard; Edwards, St. Paul's-churchvard an 1 all Medicine Venders.

THE METROPOLITAN FINANCIAL AND PARLIA- MENTARY REFORM ASSOCIATION. The first public meeting of this association was held on Mon- day afternoon at the London Tavern, Bishopsgate-street. It was most numerously attended, and amongst those who occupied seats on the platform we observed-Arthur Anderson, Esq., M.P., Ralph Bernal Osborne, Esq., M.P., John Williams, Esq., M.P., B. M. Wilcox, Esq., M.P., Colonel Thompson, M.P., Lawrence I-Ieyworth, Esq., P.M. At one o'clock, the chair was taken by Sir Joshua Walmsley, the president of the association, who was greeted with loud and prolonged cheering. Mr. Tindal ATKINSON read the report. Mr. R. TAYLOII then moved the following resolution :— "That, in the present contest between the advocates of a searching reform in the national {inances and the Parliamentary representation on the one hand, and the upholders of a system which favours the few at the expense of the millions, on the other, it is important to strengthen and give effect to public opinion through the medium of an organised body, uniting reformers of all grades and that the establishment of the Metropolitan Financial and Parliamentary Reform Association is therefore a matter not only of expediency but likewise of paramount necessity;" which, after it had been seconded by Mr. W. J. HALL was sup- ported by Mr. OSBORNE, who said, he had been much amused by an account in the newspapers that a member had sat 20 years in the House of Commons who turned out afterwards to be a wo- man. He would not repeat the name, but although he did not know the gentleman, and had not the honour of sitting with him in the House, he understood he was a good Conservative old lady—and he had strong suspicions that his was not a sin- gular case. Most respectable and amiable old ladies held seats in that assembly, and with a feeling natural to the weaker sex, they were fond of rank, and mistook the principles of taxation for the principles of the Constitution. It was their duty, how- ever, to purge the House of those old ladies, and send them back to those places which they were more qualified to adorn and represent. He would ask whether it was fair that the Go- vernment, who had climbed to power by a popular cry, and who, as it were, had found their way into Buckingham Palace on the shoulders of Cobden and Bright, should throw cold water upon a motion for financial reform ? How was it that they could see no wisdom except in a lord, no probity except in an estated gentleman ? In fact, he thought the tendency of the present day was to make the House of Commons a great burrow for titled rabbits. That which was called the People's House was nothing but a taxing machine, which raised a greater amount of taxes than had ever been done under the most despotic monarch of any period. In the year 1830, when the Duke of Wellington was turned out on the score of economy, and when the Whigs canvassed the population of the country, and got a majority, the public expenditure was L54,000,000 and upwards. But there was a surplus of £ 1,711,000. Let them mark that! In 1848 the public expenditure amounted to £ 58,000,000, and the excess of expenditure over revenue— spending more than they got-was 13,000,000. Yet the inte- rest of the debt had been reduced in the mean time. What else had they got ? An income-tax of 550,000,000, which had been laid on on false pretences—for they were told at first that it would only be put on for three years. But the tax was op- posed by the present Government, and when they came into office they turned round and coolly prepared to increase the tax to iC5 per cent. last year; and if they had not put their hands in their pockets, and finding a deficit, instructed their members to speak out, they would have had an increase of the income-tax. In 1830 the estimate for the army and navy, ord- nance, and miscellaneous,- which nobody could explain, and nobody get at, was E17,500,000 (hear). But what did miscel- laneous estimates consist of? Such things as a gate to Buck- ingham Palace, £ 80,000, and £ 600 for taking a bishop to Ja- maica. He assured them, that though he and others sat as the comptrollers of the public purse, it would be the greatest ab- surdity to tell them that though they represented public opin- ion, that they did control that expenditure. IIoAvever, when the new Whig Government came in, they felt that they must re- duce the expenditure, and it was reduced to £ 14,000,000. But what did it rise to in 1848 ? Why, they could scarcely believe that it had increased X9,000,000, and the present estimate was £ 23,315,852. Compare that with the expenditure of 1830. But the truth was, both Whigs and Conservatives were to blame. They got frightened at the state of the Continent, and kept up large war establishments. But the Government said, "We are retrenching now and they began by reducing the