liament would, early next session, proceed to a total repeal of those disabilities; and he should prefer still more, a declaration that they would, at this moment, proceed to the repeal of them. But as he could not get what was most agreeable to his wishes, he gladly hailed what was offered to him.

Earl Stanhope said he rose to order, with the view of giving his noble friends on the Opposition side, a perfect certainty of carrying the motion, his object being, by means of an Act of Parliament, on which he had chanced to lay his hands, to turn the whole Bench of Bishops out of the House. His lordship then referred to an Act of Charles II. subjecting Bishops who came to Court before they took the Oaths in the House of Peers, to the penalties of Popish Recusants. He was proceeding, when

The Lord Chancellor moved, that strangers do withdraw.

Mr. Whitbread said, understanding that the point, as to which it had been his intention to submit a motion to the House, on the subject of the Toleration Act, bad not yet been brought to a definitive arrangement in another place, he must beg leave to postpone his motion, which be accordingly did, sine die.

Mr. Brougham said, a Petition had been handed to him against the Tax on Husbandry Servants, but the Bill having passed the House, he presumed it would be of no use now to present it.

The Speaker said, the honourable and learned gentleman presumed rightly.

EXCISE DUTIES-LEATHER, &c.

Mr. Brougham begged that the third reading of this Bill might be postponed till to-morrow, the parties interested being in the very act of instructing their representative to oppose it.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer could not consent to any delay, but moved that the Bill be now read a third time.

Mr. Brougham hegged of the right honourable gentleman to hesitate before he passed a Bill, which went to affect in a very severe degree 80,000 persons in this city, and 800,000 persons in the country. A tax on starch, a tax on bread, or a tax on cattle, would be objected to. What was this but a tax on cattle? A tax on leather was a tax on machinery, on every implement used in husbandry, and on the shoes of all farm servants. Pro tanto, it went to raise the price of bread. It was in the nature of a poll tax, and went to affect every man in our army and navy, to the number of about 800,000, each of whom consumed from two to six pair of shoes every year. Was this the way to raise taxes? This was taxing Government with one hand, to pay it with the other. It was the Chancellor of the Exchequer taxing the Secretary of War. He gave notice that he should, early next session, bring forward a motion on the subject of the Property Tax, as it was made to affect farmers, conceiving that tax, in the way in which it affected them, as being inconsistent with sound policy, morality, and justice.

A long conversation afterwards took place on the question that the Bill be read a third time; when

The Speaker suggested the propriety of reserving the opposition till the schedule applicable to the tax in question came to be considered.

The Bill was accordingly read a third time.

On the schedule applicable to the Tax on Leather, the House divided:

For the clause
Against it

Majority

8885

86

78

The House again divided on a question, that the further discussion of the Bill be adjourned till to-morrow:

PENITENTIARY HOUSE.

In the Committee of Supply,

Mr. Holford moved that the sum of 30,000l. be granted towards the erection of a Penitentary House. He was sorry to observe how greatly crimes and criminals were increasing in this country, one great cause of which was the intermixture of criminals in jails-an evil to which the proposed measure was meant to operate as a remedy. The total sum required would be 260,000l. which, though great, was not to be compared with the advantages the measure was cal culated to produce.

After some conversation, in which Mr. Bankes, Mr. Sinclair, Mr. Sumner, and others, objected to the commencement of so expensive a work in the present state of the country and in which the Chancellor of the Exche quer, Mr. Hume, Mr. Wilberforcé, &c. supported the motion,

The House divided,

For the grant
Against it

Majority

41

7

34

General Wilder moved for an account of the sums received from passengers in any of his Majesty's Packet Boats for the last three years, distinguishing the port of arrival in each. Ordered.

In the Committee of Ways and Means, duties were granted on bottles made of earthenware or stone, at the rate of 2s. 6d. per hundred.

Mr. Wharton brought in a Bill taking away the exemption from the Auction Duty as to all estates bought in for the owners; but allowing the same to be reclaimed on proof that the estates remained unsold.-Read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Friday.

Adjourned.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

THURSDAY, JULY 2.

BANBURY PEERAGE.

In the Committee of Privileges on the Banbury Peerage, Lord Erskine, at great length, went over all the points of the case, contending that the claim was established, and concluded by moving, that the decision of the House on the 17th of March, 1692, against the claim of Charles Knollys, to the Earldom of Banbury, was no bar to the claim of the present claimant, intimating at the same time his intention, if that Resolution was agreed to, to move another Resolution, that the claimant had made good his claim.

The Duke of Norfolk objected to the Resolution, it being already generally understood that the decision in 1692, was not to be considered a bar, and wished the Reso lution, that the claimant had made good his claim, to be at once proposed, to which Resolution he must give his negative.

Lord Ellenborough suggested an adjournment, and after a conversation between his lordship, Lord Holland, the Lord Chancellor, the Earl of Lauderdale, and Lord Erskine, it was finally agreed to postpone the further consideration till Tuesday.-Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

THURSDAY, JULY 2.

On the reading of the Report of the Committee of Ways and Means, Mr. Brougham took occasion to inquire whether it was the intention of Ministers to persist in the measure for laying a tax upon Leather, which was yester day carried by only eight votes?

Mr. Vansittart replied, that the majority of the House having decided in favour of the Bill, it remained with Government in its discretion to proceed with it, or abandon

it.

Mr. M. Fitzgerald brought in a Bill, exempting from the payment of tythes the portions of land attached to small cabins and cottages in Ireland. It was read a first time.

Mr. Vansiltart expressed his determination to oppose the measure in its next stage, and the second reading was fixed for to-morrow.

MARY-LE-BONE PARK.

Mr. Creevey, in pursuance of his notice, rose to move for Accounts of the Disbursements from the treasurer for the improvements in Mary-le-bone Park. After stating that it was the duty of the House to inquire into the state and employment of the Crown Lands, he adverted to the Act of Parliament, which called upon the First Commissioner of Woods and Forests to make a Report once in three years, within 30 days after the meeting of Parliament. This provision had not been complied with by Lord Glenbervie, and in consequence he (Mr. Creevey) had felt it his duty to endeavour to obtain information in some other mode. He went therefore to Mary-le-bone Park, to witness the im provements and plantations, for which so much money had been issued, but he only saw long gravel walks, and the principal plantations consisted of boards, which warned him from committing trespasses, by walking further to acquire the information he desired. Under these circumstances he thought that Parliament was bound to look at the accounts for which he should move, as the conduct of Lord Glenbervie and Mr. Nash, who appeared to be commander in chief in Mary-le-bone Park, was to be regarded with much suspicion. Mr. Nash was a subscriber of 10,000/. and Lord Glenbervie of 3500/. to a scheme called the Regent's Canal (but which might, with more truth, be called Lord Glenbervie's Canal, in as much as the Regent had not the slightest interest in it) that ran through Maryle-bone Park. He disapproved of these interferences of private interest with public duty, since it might be nothing more than a plan, by which an artificial expanse of water should be supplied for the ornament of the grounds of Lord Glenbervie; and as the progress of the scheme ought to be watched with great jealousy, he moved that an Address be presented to the Prince Regent, praying his Royal Highness to lay before the House an account of all sums of money expended on the Crown Lands in Mary-lebone Park, since the renewal of the lease in 1811.

Mr. Wharton did not wish by any means to resist the motion, but he was anxious to remove some of the unmerited aspersions thrown upon Lord Glenbervie, who he