The Sun. — London, England, 1846-03-06 00:00:00

lg in an r r iacc lice were ednesag house. party al vestercl99 i n the a rnbridk e lays with Lrd t° the ; hid all the , r and the ay, a! o d ,c:tnte'ndedl s Bu bert vieio ith L O CA" o A I '0 de° ...."..."°' IMPERIAL . PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, March 5. ROYAL COMMISSION. herTh,ecir. Lor,thhips assembled at Five o'Clock to hear t, AnajeSty s given, by commission, to several util r , assent commission,, to s• Ihe Commis4oners were the Lord Chancellor, E tue p i .. , .ar. of "thaltesbury and the Earl of kiaddington. .. bir theroyal. th e a s u lie ~f ek , niiii:ft - ns having been summoned to tiiii• ' assent was given to the following a Public Works (Ireland) BillDrainag s re1411(1) Bill ; and the Grand Jury (Ireland) Present taent Bill T i E LATE, VICTORY IN INDIA. pl;hret t!:::utli e of RICHMON D sa i d he took the earl i est of calling the attention of the Noble Earl at willia.ch.ead hof th e B oard of Control (Ripon), to a mistake e hid made the other night in moving a vote of '4l nk a to the Indian army,but mistake which he a u (t ii he Duke of Richmond)wai certain was altogether Zintentional, and which he was sure his Noble Friend °l4l d thank him for correcting. The error to which Vtiluded wait in reference to the Nobl e Earl stating e a n e r ", l "nel Wood, t h e a id-d e camp o f t h e Governor ken 1, having headed a regiment in the late engage- • o e : s . t Now he (the Duke of Richmond) did Lot mean L e eh 12 slightest reflection On Colonel Wood, who had 4a, e }ears in the army, and who must on this occasion . do been in advance of his regiment, but who certainly b e 4 cot head it. Though he believed Colonel Wood to ofe moat , Promising and gallant officer, he was not the r e f: I ,voo headed the 80th Regiment in the engagement bur •r e p The officer who did so was Colonel Bun. officer who had been thirty years to " Te an service on full pay, and six years 14 C alf Pay, and who bad taken a part ap d -e lead!ng engagements of the Peninsular war. India had been wounded in the late engagement in 4 0 , 4 . This was the officer who led the regiment, and regi'llonel Wood, who might have accompanied the pri2etit, and he (the Duke of Richmond) was stir th. at the N o bl e E ar l h a d not ment i one d hi s name th udi ng to the meritorious officers who had served 4at was • eorn„(l,il4PON said he could have no hesitation in pe a k in g with the request of the Noble Duke. 111 n oti on upon the subject he (Lord Ripon) took his it t i laci q the services of the gallant officers from what Prof es . s een reported in the public prints, and not bein e , h a be e' , slorlal man he did not know the difference. Had e th e ,!tw.are of' it he would have been most happy to mark ° t i g t l lstill etion • and now that he had been made aware tar r ,,,, h e could have no hesitation in expressing his tleh;„,st a dmiration the services of Co!onel Bunbury. atti l ;hged to say he felt obliged to his Noble Friend for tee t ; op4 atrord e d hi m t h e opportun i ty of make g t hi s cor . Lo r d IRISH COERCION BILL. Fleet; STOURTON mid he hoped that his Noble 148 -- :Pliesite who had introduced a Bill for the sup ',lc' crim ' ein Ireland, would also introduce a q tegnPaei passe with it, for the preservation of the 011, - " q „,liberties of Ole tenant-farmers in that country. Zslil e - T:ti i ke RICIIMO ND said he understood the Ntl'es — "'ct to refer to the corn-laws, and not to the t t e i s Which had been committed in Ireland. t f ,ll S TOURTON disclaimed any reference to the 11 4 W8 in his address. His observations simply re legTh, t) Ireland. s Duke of RICHMOND was about to address their l,":1Ps respecting the Bill, but he gave way to Leer, LORD CHANCELLOR, who said . the Noble NOW not in order, as there was no notice before the the se " ei If he were allowed to discuss the Bill under 4t • •reti nistances, it would be competent for any other i 1 e ,"r( l • to do so. 4 . DOYLE AND THE GOVERNMENT li The OF SPAIN. f ts Si ul te of RICHMOND rose to present a petition 44 ? J ohn Milky Doyle, aying their Lordships to k tilt e'" e uesideration of hiss ase to the law officers of r‘ i, ) " . stated that he had served under the Governme n t ment as one of the general officers of the 4 t pat ' tie .w l lO he co m pl a i ne d h a d no t d one justice to him, Dfi w f ii !lted ,y that the Commission which had been ap- b " 41 not treated hi s claim in a proper manner. He s'rt pai~e s , t ated th a t t h e representat i ves o f t hi s country i n 'et u "gcoveledg ed his claim. There was a clause i n th e thy (it!der whi c h the Commission was appointed, thatif '44 h es lirer eace arose with respect to the claims of the • P• B j, * bo had been in the service of Spain, should be referred to the law officers He was an experienced offieer, and tjt ser Crown th e ve. this country in Egypt and in tbe wars pet' P eninsular. His Noble . and Learned Ned (Lord Brougham) was of opinion that his case t 'ette) , b e so re f erre d. H e (the Duke of Rich . -. • f . t lierefore, tr us t e d th a t their Lordships would 0 that course in this c ase . H e was ad ,lllcl "Y his friends to take as much as he g i „et, and to memorialise the Government for the ,1 1 4 4 ' l ° o (the D u k e o f Ri c h mon d) did not th i nk he 474 4 '14'1g too much if h e only_ asked that this matter th e e ref erre d to the law officers of the Crown, and le %eY should decide whether he was entitled to this M t ? Spanish Government o r no t. I" ' ' °II GHAM supported the prayer of the lie 1 k , Ear of ABERDEEN said that he was not r - - to deny the valuable services of the 48 S, s h ,bo were engaged in the army in Por- Rt the same time he imagined that claims e p,'"acle on th e P ortuguese G overnment w hi c h k'eti . "t at all i n proport i on to the services ren k „ Vari ous comm i ss i ons had been appointed, I tit7Y had fail e d t o g i ve sat i s f act i on. The 3 ~er," Q could not agree as to the amount, and the conse ch'eti h 'as that th e o ffi cers an d men i ntereste d were , applyingoiCe to the English Government to see Their Lordships would recollect that ',e)trantitish Government were no parties to the 6V' inade, but at the same time they were bound to l'i. °ll r to obtain justice for any or every party It tt e Clai m on the Portuguese Government. It ►ern aims were entirely of a private nature, and this • 7° i t was no party n the contracts. In the year 41:_i'sr i t t! Predecessor in office, Lord Palmerston, form a m i xed' commission, which should Visanc e of - these claims, and decide upon them in 4'4 4 ' 1 , 41 111er as that. there should be no appeal to the o,e , f . d ". 4 eat of either country, and if the Commissioners ) ;,eitr. 4 ', t o their opinions it was to be decided by an h 3 / 4 , the Mi n i ster o f t h e Ki ng of the Belgians, fel t in that capacity given several decisions. 1, 1 7, 1 t i e, „. therefore precluded from opening the lie believed the Commissioners bad IteC h r oll and a fair view of all the cases l a id eleit t , - I , tll , and had given th e ir deci s ion accor d ing ly. t in 4 t he had no power to interfere in regard to \l 4 e it tis• He had examined into the claims of Sir L ev Doyle, and, he considered that the ()mulls , 8 h:, (1 . eon,e to a right decision respecting it. Even i i iitte i ` t i e ,e Earl of Aberdeen) the power, he did not tp 418 POSell to re-open the question. That officer 1 / 4 Igollteered his service to the Portuguese Government 1 1 4tc r ,'„ 4 hd it waraccepted liy Don Pedro with a great C 'tit 'deli rlki of his noble conduct. Sir J. M. Doyle after tted that he entered the service without a INo l ' t heref ore h e cou ld ma k e no claim on the Portu- Op:„ e rittnent for services performed under a contract. J r4 (l, from the returns he now held in is 1 " Sir J. M. Doyle had received sums of 1 44 501. from the Portuguese Government, and t l t tti tu - t eceipt in full of them. Then the report of the did thl)e t i Be Cointilision was to the effect that they t:eritsiet,er that Sir John Doyle . had any claim upon A t t oe 3'l Government, not having entered the Portu , - 44r4: 11 'ice und er an y con t ract , an d, therefore, h e (Lord did not consider that the claim could be enter ttho llnder th e s e c i r c ums t ances h e was o f opinion jlY ov antage would be gained by r e -op e ni ng t t l tti i , s ides h e h a d no reason t o comp l ain of the the Goveinment, as he had been treated ex by them. His Noble Friend (the Duke of ; 4 )) would perhaps recollect that some years 1' 44 inl ce ived 5,000/. or 6,000/. from that Government 444 rY he stated he had received. 4 '4 tip r ,, B ROUGHAM complained that a surgeon some Ile the Pointed one of the commissioners, whereas s have the, se e ' 4 " officers of the Crown ought to On the same principle he supposed Noble Earl (Earl of Aberdeen) would • medical point to a lawyer. The Noble et;ett*lleb referred to documents which set forth that the . 4 , r tL, Government admitted . the claim, and consi tl v q , • it ought to be paid out of the . money devoted E`T444. rn isb Government for the liquidation of similar t t ll tNo l li u ke. of WELLINGTON said . it occurred to ;etion that such a transaction as the one re vti:lttk I .°Y the Noble Earl, took place whilst he was I,_ 4 el t I s Xing in Portugal, but he did not recollect ph. t 4) „ s e f the circumstances under which it tool: eet, b e able to speak with any certainty on th . he k il ,"(', however, recollected the name of Sir th is jks Doyle, but he could not ca ll t o m ind w hy th h'",P l oeed—at any rate he was in warthe service of 1,1h,t1,-r), during the Peninsular and he had t k i . • 4 tion of being a brave man. " • t • Ti,: i c lois of ONDONDERRY thought that Sir 4 ,, v 'et 3 : 4 'e had no claim against the Portuguese 71_71t, having given a receipt in full for alle ir e hail ▪ (Lord Londonderry) knew that that gallant ° cell paid very handsomely for his se ce.,, ' s ornely than either he or the Noble Duke ,k 4 : l)4lt r e c'f 12 D said that Sir J. M. Doyle had `llallt -eeei pti ell fu l l l l ° b N ecause the Commissioners to d he n did so he would not recite a farthing. ilaplebs tit k se s (l' 4l i,s, was the petitioner entitled by his agree "ellii„°,4ter to receive the amount he claimed. tip4heslevi that he had not received a . sufficient . that' t t rei tt l° , 4 for his services, and it was therefore inflict -I;tt,eLlet,*-ol.:;darild_stlip on the Hon Baronet. He hoped ti 't h. Le i , of t ove, with every other British subject, the • - t he 1 8 , w , 4 1i1„, * ,bie i til ts of LONDONDERRY presented a pet h i ( - , 34uee., e hoped would receive the support of the h who had *ust sat down. It was a petition h /. i e h eay ill taee °Jd Arthu j r Hill, and . other noblemen and thi "e county of Down, in the north of Ireland, iNt. e ase i nl" t ee to suspend ' the standing orders 5 8 ,4 Pe Great County Down Railway. t 4 441, 44. ees e r !toed the standing orders the other even th„ 40 8111311ar to the present, and hoped they rs ;1, 11 412 /(sw, as the measure would be a great boon c'ule of Ireland, and give employment to a con re "rebe l . of ' t :tlei of Al objected to granting_ the I;ll'a.t the plan. Petition. He said that the Committee. ~., which were lithographed, as nia . ny tl.