number of poor clerks, who had, perhaps, wives and families—they caught the small flies and allowed the Leviathans to break through. They had saved a few thousands by reducing the number of clerks but if they were sincere in what they did, they must hegin at the heads of the departments. Then with respect to their diplomatic expenses, it was enormous but no one had a chance of being employed in the service unless he were connected with the Lord Tom Noddy family—no man whose name was either Smith, Jenkins, or who possessed the patronymic of Buggins. It would be next to impossible to send a man with such a name to a foreign court. The diplomatic esta- blishment costs £ 180,000; andwhatdid they get? The work could be done for much less. For upwards of a year they had. had no ambassador at Madrid, who had received £ 6,500 a-year. He was a very amiable man, but he was withdrawn; and it was noto- rious that their affairs were going on there much better, because they had no diplomatic interference, and saved at the same time_ £ 6,500 but if they must have ambassadors, let the Smiths, the Jenkinses, and the Bugginses have a chance now they, he thought, would be satisfied to do the work for ii,ooo a-year. The Prime Minister might come down to the House and say he had reduced the number of the Horse Guards, saying, See what I. have done—I have taken off some of the dead weights." Why, the Horse Guards cost £ 190,000. Why, the present Com- mander-in-Chief received £8,700 a-year, with perquisites, whilst Lord Amersham, when Commander-in-Chief, received only £ 1,000. And with respect to the perquisites, they were as much looked after as the cook looked after the perquisites she possessed in the suet. To keep up all these taxations, great appeals had been made to the warlike propensities of this country. A clever writer had said, in reviewing the history of the British Constitution, that it had occurred to him that if taxes were raised for this purpose, it would appear that war was made to raise taxes, and not taxes levied to carryon war. But then they were told they had got an empire (and he could not but laugh at the assertion) on which the sun never set. He had often puzzled himself to know what was that to working men. What was the remedy? To him it was clear. They might go on bothering about financial reform and all that, but it would be no use, they must reform the House of Commons. He was astonished that the forty-shilling franchise had not been made use of by the people. He was astonished that it had not been taken out of the dust in which it had been lying for centuries. The meeting was then addressed by a Chartist, named CLARKE, and Messrs. STURGK and PHILLIMOKE. Mr. WILLIAMS moved the second resolution, as follows: "That, in the opinion of this meeting, the expenditure of the State is characterised by an extravagance the most reprehensible that to sustain this reckicss waste an enormous amount of taxation is required, which, as now levied, presses most unequally upon the different sections of the community: that so large a proportion of the taxes is imposed upon the necessaries of life, that 110 economy nor self-denial on the part of the poor man can enable him to escape from, those burthens that the effects-of such a system are not only cruel, arbitrary, and pernicious towards the industrious ,dasseR. but are calculated to produce that wide-spread demoralisation and those flagrant crimes which are the offspiing of poverty and distress; and that, therefore, the whole fraincAvork of taxation should be so altered as to adjust its burthens to the respective means of those who are to bear them." The honourable gentleman went into some statistics to illus- trate the present unjust system of taxation. The taxation of last year was £ 57,000,000, to which were to be added £ '2;>,000,00 for local rates, making together £ 80,000,000 sterling taken from the pockets of the industrious classes. They were told that the Reform Bill would lessen taxation, but instead of its doing so the burdens had increased by £ 4,000,000, while the national debt had been augmented by £ 40,000,000, of which £ .11,000,000 had been added since Lord John Russell had come into office. So much, then, for this taxation, which was levied upon the people to pay pensions which since the Reform Bill had in- creased from £ 4,100,000 to £ 7,100,000. Now let him tell J them how these taxes were raised on articles of consumption, c such as tea, soap, coffee; on tea worth Sd. a pound the same 1 tax was imposed as on tea wortn 5a. a pound, and such was the case in reference to other articles of consumption. Then the tax upon beer was just uouble its cost, or 100 per cent. What was the tax upon champagne and claret? 15 per cent against the 100 per cent on beer. Therefore, again the poor » man paid seven times more on the average than the rich man. ) Take, again, the case of tobacco, which was esteemed by so many working men as a luxury. The tobacco consumed by the poor man was Avorih about 3d. per lb., but the duty was < 3-. 