The Sun. — London, England, 1849-07-04 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. ROUSE OF LORDS, July 3. Their Lordships assembled at Five o'cicek. BEER SHOPS. The Bishop of NORWICH presented a petition from ll*inhabitants of St. Giles•in-the•Fieldi against the pread of beer shops. THE MAIIRATTA WAR. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH rose to state the circumstances under which 'booty taken from the enemy in the Mahratta war in India had been granted by the Crown to the East India Company or to the Indian army. This property had been transferred to the East India Company, which was in point of fact the Government of India, but that transfer in no way respected the private interests of the individual directors of the company. Ac cording to universal custom, with certain reservations as her Mejesty might be advised to make, the booty in question had been made over to the Court of Directors and the Indian army. Confiscation implied power over the object confiscated, but the property in question, situated in the state of Lahore, belonged to the enemy in the Mahratta war, and it could not be rightly confiscated by the Governor-General of India according to the principle which he (Lord Ellenborough) had laid down, for that property was not in the power of the Governor-General of India. That pmperty, consisting of all the state jewels of Lahore, wias acquired by war, was retained by right of conquest; it never changed hands, and belonged, therefore, to her Majesty in right of her crown, and the Governor-Gene ral of India had no right to dispoie of it. It was a matter of policy, as well as of justice, to deal with this property as the law directs, without throwing any difficulties in the way of its legal appropriation. If this booty, which belonged to the Crown, as he contended, were not conceded to the army of India, the army of India wr,uld have no reward whatever. The 'Marquis of LANSDOWNE said he would inter pose no objection to the production of the papers fur whif.:h the Noble Earl had moved. The question was, hcr.v far the state property of Lahore was to be consi dered as booty of war, and bow far it was to be consi dered as state property, liable to the provisions of a treaty? He held in his hand the treaty applicable to the case in point, one of the articles of which was that all the property of the state, of whatever description and wheresoever it should be found, should be con frscated in part payment of the debt due Iron the state of Lahore to the British Government. Upon that treaty rested the right of the East India Company to the property which they had acquired, and the right of the Queen of England to the precious stones to which reference had been made by the Noble Lord. The Duke of WELLINGTON thought the most re gular mode of proceeding would be to leave her Majes ty's Government to settle this question with the Court of Directors, He must do the Governor-General of India the justice to say that his Noble Friend (the Earl of Ellenborough) was mistaken if he supposed that the transactions in question recently performed in India had not been well and maturely considered by the Noble Lord in his recommendation to the public autho rides of this country. Alter a few remarks from Lord GLENELG, Lord BROUGHAM said the Governor-General of India could not change the nature of the property in question by anything that he did. If the property was booty, using the word " confiscation" was a little inconsistent with all idea of treaty. Confiscation seemed to him to exclude the idea of contract. Lord ELLENBOROUGH replied. There was, in his opinion, enough in this case which rendered it in the highest degree necessary that this matter should be fully and judicially considered. After a few _ words from Lords CAMPBELL and BROUGHAM, Lord ELLENBOROUGH consented to withdraw his motion. Lord CAMPBELL laid on the table a Bill to empower the Crown for one year to appoint a sheriff for the county of Westmorland; which was read a first time. On the motion of Lord BROUGHAM, a copy was ordered of certain correspondence, in which the General Board of Health had taken part, relative to the printing of official reports in the octavo instead of the felio form. SITES FOR SCHOOLS BILL. Lord REDESDALE moved the secund reading of the Sites for Schools Bill. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was of opinion that it would be of great use in p trticular districts, and he hoped in Committee its powers would be extended. The Bill vita then read a second time. AUDIT OF RAILWAYS ACCOUNTS BILL. Lord MONTE A.GLE, in moving that their Lordships should go into Committee on this Bill, said that he would in a few words explain the magnitude of the transactions affected by the Bill, because, if they had been under stood, he was satisfied that an unexpected division would not have taken place upon the second reading last night. The companies had already pledged themselves, with the consent of Parliament, to expend a sum of 300,000,0001. upon the construction of rail ways, out of which 200,000,0001. had beeu ex pended already. When he looked at the national debt of 750,000,0001., which took nearly a century to ac cumulate, he could not but feel that so enormous a sum as 300,000,0001. voted in the course of a few years, to be applied to one branch of industry, and withdrawn from others, was the best justification for such a Bill. They had' 12,000 miles of railway sanctioned, equal to half the circumference of the globe, and when it was recollected that the whole of these railways were prac tically monopolies, it was clear the public should have some power over them; and it was not less necessary that protection should be given to the shareholders.— (Hear, hear.) Their Lordships were bound to pass this Act, because they were parties to these transactions, and it was their duty to endeavour to put a step to a spirit of gambling speculation and adventure, greater, he believed, than had existed in this country since the South Sea scheme, and in which all classes, high as well as low, had participated.—(Hear, hear.) It was stated in the papers before him that in one particular company the difference between the value of their stock at different periods represented a capital of up wards of 3,000,0001.; that fact showed the wide mar gin for speculation. He held in his hand a return showing the variation in the prices of the stock of four principal companies during the years 1845, 1846, 1847, and 1848. The stock of the North- Western in 1845 was 222 L, in 1816 it fell to 2101, and again to 1701. in 1847. In 1848 it fell to 1141.. and .in October that year to 1001. During the same period the shares of the'Great Western fell from 2461. to 771.; those of the South-Western, from 821. to 361 ; and of the North Midland, from 180/. to 661.—(13 , ar.) The aver age fall in the value of the property from 1845 to 1548, amounted to 64 per cent.--(Hear.) This was mainly attributable to the way in which the affairs of these companies were managt d, and which had thrown discre dit upon them all. The public, alienated by the expense of the bad management of some companies, had with drawn all confidence from them. Though he had not the experience of the two Noble Lords who opposed the Bill last night, one of whom was chairman of two railway companies, and the other of one, he had had the advantage of the careful inquiry instituted by their Lordships' Committee, and on the evidence given by the witnesses before that Committee.. He believed that he saw clearly the manner in which the in • tendons of the Legislature were evaded, and the opportunities for fraudulent transactions were created.—(Hear.) The auditors proposed to be appointed by the Act were not the nominees of the Go vernment, but would be independent men, and be re peated that, for the protection of the shareholders them selves, it was desirable that such officers should be ap pointed.—(Hear, hear.) The records of the companies were full of illustrations of the necessity for such public officers, and showed that the plain meaning of the Acts under which they were constituted had been disre garded, and that the directors were in the habit of acting according to their own discre ion, without reference to the powers invested in them by the law. As an illustration of the gross misapplication of railway capital to other purposes than toat for which it was subscribed, he instanced the C 330 of the Cale donian directors, who had appropriated from the funds entrusted to their care, a sum of no less than 381,0001., in the purchase of traffic on railway, and had given guarantees and security for the payment of a consider ably larger amount. Shareholders, he thought, should have the power of preventing the directors from applying their money to any other purpose than that for which it was subscribed. Such cases of mis application as he bad mentioned could not have happened if there was a good system of auditing railway a ccounts, for such practices would be at once detected. The 11;%1 on which he asked them to go into Committee was not calculated to do harm to the shareholders, but was in tended to enable them to exercise cor.trol over their di rectors and chairman. It took care that they should have the entire troth placed before them. Moreover, it had been opposed by the great bulk of the railway authorities. He asked their Lordships then to go into Committee on the Bill and to give their sanction to the clauses, Lord BROUGHAM expressed his fullest concurrence in the measure, and took the opportunity of stating that he considered the country ought to feel deeply indebted to the Noble Lord, the author of the Bill. Their Lordships then went into Committee on the Bill. On the question that the first clause do pass, Lord LONSDALE objected to the principle of Go vernment interference with private trading and commer cial speculation. Where that interference had been ex ercised, great discouragement was the result. He also objected to the exp ense which sending down auditors to the country would entail on railway companies. The Earl of YARBOROUGH p-otested against the haste with which so imis f or t trt a Bill was being pressed through Parliament. com e Government interfered in the concerns of railway tnie g s by appointing. audi tors, perhaps the shareholders manifest an indiffe rence to look aster the accounts, an d Ilia result would be great evil instead of expected good. Earl POWIS complained of the railroad Q c p:o d w r impo rtant speed with m w iatth .several which their Lordships legislated in so ter, and expressed himself dissa• clauses of the Bill. None of the railway cora tain to be affected by the measure could po l s 3 s l i n b i l y " any knowledge -f its important provisio n s. h ave Lord BROUGHAM thought they hail not on l y a right, but that it w s their i.ounden duty t in'erfe re , as the Bill proposed, with railway companies; for they were monopolies, and monopolies created by the extensive pri vileges which Parl ament had given :o the several rail way companies. After some further conve-satien, in which Lord MONTEAGLE and Earl Powis took p trt, the several clauses were agreed to, Earl Powis expressing his inten tion of moving amendments on bringing up the report. The Marquis of LANSDOVir S E fail upon the table certain returns conneo'ed with the numher of ejectments issued from the Court of Exc'is quer in Ireland during the years 1846, 1847, and 1848. Their Lordships thou adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 3. POOR-LAW (IRELAND) BILL. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr. FAGAN admitted that it they had sufficient workhouse room in Ireland, it would be well to adopt the workhouse test by refusing out- door relief to able bodied poor, but as such was not the case, be thought the course proposed by the Hon. Baronet could not be safely acted on. He must, therefore, oppose the clause. Mr. CONOLLY thought that it was the bounden duty of the Government to make some modification in the ruinous system of out-door relief, or do away with it altogether. He would support the clause of the Hon. Baronet the Member for Waterford. Mr. STAFFORD thought it would be better that the clause should be postponed till the third reading of the Bill. Sir W. SOMERVILLE had not been able to elicit from any Hon. Member who had spoken by what means they proposed to preserve the lives of the people if they did away with out-door relief. He admitted that abti , es were inseparable from the system, but it was surrounded with as many safeguards as possible, and would be abandoned when it could be done with safety. He trusted, therefore, that the Hon. Baronet would withdraw the clause, and allow the other portions of the Bu il to be proceeded with. Sir H. W. BARRON withdrew the clause. Colonel DUNNE then proposed the following clause:--- " And be it further enacted that in any electoral division where the ratepayers of any townland. or union of town lands within such electoral division, shall undertake and satisfy the guardians of the poor of the union in which such electoral division is situate, that they will support a proportion of the pour of the electoral division, which pro portion shall seem to the said board of guardians to be a fair proportion of the poor (taking into consideration the entire amount of paupers liable to be relieved under the poor-law, and the valuation and extent of the townlands aforesaid and the electoral division), then it shall be lawful for the board of guardians to exempt such town land or townlands from any rate, except a rate for union and establishment charges; and in case any pauper within such townland or townlands should appeal to the board of guardians against the support afforded to him or her by the rate-payers of such townland or townlands, and it shall appear to the guardians that such complaint is well founded, then the board of guardians shall re lieve such person or persons appealing, and charge the townland to which such pauper or paupers appealing shall be chargeable ; provided always, that should the decision of the board of guardians be disputed, either by the pauper or paupers appealing, or by the ratepayers or any one ratepayer on their part, then an appeal shall be given to either party to the magistrates and assistant barristers at the Quarter Sessions next ensuing, whose decisions shall be final." Lie was convinced that unless the House adopted some such step as that contained in his clause, there would be but little chance of any adequate relief being ex tended to Irish pauperism. From conversations which he had with boards of guardians in his neighbourhood, he was sure that such a plan was one which would be of great use. Mr. C. LEWIS reminded the House that this ques tion had been very fully discussed and determined upon on the occasion of a Bill having been proposed by the Member for Stroud (Mr. Scrope), and atter the rejection which it met with there he hoped that the Hon. and Gallant Member would not press his clause. Sir A. BROOKE thought the clause could not be carried into practical operation. Mr. P. SCROPE thought that the system of support ing able-bodied men by but door relief was a very per nicious one, it would be much better to employ them in cultivating the land which lay untitled. He should support the clause. Mr. FRENCH wished to contradict a charge against Irish Members of taking but little interest in this Bill. He could confidently state that every Irish Member at present in London was then in the House. After a few words from Sir W. BARRON, Sir G. GREY wished to recal it to the attention of the House that the principle of this clause was identical with that of the Bill introduced in the early part of the present session, and which had been rejected by a ma jority of 166 to 41; and it would be found that the ma jority of the Irish Members had voted against the Bill. Mr. GROGAN suggested that the Government should adopt this clause, and modify it so that it might be re ceived favourably by the House. Lord J. RUSSELL was in doubt whether Irish Mem bers, and especially the Hon. Member who had spoken lait, were or were not in favour of this clause. He re membered that such a plan had been introduced many years ago by the Duke of Richmond. but when it was debated whether this should be made compulsory, it had been satisfactorily shown that such a course would be fall of dunger. After a few words of explanation from Mr. GROGAN, Mr. S. CRAWFORD could not agree with the Noble Lord that this clause was identical with the proposal of the Hon. Member for Stroud. That Hon. Gentleman's plan made it compulsory for boards of guardians and the ratepayers to enter into these arrangements, but this clause partook more of a voluntary than a compulsory character, and he was quite willing to support it. Mr. A. STAFFORD was afraid the clause would in flict too much labour and trouble on the boards of guar dians to admit of its working with facility. He was fearful, too, that even if the machinery of the clause could be put into operation, it would have a tendency to d press the condition of the pauper, and for these two reasons, although he did not disapprove of its principles, he felt bound to oppose the clause. Mr. ROCHE she thought the clause would work prac tically against the poor, w bile it would perpetuate the evils of townland rating system,- and overturn the very prin ciple upon which the poor law was founded. The gust.- dians, under the existing law, were bound to support the poor in certain circumatauces, and in a specified manner, but establish the system proposed by this clause, and the poor would be subject to the mercy of the ratepayers. Colonel DUNNE only wished the Committee to pro• nounce for the principle of the clause and he would modify its terms to meet some of the objections which had been urged against it. Lord C. HAMILTON quite approved of the prin ciple, but he was decidedly averse to the mode in which the clause was propose d to be put in force. Mr. FITZS I'EPHEN FRENCH really could not understand, then, why the Noble Lord should not sup port it. The Committee then divided, when there appeared— For the clause 18 Against it _ ... 80 —62 Majority Sir D. NORREYS then proposed the following clauses :-1. Whereas in many unions large sums are due to contractors and others, for the payment of which the outstanding amount of uncollected rates is insuffi cient, be it enacted, that the Commissioners for the ad ministration of the poor-laws in Ireland, shall cause an account to be taken of the debts which shall be due on the 29th day of September next, and also of the probable amount of rates which may be exp•bcted from the outstanding collection; and if it shall appear that in any electoral division, in which the expenses for the relief of the poor have during the year exceeded five shillings in the pound of its valuation, the debts due by it shall exceed its probable assets, and that a rate of sixpence in the pound, in addition to the five shillings maximum rate, would be insufficient for their payment, it shall be lawful for the Commissioners to require the board of guardians, or the paid officers in charge of the union, to borrow such -sum as may be required on the security of the rates of the union at large, but on condition always that the sum so borrowed shall be re paid, with interest, by instalments extending over a period not exceeding ten years; and the instalments and the interest payable thereon shall be the first charge on the rates of such union, and the treasurer of such union shall be bound to pay off the instalments and interest as they become due, •out of any money which may be in his hands to the credit of the union, or to advance the amount thereof and charge interest on such advance, and for so doing the order of the Com missioners shall be a sufficient discharge: provided always that the union at large becoming responsible for the debts of the electoral division, shall not affect the sepa rate liability of the electoral division for the debts due by it. 2. To enable boards of guardians to raise the union rate in aid at any period within the current year. Sir G. GREY said the clauses were open to great ob jection and opposed them. Sir D. NORREYS then withdrew the clauses. To clause 63, L , )rd NAAS proposed an amendment to the effect to repeal so much of an Act for the more effectual relief of the destitute poor of Ireland as enacted " that any covenant and agreement whereby any person liable to-pay rent, and entitled. under this Act, to deduct therefrom any rate, or any portion of any rate, shall have covenanted or agreed, or shall hereafter covenant or agree, to forego such reduction, shall, so far as such rate is concerned, have no ffect, be repeale except as to anything heretofore done or now pending under this Act." Lord JOHN RUSSELL said helfelt disposed to vote for the amendment. After some discussion, in which some opposition was offered to the clause, The House divided, when there appeared— For the clause... Against it ••• 71 ... 