The Sun. — London, England, 1848-03-25 00:00:00

difficulty in the garrison's returning the accustomed salute fired by that vessel on entering the port? Mr. WARD was understood to reply that he had no officis.l intelligence on the subject. HEALTH OF TOWNS' BILL. Mr. CARDWELL wished to ask the Noble Lord the lint Commissioner of Woods and Forests, when tie intended to proceed with the Public health Bill ? Lord MORPETH said he was afraid he should not be able to bring it on next week, but the House might rely upon his proceeding with it on the earliest opportunity. ELECTION RECOGNIZANCES BILL. On the question being put that the House, at its rising, do adjourn till Monday, Mr. STAFFORD urged upon the Right Hon. the Chairman of the General Committee of Elections the propriety of postponing the nomination of the Com mittees on the Cheltenham, Leicester, and Bodmin petitions till after the Election Recogniaances Bill had been disposed of. Mr. GARDNER also made a similar appeal to the Right Hon. Gentleman, insisting that great hardship would be inflicted on the parties petitioned against if the appointment of the Committees were not delayed. He thought the House would do great injustice if it did not take some further steps in the matter. Mr. F. MAULE defended the General Committe o of Elections from the attacks that had been made against it. Ho did not see what other course that Committee could adopt other than that which it had stated its determination to pursue, of com mencing the selection from the panels on Monday next. Any objection that could be urged against the course the Committee intended to pursue would, ho was sure, bo attended to en Monday. Mr. STUART WORTLEY was glad that the Com mittee of Selection was open to suggestions upon the snb ject, and he trusted that they would do nothing hastily. He should ask the House to take the subject of the se cond reading of the Bill into consideration on Monday next the first thing, as it was a question of privilege. After some observations from Sir G. GREY, the sub ject dropped. GAME-LAWS.—MURDER OF THE DUKE OF CLEVELAND'S GAME-KEEPER. Mr. BRIGHT, seeing the Right Hon. Baronet the Head of the Home Department in his place, was desirous of putting a question to him upon a subject that he was sure would be painful to him. It was well known that two men were at the present moment under sentence of death in the county gaol of Durham for the murder of the gamekeeper of the Duke of Cleveland. He observed that a reprieve had been sent down for one of them. He understood the jury sent up to the Home-office a memorial in favour of a respite for the unhappy men. The House, the other evening, seemed in favour ofjuries re commending prisoners to mercy when there w ere extenuat ing circumstances, in which case the extreme penalty of the law was not carried out ; but if they had signed such a memorial, it seemed to him equivalent to a recommendation to mercy. Ile wished to ask whether the Right Hon. Baronet had any objection to lay copies of such memorial or recommendation to mercy upon the table of the House ? Having received various commu nications from the district, must plead ;his excuse for asking the question. Sir GEORGE GREY gave the Hon. Gentleman full credit for being actuated by the best of motives; but he could Lot help expressing his deep regret that questions of this kind, the circumstances of which it was impossible to bring clearly before the House, .were so frequently brought before it. Such proceedings, if perse vered in, would very much tend to impede the discharge of the painful duty entrusted to him in this as in other instances. The matter had received his serious attention, and the decision he had come to was one ho should not wish to shrink from.— (Hear, hear.) The verdict of the jury was not accom panied by a recommendation to mercy. He, like the Honourable Member, had received vari .us com munications on the subject from Durham. He did not think he should discharge his duty if he produced the copies sought, as such a course, he believed, in such matters, would be subversive of the practice heretofore adopted.—(Hear.) EMIGRATION TO CANADA. Mr. REYNOLDS wished to ask the Under Secre tary far the Colonies whether any additional tax was im posed upon emigrants landing in Canada or the North American Provinces, and if so, the amount of tax? Mr. HAVES said the Ilouse was, no doubt, aware of the disastrous consequences that accompanied the emigration last year. Out of 90,000 emigrants 15,000 died during their voyage or soon after landing. Under these circumstances Earl Grey recommend that the tax should remain as now, under ordinary circumstances; when healthy, that there should be no tax ; but if the ships were in quarantine, thereby showing her passen• gera were sickly, the tax was to be doubled, and if the detention was protracted, to be trebled, but in no case to exceed 20s. per head. The tax was also doubled upon helpless and aged emigrants. LEEWARD ISLANDS LOAN. Mr. MACKINNON inquired from the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it was the intention of the Government to call in the loans, or any pars of them, made after the earthquake in the Lee• ward Islands, to the proprietors of certain estates then, or whether the period of repayment was to be extended? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied that he had stated on the first day the House met after the Christmas recess, that the repayment of the balance remaining unpaid of those loans would be postponed fur a further period of five years, interest to be paid in the meantime. Mr. MACKINNON asked if that would be five yrars beyond the original period. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the exact arrangement was this: from this time, five years would intervene, during which interest would be charged; and, at tlw expiration of those five years, the loan would be put in precisely the same situltion as it was at that moment, whatever might he the term that re mained. GOVERNMENT MEASURES. Sir W. VERNER said there were three Bills which had been postponed from time to time; he wished to know whether it was the intention of the Government to proceed with them, and when. They were the Diplo matic Relations with the Court of Rome Bill, the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Bill, and the Health of Towns Bill.—(Bear, hear ) Lord J. RUSSELL said he would answer that ques tion in moving the order of the day for going into Com mittee of Supply, when he would state genefally the course that Government intended to pursue with regard to their measures. NON-PAYMENT OF POOR-RATES IN IRELAND. Mr. P. SCROPE said it appeared from a recent return containing the names of lords, ladies, and other landed proprietors, that there was an arrear of upwards of 8,0001 in the poor-rates of the Castlebar Union. Ho wished to ask whether that arrear still continued, or whether it had been materially diminished? also whe ther, during its continuance, any portion of the chari table funds remitted from L ondon to Ireland, had been applied for the purpose to which those arrears of rates ought to have been devoted. Sir W. SOMERVILLE said that no efforts had been spared by the Poor-law Commissioners to enforce the collection of these rates; every legal step had been taken, but these law processes were not very speedy. Legal proceedings were now pending sig,inst the defaulters. In the meantime the destitution in the Castlebir Union had been very great indeed. The number new receiving out-door relief was between 17,000 and 18,000, besides about 3,000 who were fed by the bounty Of the British Association. To prevent morn dreadful calamities, the Committee had been induced to use the funds placed at their disposal by the British Association —a course which would not be disapproved by those who knew the intensity of the distress which prevailed. The last report stated that the amount of arrears was now 7,9691, but a great portion of this, it was ex pected, would be ultimately got in, though the passiVe resistance of many ratepayers, and the inability of others, rendered it a work of time. He hoped his Hon. Friend and the House would have some consideratiOn for the enormous difficulties in which the Commissioners were placed. 1 Sir H. W. BARRON said, the queition which had been asked might create an impression that the land. lords of the Castlebar Union were wilful defaulters. Common honesty ought to have prompted the Hon. Member to add, that in the county of Mayo it was noto rious that there were noblemen possessing a yearly rental of 3,0001, 10,0001., or 15,0001., who had not, either last year or the year before, received one-teeth of their income on an average. Many of the . largeSt propTietOrs had been obliged to sell their carriages and - dismiss their servants, and were themselves reduced to the greatest difficulties, owing to the destitution pre 'veiling around them. Would it not have been fair to mention these facts, when a question of this insidious nature was put ?—(Hear.) Not a single case similar to that of the Castlebar Union could be produced either in . Leinster, Minister, or Ulster ; this was not therefore a 'fair way of giving information to the public. He knew that in Mayo the landlords had paid their rates, though they had not received . anything like the usual amount of rents. During the last two years they had made enormous 'sacrifices to support the poor around them, and this was the thanks which they received in Parliament, to be vilified as a body. He begged to ask the Hon. Secretary for Ireland whether it was in tended, under the advice of " Lord Devon's Commission, tocommute leases for lives in Ireland into holdings for perpetuity? Sir W. SOMERVILLE said a Bill had been pre pared for that purpose, and he hoped it would be very speedily introduced into the' House.—(Hear.) _ Mr. E. B. ROCHE thought the attack uncalled-for which had been made on the conduct and character of the Hon . . Member roi Siiiiud. The character of no one stood higher for a disinterested advocacy of the - cause of the poor in Ireland.