The Sun. — London, England, 1846-05-19 00:00:00

the Bill. Most of these exceptions Were framed on the part of old corporations, who alleged that they had been guilty of no abuses, that their integrity could be safely relied Ora , and it was therefore unwise and injudicious to itterrupt the current of good which they were &orig, Ir. justification, hoxeser, of what he stated—namely, that there ought to be no exceptions, even in respect to these eharities—he would draw their Lord ships' attention to the ca-e of one charity, who claimed the exception on the ground that they had always ad- Ministered fairly mid justly the charities entrusted to them, and that their integrity could be safely relied on. The Commissioners gave many instances of the descrip tion he was about to give to their Lordships, but it would only be necessary for him to trouble their Lordships with one ease. He would take the case of the Mercers' Company, who had the control of a small charity, and whose officers in every June paid a 'visit to Greenwich for the purpose of auditing and settling the accounts connected with the charity. He held in his hand a statement of the expenses which this proceeding and journeying involved. In the first there was a breakfast which cost 41. 125., then there were six carriages which cost 10'. for the day, flowers to decorate the room 1/. le., then there came a luncheon which he did not quarrel with, which consisted of 16 dozen of sandwiches, 12 lemonades, half-a-pint cherry brandy, two-and-a-half dozen soda water, and ceteras. This was the first part of the day's proceedings ; but he now came to a more substantial item in the document Tneir Lordships must bear in mind, that the document itself related to the Mercers' Company, who claimed to be exempted from this Bill, on the ground of the strictly faithful manner in which they discharged their duties. Well, then, the next item was for dinner, which consisted of four dishes of flounders, two dishes of turbots, two dishes of stewed eels, three dishes of scolloped eels, three dishes of fried eels, three dishes of lam preys, two dishes of salmon, one dish of sturgeon, and several ether dishes. This was the first part of the dinner. The next course consisted of something more substantial. There were two dishes of pullets, two dishes of roast lamb, two 'calves' heads, four hams, a sturgeon, a tongue, a ham, roast fowls, capons, and one baron of beef.--( Roars of laughter.) After this there was a dessert, in which the principal item was forty-one bottles of wine, at Is. per bottle ; the reason why this small charge was made was, that this company, being a very provident one, furnished their own wine on the occasion, Mr. Lovegrove, however, insisted that if they did not have the wine of him, they should pay him Is. on every bottle consumed. After this dinner and dessert there came a very substantial tea, and the bid for the whole amounted to 891. 10s., yet these very gentlemen came to their Lord ships protesting that they ought to be exempted from the operation of this Bill, because they so admirably and economically managed the charity entrusted to their care. This was not the only case. The total expense of that day amounted to . 1001.; in twenty years it would amount to 2,0001., exclusive of interest, which in that time would be at least 1,0001. Why, that sum itself would be sufficient to endow considerable charity. This was not all, with regard to this evempany. Information had been filed in the Court of Chan• eery ,for abuses of the charity funds. The funds of the charity were-mixed up with the corporation. funds, and then small sums wire doled out to the charity, aeol the rest mixed asp with the corporation. Informations had been laid against them, and large sums recovered. And this was not confined to the Mercers' Company. Nineteen trading companies, eleven of 'whom were petitioners against the Bill, had had sixty-nine in formations directed to be filed against them, at the recom mendation of the Commissioners. He did not mean to make any charge against this Company. They might have been 'negligent in the performance of their duties, or they might have mistaken the charter, and supposed they had a right to do so. He did not mean it as a charge against the Company. Ht brought it forward as a defence of himself and the Committee, They were aware in what 'canner these charities were applied. If their Lordships thought a Committee should be allowed he bad added a large schedule to the Bill, in which he had included all the great colleges, all schools, of royal foundation, and other extensive establishments. Al the great hospitals in the metropolis, ail hospitals, either in the whole or part, which were supported by voluntary contribution. He had excepted from the operation of the Act houses of the Wesleyan Methodist society, and a groat number of other re ligionists. Powers had been given to various Commissioners, the details of which he would not enter upon at present. If their Lordships thought they were too extensive, they might bt abridged; and if not sufficiently comprehensive, their Lordships might add to them. If their Lordships would allow the Bill t, go into Committee, they might make their amendments and rn.odify it as they thought proper. Another very important 'mature in this Bill, though not an essential one, was the ap- Tointment of a tribunal to whom these matters should be re ferred. In consequence of the death and removal of the various trustees, it became necessary to supply from time to time the deficiency occasioned by those casualties. Application had been made to him to appoint trustees, and he had made orders referring them to the master to supply those deficiencies, bu the expense of these proceedings were enormous. In one charity alone it amounted to 7001., and in another case—the case of a charity in Warwick, where the appointment was contested, the expenses amounted to upwards of .500/. Indeed 2d01., 300/., and 400/. was not at al' an uncommon amount to be expended in the appointment of new trustees. This he proposed to remedy by constituting a tribunal, the proceedings before which would be comparatively cheap. Bat then a Noble Lord had stated that these trustee , might be improperly appointed, and might also improperly dis charge the duties reposed in them. This he thought would be met by the condition under which they held office. They would bold their office dependent upon their good behaviour and efficient discharge of their duties. The Noble Lord on Isis right said, " I know what will happen. You will appoint such a number of trustees that you will swamp the old ones." He thought that would be met by a simple provision, that in no instance should the number of trustees to be appointed anceed the number originally appointed. There was another point which had been brought forward by his Noble and Learned Friend. He said, " You have appointed trustees to a considerable number of charities, but there are a number who have never applied to you, because they had no funds to pay the 'expenses of such application." He thought this a great argument in favour of the Bill. He proposed to apply a remedy to this case. The tribunal would be a cheap one, before which they could apply to have those deficiencies *supplied. He had now stated the different portions of the case sufficiently clear. He now called upon their Lordships to allow the Bill to he read a second time. They must allow it to be read a second time, in order that they might be consis tent with themselve s . They allowed it to be read a second time last session. They afterwards examined and improved the :Bill, and, their Lordships would not at the present time refuse to allow the Bill to go into Committee, in consequence of the clamour which had been raised out of doors, in consequence of incorrect statements which had gone forth urea the subject. It was quite impossible to resist the application. He called upon them in regard to the justice of the measure. He would -not appeal to the feelings of compassion in favour of the indi viduals to whom that Bill applied. He appealed to their Lord ships' sense of justice—that feeling which had ever been con sidered sacred in their Lordships' House. Their Lordships wonld, therefore, allow the Bill to be read a second time, in esreler that its merits in detail might be considered in Com mittee. After the statements he had made to their Lordships, be should feel most ashamed if their Lordships did not allow the Bill to be read a second time, in order to be considered in Committee. Lord COTTENH AM said his Noble and Learned Friend the Lord Chancellor had told their Lordships that the Bill was brought before Parliament last session. Ho did not say why it was not passed. He thought that their Lordships ought to be aware of the nature of the Bill, before it was read a second time. He considered the Mercers' Company had nothing whatever to do with the Bill. As his Noble and Learned Friend had exc l u d e d t h em f rom i ts operation, that Company laving consumed a gr eat many more good things at Greenwich than he thought they should have done, insinuated that they had abused their trust, and, therefore, the Bill was not to be applied to them. He proposed also to except from its opera tion all charities supported wholly, or in part, by voluntary contributio n . By this proceeding the whole of the Bill would become nugatory. There was no society which might not take advantage of the Bill if they felt so inclined. In the Commit tee appointed last year by their Lordships, of which he was a member, the first difficulty which arose was the appointment o. the Commissioners It was proposed that it should be vested in the Crown, • It was subsequently agreed that the aPPoilatment should be left to the Court of Chan cery. He did not object to the Bill; who could object to 'such a Bill ? What he objected to was, the machinery for carrying out the provisions of the 1311 ( Cheers ) 1 hat the Bill was disapproved of by himself, l an — d the minority . of their Lordshipe' House, was not of much co ns q ence, he thought the Bill being disapp roved of by the coleleaugues of hi but s Noble and learned F r i en d , the Chancellor of the Exchequer, was sincerely of some importance. The objection which he had to the Bill. - was of deeper root, and what briefly he wo u ld now proceed to state those objections were. H e h ad in the first place an objec tiro., to the mea sure, qu i te independent of its inapplicability to charitabl e trusts. He could not help looking back to what had taken place in the Court of Chancery since 1841, without feeling that it was necessary to put an end to the system which, mince that period, had been gradually growing into use. Ile alluded to the mode of drawing from that tribunal business which legitimately belonged to it. A Bill had been passed in the year 1842, appointing two new judges to the Court of Chan cery, to enable that Court to get through the mass of business which had accumulated in it. The increase in the business was not, in his opinion, commensurate with the strength of the corps. It might be thought, therefore, that with this accession of strength the Court of Chancery would be fully adequate to the discharge of the business which came before it. Seven individuals, however, were subsequently appointed, at a salary of 2,000/. each, to tax the costs in Chancery, which up to that time was performed in the master's office. He adverted to these matters merely to show the alterations which had recently occurred in respect to the Court of Chancery. Twelve other 'Commissioners were also appointed, making the new appointments to amount altogether to 56,0001. The business therefore had been greatly reduced, while the strength of the corps had been greatly increased. Now they were called upon to remove another portion of the business, which legitimately belonged to the Court of Chancery, and which it was properly qualified to discharge. His Right Hon. Friend certainly showed that a great amount of money was expended in the proceedings of that Court, but he knew very well that these sums were actually expended in litigation, and were not ex penses Incidental to the Court. They were incurred in ex- Perlsess to counsel, witnesses, and other costs, which would also be incurred by proceedings before any other court. To tell 'em, then, of the expenses of the Court of Chancery was to till _them what had no reference whatever to the question. A d what, be would ask, then, was the object in appointing a number of men C to ou d o the work which was peculiarly the . business of that