that House to defend the language of the passages he had brought under its attention. He could not abandou his motion, for, if he did so, he thought he should be abandoning his duty. The House had a jurisdiction on the question of its own privileges which it was bound to support; aud unless it was prepared to renounce the rights it possessed on such occasions, it must, when a subject of this kind was brought before it, be prepared to do its duty. It might be a question whether he had exercised a proper discretion in bringing the matter before the House. In his own opinion he believed he had done his duty, and he therefore persisted in his original motion, adding, as an amendment, that certain passages in The Times Newspaper of the 1st, 2d, 7th, 8th, and 14th of March are false and scandalous libels, and that they be handed over to the Attorney-General, with instructions to prosecute the writer. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, but | But were they not true? (Hear.) The hon. Member for Boroughbridge (Sir C. Wetherel!) had himself partly admitted that they were so. He condemned the whole proceeding as impolitic and unjust, and as a gross attempt to accuse and punish at the same instant. In his opinion, it would be much more decent not to go to a vote on such a question. The House was following the practice of Rhadamanthus-they pronounced the guilt of the accused, and then sent him to be tried. (Hear, hear.) Sir R. PEEL said he regarded the present proceeding as purely preliminary, and it should be marked by a spirit of regularity as well as justice. Reference had been made to other papers which were not before the House; and he confessed he could not make up his mind on the question with respect to them, for he had not read them until they were placed in a counected series before him. He had heard the first, but the House was about to commit itself on several others, of which it was presumed they knew nothing. He suggested that these papers be also read. (Hear.) Sir R. INGLIS said they were all of the same character and tendency, and he wished to save the time of the House by abstaining from reading them. Mr. HUNT rose amidst loud cries of "Question," and persisted in addressing the House, noth withstanding the noise by which he was assailed. He said their patience must be great to overcome his, for he was determined to speak unless the Speaker told him he was not in order. The hon. Baronet who brought The ATTORNEY-GENERAL expressed his surforward the Motion wished the Attorney-prise that the hon. Baronet (Sir R. Inglis) General to prosecute; but were they sure, al- complained now, for the first time, of language though they might pronounce the articles to contained in papers not one of which was less be libellous, and the Judges agreed with than a week old, and said nothing offensive in them, that twelve Jurymen could be found to any of the succeeding day's papers; and he agree with them? Notwithstanding the was the more surprised, because the hon. coarseness of the language used by the writer Baronet had spoken to him on the subject, and in The Times, he (Mr. Hunt) asserted that even put the papers into his hand, without inevery word of the article was true. (Hear and timating his intention to proceed in that manno.) The question was, whether they would ner. He would not say he had expressed an agree to a Resolution declaring assertious opinion that it was or was not a libel; but false which every man in that House knew to coarse he had admitted it to be, although false be true? (Hear.) A Member behind him he really could not call it. (Hear.) He thought (Mr. Hume, we believe) intimated to him that it, and he now said, it was highly desirable he would only do The Times mischief. (Hear, that no proceedings should be taken on it and a laugh.) He repeated what he had said; with respect to any supposed breach of priviand he thought that House, in the last act of lege; and so far from believing that language its life, would be true to the character it had of that kind would induce any Member to abmaintained through its career, if it came to a stain from opposing Reform, he thought it vote pronouncing that false which every man would have a directly opposite tendency, inasin the kingdom knew to be true. much as it induced men, from a sense of pride and of honour, to persist in supporting that system which had subjected them to such Sir R. PEEL rose and said, that as the attacks from their connection with it. He hon. Baronet (Sir R. Inglis) had in his Motion thought on the contrary, that attacks in lanreferred to Papers which he had not read, guage such as that of which the hon. Baronet these Papers should be also read and laid on complained were calculated to defeat the carrythe Table before the House came to a de-ing of the measure of Reform, and to confirm cision on their contents. Strangers were again ordered to withdraw; bút Sir R. INGLIS said (as we understood) that they contained passages of the same tendency as that already read; and his Motion now was, that they be delivered to the Attorney-General to consider the nature of their contents, and to prosecute, if he found that a prosecution could be supported. Mr. O'CONNELL said the expressions in The Times were coarse, and not to be justified. the oppposition of those Members who, al though not accountable to large bodies of cou