2d. per lb., or 1,200 per cent., in the shape of duty. Now, 1 what did they think was the duty on the fine cigars consumed by gentlemen—only seventy-five per cent—so that the duty on the poor man's tobacco was fifteen times as much as the duty upon the gentlemen's cigars (laughter). Such was a spe- cimen of the system of the taxation of the people. Then, again, the.stamp duties paid by the poor was unfortunately greater in proportion than those paid by the rich. Notwith- standing the pressure of taxation upon every class of the com- munity, Lord John Russell had the assurance to stand up and state, in reply to the motion of Mr. Hume, which was not unlike the objects of this association, that the middle-classes were content with the existing state of things that they neither wanted Mr. Hume's proposed reform, nor did the working-classes want the Charter. They were all satisfied with the way in which they were dealt with by the oligarchy that ruled them. Sir R. Peel said, when he introduced the income-tax, in 1842, I can give conclusive proofs that you have arrived at the limits of taxation on the articles of consump- tion of the working-classes." Now a man of the sagacity of Sir Robert Peel knew as well as any man how he could extract the last shilling from the working-classes. The statement was disputed. Sir Robert Peel defended it he said they had put five per cent. on, which should have realised 1,800,000, but it had realised nothing, showing that the working-classes could pay no more. Then the profits and conditions of the middle- classes were deteriorating, and the working-classes were dete- riorating also. Among the classes who produced all the wealth and all the luxuries enjoyed by the taxers—last year 3,500,000 received relief in England and Wales, and 100,000 were sent to prisons for crimes of various degrees. Now Sir J. Graham uttered a remarkable prophecy in his" remarkable pamphlet, published thirty years ago, which at the present moment AA-as very striking, lie said, Whenever the country presents the spectacle of millions wanting bread, then would the people sweep away titles, pensions, and honours." Now, what was the remedy for these evils ? If any man expected any material reduction of taxation without Parliamentary reform, he imposed a great delusion upon himself (cheers). It was contrary to all experience. Look even at the proceedings of the present session Mr. Cobden, upon a motion for the reduction of only ten millions of taxation, without any definite period being specified, had only eighty-four votes and Mr. Hume, Avho proposed a small reduction in our huge standing army, had only forty gentlemen to support him. Mr. Samuel MOKLEY said, as one belonging to the middle classes lie was glad in having an opportunity of identifying himself with that movement, which he believed had much to do with the happiness of a great mass of the working people (cheers). He was connected with a house in the City which employed considerably more than 2,000 men, and he was pre- pared to state that when food was cheapest wages were inva- riably highest. During the late period of distress he thought the working classes had conducted themselves admirably, and he thought if they continued to do so, and united together, that the higher classes would no longer be able to stand against them (cheers). He thought they were entitled to their hear- tiest and strongest congratulation. He felt glad that he had had an opportunity of giving his most hearty adhesion to this movement, and endeavouring to prevail upon every one to give their support to it (cheers). He believed that if'the associa- tion pursued its course with vigour and energy all the electors for the counties of England would be secured to it, and afford them great aid in carrying out their great object. Dr. LOXGSTAFP and Mr. WILSON having addressed the meeting. Mr. Lawrence HEYAVOIITII, M.P., also spoke in favour of direct taxation. At present CS.5,000,000 were extorted from the pockets of the poor man, and, of course, he was therefore obliged to consume less of the articles of consumption, so reducing the productive powers of the country. A system of direct taxation would remove all this evil, and he hoped shortly to see it adopted (hear). He admired the universal suffrage which existed in France, and he thought the peace of the country and the firmness of the Government at that moment solely depended upon it (cheers). Direct taxation recom- mended itself in every light (hear, hear). Then with respect to Universal Suffrage, lie had advocated it ever since he was able to speak—(hear, hear)—and if there were an universal expression of opinion among the men of England for Universal Suffrage, it must inevitably be conceded to them (cheers). The next resolution was moved by Mr. D. YVntE, and seconded by Mr. REYNOLDS, and the meeting separated.