The Express. — London, England, 1847-07-03 00:00:00

interests were involved, but a protection also to the minister who, by his presence in parliament, would he enabled to stifle misrepresentations at their birth. He considered the sbsence of individual responsibility to be one of the causes of the partial failure of the Poor law Amendment Act. Although he wu aware of the difficulties arising from the connexion of the poor-law ad ministration directly as a department of the government, yet he must say that the present arrangement was unsatisfactory beceure the responsibilities were partly shared by the Home Secretary, and partly by the government, and without n having a respanole minister to answer attacks, they were all directed nominally at the commissioners, but virtually at the government. On the whole, be confessed that, not without great doubt and coesidcrable hesitation, he leaned to the impression that it was desirable to connect the heads of the poor-law department more closely with the government then they were at present. On these grounds, he came to a different conclusion to that of his noble and learned friend, and in the choice of difficulties, he thought the least was to adopt the proposition of her Majesty's government. Lord COLCHESTER thought all necessity for the bill might be removed, if a short act was introduced to establish as law the rules, orders, and regulations which had been framed during an experience of twelve years of the poor-law act, and to confirm the commissioners merely as inspectors, to superintend the carrying out those orders. The Earl of ST. GERMANS approved of the appoint ment of a commissioner to sit in parliament, and he thought it would also be desirable that hereafter there should be a commissioner resident in Dublin and in Edinburgh. The noble earl made some further observations which were jeans tibia in the gallery. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, when bills relating to Ireland and S:otland came before parliament for amend ing the poor-laws, the suggestion of the noble earl would be worthy of consideration ; and he would not press the third reading of his bill now before their lordships until the gene ral suggestions of the noble earl had been taken into con dderation. The house then went into committee on the bill. Lord STANLEY did not i ntend to propose any amend ments, but he doubted the utility of appointing honorary commissioners under the bill; they would resemble the commissioners of the board of control, who were inefficient in consequence of their attendance not being co mpulsory. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH made some observations which were not audible in the gallery. The Duke of RICHMOND observed that it would be better to make the words of the claim which had reference to the secretary of state more general, so that any secretary of state, instead of the secretary . for the home department alone, might be one of the commissioners. On clause 9 being read, The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH objected to the appoint-' meet of two parliamentary officers. The only reason he could think of for such a course was, that as it was extremely improbable that both would get seats in parliament, they might be secure of one. (A laugh.) The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said it might so happen that the president of the board might have a seat in their lordships' house, and if BS, it would be advisable that the secretary should have a seat in the other house. (Hear.) The clause was then agreed to. On clause 10, Lord STANLEY objected th at, making the employments under the present law cease and determine immediately, as this clause proposed to do, was an exceedingly harsh mea sure, which he hoped would not be persevered in. Earl GREY said that such was absolutely necessary be fore the appointments under the new law could be made. Lord REDESDALE supported the view taken by Lord Stanley, and moved an amendment in the clause to that effect ; upon which Their lordships divided —For the clause For the amendment ll-2 The remaining clauses of the bill were agreed to, excepting clause 23, providing that married couples above GO years of age should not be separated in the workhouse, which was struck out. The Duke of RICHMOND moved a clause to the effect that when the board of guardians did not appoint a cm mittee to visit the workhouse, and see that the poor were well treated, it should be imperative on the poor-law com missioners to appoint visitors, to be paid out of the union. After a conversation the clause was withdrawn and the bill ordered to be reported ; the house resumed, and was adjourned, at a quarter to ten, to this day (Saturday.) HOUSE OF COMMONS.—Fituomr, JULY 2. The SPEAKER took the chair at 12 o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. TTURD READlNOS.—Nbuteheater. Sheffield. and Lincolmtthe Railway (Supply of Surplus Waterto Manchester, SaVent, awl litock. port) ; Portsmouth Paving, Lighting, and Improvement ; Taunton Improvement scat >Lrket ; Bills. PUBLIC BUSINESS. FIRST READING.—London -bridge Approaches Fund Bill. SECOND READING. —Compensation for Damages (Ireland). REPORT. —Railways Ireland (No. 2) Bill. COMMITTEES. —Drainage of Lands ;Ireland); Shannon Naviga tion; Insolvent Debtors; Mussel Fisheries (Scotland) Bills. THIRD READINGS . —Tarnpthe Roads (South W ales); Holyhead Harbour; Seduction and Prostitution Supra-aeon; Bills. COMMERCIAL RELATIONS WITH PRUSSIA. On the order of the day for the second reading of the Navigation Bill (No. 2), Lord G. BEN f INCK rose to put a question to the noble lord the Secretary for Foreign Again, of which he had given notice. On 4th 3une last a paragraph appeared in the Globe newspaper to this effect.—" A Berlin journal says, that the Prussian government has received despatches from the Eng lish cabinet, announcing that if the Zollverein persist in not renewing the treaty of commerce end navigation with England end introducing a system of differential duties, the English government will be itself compelled to use reprisals." The journal in which the paragraph appeared was the Prussian Stales Gautee, the official organ of the government. It had therefore the semblance of truth and of an official character. He wished, therefore, to ask the noble lord whether he would threaten Prussia with retaliatory men. cures if she persisted in retaining protecting duties and taking care of her own interests to the prejudice of the in dustry of this country Viscount PALMERSTON said that he had seen the rem graph in question, and it was entirely incorrect. By a treaty made in 1841, between England and Prussia, the prude° of the navigation system was much modifiei. By that treaty certain ports on the Elbe and the Meese, which were the naural outleta of certain inland Germtn states, re to be t considered as the ports of those states, though they were not in their territory ; and the vessels of those states being members of the Zollverein would be ad mitted into this country on the same terms as our s hips. That privilege was granted in return for certain privileges the vessels of this country enjoyed in Prussian porta, which were not then granted for the fleet time, but which had been adopted under the more liberal navigation system of Prussia. That treaty might be put an end to at the close of this year, by a notice given on Ist July. The Prussian government had given that notice, and the treaty would be at an end at the else of the present year ; seat it was intimated on the part of Prussia and the Zollverein, of which Prussia was the diplomatic organ, that they were dis satisfied with tine treaty, because it was net founded on a principle of real reciprocity; that our navigation laws did not accord to the vowels and commerce of Prus sia and the Zollverein, that which our 'velem received in the states and parts of the Zollverein. It woo further inti mated that if Great Britain persisted in her comparatively restricted navigation system, the states of the Zolverein would thirds it to be their interest to establish a differential duty of 20 per cent. on the manufactures and produce of Great Britain. That was the real state of the case, and no threat of retaliation bad been made by Great Britain to compel Prussia to do anything she did not wish, but Prussia and the Zollverein had intimated that if Great Britain did not relax her navigation symtem, a differential ditty would be imposed. An answer had been returned to this communica tion, that the treaty of 1841 had been of little advan tage to Great Britain, that a very small amount of tonnage, less than :AO tons, had availed themselves of the advantages given by Prussia under the new system, and that tz was a matter of indifference to this country whether the treaty was continued, or expired. These communications could