The Sun. — London, England, 1846-06-23 00:00:00

1 1; the two Houses. Now, my Lords, your Lordships have been pleased, in your late discussions in the Committee on the Corn Bill 'o adhere strictly to th;s question. Your Lordships refused to agree to amendments on the Corn Bill. No doubt, had you agreed to those amendments, you would have lost the Bill. 11Iy Lords, it is not only the losing of the Bill you are to consider, but what would be the consequence of Making alterations in the Committees in the clauses of money Bills, Excise Bills, and Customs Bills. Your Lordships would, In point of fact, find afterwards that the proceeding' in Parlia ment would be entirely paralysed. These are the inconveniences Which I am desirous to bet , of your Lordships not to incur ; in conveniences which the public n will feel most severely and most particularly ; and I conclude that your Lordships will have the same feeling upon this Bill as you had upon the other Bills. That whatever may be the effect upon your opinions by the ar guments of counsel, you will not consent to make any altera tions in the details contained in this Bill, and in the schedule of the duties upon silk, but that you will persevere in voting for the Bill. You will establish a precedent by hearing counsel in Committee against the details of that Bill which must be at tended with the greatest possible inconveniences, not only to your Lordships. by impeding public business, but alto by in ducing you to listen to arguments for a considerable time to Which you were sensible at the time you would give no attention.—( Hear, hear.) And thus you will have established a precedent which most b.. useless as to your selves, but most dangerous to those who will feel the evil effects of this precedent, by emplo)ing counsel to come her to plead their cause, which your Lordships must know can have no avail in inducing you o make any alteration in the details 01 the Bill. What 1 am particularly anxious to call your Lordship? attention to is, that the motion is to induce you to listen to counsel in the Committee on the Bill, of which the object is to levy duties or customs or. different branches of trade. The Duke of RICHMOND—My Lords, I did not intend to rise again on this subject, but for the speech of my Noble Friend the Noble and Gallant Duke, and I must say that I rise to protest against it. —( Great cheering.) If this is to be the constitution of Parliament--( Cheers)—l will ask your Lordships whether it is not a mere farce upon legislation — ( Vehement and long-continued cheering from the p otection ist Peers)—to call on us, night after night, to speak upon a Bill? and then, forsooth, we are to be told that it roust be passed because the House of Commons have said so.—( Great cheering.) My Lords, I contend that these petitioners have a right to be heard.—( Hear, hear.) My Lords, I will not deadn you by saying more than that, it this is to be the future course which is to be pursued by the Government, I hope you will alter your standing orders— (Cheers)—and that they will say that the Queen's consent and that of the Commons is sufficient. —( Cheers.) That must be the result of this argument as ventured to be made in this House.—( Hear, hear.) If it had been made by a young man wh o had just run away from school, I should not have noticed it—(Laughter)—but when it comes from my Noble Friend, the Noble and Gallant Duke, I am bound to protest against it, and I shall certainly feel it my duty to take the sense of your Lerdships' House on the motion.—( Cheers. ) Their Lordships then divided, when there appeared— For the motion—Present Proxies _ _ —74 Against the motion—Present Proxies 36 —7B Majority against the motion. 4 On our return to the gallery we found Lord BROUGHAM on his legs, protesting against proxies being used in such a question as that just under consideration. Those who represented the proxies could not have heard the arguments brought forward on behalf of petitioners, and, there fore, could not be supposed capable of forming any judgment on the point whatever. A desultory conversation then ensued from a question put by the Earl of Charleville to tht Duke of Buceleuch, as to whe ther the Noble Duke had heard the question put from the Chair, in which the Earl of Home, Earl of Haddington, and the Rail of Dalhousie took part. The Earl of WICKLOW thought that in these reforming times proxies ought to be disallowed. At any rate, in the question before them, he considered the privilege of using them ought to have been waved. Earl GREY concurred with the Noble Earl ( Wicklow) that Proxies should be abolished, and if the Noble Earl would make l motion for their abolition, he would support him; b ut as i t 2ng as proxies were allowed, he thought the present subject was one in which they could be legitimately exercised. He agreed with the Noble Earl, however, that in these reforming times they ought no longer to be permitted. The Duke o f RICHMOND thought the discussion oug ht t ot to be protracted, as it was an inconvenient one. For his 1 0 part he was always ready to submit to a majority , bu t he thought that the decision just come to was a very injudicious One, and that the privilege of using the proxies on such a sub mt. where a majority present were in favour of the motion, aught not to have been exercised. Lord STANLEY thought that if ever there was a ca se where the votes of those who were present should have over ruled th e votes o f th ose who were absent, the present was one . They who were called upon to decide in Committee had de cided that they would hear the petitioners by counsel at the bar of the H o u se , but their verdict was overruled by those wh o were abs en t, an d who, without hearing any of the argumen t s which had been advanced, virtually pronounced that hose Present should not hear the statements of the petitioners. A stranger case could not have been made out. It was not, h owever, for the purpose of entering into this que stion that but rose, nor to interpose any delay into going into Committee ; out he thought he should save the time of their Lordships if he made a few observations then, rather than unnecessarily oc cupying their time on the individual articles. If he were de- Pus of finding fault with her Majesty's Government, he should have no difficulty in showing that that Bill was incon sistent with the other Bill they had brought forward in refe tenee to corn, and which a Noble Lord pro nounced,ex cathedra, to, ,_be a perfect exemplification of the p rinci p les of free trade. ,ner should have treated the subject t o which this measure ap plied in the same way as they proposed to do with agriculture. They would, if they continued in this principle, find the land °7roers calling for the removal of other restrictions. He hoped they would not so stultify themselves by asking for the same in i tlyi:tion of injury on others as was to be inflicted on them ses—he hoped not, for though the measu re mi g ht for the present succeed, they would find that the landed interest would Still continue their opposition to this measure. He would w arn the Government that they would find themselves in the theit:se of twelve months in a very dangerous position. Now e was a reduction of revenue of 2,326,C00/., and on corn alone there had been a reduction of 357,0001. alone, and it was with such a falling off they proposed to take away protection from agriculture. This reduction of the revenue would be much greater in the course of another year, and it will then be seen how politic the measure proposed by her Majesty's Go vernment was, and how well it will have worked for the advantage of the country. Now the importation of silk since the reduction of duty on that article was, very great, and it was at this mom ent the y pro p osed to re mice the duty still further. There was also to be a reduction an timber. Again there was to be a reduction on boots and shoes ; and what would be the result if the benefit would not be to the humbler classes, for it was well known that boots were all article of luxury, and the advantage would be to persons who, like their Lordships, could atlord to purchase them. In 1 841 there was a duty of 21. 14s. per dozen pair, and in 1842 !, 1,11 1 duty was reduced to I/. 9s. 4d. The increase of importa 'Pm was from 4,8 9 1 dozen to 8,350, 12,220, 13,261, and 44 ' 387 Was it at so increased an importation that they should tow reduce this duty from IL. 9s. 4d. to 16s. This was a d uty which would materially affect the workmen of this . t hey The items he had g iven a pp lied to mens' boots, but would apply in like man ner to women's shoes. He t h ought the duty was quite low enough as it 4t present stood to enable their Lordships to pur t;(se that article of luxury. — ( Hear , hea r. ) He :;Ouse it right to make these few observa t i on s be fore the went into Committee, for he considered that, according I T the arguments o f h er M a jesty's Ministers, it had been ._ e o l( Tta that the import trade was most prosperous , and that frevenue was good. That with such a state of things a Feat reduction should be proposed required some explanation from the Government, and he hoped it would be given. The Earl of DALHOUSIE said, that in rising to answer e question put by the Noble Lord ( Stanley) he would en deavour to follow him as closely as possible. The Noble Lord measure stated that her Majesty's Government had introduced this because they were favourable to free trade — becaus e they were willing to adopt the measure as a frea trade question. Lord STANLEY explained what he had said was that the Government had not introduced it a.s a free trade measure, but that th ey had on the contrary introduced it as a measure favourable to protection —they had professedly introduced it as a protective measure, whereas in reality its effects would be the reverse. Earl DALHOUSIE—There certainly were in the Bill Which be had submitted to the House many anomalies which he would have wished removed. What her Majesty's Govern ment wished to do was, as they were about to remove all restrictions on fo id, to reduce also the duties on all other neces sary a r ticles which pressed heavily on the poorer c'asses of the Community. The duties on woollen clothing were such as pressed heavily on the poorer classes, and it was with a view to their benefit that they proposed such reductions. - Upon articles partially or wholly . manufactured, it was but right that there must be duties levied, and he was decidedly of opinion that a duty of 10 per cent. on manufactured articles, was not to be regarded as a protective duty, but simply for the Purposes of revenue. His Noble Friend had asked him what might be the loss of revenue from the repeal of the duties now proposed ? On this point he would accept the amount of lose stated by the Noble Lord. The Chancellor of the ' xchequer, in the other House of Parliament, had stated the probable foss at about 700,0001. per annum, which was, thought, a fair estimate. If that were so, they should be guided by what had was tak en place after the last alt eration in the tariff, when there a large reduction the first year after the change, which gradually became less till it righted itself The following re turns would show how the tariff of 1842 had operated : In 1842, the reduction in the Customs were 1,350,0001 ; in 1843, the Customs were 2 0 0,2000/. against 19,600,0001., the receipts of the year betore. In 1844, the duty was 21 ,400,0001., instead of 20,200,0001.; thus showing that the Customs had gradually recovered the loss occasioned by the re• duction of 1842. The total reduction in Excise and Customs thus afforded was 2,400.0001.; and the following was the result in 1845, independent of the great benefit that had been con ferred on the country. In 1845, the total receipts for Excise and Custo ms were 3 3,400,0001. against 32,100,000/. in 1842. This showed that the revenue was gradually improved year by year, while it had given a great stimulus to production. and operated as a powerful incentive to trade and commerce. — (Hear, hear) The Government had not the slightest doubt but that gradually the amount lost won d be replaced by incr eased consumption. The experience of the past was a guarantee for the future. His Noble Friend to referred to several other arti cles in w hi c h reductions were be made, and asked what good result would come from these. With regard to butter and cheese, it would have been inconsistent to duties in other articles of a similar kind, and hence it was proposed to reduce the duty on butter from 1/. to 10s., and on cheese from 10s. to ss . The Nobl e L or d h a d talked as if these duties were of astanding, or i nst i tuted for protective purposes; whereas, change impo se d t ill the end of the war.