The Express. — London, England, 1853-06-23 00:00:00

DI PERIAL PARLIAMENT. Mot:SE OF COMMONS.-4VEDNESDAY, JUNE Tb, Sr it t as took the chair at 12 u'clock. B \404111V took his seat for Harwich. ftri hon. teatleman, who took ha seat 'amidst hearty cheers, icie in kJ b thy Earl of Mulgrave acd Mr. Mackionon. rILIVATE BUSINESS. lAn 1.10 ramendenente to the Leeds and Wi,itch:il Roads I I. enerlie Corporation BM were agreed t,. 1 h.• I 11 , iwing bills were considered .—Crietl Junction Hof way Bill (three eleven and amendments to be pro pos d) ; ilway Harbour Bill ; Galway Improvement Bill ; lonieri.l. Improvises' Bill ; Nerds and Seth W. stern (Ilami..tiai and City Junetioir) Railway Bill; South Dean and Tavi%tock Railway Bill; Unit il (Animates sad Life t' nnpany Dill; Westfield and Sheffield Road Bill; Wts!oort Port and Rarheur Dill; and Liverpool, Crewhy, an! firsthport Railway Bill. rtrni.ic BUSINESS. BRCOVE.TLY i iii i iiiii i ii ii iiiiiii IN CER- TAN CASES BILL. S., It. INULIS, is moving the second reading of this called emeriti= to the various Misdeocripti4n, of it se set hid occurred in the hundred., and perhaps thou- Minds, of petitoos which bad been presented, and in the roans utipetehes which hail been made, against it. It had been styled a bill for " the visitation of nunneries," for inspecti.in ef nunneries," and, as the hon. member far Dr•whAla had termed it, the di secretion of nunneries. (Cassis) Now it really was, at its title imported, a bill s• fir the recovery of persona! liberty in certain taws." (Hear, hear.) No religious question whatever was rem:ly frivolired, sad there was not a single word in the bill that ought t. be regarded as offensive to any person what ewe. The sterawit opposer of the measure would admit that it was possibe fur %bume to exist in the system which be corset ntionsly upheld, and he (Sir R. Inglis) asked for ▪ aCier cineitosion ; WWI', if abuses wac possible it was the duty of parliament to provide a remedy. The Council of Trent. the latest which had 'wen held by the church of It.urne, anatht itised those wh t should force persons into convents suraiist* rrhaps their own will, but certainly against the wishes of their parents and friends. It wss, therefore. • t sident that abases were possible; and there was no • co in•ry in Europe, whetner Rrman catholic or pro • :It re the a:ate did not interfere. Mr I'll INN then mond the following amendment : s• r it In referred to a select committee to consider whe ther y aid what regulatiuns are necessary fur the better prot e , 11 of the inmates of establishments of a conventual nature, and for the prevention of the exercise of undue in fluence in procuring fil2 alienation of their property." Ile (tho hum eon learned gentleman) lelt bound to say that the b.l:, upon Iron all questions of religious difference, and ham all those difficult and deli ate considerations which it !aerobic'', was as unconstitutional • measure, and as sub 1161traiT! of the liberty of the subject, as any that had over b ten submitted to this house. (Cheers.) He fel: humliated as a lawyer that any membar of the pro fession s'inuld have stabmitted a bill to that house which bed in vreh n false recital and terminated with a prowidion which he (Mr. Men) must consider as altogether destruc tive of that great principle of English law—that every swan's holm was his castle. (Loud cheers.) It was op likewise to every principle of fair legislation, that • C 1 for the purpose of procuring a particular remed yt should be brought in under a general designation ; or that a bill levelled t personal liberty should he brought in to amend that act which we rejoiced to consider as the very founds of our freedom. (Cheers.) It was rather too late in the day to say that the Habeas Carpus Act, upon which our I.sertiei were founded, was ineffectual to preserve those of :h" on sanest subject of the realm, and hat, if they were to bol eve the hon. baronet, it was perfectly necks'. (Hear.) M. 1. DU TT said he rose to second the amendment. In mach that had fallen from the last speaker he agreed ; but he. Lai tired that the bill was an outrageous violation of the prin.:;ll- sof civil liberty. (Year, hear.) From the time he fin tread it he entertained insuperable objections to it, not fr m shy regard for conventual institutions, for he had no wit a to give the slightest countenance to religious livid title( s which he thought very objectionable. His objection was tat the bill, while professing to attain a general ob ject, t Imes at a particular one ; and this he held to be an mum my and coward.y mode of legislation. (Cheers.) If they wished to regulate nunneries, let them deal with them ores y, but de.' fairly at all events. Let them not, he eau., they wished to suppress Roman eithoiie nunneries, es' %%lab • protestant inquisition. (Cheers.) The bill saws to a particular person appointed by the crown the pother of eateung any man's holm, dragging forth it. la. ma'es. quietionicg them as to who had slept inrhe house du ong the last week, and subjecting every inmate to heavy ba as and penalties. (Hear. hear.) Oa the prineiplts of • std reason he never cost! agree to such a measure as t sat. Mr. FAOAN referred to the petition he had 'resented, ed rail taat both the prop, JJ i J loos before the house were fresa.ve to the seven millions of Reiman catholics, who serer oar fellow subjects. Ile mobd only account for such prop *limos Irom the belief on the part of protestants that she la.t's of catholic* was a mere political my-tens He oh trete I as strongly to the antendeneut as to the second read hog of this bill, believing that it was equally off footsie ts the • jogs of Roman catholies. It conveyed an imputation spinet Ronan catholic families that they had not the spirit tad the esurage to resist coercion. The demand for inquiry also impose' that tb,re was cause fur inquiet. It was an amnat, in on the inmates of nunneries, who belonged to wawa the highest families in the land, and, while devoted b. eharitabiii and religious exercises, were also highly meted members of the community. Mr. NAPIEIt said he was anxious to state the grounds 31 tithe s .' he should support the proposition of the hon. and leeratil member fir Bath. Before doing so, however, he wrist remark that he did not agree with the boo. and learned member for Youghal (Mr. Butt), that the course p usuei by the hon. mover of the bill was cowardly and stuntaisly. (Cheers.) He (Mr. Napier), thought the hon. member (Mr. Chambers) stated hip case with fairness and caosione; but be objected to the bill because he believed it to be inadequate to meet the evils complained of ; because R did Not touch the very importont question of the free oispos:tion of pmperty,end because the system of inspection pr pared would not. in his opinion, be any safeguard for personal liberty. At the same time, he thought the provi times of the Habeas Corpus Act did not meet the existing evils. (clear, hear.) By that act it was required that the sophist, .11 to the court should be made by or on behalf of the person concerned ; it must be shown that the party was letained against her will: and, though a r er ion% night have • strong moral conviction that emus one was in that position, it would not be enough to pees int that conviction in the shape of aa affidavit. (Hese, bear) He thought the best