not be imid to be cncluded, but there wee no objection to lay on the table the n o tice given by Prussia for the cessa tion of the treaty, and the reply of the British government. Mr. HUTT begged to put the questions of which he had given notice, although the first one had been answered by the speech of the noble lord ; Whether her Majesty's govern ment had received an intimation from any of the states north of Germany that they had in contemplation to impose differ ential duties , et British vessels importing into Germany the production' of countries other than the possessions of her Majesty, unless Great Britain would so far abolish her navi gation laws es to allow German vessels to import productions from all parts of the world into the united kingdom; and whether the noble lord was aware of any negotiations going on for the purpose of inducing the Haase Towns to unite with the sta - es of the Zollverein in an arrangement to impose differential duties on the ships of all nations which did not accord to German mates the same privileges of navigation which the German states extend to them ? Viscount PA.LNIERSTON said the first clueotion was almost answered by the reply he hod just made to his noble friend, and the communications in question he would lay before toe house. With regard to the second question, it was true that Prossia, as the organ of the Zollverein, had beeu in communication with the Plante Towns with a view, as it was understood (there was no official communication on the subject between Prussia and the Zoliverein, but there was reason to believe that a person had been sent from Ber lin to Hamburg and Bremen), to induce the Hawn Towns to become members of the Zollverein. There was eo disposi tion on the part of Hamburg and Lubeck to join the league, bat there was in Bremen. That state looked to receive great advantages from the railway which communicated with the interior of Germany, and, therefore, there was a greater disposition on her part to join the league. He was not aware, however, that the intention of Bremen to accede to the invitation to join the Zollverein had been expressed. NAVIGATION LAWS. Lord J. RUSSELL moved the second reading of the bill for the renewal of the atumeneion of the navigation laws. Lord G. BENTINCK said, that the noble lard the first minister of the crown the other night informed the house, that if but 500 quarters of corn had been imparted in foreign veeersis, under the suspension of the navigation laws (not 600,000, LE had been erroneously stated in tile newsp aper++), he would still have proposed the continuance of this bill MI Ist Mareh. He (Lord G. Bentiack) might fairly say, that In this proposal lurked a real intention of repealing the law alto . On this ground he thought it was his duty to oppose C li fillter suspension of the law. The noble lord did lay on the table a return which purported to give the number of shi and the cargoes of grain which bid been imported t5 .....d the suspension of the navigation laws, which it was to was not given with the intention of snaking out fo r the necessity of the repeal of the law. lic (Lord (1, lienrinek) then gave his reasons for thinking the return j,,,,,,r, at any rate as regarded Ireland, and he asked for Illn ee ._ further explanation i but as yet he had received none except with regard to 136 ships, and 70,600 tons of produce, in the port of London. There were, in September last, 17 shi f p. of war in the Tagus to mast the Queen of Portugal, and i four of them had been lured, they might have been sent the United States to fetch grain, and they would to have imported ea much as those 13 6 ships mentioned in the return ; for out of that 136 no lees than 76 were nothing but i river craft, the lighters and barges of Hanover—the small craft of the Elba or the Weser, of 65 or 70 tom Even with regard to the port of Lindon the importation was scarcely worth consideration. At Christmas last so great I was the demand for shipping to the United States that freights rose to 17s. 6d. a quarter for grain and 12s. 63. a barrel for flour ; but how was the matter now ? By a return which he had up to May 20, it appeared that at New Orleans there were 108 ships, and -10 of them were t lying there looking in vain for freights, while at New Yoric there ere were 37,000 tons of shipping wanting cargoes, but h were no bur* W bring the torn from the interior, and the British ships were leaving to seek timber-cargoes in our North American provinces. At that time there were dxty ships of large size which left Liverpool for New York sad New Orleans, seeking grain freights. There could be no doubt that instead of the freight market being starved for want of shipping. it was glutted, and the charge of 12s. 61. Baltic, he a letter from Mr. Court, the secretary to the Underwriters' Room at Liverpool, which stated 'that on the 12th of May the first ship had arrived at Cronstadt, and that there were 926 lying there waiting for cargoes ; that the loses of shippers to Petersburg would be very great, I and that the supply at Riga and Petersburg . wait enor mute, and out of proportion to the supply of grain." There had been no return of the number of ships which had come from the Mediterranean under the suspension of the naviga tion laws, but be believed there were not more than one or two, anethat freights were falling at Constantinople and Odessa. The necessity, therefore, for the repeal of the law was done away. The present suspension of the law lasted until September, and several vessels from the north of Europe, from Hanover, from the Weser and the Elbe, could not come here after November, as the rivers were frozen. So far, therefore, as they were concerned, any further suspen sion of the law was inoperative, and was only operative in that part of the trade which was already glutted with ship ping. The question, therefore, now was not whether the nevi- Ration laws should be suspended, in order to supply a deficiency of shipping, but u a step to their permanent rsipaL If the noble lord wished to assist the importation of corn In a time of need he might have employed the ships of war in the Tagus, or, as France had done. spared those live steamers which were cruising off the coast of Portugal to go to the Gut of Gibraltar, to tow through that passage the ships which lay there six weeks wind-bound. The - result 111115 that when these ships arrived in the channel their cargoes were so heated and stank so much:that they might be smelled a quarter efa mile off. This would have done far more good than the suspension of the navigation laws, and would have been not an injury, but an advantage to the British commercial in• terests. As the question of the repeal of the navigation laws was virtually to be dismissed, he would ask the noble lord how he intended the navy to be manned in future ? For if the navigation laws were repealed, so as to permit foreign ships and seamen to compote with thou of England, at least he should be prepared to do away with the regulations which now cramped competition on the part of British shipowners. By the law as it now stood, every British ship must carry an apprentice for every hundred tons of her burthen, and four men and a bey. Why was it that the ships of this country , could not compete with those of the United States ? It was not, as had been scandalously and untruly stated, because the captains and mates of our commercial marine were not superior to all others, but because of the expense of carry ing five men to every 100 tons, while American ships carried only three. By a return moved fur by his hon. and gallant friend the member for Live rp ool, it appeared that in 11346 there came to this country 330 ships from the United States, of 435,000 tons, manned by 39,000 men, being a trifle over three men to 100 tons, while British shipping amounting to 1,000,000 tons was manned by 54,600 men, being over five men to 100 tons. How could the British shipper, who had W pay two-tittlis more than those of the Unite d States, l eempete with them ? If the navigation laws were re pealed, and they permitted ships to carry three men to every 100 tons, to what an extent would be the diminution of our commercial marine—the only great security they had, in case of sudden war, for manning the navy. In 1812 and 1814, the British navy was manned by 114,000 ; it was now about 30,000. Where were they to look for recruiting the navy, unless care was taken that the commercial marine was manned with surplus crews ? There were 40 per cent. more men in the British commercial ma rine than in that of the United States. There were 200,000 men in the British commercial marine; and was it henceforth to be manned by 80,000 men less than it was now, and were the supplies for the navy to be drawn from only 120,000 men? In the French ships there were 8 men to every 100 tons, while in