energetic old man, Sir J. Newport, is bestirring himself about the question. The admission of foreign corn into this country would be the finishing blow to Ireland's misfortunes. If the annual supply of two millions of quarters be stopped from that country, half a million of lusty laborers, with their families, will be added to the mass of paupers that "congregate for animal heat," and eke out a wretched animal existence in that fertile and beautiful island. Mr. Fergusson, and other Scotch members, emphatically protest against fixing 30s. as the maximum price of barley, with a duty of 10s. on the foreign grain; and 21s. as the price of oats, with a duty of 7s.---These wellinformed gentlemen declare, that at least one-third of the tillage of Scotland would be destroyed by the measure, as it applies to these two, the staple grains of the Land of Cakes; and I firmly believe them, and maintain that nothing less than 32s., with a protecting duty of at least 12s. for barley; and 24s., with a like duty of 6s. on foreign oats, will remunerate the Scotch agriculturist. The average of price besides should be taken monthly, and not weekly; otherwise there will be no end to the commercial frauds, which will be resorted to under any law, of the factors and corn merchants. I hope some of my honorable friends will profit by those hints, and force them upon the attention of the House. I solemnly declare that I cannot ascertain Sir F. Burdett's real feelings in the measure. He appears actually not to know them himself, illustrating Shakspeare's

"Though inclination be as sharp as will,"

most forcibly. His inclination naturally persuades him to preserve the aristocratic station of his birth, by opposing" any alteration in "the Corn Laws," while his will urges him to maintain his radical consistency by advocating the repeal. It strikes me, he will fail in both his ends, and render himself obnoxious to both parties.

4. Read Butler's Reminiscences, laughed much at the tender affections between old wiggy Parr and the worthy reminiscent. "Dear "and excellent Butler," says wiggy; "Honored and very dear sir," replies the papist; "Most learned and most excellent sir," says the one; "Most honored and most dear sir," rejoins the other. What interesting Damon-and-Pythiasism! Mr. Butler seems to be a very worthy man, but most borishly stupidly free from faults and energetic virtues, moral and intellectual. Old as he is, he has much of the school-boy in him. Parr aped Johnson even in his epistles. He thought himself evidently a second Johnson, and meditated writing the great moralist's life. "The materials for it,” says Parr, are now collected; but a mind congenial to the Doctor's own has not yet "rendered them into a proper form." I never heard anything of Parr above par; but his reply to Sir J. Mackintosh, which, for the benefit of those who have not heard it, and in perpetuam memoriam rei, I will notice in the Inspector. Parr, his wig, and Sir James inet at dinner at Lord Holland's (a very stupid place, say what they will) shortly after a Mr. O'Quigley's execution. The Doctor said something palliative of O'Quigley's conduct, to the no slight horrification of his companion, who rejoined that O'Q. was as bad a man as could pos

sibly be, in every point given.","No, no, Jemmy," replied Parr, "not so bad as a man could possibly be neither, Jemmy! for recollect "O'Quigley was a priest, he might have been a lawyer; he was an "Irishman, he might have been a Scotchman; he was consistent, "Jemmy, he might have been an Apostate;" alluding to some convenient modification lately introduced by the author of the Vindicia Gallicæ, into his more recent political opinions. Even this has more of Johnson's rudeness than his wit. Met Clanrickarde-become quite a diplomatist-glad of it—will wean his mind from his wild pranks-a well disposed fellow. Tells me Dick Martin will lose his election -sorry for it; will kill the old man, to whom the House is a habit of life, and who cannot substitute his Smithfield humanity, in the regard of certain shepherds that have, I understand, taken Peter Moore into their special keeping.

5. Lost the fun at Brookes's-don't know that Raikes-think he did very right. Lawyers should not make their gown a petticoat to excuse their unnecessary personalities. Of all men, Brougham should be the last, though he is ever the first, to go out of his way to mangle the feelings of others---not over ready to go out of his way to Chalkfarm-it in return. Spring Rice seems to be pacificator-general to the whigs---gets himself into ugly predicaments by it. Vexed the reporters last session on his peace-making between Sir H. Harding and Dr. Lushington, consequently not a word uttered during the session appeared in print, and he was very near losing his election for his mute eloquence. Summoned for Wednesday to Brookes's on the business. Old Lord Fitzwilliam to take the chair; a truly venerable and respectable nobleman, a nobleman after Dryden's heart.

"The nobleman is he, whose noble mind

Is fill'd with inborn worth."

