The Sun. — London, England, 1846-05-20 00:00:00

_ _...~ Vtirb ;baton SUN OFFICE, Seven o'Clock. THE ENGLISH ARMY. TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN. Sla,—ln the Gazette of yesterday evening I find the fol low ing announcement : ,‘ ai3 Serene Highness Prince William Augustus Edward eA of 8 e Wernar to be Ensign a n d Li eu t en ant in the Grena dier ards." it me to ask some cons tit u ti ona l l a wy er , th roug h th e m of your columns, w h e th er this admissi on o f a f o reign nto the army of Great Britain be not illegal, and a violslton of the Act of Settlement ? It may be supposed that the Prince of Saxe Weimar has availed himself of Mr. Hutt's Act, and obtained from the Secretary of State a certificate of naturalization. I appre hend, however, that the Prince has done no such thing. He would hardly take a step which would involve the renuncia tion of his natural allegiance; nor would Sir James Graham have granted him a certificate unless he were quite satisfied that the Prince was living in the country with an intention to abide here, according to the terms of Mr. llutt's Act. I have no doubt that the Horse Guards has acted illegally in granting a commission in the Queen's army to a foreigner. It would not have mendsd the matter, in the opinion of the great outhors of the Act of Settlement, to say that this is nearly allied to a Sovereign Prince ; but it ap pears to me desirable that the relations of our illustrious Queen should not be held up before the minds of the people of this country as involved in any violation of its laws. ___ Lincoln's Inn, May 20. BRITA IsT N TATTERSALL'S—THIS EVENING Six o'CLocx. DERBY. 9 to 2 agst Sir Tatton Sykes 7 to 1 apt Tom Tullock 10 to 1 agst Humdrum 10 to 1 agst Fancy Boy 12 to 1 agst Sting 20 to 1 agst Peri colt 25 to 1 agst Broeardo 40 to 1 agst The Premier 40 to 1 agst The Conjuror. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS DAY.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. LACE FACTORIES BILL. Sir JAMES GRAHAM (in continuation from our After noon Edition) said—By far the greater of all the lace manu factures which was produced was not the results of ma chinery, worked by power, but the effect of hand-loom weaving; and there existed a very marked difference be tween the lace and the cotton manufacture, the raw mate rial of the latter being in a great degree the produce of ma chinery wrought by power, whereas the other was almost all produced by the hand. The hand-loom weaver was waging a hopeless struggle against the untiring efforts of machinery, but the Honourable Member, by 'this measure, ought still more to fetter his exertions by denying him the liberty of working at night. Then there was another striking differ ence between these manufactures, for while the one was con ducted in dwellings, where large numbers of persons were congregated, the other was performed in small shops close to the dwelling-houses, or more frequently in these very dwel hugs themselves, and if the lion. Member's measure were carried out in the matter of inspectors, it would be necessary to give them a power of entering their houses at all hours of the night.—(Hear, hear.) Let them look at the very great disproportion which existed between the cost of the machinery employed in the one case and in the other. The average cost of a power-loom was esti mated at 201., while the machinery required in the lace trade ranged from 200/. to 1,0001. There was also this remarkable fact to be considered with respect to the lace manufacture, that the trade was dependent upon the caprice of fashion and the fancies of the public, and this machinery, which in many cases cost above 2,000/. might, in six or eight months after its first purchase, require extensive alterations which would involve a further and increased cost.--(Hear, hear.) Then, again, with reference to the number of persons employed in a power-loom factory : a girl of thirteen to eighteen years of age could superintend three or four looms, while in the silk trade one worker was required to be at tached to every loom. The lace trade, it was well known, was dependent upon its foreign customers, but the Bill of the Honourable Member would press severely upon the manufacturer, who was already competing at a disadvan tage with the French manufacturer. He hoped that arrangements would soon be completed which would give him a fairer chance of coping with his continental rivals. — (Hear, bear.) The Hon. Member had told them that the physical condition of the labourers in the silk manufactories was of a very low character ; but he could not see that any improvement would be effected by a measure which would, from its very character, involve a reduction of wages. If this Bill wore passed into a law, the capital employed in the lace manufacture of this country would fly away into other hands, it would go into other countries where no such restriction was enforced.—(Hear, hear.) The destruction of that branch of our manufactures must be the inevitable re sult of such a law. He had already stated that his first objection to this Bill was, that it proposed to interfere with adult labour, though he felt that there was another grave objection to it—an objection which the Hon. Member for Finsbury felt also—which was this, that it was not expedient that children should work from six in the morning till ten at night. If this measure were passed it would be incumbent on the Legislature to restrict the labour in the other four prin cipal branches of manufacture. It was impossible for them to carry such a measure into effect in the way proposed. It could only be enforced by a system of inspection or in formation on the part of fellow-workmen, which would not be tolerated in this country. The Excise law would be per fect lenity compared with such a law as that proposed. It would empower a body of men to enter constantly into the bed-room of a family being the room in which the hand-loom work was carried on. An industrious man, who wished to earn a subsistence for his family would be prevented from pursuing his trade after ten o'clock at night. His rival would, no doubt, be tempted by the offer of 10/., and give information against a man of an industrious character employed in the manufacture of lace. But the fact was, that the objections to this Bill were so insuperable, that he felt satisfied that it would never be tolerated in this country.—(Cries of "Hear, hear.") He would, for a moment, beg leave to call the attention of the House to the effect of their recent interference with the rope makers of this country. Petitions from both wasters and men in that branch of trade were continually being pre sented to the House, praying them to repeal the late law which they passed with reference to the hours of work in that trade, and it was now a subject for discussion whether they should not comply with the prayer of those petitions. Both masters and men had found that the recent law, which restricts the hours of labour in their trade, was injurious to their interests, and they asked the House to repeal that Act whose con tinuance they represent to be fatal to rope making in this country—that that trade must in fact be abandoned if they were not allowed to work free from all such supervision as that law had introduced. Well the Legislature had now time to coesider. They were, by this, called upon to interfere directly with labour. They were called upon to extend the system of inspection into the private workshops and dwellings of this country. It was certainly one of the painful duties attached to the office which he filled to be opposed very often to the popular wishes, and he had almost said the popular feeling, but, entertaining the strong opinion which he did that this would be a fatal and a wrong step, he did not hesitate for one moment to move an amendment, that the Bill be read a second time that day six months.—(Hear, hear.) Colonel ROLLESTON said his name was endorsed on the Bill, and he was of course bound to give his support to it- After the fullest consideration which he had been enabled to give to the Bill, and the circumstances attending its intro duction into the House, he felt it his bounden duty to entreat the House to take into their serious con sideration the various provisions of this Bill.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The parties whom it would effect looked to the Legislature for relief, for they were unable to rescue themselves from the bondage and slavery in which they were under the present state of things. The hardship which they had to endure was, if paralleled, certainly not exceeded by any persons employed in the manufactures of this country.— (Hear, hear.) Before he touched upon the details of this measure he would briefly allude to an objec tion raised by the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department, who had said that no petitions had been presented by the operatives employed in the manufacture of lace. Now the truth was, that it was not many days ago, since he (Colonel Rolleston) presented a numerously signed petition in favour of this measure from those individuals. A petition had also been presented a few nights ago, and at the head of the names attached to the petition,_was that of Mr. Herbert, the Mayor of Nottingham, the centre of this branch of manufactures. The petitioners prayed the House to adopt speedily some measure whereby the children employed in that manufacture should be released from the bondage to which they were subjected at present. The Right Hon. Baronet had said that the Legislature should not interfere in the mode proposed by this Bill, because there were not many children employed in the manufacture of lace, but after travelling through four or five volumes that of v the Commissioners' rep or t u p on the question, the number of children so employed was e s iderable indeed, and that th e e ff ects were of eti7e ss ru i n ous character as regarded thei r health, morals,l and education. (The Honourable Member then proceeded to read several extracts from the report in question.) He hoped the House then would allow this Bill to go.into Committee, 'for in his opinion it was the only measure calcu lated to remedy all the evils complained of.— (Hear, hear.) Another portion of the Bill had reference to adult labourers; but he did not attach so much importance to this part as to those clauses and provisions which re lated to the employment of children in factories. Those provisions, if agreed to by the House, would improve the physical and moral condition of a multitude of children of industry, and he entreated the House to let the Bill be read a second time.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. STRUTT said the Hon. Member had quoted from Hansard, which only gave a condensed summary of what he (Mr. Strutt) said some few years ago upea a similar sub ject to the present, but he would, with the per mission of the House, read a more extended re port from the Mirror of Parliament," and it would be seen that he was then, and be might add that he was now, of opinion that such a Bill as the one before the House would be ineffective unless it applied to mills worked by power as well as by hand.—(Hear, hear.) Were they, howeveof, prepared to go the length of saying that they would not allow a poor lace worker to get up at four o'clock in the morning and labour at his trade in his own room ? And vet this Bill went to this extreme, and he for one said the Bill would be committing a practical evil instead of doing any good. Why, they might with as much justice apply the same principle to the sailor, the shoemaker, or the bricklayer; but be that as it might, he was sure, if they pas e 1 this Bill in its present form, it would 'be made the medium for committing acts of oppression and injustice on poor and industrious persons who were anxious to improve their condition by employing their leisure time or what they treeted as leisure hours iu labour and industry. —( Hear, hear.) He was sure, then, if the House passed this Bill, they would be committing a gre a t wrong on the manufacturing interest of the country;while the Bill itself would only aggravate the evil which it was intended to remedy.—(Hear, hear.) Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE said he was an advocate for a Bill defining the hours of labour for persons employed in large public mills, but he certainly could not go the length of sup po,ting a Bill which applied generally to all mills and all workshops, whether public or private, large or small.—(Hear, hear.) He believed, too, the public were not prepared to go this length ; for, in the petition he had presented to the House upon this subject, he found they applied to large public factories, and not to private work. shops. The principle of this Bill was not to regulate the hours at which children should be employed in fac tories, but to atop the night labour of adults, and he for one must say he was not prepared to support a Bill of this nature.