10 - Majority -61 Lord JOHN RUSSELL intimated that he proposed to proceed with the Bid on Thursday, at twelve. The [louse then adjourn , d until five o'clock. The House resumed at Five o'clock. PETITIONS. Lord SE AHA 11 prese❑ted a petition from Durham. in f• your of t he People's Charter. Captain PECHELL presented a similar petition from Brighton. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Edin burgh, praying that an Ambassador might be appointed to the Republic of Rome. Mr. B. OSBORNE presented several petitions from Middlesex, in favour of household suffrage. Petitions were presented in favour of the Charter by Mr. Villiers, Mr. George Thompson, Lord Dudley Stuart, Mr. Cobden, and Mr. Bright. Lord DUDLEY STUART presented a petition from hlarylebone, praying that the Government might recog niz, the Roman Republic. theMlri a t r l r U i a g N lE ei p ,w r g e ißis s ,ho e t er n v:i t (Scotland)ttisTiht e o ß n sue f al kirk linst irk ag tto ask Mr. WYL M D ET Secret ry o f the Home Department if his utt • ention has been directed to the statement of Dr Simon, State for Health for the city of rjeed the officer of Public a r ur ev e en, cer tain cases of cholera within the as ci t t o y theof i c a ause of rne n i den ; and also if' it be his intention to introduce any dur ing the present session of Parliament for the prevention of the interment of dead bodies within the city of London. in Sir G. GREY said he had not seen the report of Dr. Simon, but having made inquiries yesterday, in conse quence of the notice of the Noble Lord's question, ho bad no doubt that cases of cholera htd occurred in certain localities trom causes which injuriously aff.cted the public health. As to the other question, the Go vernment had under their consideration a measure to prevent interments in towns; but he was avrii..l it was not sufficiently matured t ,- ,be proceeded with this session. THE SUN, LONDON, WEtiNESDA'Y EVENING, manner,. No difference haa taken place in ate manage toeut of the force since that inquiry, and he could not see any reasou why another inquiry should be granted. With regard to the increase of the expenditure, and of the number of the force, he was willing to afford all the information in his power, and that would be desired by the Nylole Lord- The original Act required that the expenses of this force should be paid by a county rate of 3d. in the pound ; and by a subsequent Act 6.1. in the pound was fixed, and in cases were this was not sufficient the Treasury was authorised to supply 21 in the pound; and 60,0001. was now paid from the Consolidated Fund. The counties included in the metropolitan rate were Middle sex, part of Sussex, Surrey, Kent, Essex, and Norfolk. Some of the counties were below the average of the property-tax valuation. Kent was 22 1-13th below the average. The Right Hon. Baronet then concluded by moving, as an amendment, for a return of the increase of streets and houses in the metropolitan district, and also of the population in the same, with a view to account for the increes-e of the police expenditure. Mr. BRO FHERTON said the Noble Lord had brought torward this motion with reference to the in terests of his constituents in the borough of Maryle bone, and protested against the injustice of this rate; but instead of the rate being unjust in the case of Mid dlesex, of Marylebone, it was still more unjust towards other counties, and it was on that ground he should support the motion of the Noble Lord fur a Committee of Inquiry, which he considered absolutely necessary. In the county of Middlesex the rates were 6,500,0004 Mr. OSBORNE-7 500,0001. Mr. 811,0 l'HEßTON—Laneashire was assessed at more than that sum.. In Marylebone the exp , nse was 21,000 1 . a year, and in Manchester it was 29,0001.; and in addition to that, they had to pay towards the general expenses of the police to the relief of the inhabitants of Marylebone. He hoped the Noble Lord would per severe in his motion for a Committee of Inquiry, and he should feel it to be his duty to give to him his bast s upport. Mr. OSBORNE regretted that the Noble Lord who brought forward this motion had led the House to be lieve that this was an attack upon the metropolitan po lice, and he hoped they would not go to a division on the question with an impression of the kind. He did not agree in the calumny which the Noble Lord bad thrown on the metropolitan police, because he believed a more excellent and more efficient body of men could not be. But, in the motion of the Noble Lord with respect to the increase of 35,0001. on Middlesex, for the police force, he entirely concurred. Instead of 6,000,0001. a year, the county was rated upwards of 7,000,0001., and with a surplus of 61,0001. in the hands of the Commissioners of Police, he was at a loss to knew why the county should be thus heavily rated. This was not intended by the constituents of the Noble Lord as an attack on the police, but they wished to be relieved from this additional charge. Sir W. JOLLIFFE did not think the force adapted to the duty they had to perform in the district between Woolwich and Kingston, which was thinly inhabited, and could not be protected by the few policemen ap pointed to perambulate that district; and in tact depre dations had been committed to a great extent without the constables being at all aware of it. To prevent this they ought to be mounted, which would afford them greater faeilities of detection. Mr. FIUME said he objected to the grounds upon which the motion was founded. It should be recollected that this force cost 328,000/. a year, a part of which was contributed from the Consolidated Fund, which he thought a bad principle, as any expenses incurred for local purposes should be supplied from local funds. He thought these ought to be made to ascertain whether those expenses were fairly expended, but he did not think there was time this session, and the Nuble Lord should be satisfied that the Government bad called for preliminary information. He did not agree with the Noble Lord In the condemnation which he passed upon the police, but it he persevered in his intention of di viding he should vote with him. Sir DL LACY EVANS said there were just grounds of complaint on the part of several parishes against this charge. At present the sixpenny rate must be levied, although enly twopence might be sufficient, and he hoped the Gov, rnment would consent to an inquiry into this absurdity and injustice. If the additional sum was required, one-third part should be contributed from the Consolidated Fund. Sir G. GREY explained. Sir J. HOGG said the Government had given an as surance that a Bill would be introduced to relieve the metropolitan parishes from the burden that when a four penny rate would be sufficient, a sixpenny rate should nut be levied, but they afterwards abandoned it. He thought it was but fair each locality should support its own police, but the metropolitan police were sent on duty to all parts of the country, and on that ground a contribution should be made from the Consolidated Fund. Sir G. GREY said the grounds on which a motion of the charge of this force was borne by the Consolidated Fund was, that the metropolitan police were employed at the Houses of Parliament and by the Government, and not because they were sent into the country, for on those occasions the expense was borne by the locality to which they were sent. Mr. THORNELY said he hoped if a Committee was appointed, that county Members would be placed upon it to defend the in•erests of their constituents from the burthen imposed upon them by the , contribution to this force from the general taxation. Lord D. STUART replied. He said it was true that the expense of the police when employed in the country was borne by the locality to which they were sent, but a larger force was maintained to enable them to draught them to the country on these contingencies than would be otherwise necessary. As he had received no ssiur anee from the Government that they would provide a remedy for this grievance he should divide the House upon the motion. Lord R. GROSVENOR said, as the Noble Lord was determined to divide, ho should vote with him. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion ... 28 Against it ... ... ... ... 137 nijority ... " ...----109 THE PEOPLE'S CHARTER. Mr. MUN'IZ presented a petition, numerously signed, from places in the county of Warwick, in favour of the People's Charter. Mr. FOX presented thirty-six petitions from various places to the same effect. Mr. F. O'CONNOR having presented a number of petitions from Nottingham and other places, then pro ceeded with his motion to the following effect :—" That this House, recognising the great principle that labour is the source of all wealth—that the people are the only legitimate source of power—that the labourer should be the first partaker of the fruits of his own industry— that taxation without representation is tyranny, and should be resisted, and believing that the resources ot the country would be best developed by laws made by representatives chosen by the labouring classes, in con junction with those who live by other industrial pursuits —that, in recognition of the above great truths, this House adopts the principles embodied in the document entitled the People's Charter, namely, annual elections, universal suffrage, vote by ballot, equal electoral dis tricts, no property qualification, and payment of Mew* hers." He was aware, he said, of the disadvantages under which he laboured in bringing forward his mo tion ; but it was the cause of justice, and he would not shrink from doing his duty. He contended that great questions such as these, affecting, as they did, the vital interests of the people, ought to be discussed sessionally, and if ttiey were to be opposed, let then be opposed by sound argument and not put down by brute force. Applications were made 'to him to withdraw his motion, in order to allow the motion of the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire to proceed; but he felt he