By the way, how strangely misapplied from its strict import, is the word---nobleman. We use it rather as the synonyme of patrician descent, and as the antagonist term of plebeian; while in truth it more means one that is not a patrician, but is ennobled from having filled certain judicial or magisterial offices. The law lords, therefore, are the only true noblemen in the House of Peers, though considered by us patricians as the least noble. This distinction prevailed even in ancient Rome. The title of patrician belonged only in a proper sense to the families of which the senate was composed in the earliest times, either of the Kings, or the first Consuls, before the Commons had obtained a promiscuous admission to the public honors, and by that means into the senate. All other families, how considerable soever, were styled plebeian. Patrician, then, and plebeian are properly opposed to each other, but noble common to them both; for the character of nobility was wholly derived from the curule magistracies which any family had borne; and those which could boast of the greatest number, were always accounted the noblest; "so that," says Middleton, "many plebeians surpassed the patricians themselves in the point of nobility." The last batch of Peers the most credible to the monarch of any made since the time of the Tudors; all gentlemen, all men of

character, of honorable descent, of elegant and literary tastes and endowments, and of fortune equal to the dignity. Stuart Wortley, now my most esteemed Lord Wharncliffe, a good sample of the best quality of the English country squire. Independent in his fortune and principles, proud of his ancient pedigree, a constitutional, upright, unlawyerish magistrate, a good sportsman, and Yorkshire to boot. My friend's foible is, that he thinks he is an orator and a statesman; though no fool, he is innocent of either. He is game lawing it in the House of Peers à la methodist Suffield---he'd better not meddle with it. I must take up the subject myself. (By the way, a good article on the subject in the last month's Inspector.) Sir C. Long and Sir J. Leycester, (now Lords Farnborough and De Tabley,) are such a-virtuosous pair, that I must leave them to the historian of picture galleries and the fine arts. I regret exceedingly that I have not the honor of C. R. Ellis's (now Lord Seaford,) bona-fide acquaintance. I only know him from his sound and able speeches on the West Indian subjects, and from having occasionally met him at Lord Granville's, at Paris, but every body knows him as the confidential friend and adviser of Mr. Canning; and it has been said that the Right Hon. Secretary himself, with all his genius, is not a little indebted to the judgment of his friend, for aiding him in some difficult emergencies of his life. I can readily believe it. I have often admired the tact of his West Indian speeches. His cause was the most unpopular one to defend, and yet he never committed himself, or his party,---while his character, in itself, made all the declamation of Messrs. Brougham and Dr. Lushington against West Indian feelings and reputations, mere bruta fulmina. He was slightly tinctured by a hyper-refinement that bordered on the fastidious. His disposition appeared to me very Coriolanish, too proud to be popular I suspect---cut out for a lord. What a noble looking family his is---I met "handsome Augustus" (as they call him at Seaford) at Plymouth.

6. And is the notorious John Wilks to sit in the British legislature? Is the synonyme of low Stock Exchange trick---of successful joint stock company gambling--of vile attorney chicane---to sit cheek by jowl with all that is illustrious of talent, station, character, birth, and fortune in the land, to be one of the Commons of England? But that I am unwilling to bring the proprietors of the Inspector into expensive contact with the fellow---as the greater the truth the greater the libel---I would denounce the idea, and endeavour to have the vile pettyfogging mass of the most barefaced impudence scouted from our benches. What cause can that man take in hand that will not be polluted by his touch? What measure will not be disgraced by his vote? Shakspeare's bold expression is but a tame commentary upon this man's career--

"Fortune upon his damned quarrel smiling,
Showed like a ********'s whore."

Would Mr. Pitt, in his extremest anxiety to muster commercial parasites, sit in the House with such a person? Is it not enough to make the great Lord Chatham tremble from indignation in his grave, swell

with lofty rage, "burst his cerements," stalk into the House, and annihilate the brazen monster with his proud contempt? solemnly declare I will not speak to any member who sits on the same bench with him. If report be true, that Peel is countenancing the fellow for the sake of his vote against the Catholics, the Home Secretary's fair fame is gone for ever. But I don't believe it; Peel was bred in

Harrow.