--(Hear.) The question he had asked was no sweeping attack oh the landlords of Ire land, but simply a reference to documents and returns which were on the table of the House; and, if there was any attack in such a question, it was certainly better founded than the defence that had been offered by the Hon. Baronet (Sir H.. W. Barron). Mr. P. SCROPI was not aware that, on this or any former occasion, ho had made any sweeping charge ! against the landlords of Ireland. He had merely drawn attention to the vast amount of rates which remained uncollected in a certain union. Sir H. W. BARROff said it ought to have been stated thst not only rates but rents were uncollectable in that district. SUGAR AND COFFEE PLANTING. Lord G. BENTINCK requested Mr. Hume to post trEWSPA) tiq the motion of which he had given notice on Tues. r 4 t, s , -,-., ;_ "'hex% until a , later period. lie could assure the .. " : • - --,- , --1 .E - ;/. ..,,- that the Committte on sugar and coff,,e, planting ":ar:- ? V--: ::. : ---- s ztr. , ,A). ' have terminated its labours to about a week, and „,,!...,„ ~.,...„.„ , d thee be able to report to the riou s e, t, „13-;!,- , t ,:: : /, , - , z r HUME said he should be reluctant to postpone tl . - - '' .- t 4,= - .,e. A tion for any lengthened period, but as he did not T:l‘.-_ r•l ' wpreitidge the questinn; and having the Noble isz a THE SUN, LONDON„_ Lord's assurance that the Committee would very soon report to the House, he would consent to a short post ponement of his notice. The motion for the adjournment of the House at its rising until Monday, was then agreed to. PROPERTY TAX BILL. _ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the second reading of this Bill (which was one of the dropped orders of Thursday). Mr. HUME said he should not oppose the Bill in its present stage ; but on the motion for going into Com mittee he should certainly propose to send it up stairs to a Select Committee. Mr. OSBORNE asked if the Right Hon. the Chan cellor of the Exchequer had taken into consideration, as he had promised to do, the question of making a deduc tion from the assessment of house property, in respect of insurance from fire? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had done so; and, after the fullest consideration he could give the subject, he thought the best course would be to pursue the course adopted in 1845, and ask the House to continue the Bill for three years as it stood, without attempting to introduce matters that might be supposed by some Hon. Members to be improvements. Whatever he could do by any arrangement of the schedules he was perfectly ready to undertake; but not to introduce alterations in the Bill itself. The Bill was then read a second time, and the Com mittee fixed for Monday. COURSE OF PROCEEDING WITH THE GO-I understated the case. He had made the candid avowal that all his efforts to suppress the slave trade bad only augmented it in a tenfold degree.—(Hear.) He declared that Great Britian had expended upwards of a million and a quarter, besides the annual cost of supporting her squadron—in all, about fifteen millions sterling ; num- . hers of valuable lives had been sacrificed ; and yet the traffic had not been diminished, but the numbers ex ported had increased, being as two to one compared with what they were in 1807, while the loss of life had been twentysfive per cent. He would be prepared to show that Sir F. Buxton had understated both the amount of money which had been spent and the increase in the loss of human life. As far as he could ascertain from Parliamentary returns the total amount of money spent by this country between 1808 and 1347 was` 49,105,705/., including the 20,000,0001. paid to the West India planters. If to this sum be added the amount paid for the increased price of sugar, rum, and molasses, thq total would amount to 82,387,1304 Now with regard to the loss of life Sir F. Buxton had stated the increase at 25 per cent., but he believed it was at least 33 per cent. Mr. Cliff had estimated the loss of life on the passage at one-third, and that was also the calculation of the mer chants at Havannah. Papers which had been presented to the House of Lords in 1799 showed that the mor: tality in 1791, three years after the passing of the Slave trade Carrying Regulation Act, was only 13,1 per cent. In 1803 he believed the loss was still less. Were they, therefore, to continue a system on an idea of mistaken philanthropy which had been attended with such disas trious results, both in loss of money and loss of life ? It was shown from official returns, which were quoted in Sir Fowell Buxton's work, that 49,643 slaves were im ported annually into Rio Janeiro between the years 1827 and 1830, and that there were landed on the entire coast of Brazil no less than 78,331 slaves annually.—(Hear, hear.) Sixty thousand were landed in Havannah alone, besides those which were landed in other places. If the trade had remained per fectly free he did not think that Cuba and the Brazils could absorb greater numbers.—(Hear, hear.) So much with regard to the question up to 1840. From that time up to 1846 it would be shown that the number of slaves imported depended on the demand for their produce in the markets of Europe. It had been said by the Noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, that only 3,000 slaves were imported in 1846. That might be true, be: cause at that time a great blow had been struck at the slave trade by the measure of the late Government' which admitted free-labour sugar into the markets of this country.—(Hear, hear.) The house of Drake and Co., of Havannab, had petitioned the Spanish Government, in consequence of that measure, for a total extinction of the slave trade in Cabe'. They said that the Engiish market being thrown open to free-labour , sugar would compensate theils for any loss that might be incurred. It was in consequence of this measure, and not from any increased activity on the part of the British squadron, that the diminution in the number of slaves imported in 1846 was to be attribu+ ted. He could show that the profits realised from the trade were so large, that it would be impossible for any exertions on the part of this country to put a stop to it: He believed it was a maxim at the Custom-house that no smuggling on which a profit of 33 per cent. was real lised could be put a stop to. But the profits of the slave trade were vastly more than that. He would read to the House a statement of those profits. The price or a slave on the coast of Africa was 41. per head. If the number of slaves amounted to 556, that would give a sum of 2,2244 The amount of freight was 4,0001., and the cost of water, rice, 637/. The price of a a slave in Brazil was 501.; now supposing that only 371 of the 536 were landed alive, that would give 18,550/., or a net profit, after deducting the expenses, of 11,6891., which was equal to 200 per cent.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon', Gentleman quoted several statements of a simii lar character. All the accounts lately received had shown that a great impulse had been given to the slave trade by the measure of the present Government.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentlemen read several extracts of letters which had been received by mercantile houses in the City, which stated that the slave trade was annually increasing. Those statements were fortified by the opinions of Mr. Oldfield, who said that " it was a perfect farce to try and put down the slave trade by their present naval force." But the Gos vernor of Sierra Leone himself, in a letter dated October 1, 1847, stated that notwithstanding the extreme yips lance of her Majesty's squadron, the traffic in slaves was more vigorous than ever.—(Hear, hear.) Sir Thomas Herbert gave similar testimony. Was it to be endured then that the Government should keep up a squadron at a vast expense to the country for the suppression of the slave trade whilst they passed a measure which tended directly to encourage it?—(Hear.) They must do one of two things—revoke their measure or call back their squadron.—(Hear, hear.) The people of England were taxed to support a squadron which was not able to suppress the slave trade, but which enhanced the price of slaves in Cuba and Brasil. The people of England were the great consumers of their produce, and the consequence was, that they were obliged to buy it at a much higher price. How long would the people of England endure this ? He knew that the Government would answer him by asking if the people of England were prepared to depart from the course of policy which they had now followed for several years. But he had proved that it was desirable, on the ground of humanity, that the Government should change their policy. The way the slave trade was carried on was this: the slave trader contracted with the merchant to bring him Loop slaves, for instance, and he wrote to his agent on the coast of Africa to send him, not 1,000 slaves, but 3,000, calculating that the difference would be lost on the pas sage. He did not believe that the people of this country were prepared any longer to pay for a state of things attended with such inhumanity. It' they were really anxious to put down the slave trade, they must withdraw their squadron from the coast of Africa, block up the ports of Cuba and Brazil, and refuse admittance for their produce into this country. It was the will, and not the power, to suppress the slave trade that was wanted. If the Government were not pre pared to take the responsibility of that course, let them at least not put forward their desire to suppress the slave trade as an excuse for persevering in a system which had utterly failed, and brought nothing but loss and ridicule upon the country.—(Hear.) With regard to their West India colonies, he believed they were well nigh ruined, with the exception perhaps of Antigua and Barbadoes. There were some in that House who de sired such a consummation. He confessed he was un able to join in their views. The Hon. Member for the West Riding (Mr. Cobden) and the free-traders thought that their principle would bind the whole world in the bonds of peace. They had visions et a coming golden age, but for himself he preferred even the sad realities of the present Administration to those flattering visions of the future.—(Bear.) He supposed that assurances would be given of the adoption of vigorous measures, but he entreated the House to reflect on the dreadful sacrifice of human life by which these repeated experi ments had been attended.—( Hear, _hear.) He held in his hand a statement of the deaths of officers and seamen and of those who had been invalided in the year 1845. It appeared from this statement that the entire charges for the squadron in that year amounted to 706,4541.