introduction to legislation was in tuiry, and he for one was prepared for • fair, candid, sad imparttal investigation. (Hear, hear.) Mr. 1. BUTT ezplauted that when be used the words " cowardly and unmauly legislation," he meant nothing piranha] to the boo. gentleman (Mr. Chambers), but he tassel thou teems as describing the objectionable character of the bill, sod the unworthiness of the arguments with which it was supported. Lori J. RUSSELL regretted that the question did not coma bef re the house in the simple form in which the bon. gentlemen who moved the bill had first placed it. The bill itself appeared to him to be so drawn as to admit of hon. members easily making up their minds with regard to the c nine they ought to take. For his own part he must confess he concurred generally in the statements made by the boo. and learned member who moved the amend ment and repeated by the hon. gentleman who seconded it, both of whom adduced most powerful arguments against the provisions of the measure. (Hear, hear.) In the first place he must be allowed to say he was surprised to fi nd his boo. friend the member fur the University of Oxford (Sir H. Inglis), endeavouring to prove that the Habeas Corpus An*, which had been the security of the personal liberty of the subject ia this country for upwards of 170 years, gave no aid in securing the liberty of the subject—that it was totally inefficient in its provisions for the object for which it was passed, and that without the bill now before the house there would be no security for personal liberty. In the neat plate he considered that a bill of this nature ahoitld state in its preamble some real ease upon which to found the enactments that followed, but in the preamble of this bat he confessed be could see nothing but allegations which appeared to him to be totally destitute of truth. Then when he came to look at the remedy proposed he loans, the en setenents of soch an extraordinary character that he should indeed be much astonished if th e house ever con sented to the passing of such a measure. (Hear, bear.) It did no:, as he supposed it would do—taking his understand ing of its provisions (rim the statement of the hon. mem ber who introduced it.(Mr.Chanthers)—it did not empower that Secretaiy of State to name the person who was to obit these convents, or to make the necessary regulations for visiting them ; but it emp owere d th e Chancellor, who was not only a great judge hut an influential member of the executive government, to name certain commissioners, any em• of whom, if be saw what he might conceive to be res. sonthle grounds for supposing that any female was de tained in any house or building against her will, was empowered and required, with the assistance of a justice of the peace, to make forcible entry into such house or building and examine. Where was the safety of our houses under such • provision as that ? What an amount of vexation and oppression might not be exercised by commissioners armed with such a power as Via I Tney knew not who might be the Lord Chancellor who appoiwed these commissioners, or who might be the commi-sioner who was to he empowered to make forcible entry into any house in which he bad (not upon allegation made upon oath, but upon what, is his own mind, he might ei.nteire to be) reasonable ground for supposing that • hmtle was detained against her will. He had no doubt there wire cases, setting aside altogether this questien of convents—he had no doubt there were at all times in this country some bowel, private houses,wherein there might be pertain whoothers might say were detained against their win—but at no time tad the legislature therefore thought at to sot aside that general rule of law—that sacred part of the eonstitution which protected the private houses of viduslr, sad which was known by the common phrase that every Roglishinahs house is his castle, to provide against mere chance tad accidental eases—(hear, hear)—and under Me pl. a of pretesting the liberty of the subject set up a sweat of tyranny. (Cheers.) With these views he could blots no hesitatio• in voting against the second reading of the bill. (Hear, hear ) He believed that during his time there had bees cases, and other cases had occurred before, teottah he could not tax his memory with the recollection of any ease to which • person was detained against his or her will, and the proved cause of such detention was the iitefficiency of the Habeas Corpus Act. (Hear, hear.) Ile w o e satisfied, therefore, notwithstanding these proffered provisions for our further security—he was satisfied with the Habeas. Corpus Aet, framed as it bed been by the wis dom and skill of one of the ekrewdett heeds that ever took part in the law and legislation ot this country, awl seented to by the parliament of Charles 11, as an effectual mote! , tion for the liberty of the !teepee (Hear, hear.) No doubt in subsequent times, so some small particulan, amendments had bee , / mode in that net, but the great and main provolone of it remained, and posterity. and every writer on the suer c:, ' bad done justice both to the skill of the person who framed aril the wisdom of the parliament that posed the net.' (Hear, hear.) But he must now turn to another question, which, he was very sorry bad been forced into this discus sion by the amendment which bad been moved by the hen. ' and leotard member for Bath. That hon. and learned gentleman bad argued ably:and conclusively against the bill; and if he had moved that it be read a second time that day six months, he (Lord J. Russell) would gladly, without taking part in the debate, have gone with him into the same lobby to endeavour to throw Put the measure. But the hon. snit learned gentleman hail raised another issue, and, as he thought, without showing by any means reasons so cenclueive as he did with respect to the bill, had moved that • select committee should be appointed. That select committee is to have two objects—the first is to consider whether any and what regulations are necessary for the better protection of the inmates of establishments of a conventual character. Now that appeared to him to raise again the whole question of this bill. (Hear, bear.) Ile could not say that be thought, without some proof of abuse, or acme circumstance shown to the house to justify their interfe rence, that they ought to enter into an inquiry before a select committee as to the necessity of protecting the inmates of thew conventual establishments. (Hear, hear.) Tne bon. gentleman hail said that these estabeshments were not made lawful by the Emancipation Act ; but it could not be ' denied that they were dist:lndy recognised by law as exist ing institutions. The clause by which that recognition was' ' made was • short one, and he would read It to the house. After making provisions against Jesuits and monastic orders, it proceeded thus—" And be it further enacted, that' . nothing herein contained shall extend in any manner te religious orders and societies of females bound by religion.; or monastic vows." (Hear, hear.) Ile admitted that the law took no notice of the nature of those monastic vows, or to the rules and regulations of the establishments themselves, but it could not be denied that they were existing under the reteernition, and with the sanction of the law, and they ought to have