The Sun. — London, England, 1842-03-02 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, March 1. Thy 1.4011 D CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool sack shortly after Five o'Clock. Thu Earl of ROSEBERY presented petitions from places in Stirling, Dumbarton, and Linlithgow, praying for a total repeal of the Corn-laws. The Noble Earl dis sentel from the prayer of the petitioners, but expressed an opinion that some alteration should be made in these laws. The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from the owners and occupiers of mills engaged in the grind ing of corn in the city of London, stating that the pre sent duty on flour did not afford them a sufficient pro tection ; that they had heard with regret that a measure was about to be introduced to lower that dut y , and they prayed their Lordships not to give their consent to the measure. The Duke of BUCCLEUCH presented ..1 petition from the landowners of Banff, praying the House to pass some measure to secure the franchise. Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Ren frew, praying for a total repeal of the Corn-laws.. The . Noble Lord also presented a petition from Antrim, praying for an alteration in the law with respect to Dissenters' marriages. ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. Lord CAMPBELL then rose for' the purpose of bringing under the consideration of their Lordships three Bills which he had prepared, for the pose o f improving the administration of j ustice in this country. In bringing - those measures before their Lord ships, he would state shortly the object he had in view, reserving the discussion till the second reading of those Bills. It gave him great satisfaction to think that the measures he proposed were totally uncon iected with party. His object was to im prove the administration of justice in the Courts of the last Appeal, and likewise to improve the o,dministration of justice in Chancery. He need not point out to their Lordships the extreme importance of having a satisfactory tribunal to which all cases might be carried in the last resort, for not only the rights of the parties were finally determined by that tribunal, but that tribunal settled the law. It was of the last importance, therefore, that there should be a supreme Court of Appeal, which should command the respect of all those who had occasion to resort to it, and of the community at large. It was of importance that that Court should be sitting the greater part of the year—that access to it should be easy, and that the administration of justice should be expeditious, and should not be burdened with excessive costs. It was of particular importance that there should be only one tribunal of appeal. In England there had been great irregularity on this subject. Their Lord ships' House, from an early period, had had the undisputed power of deciding upon writs of error from the Courts of Common Law ; but it was not till the reign of the Stuarts that appeals respecting equity suits were entertained by that House. With respect to the Ecclesiastical Courts, which determined matters of great consequence, before the Reformation the appeal was to Rome—to the Pope. After the Reformation that was put a stop to, and there was a strange sort of anomalous tribunal established—a tribunal pro hac vice. That was the Court of Delegates. 'With regard to Admiralty causes they came before the King in Council. Appeals from the colonies also came before the King in Council, and from the Court of Chancery in lunacy cases appeals were not to their Lordship's House but to the King in Council. Things continued in that state till the year 1833, when an Act was passed for which the public were indebted to his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord Brougham) who then sat on the wool sack. By that Act the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council was established, which was a great improvement in the administration of justice. By that Bill the Courts of Delegates were abolished, and al: cases from the Admiralty and Ecclesiastical Courts were to come before the Judicial Committee. Although the system established by his Noble and Learned Friend was a great improvement, yet that improvement was by no means of a permanent nature, and the time had now arrived when a change must be produced. That system still allowed of two tribunals of the last resort. Extreme inconvenience arose from such a system. There was no question which came before their Lordships' House which might not likewise come before the Privy Council upon an appeal from the Courts of Law or Equity in the West Indies, Australia, and America. Those two Courts were of co-ordinate power and authority. The Judi cial committee of the Privy Council had no control over the House of Lords, nor had the latter any power over the decisions of the Privy Council. Nay, more not only might the same questions be referred to both tribunals, but in the very same suit it was a matter of doubt whether the case would come before the Privy Council, or the House of Lords. For example, such a ques tion as that of the Braintree Church-rate case, when the question was, whether the churchwardens had the power to make a rate against the wish of the majority of the parislioners. Now this question might ultimately come before either tri bunal. If it went in regular course before the Ecclesiastical Court in the first instance, it would afterwards come before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council ; but if an ap plication were made to the Court of Queen's Bench for prohi