—(Hear)-259 deaths of officers and men had taken place, and 271 had been invalided, making a total of 530, which was a greater sacrifice of life than that which had gained them some of their most brilliant naval victories.—( Hear.) If this did not move the House, he called upon them as guardians of the public purse to vote for his motion. To the sum of 706,454/. was to be added the expense of their establishments on the coast of Africa, at Sierra Leone, Fernando Po, and Cape Coast Castle, the courts, the commissions, and the expense of maintaining the negroes who were taken, which would make a total of 1,200,0001. raid yearly by this country for a purpose which had proved worse than useless. — (Hear, hear.) He called upon the Hon. Member for Finsbury and the other Members who represented large constituencies to aid him in relieving the people of this country from the unjust burden of the window tax by supporting his motion—to aid him in dispelling that delusion which so long prevailed amongst the people by means of which they had been made to pay a heavy penalty for the weakness and folly of their go vernors.—(Hear.) The Hon. Gentleman concluded by moving " That an humble address be presented to her Majesty, praying that she will be graciously pleased to give directions that negotiations be entered into with fo reign powers to relieve this country from the engage ment under which it labours of maintaining a squadron upon the coast of Africa." Mr. HUME seconded the motion, and urged that nothing could stop the slave trade whilst profits re mained as great as they were at present. He contended that we were aggravating the horrors of the slave arade, and that we ought. not to be ashamed to,replace our steps. He dissented, however, from the Hon. Member in thinking that we could use any measures of coercion to suppress the slave trade. It was no use our attempting to drag on.the whole world. But there was a course open to us—that of giving encouragement to free labour, in every overynly sense m aodfe cheap u the term ; o an r d if be t n h e a v t o s le y n st t em in o te f o la tro o n u i r were respecting the slave, he felt assured, would have inff • nitely greater success than at present. All our consuls were agreed that the present system was ineffectual, and unless it were put an end to he could never anticipate a termination to the existing slave traffic. After a short pause, Mr. G. THOMPSON said that. abhorring the slave trade, he could not hold it to be right to inflict so heavy a burden as that imposed on this country since 1808, in order to put down the African slave-trade. In his judgment it was not right to seek the attainment of mo tives, in themselves holy, by such means as this country had adopted. But it was not necessary for him to press that argument, for the strong position upon the present question was that our existing system was utterly abor tive. We had found nothing but insincerity among other nations which had entered into treaty with us to put down the traffic. Scarcely any one of these nations ever had the stipulated number of cruisers or guns upon the coast of Africa, and the consequence was that the burden upon us had become utterly intolerable. He was pretty well acquainted with- Sierra Leone and the sys tem in operation there, and he could safely declare that that and like places had been hotbeds of fraud and chicanery—places full of men who profited by the humanity of this country to carry on co vertly and by fraud the very system they were paid to suppress. He had every confidence that free labour was entirely able to compete succesfully with slave labour. If it were not, he should doubt whether or not free labour was the law of nature and of mankind. But all experience proved the coaverse. The condition and circumstances of India proved it, where freo labour was quite able to cultivate the soil with success. He was therefore disposed to confine his efforts to the great object of suppressing the slave trade by the encourage ment of free labour. Lord 11. VANE thought it would be inopportune to decide this question in any way whilst the subject was under the consideration of a Committee. He was in clined, however, to agree with the arguments by which the motion was supported, and should his opinions not VERNMENT MEASURES. Lord J. RUSSELL—Sir, in moving the order of the day for the House to go into Committee of Supply, I will take the opportunity of stating the course which we propose to pursue with respect to the business Govern ment has brought before the House, and of submitting to the House some general considerations on that subject. With regard to the business now before the House, I propose to take to-night the estimates and the vote of men for the army. There is likewise a vote of money on account iu the navy and the ordnance, which it will be necessary to take in a very short time. My Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exche quer proposes on Monday to proceed with the Income tax Bill, as he has already stated ; and we propose to go through with that Bill on the days on which the Go vernment has precedence. After that Bill I propose to proceed with the Committee on the Bill for removing Jewish disabilities, and then to take the third reading of that Bill. Next, my Noble Friend the Chief Com missioner of Woods and Forests will propose that the House should go into Committee on the Health of Towns Bill. The Hon. Barnonet opposite (Sir W. Verner) has asked me with regard to two other Bills—the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Bill, and the Diplomatic Relations with Rome Bill. Of these we propose to take first the Landlordand Tenant (Ireland) Bill. I have been informed that a considerable wish has been expressed, if the House should consent to the second reading of that Bill, to refer it to a Select Committeee and, if that shall appear to be the general wish of the House on a subject of such great intricacy and difficulty, on which the Government themselves hare bad the greatest difficulty in deciding on the different provisions of the Bill, I can have no ob jection, if there appears a chance of improving the Bill by any inquiry before a Select Commtttee, to take that course.—(Hear, hear.) There will probably be a good deal of discussion on the second reading of that Bill. Having stated so much with regard to the business of the House, and as the Easter recess is approaching, it is not necessary, perhaps, that I should fix any other time for the other Government business. There is the Di plomatic Relations with Rome Bill; there is also a Bill which has met the concurrence of the House of Lords, and has come to this House—the Encumbered Estates Bill—which we think a very important measure. Now Sir, I wish to make a statement with regard to the general business of the House, so far as legislation is concerned ; and I do so at this time—first, because it is an early period of the session; and, in the next place, because I have every reason to thank the House for the attention it has given to the business which has been brought before it by the Government: for I do not know of any instance in which the Government has wished to press business forward in which the House has not immediately fairly dealt with and disposed of it according to our wish.—(Hear, hear.) Therefore, what I am about to say will be without any sort of complaint either against the House or against any individual Member. My Noble Friend the Member for Bath (Lord Duncan) has to-night given an instance of his wish to accommodate the Government business by not bringing forward a motion which he had placed on the paper (re ferring to a motion on the subject of the Crown Lands which Lord Duncan had withdrawn at a previous period of the evening). And I should also be very glad if another Honourable Member (Mr. H. Baillie), who has given a notice with respect to the subject of our squadron on the African coast, would follow the course which has just now been taken by the Hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume), on a subject which is nearly akin to that. My Noble Friend the Member for King's Lynn (Lord G. Bentinck) has stated that the Committee over which he presides, on the production of sugar and coffee, is about to enter into deliberation, for the purpose of making some report to the House; whereupon the Hon. Member for Montrose has very properly deferred his motion on that subject.— (Hear, hear.) But Ido think there are other reasons why the House, if it wishes that matters of legislation should be deliberately considered, at a time when there is a full attendance of Alembers, should not interpose other questions on those days which are devoted by the orders of the House to the business of Government.— (Hear.) I beg to submit to the House that there have been, in the course of the last thirty years, very great changes in the mode of conducting the business of the House, both by the Government, and by individual Members. I remember at that time, when I first entered the House, it was not usual for the Government to under take generally the subject of legislation; the Government generally confined itself to those measures which pro perly bet( nged to the business of administration, and to any particular subjects which required their pressing at tention. At the same time I think there were at that period two Government days in the week; and though notices had precedence on other days, the orders of the day could come on on any day of the week; so that the business of the Government proceeded at a more rapid pace than it does now. Two great changes have taken place—and they may be both changes for the better — but they are certainly somewhat inconsistent and incompatible with each other. The one is, that for many years past—that is, since the passing of the Reform Bill—it has been thought to be for the eonvenience of the public that upon every subject on which an alteration of the law was required, Government should prepare a Bill on that subject, and undertake the passing of it through Par liament. The other great change is, that measures of all kinds are more discussed in Parliament, a greater num ber of Members take part in their discussion, and a far greater number of motions are made by individual Mem bers than formerly was the case. The consequence is, that