‘lt".ed w ee very incorrect. The lithographing tiL it a i t in the levels,the height, and the arching, !hsl' tt 4s hardi Vv a exe Possible to make out whet they opthe of :Lae made for this incorrectness was th,E)l'ojottotthle, but the answer to this would be ante 4 0th 1 1 h ad not time to get up efficient plans il l C. Ye oth ? °I November, why not wait for an -0111. i v ri t i r , :v r oep Asio T n here' was no hardship in this.. .14 04 e'sted , lhen ti decision was given against , a reversOrties hone forward in order to get tne "in their favour. There was no use in hearing standing orders at all if this practice was to be carried out. He had resisted the trioti.n the other evening respecting the Wexford, Carlow, and Dublin Junction Railway, and he would resist the present, he hoped with greater success, as not a word could be said in defence of the plans which had been got up. The inerits of the Bill was a totally different question, and if the; project was a good one it would stand so much the better chance next session. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, that as they had done the same in respect to other lines of minor im portance, he trusted that they would not hesitate to do so in one of such great magnitude, and which would prove of such great benefit to that part of the country by giving employment to the poor in this season of distress. In the case of the Wexford, Carlow, end Dublin Junc tion Railway, there was no practical irregularity, be cause the parties who received the notices came with them in their hands ; therefore, admitting their service. There was no analogy between the cases. Earl of WICKLUW could not conceive the use of standing orders at all if they were not to be adhered to. The errors were entirely owing to the neglect of the solicitors. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY did not wish to press the matter further, after what had fallen from Noble Lords. They had consented to the perpetration of a litzle sin, but were determined to re sist a great one.—(Cheers.) Lord REDESDALE stud it was competent for the Standing Orders' Committee to report on the schemes submitted to them, and to suggest if they thought proper that the standing orders should be dispensed with. He would resist any application of this kind in the same way that he had resisted the application made by the Noble Earl the other evening, because if it were ac ceded to, it would give rise to very great carelessness on the part of solicitors and agents in Ireland. After a few words from Lord MONTEAGLE The Marquis of LONDONDERRY withdrew his motion. The Duke of RICHMOND moved for the County Treasurers' returns for the counties of England and Wales, from Michaelmas, 1844, to Michaelmas, 1845. The House then adjourned at a Quarter past Six o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 5. The SPEAKER took the Chair at a few minutes before Four. SECOND READINGS. The following Railway Bills were severally read a second time, and ordered to be committed, viz., Kent Atmospheric Railway Cockermouth and Workington Extension Railway East Lothian Central and Tyne Valley Railway Yorkshire and Glasgow Union Railway Manchester, Huddersfield, and Great Grimsby Direct Railway GREAT NORTH AND SOUTH WALES RAILWAY. Mr. MORRIS moved the second reading of this Bill, when Sir DE LACY EVANS said that he should oppose it, in consequence of the surreptitious manner in which the petition had been taken before the Standing Orders' Committee. It was quite clear, that the Company had come to a resolution that, if in the opinion of the Solicitor-General they could dissolve themselves, they should do so : the opinion of the Solicitor-General was in the affirmative, but the resolution had not been rescinded by the Committee ; therefore, iu coming before the Standing Orders Com mittee, the Company had acted surreptitiously. He would propose that the second reading should be post poned till Monday next. Mr. DUNCOMBE would second the motion of his Hon. and Gallant Friend. He thought the best way to put an end to the discussion would be to postpone the second reading of the Bill. The House would, in that case, have sufficient time to decide whether or not the Bill should be proceeded with. After some further discussion, it was ultimately re solved that the seoond reading should be postponed till Monday. Mr. GREENE moved that the House do rescind pa ragraph 20 of standing orders No. 87—Motion agreed to. ENROLMENT OF TilE MILITIA. Mr. T. DUNCO MBE presented several petitions from different places against the enrolment of the'militia. CORN LAWS. Mr. BRIGHT said that he wished to call the atten- tion of the House to a petition from the inhabitants of the Shetland Isles. It was signed by almost every adult male inhabitant in the whole 46 islands—to the num ber of 7,000. They were all fishermen, and they complained that they had great difficulty in disposing of their produce. The were also obliged to pay unna turally high jifices for what they consumed, as the islands did nori)roduce half enough food for them. They therefore prayed that the corn-laws might be abolished, as during the 30 years they had been in existence they had deprived the fishermen of the fair reward of their labour, He also preiented a petition from Mr. Arthur Ander son, a merchant of London, but a native of the Shetland Isles, which stated facts corroborative of those stated in the former petition, and prayed for the immediate and total abolition of the corn-laws. COUNTY ELECTIONS. Mr. H. ELPHINSTONE said that he wished to give notice that he would, on that day fortnight, move for leave to bring in a Bill to limit the polling at county elections to one day. THE NEW POOR-LAW. Mr. FERR AND gave notice that he should move as an amendment to the motion of the Hon. Member for Andover, " that they also inquire into the administra tion of the New Poor-law throughout England and Wales In answer to a question from Mr. V. SMITH, Sir R. PEEL said, that before the conclusion of the debate on the corn-law question, he should lay upon the table of the House a Bill for a new law (if settlement, and also a Bill for the levying of parochial rates. He did not wish, however, to take any discussion upon them until afterwards. ROYAL ASSENT. Mr. Pullman, deputy usher of the black rod, ap.. peered at the bar of the House with a message from the Lords, requesting the attendance of the Commons, for the purpose of hearing her Majesty's Commission, and giving the royal assent to several Bills (for which see Lords' report). Tl - IE - CORN-LAW DEBATES. Mr. FOSTER said, the corn-law debates had now been so long protracted, that gnat inconvenience was felt from the question remaining so long unsettled. There were a great number of notices of motion on the paper for this evening, which must, if persevered in, be disposed of before the Committee on the corn-laws could be resumed. He therefore hoped that those Hon. Gentlemen who had charge of those notices would con seat to postpone them. Mr. ETWALL said that this motion had been before the House ever since the beginning of the session, and he was surprised at the request which the Hon. Member had just made. He mild not but demur to accede to his request, for he believed there was an understanding with the Government, that his motion respecting the Andover Union should be brought before the House to-nigt.t. He was not aware that any thing had occurred to prevent that course from being followed, but if there was, he was quite ready to submit to any reason that might be assigned from the Treasury benches.—(Cries of " No, no," from the Ministerial side of the House.) _ _ _ Sir J. GRAHAM said that certainly no under standing had been entered into with the Hon. Member; but if the motion were to be persevered in, he should cer tainly feel it his duty to move an amendment, for the production of all the papers connected with the affair of the Andover Union. But he thought a better course might be pursued, and he proposed to place in the hands of the Hon. Member, and ever y M em b er o f that House, copies of all the papers which h a d p asse d relative to the transactions o u hich the Honourable Member referred. which would pro (all the infor mation which the Gower Li MTh t required on the subject. In addi4ijen to itc- papers to which he understood the Ilion Member alluded, he intended to print arid forward to each of the Members of the House the report of Mr. l'Arker, as well as all the letters which had passed between the Poor-law Commissioners relative to the Andover Union, between the Ist of September, 1845, and the Ist of March, 1846. This would place the House in possession of all the information which the Government had re ceived, and he thought it would satisfy the Honourable Member. Mr. FERRAND hoped that he might be allowed to make a few remarks. The SPEAKER (interrupting Mr. Ferrand)—The House must first know whether the Hon. Member was inclined to withdraw his motion. Mr. ET%VALL was quite ready to withdraw his, and would do so, but he thought that in the event of his pursuing that course, other Hon. Members who had notice of motion on the paper ought to do the same. Mr. NEWDEGATE was understood to say that, owing to the importance of his motion, he could not con sent to withdraw it. THE ANDOVER UNION. Mr. ETWALL rose to move for a Committee of inquiry into the working of the poor-laws in the Andover Union. He was certain that it was the feeling of that House that the poor • laws should be administered fairly, impartially, and kindly, and that the unfortunate inmates of such asylums should be treated with kindness and in dulgence.