but the meeting was totally unconnected with politics. Differing as he did from that illustrious individual, he could not blame him for the honest and open avowal of his sentiments. Under these considerations he had acted; and, as he had answered both the charges brought against him, be should dismiss the subject altogether. (Great applause.) With regard to the individual who had made this attack, he only knew him as having published a book, whose sole object was to traduce the liberal institutions of his own country. As an Elector of Westminster, he should always attend this anniversary, because it was the anniversary of a great example set to the people of England, which had shown them how reform was to be carried. After a few more observations, Mr. L. sat down amidst considerable applause. Mr. WHITBREAD and Sir ROBERT WILSON, returned thanks on their healths being drunk. The healths of Mr. M. Fitzgerald, Mr. J. Burdett, Mr. Ponsonby, and Mr. O'Connell, were then drunk with enthusiasm. "Mr. Honeywood, and the Electors of Kent."-Mr. HONEYWOOD, in returning thanks, begged to assure the electors of Westminster, that his principles with respect to Reform were unchanged, and he trusted unchangeable. Sir F. BURDETT next proposed the healths of the Hon. M. Fitzgerald, S. Rice, Esq. M.P., D. O'Connell, Esq. and the Hon. Members of Parliament present, who were friends to Reform. Mr. M. FITRGERALD returned thanks. Mr. O'CONNELL, on being loudly called, came forward; and was warmly applauded. His unwillingness, he said, to trespass on their attention, was increased by his inability-by the impossibility which he felt of giving adequate utterance to the sentiment of gratitude that penetrated his soul, and to the sense of high obligations which he, in common with his countrymen, felt towards that illustrious man, Sir F. Burdett. There could not be found in the British Empire a purer Representative; and never was he more delighted than with the ability and eloquence with which he illustrated the first principle and precept of Christianity that night-"the doing unto others as we would be done by." He would take some pride and vanity to himself for being the person who first sug gested, and who was instrumental in obtaining for his countrymen, Sir Francis Burdett as their leading advocate; and in the petition which he (Mr. O'Connell) prepared, that participation of equal rights was solicited on the principle laid down by Sir Francis Burdett that night-on a desire of sharing liberty in common with other Dissenters, and on the ground of religious liberty being a civil right. (Loud cheers.) If in the struggle to obtain this object, difficulties beset us; if violence was manifested-if aught of obstacle or unpleasantness occurred, let it be borne in mind the object of the prize for which we contend is, the becoming the brothers of Britons. (Great applause.) The name of Sir Francis Burdett would serve as a spell-word in his native country to sustain them in their present disappointment, and to cheer them to future exertions for the recovery of their rights; and the respect they bore him would also actuate them in following his counsel, and to seek redress for the long and unmerited wrong, by those means, and those means only, which the constitution sanctioned. (Loud cheering followed Mr. O'Connell's speech.) On the health of Mr. JOHN WILLIAMS and the prosperity of the Bar being drank, that Gentleman returned thanks, and observed, the cause which they were at present met to celebrate was the cause of freedom in general, and he hoped it would shame the rest of England to imitate their conduct. "The health of Mr. J. Smith, and the other independent Members of Parliament." After which, that of Lord Cochrane. Mr. THELWALL then proposed The Liberty of the Press" in a short speech. The toast was druuk with great enthusiasm. The meeting broke up at eleven o'clock. SPEECH OF A COTTON SPINNER. Catholic myself, and have no passions on this subject to be inflamed, but [The following Speech is given, as affording another proof of the intelli-justly dealt with, I should not consider it a mortal crime if they were to Mr. HODGINS (an operative cotton-spinner, whose speech, at a meeting held about two months ago respecting the Combination Laws, some of our readers may remember) then came forward; and asked whether a working man was entitled to address the meeting. On being answered in the affirmative, he said," I come forward with the view of arguing the question now before the meeting, with working men, like myself, of whom I see a good many here. I know that there are gentleman present, of great eloquence, and much better qualified than I am to discuss this question: but then their eloquence is not always convincing to the working man's mind, because it is frequently above his comprehention: it is a dish of fish that he does not understand.—(4 laugh.) Now I, who am a working man myself, have paid some attention to this subject, and having formed certain opinions upon it, I now come forward to deliver those opinions to my fellow-workinan. In the first place, I beg to make a few observations on the speech of the gentleman who spoke the last but one (Mr. Braidley.) I cannot help thinking that he wishes rather to inflame our passions than to appeal to our understandings. I am no THE PRESS IN INDIA.