Cottenham's) argumenrttes:? u a r s, It was a fallacy. His (Lord the competency of the that as long as they admitted and the e n'tt of Chancery, the excellency of its jurisdiction, duty shssuld be to diminish tihYeandjustice of its decisions, their expenses te and make the proceeds before it not more costly than Bill brought in would be before the Co s airnissioners. In a t t o he tb N e oble peke opposite, where the question was raised as y of expense incurred in proceedings before that CourtmtTelmfueems elid not amount to more than 15'. What he said, therefore, was', let them do away with the fees; let them go t the Master's office and let no fee be required. When he (LordLod Cottenham) acceded to the office as Lord Chancellor, he remitted fees to suitors to a considerable amount, whi c h appeared to ive meat sure. On principle, therefo re , h e ohj " cted to the rnea t sure. He denied its necessity, he o bj ected to it on the ground of expediency, and a l so b ecause it was an encouragement of the system t o w hi ch he had alluded. His Noble Friend alluded t o the amount of property which would be affected by the Bill. It was diffi cult to say what that property was. There were 38 large folio volumes, covering 27,200 folio pages. givi ng an account of these charities , Fom those it appeared that th ere were 40,000 different charities , and the amount of mo ney , I ,- • their control was 1 , 500,000/. But there was at' '' _aster which he would wish to advert to. Th ... ;1 77 r! .at nt variety of trusts, in the nature of w rit deal of difference. He was, awes thel-e Was a grea t which breaches of trus t .e of eases having occu rre d it' variety of the natar mut • taken place ; but th e great ~ of the trusts would fecilitate oppOr tunities for su e .t acts. In many cases also there heti instances is a great difference arising between the ibtention of the der.er and the acts of the doner, who often thought himself cii t ..tled to the property pare passu with others. There were also a class of cases of changes in property with which Noble Lords, who were well acquainted with the state of their pro perties, were no doubt familiar, and which very often arose in cases of charity charges. Such properties, subject to these charges, would also be subject to the despotic and indispen sible control of those Commissioners, and he mentioned this now in order to show to what state the properties of many Noble Lords would be redacted. He w th ould now p rocee d t o state e ziature o f it f ew of the clauses. The Pill applied to three une of those was all charities ...,aof of 1001. a year, and the other affected all 'ties under the charge of the taunts/4ml corporation. In the cases of the latter an inspector vvonlil be appointed to , xarnine all the accounts, and all other matters connected with the property subject to the charity. The Commissioners ,wouldlhave the power t o i nves ti ga t e a ll accoun t s, an d t o ma k e n into the mode of keeping those accounts; and that Commissioner might tell parties that they had not kept those accounts in a proper manner, and that his orders should be obeyed upon pain of fine arid imprisonment, and if the Corn nissioner thought proper he could order a clerk to ba kept, ,who should be paid by the owner of the property, and then he Commissioner might see an item in the account which he might think proper to strike out and disallow. There was also another clause, by which all parties, having proper ties subject to a charity, would be compelled to produce all their title-deeds, and get copies of them made, and all this at :heir own expense; and the owner of the property would be obliged to attend the Commissioner at whatever place he should think proper to sit. Another clause required that all monies should be paid into the Accountant-General, so that, as there were about 40,000 charities, the Accountant- General would have to open 40,000 accounts.—(Laughter,) There was another point to which he would refer--it was that provision of the Bill respecting incomes arising from charities estimated at 100/. a year. There were many chapels in the country left as charities, which would be valued at 100/. or 2001. a year, yet did not yield any income whatsoever. The provisions of the 13111 would, therefore, press severely upon property so situated.—( Hear, hear,) It was a startling pro position of this Bill that the Commissioners should have the ap pointment of the whole of the masters of the various charities referred to. Ti' :re was no protection in the measure that these appointments would be impartially made. He was persuaded that its operations would be most partial and unjust, and an invasion of the rights of property. Moreover, he considered it would be injurious to the charities which it proposed to bene fit. For these reasons he objected to the measure being passed into a law. But these were not the only objections that could be urged against the Bill. Perhaps the greatest of all the ob jections that could be stated was the great injury which it would inflict on Dissenting bodies. The Bill cut them off from all protection for their charities. The Bill, and the power of the Commissioners, applied to all schools and chapels erected by charitable gifts, so that those who occu pied them, and for whose use and benefit they were endowed, would be subjected to the direction and control of this extraneous power.—( Hear, hear.) A great number of peti tions had been presented to the House in reference to those objections, and yet no answer had been made to them. He did not, however, wonder at that, as these objections could not be answered. He had admitted that much required to be done to place the charities of the country on a sati,factory foundation, but that while he considered such a step necessary he did not believe that the present Bill would accomplish the end contemplated.—( Hear.) There were many other ways in which the present system might be improved, : by appointing trustees` through boards of guardians, by niagiatrates in quarter sea-ions, or by other local bodies who_had a competent knowledge of what was best to -be done in particular districts, and the persons who were best qualified to administer those charities. The present measure was so bad in principle, and so repugnant to the rights of individuals, that he hoped their Lordships would put an end to it, by rejecting the second reading of the Bill. He was quite confident it would never become the law of the land.—(Hear. hear. ) descriptions of charities • qnder the am" Lord BROILiGHANI said he rose under great difficulty, after the multifarious objections which the Noble and Learned Lord who had just sat down had introduced. The improve ment of the charities of the country was a vineyard in which he had long laboured, and therefore he would for a short time occupy the attention of the House. He ( Lord Brougham) must however object to the confident way in which the Noble and Learned Lord had condemned the Bill, a con fidence that he had never heard equalled in any court of equity, or in the criminal courts of the country. The Noble and Learned Lord 'had spoken more positively of what was to occur hereafter than historians had of what had already taken place. The fact was, this Bill did not pass last session, because it did not reach the other House till the session had nearly approached its close. But how, asked his Noble and Learned Friend, was it that the Bill did not reach the otter House till so late? Why, it was because the Bill was not finally settled by the Committee appointed to consider the sub ject, until the session had so far advanced.—( Hear, hear.) There could hardly be a doubt, in his opinion, of the necessity which at present existed for the passing of this Bill. But his Noble and Learned Friend complained of it, because it increased the patronage of the Lord Chancellor. Look, said his Noble and Learned Friend, how this patronage was yearly being increased. Two .years age they passed a Bill 2iving the Lord Chancellor power to appoint two lunacy Corn- Missioners, but what had this Bill to do with lunacy 7 —( Hear, and laughter.) But though it had nothing to do with lunacy, he could assure his Noble and Learned Friend, for he had personally inquired into it, that the appointment of those offices had been productive of the greatest good, and had resulted in the saving of a good deal of expense in lunacy proceed ings. —(Cries of " Hear, hear.") His Noble and Learned Friend, after making this divergence to lunacy matters one would have thought he would have returned to the Bill before their Lordship; ; but he did no such thing. He went into the %tasters of the Court of Chancery's office, and complained of the appointment of certain taxing masters. But here again he could bear testimony to the immense good these appointments had produced. But what had masters in Chancery, or taxing masters, to do with this Bill ? he must again be permitted to ask his Noble and Ls.arned Friend.—(Hear, hear.) What gad all this to do with a Bill for correcting abuses which could not be remedied or prevented by any existing tribunals ? But he could tell his Noble and Learned Friend, that of all the ditties of the master's office, that almost gave the least satisfaction, was the taxing of costs; and, however, his Noble and Learned Friend might complain of the appointment of taxing masters, the suitors, the parties interested in such a matter, did not object to it. On the contrary, they felt, and still believed, that they had been greatly benefited by it.—( Hear, hear.) After diverting still longer from the immediate subject before their Lordships, his Noble and Learned Friend came at last to the Bill, and commenced his irregular observations upon it, by asking if there ever was such a thing known as giving power to commissioners to till up defunct trusteeships. Why not let it remain as it was pursued the Noble and Learned Lord, and confine the power to the Lord Chancellor? Why, what an idle way of meeting the Bill this was. How were trusteeships tilled up now ? Why, •by the Master in Chancery, to whom all such questions were referred by the Lord Chancellor. and virtually the duty was performed by the Lord Chancello r himself. Well, would it not be the same under this Bill ? Would notthe Commis sioners be appointed by the Lord Chancellor himself ? Oh, but his Noble and Learned Friend and these Commissioners might be subjected to, and liable to be actuated by, political influences in the performances of their duty. Why, good God, was not the Master in Chancery liable to be acted upon by the same influencea ? Well, then, what nonsense it was to argue against the Bill in this way.—( Hear, hear. ) The Noble and Learned Lord would find several cases in the books which he decided himself, and with which he had edified himself this morning. 'the Noble Lord then referred to the case of a charity established in the year 1475, to grant loans to people. These loans had never been granted, and the funds had been appropriated to the trustees. They committed sins of omission, they omitted to pay these charities, but they com mitted themselves by appropriating the funds to themselvs.— ( Laughter.) Since the fire of London, the Mercer's Company had distributed their charities, although they faithfully and zealously went down to Greenwich every year to luncheon and &nner.