would not be doing justice to the labouring classes had be postponed his motion on any such account. He contended that any question affecting the people ought to be discussed sessionally. The Irish Catholics had discovered that no good was done them by emancipation, so it was with the Reform Bill in this country, for no sooner did the party who carried that measure get into power, than they forgot and abandoned the people. Every Hon. Member must be made aware that that House was divided into classes, into officers of the army and navy, bankers, merchants, traders, and lawyers, all of whom believed that the interests of the working classes were opposed to theirs. He contended that if labour was fairly represented it would conduce to the prosperity of all classes. Labour was now the great question on the continent, and although the state of countries there may be urged as a reason for making no concessions, he deni,d it was just to do so, If France he referred to, he should quote that country in favour of his argument; for they had had two elections for an Assembly and one for a President since the revolution, 'without any convulsion having taken place. He should not detain the House at any great length; for probably he should be without one before he concluded his speech; but be that as it may, ho should discharge his duty. He con tended that reformation never led to revolution. He produced the original charter, drawn up by Daniel O'Connell, and signed by J. A. Roebuck, C. Hindley, and others, the only difference being that annual Parlia ments were preferred before triennial. He denounced the Irish Members as " lickspittles " who supported Government on e very ques ti on , but absented themselves on the present occasion, when the interests of the people were at stake. He contended that if they had annual Parliaments they could settle annual accounts with their constituents, and not allow political tergiversations to go on for years, as happened under the present Parlia ment. Instead of having that hasty legislation they now had, men would know what they came into Parliament for, and instead of having important questions settled by majorities of 50 or 60, they would be discussed by the people at large. He remembered a signal instance of the value of annual Parliaments. At a time when it was proposed to dissolve Parliament a question was brought forward for the liberation of all political offenders, and was only lost by a small majority—whereas after the election was over, the question was again discussed, and negatived by a large majority. That showed that when they were about to appear before their constituents, they held opinions which they thought would obtain them favour, but the moment that was past, they set them at defiance. One great object would be obtained by holding annual Parliaments. What did they legislate for, but the mind of the day? aed wss not seven years now ot grea:er 'length—if he might say so—than a century in the old Tory tier s? He rose just now under very unfortunate circumstances. He had no monster petition, no popular demons ration to back him, but let them not take that as a sign of the times agsinst him; for the fact was, that the peop'e, disgusted with the mode in which their petitions were received, had resolved to petition no more. The absence of titiens was a proof that the people had lost all coc,fidence in thet House. His object was to obtain a fair representation of the whole people in that House At present there was only a representatien of classes. If the working classes were admitted to heir fair share of representation in that House, and? traei pationi n the privileges of go vernment, would that ? He thought THE AMERICAN MAILS. In reply to Mr. WYLD, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated with reference to the refusal of tne persons in charge of the mails coming by the lass American packet to allow the correspondents of the London and other newspapers to see the files of American newspapers until after the general delivery of letters, that in consequence of the Noble Lord's question he was unable to give any definite answer with respect to it. METROPOLITAN POLICE. Lord DUDLEY STUART rose, pursuant to no tice, to submit a motion for a Select Commit'ee to inquire into the manner of making the assessment in the several counties for the maintenance of the metropolitan police, and into the expenditure thereof; as well as into the general administration of the force, and espe cially into the recent annual increased charge of upwards of 35,0001 on the county of Middlesex. He trusted the House would bear with him while he bristly s tated the grounds upon which he made the motion. He trusted the House would bear with him whilst he endeavoured to convey to it—and he promised to do so in the smallest possible amount of time—a knowledge of the whole circumstances connected with this most important subject.—(Hear, hear.) A motion for such a Committee of Inquiry was not only not unusual, but not unreasonable. There had been a great many such Committees appointed, and only a few years ago—in 1844—a motion almost similar was made by his lion. Friend who was now on the Treasury benches; and he hoped, therefore, indeed he had no doubt, that he would have the support of his Hon. Friend the Secretary for the Treasury. That motion wa., however, resisted by the Government of that day, and accordingly no Committee was appointed. There had now been no Committee on this important subject for fifteen years, and he must say that that alone was a sufficient reason for the House agreeing to this Committee, supposing there were no other; because ho must say, if this police force were at all necessary, that it formed a kind of anomaly in our constitution. When the force was first established it was resisted, as not being altogether in harmony with our old-fashioned notions of constitu tional liberty.—(Hear.) It was felt that it was neither more nor less than an army, which was paid out of the pockets of the people, not by money annually voted,, but by money obtained under an Act of l'arliament—a princi ple which was not altogether consonant with their notions of what was right and proper; and that being the case, he thought it would be admitted at any rate that the expense and management of this body ought to be watched with a jealous and vigilant eye.—(Hear, hear.) Another reason for his asking for this Committee was that within a short space of time the expense of the force had been materially increased, and that a heavy additional burden had been placed ou the inhabitants of the metropolis and the surrounding districts. It had often been a matter of astonishment and perhaps exultation to Englishmen that there were 5) few soldiers in the capital, but they were little aware of the fact that they possessed a vast body of soldiers which, though of a military character, assumed a desig nation denoting a civil capacity.—(Hear, hear.) There was in this metropolis an. array of upwards of 6,000 men composed of policemen-5.500 metropolitan police and 600 City police, and though they did not carry arms with them, they were not the less an army, for they were supplied with arms and weapons whenever the Government thought necessary. Since the beginning of last year there had been added to +he metropolitan police more than five hundred men, en tailing an additional expense to the community of 45,0001., being about one-seventh of the whole.—(Hear, hear.) Now that might be necessary and proper, but did it constitute any rea , on why that additional expen diture should be allowed to pass without some inquiry being called for on the part of the inhabitants of the metropolis ?—(Rear.) The total sum paid for the police force in 1847 amounted to 329,2081., and in 1848 to 374,9291., and those sums were exclusive of the pay ments on account of the Superannuation Fund, and also on account of the Police Courts. That increase of ex penditure was a sufficient ground for inquiry.— (hear, hear.) It was drawn from the people in a way which was oppressive, because it was unjust and unequal; and though its injustice had been admitted by the Government in an official communica tion, they did not propose to afford any relief to the people, and yet repeated representations had been made to them to continue to do without it. The expense of the police was provided for originally by a rate of Bd. in the pound. Afterwards, 2d. in the pound was taken from the Consolidated Fund, and 6d. in the pound was levied. In 1847 the magistrates of Middlesex raised the valuation of the county by the enormous amount of two millions and a half ; they raised it from 6,367,4561. to 7,792,1681. The effect of that was to add to the an nual police rate paid by the ratepayers of Middlesex the sum of 36,6171., while nothing was added to the bur- dens of the inhabitants of other counties. This was represented to the Government, and they felt the justice of the complaint, and undertook to provide a remedy. On the 30th of December, the f.dlowieg t.ttPr Wa .1 writ ten by order of Sir George Grey, to Mr. Flood, the ves try-clerk of Marylebone :—" Secretary Sir George Grey directs me to inform you that he has considered the re solution of the joint vestries of St. James's and St. Mary lebone, which you forwarded to him, requesting a reduc tion of the quota on which the police rate is levied, in consequence of the greatly increased valuation upon which the county is now assessed, and I am to inform you that Sir George Grey proposes to introduce a Bill to authorise the Commissioners of Police to reduce the police-rate one penny in the pound fur the year, in their warrants issued to parishes in the county of Middlesex, provided the present assessment is not reduced, and Sir George Grey trusts that an ar- rangewent may be made to give the parishes the full benefit of this reduction, if sanctioned by Parliament for the ensuing year." That was the official statement made by the Government, and the inhabitants were told that they would have to pay 20.0001., whereas the fact was that they had to pay 25,0001.; that was a most extraor dinary increase to add to the burdens of the people of Middlesex, and he thought afforded a good ground fur a Committee. The Right Hon. Baronet (Sir George Grey) no doubt intended fully to carry out what he ex pressed iu that letter, for he brought in a Bill on the subject in the early part of May, but after being read a first and a second time, the order of the day for going into Committee was put off from time to time, until the 27th June, when the Government, at two o'clock in the morning, and without giving notice to any of the parties concerned, moved that it be discharged. And when theyconsidered that the object of that was to continue on the metropolis and the community at large a heavy tax for police, which was generally much more numerous than was necessary, and was objectionable in many ways, there could be no doubt that the people had a right to complain of the way in which their requests had been refused. He did not complain so much of the conduct of the police as of their number and cost. The metropolis might be as well and as effectually protected with a much less number of men and a smaller amount of money. The increase of expense had been 25,0001., and the police, for whom they had so much to pay, were not so ad mirable in their conduct as many persons seemed to believe, since there were many cases 'on re cord in which the police had greatly exceeded their duty and oppressed the people. Doubtless, it might nut appear in this light to fine ladies and gentlemen who were glad of the assistance of these well alressed men to enable them to find their way to their carriages; but such was the fact. But let the House inquire whether the people were of the same opinion, and if they spoke the truth they would say that wherever there was a policeman there was a petty tyrant.