—(Hear, hear.) He felt certain that there was no hope for the poor, nor did they expect a redress of grievances from any quarter, save from that House. The HOPI. Member then proceeded to read some extracts from the minutes of the proceedings before the Poor law Commissioners at Andover, but, in consequence of the perpetual hum of conversation carried on in al( parts of the House, it was impossible to catch even the purport of the extracts. He was afterwards under stood to say, that the Commissioners during their inquiries evinced the greatest anxiety to de prive the public of the benefit of their proceedings. He would not touch further upon the subject, but it ap peared to him that the Poor-law Commissioners took great pains to keep the public from knowing the result of their inquiries, and if they were desirous of administering the law in a way which would be becoming to them, surely it was their duty to make themselves perfectly familiar with the characters of their officers and depen dents. The late master of the Andover Union, who had been discharged, had received an excellent cha racter from Mr. Parker, a Poor-law Commissioner. He hoped that the Right Hon. Baronet would, in all future investigations respecting the poor-law, see that they were presided over by impartial persons, and by judges in no way mixed up with the administration of the law. He could nit but feel surprise that the papers connec . ted with the Anilovercase had not been pre‘se s nted earlier. `.l he bones, which were seized with so much avidity by the7pauper, hall lain in a state of decomposition in the workhouse .)ard for two or three months. There was no such instance of ill-treatment of the poor on record as that which occurred at this union. When anew bone was thrown into the yard, there was a general scramble for it ; one man, in one -instance, had been fortunate enough to get two bones, and he had to scamper off with them after the manner of a dog.—(Hear, hear.) The poor people, it appeared from the evidence, were a long while before they could eat the filthy marrow out of the bones. Ad the witnesses at the inquiry stated that there was an awful deficiency of bread. Mr. Mundy stated that the paupers were accustomed to eat potatoes which were dug out of the ground after the first crop. These paupers were employed in carrying weights, from 161bs. to 201b5., and feeling that the labour to which they were subjected was more than their strength could bear, they had applied to the master for an increase to their allowance of food. Now this was in direct contradiction to the rules of the Commissioners, and thus were the paupers placed in such a position, that either their health must suffer, or the rules of the Commissioners be violated. This matter had been brought under his notice during the last three or four years ; fur about the beginning of that time a new church was begun to be built on the site of an old During the progress of laying the founda tion-stone, a great number of bones had been re moved. Part of these had been sold to the - usual collector of bones in Andover, of whom they had been purchased by many of the farmers in the neighbourhoid, but a large portion was carried to the workhouse, where the paupers were employed to crush them. It was easy to perceive the difference between these human bones and the bones of horses. Nothing more revolting could have been imposed upon the inmates. The witnesses collected for the board's inquiry were Collected by the master of the workhouse. No public notice was given of the inquiry, and he (Mr. Etwall) was in a condition to prove that many of the persons examined were constrained wit- one. nesses on the occasion. If such matters as these were allowed to, pass over, there was no knowing whe re the system would end ; and therefore he felt it necessary to move for a Select Committee to inquire into the work ing of the system of poor-laws.—(Hear, hear.) He would not go into the details of the second case, because the object of his motion was not to disgrace the officers of the union, but merely to call the attention of the House to the subject. The gentleman who caused these inquiries to be brought forward had been for some years the medical attendant in the union. He was elected in March, 1842, and received a higher salary than was usually given. For two years Mr. Westlake had suspected that the aged and sick paupers . id not receive the full allowance allotted to them, awl in April, 1844, he suggested to the board of guardians that these allowances should be entered in a book. It might be asked, why did not Mr. Westlake inform the board of guardians of what he suspected, but there was every allowance to be made for his not doing so, as he alleged as his reason than, until he had a strong, con vincing case to lay before them, it would be impossible to persuade the Board of the correctness of his suspicions. He should rather consider it was the duty of the board of guardians to look into the allegations preferred against the master, and not have shown such an anxiety to avoid inquiry. He could quote numerous instances of hardship committed on the unfortunate paupers by the servants of the Commissioners—he would refer to the case of William Lawless, an old man, aged seventy six years, and twenty-one days in the workhouse; he was charged with all those little extras of tea and so forth, to which he was entitled without any payment. There was also the case of William Norris, an old man, nearly blind, who was set to the work of able. bodied men, and who chopped his own hands in endeavouring to perform it. He would also allude to the case of Sarah Webster, who was charged with extras which she never received, and to which she was entitled. Now, if these frauds were practised upon the poor, simple, aged, and infirm paupers, they surely ought to consent to an in quiry, with the view of preventing such conduct in future. But he found that those frauds had been committed, and the paupers had been defrauded at the expense of the rate-payers. There was a certain number of paupers who received broth on certain days of the week, but When they had the broth they were allowed no cheese; and the aged and infirm, when they received the broth, had neither beer nor cheese. He was not quite aware of the in gredients of which this broth was made, for there were many things of which the paupers in this workhouse partook which was a perfect mystery. Large quantities of the butter allowed were saved by the skimmings of the bacon pot, and sometimes they were treated with hot water, and as a luxury were occasionally allowed a little salt. He found, on reference to the books, that in one of the quarters the paupers had been put on half allowance, and it had been reduced as much as 1 oz. of meat. But whether it was 2 oz. or I oz. it was immaterial, for his only object was to show that there was a great inaccu racy in the master's books, which was altogether passed over in the Commissioner's report. At every weekly meeting of the guardians the master was bound to lay before the board an estimate of the stock of provisions required for the ensuing week, for which a check was to be given by the clerk and entered in the check book. New the check books were never filled up until the week after the goods were delivered and consumed. There was one fraud arose out of that practice which he should mention. The teas and sugars sent to the workhouse were made up in parcels of half a pound each, and it was not unusual for the master to return many of the parcels, and get them exchanged for better descriptions, which he converted to his own purposes.—(Hear, hear.) There was also another species of peculation. It ap peared that out of 901bs. of Chedder cheese, only 701bs. were converted to the purposes of the union. There happened to be a man named Watt who was employed at the union, and this man, when his day's work was over, went home to his family, and said that he had seen the inmates of the workhouse eating raw potatoes. A neighbour of the man beard the story, and it was noised abroad until it reached the ears of the board of guardians. The man was summoned before the board, when, on being spoken to, he confirmed his statement. He was then told that he would be employed at the union no longer, and that if he wanted relief he should go into the house and eat raw potatoes with the rest of the paupers. He had never witnessed a more extraor dinary state of irregularity than was exhibited in the manner in which these accounts had been kept. Persons had received sums varying from ss. to 12s. for various attendances, for which no accounts had been rendered. Nothing was more detrimental to the character of the Poor-law Commissioners than these frequent charges of cruelty and incompetency- He trusted that a searching investigation would be instituted into the matter; and he could assure the House that nothing but a strict sense of the important nature of these charges could have in duced him to undertake his present disagreeable task. Sir JAMES GRAHAM confessed he could not help regretting that under the present aspect of public affairs, so much of the precious time of the House bad been consumed in a matter, which after all was nothing better than a workhouse squabble.