sidering it a matter of the greatest importance that the speaker
should concur generally in the political sentiments entertained by a
majority of members. Mr. Hume's motion was seconded by Mr. O'Connell,
who denounced the intention of government as "another instance of the
paltry truckling of the present administration." On the other side, Lord
Morpeth moved, and Sir Francis Burdett seconded the motion, that Mr.
Manners Sutton should take the chair. In doing so, they insisted on the
admitted fact of his superior qualification, as well as the candid
and impartial conduct which he had observed during the late political
struggles. Mr. Littleton himself requested Mr. Hume to withdraw
his motion; but that gentleman declined to do so. Seeing the house
universally in the favour of Mr. Manners Sutton, the Radicals now
chiefly confined themselves to the question of the pension. The attorney
and solicitor-general argued that there was no feasible ground for these
objections, and asserted that he would have no claim to his retiring
annuity. By act of parliament, any speaker was entitled to his salary
till a successor was elected, and Mr. Manners Sutton, being thus
entitled to his salary, he could have no claim for a pension. On a
division, Mr. Manners Sutton was re-elected by a majority of two hundred
and forty-one against thirty-one.

OPENING OF THE REFORMED PARLIAMENT BY THE KING IN PERSON.

The first session of the new parliament was opened by the king in
person, on the 5th of February. His speech on this occasion took a
comprehensive view of our foreign and domestic relations, in which the
affairs of Holland, the approaching termination of the charters of the
Bank and the East India Company, the temporalities of the church, and
the state of Ireland, were prominently introduced.

In the house of lords the address was voted almost unanimously, a slight
discussion only being elicited by the sentiments of Lord Aberdeen and
the Duke of Wellington, against the foreign policy of government, and
especially that regarding Portugal and Holland. Such harmony, however,
did not exist in the commons. A part of the speech which pointed at the
adoption of extraordinary measures to suppress insubordination, excited
violent indignation among a large portion of the Irish members.
Mr. O'Connell denounced the address as "bloody, brutal, and
unconstitutional." He concluded by moving an amendment, that the house
do now resolve itself into a