-MR. BUCKINGHAM-THE JOHN BULL. On Monday the Privy Council was occupied in hearing arguments on an appeal entered by Mr. Buckingham against "a certain regulation, issued by the Governor-General and Council of Bengal." The principal object of this regulation was to render the right of publishing a newspaper in India dependent on the obtaining of a licence from the Government, which licence was revocable at the pleasure of the Government. Mr. Denman and Mr. Williams appeared for the appellant; Mr. Sergeant Bosanquet, Mr. Serjeant Spankie, Mr. Brougham, and Mr. Tindal, for the East India Company. same control over themselves that we did. The progress of knowledge in India must be slow milk was for babes, meat for men. The effect of introducing into India any regulations inconsistent with the policy by. which it had hitherto been governed, would be to cause scenes of bloodshed and warfare, and might not only separate the country from us, but, perhaps throw it into the hands of one of our enemies. Mr. Sergeant SPANKIE contended, that the freedom of the press was totally incompatible with the existence of Indian society. During the time the Calcutta Journal continued, it created a most feverish state of public mind. It acted like a perpetual blister or a sirocco, which daily. assailed the inhabitants of Calcutta. Mr. BROUGHAM said, that having been pointedly alluded to, he would,, with their Lordship's permission, submit a few observations to the Council. The Earl of HARROWBY stated, that Mr. Brougham could not address the Council, because it was the custom to hear only two counsel on each side. broke up. The decision will be given on a future day. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the Council shortly after UNITED PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS. LAW OF ATTAINDER. Lord HOLLAND moved the second reading of the Bill he had intro duced respecting the Law of Attainder, the object of which was, he said, not to lessen the punishment of treasonable offenders, but to confine it to the guilty.-The second reading was opposed by Lords MELVILLE, REDESDALE, and ELDON,-the latter observing, that with respect to the principle of the law of attainder and corruption of blood, he thought, when it was considered how extensively ruinous the consequences of treasonable practices might be to the very existence of families, there was no reason to complain if some portion of the punishment of a defeated treason was made to fall upon the families of those by whom it had been set on foot.-On a division, the bill was thrown out by 15 to 12. Friday, May 27. Mr. DENMAN observed, that Mr. Buckingham had, by the operation of the ordinance against which he appealed, been reduced from a state of affluence to one of comparative poverty. Under the Act of George III. the Supreme Government in India had the power of publishing certain regulations, which acquired the force of laws on being registered in the Supreme Court; but that statute contained a restrictory clause, that those regulations should not be repugnant to the laws of England. It was on the ground that the regulation issued with regard to the press was repugnant to the law of England, that Mr. Buckingham had appealed against it. The regulation in question was not the act of Lord Hastings, but the act of Mr. Adam, the Deputy Governor-General. Within a very short period after the regulation was registered, the licence was withdrawn from the Calcutta Journal. In the preamble to the regulation,-it was stated that matters tending to bring the Government into contempt, and to disturb the peace and good order of society, had of late been frequently circulated in newspapers. It might be expected that some evidence would have been brought forward in support of that statement, but there was none. But allowing that the statement was true with respect to some newspapers, it was false with respect to the Calcutta Journal, which had been unjustly deprived of its licence. Only two actions for libel had been instituted against that paper. In one of them a verdict of acquittal was recorded, and the other was still pending because the prosecutor had not thought proper to prosecute it. But what if some newspapers had abused the liberty of publishing, was that a reason for destroying the freedom of the press altogether? Because the branches of a tree were too luxuriant, was it proper to grub up the root? The regulation placed an arbitrary power in the hands of the Government, which might be (he would not say it had been) abused. He would suppose that the Editor of the Calcutta Journal had been twice prosecuted for libel, and in one case acquitted; and in the other only not acquitted because the prosecutors were afraid to proceed with the case. He would suppose that in England a paper was circulated of the basest description -whose daily food was the misery which it caused-whose principal prey was fame and character-which had selected an exalted female, and endeavoured to drive her to solitude, to exile, perhaps to deathwhich had held out the terror of its contaminating touch over every lady of rank who ventured to pay to that illustrious female the homage which her rank and her virtues demanded-which had been frequently visited by prosecutions for malignant libels on the living and the dead, respecting which no astonishment had been excited except as to the leniency of the results-which somehow or other was supposed to have got hold of the patronage or connexion of Government, (unlike the libellers of former days, who boldly encountered the dangers of their profession), and basely crouched under the shelter which that connexion afforded them. If such a paper existed in this country, it was not surprising that the colonies, with their love of imitation, should furnish a counterpart to it. He would therefore suppose that some wretched pander might have thought it a good speculation to set up a paper of a like infamous description at Cal-tradict the facts alleged in the petition.