—(Cheers.) It would be his duty very briefly to follow the Hon. Gentleman with reference to some of the statements, which had been advanced with reference to the affair. A trans action had some time since been stated to the House; which at the time left a very strorfg impression on their feelings with respect to the employment of the poor in the crushing of bones at Andover Union. He (Sir Parker from his situation. He (Sir James Graham) had not the slightest wish to keep back one particle of the evidence which had been taken on that case, and thought that it was highly desirable that all papers con nected with this inquiry should b e l a id on th e t a bl e . . Mr. FERRAND, - before the question was put, wished to ask whether he could second du amendment to the original resolution. The SPEAKER having replied in the affirmative, Mr. WAKLEY said he was for the original motion and for the amendment also, because he thought it ex tremely desirable that the House should be furnished with full particulars respecting this important matter. It appeared to him that the better plan would be to ad journ the debate for three weeks or a month; and there were reasons for the adjournment of the debate of which many Hon. Members were not aware. There was now a Committee sitting, of which he was a member, which was inquiring into the appointment of district officers in poor-law unions. The Commissioners had as much as they could accomplish in furnishing the Committee with the necessary documents ; and he felt sure that if the proposed Committee were appointed, it would be utterly impossible fur the Poor-law Commissioners to attend - to them. He (Mr. Wakle) ) had never known a case which required a more searching scrutiny than the one now in question; and he felt sure that the Hon. Member who had moved for the appointment of the Committee would be of the same opinion. The remark that the Right Hon. Geutleman opposite had made, that it was merely a " workhouse squabble," was not very creditable. He (Mr. Wakley) admitted the im portance of the matter that had been brought under the deliberation of the House. He would not undertake to obstruct the progress of public opinion on the point in question. It involved the consideration of something more than a workhouse squabble. The powers of the Poor-law Commissioners, which had been characterised as being extraordinary, and even unconstitutional, bad now been exercised for the space of 10 years. Until now no motion bad been brought before the House with respect to the manner in which the Poor-law Commis sioners had exercised their functions. He considered it was the duty of the House to inquire in what way the commissioners had fulfilled their office. It was therefore something more than a workhouse squabble. The Right Hon. Gentleman had stated that several improvements had taken place, and that, amongst others, the amount of the dietary had been increased. But did he know that even now the increased dietary is not sufficient? It was a squabble which had led to the dismissal of an assistant commissioner, who had performed his duties in a satisfac tory manner for a long period previous to the inquiry. The Commissioners complained of Mr. Parker, and Mr. Parker complained of them. M'Dougal, the master of the union, complained that the most outrageous charges had been made against him. He had not been allowed the opportunity of defending himself. On the 2d of August the Right Hon. Baronet undertook to make inquiries on the subject of the bone-crushing at Andover. There had been also further complaints made with reference to the treatment of the paupers, and the conduct of the governors of that workhouse. He complained of the manner in which that inquiry had been conducted with reference to throwing all the res sponsibility, and providing funds, and the expense of witnesses, upon the medical officer of the workhouse. He had to appear before the public as the accuser of another officer, and upon him was -thrown the entire responsibility and expense of the examination. Was there ever such a shameful thing known before, that an officer is to appear before a Court which was not, strictly speaking, a tribunal ? There was no judge, no jury, and no witnesses allowel to be called for the defence. He (Mr. Westlake) did not, however, flinch from this inquiry which was thus unjustly laid upon him. His witnesses were procured at a great expense ; inquiry was gone into, and proceeded with to a great extent, when Mr. Parker then considered it was neces sary, in order that the master (Mr. M'Dougal) might prepare his evidence, to postpone the farther inquiry for five days. He came up to London, and was immediately sent back by the Poor-law Commissioners, who com pelled him to go on with the inquiry, notwithstanding his promise of five days to prepare the evidence. Under these circumstances, is it likely that the public will be satisfied, considering the power exercised at the Poor law Commissioners'-office—a power never before granted to any body of men—superior to any power of either House of Parliament, which enables them by a rule or regulation to suspend the operation of an Act of Par liament ? We should be jealous of that power. Not only that inquiry should be made, but even the bare suspicion of that power being misapplied should lead to an investigation in that House. If, however, there is to be no inquiry if we are to remain satisfied without instituting anyCommittee,otbe so the public and the boards of guardians not easily satisfied. The public will see how the paupers are treated—how they have been suffering in that work house since the passing of the pop-law, from the want of food. The alteration of the dietry sufficiently proves this. He hoped the Right Honourable Baronet would consent to withdraw his opposition to the present motion, and to appease the feelings of the suffering poor. Let him reflect upon their feelings if they found that this House shut their door against investigation of their grievances. He did not wish to g o i nto any o f t h e accusations against Mr. M'Dougal, because he had not had an opportunity of rebutting them, which he said he could have done, had he been allowed to do so. He will however, have an opportunity if this Committee is af forded him. If the present motion was an appeal from a law court, he would not support the motion. It is not, however, one. The inquiry was not complete, it was held before a gentleman who had not power to do justice to it. Mr. Parker was the last person to be sent down who ought to have been sent down to make that in quiry. He had to inquire into his own conduct, it was not to be expected, therefore, that he would make a re port against himself. He was a gentleman, who, by virtue of his office, was supposed to have known all that was going on in Andover ; he was sent down to make an investigation, and he was the culpable party. Upon that ground, therefore, he considered that another investigation should be made. Mr. CHRISTIE considered that the Right Hon. Ba ronet (Sir James Graham) did not always look back upon the matter in so light a manner as he had done to-night. He did not always consider it a workhouse squabble. It seemed, from a pamphlet published by Mr. Parker, that he received a l e tt er f rom one o f hi s brother Commissioners, in which he states that he had seen the Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State, and he expressed his opinion upon the subject as being a very serious matter ; but now he thought fit to de signate it a mere workhouse squabble. The subject of the Andover Union had been before the public for some time; it had assumed many shapes, but from first to last there had always been a desire on the part of the Right Honourable Baronet and the Poor law Commissioners to keep back all unfavourable upon the subject. In ref us i ng a C omm i t t ee o f I nqu i ry to-night, the Right Hon. Baronet was only acting in consistency with his former conduct. With reference to the papers to which the Right Hon. Baronet refers in his amendment, he (Mr. Christie) would ask why were not those papers produced before this ? It was more than a month since they were moved for by an Hon. Friend near him. The Right Hon. Baronet has kept these papers back to the last moment, and he then comes down and proposes to substitute these papers, in lieu of thoie for which the Hon. Member for Andover had moved. He did not wish to be unparliamentary, but he must say he thought th a t it was not hi ng more than a mere juggle on the part of the Right Hon. Baronet.—(" Hear, hear," from Mr. Ferrand.) Ile did not let us have the papers time enough to examine them ourselves, and he wished by these means to im press upon Parliament and the country that he was doing all that could possibly be done to promote an inquiry on the subject. The simple facts of the case were these :—Mr. Commissioner Parker was sent down on the sth of August to make inquiries on the subject of the bone-crushing, and other alleged misconduct of the Andover union. He sent up a report of the de positions taken on that occasion. On the Bth August Mr. Parker called on the Right Hon. Baronet at the Home-office, and a conversation took place there between the Home Secretary, Sir Edmund Head, and Mr. Parker. Immediately after that conversation the Right Hon. Baronet came down to the House, and said that Mr. Assistant Commissioner Parker had com municated to him that he had made inquiries with re ference to some paupers of the Andover Union having eaten the flesh and marrow of putrid bones. He (Mr. Christie) considered that the report of Mr. Parker went much further, and contemplated a greater number of disclosures relating to this horrible practice than the statement which had been laid by the Right Honourable Baronet on the table of the House. He says in his re ports, that three inmates of the workhouse had eaten the horseflesh, whi.l had been found attached in a putrid state on the bones,and other stinking meat. He also stated that great care was necessary to be taken, in order to prevent one of the paupers, who was in the habit of thus acting, and who was considered to be in an unsound state of mind, from going near the boneho use or the hog-tub. These men, who were described as i men of depr ave d ap petites were, in addition to other inmates of the work house, who stated that they had be en i n the habit of gnawing the meat and breaking the bones, in ord er to obtain the marrow from the bones, which were brought in a comparatively fresh state from the tables of the gentry. The inhabitants of Andover and the public generally knew nothing of this report, with the excep Lion of what they could obtain from the sources of' daily information, and they had Just reason to consider them perfectly unsatisfactory- Mr. Parker had placed in his (Mr. Christie's) hands a memorandum of a conversation which took place between the Right Honourable Baronet himself and another Poor-law Commissioner ; and in corroboration of his (Mr. Christie's) general Statements, he would beg to read the mememorandum to the House. The Honourable Member went on t o rea d t h e memoran dum in question, from which it appeared that Sir James Graham had stated to Mr. Parker that he did not lik this employment of the poor in bone -crushing. He said that if it was not speedily put an end to, there would be a confounded row in the House on th e su bj eet. It was also stated, that should the inquiry be continued it would furnish a stock in trade for the 7 imes for the next six months. With reference to the recur; of Mr. Parker, Sir James Graham