—( Hear.) The present an long wwere w re s ; but to as _ similate the duties to w h a t the y were before the p bad been imposed. The reduc tion of d uty an buenttenduti29 and cheese was made because th ese were articles that entered ex ex- tensively into the consumption of the p eo p le. The sa me argil ment applied to the article of foreign cattle, which the Noble Lord had likewise referred to. The next point the Noble Lord dwelt on was the silk trade. He said, truly the imports of silks had been yearly increased, but he (Lon). Dalhousie) did hot think the proposed alteration would much affect. those im ports. The duties under the old law ranged from 30 per cent. to as much as 300 per cent., thus often defeating the saving in any revenue from these articles, and it was to get rid of this anomaly, and to raise a regular revenue from this branch of trade that the present duty of 15 per cent was proposed. While dwelling on this head, he would sho w the ex p orts from France to this country, in variou years, from 1827 to 1843, with the amount cleated out here for consumption : Exported from France Cleared out in England to England. for Conumption. 1827 1828 ...... . ...... 335,000 lbs. ............ 156,0001b5. 1834 ............. 317,000 lbs. 1840 ......... 625,000 lbs. 11a43 ........ 484,000 lbs. and th e total exported from Franc- to England from .1527 to 1843 was 6,332.0001b5., and cleared out for consumption in the country 3,10,4000 lbs. ; showing that the amount of that cleared out for consumption didnot extend to more than 50 per eat. vf the whole imported. Apart altogether, therefore, from the question of whether the home manufacturers will be able to stand up against the competition or not, it appeared clear that the old 1a :v had not operated to increase the revenue, seeing so little 14. d been cleared out for consumption compared with the amount that had entered from France.—( Hear, hear.) The Government, therefore, would not have been justified ire doing otherwise than they have done, •so as to increase the revenue of the country and the imposition of a moderate duty. The next matter to which the Noble Lord referred was that of timber. Here also the same principle had been observed thet had been in the other branches of the tariff. The object was to impose a moderate, not a protective duty, and the result of the tariff of 1,342 was to show that the principle had been most successful. Of foreign timber there was imported as follows : —1842, 108,000 loads ; 1845, 282,000 loads ; of deals there had been imported, in 1842, 229,000 loads ; 1845, 342,000 loads. A similar increase had also taken place in colonial timber-255. a load. He did not thick it necessary to protect the colonies, and hence the . Government troposed to reduce the duty to 15 s. a load; trusting, as ex perience had already shown, that the increase in consumption in this article, which entered so largely into the comforts of the people, would soon more than eq'ialise any temporary loss of revenne. In boots and shoes the Government had acted on the same principle as was app lied to the other articles, be lieving that a reduction of ten per cent. would be a source of revenue, while those engaged in those trades would have but little occasion to complain, having that amount of revenue duty in their favour. Having, as a general principle, reduced the duty on all articles of manufactured produce, they could not consistently have passed by manufactured leather. The next point adverted to was the matter of stained parer. He thought, that of all the things sought to be introduc d, this was one where there was the least ground of complaint. The present duty was ls. a square yard—a most monstrous thine. The excise duty on the article manufactured was, at home, not more than half a farthing; the proposed Bill limited the amount of duty to 2d. a square yard. The paper stainers were a Ci-3S who were less worked than any class in the country; they none of them worked full hours. There was no reason why .hose engaged in arts and designs for the paper should not be able to compete with foreigners if they set themselves to werk. Government had done all they could to promote the success of the arts, by the establishing of schools of design, which were already very successful. Another article which was sought to ne reduced was that of pillow lace. The present duty was 121. 103. ad valorem; it was proposed to re duce it to 101 It had been urged as an objection to the Bill that the duties were sought to be removed from the poorer classes, H 2 would say, th t the me :sure w. s construe eti for no such put poses. The measure was n t proposed as a perfect mea sure. The measure was meant only to cart y Jut further the principle which had been acted upon for the last our years, in making reductions in the articles of general consumption, and reducing the amount of duty on manufactures to as near as possible the ad valorem duty of ten per cent. It rested with their Lordships, therefore, to express their opinion on the mea sure, which, :se contended would be of great ben fit to the i - - terests of all classes of the empire. Earl STANHOPE thought the parties caltal3le of giv'ng informationtn the real working of th las tariff should I e allowed to be he. rd by counsel at the bar at their Lordships' Hcuse. Nothing could al er the opinions he had express don this tceasure, and nothing could invalidate his arguments. He should, therefore, feel it his duty to ask the Noble Earl the question of which he t ad given notice, with reference to the remonstrances which had been received by the Board of Trade and the First Lord of the Treasury against this measure. The Earl of DALHOUSIE would lay on the table of their Lordships' House, in a few days, the remonstrances which had been received by the Board of Trade. Earl STANHOPE—If no regard were to be paid to such remonstrances and petitions from the people, he thought it would be entirely useless to petition against any measure, and he was borne out in that opinion by the statement of the Noble Duke on the Treasury benches. The Duke of WELLINGTON—What I said was, that your Lordships were no , in Ihe habit of altering, and con!d not alter, any clause or money Bill which was brought up from the other +touse. Earl STAN HOPE wished to know why the great autocrat of the Cabinet did not carry out his measures fully in every other article, instead of taking the protection from the labouring classes and poorer people, and driving them like victims to the slaughter-house ? He believed there could not be a single class of the country who would not be injured by the passing of this Bill. The Duke of WELLINGTON considered that their Lord ships had always recognised the principle of not altering the money clauses in a Bill of supply. In the late Bill which had been under discus.ion— Earl STANHOPE—What Bill? The Duke of WELLINGTON—The Corn Bill—their Lordships hail acted upon this principle. For 200 years they had always recognised this mode of doing busineas between the two Houses of Parliament. It would tend greatly to the in convenience of public business if their Lordships were to exer cise this power. The Duke of RICHMOND—The Noble Duke has per haps forgotten that I voted with him against Mr. Huskisson's Corn Bill, and it was thrown out. Earl STANHOPE— he fact of discussing the Corn Bill by their Lordships was, he thought, a sufficient refutation of the Noble Duke's opinions on the subject of money clauses. He would then ask the Noble Lord the President of the Board of Trade whether he was willing to lay upon their Lordships' table any information as to who were the parti-s, ether thanthose connected with the Goverment. who had fur nished the information upon which her Majesty's Minister had though proper to act. Earl of DALHOUSIE thought the present mode of pro ceeding a little comical. He had often felt the difficulty of his situation in their Lordships' ouse, but he hail never felt it so much as he had done this evening, at being called up so often to repeat his catechism. He had answered the first question of the Noble Earl because it was a question connected with a public office, and he always felt it both a duty and a pleasure to give every information on that subject. But the second question of the Nohe Lord he must decline to answer, as it would have the effect of throwing the responsibility from off . . THE SUN, LONDON. tariff would enhance the produce of the foreigner at the cost of the B:itish artisan, he must oppose it. Lord ASH BURTON considered that the Government had taken the property-tax, which should have been a reserve in time of war, and adopted it to the purpose of making unneces sary reductions in the amount of the import duties. He thought the idea of raising the revenue, by the reduction of duties was chimerical. Every authority went to warn their Lordships against that reckless system of finance adopted by the Govern ment. He thought the nem discovery, called free trade, would, if carried out, injure materially the interest, of all classes of the empire. The original motion for going into Committee was then put and agreed to without a division. The LORD CHANCELLOR then put the question, that the House do resolve itself into a Committee, which was agreed to without a division. On the clauses as to the reduction of the duty on the impor tation of foreign timber being read, Lord STANLEY said he thought no good would follow from it to the country, and that great injury would be inflicted on the partie- interested in the timber trade. He should, therefore, move that the clause be omitted. Earl DALHOUSIE entered into a lengthy statement of figures, for the purpose of showing that the Noble Lord's ob jections were groundless. Being satised that this measure was necessary to the interests of the country, that lbs. was a fair duty, and that it would be beneficial in a financial view, he felt it was his duty to give his hearty support to ir. Earl STANHOPE said, instead of the reduction of the duties on timber, there had been a decrease in the revenue since the last reduction of 60.),000/. It was certainly a most, inconvenient practice for the Noble Earl to quote from manu script documents in support of his arguments, as it did not give Noule Lords an opportunity of replying to his arguments. Earl KINN AIRD said, those reports were on the table of the House. Earl DALHOUSIE said, he had quoted from no documents that were no: accessble to every one of their Lordships.— ( Hear.) lie certainly had quoted from manuscripts, but they had been culled for convenience sake from the returns which had been presented to their Lordships some time aga. Earl GALLOWAY said that the reduction of duty upon Baltic timber had been most beneficial to his own tenants and ' the country at large, and he should therefore support the measure for a further reduction, believing that it would prove to be beneficial to the people of this country, and those engaged in the timber trade.—( Hear, hear.) The House then divided, when there appeared— Not content Content Majority against the amendment —l2 Clause 3, after a few remarks from the Duke of RICHMOND I and the Earl of DALUOUSIE, was agreed to. Upon clause 4 being proposd, The Earl of STANHOPE objected to the provisions of the clau ,e. After a few words from the Earl of DALHOUSIE, the clause was allowed to stand part of the Bill. Upon clause 5 being proposed, The Duke of RICHMOND trusted that the clause would not be considered at that hour of the night, as it affected the silk weavers, especially after the treatment they received that even ing at the hands of their Lordships, who called in the proxies. The Earl DALEIO , SIE said he was not for taking ad vantage of the Noble Duke. Lord STANLEY hoped that some arrangement would be come to with respect to this measure.—(Hear, hear.) The Corn Importation Bill was down for a third reading on Tuesday; but as the question had been so much de bated, and so many divisions having taken place, he (Lord Stanley), and the Noble Lords with whom he agreed on this question, did not intend to divide on the third reading. They would simply content themselves with signing a protest against the Hill, and stating the reasons why they opposed it.— (" Hear, hear," from the Duke of Wellington.) It might be thought convenient, under such circumstances, to have the remaining clauses and schedule of the Custom Duties Bill pro ceeded with on Tuesday, as there would be some discussion on them. The Duke of WELLINGTON—I have no objection what ever to the proposal of the Noble Lord. Their Lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 19. