The Express. — London, England, 1847-04-29 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS. — vv APIIL 28. The SPEAKER trek the chair at twelve o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. REPORTS—OIamow, Moeda% and Carlisle Railigny, and Mar ' gow Paisley, Eilow.rtiock, and Ayr Railway (No. I); Glar., palsay, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway, and Glaagow and Be Union Railway (Na. I); Kingston.opin:ftramee Small Tenements; Loin and lily (entoaaion to smilding and lintheacb); Col. cheater, Stour Valley Sudbury, and Ilalstmd Midway (eatenaion to Mciford, Lamborn, and Clare); Bills. PUBLIC BUSINESS. PETITIONS.—By Mr. W. Parres, from Lancaster; Sir G. Gam', town Oevonport ; —ln honor of the Health of Town. litlL—Mr. lino nieneros, from Belfaat, snit a place in Scotland, against the we of corn distideriea—Mr. V. 81111111, Rona Belfeat and Newry, in favour of the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill.—Mr. P. lio•Alln, from Gore. in Wesiord, against a portion id the bill.—Mr. Seolims, four petition. from inhabitant. of Birmingham for exemption from the operation of the Small Tenements 14,11.—Mr. P. Sevier, several petitions Pram various places to the came effect—air G. Gore, from Manchester, for a more summary mode of punishing juvenile offendens —Sir J. PAIDIGTON, faun magistrates in Worecsterdnie and Meutgoasef7 - stare ; and be Mr. AM11.U.1,, from Warwiekaliire, to same el rot. SEC3NU READING.—County Buildings Bill. RETURNS Ott UERELL—Ou the motion of Mr. Hens, returns of the cirealatarm of the Rink of England, and of the Iraqis of Wane in England sal Wale% :Wetland, and Ireland, (rota Jmuiire, 18 le, to the present time (in continuation of Pull inrmtiry Paper, No. 2,, of am mo 1 itiG). Of the sow., securities, bullion, are., anis Born. of Eng land, JA published in the Gucttfe, from the passing of the act 7 and 8 Vie., a.:{_, to the prevent tim^ (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. yin, of a visbn 1814). Amonnt of the quarterly averages of the 11.inklif knirand ranee the 24th rise of January, 1811 U (in coati nmtion of Parliamentary Paper, No. 27;0f sewn. n 18-16`,. JUVENILE OFFENDERS BILL. On the order of toe day for resuming the adjourned debate for the second reading of this bill being moved, Mr. ROEBUCK moved that it he read a second time this doe six month,. Ile said that any alteration in the criminal law with nit the great consideration and the sanction of the government, would lead to very serious inconvenience. He wished to knaw whether the government gave its sanction to such a bill as this? The bill was a proposal that two magis trates sitting privately, with no regard whatever to that most necessary sateguanl against the mal-administration of the law, publicity coal I adjudicate on cases where boys under the age of Aeon year, were accused of cheating, re ceiving money under false pretences, or of stealing goods not valued above 40,. There were no cases in which it was more difficult to come to a proper decision then the two former, and then these magistrates, without the slightest control, or perhaps without the slightest legal knowledge, or that which was always cesaary in such matters, the assistance of a lawyer, could come to a decision, which would be perhaps quite contrary to law rind justioe ; not only could that abuse take place, but the magistrates could uneer any circumstances be made liable to the most gross imputations. No body of men ought to he entrusted with the powers which such a hill as this would give tho magistrates of this couetry, and he was of opinion that the magistrates would not take these powers. In the admi nistration of the law there should not only be perfect pub licity. but enforced, compelled, and certain publicity. The public and the press should not only be admitted to, but matters should he so arranged that they should invite the press and the public to be present at, the administration of the law. He would not go into the details of the bill, as he believed that this objection was sufficient, and he would ask the right hon. bert. t h e Secretary for the Home Department whether he was ready to sanction ouch a bill as this ? The right hon. gent. who propeeed it said that he was ready to modify it, but he denied that there could be any modifies, tion. There was nobody, according to his bill, to control or to assist the magistrate in his deci sion, auk who woo to make that decision ? lie might be a folhunting justice, having a few acres of land, to entitle hint to the position of magistrate, and not a learned judge. The hon. and learned gentleman concluded by saying that he had no doubt that he would succeed in carrying the metion which he made. Mr. BANK ES said that be could not euepart the bill in *ethane in which it stood, hut feelir.g the great necessity far alteration, which had been long known to exist by those who took any share in the administration of the law, he thought that they could not better employ their time than in eons& dering how far it may be practicable to remedy the criminal law with :regard to juvenile offenders. He must tell his right hon. (need that he c iuld not give his support to the bill in any future stage unless he gave a direct end specific option to the party unused to appeal to a jury if he may think fit. He believed tint with a ptroeision of that kind it might be practicable, admitting the force of the observations of the hon. and learned gentleman the member for Bath, to give all the security which they were anxious to ensure, as well to the young as to Vs e more advanced in years, of b!ay leg a trial by jury at their option. He would vote for this stage of the bill, and was ready to go iota committ, e, and in troduce such a provision a. that to which he alluded, and he hoped that the government would take the same view of the matter as he did. Sir G. GREY said that, when the hon. baronet opposite intimated his intention of bringing in this bill, he then stated that the subject was one of very great importance, and he was glad that he brought it under the consideration of the how. Ho would be sorry now to dissent front the principle of the bill, which proposed that some more sum mary mode of punishing juvenile offenders should be adopted ; ;''sight that there wer. " r te.. liii•atiens to most of the details Of the bill. He thought that the subject required very full and ample consideration, and he could not express a hope that, in this session, the bill should be put in committee in a form in which it could meet with the support of her Majesty's government. It would be only a partial measure upon a subject which re quired very full eonstderation. The objections of the hon. and learned gentleman the member for Bath had been chiefly, if not entirely, addressed to the deiails of the bill ; and he had no doubt that the right hon. baronet opposite would concede one objection of that hon. member, that if this summary jarishetion is to be ex( reised, it ought to be exer cised in public and not in private. (Hear, hear.) He understood that principle to be at once conceded. Then another difficulty are, viz., what was to be the punishment to be inflicted on juvenile offenders in such cases as occurred every lay of children of six, seven, eight, or nine years of age being sentenced to transportation, and that sentence being accompanied by a recommendation from the judge or the chairman of a board of magistrates that the offenders should not be transported, which nobody could dream of, but that they should be taken charge of by the government with a view to their reformation, and with a view that they should not fall beck into the heads of either their parents or their friends, who neglected their education, and allowed them to be trained up only in vice and crime ? That subject should receive their full and entire consideration. He was not able to say that during this session he could bring in a bill which would meet all these difficulties, but he hoped to be able during the session t 3 introduce a bill into parliament to enable towns and boroughs to provide some asylums for criminals of that kind, if they ought to be called criminals, be cause he thought it was more their misfortune than crime that brought them within the law,—(hear, hear]—iu order * h e! they may rrweiTe Porno degree of punishment; for punish ment should alwa y i be connected with crime ; but more with ee view to their refomatioe, which , was the . great ei,ject at which the y airo:-..