—(Laughter. ) There was also the case of a cor poration in Leicester, who got tired of performing their duties, until in 1836 ;there was a balance in the hands of the society of 6,0001. The Master of the Rolls stated, when giving judgment in this case, that a more gross case of breach of trust he never knew. This corporation came to their Lordships' House, and prayed their Lordships not to institute any of these disagreeable and indelicate inquiries. In some cases the expense of an inquiry into charity abuses amounted to 2,0001. These were charities of 1,0001. Jr. 1,2001. a year, and could afford such expense, but their Lordships must recollect that equally as great abuse of cha rity might exist in charities of smaller income, where the light of inquiry could never come in consequence of the expensive nature of the present Chancery light. It behoved their Lordships, therefore, to provide some cheaper light for these smaller charities. With reference to the statement of the Noble Lord that the exception of charities supported by vo luntary contributions would render the Bill at once nugatory, he contended that it would not. He held in his hand return, which showed that there were 40,000 charities with an income of 1,209,0001. a year that would come under the pro visions of the Bill. A summary jurisdiction was absolutely necessary to avoid the enormous expense and delay of the present mode of procedure and to afford to small charities pos sessing property to the amount of 240,0007. a year some redress, which their funds would not now allow them to obtain. H e considered that gingerly and careful as his Noble Friend was in stepping and mincing through the subject, to avoid the dirt which would fly up in his face, he had not made out a case at all against the Bill. He considere d that the Commission ers who would be appointed under the powers o f this Bill , and w w n h , o a n w d o u w l d o ü b l d e m ef bo th tl e s Houses of Parliament, and who would have a watch ful ( a ml r y e b sp y o an nsib a l d e dr a e d s y s i f s r e o r public to b a e n re oi m n o te n d ab b le y act other than to guard over th em , da r e not, he maintained, üblic in an h ones t and straightforward manner. He begged to apo logise fo r h av i ng taken up the attention of their Lordships so long, but he felt it necessary to do so, as he could not under stand what was the cause of so much opposition to the present measure. H e hi mself was charitable to all—even to th e Whigs---but he c o u ld not und v.h e i r ly s e t hr a e n ts d hi s , et ey u d n ut l rh e g s ee s dn t f h iol they support it were just thos e e.7 eh ys refusing ohaP el rt t o some pertina ciously. peculiar o bj ect i ts view, why- ciously. Th e very reasons induced him to support it. The abu ses were,the grossthat could exist, and it was ne cessary to pa ss a measure - fortheir prev en ti on , an d f or t h e better regulati on of those mitted. in stitutions wher e th ey were per . Lord ELDON said that si • nce the beginnin g o the debate, three Noble Lords, wh o h a d all occupied the were members of the law, had t a k en up the atiWen°9ls ac k, an d Lordships, hut he regretted that s o li tt l e of the distetounssioofntl;ieir turned upon the merits of the Bill. Nobody cou ldd eny that great abuses existed, but there was great difference of opinion as to the mode of remedying them. The schedule might contain great temptations to some to wish to become connected with the Bill ; but it had none for him, nor would he ever consent to give his sanction to it. The Noble Lord then read a petition which he said had been sent from Hull, to present against this measure, for the corporation of that town were anxious to pre serve their charities from any interference as this Bill pro posed, and from that absolute power which this Bill would cen fer on the Commissioners. Lord CAMPBELL said he was rather desirous to address a few words to the House on this question, as he had been taunted with inconsistency by his Noble and Learned Friend, who was now sitting on the end of the Woolsack.—(Laughter.) The Noble and Learned Lord had made an appeal from the Whigs to himself, but they had all deserted him, and he now remained a solitary monument of what he once was.— (Laughter.) But the Noble Lord had endeavoured to per suade the House, that Henry Lord Brougham and Vatirt had always been a consistent politician.--(Laughter.) However, though he had asked the House to come to a resolution to that effect,i the House had not done so, and had taken 110 notice of always own consistency es a H rn iwever, it was enough for him to try and defend his s.itoeunsctyo exposein h andreferenceco convict 1) s he did not think thaitii7hyt, suggested would be Learned Friend • e gain that object. His Noble and h S Noble and tlßs eiisin Learned l F charities ic h n e; d w l b ra ua t st l was pas.. , ssaid, that this measure, or a similar one, in this Hotta_,e last year, lift it Was taken no notice of .n the othttr Hotis . e. Holiever, the House might have since nhanied ilkeir opinio ns u pon this question,as they had t/erore upon others.—::(Hear, hear.) But ho did not wonder that Churchnien and Dissentera should be opposed to it ,He admitted that thi ngs s h ould not remain as they were, but ne objected to the tribt , ,zi,; He would much rather submit to the Court i a: e ir ' ilau . ;al to oAmillis;i6ners that were proposed t,o under the the Bill. The principal objection to the Cot a dt p o o f int aa er the great exp ense requ i red to be gone into to reconvecrysmwas ll sums. What, th en , was t h e duly of the state under suchciar cumstances ? Why, to reform the Courts of Chancery. The clear remedy was to allow justice to be cheaply administered to those that may rt - quire it. Now the new tribunal proposed was not confined to a particular class of charities, but included all the charities in the country ; whereas, by a proper classification of them under the Lord- Chancellor, the Commissioners would be able to attend to the whole of them as far as his interference was admissable or necessary.- But under-the-present Bill; the new Commissioner was to take the whole power into his hands, it" have th 9 whole jltrildictiort of the 50,000 BtIN - , LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MAI 7 IA 18* trustees that were connected with the charities of the country. And then all these charities were to be taxed for the maintenance of this machinery. The good and well-administered charities, those in whom the trustees acted in the most fair and impartial manner, were to be saddled with the expense of those that were badly and carelessly adminis tered. The mode in which the trueces already appointed were to be interfered with met with his decided opposition, as uncalled for and unjust. On these grounds he objected to the second reading of the Bill. The Noble and Learned Lord (the Lord Chancellor) had promised them some amendments in the Bill, but all that had yet been proposed was the exception of some few charitable bodies from its operation. The general features of the Bill to which he objected still remained. He, therefore, called on their Lordships to vote against its second reading.—( Hear, hear.) The Bishop of SALISBURY said, that notwithstanding what lied fallen from the Noble and Learned Lord who had just sat down, he must support the second read ing of the Bill. The abuses that existed in those charitable trusts were such as imperatively required a measure of the present kind. The Court of Chancery at present was a most expensive quarter from whence to expect redress and a cheap and simple substitute was required. Unless a measure of the present kind was carried he did not see any means by .which a remedy could be effected. The Noble and Learned Lord (I ord Campbell) had talked of the reformation of the Court of Chancery as the proper step to be taken, but it was notorious that there was little hope of effecting a change at present in that quarter. Judging from the period that a re formation in the Court of Chancery had been deemed neces sary, and how little had been done to accomplish it, he had but small expectation of much being done in that direction for some time. What was wanted was a cheap, efficient, and summary jurisdiction, and this Bill he apprehended would pro vide that. Seeing nohope in any otherquarter, in spite of all the objections that had been urged, he would vote in favour of the second reading of the Bill. He had come to the House with the impression of voting against it, but after the speech of the Noble and Learned Lord (the Loral Chancellor) in moving the second reading, though he (the Bishop of Salisbury) had still objections to some of the details, he would support it in the present stage. Any defects in the Bill might be amended in Committee. Lord A BINGER supported the second reading of the Bill. It was his impression that while the administration of charities would be placed on a fair and efficient footing, they would be more secure and better protected than under the present state of the law. He had not heard any good reasons advanced why the Bill should be rejected. Lord VROTTESLEY wished to say a few words on the present measure. lie had listened carefully to the objections urged against the Bill, 'but he did not think they had been successful, or had made out a case why the Bill should not he allowed to pass. At this late .hour be was not anxious to trouble their Lordships at any length, but he must really shortly state some of the abuses of the present system. Nearly three-fourths of the small charities of this country were swallowed up by the officers and parties who administered them. Surely then it was high time to establish some tribunal—iome corrective authority=- to see that these charities were properly dealt with by those who had the administration of them. At present, a vacant trusteeship could not be filled up without an expensive appli cation to the Court of Chancery, and it was this difficulty and this obstacle which caused so much mischief, and so often led to those misapplications or misappropriations of the charities which the public so loudly complained of.—( Hear, hear.) The fact was, the machinery of the Court of Chancery was far too costly to be resorted to for correcting abuses in respect of small charities. Indeed, the idea of employing the Court of Chancery fur furthering the interests or correcting the mis application of small charities was almost as absurd as it would be to employ a ponderous steam-engine to pick up a pin at the foot of the Woolsack.—(Hear, hear and laughter.) He was, therefore, favourably disposed to this Bill, which, in his opi nion, would establish a very useful, and, in the present state of public charities, a very necessary domestic tribunal.—( Hear, hear.) lie could not understand the opposition of trustees to this measure, for one would have thought that they alone, of all others, would be anxious to obtain every assistance in their power for carrying out the objects of the charity intrusted to their care ; and he, for one, was inclined to believe this oppo sition assumed a very sinister aspect.--(Hear, hear.) He had other details which he should have been glad to have gone into at an earlier period of the evening, but he hoped enough had already been said to induce their Lordships to give a second reading to this Bill. Their Lordships then divided, when there appeared— . .. Contents Non-contents 4l Majority — 1 The Bill was consequently lost. Their Lordships then adjourned at a Quarter-past Twelve. HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 18. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. WEST YORKSHIRE RAILWAY. On the motion of Mr. BROTHERTON, this Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. REPORTS. The following reports were brought up, the amendments and alterations agreed to, and the Bills ordered to be engrossed. Bath Waterworks. Port Ellen Harbour. Bristol and South Wales Junction Railway and Ferry. Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole Railway, and Port, &c. of Goole. Stirlingshire Midland Junction Railway. Alford Valley Railway. Hamilton New Gas. Morayshire Railway. Aston Rates. Great North of Scotland Railway (Eastern Extereen). Gollon Inclosure. North Western Railway. East Coast Railway. South Leith Church. Edinburgh and Northern Railway (Branches from the Dundee and Arbroath ilailway, and Tay Ferry Improvement). Kennington-lane, &c., Lighting, &c. Gorbals Gravitation Waterworks. Lancashire and North Yorkshire Railway. Liverpool, Manchester, and Newcastle-on-Tyne Improvement. Guildford, Chichester, and Portsmouth Railway. London and South-Western Railway Amendment. Portsmouth Harbour Pier. Midland Railway ( Erewash Valley Branches). Midland Railway ( Erewash Valley Extensions). Midland Railway (Claycross to Newark). Caledonian Insurance Company. Leeds and York Railway. LEICESTER AND TAMWORTH JUNCTION RAIL- WAY. On the motion of Mr. GREENE, the order made upon the 6th day of March latt, for referring the Leicester and Tam worth Junction Railway Bill to the Committee of Selection was discharged, and the Bill was also discharged. CONGLE ['ON AND CREWE RAILWAY. The order made upon the 19th day of March last, for re ferring the Congleton and Crewe Railway Bill to the Com mittee of Selection, was discharged, and the Bill was also dis charged. SCOTTISH MIDLAND RAILWAY. The order made upon the 2d day of March last, for referring the Scottish Midland Junction Railway (South Inch of Perth branch) Bill to the Committee of Selection, was discharged, and the Bill was also discharged. EAST LINCOLNSHIRE RAILWAY. This Bill was read a third time and passed. LONDON AND SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY. On the motion of Sir J. EASTHOPE, this Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. OXFORD AND CHELTENHAM RAILWAY. Mr. BERKELEY presented a number of petitions in favour of this railway. CALEDONIAN EXTENSION RAILWAY. This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. On the motion of Mr. HUDSON, :the Midland Railway (Birmingham and Gloucester Branches) Bill was read a second time and ordered to be committed. On the motion of the same HoN. MEMDER the York and North Midland (East Riding Branches) No. 1, the York and North Midland (East Riding Branches) No. '2, and the York and North Midland (Whitby and Pickering Extension) Rail way Bills, were read a third time and passed. The Sidmouth Market Bill was read a third time, and passed. The Midland Railway (Leicester and Swannington Altera. tions and Extension) Bill was read a third time, and passed. NORFOLK RAILWAY EXTENSION. This Bill was read a second time and ordered to be committed. WARWICKSHIRE AND LONDON RAILWAY ( HAMPTON AND BANBURY LINE). This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. STO WAIARKET NAVIGATION. This Bill was read a third time anti passed. WEST RIDING UNION RAILWAY (No. 2.) This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be com mitted. LIVERPOOL AND BURY RAILWAY. This Bin was read a second time, and ordered to be com mitted. The third reading of the North Staffordshire (Churnet Valley), the North Staffordshire (Harecastle to Sandbach), and the North Staffordshire (Pottery) Railway Bills, was postponed till Thursday. Mr. GIBSON CRAIG moved that the order (pith May) that the report on the Carnwath and West Linton Railway Bill do lie on the table be discharged, and that the Bill be withdrawn.