thou of the United States there were only two-thirds of the number. The British commercial marine was entitled to protection, and to something like a mo nopoly of the carrying trade. So long as Br t he y ty had any regard for the supremacy of Greatt on the ocean they should take care that not hin g was done which would impair the British commercial marine. Then, as to the scandalous charges, unfounded in truth, which had been made against the officers of the British commercial marine, and in which it was said that they lest the trade because they could not navigate as well as others. Now, so far as skilful navigation was concerned, the United States stood next to our own. lie had a return of the I number of grain-ships which rime to Great Britain from the United States between 10th of September and 12th May, and of the comparative losses and disasters at sea which befel those of thin;, country and those belonging to the United States. He acknowledged that those of the United States were larger in number—there being 296 British ships and 460 American. But what was the amount of disasters? There had foundered at sea, of grain-laden ships, 3 British and 21 American ; 3 British and 19 American had put back into port; 6 British ships hail failed to bring their cargoes safe into port, while 27 American ships had thrown theirs over board. Four British ships had been stranded, while the number of Americans was twelve. On what ground, there fore, could practical men give credence to the evidence given before the navigation committee, whieh went to show that the hand of the British pilot had lost its cunning, and that British seamen had lost their skill, courage, or energy ? Having made this defence of the British commercial marine, all that he should do would he to move that this bill lie read a second time this day three months. Lord J. RUSSELL said he did not propose to consider — and he hoped the house would not consider—this question as one with regard to the maintenance or the repeal of the navi gation laws. Whatever might be the merits of those laws, or whether it was right to mike important changes in them or to repeal them, was not the question in this bill. With regard to that part of the speech of the noble lord which addressed itself to this portion of the subject, he begged to remind the house that when the committee on the navie s- I tion laws was appointed he (Lord J. Russell) said that it wee a question of serious importance to this country, and if I in consequence of the report of that committee, and the evi.l deuce which was given before it, there should be an altera tion in the navigation laws, the house would have to con. I sider the burthens of the British shipowner, and to cone eider the disadvantagee with which he would have to contend when there were no restrictions on foreign shipping. But the question now was whether the present navigation laws should be suspended. Re thought it was obvious that the navigation laws might be suspended without at all affecting the principle upon which those laws were founded. With respect to the very question of the corn laws, they, during the lest fifty years, had been frequently suspended ; sometimes for upwards of six months, sometimes for one year, and sometimes 'or two years, though both houses of parliament bed declared in favour of the policy of those very laws. Su it may be cud with regard to the navigation laws; and he (Lord J. Russell) was surprised that the noble lord and his friends should take the course the noble lord proposed at the pre sent moment, they having been consenting parties to the suspension of the corn duties for the same period. The noble lord, having consented to the suspension of the corn duties, would be justified in saying that by that temporary suspension he had surrendered the principle of protection, and that a return either to a fixed duty or a sliding scale would be better policy than the continuance of the existing law ; and it would he a stronger answer to give to such a proposition to say, Oh, you are precluded, because you consented to the suspension of the laws during the past year." The same was the ewe with regard to the navigation laws ; but the noble lord, basing consented to the suspension of the corn duties, declared that the navigation laws ought not to be held in abeyance. For what purpose had the earn laws been suspended ? Because there MIS an expectation that there would be a want of food and provisions to supply the people, and therefore it wee the policy of this country that the ad mission of corn should be free. Now if it was right that corn should be aihnitted free, it was equally right that freedom should be given to these foreign vessels in which corn was brought to this country. (Hear, hear.) Why not say teat, whatever may he the vessel< in which corn was brought, we will ask no questions as to the country in which they were built and to which they belong, but, because they bring the corn and provisions we want, we will ask no question*, but will admit them free ? (Hear, hear.) Therefore it appeared to him (Lord J. Russell) that the two questions stood on precisels similer grounds, and that it was quite inconsistent fur the noble lord, having agreed, without a dineiou, to suspend the cern duties, now to raise an objec tion to the suspension of the navigation laws. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord had 'mid truly that he (Lord J. Russell) hail declared the other day that he was prepared, even though only 500 quarters of corn had come in under the recent sus. pension, to argue that the nasigation laws ought to be fur ther suspended. He argued thus because he believed the ne ressities of the country were such that no restriction what ever ought to be imposed upon the free admission of corn. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord had referred to returns showing the quantity of corn which had come in, and he had questioned the accuracy of those returns. He (Loral J. Russell) believed those returns to be correct, though inquiries had only been made at the ports of London and Liverpool. With respect to some of the smaller ports of the United Kingdom, the customs might have made an error with regard to corn which might have come in oven if the navigation laws had not been suspended, but as to the total amount the returns showed tolerably correctly the quantity that had been introduced. The amount had been brought by 538 ships, representivg 63,556 tons. The noble lord said it would have been better, instead of suspending the naviga. tion laws, to have sent four line-of-battle ships that were lying is the Tagus to bring corn home from foreign stations. That e Lestion he (Lord John Remelt) had argued at the commencement of the present mo tion, and, he believed, had sesisfied an honourable member who brought forward u motion on the subject, that the amount of the tonnage of those line of-battle ships would be hie anion for the purpose; secondly, that it would have taken too much time to have fitted them fur the reception of cargoes of grain; in the third place, it would take them from the military service ofth e country. at a time when th e y m i g ht be wanted en adders emergeney, as in the case of the Tahiti affair, some time since ; and, lastly, be urged that the more the state inter it fered in reasubjects of that bsort, tie more it proclaimed that was y undertake to furnish that which commercial enterprise usually supplied, and thereby to discourage the regular ,trade and commerce of the country. (Hear, hear.) But with regret tog e em ployment of the four line-of-battle slips— ti e Qu the n, Trafalgar, the Albion, and the fourth mentioned by the noble lord—in such a traffic, he (Lord J. Russell found that the tonnage of the four ships amounted to about 12,000 tons—that amount would not have availed in comparison with the 63,565 tons of foreign ships, which, by the suspension of the navigation laws, had brought previsions to this country. These foreign ships had brought five times the quantity that could have been introduced by the four line-of-battle ships, and had saved the expense of fitting them up for a useless service. But, apart from the consideration of the navigation laws, he called upon the house to consider the immense operations which had been carried on by tke trade of the country for the purpose of supplying the population of the United Kingdom with feed. There had been an unexam pled high price of corn; but, at the same time, efforts to an enormous extent had been made by the trading community. Some time ago the imports of corn were at the average of 9,000,000 quarters per annum; last mouth they were at the average of 12,000,000 quarters per annum, and in some weeks they had exceeded that amount, and when the accounts were made out he believed it would appear that the importation had been g