had stated that the report must not be brought for ward in that state. Mr. Nichol, one of the Commissioners, also expressed an opinion to the same effect, and, finally, Sir James Graham undertook to bring the matter before the House, in the most favour able manner possible. The Honourable Member went on to say, that no benefit could be d er i ve d f rom b r i ng i ng forward the deposition of witnesses taken upon the second trial, for no adjudication had taken place u p on th e su bj ec t. The inquiry bad been productive of no beneficial results, and it had given satisfaction to no parties whatever. Ho considered that the Right Hon. Gentleman should not have gone so far in his condemnation of the master until his guilt had been decided by the tribunal esta blished to try it. The case . of the master was a pecu liarly hard one; he had petitioned the House, detailing the particulars, and stating, that if he had been allowed time to prepare his defence against the alleged charges, he would have been able to have met them James Graham) had in his place expressed his strong objections to the poor being employed in that particular kind of labour, and his regret that it should have been put in force in so many Unions. When this particular transaction had been mentioned, he had thought it his duty to call the attention of the poor-law commissioners to the subject. The Hon. Member who had made the present motion, had referred to the report of the Com tnissioners in 1833, in which they stated their views of the species of labour in which the poor should be em ployed. He (Sir James Graham) thought that the abour of the pauper should not be of a degrading or revolting character. So far from vindicating the trans actions at Andover, his previously conceived opinions had been strengthened. He had now the pleasure of stating to the House that by a general order of the Poor law Commissioners, notwithstanding the remonstrances of nearly 100 unions, the system of employing paupers in bone crushing had been suppressed from the Ist of January, and, with the exception of 10 or 12 parishes, the general order had been maintained, and he trusted the system would never be renewed. He begged to call the atten tion of the House to this remarkable fact, that all the abuses which had been complained of were confined to the local management. He did not possess the least power of controlling the management which the Poor law Commissioners might think proper to institute. In addition to other objections which might be raised to the employing of paupers in crushing bones, it was a mode of labour exposed to many abuses. In particular it led to local jobbing; and therefore on every ground, whether on account of the objectionable nature of the labour itself, or because of the local abuses to which it led, this method of employing the pauper was highly objectionable. He had already stated to the House that effectual measures had been taken to suppress that employment. But bone crushing was only one of the many abuses, of which the Hon. Gentleman had de scribed a great number. There was the insufficient state of the dietary. He (Sir James Graham) had to state that a material alteration had been made in the dietary, and that during one day in the week meat had been substituted. Then, with respect to the master of the workhouse at Andover, he had been appointed to this situation by the poor-law guardians, and not by the Commissioners. During the progress of that inquiry the master had sent in his resignation, since when he had been again called to fill the office of master by the poor-law guardians, and had subsequently been removed by order of the Commissioners. This was not all. A complaint had been made of the conduct of the medical officers of the union. In this case it was not doubtful that the medical officer had been to blame, and had improperly interfered. Among other complaints which had been investigated by the Poor-law Commissioners, one was, that, the number of the relieving officers was not sufficient for the ade quate performance of the duties which devolved on them. The evil had been remedied by the appointment of an additional relieving officer. He believed that he had now mentioned all the objections, with the exception of one, and that was, the insufficient manner in which the audit of accounts was conducted. During the last year, he was of opinion that the audit of accounts was not suf ficient for the Poor-law Unions. District auditors had been appointed, and were now in the full discharge of their functions throughout England ; and the union of Andover, as well as other unions, now partook of that benefit. The lion. Gentleman had also complained of the mode in which the second inquiry at Andover had been conducted. He (Sir James Graham) did not stand there to vindicate the mode in which that investigation had been conducted. He certainly was of opinion that good judgment had not been displayed in the method of conducting it. He would not say that the removal of Mr. Parker from his situation arose out of the mode in which that investigation had been conducted. It would appear that the Poor law Commissioners, in consequence of their i n quiry into the manner in which the investigation had been made, had considered it their duty to remove Mr. THE SUN LONDON, FRIDAY MORNING, MARCH 6, 1843. satisfactorily ; and, moreover, that where he had time to prepare, he had entirely established his innocecce. He further stated that Mr. Parker had promised him time to prepare his evidence, and that that promise had been fulfilled; in consequence of which, he found it necessary to resign, or proceed to his de fence without being able to furnish any evidence of his innocence. Under these circumstances there was only one course open to him to adopt, and that was not to allow the inquiry to continue, and to throw the de nial of justice on the Poor-law Commissioners. There were two incidents in the;, inquiry, which struck him in a remarkable manner, and which, he must say, ap peared to him inexplicable, except upon a supposition to which he was most unwilling to give his assent, namely, that the Poor-law Commissioners, thoroughly scared by the inquiry, were determined to stop it, at every hazard, no matter who might suffer or be injured. —(Hear, hear.) At a time when the public prejudice was at its height, the Poor-law Commissioners suddenly sent down an order suspending an inquiry, and with it a proposal that another course should be adopted, which he (Mr. Christie) must say was of a most extraordinary and unjustifiable character, It was that Mr. Wesley, the party bringing the charges, should select one case of embezzlement upon which the Commissicners would prepare an indictment against the master, and one charge of an attempt to take liberties with the female inmates, upon which also they would prepare an indictment, and send the cases for trial at the sessions. Now he asserted that this was a most unjust proposal, for if the master was acquitted on one case, would he not have reason to complain that he had not been allowed to defend himself from the other charges which were brought against him, especially when it is considered that the evidence supporting those allega tions was before the public—and even were he acquitted on that one case, would it not have been said ever after by the public, that he would not have been acquitted on the others had the evidence been gone into. He said, therefore, that such a course would not have been avail able for the purpose of justice. The proposal, however, being unsatisfactory to both parties was refused; and when it was so the Poor-law Commissioners determined to resume the inquiry, and accordingly Mr. Parker re commenced the investigation. That gentleman pro. posed that the master should be allowed some few days to prepare his defence ; this was, however, negatived, The counsel for the accused then applied for time and sought a respite of ten days. After much discussion, however, all parties consented to the propriety of a grant of five days. Mr. Parker returned to town, and had an interview with the Poor-law Commissioners, whom he found strongly disapproved of the course which had been adopted in permiting the delay of five days. Now he (Mr. Christie) contended that for a defence to the charges which had been made, five days was but a short time to prepare some of those charges ; especially those relating to improper conduct, which were of a nature diffi cult to disprove; and particularly so when the party is inno cent. But it should be recollected that many of these very Niarges referred back to a period many years anterior to the time when the charges were first made. But the Poor law Commissioners overruled the delay, though Mr. Parker assured them that if they didso the counsel for the accused would advise his client to throw up the case, • and throw the odium of the denial of justice on the Commissioners. His remonstrances, however, were without effect, and the matter turned out exactly as Mr. Parker had anticipated. Now he considered he had made out a case upon strong grounds, which fully jus tified him in demanding an inquiry into the conduct of the Poor-law Commissioners. Something had been said of the mode in which Mr. Parker had conducted the inquiry, and he must say he heard with great surprise an observation which fell from the Right Honourable Baronet in depreciation of that gentleman. He bad been dismissed from his situation, but there was one thing which must strike every man, that Mr. Parker invited inquiry ; the Poor law Commissioners shunned all investigation. If the Right Hon. Gentleman alluded to the appointment of Mr. Price to the office of master, he (Mr. Christie) had only to state, that before Mr. Parker went down to An dover, he had an application from Mr. Price, for Mac dougal's situation, for such time as would be thought fit. Mr. Price had the highest recommendations, and Mr. Parker had an opportunity for same years of judg ing of his character and capabilities when placed in a similar position ; and, from what he then observed, he highly approved of his conduct, and, be sides that, Mr. Price had letters of recommendation from the chairman of the board of guardians at Oxford, speaking in the highest terms of him, and urging Mr. Parker to get some better situation for him. Mr. Parker had also seen Price when he was applicant for the Swin burn Union, and he then examined his testimonials, which were of the highest character, and he was there fore not surprised to receive the application; and having such a high opinion of Price, he had no hesitation in ap pointing him. No person who considered the circum stances, could ever blame the course pursued by Mr. Parker. It would have been much more agreeable to his (Mr. Christie's) feelings if the Right Hon. Gentleman had felt it his duty to consent to this inquiry, for he would then have moved for it without any preface, but under the circumstances of his refusal, he could not have sought one without making a case which would justify his demand. He had the honour of being acquainted with Mr. Lewis and Sir E. Head. No one could deny their abilities, and he was sure he would be the last person who would be a willing party to any harshness. But he must say, that Mr. Parker had been most un fairly dealt with by the Poor-law Commissioners. Mr. Parker had been in the service of the Poor-law Commissioners for a term of nearly ten years. He had been first engaged as assistant secretary, and subse quently as Assistant Poor-law Commissioner. Ile left the honourable profession of the bar to enter their service; and now, after the lapse of nearly ten years, by that act, that arbitrary act of dismissal, he was again thrown back on his profession, though every gentleman who knew anything of human nature should be aware that, having given up a profession for so many years, ind then returning to it, the man who did so laboured under very inauspicious circumstances.