—Agreed to. notice that he would ask a question almost. identical with that put by the Hon. Member for Southampton ; and, in answer to it, he wished to say that it was intended to introduce a general measure before any local Bills should be considered. It would be well to suspend the progress of all local Bills till an opportunity was given for the introduction of a general measure, in which would ba established a regular code of fees. This he submitted would be the most regular course of pro ceeding. Mr. MONCKTON MILNES gave notice that, to-morrow evening, he would ask the Right Hon. Baronet, the First Lord of the Treaiury, whether any instructions had been given to the British Ambassador in Paris, to invite Ibrahim Pada to this country. DANISH CLAIMS. Mr. CHRISTIE, on behalf of Mr. Hawes, intimated that he intended to postpone the order of the day for going into Committee on the Danish Claims till June the 10th. EAST HAMPSTEAD UNION. Captain PECHELL moved that the petition of the ratepayers of the parish of Winkfield, complaining of the conduct of the Poor-law Cornmiss:oners, and the proceedings of the board of guardians of the East Hampstead Union, be printed. After a few words from Sir JAMES GRAHAM, to the effect that it was intended: to send down a Commissioner to make inquiry into the matter, the motion was agreed to. GAME-LAWS. Mr. COLLETT called the attention of the House to the circumstances which had recently taken place in Sussex in connexion with an information laid against a poor person for purchasing game at the instance of Sir Charles Taylor, and who was severely punished by the magistrate. The lion. Member then read an information which had been laid against a person of the name of Burnard, at Petersficld, to the same effect, and stated that an answer had been given by Lord Langdale to the effect that the information had not been acted upon, which had b een l a id b efore Si r Ch ar l es T ay l or. S r JAMES GRAHAM said that the person referred to by the Honourable - Member for Athlone (Mr. Collett) had been convicted under the game-laws. The name of that person was Silvester. The question was whether this person had been committed on the information laid before Sir Charles Taylor Now he had made inquiries of Sir Charles Taylor, and he found that that gentleman was not on the bench at the time the conviction was made. He had also made in quiries of the bench of magistrates as to what had taken place on this occasion, and lee found that there was no reason for the Ministers to interfere, as, from what had taken place, he did not think that Sir Charles Taylor had been M e an implicated, and therefore no case, so far as he could see, has made out for the interposition of Ministers. Sir Charles Taylor was present, but took no part in the busi ness. The policeman Hall denied that he had had any con versation with Sylvester in reference to the transaction, and he ( Sir J. Graham) was unwilling to bring the character of an Hon. Gentleman into juxtaposition with that of a con victed horse-siealer, in that House.—(Laughter.) It appeared that Sylvester had been convicted at Manchester for the crime of horse-stealing, and he considered, therefore, that his evi dence should be received with a considerable degree of doubt. Since the Hon. Gentleman had put his first question he had introduced another charge; which he ( Sir J. Graham) had had no opportunity of investigating, and, therefore, when he came down to answer the first question, he was quite unpre pared for the copies of affidavits which an Hon. Member had laid before the House. (The Right Baronet then read the re port of the case, as it appeared in the provincial papers. ) Now then he understood the question to have been narrowed to the three persons he had named ; but if there was to be a new question he hoped the allegation would be made on affi davit, and if they should not be proved to be true, the whole question would then be properly investigated by the constitution of criminal proceedings against the party making the affidavit. Mr. COLLETT said, the Right lion. Gentleman would see that the report eructed to the conviction of Mrs. Bridges. Mr. BRIGHT said, there always appeared to be extra ordinary sympathy in that House for any official who might have any charge brought against him, espfrially if he happened to be a magistrate.--( Cries of " Oh, oh," and Hear.) He would contend for it that such was the fact, and he did not think that any Hon. Member of the House would be found hold enough to deny it. He (lid think that the Hon. Member for Athlone was perfectly justified in calling attention to this matter ; and there were many p ersons in 'Petersfield who had said that what had appeared in the public papers was a correct representation of what had taken place, and that Sir C. Taylor was present in the justice room, and did not contradict it. It appeared that this woman had been convicted on the information of a servant of Sir C. Taylor, and that certainly looked suspicious, and the woman was sent to gaol for a month. How could she know that the person in question was not licensed to sell game? He knew that at the time when it was illegal to sell game many Members of that House were in the habit of purchasing it.—(Cries of "No, no.") They could then be supplied with as much game as they pleased for dinner. In the present case, here was a poor labouring man sent to gaol for a month, and he would have remained there for the fall time, had it not been hat the Honourable Member for Athlone (Mr. Collett) kindly forwarded the money to re lease him.—(Hear, hear.) No one knew how gross were the proceedings of the magistrates on the subject of game, and he trusted that the present case, with the others of a similar cha racter that had been brought under the consideration of the House, would induce the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Home Department to introduce a measure so as to change the present Atate of the law. Nothing could be worse than it was at present ; as, from the great body of the magistrates who adjudicated in these cases being interested in the preservation of game, it was impossible to get a just decision.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. LEADER considered the charge of an infamous character, and therefore he did not think they should bring forward the name of Sir Charles Taylor in the way they did, without very good reason. It was not of so much importance to attack public men, for they were used to it ; but to• charge a private gentleman, almost 80 years of age, with a disgraceful proceeeding, without good grounds and evidence, was too bad. He could say that there were no estates its that neighbourhood that were better cultivated than that of Sir Charles Taylor, and he could assert that the bulk of the returns of that estate were expended in giving employment to the neighbouring poor. Mr. POULETT SCROPE thought the time of the House might have been much be tter employed at the present moment than the discussion of this matter. The question, if he understood it aright, was, whether Sir Charles Taylor bad, in his capacity of magistrate. overstepped the rules which were prescribed to him for the fulflhueut Li( his duty. fle must say that he thought the greatest injustice had been done to Sir Charles Taylor in this matter. lie could not help saying that he conceived that the Hon. Member for Athlone had deserted the ground which he had originally taken, and had entered into a series of statements quite irrelevant to the matter in hand. He had stated, on the information of Sylvester, that policeman Hall had been convicted before Sir Charles Taylor in the penalty of five pounds for a breach of the game laws. Now, it appeared that the facts were, that this man had not only been convicted on this count, but on others, of a breach of the game laws. Now, what were the circumstances? Not only was Sir C. Taylor arrainged upon the information of a common culprit without any evidence, but had been so ar raigned without any sufficient grounds. He should inform the House that Sir Charles Taylor had been 34 years a Member of that House and 35 years in the Commission of the Peace. Ile thought that under the circumstances the evi dence which had been laid before Government against such facts was quite unworthy of notice, and that the time of the House had been most grievously wasted. RAILWAY COMMITTEES. Mr.- B. DENISON said that from a report presented to the House on the 17th February, 1846, and which was con firmed and received on the 21st April, it appeared that a certain rate was to be adopted in railway Committees under the report of the Gauge Commission. On this report a decision had been come to in one way in room No. 10, and a decision had been come to in No. 11 quite in a contrary way. He found that it h a d b een required by the House that to morrow he should take part in the discussion of this question in a railway Committee, and he wished for some communica tion to know upon what rule his conduct should be guided. Sir R. PEEL said he was sorry that the Hon. Member had given an opinion that, takin g everything into consideration, was erroneous. The report, and the evidence consequent on that report, had been made by her Majesty's command to the Board of Trade; and the Great Western Company, the railway which was principally interested, were allowed upon their application to make such remarks as they might think fitting; and it was only after receiving these suggestions that the report was furnished to the Government. The Board of Trade were fully aware of the value of those suggestions, but as many interests were in volved, and as the evidence was of a voluminous character, it was necessary that an opportunity should be given for the pro per censideration of them. With reference to the subject of the gauges, it must be remembered that opinion was all on the side of the narrow gauge. Sir It. PEEL said the House was aware how much the Government had been occupied by the business of the House since the 21st of April. Ho hoped that the report would shortly be ready for laying on the table of the House. Lord PALMERSTON said a communication had been ;Made to him of a very ingenuous invention, applicable to the goods traffic, by means of which goods could be transported from the broad to the narrow gauge, and from the narrow to the broad gauge. The inventor had taken out a patent for his invention, and a report upon it had been s u b m itt e d to th e Board of Trade by General Paisley. He would ask the Presi dent of the Board of Trade whether it was their intention to take any steps with reference to the invention, and also whether they would have any objection to lay upon the table of the House the report of General Paisley ou the subject? Sir G. CLERK stated that there would be no objection to lay the report on the table of the House. means of ascertaining t h e nature of their decision ; as soon, Mr. RUSSELL said that the G un re ti a l t t .w he es r t e e p r o u rt c o om f tphaenyCohmadminso sioners, the directors of however, as they had seen it they immediately opened a com municationdeclined to express any sired to have them reduced to writing. The and de with the President opinion h o a f toin t h b e toheen Board sstoat emm o u f ecuh T t sr employedamdte,di se who to. The officers of the company re port, and he hoped, however, would be ready in a few days. ERE considered that it would be the best Mr. LABOUCH further suspend the. progress of the Bills before latterly that they hadnothadthtaimt e it finallyto prepare . course to by narrow gauge that they should also ...3 sue- Parliament for broad gauge lines, and where they w h ere op posedponded. EDUCATION IN IRELAND. Mr. WYSE wished to know from the Right Honourable Gentleman the Secretary schools yotS in had tateforlrte hleanHd,oamned,Difeps:tmwehnatt, whether the act of inco r p orationbe enissued for the fur therance of the national steps had been taken for the formation of those schools. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that the charter of in corporation had been issued, and he understood that the neces sary steps had been taken for the formation of the schools. BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. Mr. BANKES said he had, for the last five or six slays de layed bringing before the House a matter which involved a breach of one of the privileges of that House, because! he did not wish to interrupt the debate upon the corn-laws. But ho now wished to state that a statement had appeared in ;a public neerepaper in reference to a proceeding that had taken place in that House, and which he did contend was an infringement of the privileges of that House. He was by no m eans anx i ous to resist the legitimate exercise of the right to criticise the conduct of public men in that House ; bat a letter had appeared in the Times newspaper on Tuesday last, which he wished to bring before that House. It had been written in consequence of some ob servation he heed made upon the state of Ireland, and in an swer to which ihe Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland took the occasion to tannt him (Mr. Banker) with the state of the labouring poor of Scotland- And a clergyman of Dorsetshire thought proper to take notiee of that speech, and to write a letter to the Times newspaper. In that letter the rev. writer took the speech for his text, and commented very freely. H e I was surprised at that letter coming from the Rev. Gentleman, knew him to be a. gentleman of character; and:in giving hbaubtit he e f h s a p d ea u k l i w n a g y f i l l: hopelnionof that letter he separated . the character of the rev. a s o treated r e h a i t m e d ( s A u l c r h . wourwiteorrtfbryomofthhehua—rnicolef i a n t, q w u h e o s i t l i y o . n o , ow w o h r e t n hy he of h c un all . ed m it e q n u e i v te . Banker) House, he (M • Last year with the greatest contempt. But when he spoke man, veho for the first time addressed the r Banker) felt that some notice was called for. a w n it h h ad gr b e e a e t n fr i e n etlo th m e, the honourable andreverend writer Hight Honourable (Sir James . the"popularity . a P Baronet (Sir He was ,o hunting parson. .(Loud The Reverend Geetihtleeman was very fond of dealing in attack. Gentleman was called by nst the Right Lim Baronet at that e sp nin ok m e e o n f t a ar y ie o s James Graham) laughter.) time, he was now with him, and-perhaps that would very mate rially alter the Right Hon. Baronet's opinion of the Rev. Gen tleman. He hoped that what would fall from him (Mr Bankes) thlt evening would meet the eyed the Bishop of the dioeme.— (Crhs of " Oh, oh.") Ile hoped his remarks on the Rev. Gentleman's conduct would come under the notice of his Bishop, for that was the proper mole of complaint. This was the view of the question which he took, and if the Rev. Gentle meavnearin acted in th e manner he had done, he should certainly move that he be brought to the Isar of the House. If they visited persons of infer'ior station and education for infringing the privileges of the House, he could not see how they could pass over those in a higher condition of life, and w h o w e re cog nizant of what th ey were doing. not in was sorry the N o bl e L or d n the Secreta r y f or I reland was in his plac e , th e more so as he understo o d hi s absence to arise from illness, as he ( Mr. Bankes) could not answer the taunt which the Noble Lord had thrown out. He (Mr. Bankes) had put a question to the Noble Lord, which had been only answered_ by a t aun t a b ou t the Dorsetshire -labourers. _ measure in r e l a ti on to asked hi m h ow t h e could benefit I re l an d, either nonr or the importation of c a future period; and t o t h e taunt about labourers bein g as b a d as the peasant the of Ireland y only answer he would g i ve to that was , howr couldthe measure n benefit the peasantry o f Dorsetshire ?.(Hear, it would not benefit . th e. peasantry Of Dorsetshire it ea w r. o ) uld no if benefit the peasa n t r y-, of Ireland. Th e N oble Lord had n 9 et yet, however, answe r ed hi s quest i o n a b out how the measure t was to benefit the people of Ireland. Perhaps some of his colleagues would da so that night. He ('sir. Bankes) recol lected a conversation with the Hon. Member for Durham (Mr. Bright)—not a confidential one—in relation to the re turn of Lord Ashley to that House, and on that occasion the lion. Member said the reason they (ths Anti-Corn-law League) attacked Dorsetshire was, because that Noble Lord had attacked them.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear," and cheers.) On the whole of the matter, he could not see that there was any express declaration, as to the course which was likely to be pursued, or the effect which was ,likely to be wrought by the reduction of wages. Mr. BRIGHT and Mr. Hurts rose together, but on the call of the House Mr. BRIGHT proceeded to say that this was a breach of privilege, and he thought that it should be tested by facts, and he certainly did think that the recommendation which.had been thrown out would have been wisely taken. What might have been the subject of communication to which the Hon. Member alluded, he could not pteLnd to know, and it was therefore irtaissilale for him to speak posi tively respecting it, without having communication from some Hon. Gentleman.—(Hear, hear, and cheers, from both sides of the House.) Of this motion he certainly had had no inti mation, but with respstot to the condition cf the labourers of Somersetshire, in comparison with those of Dorsetshire or Wiltshire, he could not , whether he had made any differ ence with regard to their'. But this much he would say that if he had stated that there was no difference between the condition of the people of these counties, and that of the people of the other counties its England, he should be telling that to the House, and to the people of England, which would be grossly unjust to every member of the community. Mr. HUME wished to ask whether the Hon. Member opposite had any sufficient documents to show that the subject was brought under dismission in the House, for without them he himself was committing a breach of privilege. Mr. BANKES did nut wish to name the clergyman who had so severely criticised the proceedings of the Hon. Member for Durham (Mr. Bright), but if the House desired it he would do so. He would only state from it, that he asserted that that lion. Gentleman was not up to his work, and that he was unworthy of the terms for which he was engaged. He further asserted that the labourers said, that they knew not who was in fault, but it appeared to them, one man made the bullets and another shot them. Who was the real culprit he could not say. Mr. CHRISTIE said he was quite sure the Hon. Gentle ' man would himself feel no objection to the name being men tioned, nor to the production of the letter, a portion of which was read that night. The Rev. Dr. Northcote was a most es. timable gentleman, but he was not prepared to say that that , reverend gentleman, in all instances, could act in such a manner as to please every one.. His impression was, that there was rrthing in that letter of which the reverend gentleman should be ashamed, and nothing certainly that infringed on the privi leges of that House. lie was sure that if the Hon. Gentleman had read the whole letter, the House would say that there was nothing in it to justify the remarks of the Hen. Member for Dorsetshire. He was sure that in the whole letter there was nothing to lead to the charge which had been made in that House. Mr. WAKLEY—The reverend gentleman had, no doubt, the opportunity of reading the debates in that House, and having noticed the personalities which take place within those walls, had taken the same liberty out of doors. He feared the Hon. Member had something to answer for in that respect. IMPORTATION OF JEWELLERY. _ _ Mr. T. DUNCOM BE presented a petition, signed by 9.96 pawnbrokers, silversmiths, and jewellers of London, praying the House to adopt some measures to prevent the importation of jewellery, which was now largely imported into the country at five per cent. MR. S. O'BRIEN. Mr. O'CONNELL presented 147 petitions from various parts of Ireland praying for the liberation of Mr. S. O'Brien. POOR-LAW (SCOTLAND.) Mr. T. DUN CO3IBE presented a petition from Paisley praying for an alteration in the poor-laws of Scotland. PUNISHMENT OF DEATH. Dr. BO WRING presented a petition from a gentleman, praying that the punishment of death may be abolished. The. petitioner stated that he had once been robbed on the highway, and his name had once been forged, but owing to the san guinary character of our laws , he had refrained from pro secuting. THE TEN HOURS' BILL. Mr. FERRAND presented ten petitions in favour of the Factory 1301—five of them being from men in the employ of millowners of Manchester ; others from Huddersfield ; one from Bradford, in Yorkshire; and one signed by 200 indivi duals in the employ of Messrs. Marshall, of Leeds. Another came from shopkeepers of Bradford and Huddersfield. The Hon. Member also presented a petition from a gentleman re siding in Dublin, praying the House to alter the laws of land lord and tenant in Ireland. NOTICE OF MOTION. Mr, FERRAND gave notice that, tomorrow, he should put the following questions to the Right Hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Treasury : —Firstly— Whether her Majesty's Go vernMent possess the power of rescuing from the tyranny of the Poor-law Commissioners seventy poor persons who were confined in the poor=house of Bingley, under the or ders of that Cornmission, the koor-house not being capable of comfortably accommodating more than twelve inmates ? Secondly—lf her Majesty's Government did possess that power, whether they would exercise it , as a. fever had broken out' amongst the inmates of the poor-house ? Thirdly—lie would ask whether her Majesty's Government poisessed the power of compelling the Poor. law Commis. sinners to visit the poor-house, which had not been visited since 1342, and on which occasion a false return was made. Fourthly—Whether the Right Honourable Baronet, on the part of her Majesty's Government, would take that opportunity of retracting the unfounded charge made against the rate-payers and guardians of Bingley, viz., that their proceedings were the cause of the present state of the poor-house and its inmates? Sir GEORGE GREY said, that in these cases it was desirable that lion. Members intending to put questions should hand in written notices of those questions, as expressions of a troublesome nature sometimes got upon the votes. ges S t i jo r n rt o . f I t N h G e RLligShtsHaitoint.haiitabroeileetittivvrehioy irao(nteluartresdpoiknetnh.e sag- Mr. FERRAND said, he had taken care that all expressions that were Parliamentary should be used in the notice — (Laughter)—and if it contained any that were not he would withdraw them. Lord PALMERSTON said, he had just hoard that the Hon. Member opposite had given notice in respect to a poor law union which was in terms that were not in accordance with the rules of the House. Mr. FERRAND said he had withdrawn the terms. SMALL DEBTS BILL. Sir J. GRAHAM, in answer toa question from Mr. Vernon agid that & Noble Lord AM him bad given CUSTOMS' DUTIES BILL. On the motion for bringing up the report on this Bill, Lord G. BENTINCK ruse to oppose the motion. He thought there was good reason for opposing the further progress of the Bill which sought to remove duties amounting to no less than 2,400,0001.. He contended that if the Government con tinued to receive that amount, they would be enabled to reduce the amount levied on exeiseable articles. When the duties were taken off glass and auctions, amounting to 900,0001., the country was at once relieved from the cost of collecting that sum, which amounted to 52,r001. ; and, at the same time, were relieved from 450 excise officers. Thepresent reduction proposed in the customs would not effect the reduction of a single excise officer. They diminished the amount of duty, but did not at all reduce the amount of collecting that sum. In pro portion, therefore, as they lowered the amount of duty, they increased the per centage of collecting. Another reason which he had for opposing the Bill, was that it would give to the foreign producer a share in the benefit as well as the home consumer. If they reduced the duty on soap, hops, and bricks, it was clear that the entire remission mast go into the pockets of the subjects of Great Britain. It was admitted, on all sides, that soap was an article which tended consider ably to the comfort Gf the poor, and it was also of great service in the maunfactures of the country. The duty on hops amounted to about 300,0001. per annum, being no leas than tad. on each pound. That duty put the hop growers to the greatest possible inconvenience ; they could cot gather their hops without sending the excise officers twenty four' hours notice of their intention to do so. The effect of the reduction of the tax upon the importation of foreign timber had had the effect of seriously damaging the Canadian timber trade. It was perfectly clear that the Baltic timber growers had now a monopoly.