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'c!oek. COVENTRY, NUNEATON, BIRMINGHAM, AND LEICESTER RAILWAY. Mr. SPOONER moved, that the Committee on the Coventry, Nuneaton, Birmingham, and Leicester Railway Bill, 11)-- revived, that it be an instruction to the Committee, to entertain and hear the parties on the petition of William Atkinson Gardner, and the petition of Charles Holt Brace bridge, with reference to the non-compliance with the resolu tions of the House of the 30th day of April last. If the reso lutions which were adopted on the 30th of April by that House were to be maintainee, then it was imperatively necessary that the Committee on the Bill should be revived, in order that the case of the petitioners might be heard. Mr. BANNERMAN thought that before the House decided on the proposed motion, they should inquire who the pe titioners were. The party who petitioned against the Bill wa , deputy-chairman of the line against which the Committee had decided. It was also extremely doubtful whether the peti tioners had any locus standi before the Committee, as the peti tion was not presented until the day after the Committee had given their decision. Lord G. SOMERSET thought the explanation of the Hon. Member ( Mr. Bannerman) was quite satisfactory, and he should therefore oppose the motion. Mr. T. DUNCOM BE understood that the resolutions of the 30th of April directed that the Committees on Railway Bills were to entertain every petition presented, but it would appear that in the present case the Committee had not done their duty. If the resolutions were not attended to, it would be better at once to put them behind the fire. He should cer tainly support the motion. Mr. ESTCOURT considered that the present case was one of contempt of the House, inasmuch as some of the parties had foisted a fallacious return on the Committee. He would sup port the revival of the Committee, not for the purpose of con sidering the merits of the Bill, but whether the decision of the Committee had been come to in consequence of this fallacious report. Mr. GREENE supported the motion. He thought the petition should have been entertained. Mr. VILLIERS did not think that the revival of the case before the Committee was the proper mode of dealing with a fraud practised on the Committee. Mr. SPOONER had consulted the highest authority in the House as to the course he should pursue in the matter, and had acted according to the advice given him. Mr. NEWDEGATE hoped the House would not revive the Committee upon such vague allegations as those contained in the petition. Mr. B. WILLIAMS said the motion was only made for the purpose of incurring additional expense and delay. Mr. MUN f Z supported the motion, because he thought the Committee had not strictly followed the rules of the House. The House then divided when there appeared -For the motion l2 Against it - - 51aj,)rity against the recommittal of the Bill —6B GLASGOW AND BELFAST UNION RAILWAY. The report on this Bill was brought up, and the Bill ordered be engrossed. GRAVESEND AND ROCHESTER RAILWAY AND CANAL (SALE AND PURCHASE). The report on this Bill was brought up, and the Bill ordered u be engrossed. ,e shoulders of the Government on to Other and inferior persons. Earl STANHOPE replied, that his object on putting the question was, to be informed whether the Government, before they proposed this measure, had taken the opinion of intelligent, impartial, and well-informed persons on the effects likely to follow the carrying out of the measure, and he really believed that the Noble Earl had it in his power, there and then, to give a distinct answer to the question. He knew that it was utterly in vain to argue this question further, for there seemed to be a strange and unaccountable _conversion of opinion on 'this subject. Their LoidshipS, hOwever, would find probably. at the end of the year, that thp principles of free trade would become odious even amongst the mannfac rurers themselves, and they would find that those very men would come before their Lordships praying them to re-enact those laws under which their commerce and the country at large had flourished —(Hear, hear.) The Earl of RIPON said, that if lie had consulted the opinions of merchants and traders as to the effect of this measure in the same manner as the Noble Earl h represented had been done by Lord Liverpool, he should have received the most contradictory answers. N.rw he (the Earl of Ripon) conceived that that could not be the best mode of proceeding in this matter. The glovers of Wor cester and Dover, when a previous measure similar to this was submitted to Parliament, came to Parliament anu represented that they should be ruined if it passed; but it was shown to them that under the old system they could not proper, in con sequence of the high duties, which kept alive the system of smuggling; whereas the measure proposed would make the trade of smuggling a most unprofitable, instead of, as under the old system, a most profitable system.—( Hear, hear ) The deputation eventually, after the matter was fully explained, admitted that they were totally in the wrong. Another depu tation waited upon them from the dealers of prevision in Ire land, but the result was the same. A deputation from the boot and shoemakers also waited upon him in his official capa city of President of the Board of Trade ; but their Lordships themselves must know that not a whit less leather had been used in the manufacture of boots and shoes in this country since the passing of the tariff of 1842. Another most important deputation, consisting of thirty-two Members of Parliament, as well as several other gentlemen representing the milling interest of this country, waited upon the Members of the Government to state that unless the ancient system of protection were not only allowed to continue, but even to be inc eased, they would be totally ruined. But e very one knew that all these prophecies had been any thing hut fulfilled.—( Hear, hear.) Lord MONTE A GLE ,aid the House had a right to ask the Members of the Government what they expected the conse quence of this measnre would be.—( Hear, hear.) They had so often asked, but he appealed to their Lordships whether the Government had given a decided answer to sin of the questions that had been proposed to them. Their Lordships had a right to know a little from their Lordships what effect these measures would have on the revenue—the finances of the country.— ( Hear, hear.) Of course he gave the Government his hearty support in their attempts to carry out the principles of free trade, but the passing of measures like th se must inevitably lead to the perpetual continuance of that heavy burden the income-tax. ( Hear, hear.) If the country were condemned to a tax of 5,500,0001., it might be quite just that the country should be so burdened, but lie wished to know in what position this measure would place the finance of the country ? He did not feet any apprehension as to the security of the country, with respect to its finance. He should regard that man as a mere quack in the free trade cause, who should hold that the recent diminution of burdens upon the commerce of the country had led to its prosperity. ( Hear, hear.) The recent prosperity was not any more attri butable to the policy of the Government than a good harvest should e as the thise effect metoefastuhreeir would necessarily h,ar) consideredewould repatthat cause the continuance of the income-tax, and that the House had a right to demand an answer to the question, " what effect will the measures have on the finances of the country?— (Hear, hear.) Free trade was the question which interested all classes, and he grieved to think that his Noble Friend op posite should have lent his talents, his influence, and his youth to the advocacy of protective duties.--( Hear.) His Noble Friend did not always hold those opinions, for in 1842 he reduced the timber duty, when it was an increasing duty, The duty amounted to 600,000/. a-year. lie also consented to a repeal of the auction duties, which amounted to 300,000/. a year Here, therefore, was a million gone. The manufactures of this country required no protection. The Noble Lord here quoted the evidence of Mr. A'hworth and Mr. Gre 'g, to show that the British merchant did not fear the competition of America, or any other place in the world. The evidence of these gentlemen being relied upon as proofs against free trade, was the most extraordinary misapplication of evidence he had ever heard of. There had been objections taken to many parts o f this tariff, which were disposed of by the Noble Lord the President of the Board of Trade. It was well known that foreign arti cles were introduced into this countr y b y smugglers, w ho injured the revenue to a very large amount. I dics into one, th y y Pis country between slates, which The article o f mosa al upon which a heav dut was im posed, was amugs e „ trade they would increase the amount of this ve nue. ve nue. (Hear, hear . ) thi s contraband The cry got up against t wer e used as ballast. By d o ing away with the incentive to well known that the to plain fact, it was but to come the great benefit of the country. Lord COLCHE measure might do very well in poetry, and excite a cheer , result of the Bill would h e to S,TER believed d be yet taken up b y the which was now so m uch despiad, would more directly affected ' the protective principle manufacture r s th emse lves when they were by competitio n with America, and other countries, and they Housethe wagril'edulmtuorriestsfaovf.our would be prayin g the House for that protection which they were now deprivin g came that farmers of the country , The to consider those consider their clairn3 than they were now disposed preferred by the the imports had iner n e t a's w ed th ' P ab e l r y haps when that period 3% The Noble Lord concluded by re ferring to some retur ntr Marquis of SALISBURIL samee diC 1843, the amount of shipping had not increasedsiinne;.ll th e object of showing that though nroattiothink the measure ßritish as h was expected by proposedg who w supportedoul d work t so T ari h v e a iN n t o a b g i e e o 1 1, 1 , 2 !r d The President of the ;i i e t ries of tho Board of Trade, had supported the measuret re turns which he ( the Marquis of Salisbury) tho y u a at tended with a great deal of mystification. He did not weretk results deduced from them so satisfactory as they had been the con sidered by the Noble Lord ; for while the reduction of the duties might lead to an increase in the consumption of foreign silks and hoots and shoes, it would be at the expense of British industry. He recollected that a similar change in the tariff some years ago, raised the linen trade in and ar,rund London. The measures now proposed would tend to reduce the revenue very much, andforce them to depend on direct taxation, when they would find a general outcry raised by the country against the course they were pursuing. —(Hear, hear.) As the present GREAT GRINISI3Y AND SHEFFIELD JUNCTION RAILWAY EXTENSION (No. 3). Tile Lords' amendments on this Bill were read and agreed to. GREAT GRIMSBY AND SHEFFIELD JUNCTION RAILWAY AND GRIMSBY DOCKS CONSOLI DATION. This Bill was read a third time, and passed. HUDDERSFIELD AND SHEFFIELD JUNCTION RAILWAY (DARFIELD BRANCH). On the order of the day being read for the further proceed ing on the third reading of this Bill. Mr. STEWART WORTLEY said that the Bill, if carried into effect, would cause the most serious im pediments to the public, and he therefore moved that the Bill be read a third time that day six months. Messengers came down from the Lords bringing several Bills, which were ordered to lie on the table. Viscount EBRINGTON considered that no line at all would be preferable to the one under consideration, and entertaining, as he did, the strongest opinion on the subject, he would vote against the third reading of the Bill. Mr. MONCKTON mILNES hoped that the House would not swerve from its usual custom, b..t would affirm the decision of the (jommitte. Mr. C. WOOD said he should vote for the rejection of the this d reading. In another session the tribunal to which the Bill will be submitted would have a much better opportunity of arriving at a just conclusion. Mr. B. DENISON said he hoped that the House would reject the third reading of the Bill. The two Bills which had been passed ought to have been rejected by the Committee, and those which had been rejected ought to have been passed. Mr. ST ANSFIEL D supported the third reading. Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the House di vided, when there appeared, For the third reading ... 50 Against it 64 Majority SCOTTISH CENTRAL AND CALEDONIAN JUNC- TION RAILWAY. This Bill was read a second time. BELFAST AND COUNTY DOWN RAILWAY. Th's Bill was read a third time, and passed. BUCKINGHANISHIRE RAILWAY (OXFORD AND BLETCHLEY . JUNCTI6N). On the question that the Lords' amendment's on this Bill be considered, Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition containing strong allegations against the Bill, and hoped there would be no objection to have it printed and taken into consideration with the amendments. The Marquis of CHANDOS objected to any postponement. He was not aware until that moment that'any opposition would be entered into against the line, but he would pray that the House would not take notice of individual objections to a great public line. Sir GEORGE GREY also objected to the motion. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said all he wanted was to have the petition printed, so that it might in the hands of every Member of the House, who would not suffer a great injury to be inflicted on a private person. Mr. W. COLLETT said, the petitioner had no locus standi. The amendments on the report were then considered and passed. LEICESTER AND BEDFORD RAILWAY. Mr. W. ELLIS moved the third reading of the Leicester and Bedford Railway Bill. Mt. V. SMITH objected to the third reading of this Bill on account of errors which he perceived in it. It was the recommendation of the Board of Trade, and a standing order of the House, that the maximum rate of tolls should be mentioned in the Bill, but of these he found no men tion whatever. Sir GEORGE CLERK said that he had had his atten lacregesanidn the e w e!' t in io u n zin a l a u l m led ra t t o o t o h f is e c h said that there was no but upon looking over the Bill it was e foundcester andto contain Bedford su o ß h i l a , clause. The Bill was then read a third time. Mr. WAKLEY presented several petitions in favour of the Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle Railway. NEW ZEALAND. Mr. C. BULLER said it might be in the recollection of the Right Hon. Baronet that about a month ago he had called ttention to the colony of New Zealand, and the Right Hot. Gentleman was then pleased to state that he would give notice of the intentions of her Majesty's Government respecting the course they would pursue there. He wished, therefore, to know what the intention; of the Government wen: with respect to that colony? Sir R. PEEL said that the subject hadbeen for some time pa,t under the consideration of the Government, and the Sec retary for the Colonies. There had been some difficulties l a a i te j l e y st i y n s th G a . t v e c i o .r l i o rn ny n ; t but t ihnetrwodausetelOW happy to say that the znt e th_ority of the British Crown was being re-established there. gnz.ihoand e ld p i : e el; 1 t w y e in t sNtaetiwngztehaaltanidt ,whasatthwehianttwenotuioldn beo her e particular nature of that measure he a le w g a i : la n t o iv t e th m e e n as p u r r e e p atrheids to say. DEANERY OF WINDSOR. In reply to Mr. RICH, with respect to the appointment of a dean for Windsor. T U S-1),A,1( r Sir ROBERT PEEL said that a dean could . mot hold more than one living, but there was no disqualification whatever frem his holding a headship of an office ; he had, therefore, recom mended the present Dean of Windsor to her Majesty ; but he did not make any stipulation whatever with him as to his re signation of his tanner office, which, if he were not entited to hold, there.was a law to which the Hon. Member could apply for a remedy. SUGAR DUTIES. In reply to an HoN, INIxsTBEB. who inquired when the Go vernment proposed to .bring on the sugar duties. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he was about to rise to address the House on the subject, in order to state some circumstances in connexion with those duties, when the Hon. Gentleman rose. ' On Thursday last, after a full con sideration of the subject, he stated to the House that it was his intention, in order that deliberate consideration might be given to the subject, to move that the sugar duties should be renewed fur one month only. He stated this to the House no Thurs day last, in order that if any Honourable Member had any proeositi in to make on the subject he might have an opportunity of doing so. In or.lor that the House might be fully informed on the subject, he lead to state that at seven o'clock last evening he receivcd a notice from the Noble Lord, the Member for Lynn (Lord George Bentinck ) that it was his intention to move, on the Houseye solving itself into a Committee On those duties; that " the House is of opinion that the renewal of the sugar duties for one month is calculated injuriously to affect the : commercial inte rests of the country, and that it was the duty of her Majesty's Ministers to have brought forward their measures on the sob jeer, earlier it, the session." He thought on a qtt,tion of that importance, so much relating to commerce and affecting the policy of Government, it would have been adsieable to have given sufficient notice that it was intended to bring for ward a question of that kind. At the same . time, he did not mean to interpose between the discussion of such a question, always assuming, however, that the sugar duties were levied. He had spoken to the Noble Lord, and advised the bringing of it on after the discussion on the Coercion Bill to-night.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) He argued that the introduction of this resolution would have the effect of inter fering with the first step on the Sugar Daties Bill, but the discussion on that Bill, if the first step were interrupted, could not be postponed till next day ; and if it were postponed till the following Friday, there would occur an interval when no sugar duties would be levied, which would be injurious in com mercial affairs. He hoped the Noble Lord would not persist in his motion. If the Noble Lore wished the sugar duties should continue till the sth of August, or longer, there was nothing inconsistent with that in the Government motion ; for theeffect of it was merely to continue the present duties till that time. At all events, the Noble Lord must see that it was a question on which both the Government and the House ought to have had sufficient notice. Lord G. BENTINCK could assure the Right lion. Gen tleman that not one individual of the party with which he was connected would allow the proposed alteration in the sugar duty to take place on the 6th of July next. If the Right lion. Gentleman would propose a Bill for the usual period of one year, the Hon. Gentlemen around him would support the Bill. They blamed her Majesty's Ministers for putting the revenue in peril by delaying to so late a period of the session so important a measure as the sugar Bill. If it were carried, 40,000 tons of sugar would come in without paying any duty at all. For those reasons they would not be doing their duty to sit in silence without passing their censure on her Ma jesty's Ministers for their neglect. They were asked now to pass a sugar duties' Bill for a month. Why, it was more than probable that next week the present Right Hon. Minister would no longer be at the head of the Government. The ob ject of the friends around him wss to let the public know what they intended to do. He thought that the great interests of the public would be best attended to if the present Sugar Duties was renewed for a year, and not for a month. The party by whom he was surrounded were not disposed to offer any captious opposition to the measure, but they wished to legislate for the best interests of the country. Mr. HUME saw no reason why . the present Bill should be postponed for a twelvemonth. He did hope that whatever Government might be in power, they would be informed posi tively how the differential duties were to be arranged. Every means ought to be adopted to promote the outlay of capital in .ranufacturing sugar, as there certainty was a deficiency for supplying the lower classes. Mr. MILNER GIBSON preferred the proposed new duty to the present duties. He had received a letter from a large firm who had purchased a thousand tons of sugar. This sugar would have to remain in bond for a month, and he thought that it would be unfair to these parties if free labour sugar for the ensuing month was not to be admitted at the duty of I 9s. 10d. The Noble Lord had censured the Government for delaying so long to bring on the Sugar Duties Bill, but he would ask, why did he not adopt the advice of the Hon. Mem ber for Finsbury, and move an address to her Majesty, that the House had no confidence its the present Ministry.—( Hear, hear.) He felt sa'isfied that the Noble Lord would not main tain his character of being the poor man's friend, if he stood up so obstinately for the maintenance of a high duty on sugar. He really did not understand the principles on which the Noble Lord and his friends were acting. He called upon the Noble Lord not to interrupt the progress of public business by those paltry amendments. Let him come forward and boldly move an address to her Majesty of want of confidence in the Ministry.—( Cheers. ) Mr. BANK ES did not thank the Hon. Member for his pro position.—(A laugh). He would tell him, however, that they (the protectionists) still preserved the good opinion of the British farmer. ' He concurred entirely in the statements of his Noble Friend as to the course which they intended to pursue on the present occasion. The Corn Bill was no excuse for them to be told, w h e n the revenue of the country was neg lected, that it had prevented the attention to public business. Under the peculiar circumstances which were connected with ihe Bill, when one Government were going out, and another Government were coming in, a positive negative ought to be put to the further progress of the Bill, which was to come into operation only for a month. Mr. BERNAL wished to remind the House that they were playing with great interests—( Hear)—and in interfering they should be careful not to inflict a material injury to promote a temporary benefit. He saw a great many practical and tech nical difficulties to proceeding with the Bill, as it must come into operation on the 6th of July. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed that he had stated before that the motion of the Noble Lord might just as well, and as effectively, be made at a later period as at present. He did not wish to proceed with his motion in oppo sition to the wishes of the House, or to infringe in the smallest degree on the orders of the day. Lord JOHN RUS. 4 ELL thought whatever case the Noble Lord might make out, he did not think that -ttbers -were any parties in the House who would object to the continuance of the sugar duties for a month if they were now proceeded with. Under the present circumstances he thought the consideration of the measure should be proceeded with forthwith. Mr. BARCLAY hoped that the whole question might be fairly discussed by her Majesty's Government. Mr. JAMES observed that the greatest injury which the West Indian interest suffered from was the uncertainty in which their affairs were always enveloped. Such a state of things was the greatest possible bane to the circulation of capi tal. The colonies ought nut to be made the bone of conten ion between rival politicians for the upsetting of a Govern ment, to the great detriment of numerous private individuals and families. Sir ROBERT INGLIS rose to ask the Right Hon. Gen tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether, after the encouragement he had received, he should go on with his motion? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, if there was to be no opposition, and it thz House were prepared by common consent to go on with the motion, he should be very willing to move it. Lord GEORGE BENTINCK said it was not his inten tion to interpose any motion of the kind of which he had given notice, but he should take some future opportunity of pressing one of a similar nature. The House then resolved itself into a Committee of Ways and Means. The resolutions were moved and a gre ed to pro forma, and the report was ordered t o b e brouat uu to-morrow. PROTECTION OF LIFE (IRELAND) BILL. ADJOURNED DEBATE. The House having resumed, the order of the day for the 'econd reading of the Protection of Life (Ireland) Bill was proceeded with. Mr. S. CRAWFORD said that the people of Ireland wanted to secs fair play. They opposed any Bill which should have for its object the harsh treatment of any portion of their countrymen. He was not one of those who would oppose measures for the repression of crime in Ireland, but he thought that the present measure was not calculated to effect its object. He was opposed to the tyrannical provisions in the Bill for compelling persons to be in their houses at a certain hour, as it would be almost impossible for the people in the proclaimed districts to comply with the regulations. It would always ex pose innocent individuals to unjust accusations and annoyance, from the powers which were placed in the hands of the magi strate, and the facilities that would be afforded to the spy sys tem. Looking at the varied political and religious opinions of the magistracy of Ireland, was it safe or just to put an irre •ponsible power in their hands? Would they place the power of transporting men, on an information, in the hands of English gentlemen ? No. Why, then, should they pro pose to invest Irish magistrates with such a power ? Again, this Bill would have no operation or effect upon many parties who really were a pest to Ireland, while it would inflict great injury upon large masses of peaceful industrious people.— (Hear, hear.) He was sure had there been no precedent for it Government never would have proposed such a measure as the Coercion Bill, but the House must bear in mind what the prin ciples of these precedents were.--(Hear, hear.) The Bill of 1831 certainly sanctioned domiciliary visits, but it was not so severe as the present Bill. Since that Bill was passed by a Liberal administration, the example in some way mitigated the conduct of the present Government in bringing forward this Bill. He must remind them, however, that it had been repeatedly protested against as a measure , pernicious in its effects and -unconstitutional in its principles.—( Hear, hear.) It was a pleasing thing to live to see the change of opinion which had taken place in that House with regard to Ireland. It argued well for the growing sympathy that was rapidly rising up in this country towards the sister kingdom, and he now entertained hopes of shortly seeing the day when the social, the moral, the intellectual and physical sondition of the people of his unfortunate native country would undergo an extensive change for the better.—( Hear. ) In his opinion, the great evil under which she had laboured was the non-responsibility of her large landed proprietors for the condition of their tenantry, and he for one was an advocate or extending the well organised poor-law of England and Scotland to Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) But why, let him ask, should there be a poor-law for Scotland and none for Ireland? He saw no reason for this, nor did he believe any existed. It would prove as effective, nay, he would go so far as to say more effective in Ireland than Scotland ; and he entreated the Government to follow up the admirable measures they had just passed, for giving work and employment to the industrious classes of Ireland, with a Bill for applying the poor-law to that countiy. While he said this much he was bound to admit that an effective system of police must accompany any . remedial measures for Ireland, but he could not consent to give the police force in Ireland so much power and authority as this Bill would place in their hands.—(Hear, hear.) For his own part, if he were asked what measures he would suggest for the relief of Ireland, he would go back to the good old institutions of Alfred, and propose that all disturbed districts should be divided into so many divisions, suitable and con venient for the establishment of a police station ; at each station there should be an efficient and well organised body of police, selected from the people themselves, who should be empowered to act with rigour, but not with extreme harshness. If a plan like this were adopted the people would, gradually be removed from the state of barbarism into which they had been reduced by a long series of misrule to a state of comparative happiness and civilisation. Besides the police, he would establish • agricultural . and other schools in each parish, which had, he believed, been recom mended by the Poor-law Commissioners. It was true there existed a school in every parish now which was under the control of the Board of Education; but in his opinion a school for each parish was not safficient. There ought to be many.—( Hear, hear.) He would call on the British Members of the. House ti act with regard to the present Bill on the great principle which should be the rule ..,f Christian morality, "To do to others as we would wish to be done by. " He put it to the English Members, would the pa ss such a Bili for England? They could have had, if t' ey desired, a pl ea t o justify it, when the riots were going on, buts no such thing had been ever pr posed; s-, therefore, he would call on them to do to Ireland as they would co to England, and not to pass the ' Bill. What Ireland required were beneficial and not coercive measures. It was not his wish to t..ke a part in this discussion, n or did he itand there 45 a supporter of any party but from a NING I Jr IT N 21; 18461: desire, on all occasions, and mi - cler all Governmenti, to supporE those measures which he thought most beneficial to the country. Judge Perrin, at the last Spring assizes in Ire!ande'speaking on the conduct of the magistrates and the grand juries appointed for the special occasion, for carrying the provisions of an Act into execution for the benefit of the people, and who had re fused to do so, said that they had been guilty of a-high misde meanour and were subject to a prosecution. He would, therefore, impress upon English Members the danger of placing such a power in the hands of the magistrates of 'Mind, who had themselves set the la* at defiande. Mr. SEYMER said, when he recollected that the Noble Lord (the Member for London) had proposed a Bill of a similar nature, and that the protection party had voted for its first reading, it appeared to him that the time had arrived when, by a strong muster of all parties, it was hoped to place •har Ma jesty's Government in a minority; and the party who eat upon the Opposition benches, on those at present occupied by the Treasury. And taking all these facts into consideration, be did not think the Secretary. at- War, when he reproached the Noble Lord (Lord Bentinch ) for the inconsistency of the course Which he had pursued. end a when he excused the party led by the Noble Member for London, he had been quite fair in his observations, for he had not been equally just. The Noble Member for Lynn and his party had changed their votes with a view te defeat the Ministry, who, they think have nut acted in a 15,00/ ide manner on the qu stion of coe rc i on . B ut t h e Member for London and his party hsd equally changed their votes for the purpose of defeating the Ministry uncondition- ally. —(He r, hear.) He wou ld w i s h far a moment to con ' sider what was the nature of the measure on which such great party divisions were to take place ? or to ask, had Hon. Mem bers read tae Bill? for he had some doubts as -to that, always excluding the Hon. Member who had last ad dressed the House, and who had- appeared to have giien the subject deep attention. But the observations of some Hon. Members had induced him to beliebe that they had not read the Bill then before the House. It was not, as had been asserted, proposed to coerce the whole of Ireland— the Bill was only a temporary one, and it did not follow that any one country, or any one parish, should be coerced. When a n-cessity arose a district might be coerced, but not until then. Whatever might be the faults of the Government, and he for one would not justify them, he considered that they had acted in a just and generous spirit towards Ireland.—( Hear. ) That was his opinion ; and a similar one had been expressed by the Hon. Member for Cork on the occasion of the Maynooth Bili ; and such having been the case he was prepared to ac cede to the powers proposed to be vested in the Government. As long as parts of Ireland. remained in such a state as they were at present they would require a coercion Bill, and he was of opinion that no Government should be allowed to hold office which was not prepared to propose such a Bill in such a state of circumstances ; and if they abused the powers vested in them, or the people of England and Scotland saw a desire to oppress Irelaud, they would not permit them to remain in office, for they would know that if they permitted such a proceeding their turn would come next. The present state of things could not be allowed to continue with safety ; if the people were not protected, they would take the law into their own hands. They had heard a great deal about the liberties of Ireland, but he would like to know what_ amount of liberty existed in Ireland. He would take any five charges from the list of the state of crime in Ireland, and he would read them to the. House. One was a threatening notice to a steward not to collect his master's rents; another was a notice for a man not to pay a debt he owed to a certain man, but to his wife, from whom he had separated ; another was to prevent a man from proposing for a widow for whom another had proposed.—(A laugh.) Hon. Members might laugh, but it was no laughing matter. They could thus see that a steward could not do justice to his master, nor could a man marry the wife of his choice. They were told that things wore a better aspect, and that therefore coercion was unnecessary, but he was disinclined to doubt the statement, and they knew that former Coercion Bills had been successful, though they had never been put into operation. He would ask them how could landed proprietors be expected to reside on their estates unless they were afforded protection ? He would support the Government upon the present occasion, and he could not see the consistency of the course, that, having voted for protection, he should now be called on to vote against the Coercion Bill ; in other words to assist in bringing in a Government more favourable to free-trade than the present, and which would be strongly urged to take off the proposed three years of protection which had been afforded. The Hon. Member for Stockport would, of course, be in the Government—( Hear, hear)—and he confessed he would not be sorry to see him there. He (Mr. Cobden) had already done them all the mischief in his power, and if they were to have bail measures, why they would have the consolation of at least having good speeches.—( Hear, hear.) Nothing surprised him more than the strong party spirit which was evinced at the present moment by the party to which he had the honour to belong. When Hon. Members met in the streets, after the first observation of the heat of the weather, the next ques tion was " What will you do on the Coercion Bill ?" " Oh, I will take the straight course, and vote against the Bill." ( Hear, hear.) The straight course ! as if no other course was straight. Now, he would be almost inclined to call it the crooked course, but if his course was allowed to be straight in supporting the Bill, he would allow the contrary course to be straight also.—(Hear, hear.) But if his course was not called; straight, he would be obliged to quarrel—what he most wished to avoid. Again, if he met in a club-room, he would be told, .‘ Oh, we count upon so many honest and true men to defeat the measure." Now, he was not so foolish as to take offence, but he felt his face getting rather hot—( Hear, hear) — when such language was used. He was attached to the principles of protection to British industry, but he also believed that the present Bill would be beneficial, and - he would therefore vote for it He would just instance in the Secretary-at-War, a man who never took a course but such as was perfectly con=istent with honourable feeling; and he did so because he knew the Right Hon. Gentleman ; yet that gentleman, he ventured to say, would not stick at applying in debate those hard names which had been made use of by the Hon. Gentleman. The case of Fox had been introduced in exculpation, but he would answer that by a single line of the Latin poet— " Distat eloquentid Let Hon. Gentlemen imitate Fox in his eloquence, and leave him alone in his use of hard names and hard words.