I am far from agreeing with Ashley, Lowther, and others, that Sir F. Burdett's speech was, all things considered, somewhat of a failure. The worst sentence in it is beyond the combined efforts of their lives. It was just what I expected from him, knowing him as I do, bearing on its very defects the impress of his lofty minded" in-born worth, and of his refined, indolent, and contemplative intellect. In tone, it bore all the moderation of a man whose love of liberty is "not of "these days," deeper even than conviction of the injustice of oppression, and in whom the philanthropic fires of youth have been more chilled by the philosophic melancholy which a continued experience of the general worthlessness of the mob of mankind generates, than exhausted by age, or extinguished by disappointment. In argument, it was rich even to prodigality; in construction, the masterly rivulets of sentences betokened the inexhaustible fulness of the spring, while the irregularity of their flowings and endings, declared that their channels were not prepared before hand, and that their locality (so to speak) was accidental and effected without pre-arrangement. This is the evil consequence of the Hon. Baronet's indolent disposition, or rather, perhaps, of that procrastinative reflecting habit, which metaphysical studies, and a feeling of fulness and conscious ability, seldom fail to generate Sir F. Burdett is a first love of mine. Long before I became acquainted with him, when a boy, I made up my mind to the belief, that the best qualities of Coriolanus, Sir Philip Sydney, and William Hampden were united in his character. He is, I believe, the only public man in whom my early predilections have been realized I esteem him, the more I know him. His countenance, his manner, and his voice, are peculiarly expressive of his rare unison of the highest powers of intellect, with the most generous feelings of the heart. I trust his honorable efforts for the welfare of Ireland will be ultimately crowned with success, though I fear otherwise on the present occasion. It surprises me that George Dawson is such a bigot; for, politics apart, I don't know a better hearted fellow. His speech last night was delivered in such an ultra tone of party vituperation, that its effect was neutralized by its absurd virulence. Was up at Bellamy's when G. Bankes was on his legs---heard his speech as usual---presuming and superficial. Heard a dead set to be made at Canning to night.

7. So the Catholic question is lost? Insurrection, and murder, and hanging, and general misery and discontent to be still the order of the day in Ireland, and all from the fallacies of words, and the bugbears of the nursery, and above either, because the Catholic Association, indeed, have not been complimenting their sworn enemies, and the Catholic priesthood have not forsooth been aiding their deadliest foes because, in fact, the Catholics have shown they are not the

degraded beings their oppressors would fain make them! All admit the principle, but oppose its adoption as dangerous to the Protestant Constitution. I asked Peel, at his father's at Staffordshire, what he meant by" Protestant Constitution?" and he could not answer me, nor any one I ever put the question to, except, indeed, George Dawson, who honestly avows by Protestant Constitution, is meant Protestant Ascendancy---that is, Orange oppression. The question is not as to the absurdity of the Catholic tenets, for that is undeniable, or whether the Protestant or the Catholic religion is the best; but the question for us Englishmen to determine is, which is the best way of governing the people of Ireland, a large majority of whom are, and will be Catholics; whether by extending to them the blessings of the Constitution, without repairing, but actually strengthening it, they will be made better or worse subjects; whether their attachment to British interests will be diminished by good instead of ill treatment? Admiting the expediency of the laws against the Catholics of Elizabeth and the Stuarts, at the time of their government, the question is, are they applicable to the present time? Sir J. Copley and Mr. Peel, and a higher authority than either, Lord Liverpool, admit not. The question then is, is there any thing in the religious veneration of the virgin, or the doctrine of the mass, so diabolically dangerous to the Constitution, that it would be unsafe to admit Mr. C. Butler to be along side of Mr. M. P. Battley, the Duke of Norfolk with Lord Winchelsea, or Lord Surrey with Mr. Sudbury Wilks?---No, but then the " Pope "and Guy Fawkes, and the Gunpowder Plot," and Jack the Giantkiller, and the premunire. What is the great argument, the insurmountable objection, the terrific danger, against which there cannot be provided an adequate security? That's the fee-faw-fum, which frights the isle from her propriety;" there the " conscientious con"viction," the "overwhelming arguments," for keeping one-third of the population without the pale of a free Constitution. But there's a Providence in the falling of a sparrow: it cannot last long; and it will be a problem with our posterity, not easy to solve, why the senate of a "thinking people," the guardians of a boastedly "free" Constitution, were in the nineteenth century influenced by such ab surdities, and actuated by such narrow-minded intolerance*.

I dont think much of any speech delivered on the subject. The Master of the Rolls's, a plausible jury statement, from the brief of Dr. Philpotts-nothing senatorial, in either the matter or manner of it. Plunkett's, effective; more, I think, from its direct appeal to common sense, and oratorical variety, than its sustained power. Peel's, an elegant piece of haberdashery. Brougham's, forcible, but declamatory; and Canning's, energetic, but more characterized by its soreness and intense sneering, than for its wit or burning eloquence. I never saw any man so much affected as he was by the result. Between it, Lord Liverpool's and his own illness, I fear for his convalescence. Nothing consoled me but Wilks's voting just after Ashley. “ Mr. John Wilks," "Lord Ashley!!" Dont pity Ashley;

wanted him to vote with me and Howie.

We beg leave once for all to disclaim all participation in, or responsibility for, our M. P.'s opinions. THE INSPECTORS.