the present bill would not be attended with its full efficacy.

Sir H. Parnell thought it was through the fault or negligence of the civil power alone that any measure of this nature could be deemed necessary.

Lord Castlereagh recommended the adoption of the repeal of the fining system, combined with the establishment of the police, and the postponement to next session of that part which related to small stills; with a pledge that it should be one of the first measures then taken into consideration. Some further discussion took place; after which various clauses were proposed and discussed. On a clause for giving the grand juries the power of levying the still fines on town lands, the House divided: Ayes, 37; Noes, 17. The House then resumed.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Wednesday, June 30. REVERSAL OF LORD E. FITZGERALD'S ATTAINDER.] The Earl of Liverpool rose with peculiar pleasure to present to the House on the part of the crown, an act of grace to restore two unfortunate individuals to their full rights as British subjects. It was to reverse the attainder of lord Edward Fitzgerald, by which the blood of his two children, Edward Fox Fitzgerald and Louisa Maria Fitzgerald, had become corrupted. The preamble of the present bill contained three reasons why the former bill should be reversed. The first was, that the individual in question had never been brought to trial, owing to circumstances to which he should do nothing more than allude at present; the second was, that the act of attainder had not passed the Irish parliament till some months after his decease: and the third, which arose out of the two first, was, that as he had not had the benefit of a trial, the attainder could not have been issued against him upon a regular conviction. He thought that these were sufficient reasons for the House to accede to the bill; but, even if they were not, he implored their lordships to recollect that he stood before them as the advocate of unoffending and innocent individuals. One of them had served his country in the field, and had distinguished himself by his gallant behaviour on several occasions: to him, therefore, as well as to his sister, the boon now proposed would be peculiarly gratifying. The Crown, in proposing this

act of grace, was performing an act which was delightful to the feelings of the Prince Regent; and he had no doubt but that it would be quite as grateful to the feelings of their lordships to mitigate the severity of a measure which had been passed in unhappy and unfortunate times.

The Duke of Wellington said, he could not let the present opportunity pass by without bearing testimony to the brave and honourable and excellent conduct of the young man in question, during the time that he had been acquainted with him.

Lord Holland confessed his inability to restrain the feelings by which he was then agitated. He must, therefore, express his gratitude to his Royal Highnessfor the act of grace which he had just caused to be proposed to the House; he must express his acknowledgments to the noble earl, for the honourable and manly manner in which he had proposed it; and he must return his most heartful thanks to the gallant duke, for the flattering testimony which he had borne to the merits of one of the individuals who were to be benefited by it. He felt great satisfaction at the manner in which the preamble was worded, both on private and public accounts. With the private reasons it would be improper to trouble their lordships; and with the public reasons, it would be both injudicious and ungrateful to interfere, on an occasion where unanimity was of so much importance. However, he might have differed in the course of his public life from the noble earl opposite, he was happy to state that that difference had never destroyed or diminished the private attachment which subsisted between them; and in the present instance, he must say, that the dearest friend whom he had in existence, could not have conferred an essential favour upon him in a manner more congenial to his (lord Holland's) feelings, than that which the noble earl had just adopted. He must, therefore, beg leave, both as a public and a

private man, to return him his most sincere thanks for the generous and kindhearted attention which he had exhibited towards the individuals whose interests this bill was calculated to advance.

The bill was read a first time.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, June 30.

CORK HARBOUR BILL.] Sir Nicholas

Colthurst moved, that this bill be now read a second time,

Mr. Hutchinson said, he felt it to be his duty to state to the House the very awkward situation in which he was placed with respect to this bill. Some time since, when the hon. baronet brought in the bill, he had received a letter from the mayor of Cork, and from a number of merchants, requesting most anxiously that he would give his support to the measure. By the very same post there was also forwarded to him, a letter, agreed to at a very numerous meeting of the mercantile interest in Cork, calling on him to oppose the bill. He was sorry to find that so decided a difference of opinion existed in the city of Cork; but the fact was, that many of the inhabitants, persons of great respectability, were decidedly opposed to this bill. It was a most desirable object, that the harbour should be properly improved. Those who petitioned against the bill were of that opinion; but they differed essentially, as to the nature of the present measure, from those who approved of this bill. The bill went to impose a considerable taxation on the city of Cork. He found that a public meeting was called, in May last, for the purpose of considering this measure. The object of the meeting was, to discuss the merits of the bill; but that meeting did not come to any decision, although it appeared clearly, that the sentiments of those who attended it were hostile to the bill. Two days afterwards, another meeting was assembled, in consequence of the former not having come to any resolution, and agreed unanimously to a series of resolutions against the bill. Here, he wished to state, that he did not mean to censure the bill; perhaps when the measure was duly considered, it might be found unobjectionable; but it came on him entirely by surprise. They were now very near the termination of the session; so that it was not possible for those who were hostile to the bill, to state, before a committee, their reasons for wishing it to be rejected. He, however, submitted to the hon. baronet, whether it would not be better, to postpone any further proceeding until the ensuing session. It was not the wealthy merchant that would feel its operation, but persons of more humble means, and whose case, therefore, called more especially for the protection of the legislature. He was placed, with respect (VOL. XL.)