reater than ever was known, and that not less than 6,000,000 of people had been fed during the course of the year by importations which had been made from foreign countries. Let the house compare that with any effect that could have been made by the employment as suggested of four line-of-battle ships. The enterprise of the merchants sod importers exceeded any that the government could have made in these times of misery and distress. The noble lord seemed to think that the necessity for the suspension of the navigation laws had passed away, and that no extraordinary ' circumstances now existed. Lord G. BENTINCK—WiII have passed away on the let of September, when the northern ports of Europe will be closed by natural causes. Lord J. RUSSELL begged to remind the noble lord and the house what had been the extraordinary circumstances of the last few months. In France, there had been • great failure in the crops. In Germany, the dsficiency had been so great, that on the Rhine corn had risen to 90s. per quarter. In Prussia and other parts of Europe, similar results had been shown. These circumstances called for the importation of corn from all parts of Europe and front America. From America an extraordinary supply had been received—a supply without any precedent ; but, on the other hand, France required the greatest part of the supply to be had train the ports of the Black Sea ; and corn which otherwise would have been brought here, had been taken by France for the consumption of the people of that nation. In the month of January, he and his colleagues thought the case so urgent, that they proposed the suspension of the corn duties and of the navigation laws. At that time the average price of corn during the preceding six weeks was 635. 10d. per quarter, and the week preceding that on which the proposition was made by the go vernment to the house, the price was 70s. 3d. per quarter. Under these circumstances the house agreed unanimously to the suspension of those laws. Since that time there had been a still further rise in price, and in Mark-lane the price of corn had been 1005., 108 s., and on one day 115 s. per qr. (Hear, hear.) From that, prices had again fallen, hut the average of the last six weeks was 9 is. 10d. per qr. So that when the house unanimously agreed to suspend these laws, the price was 635. 111 d., and yet now, when the price was 945. 10d., he.was told by the noble lord it was unreasonable to ask for any further suspension. (Hear, hear.) Then the' noble lord stud that on the Ist September the necessity for the suspension would have passed away. Who can tell that at present ? Lord G. BENTINCK—The necessity for ships will have passed away—that is the whole question. Lord J. RUSSELL repeated that his whole argument was, that if there existed a necessity for corn, there existed a necessity for ships—(bear, hear)—and he contended that if a ship arrived at Liverpool, bringing corn from America, the law should not be such as to say, " This is American corn, brought in an American ship, which has been to Ham, and because it has been landed there it must he taken back again." (Hear, hear.) If corn was admitted free, it must be so admitted in whatever ships it was brought. Who could pretend to my that the weather during the next six weeks would give this country a bountiful and abundant harvest, or that the harvest throughout Europe would be plentiful? Neither could any man predict that the abundant harvest last year in America would be repeated in the pre sent year. (Hear, hear.) Let it not be forgotten, that with high prices and a depreciated currency, the amount of con sumption ia this country had been extraordinary. No doubt the extent of railway works had alleviated the calamity under which the country laboured, by causing a considerable demand for labour; but, at the same time, when the amount of railway calls amounted to 21,000,0001., of which it is calculated that since January 18,000,0001. have been applied to railway works in the united kingdom, it was impossible not to see that such an expenditure must have led to the very considerable con sumption which had taken place. (Hear, hear.) So that, while in one sense the construction of railroads had been beneficial, in another sense they had aggravated the diffi culties. Taking all these circumstances into consideration, his general result that it was the policy of earliarnent at this time to open the doors as widely as possible for the ad mission of food, and to take away every restriction that tended to prevent a single quarter of corn from coming into this country. (Hear, hear.) If it was desired to keep up at all the manufactures of the country, to maintain the condition of the labouring classes, and to sustain the national source of revenue, the house would not hesitate' to pursue the policy of the free and indiscriminate admission of corn. Having come to that conclusion, he could not agree to the suggestion of the noble lord opposite, and would not now enter upon a discussion of the general question of a repeal of the navigation laws now pending before a select committee. It was a question which probably would come under the attention of the next parliament. For his own part, he promised to give the most serious consideration to the evidence taken by the committee when it was pro duced. The question was of the utmost importance, in its various aspects in relation to the state of the commercial marine, of the naval power of the country, and the princi ples of freedom of intercourse between nations. He was unwilling to discuss such a question at the end of the session, with a committee still sitting; but the noble lord was Rot, on that account, justified in supposing that any determination had been taken by the go. vernment on the subject. Next session he (Lord J. Russell) should he ready to consider the whole question with refer ence to the general principles of commercial policy, with re oft the effects of this law as rt graded th altered state the world, and luitly, as regarded the naval force and naval supremacy of this country. (Hear, hear.) Mr. RICARDO rejoiced to hear from the noble lord that the navigation laws were not to be discussed until the evi dence was brought to a close by the select committee. The noble lord opposite (Lord G. Sentinel) had peculiar notions with respect to protection to British shipowners, for, while he would not allow foreign ships to compete with them, he would bring into competition British line of battle ships. He had sat now four months on the navigation committee, and everything he had heard convinced him that many months could not elapse before the whole question of those laws must come under the notice of the house. Under these he would not now embark in a premature die. mission. Mr. LIDDELL said he had listened with great satisfac tion to the speech of the noble lord at the head of the govern ment, who, if he understood him right, had declared that he should keep his mind free and at liberty on the general ques tion of the repeal of the navigation laws, and that the pass ing of this bill for their temporary suspension should not in any degree prejudice the minds of the government on the subject. On the part of the shipowners of this country he was prepared to state that they were fully sensitive of the necessity of providing supplies of food for the reople, but only feared the danger of yielding a question of principle by the adoption of the bill. He (Mr. Liddell) was, however, con tent with the declaration of the noble lard. Without yielding the great question, he should nut oppose the bill. Lord J. RUSSELL said the hen member understood him correctly. He (Lord J. Russell) did not mean at all to pre judge the general question of the repeal of the navigation laws. After a few words from Mr. TKELAWNY in support of the bill, Mr. S. HERBERT said, that having listened to the argu ments adduced ag iinst this bill, he woks willing to support it, even if the suspension of the navigation taws wee proposed for a longer period than the month of March, ISIS. lie doubted whether there would he other means far securing food for the people, especially of Ireland, next year, and hence he did not taink it prudent to interfere between the consumer and the supply. He thought that a discussion on the navieation laws could not come on at a more untie tunate Period to those who wished to maintain those laws than that at which the consumer, suffering front the high prices of provisions, would charge ho suf ferings to the maintenance of the existence of those laws. Therefore, without giving any opinion on tho navigation laws, and anxious that they should not be discussed at so un. favourable a period, he should support the continuance of their suspension till March next, Ile regretted that the government had, moment the dropped bills, placed one from which he