subjects of legislation of very great importance are broughs into this House ; but it is found impossible by any Government—it has been so found by preceding Governments as well as the present—to bring them on at a time when they can receive a fair deliberation; and they are frequently put off till quite the end of the ses sion, when very few Members remain. I know it is constantly said—and said, I think, without much reflection—that there are important measures which have not been pressed forward. But if the House will consider what is the nature of its own orders, they will see how impossible it is for Government to press for ward measures, and obtain the time necessary for their discussion. There are only two days in the week reserved for Government business; considering holidays and adjourned debates, that gives about eight days in a month. Now, it seems a great while to say that four months of the session are gone, and that several Bills have not yet been brought under discussion ; but when we come to the number of days, we find there have been about 30 days, and no more, on which the Government business could come under discussion. I am not making any complaint of this, nor asking for an ad ditional number of days ; I only wish the matter to be before the House, in order that they may consider it. If they think it desirable that Bills should be brought in and pressed forward more rapidly than they are now, probably some mode may be found of accomplishing that object ; but if they are satisfied with the present mode of conducting the business, at least they should reflect that it will be impossible to press forward Bills for the general purposes of legislation at an early period of the session. In the present year there are im - portant questions which must come under consideration. The Income-tax Bill will expire in April next. The Mu tiny Bill must be renewed: The estimates in Committees of Supply and the question of the income-tax will pro bably take up about two months of the days which Go vernment has to dispose of. I think that to night it is desirable that the Hon. Member for Inverness-shire (Mr. H. Baillie) should not press his motion, but should allow us to dispose of this night for the purposes of the Go eernment business.—(Hear, hear.) With regard to any alteration I do not ask any such at present; I only hope that Hon. Gentlemen will turn the matter over in their minds, and perhaps some proposition. may be made here after which will meet the wishes of the House. I will now move that the order of the day be read.—(Hear.) SLAVE TRADE—COAST OF AFRICA. Mr. BAILLIE said he felt it his duty to proceed with his motion. This was not a question to be referred to a Committee of Inquiry, but one on which every Hon. Member was competent to decide. The Government sought to solve all their difficulties by the magic name of &Committee; but it was for the House to dispel the delusion which had so long prevailed in the country as to the slave trade, and to let it be known that all the valuable lives which had been sacrificed, and all the treasure that had been squandered, so far from attaining the object in view, had positively augmented the horrors of the slave trade. These facts proved that it would:be highly criminal for any Minister, be he who he might, to persist in such u course. The formation of an addi tional treaty with the republic of the Equador, an nounced in her Majesty's Speech, was but a con tinuance of that system of delusion which had been so long practised on the country. Our squadron on the African coast had proved totally unavailing; and it was the opinion of eminent naval authorities that the whole navy of England would not be sufficient to keep up an effective blockade on a coast of 6,000 miles in extent. The late Government had, in 1845, announced a great addition to the efficiency of the blockade. This consisted andin t the mutual eu ei te d r i s g t h a t t eosf were searc p h e , e a u b l i o a u r t l y n i n c s h i t i b r both . t h T F h r e a u n g e h e the late Government had settled that question most amicably, it was not fair that the people of this country should be saddled with the cost of a squadron which was nearly useless. He should show that the slave trade, so far from being suppressed, had increased, and that the supply of slaves to the markets of Cuba and Brazil had been quite equal to the demand, notwithstanding all our attempts to prevent it. Sir F. Buxton, shortly before his death, had published all the evidence that could be 'obtained on the slave trade ; he had been 'accused of exaggeration, but so far from that, -he had SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 25, 1848. hereafter be shaken by the inquiries now going on, he ' should be disposed at the proper period to support such a motion as the present. Mr. URQUHAHT thought every means ought to be taken to keep down the expenditure of the country. The philanthropic objects of the promoters of the pre sent system had completely failed. They had laboured under a mighty delusion, and, recovering from their insanity, it was their duty to review what they at tempted. He returned his thanks, therefore, to the Hon. Member who had brought forward this subject, and he appealed to Members on the Liberal side of the House to give the motion their support. Capt. PECHELL defended the squadron on the coast of Africa. Our cruisers there were employed in the most perilous of duties; and, instead of getting re warded, they were attacked and sneered at. He opposed the motion because it was ill-timed, and because he did not think the premises were proved. Mr. HUTT, as chairman of the Committee to which the House had devolved the whole of this most serious and important question, wished to remark that they would scarcely be acting a wise or a prudent part if they were to pass an opinion upon any one particular portion of it, as proposed upon this occasion. Mr. MOWATT, having made up his mind to support this motion, wished to explain why he had done so, lest he might be charged with being friendly to the slave trade. After the clear statement the Hon. Member had made, and in the absence of all explanation, he saw no other conclusion at which an unbiassed mind could arrive, except that the system had entirely failed.— (Hear.) It appeared that the present system cost at it sat a million of money and not less than 250 lives a year. Were we justified, in the face of this evidence, in continuing such an expenditure and such a sacrifice? He thought not, and therefore he should support the motion. Viscount PALMERSTON did not dispute that this was a subject deserving most attentive consideration at all times, and which might very properly be brought forward when a vote for supply was demanded. But, on the other hand, considering that the whole of the sub ject was referred, not long ago, to the examination of a Select Committee, he did not think the Hon. Member had exercised a sound discretion in now bringing the subject forward. If the Hon. Member thought he had anything to prove, the Select Committee was open to him before which to prove it.—(Hear, hear.) But let him not be understood on this occasion as admitting the facts which the Hon. Member had affirmed. This was not the season to enter on their consideration. The House must remember that those means for the sup pression of the slaw trade were the result of ne slight consideration. They had been framed in con sequence of anxious wishes expressed in petitions by the country, and of anxious consideration of those petitions on the part of former Parlia ments. It was said that they had tried the system for thirty years, and that it was proved to have failed But he denied that they bad tried it for thirty years in any manner likely to be effective. Until the year 1839 the slave trade was to a great extent free from molestation; and therefore, up to that time at least, it was not right to say that the system, in any degree, had had a fair trial. If it were said, however, that it failed since 1839, he begged leave to express doubts as to the accuracy of that conclusion. The Hon. Member argued that the system had failed because the prices of slaves were so considerable in America; but surely this circumstance of great price demonstrated that the price was net equal to the demand.—(Hear, hear.) They must also remember that successive Go vernments had, by their negotiations, persuaded many countries to abandon this trade. France and Holland no longer pursued. it, Spain and Portugal scarcely pursued it, and, as stated by the Honourable Member, the trade was almost confined to a colony of Spain and to the empire of Brazil. In that way they must have prevented an immense deal of human suffer ing.—(Hear, hear.) Now, people ran away with the idea, and the assertion passed from mouth to mouth, that the means taken to put down the traffic greatly ag gravated its horrOrs: He (Lord Palmerston) denied this conclusion. Was there anything in the present day equal to the horrors of the middle passage in former times?—(Hear.) And upon either principle they might feel assured that these horrors were exaggerated. The slave-trader's interest was diametrically opposed to any such cruelties as those described. The more slaves he landed safely and in good health the greater his profits; and therefore it any such cruelties existed as those described they might merely be attributed to the blind ness of avarice, which would operate equally whether we pursued the existing system of prevention or entirely abandoned it. However, this was not the proper time to go fully into this great question. His objection at this time was that the whole subject had been referred to a Select Committee that was now sitting, and that there fore this motion was premature.—(Cheers ) Mr. DISRAELI objected to the proposal made by the Noble Lord to refer such questions as were before the House to any Select Committee. They were matters for the consideration of the House, and not for a Select Committee. The Cabinet ought to determine upon them. Two Select Committees had already been ap pointed on that same evening, and if that mode of dealing with public questions was persevered in, the whole force of Parliament would presently be absorbed by Select Committees. He wished some Hon. Member would move for a return of the number of Select Com mittees that had been recently appointed. It would be one of the most singular documents ever published by the House. The Noble Lord (Palmerston) had asserted that the system of prevention had not yet received a fair trial. But he (Mr. Disraeli) differed with the Noble Lord, and was prepared to argue the points on the ' broadest grounds. Even, however, admitting that the system bad been successful in all respects, was it, he asked, one which it was expedient to persevere in? Taken in that light, he maintained it would not sustain examination, much less the positive declaration of the Noble Lord.