good grounds shown—they ought to have something like proof—that per sons were really detained in them egainet their will, before they instituted any inquiry into them (Hear.) One of the ob jections against the proposed bill, the alarm which it would excite in the minds of the inmates of these conventual i s tablishments, would apply, at least, as strongly against the proposal for an inquiry. (Wear.) Let the house consider what must be the alarm and apprehension excited in the minds of such persons when informed that they were to be brought before a !mint committee of the House of Commons. (Ilear, hear.) Ho raid, therefore, that without some very strong case, such • case is he had not yet heard even attempted to he proved with respect to the restriction of personal liberty in these convents, he could not agree to the appoint ment of the select committee for this first object. (Cheers.) Now, only observe how vague were the allegations on the subject. One gentleman, • most reverend friend of his, for whom he had the greatest respect, was (as stated in the former discussion on this bill) supposed to have acid some thing in the other house of parliament rather confirming the prevalent rumours that persons were confined in these lemma against their will. Now he (Lord John) saw the other day in a newspaper • statement—not exactly under his own hand, but that it was his own statement there was, he believed, no doubt—that when he was out walking in Ireland one thy a female accosted him, and said she was the mother of a female who was confined in one of the con vents, and asked him bow she could concert her release, stating that she had applied to Archbishop Murray on the subject, and that she then left hits. Itempeared her name was not known, and it was afterwards stated that she mis took him for another person, and did not mean to apply to him. The whole statement might have been • mistake, or it might be the woman was not right in her mind, and had no ground for the statement ; but it was quite evident that this was one of thaw cases which existed merely in appre hension, and which could form no ground whatever fir taking any active steps in reference to it, and much lees for a g I inquiry such as was proposed by the hon. and teemed member. And the other cases which he nad heard of as justifying such a measure hail but little better founda tion. But then the hon. and 1 d gentleman said these vows are used against civil liberty, and this argument went Ice effect—though the hon. and learned gentleman did not come to that conclusion himself—that a provision by law should be made to esters, that which was mainteiniel by the Roman Cathelie Relief Act—a provision against these conventual establishments and the taking of vows in them. Ile (leird John) believed the him. gentle man was not correct in the view he took as to the state of the law in respect to the power of an individual to bind himself, not that he wished the hon. and learned gentleman to take his authority against whin he had histralf stated; but he remembered a great authority with whom he had frequently con rersed on this subject, whose opinion dif fered much from that of the hon. and learned gentleman. He understood the hon. and learned gentleman to say that no person in this country, according to law, could bind his own liberty. Now, it had been frequently a question with respect to the West India colonies, whether or not Africans introduced into those colonies had the power to bind them selves for two, three, five, or ten years. The learned person with whom he conversed on this point ' was the late Lord Chancellor Cottenham, and he asked him what in hie opinion was the low of tnis country on the subject, and that noble and learned lord always held that when • person was of full age, there was no law which could prevent his binding himself to give his labour to another for five, ten, or even thirty or forty years. If, then, Lord Cottenham was not wrong in that opinion, there was a power possessed by persons of full see to control and bind their own liberty. (Hear, hear) He did not say that that state of the law was right, but it was • state of the law which, if it existed, would apply to the Inmates of these conventual establishments. (Hear, hear.) The law, as he conceived it to be, im far as it affected these conventual establishments, was that which the hon. and learned gentleman had stated, and to which he (Lord John Russell) had frequently referred, viz., that the restriction was binding on the minds and the consciences of the inmates, and nothing more. (Hear, hear.) He believed there was no case in which one of these nuns might not leave the con vent which she inhabited, and might not at any time go back into the world, and there would be no power in the convent, or in any other authority in the country, to re quire that Ike should leave the world, or he spin bound by any of the vows and obligatirats she bad taken. (Hear, hear.) if that was the case, they came nest to the consi deration of another subject, which ha was very sorry had been mixed up with the present question. The question before the house, as introduced by the hon. and learned gentlemen, was one of personal liberty—a most important question in itself—and it was quite sufficient to occupy their attention; first, whether they thought it necessary to have any bill on the subject or not; and, secondly, if they did, whether this was the bill they aught to adopt. That question was quite sufficient to occupy the attention of the house. But the hon. and learned gentleman, the member fee Bath, had introduced in the emend part of his proposition a question for the select committee to consider —whether any regulations were necessary " for the pre vention of the exercise of undue influence in procuring the alienation of their property." Now, he took it that this was a totally different question—it was • question compli cated and mixed up with various other questions with re gard to the general policy of our laws, with re gard to the disposition of property, with regard to the liberty that was legitimately in every person to dispose of his property, with regard to the law of mom main, and with regard to the various other questions affecting the disposition of property. These were no doubt very fit questions to consider, either for the government or for any individual member of the house to propose ; and if they thought the existing law insufficient, say amendment of that law, and in such amendment this nee of the conven tual establishments m i ght be included, with all ether de scriptions of property, (Hear, hear.) He did not see that the property of convents ought to be differently provided for from that of other establishments. (Hear, hear.) If un due influence was used as to the disposition of the property of the inmates, let the matter be disposed of by law; as in all other cases. With regard to some of the instances which the hon. and learned gentleman had adduced, the hon. and learned gentleman had himself shown that the law as it stood was sufficient to meet them. In the case brought be fore the courts of law in Ireland, and quoted by the hon. and learned gentleman, as showing that undue in fluence was exercised—the conveyance of the property was held to be bad, and a re-conveyance decreed. (Hear, hear.) If then the present law was