—(Cheers.) When it happened that there were no - other witnesses to an offence besides policemen they were most unscrupulous in their testimony; and yet, upon the uncorroborated testimony of a policeman men were convicted and sentenced to the most degrading punishments. In saying this he did. not speak without the book, since he could show that a man was sent for trial, charged by a policeman with the most horrible offence, and that the jury, after hearing the case for a few minutes, stopped it, and acquitted tb e defendant. By the returns it appeared that from 60,000 to 64,000 were continually taken into custody and chargssd with offences, but the fact that out of that number 2.000 were discharged showed how ill the police dis charged their duty. Now this was a state of things that ,ought to be looked into, and if the House were to inquire into the matter they would see why the number of police was so much larger than it should be ; why it was kept up like a large army in:1849, when there was peace and quiet. Indeed, the Govern ment said, because there were apprehended dis turbances in 1848, they were unwilling to allow the number of the body to be diminislaed, But they should be diminished in number, because their present extent interfered with the comfort, and liberty, and character of the people. The effect upon a people thus constantly tyrannised over must be bad. He thought they should inquire into all these things, and. if it could be shown that they behaved perfectly well, or that the police force was kept up cheaply, and that it was inexpedient on public grounds to have a diminu tion of their number, why, then, the people would be satisfied to pay for them.—(Hear.) But let the Government bear in mind that they were not taken by surprise upon this matter, siuce notice had been given by his Honourable Colleague, who he regretted was unable to attend from ill health at the close of last session. He might occupy the House longer upon this matter, but he felt that he should stand a greater chance of the motion meeting with its approval, if he were, without, further preface, to move it. Sir G. GREY said that he thought there was but one opinion in the House with regard to the metropoliitan po lice force as to its real value and efficiency. He did net think it necessary to enter very fully into the statements of the Noble Lord who had brought fore and the present motion. With regard to the imputations; which the Noble Lord had thrown upon the conduct of the members of that force, he could only say that ;;r2 cases where they had been detected in the practices wl e'ch the Noble Lord charged upon them, and where the magis trates did not punish them, the Commissioners of Police, sanctioned by the Secretary of State, had al.vays availed themselves of the summary power whi c.h they possessed, and discharged the men. With refer ence to the motion izO the Noble Lord, he did nof think that he had laid sufficient grounds before thee House to justify the granting of a Committee. He had con fined himself entirely to empty allegations, rind had produced very little evidence to support thetrei; and in those very allegations there was Leothtrig new. A similar inquiry to this, which was :nought for, had been granted in the year 1834, and the result had been to satisfy the House to ad the public at large that the management of the police force was carried on in the best possible JULY 4, 1849. not. 119 would come next to the'vote by ballot. With the pre--eat constituency he was opposA to th 9 ballot, although, to avoid the charge of inconsistency, he had voted for it. He now came to the most inalortant of all —equal tlectora! districts. He held in his hanl a digest of the several cries, towns, and borou..ths in Efozland. An Hox. MEMBER here moved that the House be counted, but there being more than forty Members pre sent the gallery was again opened. Mr. O'CONNOR Was reading an analysis of the re presentation, showing its inequalities. He wished t, know whether they would stop in the present stage of progress? He came now to no property qaalification. They had fifty-three Members for Scotlane, the Mew bers for the Universities, and the prodigal sons of Peers, all without the property qualification; and what right had they to insist upon the property qualification in other Members? No man could vote for a M:raber without a qualification for those very Members wh o were admitted to that House without a quilification. Could anything be more absurd? He now came to the last of his preposi7ions, the payment of Members. Twenty-six Members sitting on the bench opposite re ceived as much per annum as would qualify the whole requisite number of Members. He had alluded to the aix points, and advocated the Charter, because he be lieved that with it as law there would be neither idle la leatr, idle land, or idle money.--(Hear.) He believed that the working classes were tit for the suffrage, and if they obtained it they would use it properly.—(flear.) If ever this country should be driven to a physical revo lution, the pre;s of this country would be answerable for it. In his opinion the laws of the country shout Ibe ever leaning to mercy, but they had so framed their le gislation in that House, that they placed the other classes in antagonism to the working classes. He had now proposed his measures, and the preposition coming from one who lied been prosecuted fur advocating these measures, he felt that they might have been brought for wird with a greater chance of success had they been pro posed by any other Hon. Member. He would conclude with saying that he should ever be for the People's Charter, and no surrender. Mr. S. CRAWFORD seconded the motion. Colonel THOMPSON said, as one of those who was concerned in the modern origin of the Charter. he thought he should be entitled to blame if he suffered this motion to pass without expressing his opinion. As to annual Parliaments, he was in favour of annual Par- liameots, on the principle that m'rchants balanced their books at Christmas.—(Hear, hear.) But as to one prin ciple advocated by the Hon. Gentleman, that of the pay ment of Members, he begged to say that that was no child of the modern authors of the Charter, and he, for one, was opposed to it. He was in favour of vote by ballot and the extension of the suffrage, and he should vote in favour of the Hon. Member's motion. Mr. FIUME thought that reform 4, to be efficient, ought to be in accordance with the feelings or the coun try, and it wad; on that ground that he was opposed to the Chartists. He couiti not, however. understand wtat odium the Hon. Member could be subject to, as he said he was, for advocating the principles he had put forth. The standing toast of the Fox party and of the Whig:, for years had been, " That the people were the source of all legitimate power." And he could not, therefore, he repeated it, understand how the Hon. Member c.,uld be subject to any odium for advocating the principles he had enunciated. He would, therefore, supp,rt the Hun. Member's motion upon general grounds, and thought the time would come when the Governm.nt would see the necessity of lettering the constitution of that House, —(Hear, hear.) He believed that the workinr classes, if fairly treated, would be found to be reasonable, and ii was lamentable that the men to whom this country owed so much—the artizans—should be deprived of those rights to which they were entitled. These men bad be• come Chartists from a conviction that justice had not been done them, and he was anxious that the Govern ment should so act towards them as to make them as satisfied with their condition as they were now discon • tented.—(Hear, hear.) He asked the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) to do that which he had often advocated—to do justice to the working classes, and to place them in the possession of those rights to which they were justly entitled.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. MORGAN J. O'CONNELL could not vote for the abstract proposition of the Hon. Member for Not tingham, and which the Gallant Colonel and the Hon. Member who had just sat down had stated should receive their support. For his own part, there were only two of the principles involved in the motion to which he could give his support, namely—the abolition of a pro perty qualification, and vote by ballot. He was of opinion, however, that there should be a large extension of the franchise; and considering the unsettled state of the continent, it would be wise that the earliest opportunity should be taken to give a large body of the people, who were now excluded, the possession of the elective fran chise.