—(Hear.) What could be urged in de fence of the expenditure of 1,000,0001. a year in addition to the 80,000,000 1 . that had been wasted during the last thirty years ? The Noble Lord had said nothing what ever to shake his faith in the statements of his (Mr. Disraeli's) lion. Friend. The Noble Lord had asserted that the traders to the coast of Africa were prohibited from carrying water casks lest they should - be turned to the purposes of slavers. His (Mr. Disraeli's) Hon. Friend asserted that the consequence of that regulation was to prevent the slaves from having more than one drink of water in two days during the transit through the cruising grounds of the African coast. So that he was entitled to say the sufferings of the slaves were not decreased by the regulations now in force, and that, on the contrary, those sufferings,had been very greatly in creased by the course pursued in consequence of the legislative interference. Under these circumstances, he thought it could hardly be contended that the system was one which should be upheld in a time of financial embarrassment like the present. Hon. Members would incur a great responsibility if they did not attend to the representation of the Hon. Member for Inverness, and support the motion which he had introduced to their notice. Lord PALMERSTON explained that the right of search given up in 1845 was not that which had been obtained in 1839. The latter referred to the Spanish flag, and was still retained by this country. Sir T. D. ACLANI) objected to any change in so ins portant a portion of our policy as our mar i t i me po li ce f or the suppression of the slave trade without due and care ful consideration. He did not think that after a single night's debate, we should ha s til y overturn a s y stem which we had perseveringly followed for upwards of 30 vears.—(Hear, hear.) As to the arguments which had been adduced against the maintenance of the African squadron on the score of health, he found a sufficient answer to them in the returns of casualties, from which it appeared that the loss of life on the African station was as low as might be expected in the most healthy station in the world. Neither could it successfully be contended that it bad failed in its mission. From Go vernor Macdonald's report it appeared that the slave trade had been effectually checked along a great extent of coast, and that legitimate commerce was gradually but surely taking its place. Having these views, he felt bound-to divide with the Government against the motion of the Hon. Member for Inverness. Lord J. RUSSELL wished to address a few observa tions to the House, not upon the general question as to the efficacy of our system for putting down slavery and the slave trade, but upon the particular question as it stood at that moment. He would venture to submit to the House that, for more than twenty years, under dif ferent Administrations, they had carried on the present system; and, in carrying it on, had spent eighty millions for the suppression of slavery. Suppose, then, that a primti facie case could be made out against the system, could anything be more reasonable than that the House should wait for the report of the Committee of Inquiry they had appointed, and not hastily decide the question on a night devoted to the army estimates, and when many Members must have thought that no such question would come on ?—(Hear, hear.) The House had ap pointed a select Committee on the motion of the Hen. Member for. Gateshead ; that Committee was at present sitting, and when its labours came to a conclu. sion the House would have in the evidence full materials for a decision, and if such evidence went to confirm the statement of the Hon. Member for Inverness it would be competent to them to accede to the course which he proposed. But it might be advisable to take other steps to modify the system, without abandoning it altogether. Part of a system might be founded on a mis taken policy, and yet to abandon at once our whole scheme of: maritime police was a thing not to be done without full and searching - inquiry. (Hear, hear.) He thought there could be no doubt, even in the minds of those who contended for the non-success of our measures on the coast, that a large portion of Africa had been relieved from the slave trade, and that legitimate com merce had been extensively established in its place. Surely then, even if the policy were objected to, it would not be humane at once to withdraw our squadron from those parts, and to expose them anew to all the horrors of the slave trade.—(Hear, hear.) Therefore the question before the House was not simply a question of whether the present system of slave-trade prevention should be kept up. There would be found mixed up with it various considerations, various questions of policy on which it would be necessary to deliberate, and many of which it might not be found convenient to abandon. The Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, presuming that the case had been made out, referred to the ques tion as merely one of economy; but he (Lord John Russell) would ask the House whether a system which had been so long established, and for such a purpose, should be suddenly abandoned on more grounds of eco nomy.—(Hear.) It was a question of humanity, and would not be hastily decided by the House, even to save a million a year. What he wished the House to con sider was, that the question should not be decided sum marily on the statement of the Hon. Member, on a day devoted to other business. The Hon. Member for Mon trose had said that with fair play free labour could suc cessfully compete with slave labour. He (Lord John Russell) inclined to that opinion, but from one cause,or other free labour had not as yet had a 'fair trial, Ltd that in his opinion formed another reason for careful deliberation. They might find that a great portion of the present system was wrong, and if in addition they found that free labour produce could successfully com pete with the produce of slave labovr, they might pro ceed with confidence in their alterations without having at the same time to reproach themselves with abandon ing for the sake of economy the higher interests of hu manity which they had previously been successful in up holding.—(Hear, hear.) Sir R. PEEL said that the present was not the occa sion to enter into a discusion on the merits of the treaty of 1845, or as to whether the arrangements then entered into with France were more efficacious than the previous right of search. His object in rising was merely to explain how far that treaty interfered with our pre vious right of search. We had then the right of search with regard to Spain, Portugal, and Brazil; we retained it still, and with every country except France, which country had no interest in the prose cution of the slave trade. He could only say with respect to the policy of the treaty of 1845, that when the subject was discussed with a completee knowledge of all the facts, the policy:of Government received the unanimous approbation of the House. The Noble Lord opposite (Palmerston) had questioned that policy; but so convinced was he that the House did not concur in his views, that be contented himself with a perfectly safe and harmless motion for papers, and even in that he found only 53 Members to support him.—(Hear, hear.) As to the right of search enjoyed by this country, in 1845, we had not the right reciprocally over the east coast of Africa, and only over certain portions of the west, together with Cuba, Brazil, and Madagascar. His belief was that our right of search did not extend be yond the tenth degree of south latitude, and did not extend to several parts of the western coast of Africa, where the slave trade was carried on, and to no part of the eastern coast, Under the treaty of 1845, France and England were to grant warrants reciprocally, each to authorise the right of search to the cruisers of the other Powers, but England was not permitted to ask fbr warrants for more than double the number of ships employed by France in this service. So that it would be in the power of France, if at any time she should entertain any jealousy as to the amount of our naval force engaged on the coast of Africa, to decrease it by limiting the number of vessels employed by herself. But the right of visit existed as it did before. France did not carry on the slave trade—it had never been sus pected that she did, but it was apprehended that ships of other nations engaged in that trade might assume the French flag, and the right of search was effectual as to these. But the right of visit was still possessed in all cases, and that right was fully admitted by France.— (Hear.) It occurred to the Government in 1845 that if they could obtain the cordial concurrence of France in the endeavour to put down the slave trade, the moral influence of the two Powers acting together would be more effectual in furthering that object than if we re tained the right of search and insisted on the treaty of 1839.—(Hear.) The House must not, however, suppose that the right of search had been in any way affected by the treaty of 1845, as far as it related to the vessels of those nations which carried on the slave trade. His impression was now the same as it had been in 1845, that the treaty then entered into with France was an advan tage rather than an injury, so far as the suppression of the •slave trade was concerned. He should vote against the motion of the Hon. Member for Inverness. He meant not by that to say that it might not be a proper one as an amendment under other circumstances. However inconvenient a course it might be in some cases to call in the aid of a Select Committee on matters which pro perly fell within the province of the Government, be was not sure whether this was not a case in which the House was specially called on to undertake an inquiry, for he could not forget that the suppression of the slave trade was a policy imposed on the Government by the public, of which the House of Commons was the representative. He could not forget that in 1839 the House unani mously addressed the Crown to enter into freshlreaties, and to invoke the aid of other powers in concert with ourselves to put down the traffic in slaves—(Hear, hear) —and surely it would not bo wise, without full inquiry as to the efficacy of the system which had been established under the treaties entered into in conse quence of that address, now to address the Crown to negotiate for the abrogation of those treaties.