sufficient, the matter might safely be left to the operation of that law, or if further restrictions were necessary let those be drawn up in the shape of a bill, let that Lill be introduced, and let the house consider whether those provisions wire fitted to meet the exigencies of the case. (Hear, hear.) Ile quite admitted to the honourable and learned gentleman that there ! was a public inconvenience in persons who entered these religious establishments at an early age, finding when they arrived at or 30 years old that they were bound as to the disposition of their property by • religious row made when they were perhaps le. (Hear.) He could well con ceive, without any interference with these conventual es tablishments, that the law should provide for cases of thi . deseription. (Hear, hear.) But conveyances obtained by undue influence, could, as the law stood, be set aside by the courts of this country and of Ireland, and were set aide when brought before elem. A friend of his found that his agent had, by undue influence, obtained the conveyance of , a large amount of property into his own bands, but when the case was brought before the Court, of Chancery in Ireland, that conveyance was set aside and the property was restored to its proper owner. But these are (said the noble lord), questions altogether diderert in themselves, and deserving separate consideration from that before the house. Do not let us mix them up with this 1011, sod above all do not let us t a k e th em as questions that solely affect the d eposition of property by nuns in convents, but in connection with the whole question of property of this kind, and when undue influence is used, let the low, if it is not already sufficient, be made sufficient fur the purpose of meeting such cases. (Hear, hear.) In the first place, then, without eaterine farther into the merits of the amendment, I shall vote for taking tho deci sion as the words now stand (or the second reading of the ha I think it the fairer, and beyond that the wiser tour,* for the house to take that question by itself—(hear, bear)—and when we come to the division, should the ques tion be proposed in that plain manner to the house—whe• thcr the bill should be read a second time or not—l shall cheerfully vote that the second reading be post poned for six months—(hear, hear) —considering that it is a bill which, intending and pretending to suit the particular c see of the nuns in Roman catholic convents, is not founded on any proved circumstances— that it begins with a preamble which is not justified by facts, and goes on to provide enactments which I believe, so far from being llsvourable to the Roman iatho'ic religiou s are hostile to civil liberty—(cheers)—soil that the measure, while it is hostile to the civil liberty et all creeds, pro . testant as well as Roman catholic, would ia its effect be most offensive to the whole Rennin catholic community; and that, white it would give you no malt:lent remedy for any evil if evil exists—would exasperate the feelings of those innates of these religiose convents who have devoted themselves to a religious life from motives of piety and de votion. (Hear, hear.) Mr. G. If. MOORE took exception to the sincerity of there who proposed the bill, for its title was a prevarica tion, while its first reading was carried by • pettifog s ging matneuvre. A clamour had been got up out of doors in favour of the bill, but ne faith could be placed in the religious press, nor could any weight be attached to any thing which tell from Englishmen spinet the Roman ca tholic church, because they were ever ready to say mu-- thing and everything against that chutch without inquir ing tutu the truth of what they asserted. This feeling did not confine itself to any one class, but extended through all society. They had seen hon. members while acting under a species of protestant madness give vent to assertions which were as devoid of truth as they . were recklessly made ; and they bad known instances of juries returning verdicts at variance with the evidence for the sake of up holding the supremacy of protestiustism. The black est spots in our history were attributable to these periodical outbursts of protestant infatuation and intolerance, and he regretted ti find in this, the nineteenth ci otury, they were called upon to legis . Ice towards the Roman Catholics, in a spirit which would I have done no discredit to the age in which Queen Mary ' fell. (Hear, bear.) So objectionable and tyrannical were the provisions of this bid, that lie did nit believe that any I man could be found who would be willing to carry them out; certainly none would be found in Ireland, not even amongst the most rampant Orangemen , for even an Orange man was not so great a coward as to be ever found robing his hand against defenceless women. (Hear, hear.) The bill, in fact, might be characterised as the Jack Ketch of bigotry, and the house would best consult its own dignity and the interest of the country by throwing it out. As for the assertion that ladies were confined in nunneries against their will, he believed that ladies in convents were much freer than many hon. members, who were subject to the whims of whips and angry constituents ; and it would be better to pass a bill for their relief than that of the nuns, who did not want it. (Hear.) Mr. %VARNER, who spoke amid loud cries of "Divide," said the great feature of the bill was that it recognised the great principle that priestly influence was encroaching on the temporal power. (Hear, bear.) lie would much rather vote for the suppression of all conventual establish ments than • bill of inspection, but there was thie great merit in the bill, that it discountenanced priestly inter , hereon in the temporal matters of domestic lite, and on that account he should support it as • step in the right direction. He should give his vote for the bill, as it was introduced ; and if it was lost, he would divide heartily in favour of the amendment of the hon. member for Bath. Mr. O'CONNOR lIENCIIY, in protesting against the bill, would not follow the example of the hon. member for Mayo, by raking an onslaught on protestant' ; for Roman catholic, ought not to forget that it was to protestant, they owed catholic emancipation. Mr. ROUNDELL PALMER was particularly anxious not to give a silent vote on this occasion, as he intended to act in conformity with the course he took with regard to a similar measure in a former parliament, when he said that it was right that measures simul I be taken for the super vision of conventual establishments, if such supervision was wanted. He should carry out that opinion, not by voting for the present bill, which he believed it to be utterly impossible to put into operation, but by voting for the amendment of the hon. member for Bath, which appeare • to him to be conceived in a fair spirit, and to express a I principle which those who were the most ready to resist every encroachment on religious li berty, but who were not drawn by ally amount of clamour to confound civil with reli:dous liberty, could not but think consistent with every principle of religious liberty. Mr. CONOLLY then addressed the house, but amidst such continued interruption and cries for a division, that little could be heard of his observations. He was under stood to express himself gratified