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") There was one sentiment used by the Learned Recorder for Dublin in which Le coed not concur. Tnal Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said in effect, that it would be well if her Majesty's pre sent Ministers were di , placed by the Noble Lord, because then they would have no more of those painful scenes, those hard words, and i.e (Mr. Selmer) thought he added, vitupe ration ; hut he (Mr. Soymer) ratl7e: expected that in op .positien these hard words, and bard names would be revived. At the same time, he felt it was the duty of every Memot r that House, to assuage, as far as possible, all p.2rsonalities, and the use of hard names.—The Hon. Genii Than sat down, after stating that he would oppose the amendment of the Right Hon. B ronet (Sir W. Somerville) opposite. Mr. C. POWELL said, he never hear 1 opinions expressed in Parliament, founded more upon ignorance of the condition of Ireland than those uttered by the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. That Hon. Gentleman could not surely have heard the admirable speech which had been delivered on the subject by the Member for Oxfordshire. That Hon. Member had shown to demonstration, in his able speech, that the docu ment on which the Hon. Gentleman had rested, the Govern ment returns of crime in Ireland, was incorrect, and could not be relied upon. He had shown that out of the 2,000 cases, • which was the gross amount stated, 805 were merely threaten ' ing notices, and 802 of these notices, which were never followed by injurious acts—he (Mr. Powell) believed had been got up by the scouts of the police. Instances might be quoted from the annals of crime in England to parallel what had taken place in some parts of Ireland ; but he would not detain the House. He could not imagine a severer satire on her Majesty's Government than the present measure. That Government, the strongest that had existed, came down now, the eighteenth time in the political history of Ireland, for a coercive measure—a Bill giving them the command of physical force—a measure to annihilate the liberties of the people of Ireland. It might be said to him that the present measure did not apply to all Ireland ; but his reply was, that it did, if the Lord-Lieutenant chose. Her Ma jesty's present Government on this occasion, found Ireland in 1841 in a state of perfect tranquillity, the authorities in the country had the confidence of the people ; and the present Go vernment selected for the highest offices in the administration of the law, the most obnoxious individuals in the country—indi viduals who had for years been in the habit of reviling the people of Ireland. If there was an obnoxious person in the provincial localities, they made him a magistrate; and if there was not such a man in the district, they set about hunting him up from another quarter ; and having done so, that Govern ment came down to Parliament and asked for power .._ . to put down the disturbances which had been excited by these gross abuses. Her Majesty's Government had endeavoured to represent these disturbances as non political. But he thought that the great mass had withdrawn their confidence from the constituted authorities in the country, and was not that political ?—( Hear, hear, from Mr. Sheil.) The repeal agitation had been ccnstrued by an Hon. Gentleman opposite into high treason. He (Mr. Powell) though an advocate for the repeal of the union, enter tained the strongest wish for the British connexion ; and he further thought that, repealer as he was, the measures which he would support would tend more to cement that connexion than those which had been proposed 1.1 the Hon. Gentleman who had thought proper to characterise repeal as a dismember ment of the empire. Why, for 490 years that connexion had continued to exist at the same time that there was a separate Legislature. As he had already said, the returns on which those fears were founded were incorrect, for out of 2,000, the total sum, there were 80r mere threatening notices ; and from these 805, only three had been followed by overt acts. Now, as to these notices, he himself had received a paper, which he held in his hand, addressed to Mr. Powell, M.P. Inside there were these words, " Look what comes, death to the Saxon."—( At least so we understood the Hon. Gentle man to read, for he read with great difficulty.) Then followed a coffin and cross-bones, and these words, " Mr. Powell's sur tout. Here is your fate, if you vote for the Coercion Bill." ( Laughter.) Now, he believed that many of these cases were got up as hoaxes, but many of them were excited by the secret service money of the Government, which, since their acces sion, had been freely distributed among the people of that country.—( Hear, hear.) He knew it. Many lived by it, and it was called " doing business ;" and those persons were known as " Paddy M'Kerrs." He (Mr. Powell) was sure that the social order might be sufficiently maintained in Ireland by the ordinary means of law, if these were used by those who had secured the confidence of the people. That, however, the present Government had not acquired, and he thought never would • and he believed further, that their resigiiation would be hailed by the people of Ireland. Very different would have been their feelings, if a sentiment uttered by the Hon. Mem ber for Oxfordshire had prevailed some time before in that House, when he asked whether any honest man could, upon the evidence supplied by her Majesty's Ministers, sanction en croachment upon the liberties of the people of Ireland ? Mr. COLLETT said he would support the second reading of the measure on the same grounds as the first, for since he had uttered his opinions on that occasion he had not heard anything to remove those reasons which he then gave for so voting. There existed a certain set of robbers, assassins, and marauders in certain counties In Ireland ; and as soldiers were sent out to apprehend this class of persons in Naples and Sicily, he did not see why the same means should not be adopted in Ireland. For a period of eight years there had hardly passed a day in which outrages had not been committed. There had arisen a sympathy with crime which he could not account for—a sympathy with these roaming assassins. And why should not the police have the power to suppress it? He knew that there was a price for crime. He knew—and it might seem strange to them—that the price was 21. 10s. for crime when the man was not shot dead, and 61. when the man was killed. Would he for a trifling saving of 5001. or 1,0001. per annum, send 500 men loose upon the country-500 men accustomed to the use of gunpowder, and weapons of every description ? (Haar. ) No, he could not d o it as a B r it on , or as an Englishman. Let them not be deceived by the temporarY lull that had occurred, for he b e li eve d th a t if this Bill did not pass , 1 the second reading, there would be riot and e xultation at the failure of a measure which would put a stop to the c rimes of li these maraudin g assass i ns . H e b e lieved that a temporary Coercion Bill would be of benefit to the country. He ha t always felt well disposed towards the Irish, and had done all in his power for them, but still he thought that this Bill was neces sary. The keeping of people in their houses from sunset to sunrise was not the question. It was the question of whether there was to be any security for life and property in Ireland— ( Hear, he ar )— an d they were bound to give protection to people who were well disposed towards their fellow-countrymen, and who received nothing but injury in return. He received accounts of crime and outrage every Monday morning from Killelue; and hie secret ary had on four occasionieheen stopped, although he was returning with only half notes. B e f ore h e sa t down, he would b eg t o se.± only one word.' He Was surprised to find it recorded that he had dissented from the present measure, but he felt bound to say that he would on this occasion give his cordial support to her Majesty's Ministers. Mr. HALSEY said he opposed the Bill upon a - solemn conviction that the state of crime in Ireland did not afford to them a sufficient giound.for the introdnetion of such. a mea- . sure. Did the s t ate of crime in IrelanirshoW -an increase over former crimes committed in Ireland, and there appeared a marked stmpathy for the criminals, but this Bill was a most irritating as well as a most unconstitutional measure. And with regard to the intimidation of witnesses, it did not in any way provide against that evil. The - Bill was . not what it should be—an enconrag4ment to the people of Ireland to seek measures of conciliation with their superiors. He did not seek to put the question on personal grounds, brit he did. conceive that it was a fair ground of discussion to speak of the'eonduct of public men. He certainly found fault with the : conduchof the promoters of this measure, as they had. said that the succeis of the Corn Bill was dependent on the passing of this mewiere, He did not see what connexion there could be between_ tom-: mercial measure, which was to arrive at maturity . ine three years, and a temporary and unconstitutional meastere.., (Hear, hear.) He did not wish to judge of tile un.tivea of her Maje,ey's Ministers in bringing forward this measure. They - might have been of opinion that it was necessary for the state of Ireland, but if they were of such an opinion, why did they not press it forward at once ? for under such circumstances delay w as li tt l e short of a crime. Under these circumstances he should give the Bill his most strenuous opposition. Mr. V. STUART was not prepare:' to deny, that crime existel to a frightful extent in Ireland, hat he fully believed that this Bill was net at all the one likely to suppress it. o rf f h t e l r i e r e was te n o o t f omnien dmemb e rthe of people e t o h i a l t e . v: n h d o , kw w ne h a d n i , d ah n in o g t kn..w that they bad a . great want of confidence in the laws; the e d was the w th h e ie ihires woulden t orpe restore r t ess vtehat confidence and ? Wereunconstitutional the ine lawsasure in exist nee with regard to Ireland at all calculated to restore that confidence ? Did judges inform tF e inform them that laws were made for the benefit of soviet and did their application bea r ou t t h at f act ? He had seen the ; law prostituted to the worst purposes. He . had seen whole fami.ies driven out upon the roads, their cottages unroofed, and their cattle driven away. He had seen them working by the roadside in the hopes of obtaining redress, not from the middleman who had turned them out, but from that superior landlord. These landlords were, no doubt, willing to , redress the wrongs of their tenants, but they had it not in their power, under the peculiar systems on which their estates. were managed. 'there was in geland a most singular feeling With regard to being galled by unnecessary interference; and the practice of offering money to obtain evidence was one of the most mischievous character. The man who was induced to come forward by such motives was not unnaturally regarded asidegra ded man. This Bill would not, in his opinion, answer the ends for which it was intended. It would produce a temporary lull, but its permanent effect would be to increase the evils for the abolition of which it was created. Let them not at tempt coercion, but give fair play to those laws calculated to inspire a confidence in the legislature on the part of the people. Mr. ROEBUCK said, he had well considered the effect of this measure now before the consideration of the House, and without referring to the recent vote he gave in that House, he would speak of the vote which he should give in accord- ance with those principles which had always directed his political career. In accordance with all those principles which he had derived from a careful study of the business, the science, and the art of legislation and Government, he was inclined strongly to believe that all tho e modes of legis lation in all those sorts of Bills and Acts of the present description were mischievous ; because, in the first place, they were inefficacious in a great measure for good. They were in as strong a measure efficacious for evil. If he looked at the situation of the people of Ireland, and at their past history, still stronger was his feeling that it was folly and injustice to carry such a measure. He wanted to know, before he made up his mind how he should vote upon that occasion, what it was th a t ac t ua t e d t h e protec tionist party, head e d by the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn, and the Whig party, led on by the Noble Lord the Member for the city of London, in givfng their opposition to this mea sure. In the first place, then, the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn, in his speech upon the first reading of the Bill— which, by the way, he supported—remarked that murders com mitted in Ireland would rest upon the heads of those who delayed the passing of that measure, and yet ne was now opposing it himself,—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") What was it, then, that had induced the Noble Lord to change his course? Why, it was because—to take the Noble Lord's own sentiments—because he had no confidence in the Right Hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Treasury. The Noble Lard op posed the second reading of the Bill, because the Right Hon. Baronet had done one great thing—because be had relieved free trade from the shackles of monopoly=because he had car ried the Corn-law Bill—because he had done that which the country desired.