--(Hear.) Seeing that an inquiry was going on, in which the opinions of those engaged in the suppression of the slave trade would be elicited, and all the facts connected with the subject brought out. he should decline stating any opinion he might have formed, founded on the in formation which had reached him, and would postpone his judgment until the report of the Committee should be produced, and the whole evidence should be before the House. Setting aside, therefore, the important consideration, as to whether our policy in respect to the sugar duties had given an encouragement to the cultiva tion of slave-labour sugar, and without reference to the circumstances under which the treaty with France was concluded, he thought that to fetter the hands of Go vernment by a resolution adopted, not only without in quiry, but in the face of inquiry —(Hear, hear)—would be, not to increase the influence of the executive Go vernment with France, nor add to the authority of the House of Commons.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. BOUVERIE said the whole question was, whe ther the policy was right or wrong. The motion might have been inopportunely introduced, but being before the House, he must vote for it. He could not consent to vote the public money for purposes unconnected with the government of the country. The House then divided, when there appeared-- For the original motion For Mr. Baillie's amendment BO Majority —l36 DESTRUCTION OF TENANTS' HOUSES BY IRISH LANDLORDS. The question for going into Committee of Supply having been again put, SCROPE rose to move an humble address to her Majesty, that she will be graciously pleased to direct an indictment to be preferred by her Majesty's law officers, against the parties concerned in the illegal destruction of several houses, and the forcible ejectment of their inmates, which took place within the union of Galway, on or about New Year's-day last, and which appears to have occasioned the deaths of several of the unfortunate beings so ill-treated, by the evidence taken on oath before Major M'Kie, poor-law inspector of that union, by order of the commissioners; which evidence is printed at length in p. 467 of the fifth series of papers relating to the relief of distress and state of the Unions in Ireland; thereby to show, by a practical example to the people of Ireland, that the law affords its protection to the lives and property of the poor as well as of the rich, and that it can and will be enforced by the Go vernment when broken against the one no less than against the other.—(The Hon. Gentleman on rising was received by general cries of " Oh," but on producing the blue book, and essaying to quote evidence therefrom, was met by such a storm of disapprobation that he de clared his reluctance to proceed in the face of so much impatience and discontent, and gave notice that he would reproduce his motion on the next supply night, which announcement gave rise to a general cheer.) Mr. E. B. ROCHE expressed a hope that the Hon. Member would not allow the impatience of the House to prevent him from persisting in his motion, which was really a most important one,—(Hear, hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that there was no doubt as to the law upon the subject. The landlord, upon giving notice to quit, or upon the tenancy expiring had a right to enter peaceably; but if he did so forcibly he was liable to be indicted for a forcible entry; and if that force amounted to a riot, he might be indicted for a riot. It the entry was made before the notice to quit expired, the tenant had a remedy at civil law; but it was not at all usual to make what amounted to a private wrong the subject of a public indictment by the Govern ment. Mr. S. CRAWFORD said that this question was really too important to allow it to be burked, and he joined the Hon. Member for Cork in hoping the Hon. Member for Stroud would not wait for another Commit tee of Supply, but at once proceed with his motion. The barbarity committed in the Union of Galway, to which his motion referred, was worse than anything that had occurred in any civilised country. The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY had ascer tained that the act was a most monstrous and cruel one; and the sooner the Government made it their practice to institute proceedings in such cases the better. Mr. REYNOLDS asked whether Irish slavery and murder of the Irish people were not more fitting for the consideration of that house than the mitigation of Afri can slavery, upon which subject they had been engaged for the last five hours.—(Hear, head.) Mr. Blake, the landlord involved in these ejectments, had admitted that he was guilty of an illegal act in turning these people out in the bleak month of December, by which some of their lives had been sacrificed ; he therefore asked the Government whether that gentleman was to be per mitted to remain in the comission of the peace for the county of Galway ?—(Hear, hear.) He firmly but respectfully cautioned the House against passing over offences such as Mr. Blake had committed, for if the people of Ireland were left to think that they were to have no redress under such atrocious circumstances, he feared the total loss of their confidence, which was every day diminishing, and likely to become " small by degrees and beautifully less."—(Laughter.) He called upon the Government to institute an inquiry into this case, and if they had not the power to prosecute Mr. Blake criminally for the murderous offences with which he was charged, at least to deprive him of the commis sion of the peace.—(Hear, hear.) Sir It PEEL said the declaration of the Attorney- General, that Government had no power to interfere, rendered it the more incumbent on that House to exer cise whatever moral power they possessed to put an end to such practices as were described in the motion of the Hon. Member for Stroud. The Right Hon. Baronet then referred to the report of MajorM‘Kie. from which he said it appeared that a more gri evous injust i ce had been committed than they were l ikely to fi .fi nd in any o ther country.—(Hear, hear.) Major in reply to the commission, stated that it replied this forcible ejectment had been illegal; that notice had not b een se rved; that it had been under circumstances of great cruelty; that the occupiers had been turned out of their houses at nightfall; that they and their help less children had been left exposed to a cold bleak shore on a stormy winter ni g ht ; t h at some of the children were sick ; that their p ra y ers f or mercy were in vain, and that many of them had since died ; that he had visited the ruins of their huts, and found many of those unfortunate people still living amongst the ruins, but many of them so weak that they could scarcely stand. He was sure that the mere recital of these facts, accompanied with the expression of sympathy and in dignation on the p ar t o f t h at H ouse , wou ld not b e with out its influence—(Loud cheers);— and he thought that the House owed an obligation to the Hon. Member for Stroud, in not having permitted this ponderous volume (alluding. to the blue book) to rest in oblivion, and that he had done Tight in drawing the attention of the House to it.—(Hear, hear,) Mr. RUMS wished to ask whether or llot there was a Government in Ireland ; and, if so, why such a doeument as that just read by the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth should have been allowed to have remained useless for so long a time ? Where were the public officers of Ireland ? If there were any it would be much better to remove them, and leave the Irish to govern themselves.—(Hear, hear.) Ho was not surprised that repeal should be demanded, when such atrocious proceedings as those disclosed in the blue book before the House were allowed to pass with impu nity. Much had been said to-night of the horrors and miseries of the middle passage, but these were as nothing compared with the miseries described in this report. — (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Hume) put the Government on their trial, and asked them why they had nut taken cognisance of these transactions, and if the law was insufficient to have proposed a statute to prevent the recurrence of such a state of things? He considered the Government or its officers were much to blame, and it behoved them to lose no time in seeking powers to pre chide the possibility of such atrocities being repeated. Sir G. GREY said that if the Hon. Member would read the papers now before him, he would find that it was through the instrumentality of the Government that these transactions had been disclosed and made known. He begged further to say that the question he had answered the other day had no relation to this case of Mr. Blake, but referred generally to the parties who had illegally destroyed the houses of these poor people. The opinion he had then expressed had been confirmed by that of the Hon. and Learned Member for the Univer sity of Dublin (Mr. Napier), viz., that the papers con tained no statement of facts upon which any criminal prosecution could be instituted; but at the same time he had stated his views as to the character of those facts, and had not attempted to conceal those opinions.