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THURSDAY, MAY 17. EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY ACCOUNTS. During the time of private business, on the presentation of two petitions relating to the concerns of the Eastern Counties Railway Company, Mr. HODSON and Mr. WADDINGTON entered into ex- planations respecting their conduct in connexion with that com- pany. The Land Improvement and Drainage (Ireland) Bill was read a third time and passed. On the order of the day for the second reading of the Poor Re- lief (Ireland) Bill, Mr. GnOGAN objected to parts of the measure, in respect to matters of detail rather than of principle, and suggested various suppletory provisions. Mr. P. Scilopr, approving the principle of the bill, remarked that. it omitted to secure its great object-to provide an effectual relief for the destitute poor. After some short speeches from Mr. OSBORNE, Lord C. HAilIIL- TON, Il-. CAIXAGI-IAN, Colonel DUNNE, Mr. HEKBEUT, Sir. W. SOMERVILL,E, and Mr. V. SMITH, f Lord J. RussELL, 111 reply to Mr. Smith, said, if the poor o, Ireland had been relieved by rates of 8s. or 12s. in the pound and the House was asked to provide for an excess over such rates, it might lead to some apprehension but this was not the case, and an abstract declaration of the law, that the whole property of the unions was liable, would be no security that the people would be relieved. Pie found that the last rate in Ballina was 3s. l§d., and that while in some electoral divisions rates of lis. and 12s. had been collected, in those where aid was required from public grants rates of only 3s., 3s. 6d., and 4s. 2d. had been raised. These small rates had been collected with the utmost severity, and had in some cases suspended the cultivation of the land. Li this state of things there was no way to relieve the destitute but by giving a security and a limit. beyond which the cultivator of the land should not be liable; thereby the fund for the relief of the poor would be increased, while the cultivation of the land would not be interfered with. But the question still remained there migh be unions in which, after paying a 5s. rate and a 2s. rate, there would be an amount of destitution still unprovided for, and Mr. Smith had asked whence the provision was to come. His answer was, that, as a general principle, a rate-in-aid should not. continue in Ireland, and that the maximum of 7s. being found insufficient to meet the amount of destitution would not be a ground of claim upon the Consolidated Fund he thought it would be better to 'leave its relief to such resources as existed before the Poor-law of 1847 than to sanction a national rate, or a claim upon the Conso- l.dated Fund. Lord John noticed some of the objections of Mr. Ilerbert, but reserved his opinion upon others until the bill was in committee. Mr. HOKSMAN considered that the answer of Lord J. Russell to the important inquiry of Mr. Smith was so vague as to leed to an inference that Government had not made up their minds upon the subject, so that the maximum might turn out only a nominal one, and prove a snare to the rate-payer. Mr. NAPIER objected to the principle of a maximum rate, on the ground of its injustice and its incongruity with the spirit of the law of 1833. A maximum rate rendered the local administration of the Poor-law a matter of much importance, and Mr. Napier gave some extraordinary examples of the large stocks of luxuries which even vice-guardians thought themselves at liberty to lay in at the expense of the rate-payers. IFe showed likewise how unfairly a iiitixiDiuai rate would operate upon jointures and rent- charges. After a short further discussion, the bill was read a second time. The Accounts of Turnpike Trusts (Scotland) Hill was read a third time and passed, and the House then adjourned.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—FRIDAY, MAY 18. IRISH RATE-IN-AID BILL. The Marquis of LANSDOAVXE moved the third reading of this bill. ° The Earl of GLF.XGALL, in a speech of considerable length, warmly opposed the bill, and after repeating several of the ob- ections which have been so often urged against the measure, con- cluded by moving that the bill be read a third time that day six nonths. Lord CREMOKNB had no hesitation in supporting the bill. and Lord DESAKT declared his intention of voting for Lord Glengaii's amendment. The Earl of MOUNTCASHKI.L had voted against the bill on a former occasion, and felt bound to continue his opposidou in its present stage. The Earl of WICKI.OW and lord De Ros also spoke against the bill. After observations from the End of CARLISLE in defence .it the Ministerial policy in introducing this measure, Earl FlTz- IVILLIAM expressed his decided disapprobation of the bill. Their lordships then divided, when the numbers were For (he third reading 37 Against it 29 Majority —8 iheir lordships th-m adjourned. [