had anticipated great benefit—the Agricultural Statistics Bill. After the suffering of lest year, arising in a great measure from uncertainty as to the supply, this mea sure would have been most useful; perhaps more useful in this year than it ever would in future. He therefore deeply regretted that the government had withdrawn the bill. Mr. T. A. MITCHELL censured the conduct of the hnn. measlier for Durham (Mr. Lindell), in prejudging a quer ion which was still under the consideration of the committee. Taking 01 things into consideration, he thought there we. the same necessity now for suspending these laws as thcre was six months ago. Freights , i n some instances, were even higher than six months ago; and ho thought the government would have done well to suspend these laws, not only with reference to corn, but to all articles of import, including the raw produce of our manufac tures . He feared we might look for another failure of the potato crop, and, whether or not, very large importations of foreign corn would still be required. Mr. A. CHAI'MAN considered that the safety and prosperity of this country depended on the continuance of tke navigation laws. With refereuce to the committee now sitting, he hoped the noble lord at the head of the govern ment would attend more to the evidence than the report of that committee, many of whose members hail entered it with preconceived opinions. Ile treated the further seven- I sion now proposed would not be mode the stepping-stone to the total abrogation of these laws Lord J. MANNERS said it had been mair.hr ineisted on by his noble friend near him (Lord G. Bentincl) that the war-stemmas should be employed in the importation of corn; and, to this sugdestion, the noble lord at the heal of the government seceded. It was said that the great difficulties to THE EXPRESS, SATURDAY EVENING, JULY 3, 1847. be contended with were contrary wiada and adverse tides, and these difficulties would be directly met by the employment of the steamers. It appeared that very little more corn had bees imported than if the navigation laws had remained in force, though probably the price bad bee nn little reduced se . He thought that in proposing a further spesn of the laws the government ought to have removed some of the grievances of which the shipowners complained, of which the principal was the duty on p Aides of insurance. (Hear, hear.) He had the greatest confidence in the impartiality of the government, and after the pledge given by the nobl er e lord at, its head he had no objection to support this furth suspension. Mr. HUDSON denied that there had been any necessity at all for the suspension of these laws, as there were more I ships than were sufficient to bring all the corn that could be obtained. Still he should not feel it his duty to obstruct the government on this occasion. He hoped that during the re ten the question would receive all the attention it deserved, ana that the house would not consent to take sway the pro tection to the chipping interest. Mr. FORSTER hoped that hon. members opposite (the protectionists) would not attempt to get up a cry at the next election in favour of protection to the shipowners, which would probably be as hollow and unmeaning as the cry of protection for the landed interest was in 1841. (Hear.) Lord G. BENTINCK, after hearing the declaration of the noble lord at the head of the government, had no objection to withdraw his motion. The bill was then read a second time. CUSTODY OF OF} ENDERS BILL. The house then, oa the motion of Sir G. Gave, went into committee on this bill. Lord MAHON suggested that it would be better to post pone the Prisons Bill until another session, as it was not a matter of pressing importance ; and a more perfect measure might be brought in next session. Lord J. RUSSELL said the matter would be taken into consideration; and, on a future day, his right hon. friend the Secretary for the Home Department would state the course that would be pursued. The bill then passed through committee, the report to be received on Monday. STOCK IN TRADE EXEMPTION BILL. On the motion for the second reading of this bill, Sir R. INGLIS said this bill had been passed in seven successive years without the question being discussed. These suspensions were unconstitutional in the abstract, and inju rious in their application ; for they actually changed the law without professing to do so. It was said that stock in trade could not be rated ; but it was now knowa that stock and profits in trade were assessed to the income-tax. By the exemption of stock in trade from poor-rates, the burden was made to fall snore heavily on land and the tithe-owners. In the present state of the house (there were only about 12 members present) he would not enter more at length into the subject. Sir O. GREY was not prepared to deny the inconvenience pointed out; but the origin of these bills had been in a de cision of the courts that a certain rate was bad, because it did not embrace stock in trade. If stock in trade were in cluded, it would be impossible to make a rate that might not be set aside ; for numerous questions would be raised as to what kinds of stock in trade should be rated; and some legislation would then be necessary. Still, these suspension bills hod not been passed on account of the decision of the Court of Queen's Bench, but fur the purpoee of harmonising 1 the law with what had been the practice for a long time. A bill had been introduced by the right hon. baronet, the mem ber for Tamworth, exempting stock in trade from rating some objections had been raised to it in the other house, and it had been made an annual bill, and been so continued. As S. the tithe•owners, he did nut think they were in a worse condition than the owners of any other property ; nor were any of them worse off than they had been before the decisions of the court which had given rise to these bills lie could not give any pledge that, in the ensuing session, a measure would be introduced for settlicg all the difficulties connected with this question. Sir J. TROLLOPS said the proper course would be to refer the question to a committee up stairs ; and, if the prin ciple were a just one, let the exemption be made permanent. Mr. HENLEY thought if the present law was not done away with it would lead to litigation in every parish in I England, the expense of which would fall on the rates, and the clergy would be sufferers to a great extent. Mr. NEWDEGATE opposed the bill. Mr. HUDSON said that the stock in trade of railway companies was rateable, and he did not see why any other stork in trade should be exempt. lie hoped the government would bring forward a measure on the subject early in the next parliament. After a conversation, in which Mr. Cripps, Col. Rolleston, Mr. B. Escott, and Sir C. Burrell took part, Sir R. H. INGLIS said he would not press his opposition to the bill any further at present. Lord G. BENTINCK complained that a measure of so much importance should be discussed in so thin a house. It was one of the evil effects of working double time—sitting at twelve in the day, and until one or two in the morning. (Hear, hear.) He could not understand on what principle the property exempted should not be rated, or why such a measure should be discussed when only one minister was present; and, under these circumstances, ho should move that the house be counted. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw. There being 40 members present, the bill was read a second time, and the house then adjourned till 5 o'clock. The house re-asserahled at 5 o'clock. ROYAL ASSENT. Sir A. CLITFOIIIi, the usher of the black rol, entered the house, and haviag advanced to the table, summoned the house to attend the bar of the Lords, to hear the royal assent given by commission to several bills. The S' PEAKI:II, on his return, announced that the royal assent had bees given to certain bills, for the names of which see Lords' report. CASE OF JOHN RADCLIFF. Major LAYARD questioned the Secretary of War rela tive to the suicide of a private of the above name in the 75th regiment of foot, the particulars of which event appeared in the fMity Veen some days since. The hon. and gallant major read an account of the suicide, and said he referred to this subject with great regret, as the circumstauces impli cated • most respected officer ; but he felt it to be his duty to ask whether this matter had been brought under the notice of the Hone Guards, and if such memoranda as that of Col- Halifax were justified by military law ? Mr. F. MAULE said the position in which he was placed was a very distressing one, especially as Col. Halifax wu beyond all doubt a most valuable officer, and in private life a most excellent man. The circumstances colder which the transaction referred to occurred would leave no doubt that the unfortunate suicide