bition, it would then come before a Court of Common Law, and finally before the House of Lords, so that their Lordships, as well as the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, would have to decide whether or not the churchwardens exceeded their authority in making such a rate. Now, in the case of a will respecting a personal estate, the Ecclesiastical Court first had jurisdiction, then the question of validity would come before the Judicial Cemmitteo of the Privy Council; but if it concerned a real estate, the , question would come before. that House. Thus. if a will, devising a, personal estate of millions of money, as in the case of the late M 7. Wood, of Gloucester, the ques tion came before the Judicial CoMmittee as the tribunal of the last resort; but if it devised, a single rood of land, it would come before their Lordships finally. Another great inconve niente attending the fact. of the Judicial Committee being a sepe rate tribunal, waseihat it bail no bar of its own ; consequently, either a ease was partially argued, or the Judges had to decide without the assistance of Counsel, or the suitors had to pay enormous fees to the ConnFerand solicitors whom they called from the Courts in which they usually practised. It was, therefore, indispensably necessary that the country should 'have ono tribunal of appeal in the last resort, and in choosing between the Judicial Committee of theTrivy Council and the House of Lords, he trusted their Lordships would prefer the latter. The foregoing were only a few of the reasons why they should prefer the House of Lords. But the House of Lords might avail themselves of the advice of the Queen's Judges, which would give this tribunal a great advantage over the other. The tribunal of the House of Lords would also be pre sided over by the able and illustrious men who were g enerally Lord Chancellors of England, assisted by many proessional Peers, by an able bar, and by a body of solicitors, at very much lower fees than the other tribunal would require. His (Lord C. 5) Bill then proposed that all appeals from the Ecclesiastical Courts, the Admiralty Courts, tiie Colonial Courts, and, in cases of lunacy, from the Court of Chancery, should come be fore the House of Lords. He proposed also that the Vice- Chancellor should be summoned when required. Of the Scotch Judges his Bill said nothing ; but they might be summoned whe a required ; and, being jealous of the honour of his country, he begged to express a hope that on such occasions the Judges of Scotland would be placed on the woolsack, and not at the bar, as had formerly been the case. He proposed that the jurisdiction of their Lordships' tribunal should he coterminous with the British empire, and that in future, as in the early part . of the reign of Edward 111., they should be summoned to sit upon judicial business only. He proposed also that their Lordship's President being Lord High Chancellor should also have a seat in the Cabinet of the Government, and that there ought to be a permanent Chief Judge having nothing to do with politics appointed to preside at the Court of Chancery. For his part he did not see anything in the judicial functions of the Lord Chancellor at all incompatible with his political duties. But he knew that others, among st whom was his Noble and Learned Friend th e M as t er of the Rolls, thought otherw se. But all were agreed that to have a removable Judge was a great evil.—( Hear.) It was a great evil to have a Judge removable at the will of the Crown ; but still greater to have a Judge removable upon any change of the Ministry. ...--(llear, hear.) Let their Lordships consider what en evil it would be to have a removable Judge in the Court of Queen's Bench ?—(Hear.) It was no less an evil in the Court of Chancery, and unless it was a necessary evil, it ought not to be allowed to continue.—( Hear.) He might acknowledge that in former times it might be necessary. Formerly the business of the Court of Chancery was of little amount, and might not present any objection to his being a Cabinet Minister, and sit ting in that House. But according to his (Lord C.'s) plan, the Chancellor would have sufficient time for his duties in that House and in the Ministry ; and there would be in his place in the Court of Chancery a Judge, unremo' able quamdiu se ben,. gesserit. This plan could be carried into effect without creating a new Judge ; for there had recently beets created two new Judges, and these were rapidly subduinz the arrears of business. It was almost certain that four Judges would be amply sufficient to dispatch all the business in a satisfactory manner. He proposed, 'herefore, that one of those Judges should be appointed to preside in the Lord Chancellor', Court, and that there should be the same appeal to .him as there was at present to the Lord Chancellor. Another advantage arising from this would be that there would be a real appeal from the decision of the Lord Chan . , cellar. Hitherto the appeal had been little better than a mockery, because it was from one man to himself.