— (Hear, hear.) His Right Hon. Friend near him (Sir William Somerville) was in communication with the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland upon the subject, and any measure which the Government could take would be adopted by his Noble Friend. He must remark that there was a Member of this House who was connected with this case; he alluded to Mr. St. George, and on this matter he (Sir G. Grey) hail himself communicated with Mr. Hatchett, the Solicitor-General for Ireland who held that though there was an apparent illegality, still there had been no real illegality in the proceedings of that gentleman, for the middlemen having been served with notice, the law did not require service of notice on the tenants in occupation. He stated this to show that the subject had not escaped the attention of the Go vernment, who had every desire to afford protection to parties who had been thus treated. Let it not therefore be supposed that there had been a case for prosecution, and that the Government had shrunk from instituting it.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. STAFFORD thought that the conduct of the Government in Ireland was free from blame, and that these monstrous evils, and infamous and cruel transac tions, originated in the refusal of Hon. Members con nected with Ireland to enter into an inquiry to reduce the area of taxation under the poor-law. Such a reduc tion would have compelled landlords like Mr. Blake to support their own tenantry, instead of turning them out of their holdings and sending them for support on their neighbours. It was monstrous, after all that had been said about agrarian disturbances and incendiary feelings in Ireland, to find that the greatest oppressors of the poor were those who lived amongst them, and who ought to be their protectors.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. F. O'CONNOR conceived that the opposition to the motion of the Hon. Member for Stroud (Mr. P. Scrope) arose from a general hostility to hear this question at all.—(No, no.) That hostility had been manifested, and then up got the Attorney-General who, he must say, in a most heartless manner, coolly told the House there was no law to meet this case.—(Oh, oh.) It was a matter of fact, that when Irish questions were brought before the House, they were met with cold in difference.—(Loud cries of " No, no.") He repeated that they were met with cold indifference even though the people of Ireland were known to be in a state of starvation. If there was no law to punish those offenders, why had not a measure for that purpose been brought forward by the Government on this information, which had already been so long in their possession. If such acts were committed in England the landlords would not tolerate them for one moment. It was time to legislate for Ireland. He would not talk of moral force or moral impressions, but he told the Gavernment that the Irish people looked upon them as an exterminating, crucifying; and destroying Government—that the land lords received every advantage and assistance, but that the lives of the population were regarded as the lives of so many slaves. He told the Noble Lord at the head of the Government that, looking at what was passing in other countries, this was not a time to trifle with the people of Ireland. Talk of Poland—that laud was redolent with the blood of illustrious martyrs, while the soil of Ireland stank with the dead carcases of a starved popu lation.—(Loud cries of " Oh, oh.") Sir 11. VERNEY denied the assertion that the House was indifferent to the condition of Ireland; on the con trary, he maintained that the great body of the Members of that House were anxious to promote the welfare, prosperity, comfort, and advance in civilization of the whole Irish nation. Let not the Hon. Member for Not tingham (Mr. F. O'Connor) hold out anything like a threat to the English Members, for this country had nothing to fear from the tempest which had swept over other portions of the globe. Mr. OSBORNE remarked that, after the extract read by the Right lion. Baronet the Member for Tatnworth, he was not surprised at the warmth of indignation which the Hon. Member for Nottingham had manifested, but at the same time he thought the Hon. Member had done a great injustice to the lion. and Learned Attorney- General; for nobody acquainted with that Hon. and Learned Gentleman could ever accuse him of being actuated by heartless or unkind motives.—(Hear, hear.) Until the extract was read, he (Mr. Osborne) was nut aware of the grave charges which this blue book con tained, and he now repeated the question which he believed had already been put to the Government, — viz., whether the Lord Chancellor of Ireland had com municated with Mr. Blake regarding his position in the commission of the peace? It was true that Mr. Blake denied that he had been present, though his son had been so, but he admitted that the proceedings were illegal and had been taken without his sanction, and he had promised to send an affidavit to the fact on the following day; " but," added Major M'Kie in his report, " I have never heard from him since." In this state of things he (Mr. Osborne) conteeded that the Lord Chancellor of Ireland should inquire into the matter, and if Mr. Blake was found to have been cogni sant of these infamous, cruel, and illegal proceedings, he ought immediately to be dismissed from the commis sion of the peace, and, if the law permitted it, to be criminally prosecuted for this transaction. (Hear, hear.) Unless the Government took up this question with a 'strong hand arid with a searching inquiry, it would be impossible to answer for the peace of the country. Colonel DUNNE thought it was essential not merely to inquire into the conduct of Mr. Blake, but into that of the relieving officer of the district, for not having supplied those unfortunate people who had been turned out of their habitations without fond. Mr. MONSELL remarked that they had not perished for want of food, but from exposure on a cold winter night; and he was of opinion that if the Government proceeded with vigour, they might establish against the perpetrators of this act the crime of manslaugter. Ile entreated the Government to proceed with energy, i n order to show the people of Ireland that they were as mindful of the lives of the poor as they were careful of the lives of the rich. Sir W. SOMERVILLE said that as the question had again been raised as to whether it was possible for the Government to proceed criminally against these parties, he must state that these papers had only reached him the day before the debate on the quarter-acre clause, and that their contents making a deep impression upon his mind, he had immediately communicated with Ire land on the subject, and he had no doubt the Lord-Lieu tenant had lost no time, but that the whole circum stances were at the present moment under his most serious and attentive consideration.—(Hear.) Mr. NAPIER said he had heard of this case with thorough indignation. If the stipendiary magistrates of the districts would take informations and proceed in the regular way, no doubt a prosecution might be instituted for manslaughter. It would be a disgrace to the British law if it did not reach a case of this description. Mr. SCROPE said his object had been answered, since the House had given its attention to the case. It had been declared on legal authority that the law did not reach outrages of this kind. Let them then lay aside the feint of there being equal laws for the rich and the poor.—(Hear.) If the law did apply, let it be enforced by the Government; if not, let the Legislature imme diately pass a law tor the purpose.—(Hear, hear.) Lord LINCOLN said the House was indebted to the Hon. Member for having brought this matter forward. He was surprised that, the occurrence having taken place on New Year's Eve, no information should have reached the Irish Government till February, considering the perfect centralisation of that Government. To check such offences in future, it was desirable that the officers of the Government should send speedy information of like cases in future. He hoped the Government would take this up in some form, and would endeavour to show to the Irish people that their rights would be protected, as well as those of the rich. Mr. HUME asked whether the police had reported to Colonel M'Gregor, and if so, why he had not reported the case to the Government? Sir W. SOMERVILLE was not aware that any report had been made by the police. The first informa tion Government had received was on the 29th of January. The m ot i on for going into Committee of Supply Wail then agreed to. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY—ORDNANCE ESTIMATES. Colonel ANSON said it was now his duty to take a vote for some portion of the money contemplated for the service of the ordnance department of the ensuing year. He did not wish, at that late hour, to raise any discussion upon these estimates, and he thought the best course would be for him to place in the hands of the Chairman the votes which he proposed to take. It was only pro posed to take a portion of the money on each of the voter, which he thought a snore correct way than taking the whole in one sum. He first proposed to take a sum of 400,0001. (the gross estimate was 716,2541.) to defray the expenses of " the pay, allowances, and contingencies of the ordnance military corps." Mr. OSBORNE said it was his intention to take some exception to these estimates, and wished to know whether he should be able to do so afterwards. Colonel ANSON said he should have been very glad to have entered into this question at length ; bat, in consequence of the lateness of the hour, and as the esti mates had been submitted to a Committee, he did not think it necessary to go into the details ; but ample opportunity would be afforded the Hon. Member to raise any objections he thought proper, when the matter came before the House on a futuro opportunity. Mr. MACKENZIE asked the Hon. and Gallant Gen- tleman to state the gress sum for which be proposed to take a vote. Colonel ANSON said it was 1,595,0001.—that was about the sum that would be required. The vote was then agreed to. The following sums were voted, without opposition: --- , 100,0001. (part of a sum of 316,0311.), to defray the expense of commissariat and barrack supplies for her Majesty's forces. 45,0001. (part of 29,5641.) for the expenses of the Ordnance-office. On this vote, Mr. OSBORNE said he meant to oppow the whole of the votes for the civil department; but, en. being assured by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that he would afterwards have an opportunity of doing IN he withdrew his opposition. 115,000/. (part of 323,2071.) for salaries and expenses of establishments in the United Kingdom and colonies. 132,0001. (part of 158,5671.) for the wages of arti ficers and labourers in the United Kingdom and colonies. 