• tea, °meet was to tae accomplished, ache h 0 it might be, it would be much more easy and 7.letticable to arrive at that summary jurisdicti o n, attended with all those guards by which it should be attended in all rases; by which means they would consign offenders of that clam, not to prison, not to that contamination which it was the object of this bill to avoid, but would go still further, and send them to an asylum where they would not meet with contamination subsequent to conviction. He hoped that the right hon. baronet would not press his hill in the present 'vision, in fact he did not see any probability of its be coming law; at the sometime, if he wished to affirm the pro position that there should be a more speedy mode of trying juvenile offenders, ho should be sorry to give a vote which would go against the affirmation of that principle, but beyond that he could not go. He thought that if the details of this bill were made as perfect as they could be, it would still be imperfect unless accompanied by the other bill to which he alluded. If they cane to extend the juris diction, the question arose as to who should exercise it. He did not agree with the hon. member for Bath in thinking that the magistrates were unfit to exercise it when so ex tended. It would become also necessary perhaps to extend the principle of appointing stipendiary magistrates. It had been extended to a great degree latterly, and he confessed that from reports which they had received from South Wales, where there was a large population engaged in mines and the iron trade, he thought they must look forward for an extension of them, net to supersede the local magistrates, out to act with them. He thought that a system of that kind would very much tend to facilitate the exercise of summary conviction, by placing it in the hands of those who were more directly responsible to the government than the local magistratea. He confessed that all his apprehensions as to the increase of that power might be removed by these gate guard' to which he before referred. Ile had now stated his general views on the subject, and he had only to say that the principle was not new to the house, they had sent up a bill founded on it to the other house in 11;40, but it did not pass. He was sorry that so many years should have elapsed without their having been successful in framing and carrying a bill of thie description. The subject was now receiving more fall consideration, and a committee of the House of Lords were inquiring into the state of the criminal law, and he thought that the right hon. baronet's view would be defeated by too hasty legislation. He concluded by saying that he would be happy to assist him in any way he possibly could in framing a more perfect bill, an 3 expressing a hope that the matter would be shortly put on a better footing. Mr. LAW concurred with the right hon, baronet who had dust spoken, in impressing on the hon. baronet who proposed this bill the necrnwity of withdrawing it. He thought the measure was wrong in all its details, and had nothing but the principle expressed in the first paragraph of the bill to recommend it ; and he hoped, se an assurance on the iurt of the government had been given th a t th e su bj ect would be taken up by them, the hon. baronet would with. d raw hi e bill, the more especially so so difficult and delicate a matter °eight not to he entrusted to any individual, how seer capable he might be. He thought the Attorney-Gene ral should be instructed to frame a bill on the subject, but not until the report on the question of transportation, in the House of Lords, had been presented. At any rate, until such report was to to found on the table of the house (of Commons), he hope.' the hon. baronet would not proceed farther with his bill. Mr. B. DENISON hoped the hon. baronet, after the as surance of the right hon. bar the Secretary of State for the Home Department, would w ethdraw his bill. He pro- tested, on the part of the magistracy to whom he belonged : to math power as the bill proposed being given to them for privately trying juvenile offenders for the offences set forth in the bell . Mr J. PAKINOTON, in reply, said that he agreed in the opinion th►t the subject should have been taken up by the government, and it wet only in consequence of their fail ing to do so that be bad applied his attention to it. The loa. baronet then read an extract from the report of the mi. minal law commissionaire, in favour of the principle of the bill. Sir E. Ryan, the head of that commission, bad also stated that ke improved of it; and when the hon. and learned mem ber for Bath and other boo. members complained of the power which his bill would confer on magistrates to sen tence for six months, at a private bearing, he begged to re mind them that a magistrate had now the power of veutencing for certain offences to twelve months' imprisonment in his own private parlour. (Hear, hear.) It was a moat serious evil that children should be subject to the contamination of a jail, and be obliged to stand at the public bar of justice ; and if such summary power were given so the bill proposed, they would be saved the evil consequences of being dealt with as they now were. The principle of the measure had been sanctioned by the house in 1840, when Sir E. Wilmott brought forward a bill on the subject. The house then sent thut hilt to the other house of parliament by a considerable majority, having amongst its must strenuous supporters Sir John Campbell, then the attorney-general. The anomalies of the existing law called for some amendment. As the law now stood, if a boy took apples from a tree he might be dealt with summarily ' • but if he took those from the ground which the wind had blown down he would be branded as a felon ' • would the house allow such a state of things to continue ? In conclusion, he must complain of the course which the right hon. gentleman the Ilomc Secretary had adop:cd. When he first introduced his bill, the right hon. gentleman said he approved of its principle, and gave the measure a cordial reception, but he now said that he objected to the details, without stating the nature of his objections; and he (Sir J. l'akington) could only say that those details were founded on the recom mendations of the criminal law commissioners, and he was ready to amend them, if possible, either in a committee of that house, or a committee up-stairs. He had been urged from all parts of the kingdom to proceed with the bill, and therefore he did not intend to withdraw it; and if the government chose to say they approved of the principle, and threw the details overboard, upon them would rest the con sequences of allowing the existing evils to continue. (Hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that as the bon. baronet seemed determined to go to a division, he should vote for the second reading, merely because he approved of the principle of the measure. It did not, however, cure some of the anomalies in the law which were complained of, and his right hon. friend (Sir G. Grey) had only asked the h in. baronet to postpone the bill until the whole question of reformatory punishment could be taken up. (Hear, hear.) Ile thought some means should be adopted for the speedy