-It was ordered to be printed. cutta, and, in order to destroy Mr. Buckingham's influence on public opinion, had assailed his moral character by libels of such an infamous description as had called forth an expression of horror from the Bench. He would further suppose that this paper still continued to enjoy the patronage of the Indian Government, whilst the Calcutta Journal, which had never been convicted of libel, was suppressed! It was possible that all these circumstances might take place under the regulation which the Indian Government had issued respecting the press, and therefore he desired to have it revoked. The regulation was founded on a supposed necessity, which had in no way been made out for these reasons he called upon their Lordships to declare the regulation null and void. addition to the incomes of the Duchess of Kent and Duke of Cumberland, Lord LIVERPOOL, after a brief speech, proposed an Address for a which was agreed to without opposition. (See the Commons on this subject.) : Mr. J. WILLIAMS contended that the other side were bound to prove that the regulation was not repugnant to the law of England, which, if they failed to do, it was dicta est causa with regard to their case. Mr. Serjeant BOSANQUET observed, that all the argument of his learned friends rested upon the clause contained in the Act of Parliament restricting the Indian Government from framing any regulation or ordinance which should be repugnant to the laws of England. The phrase must be interpreted in this way-that no regulation should be framed repugnant to the English law as applicable to India. All the laws of England were not applicable to all the colonies. The principle of an interference with the press had been established at an early period of the history of India. It was impossible to apply English notions to the people of India. Their opinions were as unlike ours as their persons. The laws and manners of England would fit the minds of the natives of India as ill as her clothing would fit their persons. To establish in India discussion on every subject, moral, political, and religious, would be as unwise as to administer ardent spirits to the red inhabitants of America. We might use the deleterious liquid without becoming intoxicated; but the American Indian, immediately on quaffing it, became delirious, and all their bad passions were brought into action, because they did not possess the HOUSE OF COMMONS. CRUELTY AND OPPRESSION. A petition from Mr. B. Coile was presented by Mr. J. SMITH, complaining of the sufferings the Petitioners endured in Ireland, in 1796, 1803, and 1804, owing chiefly to the conduct of Dr. Trevor (still living) the Jailer at Chilwainham. The Petitioner gave instances of the brutal treatment he had endured, and concluded by declaring, that both his health and his fortune, amounting at one time to 40,000l. had been destroyed by the persecutions he had suffered; and prayed reparation from the House. Mr. GOULBURN observed, the grievances complained of were 30 years old, and almost all the persons stated to have been concerned in them were dead. If Mr. Coile had been injured, the law had been open to him, and he ought to have availed himself of it at an earlier period. Mr. C. H. HUTCHINSON challenged the Secretary for Ireland to con BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. The Serjeant-at-Arms having reported that he had Robert Poer Trench Pilkington in custody, pursuant to an order of the House, the said R. P. T. Pilkington was put to the bar, and asked if he had anything to say for his having forged a petition to the House from Ballinosloe in favour of the Catholic Claims?-Upon this the Culprit observed, that all he had to say was, that he had been guilty of a very foolish act, and was very sorry for it.-After some conversation, it was agreed that a motion should be made to-morrow for his discharge on Monday. Some conversation arose respecting Sierra Leone, and papers were ordered on the subject. UNIVERSITY IN LONDON. Mr. BROUGHAM moved for leave to bring in a bill to incorporate a College or University in the City of London. The object of this University was to bring the advantage of education within the reach of those who could not afford to send their children to Oxford or Cambridge, and who were averse to sending them from their own roof.-Leave was given. STATE OF IRELAND. Mr. S. RICE made a variety of judicious observations on the peculiar state of things, in consequence of the decision of the House of Lords, which placed the two Houses in opposition on a question of the utmost importance. He contended that the course which they ought to steer was this to prove by evidence and authority that they were right in the view which they had taken of this great question, and that the House of Lords was wrong. He did not know how this could be better effected than by the evidence and authority of the individual who had been sent over as the King's representative to administer the affairs of Ireland under the most arduous and difficult circumstances. He thought that Lord Wellesley, as an eye-witness, was better qualified than any other man to give an account of the civil animosities of Ireland, with their consequences. (Hear!) He thought, too, that the opinion of Lord Wellesley would have very great weight with the parties with whom he had to deal.-In the course of his speech, Mr. S. Rice alluded to a similar alarm which had been sounded in former periods.-In 1753, a bill was brought in for the naturalization of Jews-a measure against which not even the voice of an old woman could now be raised, although in its day it encountered a fierce attack, and drew forth petitions from London and other places, as was the case of the late Catholic bill. The London petition set forth, that this bill "would undermine our happy Constitution in Church and State." (Hear! and a laugh.) And it further declared, that it "would be prejudicial to the interests of trade generally, and of that of the City of London in particular." (Renewed "Hears!" and laughter.) Sure he was, that, notwithstanding this severe denunciation, the Chancellor of the Exchequer did not find the introduction of Jews even into Downing-street (a laugh), attended with the disastrous consequences foreboded. And in the debate upon the bill, a West-country Baronet, Sir William Dolby (a laugh), declared