—(Hear, hear.) He was ready to admit that the Reform Bill, when it was introduced, was a large mea sure, but he thought it was unfortunate that a large and valuable portion of the community—the working classes —had been shut out of its operation; and he would ven ture to express a hope that the Noble Lord would ac quire the additional lustre of so extending the franchise as to include that valuable class to which tie had alluded within its provisions —(Hear, hear.) Mr. G. THOMPSON said, in mingling with his fel low-citizens out of doors, he found that a remarkable change was going on among them, while in that House, on the contrary, every disposition was shown to narrow the rights of the people. From the Noble Lord (Lord J. lawmen) nothing. he believed, was to be expected. Every declaration ho made of resisting every attempt to widen the basis of representation was loudly approved of by the great body of Hon. Members, and it seemed but too certain that the Noble Lord was resolved to abide by his declaration of November, 1837, that it was his determination to abide by the It .form Bill of 1832. There was no country in the world in which the suffrage could be extended with more safety than in this coun try.—(Hear, hear.) The people of Engl and are nor, as in the United States, scattered in different localities, but are united together in their different callings, and are enxious for their rights, which the motion of the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. F. O'Connor) implies. He would call the ; t ention of the House to the monstrous anomalies in the representative system, and would refer to the Tower Hamlets, which contains 419,730 persons. and which sends only two Members to Parliament, while 65 English towns, containing only 419.259 inhabitants, send 93 Members to the House. Again, he would call the attention of the Rouse to the many boroughs where cor ruption prevails, in consequence of which he 514 W the same Members returned at every election. This, he considered, would be put an end to if the people had those rights which the motion of the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. F. O'Connor) contended for. He recollected that the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) advocated, in 1841, the necessity of suppressing corruption, and be consi dered that the same opposition to so vile a practice was as requisite now as then. He felt fully assured that there are among the people of England many who would be fit and proper to sit in that House, and would be worthy of the interests and affections of the people, for many of those men aro most intelligent, and deemed fit to be entrusted by their employers with their property to a very large amount. He would contrast Manchester and the other towns of England, that had been enfran chised by the Reform Bill, with Bury, Harwich, Hors ham, and Lyme Regis, which had been the cause of lay lug on the table of the House piles of volumes, which were not characteristic of the rights of the people, and which tend to sho' the state of the country. He should, therefore, support the resolution, hoping that it would obtain the maj , rity of the House. Mr. CAMPBELL said that he considered that the motion of the lion. and Learned Gentleman, (Mr. F. O'Connor), was not based on any distinct grounds, but was mere abstract, and theoretical. When the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. O'Connor), said that the interests of la bour were sacred, he did not mean to oppose that axiom, bathe did not see how his motion would advance the inte rests of labour. lie should, therefore, oppose the motion, because he did not think that it would tend to the be nefit of the people. or of the constitution. Mr. S. CRAWFORD said that the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. F. O'Connor) had referred to his name, as having been attached to the People's Charter. Of that act he should say that he was proud, because he believed that the true principles of the Constitution were contained in that document. He considered that the interests of the people were not fairly represented in that House, and also that further reform was requisite. He sh,uld, however, say that he would be glad if the GoVernment would give them un instalment of the modification of reform, such as the extension of the suffrage, it would be most acceptable. He should, therefore, support the motion. Sir G STRICKLAND said that, as an honest man, he could not coincide with the Hon. Member (Mr. F. O'Connor), though he agreed with the Honourable Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume). It was because he felt embarrassed in consequence of his former vote on the motion of the lion. Member (Mr. Hume) that he arose to speak, and he therefore felt is his duty to op pose this motion. He thought the ballot would be an admirable ingredient in the system of representation; but though he was anxious for an extension of the franchise, he could not consistently vote for the motion. Mr. W. J. FOX said it was objected to this motion that it was abstract proposition, and would tie down the House from modifying it. It was only an abstract ques• tion, as was every general proposition. He regarded the motion as an assertion of the right of representation, which was the great principle of the British Consi. tution. To show how far this principle was carried out, he would refer to a paper moved for by the lion. Member for Marylebone, which gave the population and the number of voters in the various cities and bo roughs returning Members to Parliament. He would take two groups of boroughs from that paper. Taking the first fourteen boroughs which returned 20 members, and the last nine boroughs in the list, which also returned 20 members. In the first group each member was returned by 172 electors out of a population of 3'366; and in the next group each member was returned by 7,033 electors out of a population of 107,824. Thequal as this wag with regard to persons, it was equally sio,witierespect to property. It appeared that the difference of prop. rty represented was as between 6,200,00 j/. and • 78,0001 lie advocated a change in the representation, in order to matte the people satisfied and contented, to remove these gross inequalities, and to remove just grounds of coal plaint. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that on a former ovel - he had stated his views upon this question, and he would not have thought it necessary to atieress the House but for the allusion which hod been made to his oeieions. The Member for the Tower Hamlets said that ee would resist every effort which might be made to effect Parliamentary reform. That was not a fair re presentation of his conduct. The Hon. al,enber r. tented to a speech which ho made in the year 1837. When in that year he, as the organ of the Gorcrhtnent, he ught forward-the Reform the itetoductioe of that mee• sure excited great enthusiasm ateeng t h e pea „,; g reat alarm in the mined of others whit were not !to/our:Ole to the Bill, who were determined to upset it. There were others wile although favour able to a reform in Parliament, entertained apprehensions of more extensive democratic changes. These parties put the question to La rd Grey, who was the head of the Geverninene wheel was also put to Lerd Althorp, the representative of the Government in the House of Commons, " whether this was to be the cern• rnencement of other measures, calculated to destroy the enti-e system of representation, or whether the Bill then introduced was that upon which they meant to stand ?" L oil Grey, speaking in the name of the Government, geive an assurance up in these int Trogatoriee that Go• vernment bad no ulterior objects beyond the Bill then betught forward Upon this assurance many persons, who would otherwise have been opposed to the Bill. give their adherence to the Government and enabled them to carry that measure into effect. Some five years after wards he (Lord John Russell) was asked to give his con sent to an entirely new scheme of representation, when he stated that though there might be defects in the Re. form Bill, he was nit prepared sn soon after the passing of that measure to propose a new scheme; but that a time might come when public epinion inieht &mei d an alteration, based upon the principles of that Bid, which should receive his best censideretion, and to which he could give his coneent. The Honourable Member said, that by that declaration he had precluded him self tram supporting any meaeure of reform He after wards wrote a letter to his constituents, in which he stetted that he was not oppoied to giving greater ‘X - erasion to the political privileges of the working classes, sand that arty measure of tnae kind, duly matured, would meet his censideration.—(Hear, hear.) lie had been now for 30 years connected with the cause of reform in Parliament, an-I he would now state his epitiious on the motion when the Hon. Member for Montrose brought forward his motion, which he considered rather obscure. He' then thought it was a steo which would tend the six points of the Charter. He was not, therefore, sur prised that the Hon. Member should support this motion. The Hon. Member for Nottingham Ines it down that the people are the legitimate source of power, and that the labourer was entitled to the first truits of hie Labour. The labourer receives his wages for wnich he contracts, and there the matter ends. There was an (Tinier' is hieh prevailed in France. and which might still prevail there, that no capitalists should enjoy undivided property. hut that every man who was engaged in the undertaking should participate in the profits. If the Honourable Member meant that, he would at once declare he would not consent to it. The Henours.ble Mem ber said that taxation with-rut representation was tyranny; if he said that because a man had nut a vote, he would not agree to it. That system of representation, which was most for the benefit of the people was the best, and should not be rejected upon abstract principles. The Member for Montrose said that every man who had not a vote was a slave. He did not agree with that opi nion. He often heard the boast made, and that by the people of this country, that he was a free-born English man, hut he never understood that to mean that he had a right to vote for a Member of Parliament. What be cemeot women, if every one who had not a vote was a slave? It could not be said that they were unfit. Miss Martineau would rarely be competent to vote. The same objection might he made with regard to serving on juries, which was limited to a certain amount of pro perty. and being deprived of the qualification, it might be said that a man not entitled to serve on juries was a slave, and it might be further extended to the disqueli• ficatiou of being judges, for which certain qualifications were necessary to be called to the bar, and to have a legal education. The object of the motion was to give every man of lull age a vote, but if that was the case they would enjoy as much liberty as they did at prese , t, as if universal suffrage was the rule. A House of Commons so elected would not harmonise with the other parts of the Constitution. The whole constitution depended upon a moderate exercise of the privileges of every part. It the Crown exercised its prerogative capriciously ; if the Lords rejected con tinuously Bills sent up from that House; or if the House of Commons refused the supplies whenever the will of the House was obstructed, the Constitution would not last a month. He would not say there might not exist another form of Government on its ruirP, but they could not enjoy the temperate liberty which they had so long possessed.