trial and punishment of juvenile offenders, but he enter tained great objections to the details of the measure before tho house, and more particularly to private tribunals. (Hear, hear ) If the bill were sent up-stairs, it would only be another mode of throwing it over for the session ; I and unless the hon. bort. wished it to go to a select commit- tee, as a sort of finger-post to I'uide the government in any future measures which they might bring forward on the sub ject, he would advise him not to peers his measure. Much credit was due to him for the attention which he had paid to the matter ; and at any rate it would be gratifying to him to know that he had caused a discussion which would no doubt be useful hereafter. (Hear, hear). Mr. HENLEY thought the anomalies spoken of were no justification for the measure before the house, but rather for an inquiry into the crimiaa! law ; moreover, the subject was of too grave and dif fi cult a character to be entrusted to any independent member, and should have been taken up by the government. He should feel compelled to vote against the Lill. _ . . Mr. PACKE objected to some of the details of the bill ; but he so entirely approved of its principle that he should vete for the second reading. Mr. ADDERLEY was in favour of the principle of the bill, and would vote for the second reading. He thought that solitary confinement was not applicable to juvenile offenders, and would prefer some description of corporal punishment. He also thought that as ignorance was its • great measure the cause of crime, it should be taken into consideration in awarding punishment, Mr. ESCOTT said they were all agreed that something ought to be done to bring offenders to a more speedy trial; but they were also nearly all agreed that the provisions of this bill would only make matters worse. After the de clarations of the right honourable gentleman and the attor ney-gen,ral, there was no expectation that the bill would pass ; he would therefore vote against its being referred to a committee up stairs. Mr. R. PALMER would vote for the second reading of the bill, although he objected to many of its provisions. At least three-fourths of the eases which came before the magic bates for trial were for some trifling theft, ,which should never have teen brought before them. Some of these cases cost the country 101. or 121., although the value of the artiee stolen was not worth so many farthtngs. It mutt be apparent to all that it was desirable to get rid of such a system so soon ' as possible. Mr. T. EGERTON was in favour of the ?rinep a of tl e bill but opposed to several of its provisions. If the government took up the subject he would strongly urge upon them the expediency of erecting houses of refuge. Mr. PROTHERUE would vote for the second reading, As ignorance was the parent of crime, he thought that it should be taken into consideration in awarding punishment. The house divided—For the second reading 7.5 Against it 23-52 The bill was then read a second time. RATING OF TENEMENTS (No. 2) BILL. On the Melon for resuming the adjourned debate 6h this bill, Sir G. GREY said that the time which had elapsed since this bill was before the house on the former eceasion, did not induce him to consider it in a more favourable A great disturbance of the rating of property would be created by it, and the subject required more consideration before he could consent to the second rending. (Hear.) Mr. OSBORNE hoped the house would not consent to the bill. It would raise the poor rates, which were already too high in several of the towns in England. Mr. P. SCROPE hoped the house would not assent to the second reading. By the act of the 54th of Geo. 111., cottages below a certain value were exempt from the pay ment of rates. In the town of Liverpool there were 30,0001. oat of 100,0001. excused to the occupiers of such cottages. (Hear, bear.) Then the question came whether it was the occupier or the owner that was to pay. The owners of such cottages were generally small speculators, and it would be unjust to impose, by an invidious e,c post facto law, a direct rate on that claw of property. Those persons conferred a great benefit by providing cottage habi tations for the poor, and would they oppose an obstacle to that supply, by imposing • rate on such property? He thought they would act unwisely if they did so. He knew that at present great trouble and expense were in curred in ascertaining who were proper objects of exemp tion from paying the rates; and as the overseen had their favourites, it also gave rise to favouritism ; but the hill which stood in his name, and which was to come on immediately, would do away with that, for he drew a broad line by fixing the amount at which the cottage should begin to be rated. In that bill he confined the ex emption to houses under 61. In litrge towns he proposed that houses under Si. or 10/. a year wound be exempt. Mr. CHIN'S said that of all friends of the poor he prayed to be delivered from a political economist. (Laughter.) The hon. member was one of that sect, and he had taken an opportutiity of enunciating his favourite dogmas without urging a single valid objection to the measure before them. lie (fir. Cripps) believed that the measure would have no such effect as that of raising the rents of cottages, for no man took a house of any sort without knowing to what I rates it was liable, and regulating his rent accordingly. For his own part he believed the bill was a very useful one, and one which was very generally approved by the people. He should, therefore, give it his cordial support. Mr. VERNON also thought they ought to discuss one measure at a time, and that therefore the speech of the hon. member for Stroud WWI at present out of place. lie denied that speculators in cottages were the best friends of the poor. There were no greater tyrants to the poor than small capi talists, who run up houses to let to the clams below them, and for his own part, he should tie glad to see such speculative building put an end to, and each landlord obliged to build a sufficient number of houses of a good clam, for the habitation of the labourers on his estate. He believed the bill to be a very good one. The only doubt he had about it was, whe ther it was desirable to dent with the subject at all, pending the decision of the committee now sitting upon the law of settlement. Col. T. WOOD was rather surprised at the course taken by the government upon this subject, because certainly there was no question on which they had a more ample or com plete body of evidence in favour of the principle. The speech of the hon. member for Stroud appeared to him also to afford admirable arguments in support of it. The object of the bill, as it seemed to him, was a very valuable extension of Mr. Sturges Bourne's act. The cue of Liverpool, whit had been cited, was only a monster abuse; the local ad under which smell tenements were rated, having been et pealed to check the progress of a democratic political in fluence. Nothing could be more proper than, under • pidp he bill, to make Liverpool revert to a system which had saly been abandoned from a corrupt motive. For his own pert, he earnestly hoped the bill would pass. No at preset could be more shameful than the coursepursuediawoithe poor with regard to local taxes, and he trusted that this bill would be passed, to put an end to the abuses. Captain PECHELL said the nefarious and corrupt coo duct of the tory overseers of Liverpool did not afford an argument in favour of such a measure as the present. He regarded this bill as an attempt to deprive the poor man of many of his rights. Under Gilbert's act, persons rated to the poor, under five pounds, were not permitted to vote at vestries, and this bill would extend that principle. [Col. Wood The right of voting . at elections is reserved.] The poor man would also be dep