—(Hear, hear.) Well, then, if the Noble Lord succeeded in hoisting the Right lion. Baronet from office, his opposition would be at an end, and he would no doubt be prepared to support the same measure if it were brought forward by a monopolist party.—( Hear, hear.) Well, but what was it, he wanted to know, that induced the Liberals to support it ? Before he could make up his mind as to the vote he should give, he must satisfy himself that it was dictated by no vindic tive or party spirit. —( Hear, hear.) Now, then, let him recall to the recollection of the House, that in 1832 a certain Bill, which literally was a disgrace to the statute-book, was brought in and passed by a Liberal ad ministration. What was it that had worked so great a change in the opinion of the Noble Lord since that period.—(Hear, hear.) Again in the year 1832, a very rigorous measure of the sort, which contained the well-known domiciliary visita tion clause was passed by an overwhelming majority, acting under the advice of the Noble Lord ; and in 1835, Lord Mor peth, who was then Secretary for Ireland, introduced another Coercion Bill for Ireland, though, as compared with the Bill of 18:12, it was an exceedingly modified measure. Now, Lord Morpeth on introducing that Bill made .some remarkable"de (Aerations. The Noble Lord, for instance, admitted that crime was on the decrease in Ireland, but nevertheless the country was in such a state that•it could not be governed with out the aid of a Coercion Bill, with far more stringent provi sions than were to be found in the Bill then. under discussion.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Member for Cork (Mr. O'Connell) one would have supposed, after listening to his speech against the present Bill, must have • opposed the Bill of 1835. But what did' Mr. O'Connell say, while the measure of 1835 was under discussion?—( Hear, hear. ) Why, the Hon. and Learned Gentlernanl after admitting that the measure was highly calculated to reduce the amount of agrarian outrage in Ireland, went on to say, " The present measure, if he rightly understbod. it, was to prevent parties being out at night without being able to give an account of themselves, or for unlawful purposes; and, if so, he could only add that he was convinced its operation would produce, the greatest benefits in Ireland. He only wished, in fact, that its provisions had gone a little further." Mr. Grattan, who was another member of the Irish party, on the same occasion, ob served, " That it was impossible to let things go on in Ireland without something being done." True, the observation was rather ambiguous, but there was no mistaking the speech of the Hon. and Learned Member for Cork.—(Hear, hear.) He wanted to know what actuated the Hen. and Learned Member for Cork, in his present opposition to a measure of a much more modified character than the one of 1835.—(Hear, hear.) He now came to the Noble Lord the Member for the City of London, and before he could make up his mind as to the vote he should give, he wanted to know what it was that had pro duced so extensive a change in his opinions upon the subject of Coercion Bills.—(Hear, hear.) He well knew that when the Noble Lord returned to power, in 1835, Lord Besborough was to have been sent to Ireland upon the expressed under standing that the Coercion Bill should be proceeded with with out delay.—(Hear, hear. ) Lord J. RUSSELL—That is not true.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. ROEBUCK continued. He must take the Noble Lord's denial, but still he gathered this fact from the history of Coercion Bills, that this was the first time the Noble Lord ever opposed one. Now, under all these circumstances, before he could make up his mind to oppose the Bill, he must be satisfied those who opposed it were consistent in their opposition. From the extraordinary combination of circumstances in the opposition, he found the votes of Gen tlemen voting against the Bill who never voted in that way before. He found that the object of the one was to throw out the Administration, while the other was actuated partly by the same object, but principally with the view of facilitating their return to office. He could not help looking at both their oppo,itions in a similar light; and he thoUght the opposition of the Noble Lord the Member for London was most unfair. It was urged at an inopportune time, but with - opportune ef fect—urged with the view of unseating the present Admi nistration, while there was not the remotest hope of a better coming in. —(Hear, hear.) Brit he could tell the Noble Lord that he • was not in a position to govern this country, and if he succeeded in obtaining office, it would prove the de struction of the Liberal party. —( Hear, 'hear.) He believed, in fact, that it would produce a recurrence of the events of 1640, 1841, and 1842, when the Whig party continued in power for no beneficial purpose—brought in measures only to be a Government losing credt rejected—a party in fact w .t i vr th it t h he ev m er in y o o r t i h ty er fo o r atl i o ts n s a u n p d p e o o e n t, nt a r n y d . —(Hear b t e h fo a r t e h h e e h e n o d u a ld ha j n oi d n on th ed e N coe ob r le ei L on ord ß , i h il e s for mast ever.—( v ehve hear.)r —(Hear, hear.) Let him declare his intention to apply his assurance a is wise And conciliatory measures to that unfortunate country, and he might rely upon it he would then, in the event of his taking office, be able to govern with credit to himself and honour to the nation .—(Hear, hear_) Lord J. MANNERS said his objection to the measure was one of principle, and if he asked himself how such men as Wind ham, and Swift, and Bolingbroke would have voted upon such a measure, he could not fail to receive an answer that they would have voted against such a Whig proposition.—( Hear, hear. ) A case of paramount necessity had not been proved for its introduction, either by the statistical reformation placed before the House, or by the conduct of the Government in pressing the measure through the House. The claus e s o f th e Bill did not reach the evil. The offences complained of were com mitted for the most part during the day, and the provisions of the Act did not give any protection during that period. It was therefore inapplicable even if there was a case of paramount necessity made out or proved to the House, and he would, therefore, vote against the Bill. Sir J. GRAHAM said, he did not ri e to address the H. use immediately after the Hon. Member v f r o e r sen ß t a' w .h a , s a n s 0 11 ,, e a constitutional considered that there might be some Member on the sam e s id e of the House, who woul a d n h io a hn v e e ced 7 d notittaedt thet ohave spoken t o the question. agree with the rntsim on.Al e m b ein,r he h e a c t 0 n d s e i s d p e e r r e a d t , e that they diseases ion. He measure, am 'tted atc shouldo ucould n e t h, norav e ought not, to pass s uc h a desperate o f theH remedies; measure as the present, unless there could be a case shown of paramount nee _' sity; and it would be on these .mounds alone, that he would ask Hon. Members to vote with him in support of the Bill. And, with reference to the charge of delay, he would observe, that the Honourable Member for Lambeth was the only one who had done justi ce t o t h e Government upon t h e o ccasion; for ho had said th at, rev i ewing the whole conduct o f the Government, •he did no t cons i der that they cou ld h ave in earlier p er i o d. H e mus t sa y that the Noble that somewhat L or d reproached the Gove rnmen t w ith delay, in circumsta n ces the L( rds in the surprised him. The Bill came down moved that the n f rom end of March, and an Hon. Member conside ration of the Bill should be postponed to the o_her orders of the Noble Lord the Member fo r L on . the day, and he believed don supported nun in that motion.—( Hear, hear.) H e h ad Government, having t o consider of further to observe that the an alteration in th e corn-la especially the question were now 7s, and which t hey discussing, it h a d the measure to decide likewise that that which was of primary importance, and that which, though important also, was still but secondary. Now the state of Ireland, the necessity and destitution of the people made an alteration in the corn•lawe a question of primary importance. If then, the primary im portance of that question were admitted, it would seem, he said, that no delay could be charged against the Government in the pro g ress of dr, measure now befo re th em. Th us muc h on the first point. He was unwilling to detain the House with the repetition of facts which had already been laid be fore it ; hut an attempt had been made to show, that whatever might be the case in referenoe to certain parts of Ireland, yet,'_in refe rence to the whol e o f Ireland, crime was not on the increase. Now, he wa s not there to prefer an indictment against the whole of I re l an d ; b u t certainly, though in 5 still, there had not b een an i ncrease of cr i me in 1 ithe whole of Ireland crime was not on the increase. The Bill was founded on fi ve count i es v i z . : —Tipperary. Roscommon, l Clare, Leitrim, an d Li mer i c k, and he knew i theren certain d would spread, and it had circumstances crime, unless checke , been. spreading. He would compare these counties with the whole of Ireland. The populatioh of .the,whole of Ireland was 8,400,000 ; the populatlon of these five counties, 1,500,000. or one-sixth of the - whole. The arca of Ireland was 20.000,000 of acres, and of th 4 five counties, 3,500,000 acres. The total of crime in the five countiea for fire months of the year.lB4s was 1,074. The return for these counties during the same months - of 1845, gave 1,323, or an increase equal to 25 per dent. Of • insurrectionary and agrariarre rinie for five months; the return gave 779 for 4845, and 933 for 1846, being an increase, of 29 . per cent. - Taking these fi ve"counties, as compared with the whole of Ireland, the following was the return of specific crime : Homicides in those countries increased in 1546 at the rate of 36 per cent. as compared with all Ireland ; firing at the person at 68 per cent.; aggravated assaults at 48 per cent.; assault, - with intent to injure life, at 38 per cent. ; demand and robbing of arms at 72 per cent. ; murderous intention in the use 'of - arms at 80 per cent. ; administration of unlawful oaths at 39 per cent. ; assaulting and taking dwelOng-honses at 79 per cent. The total, in 1845, was 665 ;, in 1846, 872 ; and. for the whole 'of Ireland in 1846, 1,443; in those specified crimes allowing an increase of the proportion of 60 per cent. In opposing this .Bill, it was observed by the Noble Lord the, :Mem beclor Newark, that this Bill was inefficacious, or only efficacious as against crime committed by night. The Noble LOrd the Member for Durham has moved for a return of all the murders committed in Ireland during the present year, and with all the circumstances attending it, togsther with the hour by day or by night. With respect to these returns, the facts he was about to state were well worthy of the attention of the House, as it was directly against the argument that the Bill woutil be inef f icacious with reference to crime, and they were mostly com mitted by day. The returns showed that the numbers of mur ders committed between sunrise and sunset was 27, and be tween sunset and sunrise, showing .a majority of one • half, or nearly so. The attempts 'at murder be- • tween sunrise and sunset were only 13, while be tween sunset and sunrise they numbered 45. It was necessary to state to the House something with reference to the comparisons drawn between the murders committed in England and Chose committed in Ireland. Between the years 1841 and 1845 the average number of murders committed in England was 110, including infanticides, which made up a pro tpbo e r t n i o u n m o b f e m r o o f r e b t o h m a o h i d a e s l f o no t m t h m e tr ; e d and n during lreland the w a s e e x p e e l u r i s o i r d e s of infanticides, 128^; being a proportion of one homicide to 64,000 of the population ; while in England, exclusive of in fanticide. the population was one to 100,000. The proportion of convictions-Its Eng land was one to 32 3 / the of• the criminals, , anitin Ireland one to 8 1 •!.. - He had received accounts of the most ' hideous esorders in 'Clare and other counties ; .and it was very evident; from all accounts, that . the numbe r of crimes was, not at all on the decrease, The number of homicides committed in ,Ireland during the last four years amounted to 446, and he had ascertained that most of the parties the offence was committed against belongedto the labouring classes. 