had been guilty of a very great crime. Col. Halifax viewing with detestation the offence committed, issued no doubt a must severe order. He (Mr. F. Houle) would not go the length of saying that Colonel Halifax's punishment had not been severe, but upon the whole he was bound to say that ho thought a severe punish ment was deserved. He must adthat he could not, on a review of the facts, concur in the verdict of the coroner's jury. Radcliff was a nun of violent temper and disposition, and had threatened his own life upon previous occasions. IRISH LANDLORDS. Sir D. NORREYS moved that there be laid before this house so much of the correspondence or reports of the in spectors under the act 10 'Vie., c. 7 (with the name, rank, and residence of the parties referred to), as sustains the statements made by the commissioners of relief in their third report, condemnatory of the conduct of committees, or of individuals, in carrying out the provisions of the said act. Lord J. RUSSELL declined to accede to the motion, but intimated that the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland had directed ouch extracts from the reports of the oomminioners as im pugned the conduct of certain magistrates to be forwarded to those magistrates with a request for explanations. Sir D. NORREYS was not at all satisfied with the noble lord's reply. He considered that the names of those land lords who had merited the censures of the commissioners should be made known, in order that the innocent might no longer be confounded with the guilty. Lord J. RUSSELL replied that the censures were quite exceptional cases. What the commissioners reported was, that in 1,700 committees they had found some instances of abuse, and these instances of abuse were now about to be inquired into by the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. (Hear.) Nit.. B. OSBORNE hoped that the government would make it a point to purge the magisterial bench in Ireland of those justices who at present, in far too many cases, occupied it without any qualification whatever. CASE OF TAWELL. Dr. BOWRI NG asked the Attorney-General whether the property of Towel', who wa, executed for murder, and re specting which an offisial inquiry had lat el y taken p lace, instead of escheating to the crown, would be restored to his widow The ATTORNEY.GENERAL said he had been wholly surprised at the turn given in various quarters to the late in quisition into the property of the convict Tawell. The hon. member was aware that the goods of convicts escheated to the crown ; hut the widow of Tawell having petitioned the crown that an inquisition into her late husband's property might be made, with a view to its being vested in herself, the petition been rented, and the inquiry had taken place accordingly. (HeaMr, hem ALTA. Dr. BOWRING asked the Under Secretary for the Colonies whether the memorials and petitions from Malta on the subject of the grirvances of that telan i had re ceived the attention of the government, and whether any measures were in progress for Chair redrew ? Mr. HAWES said the subject was under the anxious con sideration of the gores neat. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY. In reply to an HON. GENTLEMAN, Lord J. RUSSELL said he proposed to proceed to com mittee of supply on Monday, if possible. SITTING OF THE HOUSE. Mr. SPOONER asked whether the noble lord proposed that the house should sit to-morrow (this day)? Lord J. RUSSELL h B at RNEO. that moment, no such intention. O Mr. EWART inquired of the Under Secretary for the Colonies what measures had been adopted for the establishment of a settlement in the island of Labuan, on the coast of Borneo, ceded to the British crown in December last? Mr. HAWES replied that the government were having the fullest inquiries made ONG KONG. into the subject. H In reply to Lord BANDON, Lord J. RUSSELL said that the expedition to Canton by our military and naval forces had been resorted to by tlie governor of Hong Kong as the only means of effectually putting a stop to insults and aggressions upon British sub ects in China by the Chinese population. The expedition ad been most ably conducted, and quite successful in its object. When detailed information reached him, he should be ready to lay it before parliament. INTRAMURAL BURIALS. Mr. RORSMAN wisbrd to ascertain from the noble lord how matters now stood with refrrtmee to prwess ill get ting rid of a elofee-zoe meat obnoxious in its character : h.• meant the practice of burying persons in crowded cemeteries in the hea tof cities, The subject had been brought most emphatiea'ly within the consideration of the late and of the present government, and the members of both cabinets had dish' ctly admitted the highly ppalling objectionalsle cha racter of the nuisance, the a details of which had been elicited by the clearest evidence before a committee of the house, but no step had been taken or re , medy the evil though years had elapsed since it was first denounced. 'The . public felt that there must be s ome reason ' for this —(hear); it was obvious to them that the difficultiee, the impediments, must arise from some power unseen by them, but strongly felt by government—the late as well as the present. (Hear.) The power , indeed, all were convinced, I must be very effective which could deter a man of such strong energy and determination as the late Home Secretary I from prosecuting that object, in favour of which he had ex pressed himself in such decided terms, the suppression of the existing nuisance. The noble lord (J. Russell). on accession he office, hal also promised legislation on the subject, but no leOlation had come. The public earneetly desired to know who, in this matter, was the public enemy. (Hear, hear.) In the absence of this knowledge, their angry suspicion fell open parties perhaps not really responsible. The clergy were supposed to be at the bottom of the mystery. If such were not the case, the imputation ought, without loss of time, to be removed from them. (Hear, hear.) He denied that the clergy were opposed to this alteration, and one of the most zealous witnesses before the committee which inquired into this subject was the Bishop of London, who stated that twenty-five years ago, when he was a rector in the metropolis, he felt convinced that some one must take up the subject on grounds of morality as well as health. Since then the evil had been aggravated. He hoped he should hear from the government what was the great im pediment to legislation on this subject, and what that was which stopped an improvement which was called for by reasons of health and morality. Mr. HUDSON said that this subject had excited much attention in the city of York, and he had received a requisi tion to call a meeting to consider it, and over which he was to preside in ten days. Viscount NIORPETII could only state that as soon as he succeeded in passing a bill for the health of towns in rela tion to sewer.sge and drainage, he would feel bound to do his best to mature, introduce, and he hoped, to carry a hill for preventing in:erments in towns, but he despaired of carry ing any suck measure unless the present bill was paased. Mr. WAKLEY regretted that the noble lord had given so brief an answer in reply to the question of the bon. gentleman, the subject of which was most pertinent to that which was be ore the house—the health of towns. The hon gentleman wished to know where was the obstacle to legislation on this matter. No doubt the bon. gentleman was well informed on the point, but, it would have been satisfactory to have had a statement of what the obstacle was from the noble lord. It was in fact a question of money. In this country there was a trade iu the burial of the dead. It was a matter of pounds, shilling., and pence. The clergy were hostile to the of burial-groueds, and whenever a proposal was made by private bill for the establishment of a cemetery in a distant place, the vested interests were put into motion, and there was En means of carrying such • bill except by an arrangement with the clergy of the metropolis. He would have been glad to hear from the noble lord whether there had been any communication of an official character with the bishop of the diocese on the subject. He hoped when there was any legislat'on on the matter, the public alone would be considered, and not cemetery companies and such interests. Mr. HORSMAN protested against the manner in which his question had been answered. He had ne wish to obstruct the progress of the bill, and he had given the noble lord notice of this question yesterday. The noble lord at the head of the government had asked what this question had to do I with that before the house. Last year the hon. member for Lymington had withdrawn a bill to prevent burials in towns, on a distinct pledge from the government that in the Health of Towns