—( Hear, hear.) They had given to the Baltic people that monopoly by the measures which they had introduced ; and the Government was now proposing to in crease that monopoly still further. The reduction on foreign timber did the greatest injury to the revenue of the country. They had the authority of the Hon. Alember for Sunderland for saying that there were five millions of cubic feet of timber used in the formation of railways in the country, and that that quantity would have been used irrespective of the duty being either 10s. or 555. a load. See, then, what an enormous revenue this would have given to the country.—(Hear.) In the year 1840 there were imported from the Baltic five hundred and sixty one thousand, three hundred and thirty-two loads of timber; and that would also have been consumed irrespective of the duty.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. Pitt argued tbat for every 100,0001. France gave, England should give one million. They had put it out of their power to give anything or receive anything in return, for they had given all they pos s,ssed away. Mr. Pitt did not propose to admit the grain of France, or anything which came into competition with the produce of England. And that was tha sound policy which a great statesman should follow. It was the policy of Mr. Hus kisson, of Mr. Pitt, and of Mr. Canning.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. Huskissen, _speaking of the American tariff in 183 S—the Americans having raised their duty on wool to 14 per cent. — observed, that if such a proceeding was eventually carried out, the English nation would retaliate. He referred to the bene ficial effects which the country had derived from putting a protection on indigo. He therefore proposed that they should put a duty on cotton, and encourage its growth in the East Indies. It was clear that Mr. Huskisson was not an advocate for free trade without its reciprocity.—( Hear, hear.) Like the Right Hon. Baronet, he was sure, at all events, he was not a disciple of Mr. Pitt or of Mr. Canning. He thought the policy which should be adopted was, to reduce the duties on the trade of those countries which took our ma nufactures.— (Hear, hear.) And it would also be a wise policy to reduce the duties on the imports of those countries which had no shipping of their own, but who used our shipping, and especially with regard to China.—(Hear, hear.) It was not free trade that was wanted. How would it act with regard to Canada? What was the feeling there? I shall quote, not from the language of Mr. Papineau, not from the language of other gentlemen identified with him, but from the language of the Ministers of the Crown in Canada. (Hear, hear.) This was what the Solicitor-General for the Crown said at a meeting held at Toronto. He raid, " that if ever there was a time when the national credit and interest of Canada was at stake, it was at that moment, when they were threatened with a great and dangerous change." Why, with what satis faction could the measures of her Majesty's Government be looked upon, when the officer of the Crown in Canada used such language as this ? And what said Mr. Draper, the At torney-General? That gentleman, when addressing a public meeting upon the measure of her Majesty's Government, ad vised the meeting to prevent, if possible, the passing of a law which was calculated to be of the greatest injury to the Canadas. lie said, in language not to be mistaken, .‘ I tell you, that I see what is coming, and I tell the people of this province, it is of no use shutting their eyes to the injury about to be done them ; and I would advise, if there is no other remedy—if there is nothing else left for them—the best thing they can do is to declare themselves bankrupt at once, and repudiate.—(" Hear, hear," from the protection benches.) Was this to be mistaken ?—(Hear. ) Hon. Members were well aware that the mode of distribution of their revenue was according to the population of their towns. The result was, that the population increased from 23,500,000 to 27,500,000, and the receipts increased from Is. 63%d. per head to 2s. 9 1 ,4 d. per bead ; and would the people of the Zoll verein consent to this reduction so injurious to themselves. They would say first, that a mutual accommodation might be made by a reduction of the duties of the produce of both countries ; but now, when our markets were open to them on any terms, they would take care to protect their own manufac tures. He found that in raw grain they imported 363,610 setuas, each setua being about 1 cwt. ; and, in 1841, the im ports had increased to 434,000 setuas, making, with their home manufacture of the article, more than 900,000 setuas. In 1841, they exported 80,000 setuas of cotton hosiery to this country, paying duty; while our exports paid duty there. These were the grounds which induced him to think that there were no just grounds for the hope that our present proceedings would induce foreign countries to take our manufactures in return for their own. There was no hope that, because of our free trade the demands for reciprocal benefits in return, would open the markets of foreign countries to the manufactures of this coun try. The present course of policy of the Right Hon. Baronet would give the greater portion of the beneficial effects of re duced duties to foreigners, instead of the English. He wished, when the circumstances of the country admitted of a reduc tion of duties, to see the benefit of that remission going to the English manufacturer. If the duties were to be reduced, he wished to see it done in such a manner as to employ our own shipping. The principle of the policy which seemed to be adopted by the Right Hon. Baronet was, to deal hardly with those nations which dealt kindly by this country, and to make concessions to those nations who opposed our interests. He objected to our foreign policy, as it made concessions to those who were enemies to, and opponents of, our interests, and the interests of our manufacturer ; and, under these circum stances, he should move that the report be read a second time that dity six months. Mr. LAWSON said he rose to second the motion of the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn, and in doing so he felt that he followed him at a very great distance in the same task. He followed him " enagno sed proxi mus intervallo." He did so in pursuance of the opinions entertained by him on all occasions. For in 1842, when the amended tariff was brought forward in that House by the Right Hon. Baronet, he did not give way on that occasion in the opinion which he had always entertained, but he gave notice of a motion for an increased protection duty to native industry in general, which motion he should have adhered to, had he received the support which he ought to have ob tained. He would now, with the permission of the HOUT, t read, from a paper prepared by command of her Majesty, tvdo very short extracts, which gave strong reasons for the con tinuance of protection duties. The paper staled nes., that it would not be too much to expect that the continual in crease in the linen trade would result in the fact that the manufacture of linen would stand in the same relation with regard to foreign countries which their manufactures had done towards England. With this great difference that we spent 2,000,000/. of money annually in foreign countries for the raw material, which, if it were permitted to grow in this country, would be expended at home by the labour of out own hands, and wellth, industry, and prosperity would be spread throughout the country. The' conclusion of this statement was, that from 5,000,0001. to 6,000,0001. annually were drained out of the country to pay foreign nations for the produce of a crop which could be grown at l.oroe, with profit to the farmer, the employment of the labourer, and the benefit of the community at large. The point to which he would wish most particularly to advert was to the potato crop, unless any Gentleman should consider that in ad verting to that crop he referred to 'what vras trifling, or unworthy of the House. He would ask Honourable Members to remember foreign debates upon the subject. The whole of the corn-law question had been based by the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government on the failure of the potato crop, or what was sometimes called the potato panic. He thought the Noble Lord near him had done the state some service with regard to this crop. The Noble Lord had said very pathetically, if they waited till May they would find that the potato panic would be given up by the Right Hon. Baronet. That had turned out to be the case, and if he understood them r i g h t l y, that was not now the cause of the reduction of th e d ut i es, so that the Noble Lord, if he had done no good in the debate which had taken place, had at least taken away h ha ib v i e tory; laboured. it fa i n se l i B mression, under which many seemed to Mounted ) almost 21. per ton. That duty lad the duty on potatoes was almost pro hibitory Since 1842, theOitwas since been reduced, to and. House ue would :et 5) of tallow,the in troducing potatoes into this country would d os b ed e a to fa ta ir ke v i , t c o im ff e a n ito o - f what would take place in thee tot a I t r h e e m c o o v s a t l o o f f I e duty. De wished to ask the Ho y been lowered since 1842. Next, t a f d th t e price of potatoes had hal taken place made them independent oh; importation which whether they received an ample foreignthe seasons ? Also hear.) And after that, could the pricese s a u t l eW ? --(Hear, Bard to those questions, especially the last, which r 7 e a Pith re statement of prices, he would be able to answer. fie heldtline his hand some returns which were all but official, and these returas, like the statement he made the other night, he was prepared to verify. From these statements he found that in the year 1842, 1843, 1814, the prices fluctuated from 40s. to 995. wr ton, and at the present season the prices varied from 110 s. to 150 s. per ton.—(Hear, hear, in which Sir James Graham joined.) He was very glad to see the Right Hon. Secretary join in that cheer ; but would he cheer at the next statement he was about to make to the House, when he stated that he was convinced of the benefits which would be pro duced by the sliding-scale when really prices were steady, and the greatest variation was about 20 per cent.? As - ttrat statement was so much cheered from the Treasury Benches, he would state when the greatest rise in potatoes took place. It was ja December last.