that if they admitted the naturalization of Jews, they would soon be outvoted by them in Parliament. "They will divide our estates," said he, " in lots among their tribes, and sell our lands to the highest bidders." (A laugh.) Sir John Barnard took a more deep theological view of the subject-like that taken in a late petition from Leicester, which charged the Catholics with being the descendants of those who had burned their ancestors-and said" that the Jews were the offspring of those who had crucified their Saviour, and whose descendants to all generations laboured under the divine curse." He referred to these extracts merely to show, that the old alarm was just as consistent as the new. (Hear!) Lord Chatham stated in Parliament-" Religion has nothing to do with this dispute, but I see that the people have been made to believe it has, and the old High Church persecuting spirit has begun to lay hold of them." (Hear, hear!) So (said Mr. Rice) it was the old High Church love of exclusive power and profit, that was working against the Catholics, and had been used to delude the people; and he was convinced that many who used such arts knew as well as he did that there was as little of religion in the late bill, as there was in that for the regulation of weights and measures. He concluded by moving an address to His Majesty, praying that he would be pleased to give directions that there be laid before the House copies or extracts of despatches, received from the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, respecting the origin, nature, and extent of religious animosities in that country, and the best means of allaying the same. (Hear, hear!) Mr. GOULBOURN said that there was no ground laid for the production of the documents required, and that such a proceeding would tend to irritate, not to soothe the people of Ireland. Sir J. NEWPORT earnestly supported the motion, and warned Ministers against the alarming course now pursued in respect to Ireland, whose unfortunate people, he said, seemed to be doomed to inhabit always"Regions of sorrow, doleful shades, where peace "And rest can never dwell-hope never comes, "That comes to all; but torture without end "Still urges. Mr. BROWNLOW supported the motion. the motion. Mr. PEEL objected to the production of the dispatches (if there were any)-contending that the Government ought to be deemed the best judges, whether their production would tend to good. He avowed, however, that the sentiments of the Marquis Wellesley were unchanged. Lord J. RUSSEL, Sir W. MAXWELL, and Colonel BAGWELL, supported The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could not see what good would be caused by the production of the dispatches: he declared, however, that if he thought he could forward the great question of Catholic emancipation by going out of office, he would resign to-morrow. (Loud cheers). He at the same time would readily acknowledge, that he could not see how Ministers could be called upon to retire from the government at a time when the country was generally satisfied with them (hear, hear!) and when he did not know how a Government, ifthe present one were now broken, could be formed again, on account of their not being unanimous on this question. Mr. BROUGHAM contended, that it would only be doing justice to Lord Wellesley to produce the dispatches sought for. He could not, he said, allude to what had been urged in the House of Lords, but there was nothing to prevent his alluding to a libel printed in fair character by Benbow, the greatest libeller both of religion and of Government, which modern times had produced. (Laughter, and cheers. That libel-a speech which never was spoken, which never could have been spoken by an illustrious Person, whose sentiments it purported to express-had been circulated by a Noble Peer. (Hear!) Of course, his Learned Friend the Attorney-General would move in the King's Bench against Benbow; for nothing more scandalous, more monstrously injurious to the Illustrious Person in question, mortal fancy could devise, than to make him say as was done in the pretended speech-that when he came to the Throne, he would not govern according to the principles of the Constitution, but according to a model and scale of his own-a scale which even James II. never dreamed of governing by. (Cheers.) Certain Right Reverend Prelates, too, had in the same way been represented as having mainiained most extraordinary doctrines. One, who had supported the Catholics before he became a Bishop (a laugh), but was now opposed to hem, had-(would it be believed?)-he, (the Bishop) being of sound mind (a laugh), in order to prove that he and his Right Reverend Breen had no sinister motive in opposing the Catholic claims, but were 1 actuated by nothing but what was most pure, referred to the case of the seven Bishops. But, good Lord Bishop, very different were the two cases. The seven Bishops opposed the King and the Heir Apparent; they resisted the encroachments of arbitrary power; for this they went to trial, and for this they were prepared to go to the scaffold. The good Lord Bishop should remember, too, that by his opposition to the Catholics, instead of exposing himself, as the seven Bishops did by their oppo. sition, to the liability of going to the Tower by water, and afterwards brought to trial, exposed himself only to the danger of greater promotion. (4 laugh.) The most imminent danger which he would run was that of being removed from his own See to another-it might be better. (Laughter.) Another great risk which he ran was that of getting the extreme favour of the ruling party at Court. The jeopardy which he ran was that of going along with the High Court party and the Heir-apparent; and his extreme devotion towards the rising sun would not, as sometimes happened, operate injuriously to the Right Reverend Father in God in the present reign; for in the