—(Hear, hear.) It was true that in 1821 he introduced a Bill restricting the hours of labour in cotton factories, when an attempt was made to include silk, flax, and lace manufactories Mit But it,Wea IbOußh>i t 14 %la UAW. siul 07 tin opocAtiva , , themselves, that as regarded those branches of manufacture, the Bill would prove inoperative, if it did not result in aug menting instead .of diminishing the evil.—(Hear.) Again, in 1827, he introeuced a similar Bill, and, again the same attempt was made, and the same arguments and opinions urged with success against it.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") If the Hon. Gentleman would subject the children in the fac tories to the same regulations which were in existence with regard to other factories in the country he should have his (Sir J. Hobbouse's) support. Lord JOHN MANNERS said that 475 of the master ma nufacturers of the town of Nottingham had signed a petition in favour of this Bill. If, therefore, the opinion of the master manufacturers were to be taken as conclusive upon this mat ter, he thought the fact he had just stated was a sufficient ground for passing this Bill. He had no doubt as to the rectitude of the principle of interference. It had been acknowledged over and over again in that House, and he trusted that it would be supported by this Bill being passed into a law. He should give his hearty support to the second reading of this Bill, reserving to himself the right of introducing amendments in Committee. Mr. MUNTZ believed that those who overworked their people did an injury to themselves. He worked his mills at night as well as day, but he employed two sets of people. The reason why people overworked themselves was that they were badly paid for what they did. He believed that some interference was necessary. These children were most severely worked ; that arose from the extreme competition amongst themselves. Now, he thought they ought ve o b u e g li h e tt d o t i h n a g t ui i r n e qu in iry to the cause of that competition, for he w as a most important one. GISBORNE said that if the Noble Lord had searched the county of Nottingham he would not find 475 master manufacturers, those, he meant, who would be so considered under the common acceptation of the word. The master manufacturers did not object to the prohibition that children under eight years of age were not to be admitted to work in factories. His Hon. Friend proposed to lay a restriction on machinery. The Hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Muntz) had stated that he worked his machinery night and day, and that the men were employed for twelve hours daily. Mr. MUNTZ here interrupted the Hon. Gentleman, and explained that his men worked only nine or ten hours a day, which, in his opinion, was quite long enough for any man to work. Mr. GISBORNE resumed—Well, then, he was mistaken. This Bill would only tend to create dissatisfaction among the workpeople. No interference on the part of the House would better their circumstances, unless the House was prepared to do an impossibility. He was distinctly of opinion that the operation of the Bill would work mischief among the labouring classes, and he should, therefore, give his strongest opposition to the second reading. Mr. WAKLEY prefaced his speech with a few allusions to the observations made by the Hon. Member, the proposer of the Bill. He thought the people ought really to be allowed to understand those questions in which they were so much concerned. Some respect ought to be paid to their feelin g s, if not to their judgment. In their petition they prayed the House to do certain things, which, if attended with evil con sequences, they were quite willing to bear the penalty, and relieve the House of all responsibility. He did not think the Bill which he held in his hand had been prepared with any degree of prudence or judgment, and if it were now before the House for a third reading he should have felt it his duty to oppose it. He had, however, no objection to vote for its going into Committee, when there would be an opportunity afforded of altering its present imperfect shape. The question was, whether or not the House could interfere to protect infants from a species of toil which was calculated to injure their physical energies and destroy their moral constitution.—(hear, hear.) It had been argued that the labour was not of a severe nature. He had heard many Hon. Members complain at times of the weari ness they felt at attending the House on long debates—what then must be the feelings of infants, of eight years of age, when subjected to similar watchings and late hours? The House had interfered in regulating the hours of other species of labour, which had been attended with advantage both to the manufacturers and their workmen. Why, then, was this species of labour to be exempted from the interference of the Legislature ? He would not wish to interfere with the late houre e of adult labour, as any change might be more productive of evil than of good. If they began where were they to stop ?—(Hear, hear.) To interfere with the labour of adults would be a tyranny which should not be endured. As they had it in their power to alter all objectionable clauses in Committee, for the sake of the infant children who were compelled to work clay and night, night and day, without holiday or intermis sion, from one year's end to another, he would vote for the second reading. Sir ROBERT PEEL was very much surprised, after the speech of the Honourable Gentleman, that he should still affirm the principle of the Bill by voting for its second read ing. There was nothing which the Hon. Member re pudiated more—nothing which he allowed to be more radically unjust than to restrict the hours of adult labour. If they once interfered with the labour of adults the next demand would be to fix the minimum of wages and how could they resist that demand ?—(Hear, hear.) The Bill (lid not profess on the face of it to apply merely to children, it professed to interfere with the labour of adults. The title of the Bill was to regulate the hours of labour in all night fac tories. And see what would be the effect of an interference ; why it would be a direct premium to increase the labour in those places where their enactments could not reach. Then, as the Hon. Gentleman had just said, how were they to carry into effect that interference with labour? Why they might take their choice between the common informer and what were called domiciliary visits ; that meant, that if, as was very natural, they shrunk from the contamination of the common informer, then they must establish these domiciliary visits throughout the whole of the country, those visits to be carried into effect by a Go vernment officer. Thus, if a light were seen in any house after ten o'clock, then they were liable to the infliction of a visit from one of those officers—a domiciliary visit because a man was suq)ected of labouring for his daily bread.— (Cheers.) - Why this Bill made no provision for any cases like those which the Factory Bill excepted. It made no provision for a case of accident, such as might happen from a derangement of machinery, when the works would require to be suspended. If the factory were turned by water-power, the stream might be suspended, and the Bill very fairly and very wisely in such a case allowed some extra labour. But this Bill con tained no such provision, and, therefore, no case was provided in the event of a man being subject to sickness for any period. Let them suppose him to have had an accident—let them suppose him to have been invalided for three days—(Hear, hear)—let them suppose bins visited by sickness, prevented from making any exertion on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, or at best only working some five hours a day, and his wages reduced in a corresponding degree. Suppose him not quite recovered, but, for the subsistence of his family, he determines to work some additional hours on the Thursday, Friday, and Saturday—let it be remembered that he worked within his own house. Why, was it pos sible, then, that because he said to himself, " I must repair the misfortune of the earlier portion of the week, by extra ordinary labour at its close,' they should punish him, be cause he toiled till eleven or twelve o'clock at night, for the laudable, the truly honourable purpose of providing sub sistence for his family ?—(Cheers.) What, did they mean to sanction any measure that could punish a man like this ?—(Cheers.) Would they sanction a law which would subject this man to the annoyance of a domiciliary visit ?—(Continued cheering.) But, then, the measure im posed a penalty. He (Sir R. Peel) should ike to see an in dictment framed against such a man.—(Hear, hear.) He should like to see him after some •five or six persons had been brought up for petty larceny, or crimes of a similar character—he should then like to see this man brought up before the magistrate to answer the offence of working till eleven o'clock at night to provide his family with food !—(Cheers)—and 50/. was the penalty to be exacted for this offence—(Hear, hear)—an offence charged by his next-door neighbour, perhaps, the informer, being an idle, dissolute fellow, who ne glected his work, who envied, perhaps, this ho nest man because he was honest, who hated him because he was industrious and succeeding in the world. The informer said to himself, " He is my enemy, and I will punish him. I want 10/. (the reward granted by this Bill). I want to advance myself and to depress him. 1 am idle, I am a vagabond; he is industrious and honest. I saw a light in his house. I found. lairo. out. He was work ing for the maintenance of his family. I will lay an information against him. I shall receive 10/., my reward for maintaining the law, while he should be punished with a penalty of 501., or sent to prison for main taining his family."—(Cheers.) Was it likely that they would be rewarded for inculcating morality like this? — (Cheers.) Was it likely that they would be thanked for this charitable interference?—(Cheers.) What answer could be made by the framers of this Bill? None. No answer could be given. The Bill was to regulate the hours of labour in all factories. This was not a question of restricting the hours of labour for children. It was not a mere measure for regu lating the hours of labour in factories only. It was a ques tion whether a man had a right to labour in his own house after ten o'clock. But the Honourable Member said that the benefits to children would compensate for the other defects of the Bill. He would not go into that question, he felt and acknowledged the evil of taxing the infant labourer too severely. But what was this Bill ? Was it possible for the House to consent to a measure which not only permitted but sanctioned the employment of children above 8 years of age to the extent of 16 hours a day. And yet the Hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Wakley) would, in his zeal for factory children, sanction a Bill which permitted girls above eight years of age to work.sixteen hours a day.—( Laughter and cheers.) He thought that the artists who had framed tasoellel have bestowed a little more pains upon it b r : e tb an re a th hav e 7. % b.w. it to the H ou se. Let them by every not require them, by. - . and let Hon. Gentlemen that girls above eight _yeairsety l c 'e=the principle, sixteen hours a-day.—(Cheers.) a should, hate. worked that the Hon. Member for Finsbury would, eueeee thoughtf.d mitting the second reading, have been the fitat to have re ceived the Bill with an indignant remonstrance.—(Hear.) Mr. WAKLEY—I don't like it at all.—(Laughter.) Sir R. PEEL—Then if this were the reason for the sup port that the Hon. Member forFinsbury gaveto the measure, he (Sir R. Peel) could not say another word to such a curious argument in its favour.—(Laughter.) Mr. FERRAND could not but express deep regret that the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government should turn into ridicule the arguments in favour of this Bill.—(No, no.) It was a melancholy fact, that whenever an Hon. Member in that House proposed to legislate for the welfare of the working population of this country, h e was always met with the strongest opposition.