rived of his electoral franchise if the bill were to pass, and he trusted that any bill having such a tendency would be rejected by a large majority. Colonel SIBTHORP said he should not detain the house ten minutes. (Oh!) Every one knew he was a friend to the poor and anxious to serve them. But he much doubted if this bill would serve them. How were the owners of cottages to be found, and who were they ? Many of them were as poor as their tenants—some still poorer. And how would the bill act on the tenant ? By the fifth clause, the overseer's remedy was against the tenant, if the landlord did not pay, and the tenant was thrown back for his remedy against the landlord. This was likely to act u • great hard ship, and by no means as a relief to the tenant. He gave every could n Mr. m crid rc it Kpi t z t p ti tt i l so li m tb. e bill, a go i o u d ad in h te e n w tio u ns sa , but tie be a that the exemptions allowed must lead to great abuse. Mr. GRIMSDITCH objected to the bill, on the that as it threw the rates on the owner as . long m 't house .0 occupied, it would induce l an dl or d s to t - re wo rkm an out Of their cottages in seasons of distres s , when the y eould get no rents from them, instead o f a ll ow i ng them to live rent free, aa they_did under the system now in operation. Mr. HENLEY said the poor of this country experienced great difficulty in getting houses at ell--(hear, bawl—and if the bill pared the difficulty would be increased. He should, therefore, oppose the bill ; pad he should also oppose the bill of the hon. member for Stroud, u he saw no reason why a matstibould be exempted if he were able to pay. Mr. ALLIX supported the bill, expressing his belief that it would confer very great benefit on the poor. Mr. CAREW said that under the existing law poor men were compelled to pay a higher rent than would be paid by the owners of the property. Ile thought the bill was likely to be exceedingly beneficial. Sir 3. PAKTNGTON thought that if the bill passed it would, in many instances, bear very hardly ou owners of cottage property in towns. It would be an iia!dcemer.t to such persons to raise their rents, and thus would ultimately be imurious to the poorer classes. Ho was rather disposed to vote with the bun. member for Stroud for entirely reliev ing this property from the hut den of rates. Mr. PACK E supported the bill. Mr. HUDSON had received from the borough which be represented the strongest representations against the mea sure. A similar feeling existed in the city over which he presided, and he believed also in the towns generally. It was s aid that the bill was intended to benefit the poor ; but would the hon. member for Middlesex undertake to say that the owners of property would exempt the poor from rates ? (Hear, hear.) He hoped the house would reject a bill which must operate very oppressively towards the poor. Mr. BROTIIERTON suggested, that as there was on much diversity of opinion on the subject, the bill should be postponed until another year. Mr. STANSFIELD thought the bill was objectionable, because it would shut out the poor from many little otlices which tencb-il to give them a siTt of political education. On that ground he should vote against it. Mr. WODEROUSE opposed the bill. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it was remarkable that almost every gentleman who represented a town had stated that the strongest objections were felt to the measure. It was manifest that if the landlord was to he primari,y chargeable with the rates, although in some cases ho might be willing to run the risk of losing his rent for the aecommo dation of his tenant, he would not make himself liable for rates. In order to satisfy the landlord, it would be new nary to make an isquiry in every as into the solvency of the tenant, and that seemed to him a very great evil. Mr. W. MILES said it was to be observed that it was not the magistrates who sued, but the overseers and church wardens. lle would prefer to see such property eatirely exempt from rates, but ho feared that thgt was impracti cable. It was better that the bill should be thrown out, than that it should be mutilated by exceptions. The house then divided—For the motion 7l Against it TENANTS (IRELAND) BILL. Mr. S. CRAWFORD moved the second reading of this bill. Mr. B. OSBORNE objected to the second reading. It was, he said, very fasbionahfr in that house to talk about giving compensation to Irish tenant,, and he was free to confess that ho himself was firmerly in the came state of ignorance on the subject as many other hon. members. (Laughter.) A two years' residence in Ireland had, however, shown him that great sympathy was due to the landlord as well as to the tenant. (Great laughter.) The tenant right might be consecrated in Ulster, but he protested against ita introduction in tho South of Ire land. Ile could assure the house that he had had tenants owing him three or four year's rent, to whom he had been obliged to psy 201. each, in order to induce them to give up possession. (Laughter.) Thu first thing which the house ought to do was to confirm the right of property. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member concluded by moving that the bill be read a second time that day six months. After a short conversation the second reading was paid poned until Wednesday neat. HIGHWAYS BILL. The following members were appointed a select committee on this bill:—Mr. Vernon Smith, Mr. Manners Sutton, Mr. Henley, Sir J. Duckwerth, Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Christopher, Mr. Talbot, Mr. 0. Stanley, Mr. Wykeham Martin, Sir John Pakingtoa, Lord Robert Grosvenor, Mr. William Lascacs, Mr. Adderley, Mr. Rice, and Viscount Ebrington. The house adjourned a few minutes before five. ght P):4artg)s. MAILS .... ..• The malls for New South itTale; Vein Diemen's Land, sad New Zealand will be made up on the rocnlng .d tloc 30th April. The West India maiht ext. iuding Ulm*, for Melte°, Honduran, and the , favannah, w il l be snide nn en the morning of the lot The overland mails for Gibraltar. Malta, Greece, the lonian Island', WM Aden, Ceylon, lade, Hong-Koine. and China, eon Southampton, woll ha made up on the morning of the 3rd May. The mail, fur Britivh North America, Bermuda, and the United States, will be um.le up on the eveldne of the 3rd May. The mails for the Brasil. ' the Hirer Plate, Monte Video, Fern., Mem Bahia, )fade, and Baynes Ayes., will be made up on the evening of the Mb May. The mails for Vigo, Oporto, Lisbon, Madeira, Cediz, and Gibraltar, will be made uo on the morning of the 7th May. The over la nd closed mods, eta Maracill, to the hfeclitcrraneen, Pgypt, Aden, Ceylon, India, Hong Kong, &c., trill be made op on the evening of the 7th May. TO CORRESPONDENTS. ••• Advertisements Intended for The Knew:, Lenr•on carolled parer, soot be at the Mee by Two o'ekeek on the day of rubliceboa. THE EXPRESS, THURSDAY EVENING, APRIL 29, 1847. HIGH WATER AT LONDON-BRIDGE, Tom DAr —Morale& 28 min. part I ; Afternoon, 43 win. rant I To•Monnow—ltorning, 0 min. put 2; Afternoon, 15 min. put 2. LONDON, THURSDAY, APRIL 29. AT the morning sitting of the House of Commons, yesterday, on the question of the second reading of the Juvenile Offenders Bill, which had been intro duced by Sir J. Pakington, Mr. ROEBUCK moved that it be read a second time that day six months, stating, as his reason for moving this amendment, that any alteration of the criminal law, without the greatest consideration by, and sanction of, the go vernment, would lead to great and serious inconveni ence. He also objected to the bill because it gave power to two magistrates sitting privately to hear and determine in certain cases, which magistrates might be fox-hunting parsons, not possessing the slightest legal knowledge, and who therefore, unassisted by legal aid, might arrive at decisions wholly contrary to law and justice. The presence of the public and the press, instead of being restrained, ought to be invited in any and every court where the laws of the country were administered.