course he was pursuing, he would just do himself as much good in the present reign as he expected by reversion in the next. (Laughter.) Surely the persons who had put forth such libels on the Right Reverend Prelate to whom he alluded would be subjected to prosecution, What could be more scandalous than to make a Right Reverend Father in God talk such unaccountable nonsense? That it was a libel, any body who ran might see-ay, if he ran as a Bishop would, from Chester to Durham (great laughter); or as a curate ran, which was, it was said, as the crow flew. Mr. B. then noticed "the trash" which had been uttered by certain Lords in another place, and observed that it gave Him great satisfaction to know that though the House of Lords believed they had set the Catholic question at rest by mustering their large majorities, it never would be set at rest till that was done which alone could tranquillize Ireland, giving her equal justice, and making equal law for the millions as well as for the few. (Hear, hear!) The opponents of the Catholics might set forward their military commanders, they might array against them their subtile lawyers, for the first time changed by the new light which appeared to have broken in upon them from the declaration of war, falsely ascribed to a Royal Duke. They might bring into the field their military patriots, and their legal patriots, and, by the assistance of their proxies, obtain a triumph over Ireland, over England, over right, and over justice. That triumph, however, would be but momentary. It was not easy to stifle the cry of six millions of their countrymen, even if that cry were wrong, much less when it was the cry of right, of reason, and of justice, against mere brute power and unreasonable obstinacy, which set all justice at defiance. (Cheers.) To the people of Ireland he would now recommend submission to the law-bad, bad as it was; but he agreed with his Hon. Friend in counselling union-above all things, union. (Cheers.) Let no little personal piques or local differences divide them-let not even considerable differences of fopinion for one moment split them who should unite as one man, and if united must conquer. (Cheers.) The Lords, the Bishops, the Heir Presumptive to the throne, all could not defeat them, nothing could do that but their own disunion and violence. He had to say a few words respecting the disunion in the Cabinet. It did appear strange that the country should be governed by Ministers who could agree about a joint-stock company, but could not upon a question which distracted a great part of the empire. His late Majesty was an elderly man of formed habits, and his scruples were conscientious, and therefore entitled to some respect. His present Majesty, however, was not in the same situation. He was, to be sure, a man well stricken in years, though not of very venerable age (a laugh) and had no conscientious scruples that he had ever heard of (laughter) with respect to the Catholic question. On the contrary, his Majesty had always stated that he was in favour of Catholic Emancipation. He had repeatedly given his pledge in private to support the question, to the leaders of the measure, and with that they had been satisfied.-[Mr. CANNING suggested, that the Learned Gent. was pursuing an unparliamentary course in thus entering into details of the private life of the King.]-Mr. BROUGHAM said, he would pursue the matter no further. His object had been to show, that the scruples of the Sovereign, which rendered the question a difficult one in the late reign, did not apply to the present. He hoped yet to see the day, however, Let the friends of that question make that stand when they might, it when a stand should be made for the question of Catholic Emancipation. was an act which must cover them with glory. (Hear, hear!). If it so happened that they left office, they would, indeed, be quitting the smile of the Court, but they would quit it for the gratitude of the nation, and for the still more delightful reward, the applause of their own hearts. (Much cheering.) To address himself, however, to those-if any-who might treat recompenses like these as somewhat visionary-who might consider the applause of a country, and feelings of self-approbation, as topics pleasant to declaim about, but not, in practice, very profitable or desirable-Hear! and laughter)—to those Gentlemen he would suggest -and this, at least, was a doctrine which they would listen to-there would not be much risk in making the stand adverted to, for he did not think that the sacrifice of places would be demanded. They might carry the Catholic question, if they put their strength to a proper use. But let Ireland be but true to herself-let unanimity prevail among her children let violence give place to sterling opposition, directed constitutionally, and he had still no doubt that, by herself, she might work out her own salvation. Mr. R. MARTIN was disposed to vote for the resolution, if his Hon. Friend persisted in bringing it forward; but as the majority against it would certainly be large, he put it to his Hon. Friend-as a friend to the Catholic cause-whether it was worth while to press it to a division. particularly attended to; and that, above all things, such education should be in this country. Mr. BROUGHAM thought that 60001. was rather a large grant to the Duchess of Kent, though he should not oppose that: but with regard to the other, it should be remembered that the Duke of Cumberland had already 19,000l. a-year, and lived abroad, where that sum was equal to 30,000l. in England. Why was this? Nothing called him abroad; and yet he did not live among his countrymen. He had no desire to grant the Royal Duke six thousand a-year more, until he came to show himself in England. Why did he not act like his brother (the Duke of York) who continued to remain in England, though crippled with debts-which, although he