261 of the number were' labourers and gervants; while'others were night workers and bailiffs. The same might he said with regard to attempts at murder. The number was 436, while of parties against whom the offence was com mitted 94 were farmers, and 39 were labourers, and the rest wood-rangers, stewards, and servants.—( Hear, hear.) The Honourable Member for Cockermouth had stated that Government brought forward this measure not from a conviction of its necessity; but to satisfy their partisans in Ireland. So far, however, from this being so, he could assure the House that even last summer, from the accounts he received from disinterested parties, he had begun to be im pressed with the conviction that some such measure as this would have to be passed.—( Hear, hear.) HE admitted that the position of land in Ireland was originally the primary cause of all the crime in Ireland ; but then they must bear in mind that although the immediate crimes themselves were connected with no religious or political causes, they had become so exten sive as to shake the very foundation of society itself. This rendered it clear that something must be done to reduce the amount of crime in Ireland, and it was the knowledge of this faet which had induced the Government to bring forward this Bill.--(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman said that the poor should receive relief. Why there were no less than 14,000 able-bodied men receiving daily wages in Ireland under the Public Works Act; and as to schools for agriculture, they had been already established, and an Act for draining land had re ceived the royal assent. He had, moreover, the satisfaction to state that children to the amount of 400,000 were receiving ,edueation. The Secretary-at-War had also laid a Bill upon the table of the House for advancing a mil lion of money to the landed proprietors for the purpose of encouraging them to drain and improve their estates, and these were all the measures which had been recommended by the Hon. Me m b er . (Th e Ri ght Hon. Baronet then read a document for the pu r p ose o f s h owing that the people in Ireland were accustomed to conceal the criminal, and not to / bring him, to justice.) The Noble Lord had said that he (Sir J. Graham) had not dealt fairly in changing his opinions on these great questions, without apologising for language which he had used' in oppositicn. He would not be compelled to defend particular expressions, but he would remind the Noble Lord of his having overthrown Sir Robert Peel's Government, in 1835, in a measure for the appropriation of the property of the Irish Church ; and yet,: when in office, he had abandoned that measure in a way which he would not characterise. He said there was this to be said for himself and his colleagues, that whatever change of opinions they had adopted, they had adopted them under circumstances of necessity, and had car ried those changes into effect, at a sacrifice to themselves, per haps, of their power. The Noble Lord opposite and those with him had changed their opinions as often as circumstances had made it appear necessary. The Bill before the House had been contrasted with that of the same nature which was intro duced in 1835. The contrast had been well depicted by the - Hon. Member for Bath. The present measure was very much less stringent than that introduced in 1835. Now he begged to draw their attention to the state of crime when that Bill was introduced. In 1835 the total amount of crimes was 10,2.25;-.in 1836 it had fallen to 8,067 ; and in 1837 when a motion was made for repeal of that coercive Act, crime had fallen to 6,775. In the year 1835, his Noble Friend thought that he was justified in passing a measure of a less stringent character, and one more calculated to enlist the feelings of the people on behalf of the Government. The Noble Lord said, that though he trusted he was justified in thinking that the as pect of affairs in Ireland was not so menacing as before, yet the state of crime had nut' been sufficiently reduced as to call upon the House to dispense with the powers contained in the Act. This was the opinion .of the Secretary for Ireland. Mr. O'Connell said that the end for which such a measure should _ be introduced should be .to punish, and not to prevent. That was the object with which he had intro duced it to the Hous . e. He would observe that during -the whole of Lord Melbourne's Government, from its first commencement to within nine months of its close, they ' po4sessed a' measure niorr strinn.ent in many respects than the one he vas then introducing, and it received the concurrence of Mr. O'Cotinell. During its existence crime fell very much, but when ip 184 Pit was at an end crime rose rapidly; and from being about 4,000, it in the course of the four following years came up to 8,000. The first strong coercive measure was in troduced by Lord Grey, with Mr. Fox. The second was in troduced by Lord Melbourne, the Noble Lord tl'e Member for the city of London being then Home Secretary'; and the state of crime then was not half so urgent there as it was now. That measure had received the sanction of Lord Linsdowne, and Lord Melbourne had written a letter to the Repeal Association. stating his opinion that this measure had been too long delayed. On the outset, he had admitted - that the Bill was unconstitutional and harsh in its provisions but such a measure was required by the existing circumstances, and he agreed that no one Member of Parliament should vote for such a measure unless he believed in its necessity.—(Hear, bear.) The Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Newcastle- Under-Line, had, in the course of the debate, asked him a ques tion with regard to the Bill, which, like others, was purely matterof detail, and he could answer that in Committee. Go vernment would be glad to make the clauses as much recon cileable with the views of Hon. Members as they could.—(Hear, hear.) Before he sat down, he 'must remind the House 'that for the last five years they had fortunately been enabled to go vern Ireland withouthaving recourse to a measure of this sort; but he must, at the same time, remind the House that the time might come when such an Act might be required, and on his conscience he declared that Ministers were firmly convinced that that time had already arrived, and no matter what Administration might be in office, Ireland could not be governed without the aid of a measure like the one he now asked the House to read a second time.—(Hear.) Mr. LABOUCHERE would not detain the House for any lengthof time at that late hour, but he could not allow a single moment to pass without answering the charge the Right Hon. Baronet had thrown out against him, with regard to the sugar duties.—(Hear, hear.) It was not the first time the Right Hon. Baronet had made the same attack, and he really, till now, fancied that he had effectually silenced the Right Hon. Baronet-on that point.--(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Ba ronet, toe, ought to be the last man to make a charge of in consistency against him, for he was not aware that ha had ever suddenly turned round and changed his opinions on particular r edto ce pe t r o s uad e principles the House that points. h he aNttaorchehdad co h n e sid e e v r e a r tt bl a ci e m mp po t tan opinions which he had long before abandoned as being im politic, unsound, and opposed to the best interests of the coun try. —(Cheers.) Now the Right Hon. Baronet had,. for the second time, charged hint with having, a few years back, while in office, argued in favour of the exclusion of slave grown sugar from the Briti,h markets ; but he begged the House to remember that this was the construction the Right Hon. Baronet himself tint 'upon 'his words; and not his own meaning. ' -What he did say was,' that slavery having been so recently abolished, the colonies ought for a time to be protected against all foreign-grown sugar, but not against any particular class of sugars.—( Cheers.) Now, with regard to the question of Ireland, the Right Hon. Baronet had taunted them with againstiers of them al l. the--- ( countryH e o a r not being able to govern Ireland without having recourse to ofdildhehpoepoepltehawt ttltas. Co:rcion Bills. But whose fault was this?—(Hear, hear.) Why, it was the fault of the Right Honourable Baronet and his party, who were constantly raisin g ßut entl t e o m make compli ment ire(i an d o f he, eh,e therefore,liberties be the the ery hest of met ‘ oof ' P rn o a p k e i r n y g " r e n Members would give their votes upon the measure accord*: to their conscience. He was not to pledged support the Me' because he voted for it s fi rst reading every person was aware that that was o n ly a formal proe.eetlin " Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN moved g the _adjoumment of the debate. The followin g Bill s were a dj ourne d until Monday next Landlord an d T enant (Ireland) Bill (Second reading) ; Eject-, ments, Ireland, Bill (Second read i ng) ; Lea s es, Ireland, (Second reading). postponed until Thursday next. Bill was adjourned till The Coroners' (Irelan d)Wednesday The Joint Stock Banks (Scotland and Ireland) Bill, was next. Service of Heirs (Scotland) Bill, Crown Charters (Scotland) Bill, went through Committee. County Works Presentments (Ireland) Bill was read a third m passed.EEeL moved for leav e t o b r i ng i n a Bill to continue thetiA C o lon e l teo P authorise and facilitate the completion of a survey, of Great Britain, Berwi c k- u p on -T weed, and the Isle of Man, to 3Hlosut seadjourned December, I at B a ti 5l . A a r g t r e e r e . d p a s t to. One o'clock. ... .„ , a The other or d ers o f the day were th e n disposed of , and this [A _ DV ERTISEMENT.)—BOTANIC WATER AND BEAR'S GREASE. —When the hair is becoming thin, and falling off, the only effectual remedy, besides shaving the head , i s the use of the tw o a b ove - nam ed articles, applied alternately—the bo tanic water to cleanse the roots from scu.li and as a stimulant, and the bear's greas e a s anf ou be ri a s r lte s r. grel f se an fo y r re further novat e i v n i g de a n n e d e virtues was requir.d of the o preserving the hair, Mr. Catlin's account of the qu antity used, and the length of hair obtaine d b y some of the North Ame rican Indians, would be a sufficient answer. Ross and Sone, 119, and 120, Bishopsgate-street, who first introduced the use of bear's grease in this country, and who fat and kill the ani mals, recommend the public to purchase none other but with their names and address printed on the pot, or the chances are their obtaining a spurious article. All vegetable oils applied to the hair are worse than useless. [ADVERTISEMENT.]—EXTRAORDINARY CURES OF DROPSY BY HOLLOWAY'S PILLS.—Emma Williams, a servant living with Mrs. Smithers, Oldham-road, Manchester, hail lately become of such a size from dropsy as to appear, (to itse her own expres, sion), as big as a butt. Every usual treatment wa s tried ,but with out effect; in this sad state she had recourse to Ilelloway's Pills, itta by them the Water was entirely removed from her txyritem, And an effectual cure perfected in about six weeks. These pills were lately tried upon two dropsical patients discharged as incurable from one of the largest hospitals in London, and they also were both shortly cured by this famous medicine:—Sold by all druggists, and at P 4 -. fessor Ilonoway's Establishment, 244, strand, London. George Clarke, a pedestrian, has succeeded in wi t ik. ing 1,500 miles in 1,000 4uecessive hours, at Norwich.