to find from the speech of the hon. gentleman who had just sit down, that the feeling of the house was opposed to the bill, as odious and tyrannical. As to the amendment, if the bill was odious, the amendment was as bad, or worse. It was merely a half measure to satisfy clamour, and would please neither one side nor the other, and was unworthy of the considera tion of the house. Mr. T. CHAMBERS, amidst impatience and cries of "Divide," said he accepted with the liveliest satisfaction every single issue that had been raised on the bill, and he was glad that at length some issue had been raised ; for it was impossible so avoid remarking that, alter the most anlious scrutiny of all the eager and impassioned orations which had been made against it both in Ireland and this country, not one single single argument on which he had grounded the necessity of the measures hod been over- thrown, and much more than that, not one of them had even been assailed, (" Oh," and cheeri.) The ho nourable gentleman was about to proceed, but the impatience of the hou:c was so manifest and the cries of " divide "so continuous, that he c•'nctuded abruptly by saying that he was willing to accept the amendment of the hon, member for Bath. Sir 0. GREY, in order to prevent the vote he was about to give being cc , isunderstocsd, wished to s..y that he should vote both against tbesecond reacting and the amendment, but he should vote now for the words that the second reading stand part of the question in order that he might vote again against the amendment. Sir J. PAK INGTON said, that as the hon. member fur Hertford accepted the amendment, he intended to vote against the ball in order that he might vote for the amend ment. The house then divided on the proposition, " that the words proposed to be left out stand part :of the question." Ayes Noes The effect of which is, that the second reeding is lost. It being sic o'clock, the house immediately adjourned. tit Orivrll.4-.). THE EXPRESS, THURSDAY EIiENINO, JUNE 23, 1553. the House of Commons. Great and small prin ciples in that hall of hereditary parties 'and inter changeable opinions are like pieces and pawns at chess; sometimes men play with the black, at other times with the white; but the fortune of the game depends not upon the colour of the temporary prin ciples with which they play, but upon the dexterity ' with which they are advanced and withdrawn. Such is the result of the system whereby some men appoint themselves or their sons and brothers to sham the part of elected and responsible representa tives of the people—whereby others buy their Kati by open bargain from the privileged brokers whom the great aristocratic factions employ for the purpose—and whereby others are enabled to force their way into the Legislature by the unscrupulous and unchecked use of local and per sonal intimidation. In every degree and in every form we have seen these beauties of the present sys tem laid bare during the last few months; yet we have beheld every effort to apply a remedy scouted with indignation by tho nominees of bribery and bullying. Not a single prosecution has been ordered —not an isolated example has been made. A few writs were at first suspended and a few commissions of inquiry instituted ; but the inconvenient precedents thus set were speedily over-ruled, and now all goes on with impudent impunity as before. And by way of preventing the possibility of any general measure of Parliamentary purification being introduced betimes next year, the colleagues of Messrs. STAFIVIID, MACKENZIE, and BERESIORp graveiy propose that nothing should be done this session regarding India reform, but that next session should be specially devoted thereto. A very obvious and consistent course this, unquestionably, for those who feel that it is the interest above all things of the faction to which they belong to stave off electoral reform. So long as they were in office and hoped to remain there, they had no occasion to fear the approach of such an event. The door was shut, and they believed that they had the key in their pocket. But now that they arc upon the wrong side of the door, and the key is in the custody of one who once before made use of it to admit the people— the Tories begin to take all sorts of measures "to stop the way." Tney are all for reform, but it is in India, not in England. Corruption and oppression on the banks of the Ganges have, they are ready to declare, touched their sensitive hearts, and stung their collective consciences to the quick—but it is only when the manifestation of philanthropy is likely to stifle irksome questionings as to the cor ruption and oppression perpetrated on the banks of the Thame3 and the Humber. For the sake of India itself nothing can be so de sirable—let us say rather so indispensable—as a permanent and thorough amendment in the repre sentation of the United Kingdoms. Until that is secured no real or vital change will be accomplished in the government of India. The increased power and patronage which must be vested in the minister of the day, if it be taken from the Board of Directors, will run every risk of being abused until that minister feels that he is accountable to a house composed of men who are themselves responsible to really independent constituencies. Every sound hope of India reform rests upon the supposition that we are about to obtain reform of Parliament, for without the latter the augmented authority and influence of the Supreme Executive at home can afford no guarantee for a healthier and honestcr administration in Hindostan. In the interim, it may be well to take preparatory steps towards breaking up the old network of walversation, secresy, and jobbing ; and in this sense the ministerial scheme bad as it is—is certainly better than nothing. In the main the recommendation of the bill of Sir CHARLES WOOD lies in the fact of its being essen tially and all but confessedly a Continuance Bill. Under it no new lease of power is granted to Leaden hall-street. Under it the pyramid of India jobbery will rest upon a basis of sand. Agitation for India Reform is only yet in its infancy, and will grow and strengthen until full justice is done to the millions of our fellow-subjects in the East, and its growth will ever be, as it has ever been, fostered in these columns. The pro tern. measure of the Coalition affords time for more complete and searching inquiry into the actual plight of the people, and the actual progress of the country under English rule. It must be the duty of a new, and we trust a very different parliament to act upon the results of such inquiry two or three years hence. Meantime it seems unlikely that the scheme o Young Derbyism will be successful. Lord STANLEY'S Tory counsel is not likely to be followed, and the House of Commons not likely to throw out the present bill—unless they could get a better. ON Thursday last Prince ALBERT laid the founda tion stone of the new Asylum for Idiots at Earlswood. The occasion was one of deep interest, on various grounds; and there was a warmth of generous en thusiasm about the whole observance which distin guishes it from the multitude of charity meetings which are crowded into the London season. We do not refer to some of the peculiarities° f the ceremony, which are matters of moral taste, and admit. there fore, of difference of