—Mr. BANKER approved of the principle of the bill, but not of its details, and should oppose it at a future stage, if a proviso were not inserted giving a direct and specific option the accused parties to appeal to a jury if they thought fit en to 0 0 .—Sir GEORGE ORE7admitted the importance of the subject to which the bill had reference, expressing his hope that in committee it may be so amended as to entitle it to the support of the government. With regard to the exercise of the proposed summary jurisdiction in pri vate, he bad no doubt the hon. baronet would concede that point, as unquestionably such proceedings ought to be public. The whole subject was surrounded by great difficulties ; one of the principal of which was, how children of tender years were to be disposed of, who were sentenced to transportation, such sentence being generally accompanied by a recommendation from the court, that it should not be carried out, which no one would dream of doing. Such offenders undoubtedly ought to be taken charge of by the government, with a view to their reformation, in order that they should not be thrown bank upon their parents or friends, who neglected their education, and allowed them to be trained up in vice and crime. Though he despaired of being able to grapple with all the difficulties which presented themselves, he did hope to be able during the present &elision, to bring in a bill to enable towns and boroughs to provide asylums for such criminals, if they ought to be so designated, thinking that it arose more from misfortune than crime, that they were brought within the operation of the law. He did not concur in the opinion that the magistrates were unfit to exercise the proposed exten sion of summary jurisdiction, but he thought it would be desirable to extend the principle of sti pendiary magistrates, not to the exclusion of the local magistrates, but to act with them. He was anxious to affirm the principle of the measure, and would l en d his best assistance, in order to put it is a more accept able form.—Mr. LAW urged the withdrawal of the bill, thinking that so delicate and difficult a subject ought not to be entrusted to any private individual, but ought to be brought forward by the law officers of the crown.— Mr. B. Derasorl, on behalf of the magistracy, protested against the proposed power being extended to them of privately trying juvenile offenders.—Sir J. PAKINGTON bad brought in the bill in consequence of the government having failed to do so ; and it had received the sanction of the Criminal Law Commission. Ho begged to remind the house that by the existing law, a magistrate could commit a prisoner for twelve months, the inquiry taking place in bis own parlour. He was determined to proceed with the bill, having been urged to do so from all parts of the country, and upon the government must rest the consequences, if it were deeted, of allowing the existing evils to con tinue.—The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that approv ing as he did, of the principle of the bill, he should vote for the second reading ; but he objected to the details, particularly as regarded private tribunals. —After some further observations from several hon. members, the second reading was carried by a majo rity of 52, the numbers being 75 to 23.—The second reading of the Rating of Tenements Bill was opposed by Sir 0. GREY, on the ground that a great distur bance of the rating of property would be created by it, the subject requiring much more consideration before he could consent to its proceeding further. After some dis cuss i on t h e second reading was nega tived by a maj or ity of 18, the numbers being 89 to 71. Altera short conversation the 'fenante' (Ireland) Bill (Hr. OSBORNE having moved that it be read a second time that day six months) wv.s postponed until Wednesday next. THE debate, if it be right to call it a debate, on Dr. BOWRING'S motion for a decimal coinage, is very satisfactory. It shows that there is no opposition to the proposal, except the opposition of inertia. Good people of England, you are justly called the most business-like people on the face of the earth. The Chancellor of your Exchequer tells you in effect, that he has no reason to oppose what all who have studied oho matter know to be a great improvement in your coinage, except your prepossessions and prejudice s. Will you not show him that you are not the fimls he takes yon for? Mr. SHUT. was said to have announced it as a result of what he called Professor DE NloncsN's plan (but which is not peculiar to that gentleman, being the plan of every one who would avoid meddling with the gold and silver), that five shillings of the new copper would IoJ four shillings and twopence of the old. This was an error in our report. It should have been four and ten pence. By supposing small debts to be all paid in copper, the opponents of the measure can get four per rent. of the amount on which to predict disagreements and confusion. But the fact is, that if copper be not legal tender, nor usual tender above a shilling, it is only the odd money, the copper residue, on which this four per cent. of difference exists. This plan was the only one advocated on any side ; and the CHANCELLOR ef the Excil EiluEn, in saying that he had no objection to make the first step, the introduction of a two shilling coin, did all that, for the moment, we want him to do, except propusMg gradually to with `draw the half-crown. We shall always advocate the perfectly gradual introduction of this great small change. IT is not to be denied that Ireland at this moment threatens to break the back of England by the weight of its distress, and by the want both of zeal and intelligence displayed by that country in the efforts to right itself. There are landlords who in the fear of disaster prefer suicide to a struggle for life, and coolly devote themselves and their peasantry , to the internal gods. There is capital in Ireland without the spirit to employ it, or the intelli gence which might make capital return twenty-fold. 'rhe middle class denounce th, upper, and the peasant execrates both. Landlord and townsman, spokes man and journilist, are loud in self-exculpation and self-laudation, look to government and to England for food and for employ, lavish and misuse what is given them of thew elements of life, and then turn to stab the hand and blacken the motives of the giver. A more disgusting picture of pandemonium was never presented. And yet behind this criminal and disgusting crowd which occupies the foreground, there lies a nation and millions suffering, starving, rotting of fever, casti gated and decimated by no crime of theirs. As long us there is money and Christian feeling in England, re sources and zeal, both will flow, both will be applied to Ireland. The English government dare not relax its exertions, dare not leave the Irish to starve. Econo mists may exclaim, and the Saxon denouncer of the Celt may howl, charitable and benign feelings in this country are more po•.verful than the malignant and the hateful. Nor will the English, as a nation, ever demean or unchristinnise themselves so far as to answer the screechings of Irish ingratitude and hate by any sounds or sentiments of the same base and bestial kind. The Irish must be fed—the Irish must be saved. No legislative ignorance or weariness, no pressure or panic of the money market can shake off that duty. The question is not to give or to deny money to the For millions are already voted, and all the millions necessary must be paid. The question is, if some of the money to be expended in mere soup distribution might not give an equal amount of subsistence with the certainty of repayment. As