—(Hear.) For these reasons he (Lard John Russell) could net agree to universal stiffrage. With respect to the equelzation of electoral di.tricts, the proposition of the Hon. eiember for Nottingham was certainly more intelligible than that of the lion. Mem ber fur Montrose. He could understand the division of the country into districts, each district to have one or more Members; but that it would put an end to the in fluence of the aristocracy, who were a bugbear with some Hon. Members, he did not believe. If considerable pro perty possessed by one man or by several, was to have an influence in a neighbourhood or district, most as suredly it would carry elections with universal suffrage as well as with the present mode of election. Ha did not, therefore, think it so good a system as that which they at present enjoyed.—(Hear, hear.) The Honouc able Gentleman who spoke last, spoke for the hundredth time of the discrepancy which existed between the num ber of electors in one place and that in others, but there never was a doubt of that fact. He (Lord John Russell) never denied it, but what he did say was that the sys tem of representation, though not of numbers, was more a representation of the whole community than it they had districts. If they had the country divided into districts they would have the Members of many town and country districts discussing questions which, no doubt, would come before them, touching their particular interest•. Very possibly those who at first expected a great de mocratic change, would be disappointed, for a Conserve• tive may be returned. But if they made that great change in the Constitution, would those who did so be satisfied?—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Why, they had seen in a neighbouring nation within the last year that a large majority was returned ot Conservative opinions; but did that give satisfaction, or did the mino rity sit down contented?—(Hear, hear.) They brought their question before the Assembly, and afterwards laid plots to carry destruction through the str,ets oF Paris, and to obtain by force what they could not otherwise get.—(llear, hear.) These were the results of the doc trine of universal suffrage, and also that which held that the working classes should be always in a state of pros perity ; that the order of society might to be so managed that manufacturing industry should be so restricted to the exact necessities of the world, so that the supply c.muld never excel the demand. . They were disip•- po nted. and then some 30,000 men went into the streets of Pads prepared to saeritice their lives. For his own part he did not think that the people of this country, who were called slaves by some 11 , .n. Gentlemen, that what they possessed was so trifling as to induce them to ruu a risk. Feeling this, he was prepared to resist the pre sent motion, cut at the same time he believed that it would be for the advantage of the country if a greater number ot the working clan-•es were possessed of the suffrage, if that could be done without a sacrifice of their Constitution. He should, therefore, oppose the proposition of the Hon. Gentleman, feeling that it would tend to the greatest evils, and deprive them of the enjoyment of benefits which, if part d with, would place them among the most foolish and unwise nations of the earth. Mr. MUNTZ reminded the Noble Lord of the declara tion he had made with respect to fin slily when he was called " Finality John "—(Laughter)—and asked how he'd explain that. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he never used the word finality. The nick-name given him was no doubt a good one, but he should repeat again that he never used the word. Mr. MUNTZ continued—He (Mr. Muntz) had heard with great pleasure the last declaration made by the Noble Lord, that he was prepared to extend the suffrage to a large portion of the working clas::es. He, however, thought the resolution of the Hon. Member for Notting ham was exceedingly ambiguous. and as for making elec tions annual, he certainly should give that proposition his opposition. He was quite ready to extend the suf frage, and when that was done he should support the vote by ballot. As to the electoral districts, it required very careful consideration; but, as regarded nu property qualification, it was absolute nonsense.—(A laugh.) He should, however, he regretted to say, be compelled to vote against the motion. though it contAined much of what he approved, and which, if not given to the people, trier would take themselves. Mr. F. O'CONNOR replied, and denied that his reso lution was either a Socialist or Communist one, for he was opposed,to both. Thu House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion... ... 13 Against it ... 222 Majority 209 FRAUDS IN THE SALE OF BRE aD. Mr. BANKS then rose to move " that the House do resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House for the purpose of considering the means of more effectually preventing frauds in the sale of bread, and also ot pro viding in the manufacture of bread against the use of deleterious ingredients in that article." It had been er roneously supposed that when he introduced his Bill of last year he meant to cast some imputation on the trade of bakers. Any such intention he disclaimed; but it would happen in that, as in other trades, that the honest trader would be placed at a disadvantage in the compe tition with those who were of an opposite disposition. At present the poorer classes had not that degree ot pro tection in the purchase of bread to which they were en titled The lion. and Gallant Member for Brighton had introduced a Bill on the subject, which, though it might have been a very good Bill for the genteel inhabitants of Brighton, took away the protection required by the poorer classes. The Act of 19 G-o. lII which formerly protected the poor man, and the effect of the law now was, that all bread was sold by we fight, though not limited as to the s at size or weight bvk r way which he should make up his loaves. Undoubtedly there was the power to call on the baker to weigh his bread, and if it was not of the proper weight, he might be discharged by the rich man; hut how frequently was the poor man indebted to his baker, and, tberetore, , did not dare t o ex ercise this right.—(Bear, hear.) Ihe Hon. M mbar proceeded to read from stateine,43 that had b e e,' forwarded to him from various counties, show ing the fraudulent practices which prevailed, and the manner in which the pourer classes were deprived of the proper weight. The remedy he propo.ed was, that in stead of bakers bfing allowed to m mufac•ure bread ('f any weight and size they pleased, they shoal l be required to make all loaves of a Given weight and stamp thetn with the weight they professed to vontaiu. lie had in troduet d a Bill contaireng such a provision hat year, but was opposed by the meiropohta,, MenAers. and ulti maftly found that it was doubtful whether such a subject should not have heon introdue, , d in a Cotninittee t; the whol , House. That eas the couiste he nc4 , pro;:o,,:d to take, and to move that the [louse resolve itself into a Committee to consider the sa'e and tuatiuf4cture of bread. If the Government or the law officers of the Crown or magi trates of ~x,ierienc9 woni , l tell him that th. was no necessity for such a tn. azure, it. w tald give up the quesion. But, however, he might be toni th trade was fl turtshin4 Ani bread co +p, tie ahooght hat protection was required by the p..or matt, an ), th.a eror he kit cou,tra tel to urg, the qu shun upon t• e .•L • it: lion of the , House. He found by a case which h a d ta k en place in Edinburgh last autumn, that he was asking for a nothing impracticable, but that by a clause in the Editl• burgh I. l ,:lice Act, passed l as t y ear , a ll b a k ers were re• quired . to stamp, ill large and distinct figures, the inly p-rial weight of the iu4ves, and• tailing to do so were liable to a fine of 405.; or, if the loaves were defic!ent is weight, to a pnalty of 5/. Now, what was good for Edinl)urgh was good for London, for Essex, or even for Br is But our northern brethren were ever on the alert, and had inc,irpor,ited his proposal with their Police Act. He c•:uld, therefore, no longer 'be told that the thing was impracticable, and he trusted we would now imitate the sagacity of our Scottish brethren. At that late .hour he would not detain the House farther; but would conclude by moving the House do now resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House on a question which he bad no personal interest in; but one on which he felt strongly, as involving an act of justice to the poor.