—(Hear, hear. ) The working population for several years had appealed to that House to take the peculiar circumst h a a n d ces al u m n o d s e t r which they in l a boured into consideration. They a H I a o t u i s o e n , to look Mdesty's Government, as well and he would ask her vain, and they had now commenced to legislate for them selves,look for one instant to the m as Honourable Members on both sides t p h o e p the north of England. sr g otect themselves moment, into an alarming combination They were ent t e o rin , at this present c d t e t s i r i o n; strikes for wages masters. Let the House look at the fearful against what they called the tyranny and l oppression of their there which had taken place in Manchester , Liver p ool, and other large towns in the north of England , and he thought was there sufficient to induce that Hous e to consider that it was high time for Parliament to take int o its most mature and deliberate consideration the serious quarrels which had from some causes been taking place between masters and t heir servants. In the case now before the Hou se, the y found that_ the master manufacturers and their ow n work p eo p le had united in a body to come before that House, to ask redress for their grievances; and what had they witnessed that afternoon? Ridicule cast upon this attempt to legislate on their behalf, by the Hon. Member forFinsbury, and from both sides of the House. They had asked for the secondreading of this Bill, and he had no hesitation in saying, that if that House refused the second reading of the Bill, it would be offering to those working classes a direct insult, and would drive them ultimately to their own resources, as he had before said, to legislate on this matter, which they would do by entering into one universal combination throughout this country, and compel their masters to consent to protect them and their interests, as Parliament had refused to interfere in their behalf. He would Rot say one word about the question, whether the manufacturers of this country were in favour of the second reading of this Bill or not. The working classes of this country were watching the tone and temper of that House oh the present ecoeien—(Dear, hear) —and it WAP THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EV his firm conviction that if Parliament would, by a more con ciliatory spirit, endeavour to mitigate the bad feeling which existed between the employers and the employed of this country on the present occasion, they would do more to put a stop to the strikes in the north of England, and the mis understandings which were taking place between the em ployers and the employed than all the combinations which could be formed either amongst masters or men.—(Hear.) Mr. S. CRAWFORD did not deny that he entertained objections to this Bill, he did not deny that he felt an ob jection to limit the hours of adult labour; but, at the same time, he did not think they:were precluded from interfering with infant labour, to prevent the younger portion of the manufacturing classes of England from being overworked. —(Hear, hear.) That was what he should desire to do— (Hear, hear)—and he hoped to effect that object by voting in favour of this Bill. The great question before the House was whether the infantine labour of this country should be protected from the oppression of the holders of capital.— (Hear, hear.) The long hours which they were com pelled to work injured their health and morals, and he, therefore, contended tin t, no matter whether this Bill would injure the interests of the manufacturers or not, the Legislature was bound to extend its protecting influence to the hard-working children of England.—(Hear, hear.) The hours of labour, which this Bill sought to restrict, were more than human nature could endure. Taking that position, he conceived it to be the duty of the House to pass some such measure as this, whatever might be the effect on wages. He should, therefore, give his hearty support to the second reading of the Bill.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. BRIGHT wished to make one observation in answer to the Hon. Member for Knaresborough (Mr. Ferrand), who had asked the House to interfere with labour on the ground that certain strikes had taken place in the north of England. He (Mr. Bright) begged to tell that Hon. Member that those strikes existed only amongst those trades which were not in any degree connected with mills or factories—(Hear, hear)—and amongst a class of workmen who never worked more than ten hours a-day— (Hear, hear)—and respecting whom there was no proposi tion before the House. With respect to the feeling between the employers and employed he should think that the Honourable Member would have recollected that with the exception ofYorkshire there had not for along period been any disagreement or ill-feeling between the cotton manufacturers and those in their employ, and that there never was a better feeling between them than at this moment. He was sure that with respect to the cotton trade there was less reason for any vindictive feeling between the manufacturers and their employed at this moment than at any period since he was acquainted or connected with it. The feeling that had ex isted between masters and men during the last two years in that trade was equally creditable to both parties con cerned.—(blear.) He was sure then,that all argument which might be based upon the statement of the Hon. Member was totally fallacious, and had no bearing whatever; upon this question, and it was rather in favour of the present state of things than the Bill at present before the House. Mr. FERRAND said the Hon. Member fer Durham would perhaps remember the strike that took place in 1841 in all the cotton manufactories in Lancashire. Mr. BRIGHT—In 1842. Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought that the present Bill had not been solely on the ground of its interference with the labour of children, and it appeared to him to raise a perfectly just principle that as they protected minors and all other persons similarly situated who could not manage their own affairs, the Legislature should interfere with infantine labour. And if, therefore, that alone was the object of the present Bill, he should think that the Bill ought to be allowed to be considered in Committee. But there were two objections to the present Bill, which seemed to him to violate every principle of klegislation upon this subject. In the first clause of the Bill night labour was prohibited, and the labourer was required to work from a certain hour in the morning to a certain hour at night. Now, if a man could earn his living by no other means than engaging to work eight or nine hours at night, ought they to legislate to pre. vent him from earning his wages in that way—( Hear, hear) ought his"means of subsistence to be endangered by a legis lative enactment.— (Hear) Were there not, in fact, cases w here they could not prevent night labour ?—were there not instances where men had no other means of subsistence except by working at night, such as the driver of a stage coach, the guard of a coach or a police-office, and various other offices of business, which were carried on at night, and which could not safely or conveniently be abolished, either for the sake of the public, or of the parties themselves.—(Hear, hear.) Another part of the Bill not only applied to the interference of children, but sanctioned the interference of private houses, and he, for one, thought the interference in the private houses, whether through the instrumentalitity of the informer or do miciliary visitations, would be an act of tyranny which it would be impossible ifor Parliament to sanction.—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable Member fur Rochdale had said he wished to interfere to prevent capital tyrannising over labour, but how could they interfere with a voluntary agree ment between a person in the possession of capital and a person whose property consisted in his labour, without inter fering with respect t. the remuneration to be received by the labourer.—(Hear, hear.) Therefore, as in his opinion the Bill contained two principles of false legislation, he must give his vote against it.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. MARK PHILLIPS advised the Hon. Member for Finsbury to withdraw his measure, and introduce another Bill confining itself to infantine labour.—(Hear, hear.) At all events he could not support the second reading of this Bill, after so many practicable difficulties to its ope rations had been pointed out by the Right Honourable Baronet at the head of the Government, and the Noble Lord the leader of the Opposition. He, would, therefore, advise the Hon. Member to withdraw his Bill, as he saw himself that it was so full of inaccuracies. If the question came to a division, he would be constrained to vote against it. Mr. BROTHERTON said, that for the last thirty years, he had ever been an advocate for the restriction of the labour of the working classes, but he considered that it was impos sible to meet the views of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, by the present Bill. They would be interfering with the hours of labour in private houses.—(Hear, hear.) It would certainly be most advisable to check the hours of labour allotted to children, but the present Bill would not effect such an object. Mr. COIVPER said that he wished his Hon. Friend would introduce another Bill, which would have for its object the sole interference with children. The principle of the Bill as far as they were concerned was sound.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said he should take the sense of the House upon the question— (Hear, hear)—the case before the House was, whether they would interfere or not in the lace manufactures, he was the representative of four-fifths of the capital employed in the lace manufactories, and he was there representing their sentiments—petitions bad been presented to the House in its favour signed by both masters and operatives. Yet this was the Bill which was met with ridicule. The principle of interference was admitted with respect to chil dren, well then, if they passed this Bill they would have an opportunity of altering those portions of the Bill which they thought proper. The House had to decide whether protection was to be given to infants of eigth years of age. He had wished to conceal nothing in his statement to the House, and should be quite satisfied if he could obtain a second reading for it. The Hon. Gentleman then read some minutes of evidence from the report of the Factory Commit tee, from which it appeared that the machines worked by hand as well as by steam power, and water could be brought under the operation of the Factory Act. He did trust that the House would allow the second reading of the Bill to take place. Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN wished to explain. He would give his vote for the second reading if in Committee he could distinctly be assured that any interference with adult labour should not boeincluded. Mr. DUNCOMBE—Most distinctly. Mr. FIELDEN would vote for the second reading of the Bill, because he thought it would be attended with advan tages to the labouring population engaged in the silk manu facture. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the amendment l5l Against 66 . . . _ Majority against the second reading ---85 ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIEF BILL. The House then went into Committee on the Roman Ca tholic Relief Bill. Sir R. INGLIS said he left the House under the impres sion that the Bill should not come on, and appealed to several Members if such were not the impression they laboured under ? Mr. LAWSON said that if such were the feelings of the Hon. Member, he would not press the Bill. The Bill was accordingly adjourned until this day three weeks. ART UNIONS BILL. This Bill was also postponed to this day fortnight. CORRESPONDING SOCIETIES. This Bill went uhrough the Committee pro forma, and was ordered to be re-committed for the purpose of considering an amendment proposed to be inserted by Mr. T. Duneombe. VISCOUNT lIARDINGE'S ANNUITY BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. LORD GOUGII'S ANNUITY BILL. This Bill was also read a third time and passed. ART UNIONS. Lord G. BENTINCK presented a petition in favour of Art Unions. THE WHITSUN HOLIDAYS. Mr. REDHEAD l ORKE wished to know from the First Lord of the Treasury to what period be was prepared to ad journ the House for the Whitsun holidays. Sir ROBERT PEEL said he did not know what business was yet fixed. In the meantime, he would have no objection to take the adjournment from Friday week till th Thursday following. METROPOLITAN IMPROVEMENTS BILL. In answer to a question from Mr. HAVES Sir J. GRAHAM said that on Friday next he would state what course the Government intended to pursue with re spect to the Metropolitan Improvements Act. THE POISONING IN NORFOLK. Mr. WAKLEY called the attention of the Right Hen. Baronet the Home Department, to the case of poisoning six members of a family in North Walsham, Norfolk. He thought it was a case which called for the interference of the Government. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that Government were pre pargati ed on. give every assistance in their power to the invee. ti to ry The House then adjourned. RAILWAY COMMITTEES. (THIS DAY.) elicited at all calculated to shake th e In the cross HOUSE OF LORDS. G 3 R fr OUP I. N .. ( e C i o L a n nl t O i i n a u a e t n d i 0 f i 7r o o N t f n u Aran c lft ub e it r t n Y o n o o O n t h it E i a E d g i t i . , o v n a a ) * evidence in chief. At the conclusion of the cross-examination for the case of th e Eastern Counti es , Mr. York TALBO T said he appeared , Whose Property wouldfor his Grace the Archbishop of Railway. be slice teal by tke London and York The cross-examination of Mr. C The line would interfere ' übitt was then proceeded with— • with divide the farm front the part of his Grace's farm ; it would residence, and garden. go dose to tke kit c h en- By Lord VIVIAN—It was not a residential deviation the line could be carried ou t interference, and by a this farm at all. without any interf e r ence with By Mr. TALBOT—The line, as it at present stood DU the plan, w ou ld i n terfere with the kitchen-garden, but not so as t o me rely touch the wall. The interference with thefarmiiure it ; it wo u ld cer tainly separate it from his Grace's residence. Had had aan interview would with his Grace upon the matter, an d he informed witness at objection to the railw a y was not as regarded him etlhr but hie as it would affe ct the p ro p ert y of his successors to, see. The line would not cut off the farm on a level. There would be an embankment of seven or eight feet. , h e distance at which they would cross from his Grace's Palace was, as shown on the plan, about 24 chains, which was more than a quarter of a mile, ' and there were walls and gardens and a turnpike road intervening. By Lord 'Viva:l—His Grace did not come tothat an deviationt for a deviation, but he (witness) pointed out how would leave the farm untouched. Mr. B,AINEs said he appeared for the Cambridge and Lincoln Ex tension, on behalf of which he would put a few questions to the witness. Mr. sergeant WBANGHADI would object to his Learned Friend fly state his reasonsMA meeting of the appearing, and the would brie shareholders in this undertaking had been held down in the country very recently, at which meeting it was decided to abandon the line. This he was able to state on the authority of one of the shareholders who had attended the meeting, and who had written to the editor of We Malting ileraki, avt Qui7 Nullillall* 4 l'OPQrt Of Pal UlOttin la that paper, but also materially adding to the fact of the number o f votes for discontinuing the scheme being more than the number re quired by Parliament. This being the case, he could not see what locus slandi his Learned Friend could lay claim to so as to appear for that which in reality did not exist. Mr. BAINES said that he certainly was not instructed to that effect. Ills instructions were that he was to appear for the promoters. Ile knew nothing of any meeting. Ile was wholly guided by his in structions. _ Mr. Sergeant WRANGHAM said he would not object to his Learned Friend proceeding under the circumstances. Mr. ILkINEs then briefly cross-examined the witness, after which he was re-examined by Mr. Sergeant WILLNGRAM. engineer, Was then called to speak to the esti mates. • Mr. Betta, the contractor, also gave evidence as to the estimate for his department of constructing the line. It being now four o'clock, Mr. DENtsox informed the Committee that there was but one more witness to examine, who would be called on the following morning, and who would only occupy a few minutes. Itwas then arranged that the landowners'ease against the London and York should be the next gone into. The Committee adjourned till eleven o'clock to-morrow. ROUSE OF COMMONS. GROUP X. GLASGOW, AIRDIZZZ, AND MONIELANDS JUNCTZON. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition.) Other witnesses were examined to the same effect, and underwent a lengthened cross -examination by the counsel for the competing 'inv. The details were too minute to b 3 fully reported. The CHAIRMAN said that the Committee did not require any fur ther evidence of parties along the line, and they would proceed to receive the engineering evidence to-morrow at twelve o'clock. Mr. limixrertn, QC., said that the promoters were prepared with further evidence of tie same kind, but if the Committee were satisfied in this respect there would be no advantage in crowding evidence. The CnAirtmaN intimated that the Committee were satisfied. It being four o'clock the Committee then adjourned. GROUP XI 11. NOR= BRITISH (citaxaszE EXTENSION) (Continued fr•m our Afternoon Edition.) Mr. Sergeant BELLasts here objected to the cross-examination on the ground that the only part of the scheme, the Caledonian could object to, was the position from Langholm to Car lisle, which would compete with their Langholm branch. Beyond this they had no locus stand', as not a single petition had been pre sented against the portion of their (the North British) line from llawick to Langholm. Had the Caledonia* intended to appear against it, they should have presented a petition. Mr. RICKARDS said it was too late to make the objection, as both the Duke of Miceknelt and Mr. Wilson had been asked similar questions yesterday. The Caledonian opposed the whole scheme, and from the position of this, as a competing project to the Cale donian, he submitted the latter had a good locus search. The Committee overruled the objection as untenable. Mr. Lang's cross-examination continued—He had been informed that the Messrs. Pickford brought goods from lA'ewcastle to London for 31. per ton. Newcastle was 60 miles distance from Ilawick. The whole distance from Hawick to London was 350 miles. At present the sailing vessels from Leith to London took five or six days to go, but the steamers went, twice a-week, in about forty eight hours. He could not say the exact quantity of foreign wool brought into Ha wick, nor the amount of timber or other building ma' erials brought from Annan. He could not say the exact amount of coal consumed at llawiek. He got the whole that he consumed from Canobie, because it was of better quality than the coals down the Tweed. At one time consi derable supplies were got from the latter quarter. He did not know much of the examination of last year, but he believed that some expectation of a supply was held out from the Lothians by the Edits burgh line. Re-examined---He believed that Carlisle was about the same dis tance from London as Newcastle. The Earl of Minto, examined by Sergeant BELLASIS, gave general evidence that he thought the railway in question of the utmost im portance to the district in giving an outlet to the southward. It was a prosperous and important district, and ought to have a communi cation to the south by railway. Ills estates did not lie on the pre sent line, hut on the northern part, sanctioned to Edinburgh. Cross-examined. —He had not o nsidered whether these schemes of railway through the south of Scotland were compatible. He had not gone into the question. Ile knew, however, of no consideration that should operate to deprive the district in question of tile natural outlet to its traffic. Mr. William Nixon, wool spinner, of Ilawick, gave similar evidence as Mr. Lang regarding the trade of the town and district. The ton nage of the slates derived from Annan last year was about 600 tons. The general merchandise to an from Hawick, in 1845, was 7,000 tons. Ile was glad last year at the railway to Edinburgh being granted, in order to get coals from the Lothians, but he considered they would be better supplied from Canobie. Cross-examined—He thought a line to the south was highly desir able. He had no hesitation, however, in saying that in comparing two lines, one to the north and another to the south, he should de cidedly prefer the one to the north. He said so last year, and he said so now. He sent about the one-half of what he spun southward, but he did not think the others in the trade sent so much. He could not exactly state the tonnage of what he sent. There was no doubt that the greater proportion of the goods went northwards. Edin burgh and Glasgow were the principal destinations. He thought goods going southwards would go by railway in preference to steam boats, as the risk was not so great. Mr. James Syme, a mauulacturer of Galashiels, examined by Mr. TALBOT—In witness's recollection the town of Galashiels increased from 700 inhabitants to about 5,000. The goods manu factured in that town was beyond a quarter of a million. It was also the centre of an important agricultural district. A great deal of the goods went south ; nearly all his went to London, but Leith was not the most desireable route. The Edinburgh line did not, in his opi nion, supersede the necessity for one to the south. He thought the best route to the south should be through Carlisle. The goods made at Galashiels were of a high priced character. At present the coals used were entirely from Mid Lothian, but he thought it desirable for the sake of competition to open up the Canobei-field to them. Cross-examined—Glasgow was the great market for the goods manufactured at Galashiels. A greater proportion of goods went to Glasgow than to the south. He had not calculated the difference, either in time or distance, between Galashiels and London, by way of Berwick or Leith, and the route through Carlisle. There would he communication by railway with Edinburgh and Berwick, but, when that was completed, he could not say what the expense would be in those directions, and thence by steam to London, compared with the railway to the south. He could not speak as to the quantity of goods consumed annually in Galashiels. He could not say what the con sumption of coals was at Galashiels. Mr. Locke, of Regent-street, London, deposed that he carried on a large trade in Scotch goods, a great portion of which came frona Ga lashiels and Hawick. He considered it of the greatest importance to get the fancy goods as soon as possible into the market. He thought this would be facilitated in a great degree by a continuous line of railway. Cross-examined.—There was no other one in London so extensive in this Scotch line as himself. He dealt principally in fancy goods. Supposing the railway completed from Galashiels and Hawick to Leith, the present delays would be much reduced. The delay even then would be injurious to the trade, on account of the time taken by the steamers. The fancy trade was greater at Galashiels, and Selkirk, than at Hawick. If the railway communi cation to Berwick, and from thence to London, was completed, the delay in point of time would in a great measure he put an end to. Mr. Turnbull, miller of Melrose, examined—He carried on an ex tensive trade in grain and flour, a great portion of which went into Dumfriesshire and Cumberland. A good deal of barley went for the purposes of distilling at Longholm and other parts in that direction. His annual export business in tons was in 1841, 1,181 tons; and in 1844, 1,080 tons. Ho believed the amount of grain and meal that went past Moss Paul, a point between Hawick and Langholm, was 3,325. A good deal of grain likewise went by Liddesdale to the south. The present expense of grain from Hawick to Langholm was about Bs. a ton. Cross-examined—About one-third of the grain of Roxburghshire went westward, one-third to Dalkeith, and the remainder eastward. He knew nothing about the Dalkeith market. Kelso was the great market for the county. As the greater portion of his own trade went to Dumfriesshire—he was strongly interested in the present railway. He could not say what proportion of grain the other millers in the district sent towards Dumfriesshire. The Committee then adjourned till to-morrow at twelve o'clock. GROUP Lt, LONDON, HOUNSLOW, AND WESTERN. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition.) Mr. Chapman market-gardener of Isle wor th, gave ev id en ce to the large traffic in vegetables between that locality and the London markets. _ _ _ Mr. Hammond, also of Isleworth, deposed as to the large amount of traffic. The other witnesses examined were Mr. Grainger, of Brentford, and Mr. H. Stanbury, whose evidence was generally as to the large traffic in goods and passengers, and the necessity there existed for the present line of railway. . _ The Committee adjourned at four o'clock till to-morrow at twelve. GROUP XXII. WAVENEY VALLEY. _ . The Committee met this morning. Sir G. Grey, chairman. Mr. Sergeant Muarwr opened the ease for the promoters of this railway. The Committee intimated their opinion, that they would hear the evidence of this line previous to giving their decision on the case of Ipswich, Norwich, and Yarmouth Railway. The present line pro posed to commence at Yarmouth, and proceed on to Diss. Mr. Rumbold, M.P. for Yarmouth, was the first witness called, who stated that there was a general feeling in Yarmouth in favour of the line. Mr. Tilenherrish, chairman of the Beecles sessions, also gave simi lar evidence. Mr. Dare and Lieut..COlonel Smith also gave evidence favourable to the Waveney Valley Railway. Mr. J. Davy, accountant, Yarmouth, gave evidence of the large amount of goods landed at Yarmouth. A greater proportion of Passengers now went to London by sea. He believed that this cir cumstance was owing to the great number of accidents which had become so peculiarly the property of the existing Eastern Counties line between Norwich and London. Mr. Lincoln, a fish merchant of Yarmouth, stated that by the pre sent mode of conveyance on the Norwich and Eastern Counties Rail way, it took longer to get his fish up to London than it formerly did by his own vans. It took very nearly the whole of the day to get his fish delivered by the railway. The Committee then adjourned till twelve to-morrow. GROUP XXVI. SOUTH ESS MX. This Committee resumed this morning; Mr. O'Connell in the chair. They were occupied during the whole of the early part of the day in hearing evidence given by residents between the Eastern Counties line and the river Thames, who testified to the number of cattle sent to London from that quarter, as also to the quantity of chalk con veyed by water to Battersea. The farmers complained chiefly of the want of accommodation at the Shoreditch station, and the pro prietors of the chalk showed that their article is sent from the pits to Battersea for Is. 9d. a ton, while by the railway it cost 55., exclusive of cartage to the line. Mr. Locke, the engineer, was then called by Mr. CocKßuitN, Q.C., to show the course and qualities of the line. According to his evi dence, the line is to run a distance of 43 miles, from its junction with the Blackwell extension line, to Wallasey Island, and to be connected with a pier and harbour on the coast, where it wends from the mouth of the Thames, to the north, having branches to Tilbury, opposite Gravesend and to moutnend. The country is a rich agricultural district, and offers not the slightest engineering difficulty. The proposed line would bring Tilbury a mile and a half nearer to Fenchurch-street than the North Gravesend line. The proposition of the company for the latter line for a junction with the Blackwell terminus was impracticable, as it could only be carried out through the West India Docks, which of course was absurd. The distance to Southend by the South Essex line would be 38 1 A miles. In his opinion the North Gravesend Rail way was an unwise proposition, as the line would Lave to contend with the cheap passenger traffic on the river, and with the North Kent line, which had just been sanctioned by Parliament, and was to run from Greenwich to Gravesend. Part of the line to Wallasey Island would be under high water mark • but;that was no objection, fo r suc h Was the case with the whole of H o lland, and there are already good sea embankments. After the conclusion of Mr. Loeke's evidence, the Committee ad journed till to-morrow. . GROUP XXXII. The Committee met this morning at 12 o'clock ; Mr. J. E. De nison in tho chair. CRELTENHAws AND OXFORD RAILWAY. Mr. Thomas Sheldon gave evidence pf the advantage which would accrue to Cheltenham by the projected line, and went at length into details of some opposition meetings held by a party of the townspeople of ,ftelteham, and read some proposals tendered by the company to secure the people against any injury,which property or wells might sustain. He stated that the most of the property passed through by the line in the town of Cheltenham was very inferior. He was confirmed by Messrs. Bubb and Peekwood, Dr. Gibney, a physician in Cheltenham, who had been connected with the town hospital for twenty years, said ho himself had proposed by letter in the newspapers, in 1837, a line to London very similar to that now before the Committee. The proposed line passed the hospital, but at the very end of the garden, so that it would be about forty yards further from it than was the high street. Col. Watson, who has property in ornamental parts of the town, thought that these parts would sustain no injury from the railway, as it passes by a deep cutting covered over. lie had been among the first to suggest the objection to the line from the damage it was like to cause by the drainage of the wells, but he was now satisfied, alter much inquiry, that the objection was unfounded. Mr. Gardiner, lord of the manor of Cheltenham, and possessed of very much valuable p roperty in High-street and Pittville, a com missioner also on the various public works of Cheltenham, gave evidence in favour of the line. Mr. Thomas Wright, one of the surgeons of the town hospital, and who had given much attention to the geology of Chel tenham, said the town was supplied with waterr,:which flows from the Cobeswood hills on the north side of the town down into the sand on which the town is built, and that the sand, reposing in a basin of lias, acts as a sponge, and retains the water. Ile did not believe that the cutting of the line would affect this water, since, if the sides of the cuttings were built up, the water retarded thereby would rise to an adequate level to supply the town. - The Committee adjourned tin twelve o'clock to-morrow. GROUP LIV. (Continued from our Afternoon Xdition.) MIDLAND (11317ETON-0152"-TRENT TO NUN- EATON AND ISRANCHES). Mr. Hildyard appeared in support of the ?Sill , and Mr. Sergeant Allen on the part o f the Coventry Canal Company, petitioners against the:Bill. HILDTARD Bald that he would endeavour to be as brief 0.1 pCligble. 'Da prolont ragyfay might be conaidtr9d as a 'ENING, MAY 20, 1816. line to bo constructed from the Moira Collieries to Nun eaton. They proposed by this railway to afford the same communication to the south that had already been afforded to the cast and west in the locale of the line by the preceding Bill. It would join the London and Birmingham Railway, and open a communication thence to the mineral wealth of the district through which • they would pass. The present mode of transit by canal was thirty-nine miles, but by their railway it would be only 28 miles. The distance in this case was not c, r thinly diminished to the extent that it was in other instances ; but a saving of 11 miles in the communication with a mineral district was still a matter of no insignificant character. By the present mode of communication by canal, Leamington was 80 miles from the Moira Collieries ; but the proposed railway would diminish the distance to 32 miles, thereby effecting a saving of no less than 48 miles. Ile would take :mother town, namely, Banbury, which was the centre of a most important rand district, and required a much more bountiful supply of coals, and at a cheaper rate than it at present possessed. A saving of 55 miles from the Moira Collieries to this town would be effected by the proposed line. The distance to Aylesbury from the same point would he reduced to 42 miles. To Leighton Buzzard there would be a saving from these collieries of 40 miles, the distance by canal being 113 miles, while by railway it would be only 73 miles. There were a great many other places which would receive similar advantages from this railway, but he would not occupy the time of the Com mittee by even enumerating them—such being the benefits that would result from the construction of this railway and the pro , posed amalgamation with the Ashby-de-la-Zouch canal, as far as the • mineral wealth contained in that district was concerned. There were certainly objections offered to this scheme. In the first place, it was alleged that the proposed amalgamation of the Ashby-de-la- Zcatch canal would operate injuriously on certain interests. But as he had already shown th:,t, the direction of that canal was through a highly important district, he trusted that the principle laid down as related to those amalgamations would in fluence the Committee, and that they would consider the objections urged upon this ground valneless. There wore also objections on the part of the landowners, and certainly Lord Howe had a perfect right to petition against this line, but the Committee would perceive that the advantages which this line held forth were such as to overpower objections purely private. In conclusion, he had to state that he would not trouble-the Committee with any detailed evidence as to the mineral traffic on this line. Mr. J. Manors, agent to the Marquis of Hastings, was examined by Mr. MAcetiLEY, to show that the distance at present from several places on the line, owing to the mode of transit by canal from the Moria Collieries, diminished the demand for coals from that district. The Committee adjourned at four o'clock till to•morrow, when the hearing of the evidence on the part of the Bill will be resumed. GROUP LV. MANCHESTER., sizErriELD, AND min- LAND JUNCTION. The Committee. (Mr. Shaw in the chair) resumed thls morning at twelve o'clock, when Mr. Fowler, engineer of the Sheffield and Lincolnshire Junction line, was called by Mr. WHATELEY, Q.C.—Me stated that, according to his estimate, the line proposed by Mr. Vignoles was exceedingly bad, the gradients severe, and the cost of it would be 113,0001., and a great difficulty would be experienced in the accumulation of water at Dronfleld during wet weather. This difficulty could only be obviated by a sort of zigzag line over the brook there." To the cross-examination of Mr. ADAMS, the witness stated that he bad been in practice eight years, and had constructed the Stockton and Darlington Railway and the Clarence Railway. Ills opinion was that the earthworks on the line of the present promoters would be immense, and the gradients worse than on any other line with which he was acquainted. He had taken the average of eight of the prin cipal lines in the kingdom, and found that the average of their returns gave 62/. per mile per week. The Great Western, which showed the highest rate, returned 811. per mile.; and the Newcastle end Shields line, which showed the lowest, made 281. per mile; the Midland Counties line returned 62/. per mile—just the average—while it would require 1251. per mile on the proposed Sheffield and Chester field line to obtain the seven per cent. dividend which the promoters anticipated. The line would pass through or over no less than 39 streets in the town of Sheffield, and the station in the town itself would be 18 feet above the level of the street. The ground to be oc cupied is all building ground. The Sheffield and Ilakewell line had also bad tunnels and very severe gradients, gradients much more se vere than those of the East Lincolnshire line. Mr. Locke, the engineer, was called to show that the means of communication between the Sheffield and Manchester line and this line would be highly inconvenient. Mr. Harrison, for thirty years a valuer at Sheffield, stated that he had valued the property in the town of Sheffield, and estimated it at more than 850,000/. Ile further said that it would destroy more them -170 houses, including public-houses and taverns, 77 wordshops, and 27 manufactories. The line, however, passed through the worst part of the town.: Mr. Fowler, sen., had valued all the rest of the line, and estimated to the junction beyond Cheeterdeld at something more than 59,000/., and on to Bakewell at a total of 85,000/. Mr. WIIATELEY then addressed the Committee on the general merits of the case referring to the defeat of the Bill last year, and deprecating the supposition that the Duke of Norfolk's opposition was induced by any merely personal motives. On the conclusion of Mr. WHATELEY'S address, the Committee took the next opposing line. The Cruirotart explained that the statements had not been given in, as they ought to have been, two days before the Committee sat. NICANCIIBSTER AND NYDE. Mr. WORDSWOIIIII opened the case of the promoters by stating that this was a line between the two places of six miles in length. In 1821 the population through which the line passed was: 13,000, in 1841 it was over 27,000, comprising largo manufacturers of cotton and hats. The contemplated expense was 150,0001. one half of which was provided by the residents locally interested in the line, and the other half by the Manchester and Birmingham Company, confessedly the persons who were the best judges of the necessities for the lin9. The opposition offered this line was but small, and chiefly offered by the proprietor of Bellevue Gardens, a place of resort for pleasure by the inhabitants of Manchester. Some, however, of the residents in that neighbourhood were anxious for the destruction of these gardens, though that was not the oject of the promoters, who were quite desirous of giving every recompense to the present holder. 