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-FRIDAY, MAY 18. The Speaker took the chair at four o'clock. C ELECTION OF A MEMBER FOR LIMERICK IN THE PLACE OF SMITH O'BRIEN. Lord John RUSSELL moved a resolution, "That it appears by the said record that William Smith O'Btien, a member of this House, ha& been adjudged guilty of high treason;" and he fol- lowed up that resolution with another, that the Speaker do issue his warrant for the election of a member for the county of Lime- rick in the room of William Smith O'Brien, adjudged guilty of high treason. Lord John prefaced his motion by observing that it was a case without a precedent—the only precedents on the jour- nals being cases of persons taken in open rebellion, who were ex- pelled before conviction, or of persons convicted of offences which might leave some doubt whether the House should visit the parties with so severe a penalty as expulsion. In the present case the proof of the offence and of conviction was complete and with re- gard to the consequences of such an oiEmcr, all the writers upon constitutional law, from Lord Coke, declared that by the law of Parliament any person guilty of high treason was incapac 1 from sitting in either House. Mr. O'Brien was a person CIVHJV dead he could not be elected as a member of Parliament, and he could not retain his seat having been elected. He (Lord John) had thought it better not to create a precedent by moving a vo of expulsion; he had consulted with the Speaker and with other persons, and their clear conclusion was, that the proper course for the House to take was to agree to the resolution he had i-i)- posed. Both resolutions were aureed to. The House then resolved itself into committee on the Parlia- mentary Oaths Bill, when Mr. J. O'CONNELL, who had com- plained in an early part of the evening of a report in the Tinu; noticed that strangers were in the Home. The Chairman immediately ordered the strangers to withdraw, and with them, of course, went the reporters. In about three hours the gallery was re-opened, when the Hrese was still in committee upon the Parliamentary Oaths Bill. Some discussion took place upon a motion of Mr. M'CCLLAGH, to omit the sixth clause, which provides that the act shoo d not ex- tend to Roman Catholics, nor affect the Roman Catholic H(èj.ef Act. The motion was negatived by 103 against 54. The Defects in Leases Bill passed through committee. The other orders on the paper having been disposed of, House adjourned, -———

HOUSE OF LORDS.—MONDAY, MAY 21. THE ALLEGED ATTEMPT TO ASSASSINATE THE QUEEN. The Marquis of LANSDOWSE called the attention of the House to the odious, and at the same time contemptible, attempt made against her Majesty's life on Saturday. He was happy to inibrni their lordships that there was no reason to suppose that tile C: cumstances which attended that atrocious offence were such as to z justify a committal for high treason, and the offender would there- fore be tried for a misdemeanour according to the act passed in 1842. Upon these grounds it was not his intention to move for any address to her Majesty. After a short conversation the House went into committee un the Navigation-laws, when Lord STANLEY rose to move the amendments in the bill (,f which he had given notice. He proposed to secure the great pr; ciples of the Navigation-laws, which lie took to be, first, exclusive maintenance of the trade between our colonies and the mother country and next, to maintain the advantage in distant vojages. and the communication with countries possessing no shipping of their own. He would also confine a British register to a British built ship, and so preserve the shipping interest, unimpaired. But while he kept these great principles inviolate, he proposed to give her Majesty in council the power to permit relaxations in favour of countries willing to enter into reciprocal agreements. It micu be said this policy was not generous, but this was a matter j'nui which generosity did not enter, and if we were to do business as all it must be in a business-like way. It was this question of re- ciprocity that he wished to try by the amendment proposed to by inserted in the first clause and, in conclusion, he would only beg the House to consider that they had now to decide whether they should at once repeal these Navigation-laws, so long looked up as the basis of our naval strength, for adherence to the principle of which a large majority of the people were earnestly and anxiously petitioning, or whether we should deal with practical inconve- niences by permitting her Majesty to exercise a dispensing power, in regard to a portion of those laws, in favour of countries willing to confer a like advantage upon us. The noble lord concluded iy moving his amendment. J Earl GIIEY thought the most judicious course was, in the :ir-t place, to repeal existing