stituents, were, he believed, acting on a principle of honour, although he must say that he thought their opinions were liable to be biassed by their situation. He concluded by expressing his regret that a question of this kind had been brought forward on the eve of the greater debate, and under circumstances which bore the appearance of a disposition ation. to delay the decision on the most important men's minds with regard to the great topic which ever came under their consider- question that now agitates the country, you will expect at my hands an account After a few words from Sir C. Wetherell, Sir R. PEEL disowned, for himself, an in- of the recent Parliamentary proceedings tention to obstruct the debate which was with regard to the Reform Bill, and expected, and observed, that he had not even you will also expect at my hands a heard of an intention to make such a motion / statement of my opinions with regard until he entered that House, and heard that it was commenced. He trusted this explana- to the prospects now before us relative tion would clear that side of the House from to that bill, and to the great changes the prejudice which might be raised against which it has in contemplation. them by the learned Gentleman's observations. Mr. SLANEY, amid loud cries of "Question,' contended, that the people would look on the whole proceeding as an attempt to set aside the decision on the Reform Bill. (Hear.) Sir R. INGLIS thought the learned Gentleman (the Attorney-General) should not have referred to the conversation he held with him on the subject of these papers, unless he had also repeated the nature of that conversation. He (Sir R. Inglis) would not follow his example by detailing the nature of that conversation. All he would say was, that he had seen some of the papers that day for the first time, and he was ready now to read the passages to which he alluded, if the House thought proper. (Cries of no.) The Gallery was then cleared; but we understood that the Motion was withdrawu. On re-entering the Gallery we found Sir G. CLERK on his legs, with a petition, we believe, against the Parliamentary Reform Bill; but the anxiety of the House to proceed to the discussion occasioned loud cries of "No, no," upon which the hon. Baronet postponed presenting his Petition; observing, however, that that was the first time that he had heard any objection made to the presentation of a petition upon the subject. REFORM BILL. To the Readers of THE REGISTER. With regard to the proceedings in Parliament relative to this bill, on Monday the 14th instant, leave was given to bring it in without any division. On Monday, the 21st instant, the second reading was moved for, and on Tuesday, the 22d, the House divided on the question, when there appeared, according to the reports in the newspapers, three hundred and two for it, and three hundred and one against it; so that the second reading was carried by a majority of only one. Every body was of opinion that, if the Ministers lost the bill, they ought instantly to dissolve the Parliament, in which case we know well that the two County members for Hampshire, for instance, and, indeed, that every county member who had opposed the bill, would not have been returned again. We also know that there are a certain number of members called Treasurymembers, and that they would not have been returned again. This would, of course, have given the Ministers a considerable majority, without which they could carry on nothing in the way of governing the country or preserving its peace. But the case is not at all altered SINCE the date of my last, I have by this majority of one. Upon all been into HAMPSHIRE and SURREY, and other questions there will be a majority at the county-meetings in those coun-against them, as in the case of the ties, neither of which meetings the Timber Bill, when, as very happily exPrince of Waterloo will, finally, call a farce. I should like very much to give you a full account of my journey, which, all the circumstances taken into consideration, was the very pleasantest I ever had in my life. I had to pass through the whole of the country that had been the scenes of my childhood and my youth; but, before I indulge in a description of my journey, and even in giving an account of the state of MY FRIENDS, plained by Mr. DENNISON at the Surrey Meeting, the question simply was this: Shall the people of England, Ireland, and Scotland, have good timber cheap; or shall they have bad timber dear, for the sole purpose of enriching colonists, who are, at any day, ready to declare their independence, or to transfer their allegiance to the United States? This was the question, as plain as any nose upon any man's face; and yet, by a majority of forty-six, the House deter- the way. He must, therefore, dissolve mined that the people of England, Ire-the Parliament, which is now become land, and Scotland, should have bad absolutely necessary as a test of his wood dear. It is evident, then, that earnestness and sincerity, The comthe Ministry cannot go on without a dissolution of the Parliament. Observe, too, that there are several, who have voted for the second reading of the bill, who will vote against the material clauses of it in the committee; and they have even intimated already that they shall do so. There are three hundred and one who have been bold enough to vote against