'the whole of this district was occupied by extensive manufacturers of cotton and hats. There is still further a large coal field at Denton, the proprietor of which, the Earl of Wilton, was a petitioner in favour of the Bill. This coal would be exceedingly useful, and was indeed now much used in the factories in Manchester. The Learned Counsel then stated the opposition of the several newly pro posed lines. Mr. Id empson, land-steward to the Earl of Wilton, was called to show the existence of coal, and the inclination which his Lordship felt for this line. The manufacture of hats at Denton had much declined of late, from the great substitution of silk hats, but the people are anxious to enter upon the manufacture of cotton, for which the place was well adapted, and which was likely to succeed if the facilities of railway communication were obtained. The Committee then adjourned till to-morrow. GROUP LVI. The Committee met pursuant to adjournment at twelve o'clock this morning, when Mr. Ewart took the chair ; the same Members being present as yesterday . They proceeded with the case of the LONDON AND CROYDON (THAMES JUNC— TION ZULANCH). And the cross-examination of Mr. Cubitt by Mr. FLUND, on the part of the Surrey Canal Company, occupied them for a considerable time. This line crosses the canal, and it is on account of the injury that will'thereby be done to the Company that they petition. The Bermondsey, Rotherhithe, and Deptford Road Trustees also petitioned against the Bill, and the witness was cross-examined by Mr PowEa on their behalf. Mr. Gibson, the lessee of the Dudmans Docks, which will be one of the termini of the proposed line was then called. He preyed that he had agreed to transfer his lease (for 99 years) to the London and ,Croydon Railway. The rent they were to pay was 1,5001. per annum, but if they bought it, they were to pay 9,000/. for it. Cross-examined by Mr. POWER—Ho himself was to pay 1,0001. per annum as rent, to Mr. Evlyn, the proprietor, so that he would have 5001. per annum profit. The case for the promoters being now concluded, Mr. rowEit addressed the Committee at great length as to the mischief that would be done by the crossing of the line over Grove lane, which he represented to he a very important and much fre quented thoroughfare. This street is to be crossed on a level, and about twenty trains per diem will pass over it. There will be twelve carriages in each train, and the thoroughfare will be stopped each time for about four minutes. Several witnesses were called to prove the importance of the thoroughfare, and the mischief that would result from the stoppage of the thoroughfare. It was stated that the omce of the Victualling Department was with within a few yards of the crossing. The examination of these witnesses occupied the Committee up to four o'clock, at which time the Committee adjourned till to-morrow at twelve. The case on the part of the Surrey Canal Company will then be commenced. RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS. MANCHESTER, MAT 19. STOCK EXCHANGE.—Tho sales are—Ambergate, Nottingham, and Eastern Junction, % dis.—Birkenhead, Lancashire, and Cheshire Junction, I% s p.—Blackburn, Clithcroe, &c., 1 dis.—Blackburn ' Dar wen, and Bolton, % dis.—Borten , Newark, and Sheffield, % dis.— Chelmsford and Bury, 16s. Gd. c. dis.—Derby and Crewe, 314 p. Eastern Counties, York Extension, 114 p.—East Lancashire, No. 2, 3% p.—East Lincolnshire, dis.—Glasgow and Dumfries, %C. dis. —Goole, Doncaster, Sheffield, &c., 1 4 p.—Grand Union, % dis.— Lancashire North Yorkshire, 5-16 dis.—Leicester and Bedford, 14 c. p.—Liverpool and Bury, 9 1 % p.—Ditto, New Shares, 2 p.—Liverpool, I'reston, Manchester, and Southport, par—London and York, 1Q c. dis.—Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland, 1 5-16 p.—Man cheater and Birmingham, 80A—Ditto, Quarters (A), 8 15-16 p.— Ditto (B), p.—Ditto (C), 7s— Manchester and Birmingham Con tinuation and Welsh Junction, 16s. 96. dis.—Manchester and Bury Atmospheric, 9s. c. dis.—Manchester and Southampton, par— Northumberland and Lancashire, 20s. c. dis.—North British, Carlisle Branch, 1 1 4 p.—North Staffordshire, 4 1-16 p.—Nottingliam and Mansfield, 14 dis.—Oldham District, Bs. 6d. p.—Sheffield and Lin colnshire Junction, 6s. p.—Sheffield and Manchester, Quarters, No. 3, % c. p.—South Midland, 1 1 4 p.—South-Eastern and Dover, Halves, No. 4,9 s. 3d. p.—Trent Valley Continuation, &e., 19s. dis.— Trent Valley Midland, &c., sir c. dis.—Welsh Midland, 1 1 4 dis.— West Lancashire Coast, 10s. c. dis. —West Riding Union, 2% p.— Whitehaven and Furness, 2% dis.—York and Carlisle, 1 1 4 dig. HUDDERSFIELD, MAT 19. STOCK ExcnANni.—The salei are—ambergate, Nottingham, and Boston, 13s. dis.—Clitheroe Junction, 13s. dis.—Great Grimsby, Quarters, 611. dls.—lluadersfield, Halifax, , and Bradford Union, 41. B s. 6d.—Lanettshire, Yorkshire, and North Eastern, 28s. dis.—Leeds and York, 21. 88.--London, Salisbury, and Yeovil, 305.—Manchester, Huddersfield, and Great Grimsby, 22,x.—South Midlands, 265. Gd• p. NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, MAY 19. STOCK EKCHANGE.—The sales aie—Eastern Counties, York Ex tension, 275. 6d p.—Lancashire and North Yorkshire, Gs. 6d. dis.-- Leicester and Bedford, 4 p.—North British, Halves (llawick), 4 p. —North Staffordshire, 4y, p.—Newcastle and Darlington Exten sions, 9 p. — Northumberland and Lancashire, 1 dis.—South Midland, 134—West Riding Union, 3% p. HULL,AI9. STOCK EXCHANGE. —The s.les are- York and North Midland, East and West Riding, 11 F R —Blackburn, Darwen, and Bolton, 7 Leeds and Dewsbury, 14 3 4—North British, Carlisle Branch, 495. Gd. —Armagh, Coleraine, and Portrush, I2s. Gd.—Buckinghamshire, 2/. 9s.—Derby, and Gainsborough, 145.--East Coast, 18s.—Goole, Doncaster, Sheffield, &c., 2/. 9s. 6d.—Grimsby, Louth, and Horn castle, 22s.—Hull and Barnsley Junction, 265. --Leeds, Wakefield, and Midland, 37s.—Leicester and Bedford, 255. 6d.—London and York, 2% Maiton and Drlffield Junction, 42s.—Manchester, Bux ton, and Matlock, 3 1 / 2 —North Staffordshire, 6/. 7s.—South Midland, 31. M.—West Riding Union, 5. SHEFFIELD, MAY 19. STOCK EXCHANOE.—The sales are—Grimsby and Sheffield, 314 dls.—Ditto, Qukrter Snares, Is. diS.—.North British, 8 p.—East Lincolnshire, 2s. Gd. dis.—Leeds, Wakefield, and Midland, Is. dis.— Manchester, Sheffield, and Midland Junction, 2 dis.—Manchester and Lincoln Union and Canal, 13s. Gd. dis. —North Western, 11 3. p. —Sheffield and Lincolnshire, 7s. 6d. p.—Sheilleld, Buxton, Leek, Potteries, and ~Crewe, 133. dis.—South Yorkshire Coal Railway Is. Gel. die. YORK, MAT 19. STOCK EICTIANGE.—The sales ale—lpswich and Bury, 6—Ditto, Extension (Norwich), 11. 14s.—Leicester and Bedford, 11. 3s.—Lon don and York, 21. 13s.—Malton and Drifileld Junction, 21. 4s. 6d. —Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland, 31. 14s.—Newcastle and Berwick, 25%—Neweastle and Darlington (Brandling), 44% North British, Carlisle Extension, 2!i —North Staffordshire, 61. 9s. 64.—North Western, 1/. 11s.—West Riding Union, b—York and North Midland, New (East and West Riding), 11%. EDINBURGH, Max' 16. STOCK ExcitAisaz.—The sales are—Aberdeen, Banff, and Elgin, 28s.—Airdrie and Bathgate, 535. 6 d.—Caledonian, 33s.—Direct Northern, 38s. —Edinburgh and Leith Atmospheric, 203.—Edinburgh and Northern, 61. 3s.—Ditto, Locbgelly, 23s.—Forth and Clyde Junction, 35s. —Glasgow and Dundee Junction, 34s.—Inverness and Elgin, 21s.—Lanark and Lothians, 445. —North British. Extension to Carlisle, 50s.—Perth and Inverness, 333.—Scottish Central, 161. 531. —South Midland, 725. 6d. GLASGOW, MAY 18. _ _ STOCK ExcnarroE.-The sales are-Aberdeen, U.-Airdrie and Bathgate, 555.-Arbroath and Forfar, 26% -Bridge of Weir, 445. Gd. -Caledonian Extension, 335.-Caledonian and Dumbartonshire Ex tension, 31s. 6d.-Caledonian Direct Northern, 335.- Carnwath and West Linton, 228.-East Indian Railway, 165. 9d.-Edinburgh and Northern, 6%-Forth and Clyde Junction, 345.-Glasgow General Terminus, 91. 198.-Glasgow and Belfast Union, 415.-Glasgow, Kil marnock, and Ayr, 741.-Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle, 395.- Glasgow and Greenock, 171.-Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ardrossan, 375. 6d.-Great Indian Peninsular, Bs.-Great North of India, ss. 6d. -Inverness and Elgin, 205.-Lanark and Lothians, 435.-Larne, Belfast, and Ballymena, 155.-Lesmahagow, 475. 6d.-London, Bris tol, and South Wales, 185.-Manchester and Southampton, 425. Gd. -Perth and Inverness, 325.-Scottish Central, New, 7 1 ,4 -Scottish Central and Caledonian Junction, 305.-South Midland, 618. 6d. TO TILL EDITOR OF THE SUN. DEAr. Sirt,—l will feel greatly obliged if you will please to insert in your valuable paper the following :—I was a pas senger in the Boulogne boat to London of last Sunday, and I am happy to say that when I went on Monday fur my lug gage I never met with such politeness, nor such gentleman like officers as those employed at the Customs' luggage room. It would be a great credit to my country if they had such gentlemen employed, as they boast it is the country of politeness ; travellers would suppose they arrive dans un pays de barbare when they land at Boulogne, or any French port. I hope, Sir, you will find I have not intruded. May 18, 1846. A FRENCHMAN RECENT A RRIVALS AT BATH.—Lady Carew and Miss Carew, Hon. Grantley Berkeley, M.P., Sir William Whymper, Sir John Duntz, Baron de Roebeck, Major and Mrs. Anderson, Dr. Stewart, Dr. Garrett Dillon, Dr. and Mrs. Brent, Rev. Mr. and Mrs. Reeve, Rev. J. W. Middleton, Rev. Mr. Coates, the Countess of Mount Edgcumbo and family, Admiral Aylmer, Major Makepeace, Captain and Mrs. Sands, Captain Sands, Rev. Dr. Jackson, Mr. and Mrs. Phippen Phillips, Colonel Barlow, Captain and Mrs. Evered, Whish, Davis, and Chamberlain; Captain and Mr s . r anter, Aev. 111r,13rowne,eic. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, .31(ty 19. CORN-LAWS. Earl DIXIE presented a petition in favour of the repeal of the corn-laws from the town of Southampton. CUSTOMS' DUTIES BILL. Messengers from the Commons brought up this Bill. The Duke of BUCCLE UCH moved the first reading of the Bill. The Duke of RICHMOND said he could not even allow the Bill to bo read a first time—(Cheers and laughter)—without expressing his opinion that it was adding positively insult to in jury, because they were called upon to consider two Bills taking away protection to the agricultural interest ; and he must say that as far as he was concerned, it was a very unusual course, and extremely hard to the agricultural interest, for those Bills to be brought into that House before the others had been read a second time in the House of Commons. He considered that the provision for lending money for the improvement of land would be of some service, but he thought it was as bad a Bill as it was possible to conceive, because it was inconsistent, by only Applying the principle of free trade to some articles and not to others. There was no reduction on their cottons from India, for instance. The duties on some manufactures were to be reduced, but there was not free trade altogether. He saw no reduction in the Bill of the duty un cotton from India. Pre was opposed to free-trade altogether, yet if a scheme of this kind was to be proposed, it ought to be con sistent, which the present - Bill was not. It was his im pression that this measure would be of great injury to the working population of this country; especially would it operate injuriously to the silk weavers. Let the measure pass, and Spitalfields would become a mass of pauperism. There were other points in the Bill that were equally obnoxious. The Government talked of free-trade, but they did not carry it out. There was nothing said in the measure against dif ferential duties. In regard to the Canadas, why should they not he allowed to buy in the cheapest market ? If that were conceded, they would go entirely into the American market. Already bad the Americans beat this country out of the South American ports, and they were likely in a short time to lose the Chinese market. lie was justified in this view of the cotton trade by the evidence of Mr. Gregg, a free trader. He (the Duke of Richmond) must protest against this, and the other Bill brought under the consideration of their Lord ships. He considered they ought not to have been pushed for ward without at the same time proceeding with the other measures of the Government. Lord MONTEAGLE considered that the best course would be to wait until they had the Bill in their hands. Nor did he think the'speech of the Noble Lord was very conclu sive, for adopting the principle of free •trade in agriculture would not necessarily induce its adoption in manufacture; but this would be matter for future discussion. The only question they had to consider was, how they could get their money with the least inconvenience