opinion and feeling: such as the three cups of corn, oil, and wine, the contents of which were sprinkled on the stone; and the pro cession of four hundred ladies, who deposited on the stone each a purse containing five guineas. Nor will he speak of the ardour of feeling about the sen sible and good-natured Prince who presided ; nor bet ter still about the thoughts and feelings of the multitude who came together on behalf of the most . wretched sufferers, who lie wallowing in mental helplessness in the centre of our society. The thoughts of many must have been ot the fate of such in ancient times, when the helpless were deserted— left to perish by exposure, because nothing could be done for them, and the spectacle of their misery was too much for the sensibilities of their happier brethren. And the feelings were of joy and grati tude, that a better light has arisen to guide us in their treatment. It is like a new life that we have learned to befriend, rather than destroy the helpless ; that the deformed, and the deprived, and the deficient, and the very idiots of society, are aided, ou account of the very misery that once doomed them to de struction. It is cheering to think how Christendom is all planted over with asylums for their solace ; and yet more, with schools for their training: that the blind are taught to act, and the deaf to understand and communicate; and the idiots to become capable of something, however little. We have learned, by means' of efforts against hope, that there is hardly one of this most desperate class who has not some faculty or other that may be educed and trained. We find that some have mechanical ability ; some, a great faculty of numbers ; some, powers of memory, which save them from utter listlessness and blank ; and nearly all a faculty of imitation which renders them more or less teachable. We haw; learned that their health and their habits are susceptible of im provement, which intercepts much suffering to themstives, and much disgust to others. NVithin the last quarter of a century several schools and asylums hare been opened on the Continent ; and now we are to hare one of our own. The occasion is fully worthy of all the enthusiasm which was excited by the proceedings of Thursday last. This is tho second phase of idiot life. But there is a third, and a far more noble one, which we need not wait for posterity to institute. As the human ~11 , race advances in its eternal progress the intervals between its great sieges seem to become shorter. In the present case there need be no interval at all. There need not be the delay of a single day in our pre =ding to the final stage—of striving for the aboli tion of idiocy altogether. The progress of science, and especially physiologi cal science, has shown us—if only we all shared the , knowledge—that idiocy is seldom on unavoidable ' accident in human existence, but in the majority of cases, if not in every case, the result of causes which are preventible. Physicians who have duly attended 1 to the subject have informed us—and we wish the fact could be made known over the whole civilised world—that if we all did our plain duty, it might pro- bablytake only three generations to abolish idiocy almost entirely. Five years ago, the Legislature of Massachusetts sent out a commission to inquire into I the statistics of idiocy in their state, and to advise 1 measures for the treatment of the social calamity. The result, as set forth in the Report of the Commission, first appals the reader, and finally inspires him with a hope new to human aspiration—old as human as piration is in the world. The appalling part is the extent of the evil. The number of idiots iu the ' State of Massachusetts—a State in which there is a higher average of intelligence and virtue than in most societies—is above Lan); that is, more than one in six hundred of the population. This is the very lowest computation ; and there is reason to fear that it is too low. The cheering part is, that nearly all the cases are distinctly traceable to re movable causes. By far the greater num ber are congenital cases. Of those that are not, the evil may be called morally congenital. The children are born of parents who give them no moral chance, but corrupt them in infancy with drink and other vice, destroying the action of the tender brain before there was any possibility of self rule, and converting intelligence and activity into stupidity and paralysis. Of the absolutely congeni• tal cases, almost the whole are the offspring of drunkards, or of diseased parents, or of marriages between blood-relations. Of the lowest class of idiots, not one quarter were found to be the off spring of temperate parents. Out of 359 cases which were closely investigated, all but four were found to be the children of parents who had, one or both, disobeyed the natural laws of health, and brought themselves into a scrofulous condition, or a disposition to brain disease, or had married blood Irelations. At least one twentieth of the cases of idiocy in the whole State, where these mar riages are not more common than with us, were the result of the marriage of relatives. Such mar riages are supposed to be in the proportion of one in a thousand ; and the amount of idiocy to be charged to them is therefore seen at a glance to be out of all 1 proportion to that which results from other marri ages. From seventeen such marriages there were ninety-five children, of whom no less than forty-four were idiotic—to any nothing of those who were de formed, deaf, blind, and unhealthy. While we arc struggling to preserve the old theological prohibition against marriage a ith a wite's sister, against which there is no natural law, we are taking no heed to nature's loud prohibition of unions between blood relations, because no theological speculation has pre- vented their being legalised with us. The error has arisen through ignorance —the same ignorance I which has made our legal description of idiocy and lunacy too absurd to bear the light of science. I 1 By science we must amend both the one and 1 the other. The old English la w d ec l ares th a t "Per i sops who are non contpos mentis are idiots ; " that ' those who cannot count twenty p ence are idiots; and I those who cannot tell their age, or who are their' fathers and mothers: and again, that "a man shall not be called an idiot if he has the understanding to ; learn or know letters ; " or " to learn by the instrue- I tion of another." Yet are there among us idiots who beat all .their neighbours in mental arithmetic; others who read and write all day long, without any understanding of what they arc doing; and others, who can be taught, not only mechanical arts, but a certain amount of intellectual action. These old failures at description, and the mismanagemen founded on them, arise from the metaphysical pre possession of the unity of the mind, which leaves no room for the admission of the fact that the mind is i an aggregate of powers, some of which may be strong in various degrees, while others are wholly or al most deficient. And the violation of physiological conditions is owing to a similar ignorance which may be amended from this day forward, now that our brethren in Massachusetts have furnished us with facts which must set us thinking. There are active causes of idiocy among us, which are happily