Bill this session there would be a provision for the discontinuance of the practice. Therefore, when a sani tary measure was brought in by the government, he consi dered that there .hould be some explanation of the reasons for which that pledge had been departed from, and, at least, I members who wished to know what had been the obstruc tive causes which had prevented the measure should not be rebuked. Viscount MOItPETH disclaimed any discourtesy to the hon. member. If the bon. gent. wished an answer to his inquiry, he could only say that ho was not aware of any obstacle to the passing of such a measure. The bishop of the diocese was most anxious for it, but there were vested in terests which it would be necessary to look to, as well as sonic old associations to combat. Mr. MACKINNON thought that there were difficulties which accounted for the government not bringing in a mea sure on this subject, one of which was remuneration to the clergy, and another the oppenitim of persons in the metro polls and large towns who were peasetreed of graveyards. He thought this was enough to account for the government not fulfilling their pledge in this session ; but he hoped they would redeem it in another. After • few words from Mr. BORTLIWICK and Mr. HEN LEY the subject dropped. HEALTH OF TOWNS BILL. The committee on this bill was resumed. On clause 8 a discussion arose, as to the manner in which notice should be riven of a town being brought under the operation of the bill, and it was amended by the insertion of words which increased the number of places where notices are to be affixed. Co! SIBTHORP said the country had a right to know who were to be the inspectors—perhaps 100 in number—and what was to be their salary. They would be armed with very great and inquisitorial powers, and it was essential that competent persons should be appointed. Unless a satisfac tory answer was given he should repeat this question on every clause. ( le.ughter.) He complained of the estimates not being brought on, and asked why the delay . , Viscount MORPETH said he would only give the same answer as he had done on the preceding evening—that the Treasury would apportion the salaries according to the duties performed. Instead of there being 100 inspectors he del not believe that more than 6 would be necessary. The clause as amended was then agreed to. On clause 9, which gives the inspectors power to call for parish books, &c , Mr. HENLEY objected that parties such as assistant overseers and clerks would be required to produce docu ments over which they had no control. Viscount MORPETH consented to the omission of certain words, so as to obviate this objection. Mr. SPOONER asked on whom the expense of making copies of documents was to fall ? and Mr. HENLEY took a further objection to the word " neighbourhood," as not sufficiently definite. The Lord ADVOCATE said it would perhaps be better to defer the consideration of this clause lime the bringing up of the repert, when it might be modified. Cal. SIBTHORP repeated his question about the salary of the inspectors, and complained that the clauses generally were ill-concocted. It would be far better to withdraw it. After a few words from Mr. ENTWISLE the clause, as amended, was agreed to ; :awes clause 10,without discussion. On clause 11, Mr. DIVETT proposed a verbal amendment, in reference to the notice required, which was adopted. After a converse:ion, u to the expense of plans, &c., Mr. BUCK urged the withdrawal of the bill, on account of the prevailing distress, and of the extremely lax way in which the clauses were drawn. It would be impossible to emery out the bill as it stood. Col. SIBTHORP repeated his objections. Mr. BROTHERTON said the corporate 'owns were most anxious for the bill ; and if all the good desired could not be ileac, let them do as much as they could. (Hear.) The bill would have been a benefit to the metropol i s; the opposition to it had arisen from interested parties. Mr. SPOONER said the question really was, whether the towns wished for the bill? Mr. TRELAWNY wished hon. gentlemen opposite would declare at once whether they intended to wear out the government. (Hear, hear.) Mr. NEWDEGATE said, if the bill was a boon, it was a great job to exclude London from it ; if it was an injury, it was a great job to impose it on the country. Alter a short conversation, the clause, as amended, was agreed to. On clause 12 being proposed, Mr. SPOONER said that he meant to propose weeds which would terve it optional with the towns whether they would have the provisions of the bill applicable to them. The words which he proposed to add were, " and upon three fourths of the rat -payers within such corporate boroughs." Ile could see no reason for dialing with corporate towns on • different principle from other towns. Then words would tilt whether the towns wished fur the bill. Lord eIORPFITH said he found himself unable to assent the words proposed, plausible as they apeared. He oon• I kneel lie was unwilling to trust te the selhffinese of indivi- 1 duals, when they feared that calls would be made upon I I their pockets. There was no doubt the commiseioners would listen to any reseonable objections on the part of the corpo li rate towns. After a few words from Mr. G. PALMER, Mr. HENLEY said he could see no reason why an option should be left to towns nithout corporations, and that option was taken sway from corporate towns. He supposed the only reason was, that corporations were elected bodies, and therefore. net lit to be trusted, which seemed to be the rea son weigned by the noble lord. Mr. AGLION BY did not think that any distinction ought to be made te tweeze towns with corporations and towns, without them but for this reason—that be did not think' either were disposed to pay attention enough to sanitary re gulations end the health of the inhabitants. Mr. NEWD EC:SATE was surprised that those who were called liberal members should support a measure which took away from the people the liberty of taking care of their health. He thought the people should be allowed to live in each houses as they pleased. Lord MORPETH aid that Iris complaint was, that in too assay instances the people had uo such liberty as the hon. gentleman spoke of—namely, of living in what houses they pleased, but were obliged to live, in too many eases, in houses where they wen compelled to die. (Hear, hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said there was no instance in the laws of England of making the operation of any act contingent on the petition of three-fourths of the rate payers. It was usually left to the inhabitants at large. Mr. SPOONER would meet that objection by changing " rate-payers " into " inhabitant householders." Mr. IVAKLEY wished the committee to remember that this was a bill for the benefit of the poor, and it was absurd to make its operation contingent on the will of the inha bitant householders, who would have to bear the expense. Col. SIBTHORP 'eked, if the bill was for the benefit of the peer, why it was not applied to Fiesbury, where he was sure it was much wanted ? The Committee die ided—For th e amendment 27 Against it 73-46 The clause was then agreed to. On clause 13, excluding tiny part within ten miles of St. Paul's Cathedral from the operatics of the act, clause. Mr. H. KEMBLE hoped that the clause would be allowed to pass. If it were, the benefits of the measure would be such, that in another session London and its neighbourhood would be included. He was nut willing to sacrifice the mea sure on account of the exclusion of London ; and, without excluding the metropolis, it would be impossible to pass it in the present session. (Hear, hear.) Mr. HUDSON could not understand why the City of London should be excluded any more than that of York. (Hear, hear.) Such a distinction was extremely unjust. The metropolitan members were too much in the li thit of supporting the City corporation, and sacrificing th.: pro vinces. It was his firm conviction that the expenses of the bill would be a great waste, and form a heavy hurdeL on the rate-payers. If the necessary powers wore given to the se kveral corporations, they would carry out sanitary improve ments rigidly and honestly; whereas, under the measure before the house, the rate-payers would suiter gross injustice, I end the work would be perforated in an unsati•foctory manner. Mr. Alderman HUMPHERY said be had not been asked by is conatitunts to vote for this bill. His right hon. friend (Mr h . Hudson) e had asked why London was to be ex • chided. He could tell him that the miles of seweraoe both in London and in Surrey exceeded the number of miles of railway of which his right hon. friend! had the maneirement. ((fear, hear.) There was no part of York which ceuld be compared with the City of London. (Laughter.) Auy one who went to York, and afterwards c om