—(Hear, hear.) Capt. PECHELL said the Hon. Member had referred to the Biil which he had intro !treed. He had (lace so in order to abolish the intolerable evil of the assiz , sr; tem, which formerly pla,,ed the baker at the mercy of the common infermer, and ri.ntiered it Minos' impossible to carry on the bieiiness of a baker. He did not see how the Horn Member could protect the poor any more than they were under the present Act, and he had never seen any petition against it, or he a rd o f any complainte as to its working. He del not know what the Govern' ment intended to do in the matter; but he should cer tainly advise the Hon. Member, at that late period of the session, not to press his motion. For his own part he would certainly defend his own Act. Mr. LABOCCHERE said, Member had precluded last yoar from bringing HI his Bill by in informality, he was not preparad to oppose his 'notion! (ile4r.) At the same time he wished to add that be believed the present system work , :cl well both for the baker and the public, and he believed that the principl° proposed to be introduced by the lion. Member would lead to great confusion and to great oppo6itil from the master bakers, b, , cause it wouh' expose them to the mercy of common informeril while in the metropolis, at least, it would not pro: taut ihe poor.—(Bear, hear.) He was intormed thal the poor did not, in numerous instances, buy wild loaves but parts of loaves, and of course it would be ior, p,)sstble to stamp the weight upon such portions loaves.—(Hear.) He doubted whether the messure ° the Hon. Member would remove the paor from any su b ,' e srviency to the deal ers i n provisions to wnom th were indebted, while th e respeeta , ble masters would fin d themselves hampered by it. As to the clause in th i Edinburgh Police Act, it had b een i ntroduced witho ut the attention of the House being called to it.—(le3P) He certainly was not aware of its existence until till Hon. Memb-r drew his attentioh t o it. Ht' shotild egre t ; to the motion, reserving to himself the power of pu t ' suing the course he might think best. Mr. PACKE supported the motion, on the grottod that bread was much dearer in the towns than ought to be, when the price of wheat was taken ior consideration. Mr. FOLEY wished to take advantage of the die cussion to call the attention of the Right Hon. Gee, e &wan at the head of the Beard o f T ra d e to the fad that a great number of' persons had b een poisone`: and others made seriously ill, by a miller mixing t l e r deleeterious materials with his fl rur. He thought se:, cases proved the necessity for the interf e re nce of t" Legislature. Mr. 1. - IEA.THCOTE hoped the House w ould agree 10 the Bill, and especially considering the extreme disprs portion of prices in various localities. The press O w formerly to keep a c a r e f u l wa - c h over this matter, al showing the difference in var i ous l ocal i ties, and it it ,/i,, so again he tho gut it w ou ld con f er a great peui.u',l" ben. fit. While they had been cutting down the grid and profits of corn, they had not touched the profits 0, the bak -r. He hoped that, although late in the eesii! ) e the Bill would be allowed to be brought in, and reel' the sanction of the House —(Hear, near.) Sir DE LACY EVANS objected to the measure, e j f ‘ i which he thought no sulli t iient groun d s h a d b een otrePo by the Honourable Member. The insinuation altei B o l the honesty of the bakers was certainly not suffiel e d to his mind, and though this was the Hon. Men3beri hobby at present, he had c er t a i n l y c h osen a vet s unpropitious time for bringing it forward. He bro 4 this Bill in too late in the ses s i on . Th e H onou re d Genlernan who hail just addressed the House i i i d e expreied his surprise at th e d i ff erence o f PI O in the metropolis ; but was he not aware 4 , 1 ) other articles as well as bread varied in price? f 0 baker would tell him that bread changed its wel t i from being expos*d to the air, and other causes, e o unless he took care that it was h eav i er i n we i g ht vi' v e he put it into the cvtn than it ought to be, he could w o be certain that it was of the proper weight. The bed were desirous that inquiry should be instituted, be d such an inquiry as would satisfy the public. The/ that there was no necessity for such an enactment. 0 Mr. MANGLES said that a greater case of retrogro, sion that* this Bill would be he never heard of. MO spects the principle of the Bill, it was just as applie B o to the butcher who sold a bi t o f meat, or any °tie tradesman, as to the baker. He was quite sure jl Right Hon. Friend would not sanction this Bill, Ott whould let loose a host of informers, and therefor e should oppose the Bill.—(Divide.) The House then divideit, when there appeared.- - For the motion Against it ... ... ... ... 37 Majority ••• ••• •• _54 Ac e The House then went inZo Committee, and a reso/P was agreed to upon which to found a Bill. Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. ell POST - OFFICE COMMUNICATIONS WIT'" IRELAND. a i? Mr. KER moved for a S elect Committee to ifi into the expediency of the proposed alterations se Jr gards the transmission of the, mails between the 01 5 west of Scotland and the north of Irelend. He o ° l 7lo that economy, and the convenience of the public, 5110 oJ be the guile of the G overnment i n mak i ng this preeoll alteration. He thought th at great i n j ury wou ld re from adop!it.g a contrary course. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER sei cl o % really did not know anything which the Coattelo could inquire into which had n o t a l rea d y b een the 8 jest of inquiry. A:ter some conversation. L it'd CAS rLEREAGH trusted th e H on . hie — el , would press his motion to a division. After so r° t maney had been spent on the harbours in questio%t did not chink they ought to he left utte r ly use l e ss, ' 1 fall into d. cay, without good reason being assignede 0 Mr. KER said he did not wi s h t o p ut th e Hotr ij e unnecessary trouble, but as his motion had been " ported by his Noble Friend, he should divide. The Itaise then divided, when there appeared—' For the motion 37 ••• ••• ••• Against it ... .., ... ... 44 Maj , rity against the motion MINES AND COLLIERIES'. 0, Mr. WYLD o b ta i ne d l eave to bring in a Bill to end her Majesty's S core; ary o f S tate to appoint inspecte r 7 mines and collieries : and for providing the means of 1 ) 0 ' 4 4 1 ment for such inspection, which the Hon. Member 0 wards brought in. LYME REGIS ELECTION. 1 Mr.BUTLER called the attention of th e House tat special report and recommendation of the Lyme _4 Committee of last session, charging J o h n Atte;pi Esq , with bribery (theu a Member of the House, 0 subsequently unseated for bribery in his election :ir Harwich), and moved that the Attorney-General b B eo rected to prosecute Mr. Attwood and his agents feU alleged cases of bribe r y an d corrupt i on at Lyme ,P7S and Harwich. Mr. Att woo d' s con d uct, he believeet ri calculated to destroy the freedom of election, and, the fore, he brought for war d t h e present proposition. 01 Attwood, like Mr. Smith O'Brien, bad fallen underol displeasure of the H ouse , an d t h erefore he h a d bee t y public property. Hi s " d emora li s i ng generosity" ti ersu eer last Athlone el e cti on b a d b een atteste d i n a l ette r ;0' ten to him (Mr. B u l er ) b y t h e C at h o li c Bishop (Peij: phin. Unless a ch ec k were put on t h e system 011°40ei' by Mr. Attwood, they would find English eapiP o et contesting Irish ele ct i ons , an d I r i s h b oroughs repre ee by London tnillionnaires.—(Laughter.) Mr. SOMERS seconded the motion. e e Of Major BERESFORD said that h e came t o t h e ..--, ° o under the impressio n th at b e s h ould have to defenlioi present constituents and his late colleague, but he 1 : 0 01 that the only matter s to b e d efended were insag,";oo charges against an English capitalist, for inveigling B f , Milesians from their strongholds--chargesfounde4 #1 the private letters of private individuals. Unde r of the circumstances of th e case , h e t h ought the P.Ol would be goieg out of its way t o p un i s h an i n div l o case, and that the Attorney-G e ner a l wou ld b e wrel' o e beginning a prosecution w hi c h cou ld on l y en d i n fel He should meet the motion with a direct negative. ti e Sir G. GREY said that th e C omm i ttee had 0.0 commended the prosecution of M r . Attwood, and 0 /' they had, he thought that the ti me w hi c h h a d el 8" since their report would effectually act as a bar ag the success of that prosecution. The HouAe then divided, when there appeared- - . Fur the motion ~, 3 1 ••• Against ... ... ... ... 46 ••• , Majority —43 go of ••• The other orders were then disposed of, and the e t I adjourned at Hal.-___past On e o ' c l oc k . ji___ Dispatches were rece i ved yesterday at the C0 1019,f1,1 ofiica from the Governors of the West India Colon; 1, The Julicial Committ ee o f t h e P r i vy Counclpf, yes.erday. Th e a pp ea l "M ontague v. the Good/ and CouTicd of Van Diemen's Land" was eont i t Au appeal was heard—" Raja Oodit Punkash S l '' ) Niartoniell and Stacey." 8.111'1116 w ife On the 30th ult., at Totternhoe, Bedforshire, the the Rev. T. 11. Roper, of a son. 13" tin the ' oth ult , at Park-crescent, the wife of C. nett, E q , 01 a son. On the 30th ult., at Oxford terrace, Hyde-park, t be of F. Milne, Esq., of a daughter. On the 30th ult., at the Vicarage, Pembury, g en t, th air i of the Rev. G. S. Woodgate. of a s o n. ifi fe On the Ist in t., at College-house, Islington, the the Rev. J. G. lietcscb, of a daughter. MARRIED. On the 28th u lt , at St. Marylebone, Patrick Stt" c e . Esq • New York, t o H e l en , secon d d aug h ter o f J. Aliae Pat rhead, Aberdeenshire. 11 9 On the a)th u lt., a t S t . J ames ' s Ch urc h , M r. W. v:d, of lteguit-street, to Louisa, second daughter of Edivo' nip c~ of Jos, ph Trhomell, sq ,oftl e Old Kent-road, DIED ail 11 l On the 29th ult., John Phillpotts, Esq., of PorthgW i A Cornwall, for malty years M.P. for the city of Glocoti e w r, e On the 20 h ult.. at T A v is t oc k terrace , Upper 0 ' Mr. T. Palin, late of Chri s t' s H osp it a l, age d 73. ~, On the :- . oth ult., at Mill-hill, Woolwich, Liett e eP ft , Colonel Fr,de;ick Ergiish. Counnani!log Royal Ellgy, r, At Portland terrace, St. J o in t ' s - woo d, M r . Ri c har" / 41London! l'riutcd and Publi s h e d by MURDO YOV o. 1' N a 112, Stratt , l Printer, at The Sun office, ` . a cf • taniti, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the 9 , riliddlesex, Wednesday, July 4, 1849. of th 'loth be re for si consi and the i day i for b Ev ratty Ash corn; becor due I It SIM agait Th the 6 IT., VI, VII. Sr • 4 T ter of the A "A Cilror .41 r t , poetic "T to.":: "T! —Spe The for L( for wl will b .Fur Bultei cheat( Th fora tree, c ever