was vide for? What security had they, that after he received this additional Heir Presumptive, by the way, he did not come to ask Parliament to progrant, making an income of 25,000l. a year, he would come and reside in England, or even send the young Prince his son amongst us? If we must dispose of some of our redundant cash, he for one would prefer giving it embarrassments seem to require some such aid. It was well known that a to those members of the Royal Family who reside amongst us, and whose certain illustrious member of the Royal Family was in such a state of pecuniary difficulty as to have his carriage and horses taken in execution. Was this decent? These were painful subjects; but it was a duty to mention them when a grant was proposed for which he heard no one substantial argument. If such intention was to be carried into effect, he would say, in God's name let it be given to those who lived amongst us, and who seemed really to need such aid. Mr. PLUNKETT thought it probable that the resolution had been moved chiefly for the purpose of affording Hon. Members an opportunity to notice the Catholic question in its present situation: that end having been answered, he submitted to the Hon. Mover whether it was worth while to push it any further. His Right Hon. Friend near him had declared that if he thought his giving up office could promote the success of the measure, he should not hesitate a moment to relinquish it. For himself, he had been placed in one situation at least in which his sincerity had been tried; and certainly he felt no difficulty in making the same declaration. Mr. CANNING hoped the motion would not be pressed. He was perfectly ready to concur with his Hon. Friend, and he said-with the most perfect sincerity of heart-that if he thought his own relinquishment of office could conduce to the settlement of the question, he would not hesitate one moment to make the sacrifice. Not that when he made this declaration he did not see that his withdrawing from the Government would be attended with some public disadvantage; but his view would be-if such a course could decide the subject of Catholic Claims -that the public good obtained outweighed that disadvantage. But his opinion was that his relinquishment of office could only serve to bring on public evils of the most tremendous character, as well as to throw the prospects of the object which it was intended to serve still further back than ever. The ground on which the bill was resisted, he had no hesitation to say, he thought untenable. If the argument proved any thing, it proved too much-if Catholics could not be good subjects under a Protestant Government, they could not be good subjects at all. Besides, he did not like that argument of "divided allegiance," or measuring men by a scale as it were of moral geometry. If we had but halft the allegiance of the Catholics, why was it we had but half? Homer answered the question, who was a better judge of human nature than Euclid:"A man," he said, " is but half a man, unless he enjoys all his rights." In glancing, however, at what had passed in another place, he was bound to vindicate one Noble Friend of his from the charges which had been thrown out against him. The Hon. Member for Winchelsea seemed to think, that the speech of that Noble Lord had been measured after another speech which he had designated as a libel -measured to fall in with it. His Noble Friend was incapable of such a thought. Whatever he had spoken was, let the House be sure, his sincere opinion. Indeed, if the Hon. Member for Winchelsea had only looked to the whole contents of the speech in question, he would have seen the most glaring discrepancies between it and the speech to which he endeavoured to assimilate it. Who had disposed so unceremoniously, yet so satisfactorily, of the idle objection of the Coronation Oath to the removal of civil disabilities, as this very Noble Lord, who was represented as imitating the tone of a speech in which the objection of that Coronation Oath formed the chief feature? That Noble Lord was entitled to the highest gratitude of the Catholics. The Right Hon. Gent. concluded by observing, that the production of the papers called for would utterly falsify the Hon. Member's conclusions! (Hear, hear!) Mr. HUME opposed the grant to the Duke of Cumberland. proposition to the House for the payment of the Heir Apparent's debts. Sir I. COFFIN thought it would become Ministers to bring forward a was a fact that his Royal Highness owed a sum of 12,000l. to his tailor, one farthing of which he could not get. (Hear, hear! and a laugh). Mr. MONCK approved of the grant to the Duchess. Sir C. FORBES said he should vote for both.-Mr. PEEL thought it would but be fair to place the Duke of Cumberland on the same footing with his Royal brothers who were married. His present allowance was not adequate to support his rank in this country.-Mr. DENMAN observed that the house ought to pause on this motion. No sooner was one grant proposed, than another "Guardian of the Public Purse" suggested the propriety of paying the debts of the Duke of York, whom he seemed to think the most popular man in the country; and, as one item of those debts, a gallant Admiral informed the house that the Royal Duke owed no less than 12,000l. to his tailor; so that, because of this gross extravagance, which would not be countenanced in a private individual, the country was to be plundered, and asked to make good debts to he knew not what amount, An individual whose income from the country was exceedingly liberal, had no farther claim if he allowed his expenses to go beyond it. He fully concurred in the vote to the Duchess of Kent; but when called upon to vote 60001. for the education of a young Prince, whose father was receiving 19,000l. a year, the House ought to pause. Sir J. MARJORIBANKS gave it as his opinion that the Duke of York was entitled