the whole of the bill all taken together; and, perhaps, there are another hundred to vote against those clauses of the bill which make it valuable in the eyes of the people. These call themselves reformers; but are for a different sort of reform; that is to say, in effect, no reform at all! So that it is nonsense to suppose that this reform of Lord GREY'S can be carried with the present men in the House of Commons; and yet if it be not carried who is to carry on any Government at all any longer? Then we come to this; there must be a dissolution, or the Reform of Lord GREY must be abandoned. It is impossible that he can consent to remain in office without carrying the whole of this bill. That is impossible; because it is not to be done without covering himself with shame and infamy; and it is therefore declared to be impossible upon the some ground that we say it is impossible that a man should willingly jump from the top of a high house into the street. In short, the whole nation knows enough of him to know that he would scorn to remain in office an hour, having the same Parliament to deal with, after having lost this bill or any material part of it. But to retire from office would not be sufficient to the preservation of his character and his honour. To get out of the way quietly, and let others come and carry on the Government with an unreformed Parliament, would be very little better than remaining in office without carrying the reform. Indeed, it would be no better, but rather worse: it would argue a desire to save himself by shuffling out of mittee on the bill is, as the report states, put off to the 14th of April. Between this and that there is plenty of time to dissolve the Parliament, when this Parliament will be two months older than that Parliament which PERCEVAL dissolved in the spring of 1807. The ground alleged for that dissolution was, that the King wished to appeal to the sense of his people, after the recent attempt on the part of his Ministers to carry the measure of Catholic Emancipation. A great deal better ground exists for a dissolution at this time; for, here are the people, with voice unanimous, calling for a measure which the House of Commons will not pass, and which the Minister has presented to that House in accordance with that call. The dissolution, therefore, is now perfectly natural; it is a thing imperiously called for by the circumstances of the country; it is a thing which every just man is calling aloud for. The nation wants the Reform Bill to be carried; it sees that the Minister cannot carry it with the present House; it knows that he can carry it with such a House as a dissolution would give him; and, therefore, it says that, if the Bill be not carried, the fault is solely that of the Minister. Lord Grey must perceive that the nation reasons and concludes thus ; and, therefore, if after all that we have seen; if, after all the proof that we have had of his sincerity in this cause; if we could still doubt of that sincerity, every one must perceive, that the preservation of his character absolutely commands him to dissolve the Parliament. But, CAN he dissolve the Parliament ? He can, if it be true that the King wishes that this Bill should be passed, To dissolve the Parliament there must be the consent of the King; and will the King refuse to give that consent? This is the question; it is, indeed, the only question at present; and it is perhaps the most important question, a question of the most fearful magnitude that one Englishman ever put to another, in any Yet, as I have observed before, the King changed his mind, and turned out Lord GREY and his colleagues. Therefore, though the Ministers have brought forward the present measure in like manner, with the approbation of the King, you see, my friends, that that does not make it amount to a positive certainty that the King will dissolve the Parliament for the sake of carrying a measure to which he had given his sanction. I do not doubt myself; I do not suspect; I do not fear; but in truth I know nothing of the matter, except, as I said before, that kings are men, and that all men are liable to change their minds; and that Lord GREY's twenty-four years' exile from that political power of which nature formed him for always having a large share, is a striking instance of the effects of the change in the mind of a King. Upon the occasion here referred to, the King was ready enough to dissolve the Parliament, and did dissolve it, when it was only four months It would be curious indeed, if this old; but, observe, he dissolved it to very LORD GREY should (which I trust keep in his new minister, and to keep will not be the case), twice in his life- out the one that had brought in the time, have had to experience a change bill: he dissolved it, not for the purof this sort in the mind of a King. By pose of causing to be carried the meaturning to page 419 of this present vo- sure to which he had given his sanction, lume of the Register, where will be but in order to defeat the measure to found No. 3 of the History of George which he had given his sanction; he IV., the reader will find, in paragraphs dissolved it, however, when the sensefrom 74 to 82 inclusive, the whole his- less and hypocritical cry of "no-popery" tory of the change of the mind of had placed at his back the unreflecting GEORGE III. in 1807. He will there