—(Hear, hear.) His peculiar hardship was that, in the course of the inquiry, facts and circumstances had transpired, and statements had been put forward in the newspapers that caused great excitement, and brought much odium on the Poor-law Commission, in the administration of which he held a prominent part ; yet no steps had been taken to explain why he was dismissed. He (Mr. Christie) certainly thought, until he heard the statement of the Right Honourable Baronet (Sir James Graham) that there had been some cogent reason for his dismissal ; hut after what had fallen from that Right Honourable Gentleman, it would appear that the Poor-law Commis sioners disapproved of the mode in which he had con ducted the Andover inquiry, though everything he had lone in reference thereto was done under their order.— ,Hear, hear.) However, the dismissal of Mr. Parker at that time, and under such peculiar circumstances, led the public to infer that he had been' dismissed be ..atuse the Commissioners had adopted all the complaints made to them in reference to the conduct of the Andover investigation.—(Hear, hear.) ['here had been a petition presented to that House by sir. Parker,in which he stated that he believed, and was Cully prepared to prove before a Committee of that House, by evidence the most unquestionable, that the Poor-law Commissioners dismissed him (Mr. Parker) in order to divert from themselves the odium that naturally would attach to them from such an inquiry.= (Hear, hear.) And he (Mr. Christie) should say, on behalf of Mr. Parker, that he had made out, in his opinion, a strong, a powerful case in support of his statement.—(Hear, hear.) So strong did he believe the ease to be, that the Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary ror the Home Department, should, in justice to the Poor-law Commissioners, grant the inquiry, and then let these gentlemen produce their re butting testimony, when the public could judge who was right and who was wrong.—(Hear, hear.) ['he Right Honourable Baronet had, however, moved an amendment which he hoped would be negatived ; and though it might be said that the Poor-law Commis sioners had a discretionary power to remove and rein state their assistants at will, yet he (Mr. Christie) wished to know if that discretionary power was to be exercised by them without responsibility ?—(Hear.) He looked on it that there was a responsibility, for the House of Commons annnally voted these gentlemen their salaries ; and he then begged to acquaint the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, that if he should think fit to shield them from inquiry by negativing his proposition, he would feel it his duty, when the period for voting such salaries arrived, to confer with any other Honour able Members in resisting the payment of such until such an act of injustice and harshness should be inquired into and explained. (Hear, hear.) One of the principal charges advanced against Mr. Parker was, that he published documents that became known to him as a public officer, and in the discharge of his duty as such. Now if the Poor-law Commission ers had the power to dismiss an Assistant-Commis sioner, and then refuse all inquiry, such a doctrine, as precluding the injured party from making known their grievances, with a view to procure their redress, would lead to a great hardship, and the result, in his opinion, would be that there would be no security for any public servant hereafter. (Hear, hear.) He then left the case of Mr. Parker in the hands of the Right Hon. Gentleman ; and he hoped he would, in justice to the Poor-law Commissioners, grant the inquiry which he (Mr. Christie) sought for. But it the Right Hon. Gentleman should persist in refusing the inquiry, he should appeal to the Hon. Members of that House, and tell them that the case was not alone the case of Mr. Parker, but that of every public servant ; and that, judging from the way in which ho had been treated—his past services forgotten—no allowance made for the single indiscretion of a long tried and public servant—such would also be their treatment, the result of which would undoubtedly prove disastrous to the most important interests of the country.—(Hear.) Sir JAMES GRAHAM (who was quite inaudible in the gallery) was understood to say, in reply, that it was true he bad received a written report from Mr. Parker about the last day of last se,sion; and he did not hesitate to say that he thought he used that document for the public good. The Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Christie) had given it as his opinion that Mr. Parker had not transgressed the bounds of his duty, in introducing to the public reports of conversations that had occurreel between him and the Poor-law Commis sioners. Now he (Sir J. Graham) should say that such a course of proceeding was indeed very novel. Now, as regarded the inquiry sought for, he begged the House would consider what the position of the Poor-law Com missioners reaPly was. Parliament had given them the absolute power of appointing and dismissing their assis tants, inasmuch as they were responsible for every act done by their ass istants. The act of the assistant was the act of the Comm issioner, for the assistant was the agent, as it were, of the. Commissioner ; and if there rested not such a power with, the Commissioners, how was it possible that any business could be performed, or who would make themselve a responsible for its due performance ? (Hear, hear.) It would, in his opinion, be destruetive of the entire machi - nery, if the power of that body were questioned and, lie then felt bound to tell the Hon. Gentleman that it was not on account of the mode in which the Andover inquiry had been con ducted, nor was it for any specific act, that Mr. Parker was dismissed. Mr. Parker had been the subordinate officer of the Commissioners, but, in a spirit of insubor dination to his superiors, he quarrelled with them ; they became dissatified, and accordingly dismissed (Hear, hear.) He would not trespass further upon the attention of the House, as he wished to confine himself to an explanation relative to Mr. Parker. Mr. FERRAND said that he might consider this, not merely as a work house squabble, but a Somerset House one. He thought the day had arrived when the Right Hon. Baronet should declare by what means he became possessed of those documents, as be considered that his character required him to make that explanation. He congratulated the country that bone crushing had, in, consequence of this exposure, been abolished from work houses. He remembered well the treatment he received from the Right Hon. Baronet, in reference to the erec tion of a rag-mill in the Halifax union. The Right Hon. Baronet then gave a pledge to the House and the country—and how had that pledge been fulfilled ? The present question was an answer to that. He, was travelling on the continent when the news of the pro ceedings at Andover union were published—(Hear)— and the foreigners whom he met were quite disgusted. He thought it was the duty of the House to grant the Committee of Inquiry. He gave notice, that afternoon, of his intention to add a few words to the motion of the Hon. Member, and he hoped the inquiry would be ex tended to his own neighbourhood. He had no hesita tion in saying that these reports were drawn up by the Special Commission, to serve the views of the Right Hon. Baronet, and that Mr. Mott was employed for the purpose of drawing up a false report, to crush him (Mr. Ferrand). Mr. Mott entered the union on the 13th of April, 1842, and in the June following the Right ' Honourable Baronet got the report drawn up. Mr. Mott was sent down to the north of Enngland to make these caluminous statements, and Sir John Walsham was sent down some time afterwards to con firm the statements of Mr. Mott. The Hon. Gentleman, after referring to the Keightley Union, proceeded to say that a Committee of Inquiry had been appointed to in vestigate the accuracy of the statements, and he had no hesitation in saying that it was a packed committee. The Right Hon. Baronet resisted the motion for the production of all papers. The Noble Lord the Member for the city of London said that he could not under stand the reason of that refusal. Until the Right Hon. Baronet made some explanation in reference to these re ports, he (Mr. F.) should treat any resolution of the House with contempt.—(The Hon. Member, having been called to order by the Speaker, withdrew the offensive expres sion.)