230,0001. (part of 502,5851.) for defraying the ex* pence of ordnance stores for the land and sea service. 350,000/. (part of 737,537/ ) for the expense of worker buildings, and repairs, at home and abroad. 40,0001. (part of 94,4361.) for the expenses of the scientific branch. On this vote — Mr. MACKENZIE complained that Scotland never had had fair play in the sum granted for the ordnance survey. Colonel ANSON said that it was now proposed to spend a larger sum for that purpose. Last year it ha d been augmented to 15,0001.; but, up to a certain perio ds no particular sum had been stated. Northumberlan d and all the northern parts of England had the saute reason to complain as Scotland. Mr. WYLD said he did not see anything in the esti mate for the expense of the metropolitan surrey whic h Lad recently been undertaken by the Board of Ordnance. Colonel ANSON—It had not been accurately settled what amount would be required for the survey of Low don, but the matter was under the consideration of the Noble Lord the Chief Commissioner of Woods end Forests. Mr. HENLEY said a great amount would be incurred by this survey at the national expense; he wished to know if the same benefit would be extended to all the towns in the kingdom. Lord LINCOLN said, if the expense of the London survey was to be defrayed out of the vote now before the House, he apprehended the greater portion of the money would be thus absorbed, and it would be necessary, in consequence, to suspend operations in other parts of th e country. Colonel ANSON said, if the expense of the Louden survey were defrayed out of this vote, it would certainly absorb the whole ; but much would depend on the de" gree of perfection to which the survey eas carried. A t present, only six surveyors and six assistants were eta' ployed ; and the whole expenditure for the first ail weeks would be under 1,0001. It would continuo at that rate for some time till the block plan was formed, thell there would be the engraving, which was the greatez7 pense. He believed the general expense would 5e4,0 004 that of the block plan 9,000/. er 10,000 L, and the engllM ing perhaps 19,000/. If the work were to be carried on rapidly, it would certainly withdraw a great deal not the other parts of the country.—(Hear.) But a gre" many large towns had already been surveyed, and plan e made on a scale of five feet to the mile, which were ow._ in progress of engraving. All the t owns in the country were nut included ; whether they should be eo was question of expense. Mr. HUME wanted to know who was to pay for this survey. He would n e v e r h a ve co nsen t e d to it had he not understood that each town, London included, Wee .4° be surveyed at its own expense. Colonel ANSON could not say at that moment the money was to be paid. That would partly depeo, on the House of Commons. Perhap s , a s the city o f London was to benefit by the survey, it would find th e money.—(Laughter.) Mr. WYLD did not think there was any need of 11 new survey. There was a block survey already in e* . istence, and it was o nly necessar y t o com bi n e the ploe. e in order to take the levels. Mr. HUDSON said the question was whether the funds of the country should be applied to make a curve of the city of Londo n f ur san i tary p urposes . He di not think the public m one y s h ou ld b e a pp li ed in su c h way.—(Hear, hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER sai d that a sum of money had b een vote d f o r the gene ra l survey of the country. No order had been given apply any portion of the money for the purpose sanitary survey. Mr. OSBORNE said that he thought the vote ought to be postponed, because be perceiv e d that the wile . .,. dog of the Treasury had been asleep for the last he n hour.—(Laughter.) Mr. HUME—No, uo.—(Much laughter.) Mr. OSBORNE thought that it would not be right to make a surrey for London alone at the public ex pense. Lord MORPETH said that Sir H. de is Bache e e l Sir J. Burgoyne had represented that the so taking of levels in London could best be performed under the Ordnance Survey. He did not think there was anything so wrong in asking the people of the country to do for the city of London what the city of London was doing for the country. The money had been voted forgeneral purposes, and he did not think that he was asking any" thing that was wrong in desiring to commence the sur vey in London.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. C. PEARSON said that if they wanted to get this money out of the pockets of the people, they might well begin with the city of London.—(Hear, hear, and laughter) He would oppose the vote. The Earl of LINCOLN thought that if the survey in other towns was paid for by their inhabitants, it was somewhat unfair to apply the public money to make survey for the city of London alone.—(Hear.) Mr. HUME said that he had already proposed that the survey of London should be paid for by a local rate , and not out of the general taxes. If his Hon. Friend (Mr. B. Osborne) had not been asleep, he must have heard what be said.—(A laugh.) Mr. HENLEY said that the plea for the vote of 1 , 00 1 was, that it - was to be expended on a sanitary surv e y „ o London, whereas London was excluded from the sanit a r y Bill of the Government. He would not, however, eni" ,, for the postponement of the vote. Lord MORPETH reminded the House that the survey of London now proceeding was the Ordnance surrey, and observed that after a sum of 200,000/. had been 'Pe et on the survey of Dublin, it would be hard to refuse the same favour to London. Mr. CARDWELL said the Governmentlhad given nn answer to the question of the Hon. Member for Sunder land, as to whether the survey of London was to be de frayed by a local tax or out of the consolidated fund. Mr. HUDSON complained that the Chancellor of the Exchequer never gave a straightforward answer to ques tions that were put to him. The vote was then agreed to. The next vote was for the sum of 85,0001. to defray the expenses of the civil and military non-effective ser vice.— Agreed to The House then resumed ; and—the Chairman having reported progress—adjourned at Half-past One till Monday. RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS. LIVERPOOL, MARCH 24. STOCK EICHANGH.—The following were the sales to-day: —Belfast and Ballymena, 1.5 1 ,2 dis —Edinburgh and Glas gow, 36 3 / 4 -- Ditto, Halves, 7 dis. —East Lancashire, New, 6 1 / 4 dis.—Great Northern, 8% dis.—Lancashire and Yorks"' 32i. Shares, 7 dis.—Ditto, Halves (late L. and B.) 12 dia.- - Ditto, Fifths (West Riding Union), 314 dis.—Leeds nod Thirsk, 20: 1 / 1 dis.—London and North-Western, 126%-- Ditto, New Quarter s , 2% p.—Manchester , She ffi eld, and Lin colnshire (late Great Grimsby and Sheffield), 29 dis.—ilid" land, 100—North Staffordshire, Preference (late Trsnt and Mersey Canal), 21 c.—North Union (A), 204—Seut k- Eastern and Dover, 23% c.—Ditto, No. 4, 663. 3d. dis.— South Yorkshire, Doncaster, &c., dis.—Tork, Newsiest% and Berwick ( G. N. E. Purchas), p. MANCHESTER, BLincH 24. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—Birkenhead, Lanes° shire, and Cheshire Junction, OA dis.—Eastern Counties, 13%—Great Northern 8% dig.—Lancashire and Yorkshire. Fifths, 1 1 ,4 dis.—Ditto, 32/. Shares, 7 dis.— Ditto (Wed t Riding Union). 3% dig.—Liverpool, ' —Liverpool, Manchester, and New castle Junction, 2 '4 dig —Manchester, Sheffield, and Lin- colnshire, Eighths, 5 dia.—Ditto (Grimsby), 50/. Shared, 20 die.—North British, Thirdr, 1 1 ,4 2 dig — North Staffordshire, 15.16 dig . —South-Eastem and Dover, No 4, 3Vdit. HULL, MARCH 24. STOCK EXVITANGE.—The "Bears" have taken fright, and are fast securing previous sales. North British stocks, which have been heavily Beared, and which varies in price as every telegraphic communication arrives, have considerably en hanced in value; Thirds which were sold this morning at 7s. 9d., have been sold at 108. per share, and leave off buyers. The sales are—Blackburn, Darwen and Bolton, ' ll % dis. —North British (C arlis les), 4s. 6d..—Hull and Selby, Halves, 48 3 — North- Western ,6 dis.— North British, Halve* 31. 14s. [ADVERTISEMENT.]—Teas and Coffees delivered, oar riage free, at the wholesale priees, by which means, fami lies residing in th e country. whose consumption is large, are enabled to purchase on the first market terms, thereby saving all the intermediate profits of retail establish ments. Samples and a list of prices forwarded free, on application by post. References or cash is expected with first order. Mansell and Co., wholesale ten-dealers, 2, Bucklerabury, Cheapside. [ADVERTISEMENT.] —THE VIRTUX OF HOLLOWAY'S OINTMENT AND PILLS MOULT ESTEEMED initonemovt INDIA. — Th • Editor of the " Benares Recorder," publishes the following Writer' divary cure:—lleerah Lall, a cloth merchant, residing at Nagpoter had suffered for more than eighteen months with dreadful ulceroull sores all over his legs and body, totally disabling hint from bushier, he had expended large slims in medicine from the Ilakeems, with out relief, when an European gentleman, who had proved the eft. cacy of Holloway's Ointrifent and Pill's, recommended their NAM which advice he followed, and in the course of twenty days 4ie wan perfectly restored to health, from a disease which had brought kill down to death's door. gold by all Druggists, and at Professor Hol loway's establishment, 244, Strand. London. BIRTHS. On the 20th inst., at Albert-villas, St. John's, Fulham, Mrs. G. S. Hatton, of a daughter. At Swindon, Wilts, on the 21st inst., Mrs: A. Sturrock, of a daughter. On the 22d inst., at the Rectory, Thundersley, the wife of the Rev. C. B. Marriott, of a son. dIARRII'CD. On the 21st inst., at St. Mary Abbot's, Kensington, by the Rev. C. A. Stevens, M.A., John George, eldest son of R. Upton, Esq., ;of Dalston, to Emily Clara, daughter of T. Moss, Esq., of Kensington. DIED. On the 15th inst., in her 63d year, Georgians, wife of Ur- T. Wilson, of Lombard-street. On the 17th inst., at Holton Parsonage, Saffolk, Captain J. P. Tweed, R.N. On the 19th inst., at Brussels, Mary, the widow of A. L. Newton, Esq. On the 20th inst., at his residence, Hartest, Suffolk, ill his 76th year, .PL Leadbeater, Esq. London: Printed and Published by MIIRDO YOUNG, at No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in tke Precinct of the Savoy, in the wanly Siturdsr, March 25, 11148. 111.11 p