to throwing sixteen millions on certain lines of railroad--two thirds to go into the pockets of those not wanting it, and one third to gangs,—that was wisely set aside. Belt half a minim advanced for half a year, to keep the great railroad works through the southern Irish counties going,—we really cannot con sider this as either extravagant or unwise. The pressure on the money market is no doubt great, but its extent and probable duratien are much exaggerated. Nor does there seem any adequate cause for it, except in our own artificial and inex perienced legislation. The state sanctions and fosters the system of conducting all commercial operations, even foreign ones, by means of credit. Yet at the very moment when not merely the convenience of merchants, but the necessities of the state, require the greatest extension and use of this medium, the state, or one of its dependent bodies, steps in, restrict., and cries it down. Because the more solid portion of our currency is called abroad, therefore the immeasurably greater and more important portion of the currency, which is credit, is annihilated. Better destroy the credit system altogether, and force people to trade with their real capital, than subject the body politic, as well as commercial, to such syn copes as that with which we are at present menaced. No reasons, however, drawn front the monetary state of a money market ought to prevent us from duly meeting and treating the Irish qut stion. Indeed, the plans of the government do not i;o to affect the money market, the loans being to be advanced from the Consolidated Fund, and do not neces sitate the issue of Exchequer-bills, or going into the market at such a time. Ireland is a gulph into which England may throw millions, without ever descrying whither the millions go, if the attempt to fill it be made partially, unwisely, or unwittingly. Now is the great moment to pacify and reorganise Ireland. If that be not done, if pauperism be allowed to revive to its old extent, the millions of 1816 and 1847 will have been utterly thrown away. Parliament has voted a poor-law, a measure which in itself is incapable of being executed, or of produ cing any good effect in those districts where a great remedy is required. If a poor-law, and a poor-law alone, be flung to the Irish, they will mock it, as is already done at the two extre mities of pauper Ireland, Westport and Bantry. For want of such small ekings-out as this half million to railroads, another half-million to waste lands, and some similar sums to emigration, the poor law guardians, if any be to bo found, and the poor law commissioners in Ireland, will let drop their hands by their side•, trust to the soup-pots and to providence, and Ireland will have made a retrograde elide in her distress, instead of a forward movement. A NEW phase of the agricultural question has pre sented itself. Within the last few weeks a fresh de velopment of "the agricultural mind" has occurred, which promises some important results, and deserves attention and encouragement from the rest of the community. This is no less than a very extensive movement amongst farmers in favour of Mr. Pussy's Tenant Right Bill, which has been bat coldly re ceived by the land-owning section of the House of Commons. Indeed, the bill is threatened with the most strenuous opposition by the class of political proprietors of land, who once arrogated to them selves the title of " farmers' friends." That the tenant farmers of England, to a man, desire some such measure is certain, and many of them believe that it will afford much greater benefits to the cul tivators than we think at all probable. We have before stated the extent and nature of the advantages which Mr. FUSEE'S Tenant Right Bill, as originally introduced--for the select committee to which it was referred has reduced ft to a shadow as a practical measure—would confer upon agriculture and bus bandmen. They are of two kinds, permanent and temporary. The permanent use of a measure for giving a going-off tenant a legal claim to be paid for unexhausted improvements, is very considerable. It will prevent that running out of land which is now a matter of necessity and self-defence on the part of a tenant who knows that he is about to leave his farm in two or three years. And the landlord, or his next tenant—practically the same thing—is at least as much benefited by this as the outgoing tenant. It is the capital represented by manures, tillage, sad so forth—the mechanical and chemical condition of the land producing fertility—for which the landlord or hie incoming tenant would have to pay, and which, when had in combination with the farm is, out of all comparison, more valuable than the absolute amount of capital so invested. By such a valuation the out going tenant would obtain considerably more money than he could make by any system of driving the farm during the last few years of his occupancy; and ' so he ought, for the money so paid by the incoming tenant would be to him a great saving. Inatead of losing time, temper, and means to recover the land from au exhausted condition, he would find it fit for immediately profitable culture. Let any one who has entered upon a dilapidated farm and got it into high cultivation say whether it would not have been better to have paid any conceivable valuation and to have received the land in good heart. The difference is in truth incalculable. Now, to legalise tenant right, a strict inevitable right, would in this case effect a per manent improvement in agriculture. But there is another benefit of a more temporary kind which tenant right, the legal right of existing tenants to be paid far unexhausted improvements, would confer upon agriculture. And this benefit would chiefly accrue to the tenantry—that is, its direct and immediate benefit ; fur, indirectly, it would be of at least equal advantage to the honest owners of land. To explain this fully would require' a longer examination of the progress of husbandry as a business in this country than our present limits and objects permit. But the result is, that from a combi nation of causes, the tenant farmers of England are farming too well for the terms on which they hold their land. There is scarcely any moderately good farmer whose yearly outlays arc not such, that four or five years' occupation at the least is necessary to enable him to get back the proper proportion of his farming capital with the ordinary rate of profit. And this goes on from year to year. These tenants hold, in general, front year to year, and they are thus at the mere mercy of their landlords. A tit of spleen, a change of steward, an offence given to the gamekeeper, a vote disliked by the landlord, or a change of ownership, may, at any moment, lead to the dismissal of a yearly tenant, and the consequent confiscation of a large portion of his capital. It is as a protection against the continuance of this ano malous and unjust state of things farmers look to legalise tenant-rights. Is it. therefore, surprising that the tenant-farners of England are everywhere petitioning for Mr. Pe SEY'S Bill? They do not concern themselves so much with the greater or less efficacy of the measure as with the admission of the principle. It is stated that, at Devizes in Wiltshire, farmers occupying 64,000 acres of land in one day signed such a petition. And elsewhere the same thing is taking place. Indeed there can be no doubt that such a demand will be universal; for farmers, though slow to move, when once excited, rush on with an unanimity equal to that of their own flocks. Bat what say the landlords to all this? They have hitherto held the farmers in leading-strings; they have acted in the Lame of the tenantry, and have derived therefrom much additional influence. Hitherto, in all politico-agricultural questions, though the voice has been Jseon's, the rough hand of ESAU has