p ared it with London, would find that the comparison was very much again,' York. Mr. SPOONER wished to ask the noble lord the ques tions : first, why Middlesex and Surrey, which first 'toed in the clause, were now left out; secondly, why, having first proposed four miles for exclusion, he now propoeed ten; and thirdly, why the City of London had lieen e\ eluded at all? Mr. BROTHERTON would ask the honourable member whether he would support the bill if London were imluded ? (Laughter.) Mr. SPOONER said he was not in the habit of an• wering ad capfandum questions,. (Great laughter.) Mr. HUDSON said that it the City of London ere in cluded in the bill, and a large majority still support, .1 it, he would then vote for it. (" Hear," and laughter.) Lord MORPETH stated, in reply to Lhe hon. meinber for Bi r mingham, that Middlesex and Surrey would be omitted merely to make the clause more compendious; if tle.y were retained, Keut and Essex must also have h re tained. As regarded the insertion of ten miles instead four, it appesred from representations made to him that the area for drainage sad the supply of water were not includ ed within a circumference of four miles, and that was th , cause of the alteration. With respect to the exclusion of London, he begged to say that having brought forward the he was immediately told that he was aiming at too much, stet that it would be very difficult to include London in its pro, isions ; and when he returned to town eter the Easter ri i.eas the prospects of the session convinced him of the cor rectness of that view. Farther, a deputatio from the Health of Towns Association had urp .1 him not to attempt to include the metropolis in do ....meta measure. He felt as thoroughly convinced as any that the metropolis required sanitary legislation, and ii t- 0 had the opportunity, he had the strongest intention, of iL troduc ing a bill for the sanitary improvement of London the next session. Col. SIBTHORP complained of the partialita of the measure, and denied tho right of the noble lord to hi. guided by the advice of any association. Mr. ROEBUCK expressed his disappointment at the ex planation just given by the noble lord. If there wi re one place which, more than all others, required do opera don of a bill like the present, London eas that place—(hear, hear)--and he even thought that if any exemption were to be made it would have been best to com mence with the metropolis alone. There was no dithculty in dealing with the case of Louden which would not le: found equally to exist in other towns. The right hon. gentleman, the member for York, was in the habit of laying claim to great practical knowledge of the material affairs of life. (Laughter.) Although that right hon. gentleman might be able to drive a railway carriage from one end of the ..ountry to the other, he (Mr:Roebuck) did not conclude, from the experience he had had of him, that his opinion was likely to govern the House of Commons on a question so material as the cleanliness of mankind. (Laughter.) Mr. NEWDEGATE could not admit that any satisfac tory reason had been given by the noble lord for treating London as a happy oasis in a land of filth. It had been shown by statistics that there were many parts of it from which fever was never absent. After a few words from Mr. W. WILLIAMS, Lord J. RUSSELL observed that hon. gentlemen oppo site had argued as it it were intended to exclude th. metro polis from any sanitary measures. The object of the govern ment really was to pass a bill this year which should lordly to certain parts of the country, and to introduce a Lis! which would include other parts of the country and the IA trial:ells in the next session. (Hear, hear.) Hon. gentlene a oppo site, who had expressed such seal for sanitary nos arms to various tovenswonld justly lament if a measure were rejected which would eventually lead to the including of the metro polis and other towns of the kingdom. Mr. WAKLEY believed that the metropolitan opposition to the bill was now confined to the City. Mr. HENLEY appealed to the hon. member for South wark whether every part of that borough possessed good drainage. Mr. Ald. HUMPHERY —Yes. Mr. HENLEY said that that was a strong assertion. There were, in fact, many parts of the metropolis where she rate of mortality was greater than in any town except 1. ,erpoel. After a kw words from Viscount MOkIPETH, The committee divided—For the clause.. 112 Against it .... 70 -42 Clauses 14, 15, and 16, were agreed to, the latter with some verbal amendments. On clause 17, Col. SIBTHORP said it was a most important clause, which would take some time in discussion, and as he was de termined to divide on it, he should move that the chairman report progress. Viscount MORPETH said ho sPil not propose to go further than this clause, and he hoped t h e hon. au, gallant member would allow them to go on. Col. SIBTHORP signified his intention of penesting in his motion. Lord J. RUSSELL acceded to the motion, and said he should propose to go on with the bill at 12 o'clock on Monday. The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. On the motion of Sir G. Gary, it was agreed that the hoist at its risinir adjourn till Monday at 12 o'clock. NEW ZEALAND COMPANY. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved thet a lean of 1:16,000/. should be advanced to the New Zealand Company for the service of the next three years. Col. SIBTHORP protested against such a vote being taken at so late an hour, after the house had been 'Wag upwards of twelve hours. After a short conversation the resolution was agre,al to. The bowie resumed ; the report to be received on Monday. JOINT STOCK COMPANIES BILL. Mr. M. GIBSON moved the third reading of thi , 'AL After a short conversation the third reading of th, bill was postponed. The house then adjourned at w quuter.past one, till twelve o'clock oa Monday. It proigt MAILS. The mails fer British North America. Bermuda, ..td Undti :totes, will be made up on the evening of the 3ril July. 3 bs overlent =die foe Gibraltar, Malts, ts , ece, the loci ngypi., Aden, Oeylun, Inks, llong-Kong, and China, eta Southampton will be node up on the evening of the 3rd July. The rands for the lirmils, the Riker Plate, Monte Video, remain. boon, Bahia, Muteira, and Buenos Ayres, will be made kp on the evening of the 4th July. The overland closed malls, nu. Marecilies, to the Meuanean, Egypt, Aden, Ceylon. India, Ilona Kong, An, ash be made o rrp on the eninna oleic 7th July. A mall fur the United Stater, British North America, wait* made up us, the morningof lath July. for Ir:um:Manna by the steadier Washington, front Nan auriploa. Lett/nand papers must be speog 2 l marked, -Per Waahington." The West India mails, excluding those for Mexico, Honduras, and the Ilarunnali, will be made up ou the morning of the 17th July. The mails kr New South. Wales, Van Diemen'. Land, ...ad Nev 7.ealandwill be made up em the evening of the 31st July. TO CORILTSTON DENTS. meat. hottaki be TheLando. evea...g payer, oat la at Otbe• by Tab afdeek ea rig Oty at publlcadon. 11101 l RLTBB AT LONDON.B1111)0E. TN. Peg —blaming, 13 Wm pat I, AfterAcon, 14 AAA 1. 11 t• To•Blosnow—lloeniug, train. put I, Mumma. 17 .10 , P. I. LONDON, SATURDA y, JULY 3. AMONGST the counties likely to be contested at the next election are Buckinghamshire and Essex, which are, perhaps, the two districts of all England in which the most blind and bigoted adherence to protectionist notions prevails. Foe this there are various local peculiarities sufficient to account ; but it will be enough to remark that Buckinghamshire is one of the worst, if not the worst, cultivated county in England, and dist Essex is, perhaps, the greatest wheat-growing county. It is a rule amongst farmers, almost without titer lion, that the worse the system of management par sued by any husbandman, the greater has been his reliance on extraneous aid from protection or ant thing. The unfailing resource of intelligent la' reliance seeias to be the last thing that occurs to tke mind of a bad farmer. This supineness on theme of farmers is far more frequently t he moult of lord-impused trammels, or of deficiency of caTita i !, than of want of industry or acti v i t y . The s y stems more in fault than the individuals ; but wherever as blame rests, the fact is undoubted that bad fanni4 and strong protectionist longings are usually found W prevail in the same localities; yet, uwe shall re' sently show, protection is at a discount even in BO inipmmehirc. fhe wheat.growers of Essex apprehend, we dui erroneously, that theirparticular produce—wheit— will be that most affected part by foreign conipstitict and thus many Essex farmers who, from position sai intelligence, ought to have known better, have bed ardent protectionists, and have thereby added Mr. DUCIDALE said he should vote for expunging this L 4