to this bill, in a most painful situation. Those who were in favour of it had gone, he believed, to great expense to effect their object, and a gentleman of great respectability had come over from Ireland, in order to watch its progress. On the other hand, Mr. Isaac Hewitt had been sent over with a petition against the measure, which had been put into the hands of the hon. member for Shrewsbury (Mr. Bennet). He learned from that petition, and he believed the fact to be so, that there was a strong popular feeling against the bill, and therefore he hoped the hon. baronet would adopt the course he had pointed out, and abstain from pressing it further at present; or, at all events, that he would not precipitate any of its stages through the House.

The Speaker said, that where a strong opposition was manifested against any private bill, it never was the practice of the House to suffer any of the regular stages to be hurried over. This being the case, it was for gentlemen to consider, whether there was any prospect of the present bill passing through the committee and third reading in this House, and afterwards proceeding through all its stages in the House of Lords, with a proper degree of consideration. Would there be time for proceeding regularly with it? Whatever disposition the House might feel to assist in the acceleration of a measure, by suspending the standing orders, where all the parties were agreed, it was not customary, where a private measure was opposed, to relax any of them.

Sir N. Colthurst said, he would be the last man to introduce a measure prejudicial to the city of Cork, or opposed to the interests of those whom he had the honour to represent; but he believed that a vast majority was favourable to the bill.

Mr. Bennet said, that he should, in the course of the evening, have to present a petition against the measure from Mr. Isaac Hewitt, a gentleman of great respectability in Cork: that petition contained an able statement of facts; and after a careful perusal of it, he felt satisfied, that the House would not deem it proper, or even decent, to proceed with the bill. The House divided-when there appeared-For the commitment (Sir N. Colthurst acting as teller) 0; Against it, 45. The bill was consequently lost.

(4 Y)

CAMELFORD ELECTION COMMITTEEMR. HALLETT REPRIMANDED.] William Hallett was brought to the bar, where he received the following repriIrand from Mr. Speaker, and was discharged:

"William Hallett; the offence for which you stand committed to the custody of the serjeant at arms, is of the most grave and serious description, insulting to the dignity and authority of this House, and an endeavour, as far as in you lay, to impede the course of public justice. You allege in your petition, in mitigation of your misconduct, that you were not served with the order for attendance; this statement is doubtless correct, but you were reported by a committee of this House, appointed to try the Camelford election petition, as having wilfully absconded with a view to avoid the service of such order.-Be not therefore misled yourself, and think not to mislead the House, by so vain and futile a distinction;-It is no extenuation of your misconduct, and no reparation to public justice, that you did not aggravate your offence by open disobedience. I will only add, that this is an attempt that never can succeed in attaining the object at which it aims;-the only result in which it can terminate, as it has terminated in your case, is, in the disgrace and punishment of the individual who is hardy enough to venture upon it.-In consideration, however, of the peculiar circumstances of this case, the present state of your ill health, your solemn promises of future amendment, and, above all, the pledge you have given, that you will be found ready to attend at any time when called upon, and with a deliberate determination to give full, and fair, and unreserved testimony, when examined,-under all these considerations, the House has determined to forbear any further punishment, and to release you from your present confinement. In obedience, therefore, to the commands of this House, I reprimand you, and have to inform you, that you are now discharged, upon payment of your fees."

DUKE OF KENT'S LOTTERY.] Mr. Grenfell observed, that in the votes, he read the following:-" Duke of Kent's lottery-petition for leave to present a petition for a bill-reported-leave given." He wished for some explanation as to the nature of the proposed lottery.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer was perfectly ready to state the whole transaction, as far as he was acquainted with it. An hon. member had some time since applied to him, to lay before the treasury a memorial from the duke of Kent, for a bill to enable him to dispose of a part of his property by lottery. It was then thought that the consent of the Crown was necessary, and the commands of the Prince Regent were therefore taken upon it. His royal highness referred the question to the lord Chancellor, the first lord of the Treasury, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had considered the question, whether it would be expedient that any individual should be allowed so to dispose of his property to pay off debts or incumbrances, and they had determined that to recommend such a bill to parliament would be setting a dangerous precedent. They had therefore recommended that the royal leave, if it were necessary, should not be given. This information he had given to the hon. member who had offered the memorial; and it had been thought most consistent with delicacy to the illustrious personage concerned, that the memorial should be returned, and the whole proceeding considered a nullity. Since that time, a precedent had been found which warranted the conclusion that the consent and recommendation of the Crown was not necessary. A petition had accordingly been presented to the House, but his majesty's government had given no sanction to it.

Mr. Grenfell said, that government bad acted in this affair as the country expected of them. A bill had, he understood, been prepared in consequence of the petition of last night, and he trusted the House would not allow it to pass without due examination.