—The Right Hon. Baronet used language towards him (Mr. Ferrand) for the purpose of holding him up to the scorn and ridicule of the country. At the time Sir J. Walsham made his inquiry there were fifty inmates in the union at Bingley in the state that had been de scribed. He could prove that there were at that place four and five crowded in a bed. The Secretary of State for the Home Department was to blame for all that had taken place there. He was, to be sure, backed by the Poor-law Commissioners and the Assistant-Commision ers, but it was in the power of the Right Hon. Baronet to remove them. He hoped that this inquiry would end in removing the Commissioners, and that the Ministry would also be obliged to resign. Captain PECHELL thought there was a great ne cessity for the production of papers for the purpose of a thorough and searching inquiry. He thought that the Andover Union called for some explanation, and he trusted the result of the labours of the Committee would be the doing away with the abuses complained of. In one union the guardians say that they have one ton of bones on hand, and there being a refractory pauper, the bones were to be ground by him. It was well known what a punishment this bone-grinding was. They were green or damp, and it was by the severest labour they could be reduced to powder. He hoped the Right Hon. Baronet would reconsider his amendment, by al lowing this Committee to take place. Sir R. INGLIS wished to call the attention of the Right Hon. Baronet to the f ac t s a t ten di ng the case of Mr. Parker. It appeared to him that that gentleman had been too severely punishied for what was at the most an act of indiscretion ; for it was not said that he had com mitted himself wilfully. He was a gentleman of an honourable profession, yet by this act of indiscretion his whole prospects were blighted. He trusted the Right Hon. Baronet would see that Mr. Parker had been treated too harshly, and that he would yet be reinstated in his former position. If any Hon. Member would say that Mr. Parker had been guilty of anything more than an act of the most trifling indiscretion, he (Sir R. Inglis) would consent to the withdrawal of the petition. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that not only had there been indiscretion committed by the Assistant-commis sioner, but the consequences of his conduct were insub ordination and want of discipline in the workhouse. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that notice had been given fur the production of certain papers relative to the Andover Union, so far back as six weeks ago ; and that had been complied with. He had read the whole of Mr. Parker's case, and he (Mr. Duncombe) considered he had made out a very good case. But if his case was to be gone into by this House, it would be only to do over again all that had been done already. He conceived that the only mistake Mr. Parker made was in resigning his office at all. He should have waited till the Commis sioners dismissed him. It often happened that Go vernment Ministers were recommended to resign, but they declined to do so until a majority of this House compelled them.—(Laughter.) He would say that as Mr. Parker was not a member of that House, said could not therefore lay his own case before it, it would be much better if the Hon. Baronet opposite, instead of laying these papers before the House, had agreed to the vote at once. Mr. P. BORTHWICK said he did not think that this matter should be regarded as a mere workhouse squabble, but as matter of somewhat more importance. They had sent out missionaries to foreign countries to alleviate the miseries of the natives ; but would they not be more ready to make inquiry into the state of Englishmen who were at home, and within reach, and where their miseries could be more easily ascertained, and the manner in which those miseries had been aug mented by those to whose tyranny they were subjected ? He saw by the petition new before the House, that much had been suppressed before the original inquiry that should have been made known ; and that through the assent and connivance of the Commissioners, evasions had been made in the books of the guardians, and that the Commissioners and guardians had enter& d into a com bination to dismiss the physician for having done his duty.—(Cries of " Divide, divide.") Mr. HUME said the Right Hon. Baronet opposite had stated that acts of insubordination had been com mitted by the paupers. Now he (Mr. Hume) would like to know what the nature of this insubordination was; for he would contend that there should have been a minute made and a record kept of the nature of these acts.—(Hear, hear.) He would defy the Government to refuse this inquiry, for the House would grant it it the Right lion. Baronet attempted to screen the Com missioners in this way. Lord POLLINGTON said he would only utter one sentence, and that was, that from all he had heard this evening upon this question he would vote for the in quiry. Mr. JARVIS said he considered it would be of the greatest public importance that the Governmer t should define the duties of the Commissioners. 1-1* would ask, if Mr. Parker had been indiscreet before the inquiry, why was he appointed to make this investiga tion?—(Hear, hear.) He would say that he was at a loss to know what was meant by the term " refractory." Surely, it could not be said that Mr. Parker had made any admissions of this sort, or any admissior. even of in discretion. On the contrary, he made a fair and hum ble statement of his conduct, and, therefore, further and strict inquiry should be made. He hoped the Right Hon. Baronet would grant this inquiry, regardless of the consequences to the Commissioners, and he had no doubt that the result would prove creditable to Mr. Parker ; but if it were not made, the public would not be satisfied. —(Criesof " Divide, divide ") General JOHNSON wished that a Committee of In quiry should be appointed. The public were not satis fied with the present state of affairs. Even if the com mittee of inquiry were appointed at a late period—even after the recess, the Hon. Member would be content to withdraw his motion. Mr. AGLIONBYsaid that the public service was too much implicated to allow this inquiry to be suppressed and an inquiry was certainly necessary in order to clear up the mystery that had hung round this question. The public mind hal been for some time past absorbed in this question. They thought that something had been keptfrorn them, that some instructions to higher quarters had been kept in the back-ground. A man might certainly be a Commissioner, but would the public think that he onght not to conduct himself as a gentlemen. There had evidently been an act of insubordination committed by some of the parties employed, and more dt o h r e e refore he made t h oug ht that the inquiry ought t o b e general. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD said that he would not occupy the attention of the House for any length of time. He certainly thought that the present question ought not to pass without the attention of Government. It was not only the Commissioners but ut that the had taken guardians that were implicated in the proceedings place. These proceedings had been brought to light by parties who were not interested. The people were com mitted, without any remedy, to the mercy of Poor law Commissioners and guardians ; so that where miscon duct had occurred, both justice and every sound prin ciple of policy demanded a more extended inquiry, and he wished that the sense of the House should be taken upon the subject Mr. FIELDING said, that in his opinion a Select Committee should be appointed to carry out the in quiry. The public felt interested in the inquiry. They would look to the decision of the House on this matter with more anxiety than they would to the corn-law question—(Hear)--and if Hon. Members wished to do what was reasonable, the inquiry would at once be granted.—( Hear.) Sir J. GRAHAM said, that when it was said that he was always ready to attend to the general feeling of the House—nothing more than justice had been done to him.—(Loud and prolonged cheering from all parts of the House.) The production of certain papers on this subject had been moved for, but he believed that a Com mittee of Inquiry would not be necessary if the House should, after the production of those papers, remain of the same opinion. He certainly was willing to withdraw his amendment, but with respect to the motion of the Hon. Member for Weymouth, he should offer the most decided opposition. The Poor.law Commissioners were respon sible for the acts of their own servants, and therefore he thought that no interference should be allowed with the power of appointing those office's. After a few words from Colonel SIBTHORP, Mr. CHRISTIE wished to say a few words in addi tion. After what had fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet, he must press his motion. He considered that missal e ssa in l q o i f fir A y in in p t u o rk t e h r e schaouusleds he coeval v h ai ad wi l t e h d th t e ) t i h n e ve ci s i t s i gation into the affairs of the Andover Union. Mr. JARVIS rose, amidst loud cries of " Divide r divide." He should vote against the amendment. He thought it would be better to inquire into the affairs of the Andover Union first, and afterwards find a Com mitted to investigate the circumstances that had led to Mr. Parker's dismissal. He was of opinion that many parties in the House only supported the amendment, not caring for Mr. Parker, but to embarrass the Right Hon. Baronet.—(Cries of " Oh, oh.") Such was his opinion, and, under those circumstances, he should vote against the amendment. Dr. BOWRING said the remarks of the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir James Graham) decided him to vote for his Hon. Friend, as the inquiry ought to be full and complete. He must support the amendment. Mr. `'PARLEY hoped the House would unanimously agree to the fullest inqury. The feeling out of doors was unanimous for an investigation. If the Poor-law Commissioners had this unlimited power attributed to them, in Heaven's name, let the country know how they use it. The Right Hon. Gentleman has shown him self squeezable, and he (Mr. Wakley) would advise him to yield a little further. By doing so a division would be avoid e d, a nd the disagreeable possibility of a defeat. He must take that opportunity, in justice to Mr. Westlake, the medical attendant of the Andover Union, to inform the House, and through them the guardians of that union and the public, that he (Mr. Wakley) had never received any communication from that gentleman till after the period he brought the subject before the at tention of the House. He said so that Mr. Westlake might not suffer in his interest, as he (Mr. Wakley) understood that a conspiracy was on foot which was to be carried out next Saturday by driving that gentleman from his place. It was but proper that this ejection should be prevented till it was known whether he de served dismissal or not. They had shown great sym pathy to the legal gentleman (Mr. Parker) who had been dismissed, and he trusted they would also extend it to the medical profession which was attacked in the person of Mr. Westlake. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said he had always maintained that the Poor-law Commissioners were responsible to the Home Secretary, and that the Home Secretary was re sponsible to the Honse of Commons. The Right Hon. Baronet therefore was bound to satisfy the House re specting the proceedings of the Poor-law Commissioners. If Mr. Parker had been guilty of insuborlination, the Poor-law Commissioners had a right to dismiss him ; but that ought not to preclude inquiry. The question was whether Mr. Parker was in the wrong, or the Poor-law Commissioners ; and in order to arrive at the truth there ought to be an inquiry. He called on the Right Hon. Baronet to concede the whole inquiry at once, and not make the half-concession he had done, as he was sure to be def ea t e d. G ra nt the Co mm itt e e f o r the full inquiry a t once, an d i t wou ld soon co m e out which party was in the wrong. Sir B. HALL briefly stated his intention of voting for the amendment, The gallery was then cleared for a division. On our re-admission to the gallery, we found that the numbers were— For Mr. Christie's amendment 92 Against it Majority for the amendment THE NUNS OF MINSK -23 Mr. COWPER then rose to move that copies of dis patches received by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, containing information about the persecution inflicted upon the Basilian nuns of Minsk, should be laid upon the table. (The Hon. Member then referred to the punishments which were said to have been inflicted upon the nuns of Minsk.) The report of the horrible barbarities perpetrated upon them was authenticated by the deposition of each of the unfortunate victims. They were employed in works to which they were altogether unaccustomed, and of six hundred and fifty-eight that were alive at the commencement of the persecutions, which lasted seven years, only fourteen were now living. If the history of their persecutions was true, it was a most lamentable and awful one—(Hear, hear)—and one which cast a stigma upon the age in which we lived.— (Hear, hear.) It was true that some people were in clined to disbelieve the statements, from the very atrocity of the affair ; but that was no evidence that the cruelties complained of had not been exercised.—(Hear, hear.) Indeed, the annals of religious persecu tion showed us that such cruelties had never been exercised within the memory of man. In past ages we had seen, by the annals of the In quisition, that scenes of great horror and unprovoked slaughter had occurred. In England itself we had had too many instances of horrid barbarites committed some centuries ago on account of religion. But the Inquisi tion had been put down by the public voice of indigna tion of the civilised world. The persecutions to which he had alluded as having occurred in England had stig matised every one connected with them. The leader of the Reformation had been blamed in the severest manner. And a sovereign living in those times had been branded with the name of " Bloody Queen Mary." And although such barbarities had been perpetrated years ago, it was no reason why we should not show our utmost indigna tion at the late persecution in Russia. On the contrary, he thought that it became the civilised portion of the com munity to protest loudly against such barbarities, and so induce the Government of every country to prevent the holding of certain religious opinions to be placed in the same category with those offences which might be con aidered as injurious to private individuals in the Govern ment of the country. If they allowed transactions of this nature to be perpetrated abroad, without attempting to ascertain whether they were capable of proof, and if proved, without expressing their sorrows and grief at them, he conceived that we lived in a country where we had not the advantage of a free course to pursue with respect to our religious opinions ; and, further, he conceived that they should not be discharging the duties which they owed to society at large.—(Hear, hear.) There had been many opportunities of disproving the statements of these offences, if the reports were false. The accounts had spread all over Euro ,e. They bad been published in Rome, when the Emperor himself was present, and when he had, of course, ample opportunities of dis proving them.—(Hear, hear.) And until they ha I some superior information, which he (Mr. Cowper) had not yet seen, they had no other alternative hut to accept the accounts as true. Now, he did not necessarily accuse the Emperor of Russia with being cognisant of the varieties of torture to which these unfortunate nuns had heti' subjected ; but he thought that that illustrious individual could not be acquitted of having at least permitted the exercise of such perse cutions in his dominions. He hoped that the House would not object to his motion, as the venerable Greek church, which had been charged with these cruelties, might then have an opportunity of clearing itself from the charges. He understood that there were authentic documents in the hands of the Government respecting this subject, and he trusted that they would not have any objection to lay them on the table of the House.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. T. WYSE seconded the motion, and in so doing thought that it was well known that the report of these atrocities, which were of the most ex traordinary nature, had been contradicted by the Warsaw Correspondent of an Edinburgh journal, but by way of rejoinder to that contradiction, a full detail had been published at Rome by the abbess of the con vent at Minsk, under the sanction of other authentic authorities. Now, either that document must be a com plete fabrication, or the statements of the Warsaw cor respondeut were untrue. Now he would ask on which side was the truth likely to be ? The Hon. Gentleman concluded by making a few further remarks in support of the motion, which were not very distinctly heard in _ Sr R. PEEL—Sir, I am not enabled to communicate to this House any official dispatches which would throw a light on the painful subject to which this motion refers. Her Majesty's Government has not received from its representative at. the Court of St. Petersburg, or from any other quarter, any official or authentic information on the subject. The only communication we have re ceived is from the British Consul at Warsaw, a most re spectabl.. and amiable gentleman, who, seeing the rep or t s in the French newspapers that the barbarities—for they can be called by no other name—had been commit ted in Poland, thought it his duty to write to the S ti e n c e r t e ly ta t ry hat o i f t S w t a a s te a f e o o r Foreign napiete error Affairs tosapp a n n s d e state that dis tinctly thing of the kind had taken place in Poland, and his confident belief was that the report must have been with out foundation, or must have been grossly exaggerated. That is the whole of the information we have received, consequently it will be impossible for her Majesty's Government to produce any official information on this subject which would throw any light whatever upon it. Now Sir, I should feel the deepest regret if there were any foundation for these reports. I have certainly a strong persuasion that nothing of the kind has taken place either with the sanction or with the knowledge of the Government of Russia. I understand, from private communication which I have had with the representative of the Emperor of Russia at this Court, that when the Emperor was at Rome, on the matter being mentioned by the Pope, he expressed great surprise, and stated to the Pope, that if anything of the kind had occurred, it had been entirely without his authority, and without his knowledge ; kut a strict inquiry should be instituted. This fortifies one in the belief that if anything of the kind had given sanction to these statements, it was with out the authority of the Government of Russia, and that an inquiry would be instituted by that Government into the facts of the case. Sir, I should therefore strongly advise every individual Member of this House to suspend his judgment on this matter. It is very reissible, and I hope that the result may proreit to be so that these re ports are without foundation, or have been much exag gerated. But in our capacity as a branch of the Legisla ture, I still more strongly urge you not to set the example of interference with the acts of another Government. It would be impossible for any minister, 4,r any Govern ment, cr any party, to repress the outbreak of those ft elings which naturally arise on statement of facts like those to which the Hon. Gentlemqn had referred. I cannot divest myself of individual feeling, and I declare that if this statement should be founded in fact, I should view with the greatest regret such a violation of the rights of conscience and humanity. But, as a house o f private feelings may be, Commons, I advise you to on es n ts o bl a is c h co a u p nt, rec w e h d a e t n e t v o e your fr inter ference with the domestic aflairs of other Governments. How have we ourselves been occupied to-night? What has formed the subject of discussion for four or five hours before the Hon. Gentleman brought forward his motion? An allegation that inhabitants of this country—th e of this realm—have been employed—there bein g charge of poverty— had been employed grinding bones, some of s rc those bones supposednsub6iteheetharge against them than the to have been human bones, and that their sub sistence was so scanty, that on their tin ling bones in a decomposed state, from which marrow could be ex tracted, a general engagement of the parties employed took place to get possession of one of those bones, and that the party getting possession of one of these bones was obliged to hide it, in order to derive some suste nance from it. Can anything be worse than that ?—and yet we should deeply resent it if one of the Chambers of France thought themselves justified by a regard to prin ciple to take any notice of that. Surely, vv e th)uld re