—( Hear, hear.) In December, 1843, the highest average of prices - was 583. per ton. Tn December, 1844, the highest average was 5,Ss. ; and in December, 1845, the prices rose to 90s. per ton. He hoped they would cheer that. • Sir J. GRAHAM—Hear, hear. Alr. LAWSON thanked the Right . Hon. Baronet; but would he cheer what he was about to say —that when the Peel panic was heard of the price rose to 150 e. per ton. They had no cheer for that. By the returns up to January, 1546, he found that, before that year, the value of potatoes annually 23 exported was more than 5,0001., and in that year a l. ' t l h the a t r amount 4 w 5 could r ton,purchase a at which alut t l h o e , y oo w o e t r o e n s s of potatoes, 0 findcll i n la g r ai vessels i o i n r e o l f Ireland, u Primeglhf that o i, was niipi onri the Minister elro case, ,toi toa ot tthownehe would f became o t not of be thelafh able ehdeteyo had vessels enough to export, surely there p wo 'a ul o cl e . s be vessels enough to import them. From , communications which he had received from Yorkshire, he found that potatoes were ye y plentiful there; and he read in the Leeds Illereurri paper entirely devoted to th e A nt i-C orn- l aw League, that' a there were weekly 500 to 6ao bushels off ere d f or sa l e in that neigh bourhood, at from 2s. to 2s. 2d., without a disease or defect. The best potatoes were brought from York to London, and were cold, after being kept for six weeks, at 50s. per ton ; so that. it was impassible that the statements which had been made with respect to potatoes could be true. Ile felt he had already too long occupied the attention of the House, and he would conclude by seconding the motion of his Hon. Friend. Alderman HUMPHREY said that he thought the Hon. Member was mistaken when he said that potatoes from Yolk could be sold at 505., a ton when the price there was 503., afterwards raised to 955. a ton; and had they been conveyed to London, at that price, and kept six weeks, would have been unfit for the purpose of sale. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had no desire to prolong this discussion. He merely wished to make a few observations with respect to what had fallen from the Noble Lord, and he must observe, at the same time, that the state ments of the Noble Lord had been made by him when this subject was previously under discussion. The Noble Lord, he must say, had laid down some principles in finance which at least had the merit of being entirely new, and which was such, in his opinion, that every individual who paid any attention to this subject would refuse to subscribe to ; in fact, one part of the speech of the Noble Lord had answered the other. The Noble Lord had stated, as a general principle, that by the total repeal of all Excise duties they would afford great relief to the consumers of such articles as had been freed from taxation, and they would get rid of the expense of these establishments. He gage the Noble Lord the benefit of that argument, but when the Noble Lord proposed to raise the whole of the re venue by an augmentation of the customs duties, commensu rate with the whole of the excise duties proposed to be re pealed, he proposed a system of revenue which could not be carried into effect with any success in this country. The Noble Lord said it would have been far better for the Govern ment to have come forward with the proposition for the repeal of the soap duty, which, he said, would greatly promote the comfort and happiness of the general body of the community. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not dispute, nor had he ever disputed, that the repeal of the soap duty would be a wise measure, provided the revenue could bear it.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") But the Government had already gone far to reducing the cost of that article, for they had reduced the duty on the importation of tallow, from which the inferior sort of soap was principally made, and a corresponding reduction had been made in the importation of the oil of which that sort of soap which was used by the higher classes was made. He did not mean to undervalue the inconvenience of persons engaged in the manuracinio th,.o articles which were subject to the Excise laws, but the present system of supervision could not be avoided. The Noble Lord had in his speech paidea tribute to which every one must agree, to the merits—the financiol merits of Mr. Pitt, Air. Canning, and Mr. Huekisson, whoie opinions the Noble Lord on this subject said concurred with his own, but he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) begged leave to tell the Noble Lord that they had held opinions quite the reverse, The Noble Lord had said that the Government ought rather to have come forward with the proposition to repeal the malt duty, which, according to his statement, produced 5,000,0001. per annum, and which he said should be taken off malt, and the duty upon beer be re imposed. Ile (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was sure that no one would wish that supervision which formerly existed with respect to the supervision of beer to be renewed.—( Hear, hear.) It would deprive private individuals from brew ing beer for their own use, without being subjected to continued supervision and heavy duties which the rich would be enabled to evade. The Noble Lord had also said that it would have been better had the Government proposed the re duction of the duties on spirits, which, he said, amounted to 40:1. per cent. Now he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) firmly believed that such a reduction would tend not to the health and improvement, but the destruction of the health and morals of the public.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord, in one respect, admitted that there had been a great reverse in ' the timber trade between the period when timber had been first introduced and the present, and the Noble Lord cried, " See what a benefit you would have conferred on the revenue, if you had received the whole duty as it was fixed before the reduction." But the Noble Lord forgot that in 1842 they had received only 500,000 loads of timber, while in 1845, they had received a million, and the Noble Lord calculated that if they had received the whole duty of 555, there would have accrued to the revenue the sum of 1,500,0001. He forgot the importation had not been so great were it not for the reduction. The principle of trade was to increase the revenue by making a reduction on duty, for it might be reasonably supposed that an increase of con sumption would take place in exact reciprocity. The Noble Lord said you have not got the whole of the benefit by the re duction, the greater part of which was received by the growers. He admitted as to last year, but as to the former year it was quite the reverse. Last year there had undoubtedly been an increased demand, and that demand having been greater than the supply of the countries from which it came, of course the grower would place his own price upon the goods. There was ;to competitor in the market with him. There had un doubtedly been a rise in the price of food, and the Noble Lord considered that it would have taken place despite the heavy duty.—( Hear, hear.) But there was a great error on which this principle was founded. The principle on which the Noble Lord went was, that if one country had a hos tile, tariff the other should raise its in proportion, anda reciprocal receive the, manufacture of no country unles s there was much as you have. received , benefit to the other. " You h aavn e d no y t o. exp h o a r y t e ed, n ' n ' t sa r i e d t h ur e ned , a to s Russia and Prussia an equal quantity of (manufactures, or even a proportion to the quantity of wood you have received." That was n ot the way to look upon the question, but let them look to the general mass of the manufactures sent to foreign nations, and see if there had been an increase in proportion to that ex port, and that would be the proper way to view the subject, and it w i ts not by measuring the exact quantity sent to Russia or Prussia, who might refuse to receive the value of their arti cles in ex, change. The same argument applied to what the Noble Lot d said in reference to the shipping interest. There was a get at increase in their commercial shipping, but it might be proved that some one or two countries had a larger increase than heretofore ; but, as he said, in aprevious portion of his remarks, and they should look to the various relations with England to the rest of the globe, and they would there see, from the year 1832 to 1845, that this country had more than doubled her shipping during that time. The Noble Lord then adverted to the position of the Canad'as, and he would fain have the House believe that there was in Canada a feeling very adverse to the country and to tho measures which had been recommended to the House by her Majesty's Government; and in proof of this assertion, he alluded to the defeat of the Government party where the question of adjournment was carried by a majority of seven. H e wished he had laid upon the table that night a copy of th ese dispatches for which the Noble Lord had moved; in truth they had been already published in the journals, and tine Noble Lord must be well aware, as he was, of the exact position of the facts, and what was that result? Why, far otiserwise than it was intimated to the House.—( Hear, he ar.) They were told there would be a great outcry on the reduction of the duty on timber. Nt nv there was not one word said about the reduction of the duty on timber in tho se dispatches, They did not revert to thr ma at all, and though the Noble Lord quoted extracts in re fer once to the corn-laws from private correspondents, the No ble Lord should be aware, from his own experience, that the sentiments of personal members of a legislature were not alto ays those of a community ; and there was a majority of four teen in thelllouse of Assembly. He would not detain the Hou ve by entering further into the details of this measure, and lkie would say in conclusion, that the measure was calcu lated to promote the financial resources of the country, in crease its pros)rerity, its wealth and independence. Mr. BANKES said that his Right Honourable Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had made an attempt to ans wer the speech of his Noble Friend, but in making that tahte tem pt he had entirely failed. He did not mean rtosesy Rig ht Honourable Gentleman wished t o misrepresent his r, No: Ole Friend. It was unfortunate for them, how pro tection benches) that t sitting as a party on that h sideweroef the neve ti r ouse distinctly ( th e disagreed with them. could only get hen d r e d ed, b i y t w th as ose nnf H er o t been said of the Treasury bench, and as had stuffed with ly by an Hon. Member, that ear was n u . na l‘ te leni fo b r e t r h se e y m wh t o hatthey hut nourous cornn.—(Laughter .) Laughter. ) Now the speech of the Right Hon. leman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer , was no answer t G o e t hat which had been advanced by his Noble Friend, for the Rit Hon. Gentleman had entirely misunderstood the argu melt of the Noble Lord near him. What the Noble Lord that they had given the custom duties without any Le return, but had they given them in return. for some was, that they would . have been acting iu reason. That was the k qltern which he understood Noble Friend to have obsthineainig'tefict: / contended ion- ri era, _not the extravagant sy s t e m w hich his ' Right Hon. Friend, 4 ,!re Che.reaf,llor of the Exchequer wished to make cut for lis Noble Friend. .;,; they had retained the customs' duties which they had now given tip, they might have considered the reduction of the duty on tel. They might then bare taken into their consideration also the reduction of the duty on Lops—a reduction which would have benefited ell classes of the people.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") He bad thought it his duty, in the discussion on the tariff duties, to take into his consideration the one particular branch of trade; —be meant the silk trade. One of the articles of that branch of trade was the manufacture of the silk hat bands, which every Member of that House wore round his hat. Now, that-article of the silk trade was manufactured at Manchester, and the reduction of the duty on silk made a difference to the workman of 2s. 6d. on his week's work. He thought it his duty to warn the House, when the article of silk was under their consideration, to pause before they made that reduction. What he had stated had, however, no effect, and the conse quence was what he had just stated. He was of opinion that they should do nothing which would tend to reduce the wages of the workman; but, on the contrary. it Was their duty to uphold them.