restrictions, and then re-enact those it might be desirable to retain. Lord Stanley found this would be inconvenient, because; driven out of generalities, he would thou- have been compelled to defend the restriction he proposed tomain- r"1\n. 1-:ro fmm enminu to close quarters, h; t. ion untenable. The system of reciprocity was a bad one, but if it were to be adopted, the mode of enacting it pfopost d by Lord Wharnehffe was much preferable to that recommended by Lord Stanley. Lord WH IINCLIEFE protested against the amendment. The Earl of HAKHOAVBX did not think the case against the Navigation Bit! had been proved. Earl GRANVILLE designated the amendment ns altowtLev abortive. Lord COLCHESTER supported it. The Marquis of CLAXKICAHDK maintained the amendment volved a wholesale infraction of treaties. Lord BROUGHAM, after reiterating his attack on Mr. Porter, ad- verted to the great number of petitioners against the bill, and justified the assertiun. of the late Lord Melbourne, that he who advocated the abolition of all restrictions was only fit for Bedlam. If. by negotiation or treaty, we could obtain an equivalent, let the Crown have the power to give up pro tanto existing restrictions. But looking to the prodigious mass of interests imperilled, he called 011 their lordships to stand by that venerable system e.sta-^ blished by Cromwell -200 years ago, and which had been adhered" to in principle by all our statesmen ever since. Earl 11rzWILLIAM did not deny that temporary good had arise 1 to in principle by all our statesmen ever since. Earl 11rzWILLIAM did not deny that temporary good had arise 1 from the Navigation-laws, but lie altogether denied that tlu-y had created the great naval power of this country. He looked forward to the time when. by the operation of this Act, prohibitions and restrictions wouid be got rid of which crippled commerce and afforded no adequate security for the maintenance of our military marine. The Earl of ELLESBOHOUGII spoke in favour of Lord Stanley's plan. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE contended that much more w; s involved in the amendment than the question how best to cany out the principle of reciprocity. The bill removed all restrictions except those imposed by necessity, while Lord Stanley kept lip ,1:1 restrictions but those he was forced to abandon by circumstances he could net. resist. Canada would not be satisfied with the noble lord's concession, the chief advantage of which would be derived, by America, whose rivalry the noble lord deprecated so much, He rested the defence of this bill maiuly on the warehousing sys- tem, which it went to foster, by making this the great entrepot of 1 he world, the mart for all strangers, the seat of all commerce-— thus placing on a firm basis the iitval. and mercantile prosperity of the country. lie trusted their lordships would leitcc the amendment. Their iordslups then divided, when the amendment was nega- tived by 116 to 103. Their lünlÙips then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MONDAY, MAY 21. Lord John RUSSELL, in moving the postponement of some of the orders of the day, took the opportunity, in order to aliav public apprehension, which had been excited by a statement in the newspapers that, a treasonable attempt had been made against the life of her Majesty, to say that, although it was unfortunately true that a pistol had been disc harged at the Queen, there was nu reason '1 9 to accuse the individual who nad committed the act of a treason- aide (lesigi it appeared to be more remarkable for its baseness than its atrocity. He did not, therefore, propose to move an ad- dless to the Queen. Her Majesty, he added, had acted upon the oci asion with her usual firmness. This announcement was re- ceived with loucl and cordial cheers from all parts of the 11 The House then went. into committee upon the Encumbered instates (.Ireiand) Bill, the details of which underwent much dis- cussion in the course of it unavailing attempts were made to ex- tiaet from the Government the names of the persons to be ap- pointed commissioners under the bill. On the consideration of tla Landlord and Tenant Bill, a* amended in committee, Mr. MUI.LINGS moved the insertion of two clauses—one to pre- vent or lessen the evils of the right to emblemems, as well aVrfe loss and injury to tenants holding under landlords having linu;d interests the other enacting that in case the growing crops oi a- tenant shall be seized in execution, they sliall, lie liable, so Iwnu us they remain on the farm, to the rent due to the landlord. The clauses, after some objections on the part of M r. PUSKV, were agreed to. The Charitable Trusts Bill was read a second time, after a few remarks from Captain PECIIELL and Mr. TCRNEH. The Passengers Bill went through committee pro forma. The Lords' amendments in the Rate-in-Aid Bill were agreed to. The House adjourned at eleveii o'clock.