been used— we bad almost said, as a blind. The various periods of agricultural distress have seen the 'squires coming to parliament for relief, either with the tone of sturdy beggars, as in the palmy days of the corn laws; or with " a whine," as on the eve of the downfall of the food monopoly. But in all and each of these moods, it was not on their own account, but on the behalf of their industrious tenantry, and the lusty labourers, that political landlords professed to vex the public with their loud complaints. There has now, however, been much change in such illusions. The beginning of the end of all that, has come. Tenants are not only acting for themselves, but are acting in direct opposi tion to their former landlord leaders. The political landlords, too, have been compelled to cast aside the guise of " farmers' friends," and to come forth airainst the tenant right bill in their true character. In this the landowners of Lincolnshire have taken the lead, and have embodied in a petition to parliament their objections to Mr. Pussy's bill. It is this petition of which Mr. CHRISTOPHER has given notice of his in tention to present " on the motion that the house resolve itself into committee to consider the Agricul tural Tenant Right Bill." Tho committee has been postponed to the 13th of May, and in the mean time the farmers are vigorously getting up counter-peti tions. Some of the allegations in the landlords' peti tion are instructive, as marking how readily they adopt the free competition theory against their tenants. la one sentence they say the bill is " perni cious and impolitic, inasmuch as it interferes with the private agreements made between the landlord and the tenant, and must inevitably tend to destroy the mutual confidence at present existing Letween them." How that which does not exist, except in the imagination of the Lincolnshire squires, can be " destroyed " we know not. Do the stringent and absurd covenants, by which landowners seek to bind their tenants, indicate confidence on the part of landlords ? Aud is not the demand for tenant right by tenants the immediate consequence of their insecure position? Talk of mutual confidence between landlord and tenant, indeed! Why, there are no classes in this country, between whom so much mutual distrust exists. Nor can there ever be any confidence between them until the engagements for Cams assume a more commercial and business-like character than is now usual. After this flourish about " mutual confidence," the landlord petitioners say : That it is retrograding in legislation, as the supposed im provement of late years has been to leave all classes to de pend upon their own skill, talents, industry, and capital. And again : . _ That it is most unjust to the landowner, who is now ex posed to the most unlimited competition, to fetter him by legislative enactments, and to prevent him cultivating his land himself, or by others, in the mode and upon the terms he finds most conducive to his interests. Most true economical propositions certainly, but which are somewhat new in the mouths of the Lin colnshire landholders. Why, these very petitioners and their fellow-proprietors have been teaching their tenants that nothing but legislative enactments could avert the ruin of the whole class of farmers ; and having by their own course of legislation and instruc tion got the farmers into the false position we have described, they now turn rotted upon them with the most strict rules of political economy, and say each class must " depend on its own skill," and so forth. But what is sought does not offend against any sound economical laws; it is not wished by farmers to " fetter " the landlord, or to prevent him from culti vating his land as he pleases; they only desire to pre vent the landlord from appropriating to his own use a portion of the tenant's capital. The exercise of the legal rights lands possess over their yearly tenants, in the actual condition of agriculture, would be in the highest degree dishonest, and most landlords would scorn to do so. Still, tenants feel they have no secu rity, and this landlord hostility to so mild a measure of protection to tenant farmers, fully justifies the farmers' anxiety on the subject. The petition after wards thus states, and truly states, the principles which must ultimately regulate contracts between landlords and tenants : That it is unnecessary to make legislative agreements be tween landlord and tenant, inasmuch as the competition be tween the home and the foreign grower of agric• . dtural pro duce must erentually compel the landlord to concede the mon beneficial agreement in each particular district, as on no other terms can the profitable cultiration of the soil be carried on. Here we have a full and distinct admission that it is only by offering beneficial terms to tenants that the most profitable cultivation can be carried on ; and we have no doubt that this principle will eventually work out the redemption of the tenant-farmers as a class. But in the mean time mach individual suffer ing will be the result. Before a firmer, or a body of farmers, can act with effect upon their landlord, they must give up, or be prepared to give up, their farms. This will scarcely be brought about without some pre vious collision ; and in most cases new tenants would be preferred to the old ones. This is avowedly the case on the Duke of NORTRUMBERLAND'S estate, and is pretty general elsewhere. We think, therefore, the farmers are right in making a general effort in favour of tenant right. MB answer of the King of PRUSSIA to the some what remonstrant address of his states, was looked to, as we mentioned a day or two ago, with much anxiety. This answer, read on the 23rd in the states, will be perused with pleasure. It is highly conciliatory, con fiding, and liberal. It fully meets every objection of the address : promises the regular summoning of the states; declares that the law, though unalterable in its fundamental principles, is still open to development and improvement (bikrungs fahig). The King repu diates the doctrine of finality. The discrepancies said to exist between the inten- ' tions of the late King with respect to imperial states, and the fulfilment of them by the present King, are denied to exist, and the remonstrance of the assembly, the monarch declares, he does not receive as a symp tom of mistrust, but as the result of a right feeling to defend and understand their rights. The royal answer seems well calculated sad de serving to allay any cause' of discontent, and will n o doubt have the effect of removing the misgiving s and ill humour which the first speech from the Prussian throne called forth. The riots, which proved destruc tive to many bakers' and confectioner.' shops on the 22nd, had died away. The King had made his ap. pearance on the Linden, the scene of much of the uproar, accompanied by a single aide-de-camp. The French cabinet sustained another cheek in the Chamber of Deputies on Monday. The debate on co. lonial slavery did not admit of the process of sla". tion which the ministry endeavoured to apply to it, The shocking disclosures made in the speech ee o g MM. de Lasteyrie and Ledru-Rollin, literally spr ea d horror through the assembly, and at length made th e ministry feel that the only safe course was to yield to the result of the unanimous burst of indignation to which the Chamber gave utterance. It will he revel. leeted that the debate took place upon petitions against colonial slavery, bearing 11,000 signa•ores. It was proposed by the opposition to refer these petiti on , to the consideration of the president of the council and the colonial minister; this the cabinet oppo se d through the colonial minister, who insisted en pas s i ng Ito the order of the day. Towards the close of the de hate, however, the revelations made by the ndvoeates 'of the petitioners, produced an explosion of feeling, and M. Guizot himself exclaimed from his seat that they would no longer oppose the proposition. At the suggestion of M. Dupin, the petitions Wa re referred also to the minister of justice, which was intended u a rebuke to the insufficiency of the colonial mi. nister. The desire of the French nati in to se. complish the abolition of slavery led to the adoption of a law in July 1843, intended as the forerunner of that object. 