absent in their new country. A few cases of cretinism occurring in certain localities in the United States drew immediate attention, and were found to result from unfavourable circumstances of abode—want of good air, and water, and light. Our Liverpool cellars of a few years ago furnished us with warnings of the same kind. In the abundant space of the new country across the Atlantic: the instances were few, and they were immediately taken in hand. There is no prevalent practice there of living over-crowded in dark places, pestiferous with drains, and supplied with feculent water. The drunkenness remains a fearful evil with them, ex cept in the states and territories which have adopted the Maine Liquor Law. We have the drunkenness, and the other evils too. They have a few cases, ac cording to this Report, of poorly-fed workpeople, whose children and grandchildren swell the numbers of idiots and infirm ; but the cases are scarce, in comparison with ours. As they exist, we aro glad to know of them, as a warning to ourselves. Do not all these facts, with a multitude more furnished by the Massachusetts Report, indicate to us the third phase in the history of Idiocy? And does not the ceremony of Thursday last afford the stimulus to make use of our new knowledge? All honour to those who subscribed the 10,0001. for the new Asylum in the course of that memorable day. They have begun a good work, illustrative of the second phase of this touching history, and we hope they will have their reward in seeing the bowed head raised in " lifting up the hands that hang down, and strengthening the ftcblc knees ;" in witnessing the first gleam of intelligence steal over the benighted countenance, and a human viiileur taking the place of animal grossness. We hope they will see their school rooms filled with amused scholars, and hear the hymn resound in their chapel, and the cheerful laugh in their play-ground. Hut there are many who have not silver and gold to give to this cause, who, giving what they have, may give more and better. There are few of us who cannot do some thing towards improving the sanitary condi tion of society, either themselves, or by moving those who have more power. Every inlet of pure air, every gush of pure water, every re moval of a nuisance, every discouragement of intern perance, all communication of the special knowledge required, all furtherance of general education, goes to lessen the number of future idiots; and never was there, and never will there be, a case in which pre vention was more obviously better than alleviation. In three generations, if we were wise, idiocy might be precluded. In three generations: Ours would be a happy one it' we could make our children the first of the three. 'rho work must, be individual at the outset ; that is, every one should set about it. We are gratified at acing an asylum founded for the reception of an extremely small proportion of our idiots. Let us help posterity to the gratification of haring no idiots to put into any asylum. TURKEY. A telegraphic despatch, with intelligence dated Constantinople, June 13, states that the British fleet had arrived at the Dardanelles. The French tket was at Tenedos. Baron Bruck, the Austrian inter. tettlicio, had leached the Dardanelles. We have correspondence from Constantinople, re ceived via Ga!atz, to the 9th inst. The Ilatti Sheriff for confirming the rights of the Greek Christians was solemnly delivered to the Greek Pat t iarch on the 714 inst., in presence of a number of notables of the Greek church, at the Ministry of Foreign A trairs. It is said to contain all the substantive stipulations which Prince Nlenchikoff demanded should be embodied my diplomatic act. M. Balabinc, Secretary of Legation, left behind by Nl.ozeroff with the commercial chancery, received a copy of the document on the 4th, three days before it was promulgated, and left next day, Sunday, for Otle,sa, to bring it to the knowledge of Prince Nlenchikott. On the 9th he returned on board a Russian war steamer carrying a merchant flag, which was still at anchor when the mail left. It was believed by many that the steamer was to carry away the residue of the Russian embassy, but this was but conjecture. On the 6th inst. a tiro broke out in the Custom house and destroyed all the business offices, but not the warehouses mid stores. The excitement of the people was on the increase, andithe government was straining averynerve to pre pare for war. A correspondent writes: CONSTANTINOPLE. J ems 9. The preparations for war continue. The enthusi asm of the people is at its height. It is ev er y. where heard from the mouths ut the citizens Is is not we who fear war, but our Pachas. We are ready for war with the ltussiamt. We arc ready to ' put an end to their interference and encroachments upon the rights of our nation." This is the language of the Turkish people. This is the language of public opinion at this moment ; and it has such an influence upon the government that, whether they desired it or nut, they would be forced into the activity of preparation. But their preparations are really upon a most respectable scale. The following items you may rely upon. One hundred and sixty thousand redifs have be en called out. These re difs are a militia, but of a far different character from what is termed a militia either in England or the United States of America. Each rcdif is in reality a trained soldier, who, after having seen five years' sere ire in the regular army, has been permitted to return to his home with the condition of his being call«I into service whenever required. There aro full 300,0(5) of these militia soldiers in Turkey, and the it spirit and efficiency is unquestionably good. A single incident—which oc curred at the time when Kossuth took refuge in Turkey—may give some idea of the prompt and patriotic character of these men. While the "extra dition question " was going on, orders were issued to assemble an army of 40,000 rcdifs at a camp in Roll. melia. This order was issued in the form of an invitation or volunteer summons. In two weeks from the date of its issue, no leas than 120,000 mils were upon the ground, and ready for action. The same spirit animates them at the present crisis; and, no doubt, far more than the number called for will voluntarily offer their services to the government. With the 160,000redirs thus summoned, the effective army in European Turkey will be 360,0(5) men. The exiled chief of Kurdistan (a fine old man, and held in high esteem by all who know him) has offered 45,000 Koords to the Turkish government. These are all cavalry, and excellent soldiers. The Pacha of Egypt has made an offer of 40,000 troops—all trained soldiers. Prince Alexander Kura Georgevies, of Servia, has tendered his contingent of forty thousand mon, con sisting of the Servians—one of the finest races is Europe—and the hardy and warlike Albanians and Ai names. Prince Alexander is a Christian; so arc his people; yet, notwithstanding the intrigues of Russia by means of religious emissaries, the instincts of these people have guided them ; anti they are de termined, in case of war, to range themselves on the side of the Turks. The very tact of this feeling in favour of Turkey, of which they are only nominally a part, shows that there can be no ground fur the corn plaints about Christian oppression