to all parties. His Noble friend, on the cross-bench, spoke of certain duties which were still preserved. He did not know how those duties then stood, but he did agree with his Noble Friend in the doctrine, that the existence of those duties told necessarily be a depar ture from the principle of the tariff. Lord BEAUMONT said that he considered the course taken by his Noble Friend as perfectly consistent with, and in conformity with his expressed opinion; and he had been at tending to what had fallen from his Noble Friend, who stated the case in the following manner. His Noble Friend said, that they had a Bill now before them, which had been read a first time, and which Bill overturned the principle of protec tion. He objected to the principle of the Bill, for its adop tion must be in direct opposition to protection. The House should consider carefully the new Bill, which came to them on a totally different principle, and should take the Corn Bill into consideration first, and afterwards the present measure, which merely embraced the question of revenue duties. If his Noble Friend would act in any way consistently with Isis principles, he would draw the distinction between the Bills, and take the one into careful consideration before at all enter ing into the discussion of the other. But let him put what ever interpretation he might upon free-trade, the country had but one interpretation for it, and that was the interpretation put upon it by the League—namely, to consider free-trade as the absence of all taxation. The custom-house would not long survive the bonding warehouse, if the impression was generally to gain ground that free-trade and freedom from taxation were synonymous terms. They were even running the risk of as similating in people's minds duties that were for protection and duties for revenue ; and let them take care that the sus toms' duties were not the next point assailed, and eventually annihilated. Lord BROUGHAM thought it of no use to bring on a discussion on the question at present. He rose merely for the purpose of protesting against the doctrine laid down by the Noble Lord, that because he supported the principles of free trade, he must necessarily be committed to the removal of all duties which were imposed for revenue. The duties on corn could not, however, be considered in that category. Earl GREY thought it very inconvenient that any discussion should take place on the Bill at present. For his own part, he had to express his thanks to her Majesty's Government for having introduced such a measure; and instead of complaining of their having done so much, he was desirous they should have done more. He wasof opinion that it could not be called a free trade measure. He only took it as an instalment of free-trade. He (Ear Grey) had not changed his views upon the subject since the time he first came into Parliament, and he was now, and ever had been, opposed to all prot e ction, and all duties which were not levied for the purposes of protec tion. The country, he was glad to see, was hourly approaching to a state of free trade, and he for one felt that it would be the brightest day that had ever dawned upon this country, when it opened its ports to every nation in the world. Lord ASHBURTON was surprised at the suelslemvianner in which this new free trade light had dawned upon the Ministry. These measures would be followed either by good or evil, but whether by the one or the other, no one could doubt that this was a subject which called for the utmost attention at their hands.--(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord who had last sat dawn had spoken with the straightforwardness which so pecu liarly characterised him. He did not, like the Noble Lord who addressed the House at an 'earlier period,' view the question as one for protection, or for revenue, and just as it suited his pur poses, he took up the one or the other.--( Hear, hear, and laughter.) The Noble Earl had thrown this shuffling aside, and he argued upon the broad principle of free-trade in every thing.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Earl desired no restriction either for the parent country or for the colonies. But if that were the system on which they were to legislate, of what use, he would ask, were their colonies at all 2—(Hear, hear.) The Germans had their Zolvere in, the French had their restric tions, and what would repay them for their risks of war, and the other risks which they incurred in maintaining their ado tries if these colonies were not to have a preference in their markets. Her Majesty's subjects in the colonies viewed these questions in a purely,mercantile light, and they asked themselves what advantages they gained by their connexion with this coun try. The people of Manchester said that the whole manufacturing interests in the country were in favour of the system of free trade, but the people of Macclesfield, who were engaged in the silk trade, did not seem to fall into that view of the question. The people of Manchester did not apprehend any fear, because they could supply their cottons cheaper than they could be _got elsewhere. They were something like the people of New • castle with regard to coal. Who ever heard of their sending from Newcastle for that article? He did not believe the com pensation proposed was at all equal to the injury that would be inflicted on the landed interests by the measure of the Govern ment._..( Hear, hear.) Lord MONTEAGLE said, that in the distinction he made he followed the example of all great writers on the subject of revenue, namely, the distinction between duties levied for the sake of revenue, and those which were levied for the sake of protection. The Earl of DALHOUSIE objected to anything like a discussion being taken on the Bill in its present stage. He could not let the present occasion pass without stating that argtiment on the part of the Government had been avoided solely upon the ground of the present stages o f the Bill. When the proper thego tied of the time came he country, wo their Lordshipsuld be able to st at e the reasons why, for should allow the Bill so pass into a law. althoughe io r n ed, w t a li s at unusual, th t e h i e r course pursue The Duke at* oßniVileMp?eleDnt considered, must recollect that the Government in changing their opinion had also acted in a very unusual :manner. He could not let the present moment pass without entering his solemn protest against the measure. ul f R A 01l produced o U hdo S up l ece E dd rose tf o t tr o he e e xt papersiltel ai s t e t . be owhichsecond ro h ad all ng bee o n f mo Ll v 'o e hr c e l d f EA or aSrl w ilo o l3f u the Corn Bill was proposed. Earl DALHOUSIE would take care that the papers should be ready if possible. The Earl of HADDINGTON thought the Noble Duke on the cross benches had a right, with every other Peer, to pro test against the Bill. Ile would not, like a Noble Lord, start a number of hares, each of which it would take a consider able time to run down. He would, however, refer to one circumstance. The Noble Duke had stated that it was an in sult to their Lordships, because the Corn Bill was sent up from the other House unaccompanied with the other measures of relief proposed to be brought forward in connexion with that Bill. The blame of this did not rest with the Govern ment—the blame rested with those Members of the other House who had delayed the passing of the Bill in an almost unprecedented manner. The Bill was then read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Thursday, the 28th instant. WESTERN AUSTRALIA BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. OFFENCES IN IRELAND. The Marquis of NORMANBY said he had been requested to postpone the motion of which he had given notice. The motion was for a return of the murders, and attempts at murder, committed in Ireland in each month since the Ist of January last, distinguishing the hour of the day or night at which such outrages were stated in the constabulary report to have been committed. He was willing to postpone it, but he hoped an opportunity would be given to him, on Friday, to move for the return, when he proposed to comment upon the conduct of the Government with respect to a Bill which had lately passed their Lordships' House, but which, he was glad to say, had yet made no progress in the other House of Par liament. He named Friday, because he believed Thursday, being Ascension-day, their Lordships would not sit, and he was desirous of going into the discussion before they got in volved in the Corn Bill.—( Hear, hear.) The motion was accordingly postponed till Friday. INSOLVENT DEBTORS BILL. This Bill went through Committee, and was ordered to be reported on Friday. Their Lordships then adjourned till Friday. HOUSE OF GOA" — FREE CHURCH OF CO S L ID . 19 . Mr. FOX MAULE presente o f Scotland, praying the d 115 petitions, signed by 14,000 persons, fr o m various House to adopt some me asures tain sites on which to build places of worship. Mr. P. M. STEWART also partsto p en able the petitioners to oh resented petitions of a similar ° S V nature. th en rose c t o o ng m re o g v a e tin f r o i r s l i e n ay s e co t t o la i n n d tro tt obtain sites for building then enter into any s t a t ements with dn A ce lr a . F B O ill X enableti:lU i A i i di ChristiannEg places of worship, manses, and school houses. to H theweouldnot Bill. Not seeing either the Lord-Advocate o referencerthe fright lion. Baronet the Secretary of St ate for the te Home Department in their places, notwithstanding that th ey were aware of hisintention to introduce the Bill to-night, he conc i v i e d, that they had no objection ._to :the ,introduction of the Bill. Sir R. H. INGLIS wished to know what the Hon. Member meant by the term religious congregations? The object of the proposed Bill was to give to certain persons, describing them selves as Christian congregatio ns , th e power to take a certain portion of their neighbours' property—it was to enable Chris tian congregations to take their neighbours' property at fixed prices, and before he gave any such power, he would like to have some further statement respecting it. Mr. FOX MAULE said that he was perfectly ready to go into a full statement of his grounds for proposing this Bill. But if the Government officers were willing to concede to him leave to bring in the Bill, he would reserve the discussion upon its principles till a future occasion ; he was perfectly willing to abide by any proposition of the Government with reference to this measure. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said he had the most grave objec tions to the principles of the Bill, and be did not anticipate that any exposition of those principles by his Hon. Friend on any future occasion would be able to remove those objections. After what had been said in that House, in the course of a dis. cussion on the subject of the Free Church of Scotland, he did not feel himself authorised in making any agreement on the part of the Government with his Hon. Friend. He had, komar, no adeCti9ll to tho Bill Wog road a Ant time. The Bill was then read a first time, and the second readiui was appointed for Friday next. CUSTOMS' DUTIES BILL. On the question being put that this Bill be read a third time r s Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN rose to ask a question of the , Government with reference to agricultural statistics. During the present Parliament, said the Hon. Member, he believed'. in the year 1844, the question of agricultural statistics was brought before the House by the Hon. Member for blanchess ter, who was supported by the Hon. Member for North Lincoln, than whom perhaps a more experienced agriealturist did not occupy a seat in that House. The Hon. Membor for Manchester consented to withdraw his motion on the understand big that her Majesty's Government would take some steps eo ob tain an alteraTien in the mode of obtaining those statistics. He believed that it was understood that the Government of that day were unfavourable to the course which the Hon. • Member for Manchester proposed to pursue. But still there was an impression prevailing that they would take the matter into consideration, and under the difficulty that Hon. Member was allowed to withdraw his motion. He tried an experiment to get from the several counties information respecting the actual facts of the case, but received the answers from only 27 of them. It would be recollected that Sir John Sinclair, who was some years since at the head of the Board of Agricul ture, had endeavoured to obtain the same information also for the Government. Sir John Sinclair prided himself on the knowledge of the counties of Scotland, and had furnished in formation to the Beard of Trade on these points. He did not mean to say that the Board of Trade were in a condition to act at that