1 his project provided for the establishment of free workshop, the granting one day a week to the slaves to enable them by their industry to purchase their freedom, the limit ;tion of the hours of labour, the encouragement of niniringe, and the promotion of education. The in , trumeuts by which these several provisions were to rec:ice effect were the colonial magistracy and the slate-owners themselves, who also constituted the majority of the former body. The practical effect has beer. !list the law has become a dead letter, a!1 its provi; being utterly abortive, and the condition of the sli% es, phy sical and moral, being worse than ever. There is, ta fact, 110 administration of justice where a ri.aedy is sought by a slave against his proprietor. The tri bunals are composed of a majority of -owners, and if there be a few individuals in the min e ity dis posed to administer justice, they are overruled by public opinion in the colony. T o such a seandalou pitch has the flagrant di fiance of every principle of , justice in the conduct of these tribunals been carried, that in some instances where they have pronounced an acquittal or a nominal punishment againe delinquent proprietors, the atro c ity o f the criminal has been so great that the colonial governor has felt compelled to exercise a discretion with which he is invested by exiling the offender from the colony. We know not in what terms to impart to the English po. lie an adequate notion of the crimes perpetrated by masters against slaves disclosed in thi s debate , ethers which we believe have no designation in the vocabu lary of erimival jurisprudence. We can only select one or two of the many instances given by M. Lednt- Rollin and M. de Lasteyrie. We have already mentioned that the minder of a slave by a master is visited by the tribunals with the nominal punishment of a few days' imprisonment. Hut murder is the most venial of this catalogue of ini quities. An aged mother is tied naked by the four limbs, and her sen is compelled to hold her while the whip is applied to the naked tack of the woman, until her offspring is covered with the blood which spouts from her. A female, five months gone with child, is bound upon a ladder by the four limbs, a billet of wood being stuffed between her bosom and the ladder, to render her back convex. The lash is then applied, until premature delivery is produced under the opera tion of Cm torture. The blows inflicted upon her head have broken out her teeth, destroyed one of hee eyes, and deprived her of hearing; and "the man,* exclaimed M. Ledru Rollin, " who thus proved him self more cruel than the executioner, and more in exorable than the guillotine, being brought before the correctional police, was sentenced to ffievn days' imprisonment .^' Another female, also pregnant, was submitted to the whip until her back was covered with bleeding wounds, and then, by a devilish refinement of torture, a solution of pimentum and lemon-juice was poured into the wounds. A child was suspected of having poisoned an or, which had died. The head of the ox cut off, wan suspended round the neck of the child, who wee comrelled to carry it until the effluvia proceeding from the decomposition of the flesh relieved the little victim from its torments by death. The Minister of Marine mode a feeble and stammer ing attempt at some excuse for the colonial autho rities, and was persisting to demand the order of the day, when M. Guisot perceiving the sense of the chamber on the question, exclaimed from his place, .‘ II n'y a pas d'opposition." ' It was reported in the evening of Monday, that M. de dachas (colonial minister) bad resigned, as M. Dupin clearly indicated he ought to do, but there appears no foundation for this. There is little doubt that the cabinet proposes, be , fore the close of the session, to introduce a project of law into the chambers for the continuance of the free importation of every species of alimentary sub stance, including live cattle and cured meat, until July, 1848. The Journal des Debate, acting as is understood under the inspiration of the court and cabinet, persists in advocating this measure. Another able article on the subject appeared in that journal on Tuesday. We have frequently stated that among well informed persona in the financial and commercial circles, a persuasion prevails that before the close off the session, a loan will be effected. This belief gains ground from day to day, and we have reason to know that conferences on the subject have been already held between M. Lacave Laplagne and the bead of the wealthiest financial house in Paris. The funds have been for the last few days declining ! and as this impression becomes more general, will fell still lower. We have received advices from Madrid to the 22d inst. The rumour which we mentioned on a Neer day, of the intention of Gen. Narvaez to decline the embassy to Paris, is definitively contradicted, 6 8 General having officially communicated to the senate the necessity under which he is placed, of absent* himself from the sessions of that body, be rearm of his appointment as ambassador of the Ilueee of Spain to the French court. The King is reported to have intimated hie per. sonal request to the friends of Gen. Serrano, that the General should immediatly return to Madrid from Aranjuez, whither he had gone for the restoration d his health. The General had accordingly arrived the capital. A project of law has been brought before the senate, by the cabinet, having reference to the refusal of Gen. Serrano to comply with the orders of the late minatt7. It is proposed that the cabinet shall not have the power of ordering any state functionary, who g a senator, to leave the capital during the session of the Cortes, without the previous assent of the snate. It was expected that the report of the committee on the indemnity for the arrest of MM. Chico end Avirancta would be immediately presented to the chambers, and would there produce a genii discussion. PRUSSIA.-THE KING'S ANSWER TO TSB ADDRESS. BERLIN, APRIL 23.—The four estates met at half past eleven, am., fn a cons',ined court (rereinigle% Karig). The marshell of the liernen Stande announced, after GI minutes of the preceding meeting had been raid, that 4 0 first communication he had to make was the King's snore to the addren. It was accordingly read, and is as follows " We, Frederick William, by the grace of God, Kiod_l Prussia, d: c., greet our estates assembled in their Ent diet. We have received with pleasure the exprenion draw tude and confidence contained in the addressor ourloyslestra l of the nth inst., and with still greater ntisfectiso the intimation it contains that they recognise it to be t t ir e constitutional function to co operate with the crows the provincial estates to promote the future prosPoritY oftQ fatherland. We, too, regard this r the duty theY ate upon to discharge. We will not, because our loyal whets have—seeing that many of their number failed to Moir! . • complete harmony in the older and more recent legidstos respecting them—deemed it necessary to enter a protest Is the address in support of their constitutional rights, attritlit this expression to any mistrust of our royal der, nark ti me to protect and maintain all right+ ; still th. truth and frankness which ought ever to be pnssrsd undimmed between us and our people, dommadso l unequivocal reply. When we issued, in virtue of (11K rf•