to the consideration of the House, by his public services! Mr. CANNING said it was unfair to introduce subjects not at all connected with the question before the House. The illustrious individual whose private affairs had been thus dragged into discussion, had not obtruded them on the House. There were two propositions before them. As to the first, it would almost be a waste of words to add any thing to what had been already said on it; for there was only one feeling,-that it was a tardy act of justice to the illustrious lady who was in great part its object. (Hear, hear!) As to the vote to his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumthe education of the young Prince his son. It was objected to it, that after the vote passed, the object of it might be defeated by delaying the return of the young Prince to England; but Ministers would have it in their power to see that the money was applied solely for the purpose for which it was voted. Sir F. BURDETT did not think that the speech delivered by the noble person alluded to could rescue him from the fair imputation of unstatesman-like conduct. It could not be denied that the speech of the Noble Lord was inconsistent with the holding out hopes by persons most likely to be well informed as to the views of Government. That such hopes were held out was admitted. But it was unjust that persons most influential on the subject should have kept those who looked to their opinions in ignorance with respect to them. It was unfair, it was unstatesmanlike, to have this opinion held out to the delegates and others, when itberland, he wished to have it considered what it was in fact-a grant for was well known that a contrary feeling existed in a certain quarter. (Hear, hear!) He did, however, hope, that on this great question the Catholics would exercise the same prudence which had heretofore done so much good to their cause. Notwithstanding the untoward result of the discussions, he did look forward with confident hope to the decision of next Session. (Hear, hear!) Sir E. KNATCHBULL suggested, and Mr. GIPPS moved an amendment to the effect, that the 6000/. be granted for the education of the young Prince and 79 against accompanying the grant with such express stipulation. The House afterwards divided on the original proposition:-Ayes 105Noes 55. Mr. S. RICE observed, that the object of his motion was answered in Friday, May 27. Mr. LITTLETON announced that no farther proceedings would take place in regard to the Irish Elective Franchise Bill. Mr. HOME presented a petition from Mr. Carnall, complaining of the hardship and injustice he had suffered from Lord Charles Somerset, at the Cape of Good Hope.-Mr. HORTON made some remarks in justification of the Colonial Department, but did not drop a word in favour of Lord C. Somerset. The petition was ordered to be printed. DUCHESS OF KENT. DUKE OF CUMBERLAND. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, after talking about "keeping up the Royal Dignity," &c. &c. proposed an increase of 6,000l. per annum to the Duchess of Kent, for the maintenance and education of her infant daughter; and the like amount in addition to the Duke of Cumberland's income, for the support and education of his son. He said that the careful education of the Princess must be a matter of great interest to the country, on account of her proximity to the Throne; and he added, that though the infant son of the Duke of Cumberland might not excite similar interest, in consequence of being more remote in the succession, it was important that, as a member of the Royal Family, his education should be A long conversation then took place on the Judges' Salaries Bill, the discussion upon which was adjourned to Monday. FROM THE LONDON GAZETTES. The King has been pleased to appoint Major-General Sir James Camp bell, K.C.B., to be Governor and Commander-in-Chief of the island of Grenada. The King has been pleased to appoint Major-General Sir Patrick Ross, Knt., to be Governor and Commander-in-Chief of the island of Antigua. Foreign-Office, May 24. The King has been graciously pleased to appoint Lord Viscount Strangford, K.B., (late his Majesty's Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipo tentiary at the Sublime Ottoman Porte), to be his Majesty's Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to his Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias. J. Woodward, Nottingham, machine-maker. Solicitor, Mr. Yallop, D. Cloones, Goodge-street, Tottenham-court-road, upholsterer. Solicitor, Catholics are aggrieved, because they cannot ALL become Lord Chancellors, Privy Councillors, and Members of Parliament." We should like to know what advocate of the Catholics ever made so stupid an assertion! The hireling likewise affects to believe, that not more than about sixty Catholics are really disappointed or mortified by the rejection of the Relief Bill; that the public writers of Ireland only assume a tone of complaint and alarm, for seditious purposes; and that the Irish people at large are wholly indifferent to what is called Emancipation. If we could be sure that this writer was sincere, we must suppose him so obtuse in his understanding and feelings as not to know, that an exclusion of sixty—aye, or of sir— Catholics from certain civil offices, is an insult to the six millions professing that faith on account of which the exclusion is made. The number of additional offices which Catholics would fill, if both religions were placed upon an equality, is absurdly underrated at sixty; there are a great number of local situations, the exclusion from J. Goodwin, Holt, Worcestershire, miller. Solicitor, Mr. Becke, Devon-which is peculiarly felt by the middle classes; but that is of little shire-street, Queen square. G. Dean, Bridgewater, chinaman. Solicitor, Mr. Pain, New-inn. T. Phillips, Marchmont-street, Burton-crescent, merchant. Solicitors, J. Hills, High-street, Mary-la-bonne, farrier. Solicitors, Messrs. Hallett