time, but this much he would say, that when the ques tion had been proposed of a change in our system, that the clergy had expressed a readiness to acquiesce - in the change, at the time this change was most a dvisable, and not as now, when it was likely to prove most disadvantageous. He trusted, therefore, that this House would not consider that the agriculturists had no inten tion to secure a protection for themselves. Looking at these things, he felt himself not only called upon to express his regret, but also to say that he felt he had a right to complain that the Government had not taken up this subject. He believed that when these discussions were originally before the House they might have obtained the information which would have been of essential service. He believed that he and those with with whom he acteo' had made out a strong case, and that this was not the time for legislation. Instead of taking the subject at the best stage' they had taken it up at the worst, and the clergy and the AO'!" culturists expressed alarm at the changes now conternplatesl. He would say, that if the farmers of this country weep e e lf aware, or in any way acquainted with the great value and im portance of such statistics, they would have taken care to have demanded them of the Government with so much perso verance that care would be taken always to have them ready- He would say that, since the year 1770, when se great a chatoge took place in the value of agricultural produce, a greater bo via could not be conferred on the agriculturists of this courstry- The reason why he had brought forward this measure now in its present form was to prevent the passibility of having technical difficulties and objections thrown in its way. But there was another reason, and a more important one, which in duced him to bring this Bill forward; and when he stated it, he was not without the hope it would be deemed one of import ance by this House. A Bill of a similar nature was brought before Parliament some time ago, but he would not take up the time of the House by speaking of that measure, but this he would say, that though there might be some scepticism raised to his measure, he would still persevere with it, and would bring it on again and again, if the session should be permitted to advance molt later without the Government taking any step on the subject. He could not repeat too often that this was a measure upon the necessity of which the House was unanimous, and upon the importance of which they were all agreed, and the best proof he could give of its importance was the fact, that in all the debates upon the subject of agriculture that had taken place in that House, the statistics of the agriculture of foreign countries were continually referred to and easily had. He beseeched the Go vernment, as ho had always sat in his place in that House for the interest of the farmer, not to put him off again as they did the Hon. Member for Manchester two years ago—mcCelY witha letter from the Poor-law Commissioners of Somerset-bouse -- but to take into consideration the question whether an itiquirY might not at once be made with reference to these statiatids. and to the Highway Act. Sir GEORGE CLERK said, as it had been understeo d that no debate should take place on this subject, he trusted that the Hon. Member would excuse him if he did not folko r him through all his arguments on this subject, but rather confine himself to the questions put by the Hon. Member. He was very happy to inform the Hon. Member that the Go vernment had anticipated his wishes in this respect, and had fulfilled his desire that they should proceed very cautiously - in this matter in the first instance, in of der to avoid exciting any jealousy on the part of the farmers. He was anxious to ascer tain whether he could obtain any satisfactory informatiors, hY means of the existing machinery, of the o ccu pi ers o f land', rather than by resorting to new and expensive machinery. He could state that an experiment on a small scale had been tried. A portion of a cou n ty i n S cot l an d had bean selected, an'" also a portion of a county In Ireland, from which they endea voured to obtain information. They selected l'he northern division of the county of Hampshire, and also the n orthern vision of the county of Cavan. The information was Collected by the labour of an intellige n t a n d experienced person i n the county of Cavan, in some parts, these inquiries were r" re difficult, in consequence of the great subdivision of lands' th an they were in other parts of the country, where the farms Wer e larger. The requisite information had been received with re ference to a union, which only extended over 6,000 acres' In Scotland they endeavoured to obtain the informati? e through the means of the parochial schoolmasters , pe n had printed forms sent round to them—which f orms thq sent to every occupier of land, who, in their turn, were _t: fill them up with statements of their stock on their land_ • He was happy to say, that from that county in Scotland the information had been obtained. The returns were filled upo n a tabular' form. With regard to Hamp s hi re , h e w as sorry to .ay, that they had endeavoured to obtain the information, be; had not completely succeeded. Forms were prepared, And ordered to be left with each occupier of land, and a feeling of jealousy had interfered ; but many of the farmairs and land occupiers had given all the information in their ',sewer. He believed, if the information was voluntarily obtained, it would be more accurate than otherwise. He trusted he haat satis fied the Hon. Member, that the Government had exerted themselves to procure the information referred to, and he trusted that they would succeed in procuring it front every county in England. Sir ROBERT INGLIS had no doubt that, if the - cle r gy were applied to, they would be as desirous to furnish such information as they had done thirty years ago. Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN considered that the elerg • were better adapted to give statistical information than the poor-law guardians. Lord G. BENTINCK said, as the House was upon ate sub ject of statistical information, he would ask, whether there were means of procuring accurate statistical information 101 : reference to manufactures. It had been stated that the hew' consumption manufactured was U s th the whole productio n ', whereas he thought it might be shown that it amoun ted to 2-3rds. ble Mr. BRIGHT considered, from the speeches of the N° ll Lord, the Member for Lynn, that he was well acquainted the returns of the quantities of raw material imported into this country, and the amount of manufactured goods import el. If the Noble Lord would take 500,000,0001. or 600,000,0 001 ;' as the amount of the raw material itnpoetete into this country in one year, and then ascertain the quantiy exported in year, the same he would then, by the simple rn,le. of subtraction, be able to find out the quantity left at home le ` home consumption.---(Laughter.) There might, perhaps, h e some difficulty in obtaining the exact amount , as the returns 0 f some of the goods imported were taken by weight, whereas the accounts of the exports were taken in various forms. He was convinced that the manufacturers would do their utmost to furnish any useful information to the country with reference to their manufactures. When it was proposed by the Hon. Member for Manchester to obtain agricultural statistics, it was with the intention of be ne fiti ng the farmer, and not from any wish to inquire as to what agriculturists were doing. If the Noble Lord could show any means by which anything could be done by the manufacturers to benefit the country, he was sure they would do it. H e th oug ht , t h e more t h ey knew, ti'e better would e for all classes of the community. After a few s words from Mr. MILES, the Bill was read a third time and passed. . _ QUARANTINE LAWS. Dr. BO WRING rose to submit the following motion, that an humble address be presented to her Majesty, that she v/111 be graciously pleased to direct such correspondence or extracts i on the subject of the Quarantine Laws as has taken place WI foreign Governments since the last returns to Parliament , I be laid on the table of this House ; and that this House v/11 see with pleasure such relaxations in the existing s yste m a! may be compatible with a due regard to the public Izealth, ar.. the general interests of the nation. Thi s was a s u ject, he said, which was of great interest and importance, esPe cially with reference to our commercial and maritime conce rns ' Since the last time this matter had been before the Oe use ' c many circumstances had occurred to justify an inquiry into the system, and he was the more induced to urge it, f ro m the curnstance that the able and distinguished individual who bac ! done so much to disabuse the public of the impression that pestilence was so easily spread, had expressly declared his O w nion that the plague could not be communicated by contagion_ The circumstances to which he had alluded materially firmed that impression. He must acknowledge at the sa me time, that he had little hope of any assistance from the Go vernment in doing away with the inconvenience, and aiteriti the system of our quarantine laws. It would be recolleee" that the Eclair steamer arrived last year with an alarm /01 S fever on board from the coast of Arriea, and that all sorts ex communication with the vessel was prevented. He believed that she arrived on the 30th of September, with the Yellow flag (lying with the black ball in the centre, in there was death on board from fever. On inquiry, it was timag that tin as certained that there were thirty-two already dead, yet no communication was allowed. I r wasimmaterial whe ther it was the yellow or the b lack fe ver , neither of them could have been detrimental to the public. was ordered for a cruise in the Fresh provisions were sent t o the vessel, yet no me di ca l a id was rendered, and the vessel itself North Sea. Boats were ordered to row round her to prevent any communication from shore, and to hinder any one front ship. Our nextescapingthe absurditiesanti eroic men— to be foil" who would have given the assistance that those individuals re' quired, and thus many valuable lives might . have been save What was the opinion given by Dr. 111‘publish a report on this disease ?He William, who e „.., said, that in the Niger exp 01 _ tion 230 were attacked with of the four fever, and two out This proved that the disease was communicative from one to another, and it ' h Right Hon mig t well be termed a c ontagious one. T he Baronet was aware that the Russian Governm ent had issued a commission . - into character of tills to in the had disease, and he (Mr. Bowring) wished that that inquiry , been fully carried out . I t was we ll k nown t h at i n t h e b a zaars 2 ,: Grand C a i ro t h e clothes of persons who had die d o f feli,e", were exposed f or sa l e , an d t h ey were c h ar ged lu ; at the sam e ra t e as an y o th er garmen t s .--( Hea r i n w' hat were the conclusions, the unanimous conclusion s, i s which the C omm i ss i on o f t h e Academy of Medicine of F ari t s had come to with reference to the plague ? The first was, l i l t it was endemic in Egypt, Syria, and Tu r key; he believe _,.., constantly prevailed in those countries to a greater or a less eh - , tent, and its presence was almost invariably to be found hi certain period of the year. They came to a second resolutioe; in which they stated that it was their belief that the plage v r „ to be attributed to spontaneous action, and local, atraospherli causes, and not to importations from distant countries. B ut :., was evident that the plague was in a great measure removed by the attempts which had been made in diff e rent countries to promote the health of the people. At this inoraen t ' she it ; Tuscany, the Pontine Marshes were being improved, and . injurious effects which they had on the health of the Pe°Ptio were being gradually removed. The fourth resolution . which they arrived was, that the disease was epetlemlu: fifthly, that the plague was propogated by atmospher ic 10 .. fluence, and not by contagion. Sixthly, that it was not eel,: vcyed by goods or merchandise. It was, therefore , an a ,. [nullity to keep up these obnoxious quarantine law %, He believed in his conscience that there was na more evidencr of the security given against the introduction of plague by ot sanatory regulation—no more evidence in favour of that OP, tern, than was to be given of the existence of witches a t ghosts. The quarantine laws were most oppressive, and a the same time most unequal in their operation. A stea m ' vessel, arriving from the plague countries in sixteen or sever' teen days, WU allowed to pan without delay, U any atoll"- 46 ,•