—( Hear, hear.) (The Hon. Member then read an extract from a speech of Mr. Huskisson, de , livered at a period of contemplated reduction of our protec tive duties, in support of his (Mr. Bankes') argument.) There was one point to which he wished to refer more particu larly. They had b?en accused of prolonging there debates to the injury of the country. The Right Hon. Home Secretary had on a former occasion stated that be believed that if the corn, which was ready to be brought into the country in January last, had been gradually admitted it would have done a great deal of good. The SPEAKER reminded the Hon. Member that he had no right to quote former debates in that House. Mr. BANKES could not continue to do so, but he had already given enough for his purpose. With regard to the measures that had ell along been proposed by her Nlajesty's Government, they were the less liked as they became more knoen. These w ere his reasons for opp osin g the me a sure, and he thsnked the House foe its attentio n, and would con clude by stating that he should give his decided opposition to the measnre.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. HAWES said that it was not his intention to enter at all into the merits of the question before the House. He wished to refer to what had !aline Prom the Hon. Member. If ' the country received with such i ike the measures of the Go t h w ve it r h nea th e e n ra t, a w n h u y fac h t a u d ri t n h iz e7 inte no rt:o u, gi d v u e ri s n u g ppo tl r le several hours which this debate had Imo some Member connected of the Noble Lord ? No such Hon. Member h t ad th attempted support the motion, and there fo r e b e thought that he was right . to infer that it was not motio to n as the Hon. Member had intimated, and in fact he would ven ture to say, from his own knowledge of the subject, that the measures proposed were looked upon by the manufacturing in terest as likely to be a gift to teem, and one of a beneficial nature. He would seriously advert to the point which the Hon. Member had raised with rtference to the delays which they vrere .said to have occasioned to this measure. Such delays would most unquestionably seriously impede any benefit which might arise, to the country by the passing of this measure ; and, in fact, it would destroy . its utility, by the lateness of its period of passing. fleirad risen to entreat the House to faci litate as much as possible the passing of this measure, as he was conf dent, from the feelisig, manifested by all the interests likely a affectedt i o aw be wonlzb ie m b o y st its_passin Mr. P. BORTH WICK said that the Hon. Member w h o had just sat down had commenced his observations by stating acceptable g to o htahteict its near ly try at conversion into that the manufacturing and commercial classes had not been represented in this discussion, or in the debate of that evening. He was confident that there was not a person who had the in terests of the agricultural and manufacturing population more at heart than the Noble Lord who had addressed the House at some length that evening (Lord George Bentinck). and he was also confident that there was not a man who better deserved the esteem of that class of people. If it was for any class at all that Honourable Gentlemen sat in that House to legislate, it was fc r the class of men described by Mr. Burke, who called them labourers, 'and said that they were miscalled poor men as it was fur their ,benefit that struggles had al ready been made, and in spite of opposition their interests would not be lost sight of. The Noble Lord (the Member for Lynn) had proved himself the decided friend of the people, and therefore it was that he (Mr. Peter Borthwick) would support him in any way the Noble Lord would suggest.— ( Hear, hear.) He would take the year from 1934 to 1 735, and he would show what the exports of grain had been in that year. The Hon. Member quoted the different exports of grain, showing a total of 433,893 quarters, which he con tended was more in proportion than could be shown at the pre sent time. Mr. PLUMPTRE thought that if this discussion had con sumed the whole seven years which any one Parliament could claim, it would not be too much, considering the great in terests involved—considering the mercantile interests of the country, which would be comparatively ruined by this mea sure ; and the agricultural interests—in fine—considering these things, he did not see that they were wrong to oppose this measure to the utmost. He should, therefore, give hie decided opposition to the Bill. Dr. BOW1111‘.(3, would wish to define clearly what would be the effect of hostile tariffs, and as far as his experience and knowledge went, he should consider that the course of legis lature formerly persevered in would be most apt to create an hostile interest, while the liberal policy of the Right Hon. Baronet would be as certain to originate friendly relations between this country and every state in Europe.--( Hear. ) The Right Hon. Baronet's recent propositions had also had great effect on the Italian Government. The Italians had, from better experience, begun to see the ruinous effects of pro hibitions and fetters on their trade and commerce. Tuscany had long given a noble example in favour of free trade. The Right Hor. Gentlemen had, no doubt, visited it, end he would ask them whether the people of Tuscany were not in a far more prosperous and happy condition than those where the old system of prohibition prevailed, The value of land, too, in Tuscany, and all other countries where the free trade prin ciples prevailed, was more valuable than in other countries where those principles had pot been introduced. Even in Spain there was a vigorous movement at this moment in favour of free trade. The flight Hon. Baronet was showing the woild that he could compete with hostile tariffs by his free trade measures. England was now giving a practical lesson. to the world. They had been told to cure themselves of their own diseases, and they were doing so.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) And ,while the •opinion of the country was strengthening the arms of the Government, the result would be a great extension of our commerce, and the increase of our wealth and happiness —( Hear, hear.) cesieeei SIB MORI' said, that the Hon. Member who, h .d just sat down, and who had already received a suns se; 13,1:00/. as a commercial traveller in fa: our of free trade, and was no doubt looking forward for a similar situation to what he held a few years ago, and that was probably the reason of his earn t . a.lvueacy of the Right Hon. Baronet's measures.—(Laught Why did not the Hon. arid Leerrirl Gentleman at once ra . , , ever to the Ministerial benches, in sup. sik le) pert of the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government. —( Hear, hear.) Truth would prevail—(Opposition cheers) — and every day would show that the arguments of the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn were based on tru'...l. If he wished, to look for suffering perfidy and apostacy in this world, he had oily to look at the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Go. vernment.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) Mr. HENLEY said that he begged to remind the Hon: Member for Lambeth (Mr. Hawes), who said that the reams factoring people were universally in favour of free trade, that they were not the only interests concerned in these measures» the agriculturists were surely entitled to be heard.—( Hear,; hear.) If the malt duty were repealed, and the excise duties were taken away, the Government would act justly by the agricultural interest. He considered that the simplification of the revenue, which was daily taking place, would be most bene-. tidal. Ile could not, however, shut his eyes to the fact that the, lessons which the Government were teaching the masses, namely by association, they would gain whatever they demanded. The Hon. and Learned Doctor said that the loss of Canada would. even be better than not to have free trade ; but he considered that that would be paying a little too dear for their whistle. He would record his vote against the measure, as he considered it fraught with danger to the country. Mr. HUDSON denied that the reduction in silk which had taken place added to the comforts of the labouring classes; and this was surely the great test of the benefit which they would have concurred. With regard to the timber duties, be' objected to the reduction, as it would go entirely to the beness fit of the foreigner and not the home consumer. It was no. torious that railways consumed a vast quantity of timber. Well, the duty had been taken off of it. Who were to be would have duty was removed from them ; if there had beeni benefite t d hlt a W g h r y eat t e h r e qu f a o n r t e i i t g y ne o r f . br p ick ut s were used . 9 1 I t s e e g d u i is l-y u t no torious n co division,e would give his vote p l benefited oyro ent the . Hhome considered producer, t h a o n d m t ht; measure havem giventimpolitic,gre ater em ployment. he, if the question came to a ag L o a iotnstd i GEOR GE BENTINCK then withdrew hi s amend. t. Th e report was then received. PEEL intimated that at five o'clock thi s d ay . r me Sir ROBERT into Committee on Sir H enr y E ar . he T w h o e tt l ff d o t a a s k e e h th a e vi t o h g ir g d o r n e e ading of the Bill. dinge's Annuity Bill, Sir A. L. HAY moved, in Committee on Viscount Hare dinge's Annuity Bill, that the annuity to Henry Viscount Har dinge become payable during his life, irrespective of any grant by the East India Company. Sir ROBERT PEEL desired that there should be unani. mity upon the subject, and recommendod the withdrawal of the motion. Colonel SIBTHORP said as they had given away 30,000f.' to Maynooth, and other absurd grants, he saw no reason why they should refuse to give the grant originally proposed to Lord Hardinge. The conduct of a British House of Commons would be extremely mean and unworthy of Eneishmen to refuse such a grant. Mr. CURTEIS was one of those Englishmen who would refuse such a grant. In the present state of the country, it was wrong to press on the Government to confer it. Lord Hardinge had already been amply provided for, and he would resist every attempt to force the Government to make this grant under such circumstances. Had the East India Company would b not proposede very the different, and annuity the which gallant they officerdid, th ewould casboolt course entitled to recieve recognition of their services. Sir ROBERT PEEL did not take credit from the pre-. sent state of the country to justify him in refusing the grant originally proposed by the Government. H e , refused it upon precedent. The Duke of Wellington war treated 'yen the same principle, and so was Lord Combermere He hoped the House would be of opinion that the grant of the East India Company was in accordance with the mode of that. public body, subject to the sanction of Parliament. Atter a few words from Sir A. Leith Hay, Capt. Harris, and Mr. Hogg, The gallery was then ordered to be cleared, but no divisions took place. The Bill was then agreed tn. LORD GOUGII'S ANNUITY BILL. e w w a h r i d e s h v ite w a n t into The Committee House t h e o n o r es umed, L ord Cough'sand passed throngh Committee without oppositi on. eommitee on th e E 1 The House having also gone into xt? me sive Substances Bill, immediately Annuity Bill, af Mr. CURTEIS ob j ected to clause 8, which inflicted th e punishment of flogging. It had a deg ra d i ng and demoralising effect. The clause permitted three inflictions of the lash, anti i t was not like a military flogging, for the amount of punishukett was left to the discretion of the gaoler. Sir 3. GRAHAM said that two years since when the crime of arson and firing ricks was prevalent amongst juvenile offence ders under sixteen years of age, the punishment of whipping was found to have such a beneficial effect that it was to be tried on all persons guilty of that offence. The clause had beta framed by the most competent judges and would doubtless base a powerful effect in stopping crime of that description. The Bill then went through Committee without further op.. position. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Half-past One o'clock. SCOTTISH MINSTRELSY. -At a recent meeting of some friends of Mr. Wilson, the Scottish vocalist, presi(k over by Captain James Lamont, R.N., at the Lomita Tavern, a subscription was opened, limited to one guin ea each, for presenting to that gentleman some permanent tea.. timonial of acknowledgment for his persevering and sue.. cessful exertions iu the revival and extension of the popularity of Scottish song. The .Chisholm was unavoid ably prevented from taking the chair by fudden and. severe indisposition. TI- 1 "