so loully trumpeted by Russia and Austria. K'e'ith these contingents the Turkish army employed against the Russians will he near upon 480,000 men. Mehemet Ali Pucha, the Seraskier (war minister) of the Empire, and the brother-in-law of the Sultan is appointed Commander-in-Chief. Ilis energy of characer is well known. He has accepted the office of Commander, and has already entered upon its duties with activity. He has left Constantinople, and by way of Varna proceeded to the Danube, along the line of which he intends to inspect the dif ferent corps and fortifications. On the morning of the sth of June his staff left Constantinople, direct for Schumla. Schumla is the head-quarters of the right wing of the Turkish army. FRANCE. PARIS, WEDNESDA.T ErENING. Opinions are much divided es to the true practical interpretation of M. de Nesse'rode's circular. Some think it betrays an anxious desire to negotiate, and are of opinion that so much labour would not have been bestowed upon argument if it were intended to fight. Others, looking closely to the text and dis carding hazardous conjectures, see in it a plain and unqualified declaration that, if the Porte will not submit to the Menchikoff ultimatum, Russia will seek to compel her acceptance of it by force of arms. So far as the Bourse is concerned, the feeling excited by the note is decidedly one of disappointment. In spite of the prevailing indisposition to believe in the pos sibility of war, it is impossible not to see that tho note leases no door open for a peaceable solution of the crisis, except the humiliation of Turkey and the abandonmeat of the position which her allies have assumed. There is not a word from the beginning to the end, suggestive of a disposition to listen to any friendly opinions that might be offered by any of tho powers which are to be made acquainted with the contents of the circular. The whole scope of M. do Nesselrode's argument is to show that Turkey is in the wrong, to persuade the powers, two of whom have sent their fleets to the Dardanelles, that they have hitherto totally misunderstood the question, and to exonerate the Emperor of Itussia from the responsibility of the war which lie threatens to commence unless his demands be " purely and simply " complied with. It is remarkable that the Russian government scorns to use the miserable argument put forward by some of its advocates, that the occupation of the Danubian principalities under present circumstances would not be an act of war. On the contrary, it being known that this is the first hostile step which Russia is prepared to take, the plain inference from one of the most im portant passages in the note is, that the Czar himself will consider the invasion of those provinces the com mencement of war with Turkey. The note says that after the expiration of the last eight days allowed the Porte for final reflection, "his Majesty, however much he will do violence to his conciliatory disposi tion, will find himself compelled to take measures to procure by a more determined at :it tide (unc attitude plus prenunct'e ) the satisfaction which he has hitherto vainly eudeavourent to obtain by pacific means." The phrase" altitude pus pron..ncje,"used as it is in centre dist inction to " Pacific ineans,"elearly means war. So far the note is candid. The strongest part of the case made by M. de Nesselrode, and argued by him with that consummate ability with which the world has long been familiar, is undoubtedly that relating to the past conduct of Turkey in regard to the Holy Places. He bitterly reproaches the Porte for the concessions obtained by France in favour of the Latins, to the prejudice of the Greeks, and refers to the " innumerable acts of weakness, tergiversation, and duplicity," which cha racterized the Ottoman authorities when the engage ments made with Russia should have been executed. It is impossible to deny that the Sultan did alter nately play fast and loose With the Greeks and the Latins. This conduct was the result of the deplora ble position in which he was placed by M. Lavalettes ill-judged and short-lived triumph. M. de Nessel rode, however, now admits that \Then the affair of the Holy Place was re-examined by the Porte in consequence of Prince Nift!' clultiatre demands, France manifested " a spent TO CORRESPONDENTS. A 4ec,..1 YdNon •f " The Eepreve,^ ecestafaine .be lame even!rer's Garele,"l. rAablbhed every Tuesday and Friday eight, to time hy taw. & iv.r • :44a:teats intended 'or "The Exprees,"Lowleva !treeing parer, mat be at tits Ottice, 10, Bouveriwatreet, by Two o'clock on the Lay of poVicatloo. NIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE. Tll, DAT—itontins. 31 . Its .Afterneos. 2a. 3 1 3 , 5. T 3.111 mum—Montag. U. Sal.. —Afkraoss. 41. 263 L LONDON, THURSDAY, JUNE 23. TO -NIGHT, Lord STANLEY undertakes to convince the House of Commons that it ought to reject the Ministerial Bill for Reforming the Government of India. His Lordship, we presume,sdoes not intend to deny that great and important changes are re quired is the general mode of administering affair s in that vast and valuable dependency. Even the ex-Chairman of the Company—the undaunted and unconvinceable Sir JAMES WEIR Hoco, who for many years has performed the functions in Parliament of universal defender of every Indian abuse, and apologist for everything that was said to have gone wrong in the three presiden cies—even he admits that some modification of the existing system is unavoidable, and that the sooner the present Bill is passed, the better. It is true, in deed, that while Lord STANLEY, and his friends, Mr. Humus and Mr. DISRAELI, were in office, they professed to be of a totally different opinion. The Derbyite Cabinet had in December last made up their minds that no alteration of any importance in the method of exercising the civil and military powers we possess over Southern Asia was ncees eery ' • things were declared by the late President • of the Board of Control to be in a highly satis factory state ; the condition of the native population was formally and officially declared t o be greatly improved and steadily improving ; tho finances, if not exuberant, were sufficient and secure : in short, nothing was needed for India in future but to maintain things there as they have hitherto been for the last fifty years. That was the Tory convic tion regarding our Oriental possessions, up to Christ mas last. But certain incidents have since occurred that would seem to have wrought a striking change therein. Of these, perhaps, the most important and instructive has been that which altered the point of view from which Mr. DISRAELI and Lord STANLEY regard this difficult and momentous subject. They are now at the other side of the table; and they ac cordingly behold the matter in a very different:light from that which they had previously done. They have now discovered that India, like other places, stands in need of reform—nay, of so much reform that a whole autumnal recess ought to be allowed them for time to consider what shape it shall be made to assume, and a new session ought to be devoted to the task, whereunto the faculties of a whole Perlin runt ought to he brought fresh and unwearied with I discussions on domestic affairs. All this is doubtless very amusing and highly characteristic of the party warfare that goes on in