Saturday, May 28. BANKRUPTCIES SUPERSEDED. J. Warrick, Austin-Friars, wine merchant very consequence to the argument. To shut out all Catholics from places of power, trust, and emolument, as the law at present does, is to insult and injure all Catholics: whether six hundred or only sixty would actually obtain such places, if the exclusion did not exist, is of small importance-the law has formally denounced them all as politically unfit and dangerous. At present there are very few Catholic gentlemen who can feel the exclusion personally; nearly all feel it alike, that is, as members of the Catholic church. It is not their individual ambition thwarted, but their esprit de corps wounded, their sense of right denied, and their conscientious faith insulted. How often do we hear of duels among officers in the army on account of aspersions on the courage or conduct of a regiment; yet the sympathy is not half so strong between the members of a military corps, as between the individuals composing a degraded sect: a regiment may have behaved very ill, and yet the very officers who risk their lives in defence of its reputation may have performed their duty; but when the law declares that no Catholic shall be a Member of Parlia ment or a judge, the insult and injury are felt, not only by the few who would have been Members of Parliament and Judges (for nobody can tell who those are) but by the Catholics at large, and with few exceptions-equally by all. Mr. O'CONNELL admirably exemplified this feeling in his speech at the late Catholic meeting: he said, "he wanted no office, but only the capability of holding office he cared nothing about office or Government employment, but he did not choose to be branded with the stigma of ineligibility to that which was the general right of all." By the way, the Courier has exhibited the most edifying tergiver THE FUNDS The settling day has gone over, to the adjustment of large differences, and the delivery of an immense quantity of stock, with-sation this session. When the Relief Bill was introduced into the out the occurrence of any open default of magnitude; but the depression continues, and the tendency, it will be seen, is still downward. The Foreign Stocks also participate in this declension, and the Share Market more than all the rest. The absence of all political rumour renders the proximate cause of this decisive fall very difficult to ascertain; but it is now said, an idea prevails that a great part of the French loan will be contracted for in England, which notion may possibly have some effect at the present moment. Latest quotations : Consols, 89 3 per Cents. 962 7 New 4 per Cents, 104 Commons, and there appeared reason, from various symptoms, to suppose that Ministers really meant to carry it, the Treasury tool declared himself a convert to the expediency of the measure; when however the DUKE of YORK made his famous speech, he began to trim; and when the Lords threw out the Bill, he applauded to the very echo! The New Times (to give the devil his due) has been consistent and sincere: the Doctor combats fairly the pretext of the intolerants as to the danger of Catholic office-holders, and the nonsense about "divided allegiance." He unanswerably asks-"Is the allegiance of the whole kingdom of Scotland a dream? Undoubtedly not; yet it is notorious, that the Members of the Scottish church expressly deny all spiritual supremacy in the head of the civil Government. Or was the civil allegiance of the ancient Christians to the Heathen Emperors a dream? Undoubtedly not; for they are recorded in history as models of fidelity and subordination." The Catholic meeting on the 21st instant, at Freemasons' Hall, was interesting as indicative of the genuine feelings of the educated A correct Report of the Proceedings at the UNITARIAN MEETING, in our next. Catholics at this crisis. The Duke of NORFOLK, Lord CLIFFORD, &C. THE EXAMINER. LONDON, MAY 29, 1825. THERE is no foreign news worthy of remark this week, the intelligence from Greece being too vague and contradictory to merit investigation. It is now said that the officiating Congress at Milan is to concert measures for a more popular Austrian Government for the North of Italy. We shall believe it when we see it. From France, we hear of little but of the Coronation-and, Common Sense preserve us-the Ampoule, or Holy Oil. It is clear, however, under all this nonsense, that CHARLES X. is losing popularity in France, and that no Monarch supporting the designing fanatics who now possess so much influence will ever be esteemed by the French people. repelled with indignant contempt the absurd pretence so hacked in the House of Peers, that the Catholics paid only a divided allegiance." They referred triumphantly to all the considerable contineutal States, whether Catholic or Protestant, where no such chimera was ever dreamt of now-a-days. Mr. O'CONNELL delivered one of his most eloquent and powerful speeches, from which, without attempting anything like an outline of his argument on this exhausted subject, we shall pick out a few passages. Alluding to the CHANCELLOR in his character of Keeper of the KING'S Conscience, he very dexterously and wittily observed, "The King has three consciences; the English conscience, the keeper of which is very liberal on the English side; an Irish conscience, the keeper of which he hoped would soon be a very liberal gentleman; and there is no contradiction." a Hanoverian conscience, which is all liberality and justice, and in which He next noticed the ignorant jargon of Lord ELDON about our's being a "Protestant Constitution," and enumerated the great institutions which our Catholic ancestors had obtained-as the Trial The Courier affects to laugh at "the assertion that six millions of by Jury, popular representation, Magna Charta, &c. not forgettin |