millions of England and Wales and find that EARL GREY, then LORD HO- Scotland, led on by the parsons and WICK, brought in the Catholic Bill with the corporate bodies. In this latter the King's approbation and sanction; respect, great indeed is the difference that it was brought in and read a first in the two cases. Then it was the miltime without a division; that it was lions who wished the measure to be afterwards withdrawn by the Ministers defeated: now it is the millions who themselves without opposition; and wished the measure not to be defeated: that the ministry were turned out now it is the millions who wish the thereupon and the Parliament dis- measure to be carried. Dissolution was solved. Upon that occasion LORD then necessary to defeat the measure; GREY declared in the House of Com- dissolution is now necessary to carry mons, that," before he attempted to the measure. "submit the consideration of the measure to the House, he laid before his Majesty all the particulars with regard to it, and obtained his Majes"ty's approbation of it"! 66 66 so; for, With regard to the King having given his sanction to this measure, there can be no doubt that must be if that had not been the case, it would at once have been contradicted in both Houses of Parliament; but, with regard people if they voted against this Bill, to the King still continuing in the same would they have voted against it? mind, we have no such authority to rest Would they have voted against it, if they on. And, now, let me stop here just to had believed that such vote would have indulge my vanity for a moment. PEEL'S sent them packing? Look well at the father had a presentiment, you know, matter, my friends, take time to conand why should not I? In talking, sider, and then answer that question to many times, with friends, about the way yourselves. These men are, to be that I would go to work in making sure, neither Solomons nor Solons; a parliamentary reform, if I were prime but, they are not madmen; they are so minister, I have, on such occasions, al- far from being regardless of their own ways said, that I never would accept of interests and safety, that these are obthe office, unless the king would first jects which always appear to be upperput into my hand, signed by himself, a most in their minds. Would they, MESSAGE to both Houses of Parlia- then, have voted thus, purely for the ment, recommending them to make a pleasure and honour attending the pubparliamentary reform, and containing lication of their names throughout the some words describing the great princi- country? They knew to a certainty ple of such reform. I always said that, that, if the King dissolved the Parlia"Put not your trust in princes" was a ment after that vote, scarcely a man of precept that never should be disobeyed them would ever enter the House again. by me; a precept implanted in my mind They could have no hope in out-voting by that which occurred to LORD GREY the ministry; because a dissolution of in 1807. How much better would it the Parliament would render their vote have been if Lord Grey had proceeded of no use. It is, therefore, CERTAIN I by message in this case! Then all that these three hundred and one men would have been straightforward work: believed, that, if there were a majority then there would have been no idle against the second reading, the King rumours, no suspicions among the peo- would not dissolve the Parliament. ple, no intrigues at court, no cabals of any sort. In short, the measure would have been carried long ago; and the nation, all the people being in perfect harmony and good humour, would have been preparing for the election of a reformed parliament. the Now, my friends, I do not say that the thing is so, because they believed it to be so; but, at the same time, here are three hundred and one men all acting upon this one and same belief; and there are amongst them a considerable number who know very well But to what does all this tend? Do what is passing at the court and I suspect that the King has changed his amongst all those who are likely mind? I suspect nothing; but, at the to possess influence with the King. same time, I know nothing. I can only Pray observe, too, that in 1807, judge from appearances and circumstan- King was defended against his Minisces; and, I cannot help putting to my ters by an assertion, that, though self this question: Is it possible that the they had his sanction to a bill in favour three hundred and one men, who voted of the Catholics, they had not clearly against the second reading of the Bill explained to him the full extent of that could believe that the King would dis- bill! This was a very ugly assertion; solve the parliament unless this Bill were because it did not admit of disproof: carried by this parliament? This is the there was no calling upon the King to question which I put to myself; and I give evidence in the case: the Ministers, beg you, my friends, to put the same therefore, had no defence against this question to yourselves, in a very serious and, if the king should listen to advice and deliberate manner. If these such as would prevent his consent to a three hundred and one men believed dissolution of Parliament, LORD Grey that the parliament would be dis- would find himself, as far as relates to solved, and they sent to face the this point, just in the situation in which |