—( Hears hear.) It had been said that the Judges of a Court of Appeal ought to be Judges, at the same time, of a Court of origi . seal jurisdiction ; and it had been said that the Lord Chancel . ler, unless he sat in a Court of original jurisdiction, would not boa fit Judge to sit'in a Court of Appeal. • He thought such arguments were futile in the extreme. Sir John Head, when he sat in the Privy Council as a Court of Appeal, would not allow even his own decisions to be quoted there. In the plan proposed by his Noble and Learned Friend, the Vice-Chan - cellor was to preside over the Judicial Committee, and the Master of the Rolls in the Privy Council. The Master of the Rolls likewise thought that the present system could not continue, and he proposed a change of a more sweep ing nature than his, for he wished to create a Chancery Judge, a Judge of Appeal, a President of the Council, with the title of Lord Keeper, with a seat in the Cabinet. He therefore had the highest authority for say ing that some change was necessary, and it then became the question what change to choose. He thought the plan he Proposed the most advisable, because it combined two Courts of Appeal, .and made only one great Court of Appeal for the arisen"" empire.' He thought that great convenience would have m having a Vice-Chancellor, or the 'Master of the Rolls, or creating a new officer, as the Master of the Rolls proposed to do in creating a President and Lord Keep among whom th e functions of the present Chancellor should be Camp distributed. Hi s ( L ord Ca bel l 's) plan could be carried into effect without disturbing anything , nl without creating any new Judge, or bringing a ny new burde on the public, or introduc ing in fact any chan ge . He thought it the most effective plan that could be proposed. T o carry this plan into effect, he -pro posed to introduce three Bills ; one referred to that House, and all' Bills and questions that were brought before the second Bill gave power to the Crown to summon that House during the p:'orogation of Parliament, to meet and transact judicial business. He could not see any objection to extending this power to the period of the dissolution of Parliament, but the period of fifty days between the dissolution and the re was perhaps Fath er unfavourable to Judi turning of the writs , eial business, but during the recess the House would have ample time to transact all the business belonging to it. The third Bill was f ,r the purpose of appointing a permanent Judge in the Court of Chancery, and he thought in the fist instance, • he ought to be appointed from arr,ring the four Judges pre siding in the Court of Chancery ; the Lord Chancellor would thus be entirely transferred from the business of the Court to presiding over the busiress of that House. He thought it ne evoary to state as briefly as possible, the object of his Bills, • and when they came to a second reading he should be prepared to answer any objections that might be made to them. The:LORD' CHANCELLOR said he did net rise to make say objections to the Bills proposed by his Noble and Learned Friend, who had a right, according to the usual courtesy and usages of their Lordships' House to lay his Bills on the table. At the same time he begged leave to A state that as his Noble and Learned Friend had not communicated the substance or his Bills to him, though he had said, by implication, that he had done so to the profession generally, having stated that the voice of the profession was distinctly in favour of the measure, yet as he had not been kind enough to communicate the particulars of these Bills to him, he trusted he should be excused if he did not enter into any details on the present occasion, and confined himself merely to general ob servations on the subject, and on some of the remarks that had been made by his Noble and Learned Friend. In the first place, with respect to the Court of Chancery, his Noble Friend had alluded to the Bill of last Session, which Bill was supported by Noble Lords on both sides of the House ; the ob ject of that Bill was to clear off the arrears of the Court of Chancery, and to bring the business of the Court into such a . state that suitors might have their causes tried whenever they were ready for hearing. He was happy to state that tkat object had been completely accomplished. He, himself, (the Lord Chancellor) twelve years ago, when he had the honour of holding the Great Seal, introduced at two successive periods, Bills which were directed to the same object.—( Hear, hear,) But, unfortunately, though they passed their Lordships' House, almost without opposition, yet they met with so much opposition in another place, that they were not successful. He congratulated his Noble and Learned Friend near him that this was not the case with the measure he had introduced. It was a wise measure, and had been attended with all the advantage which he had predicted from it, and which he himself, as an individual, felt confident would flow from it. Their Lordships would allow him to state, in a few words, what had been the result of that measure up to the pre sent time. In November last, when the Bill first came into operation, there were upwards of five hundred cases standing for hearing in the Court of Chancery. and that amount of ar rears had continued for a long period. Their Lordships would recollect the eloquent description given by his Noble and Learned Friend of the state of the Court of Chancery, and of 1 the exertions made by the Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor, Tier did he think that that description was at all exaggerated.. He believed that his Noble and Learned Friend stated that for a considerable period the Court of Chancery had been sitting permanently till three and four o'clock every even ing, when the Vice-Chancellor relieved guard, without being able, notwithstanding all these extraordinary ex ertions to reduce the amount of the arrears. At the present moment there were standing for hearing, including old arrears. and new cases, not quite 100 causes. He slid not at all exag gerate when he said that the object of the Bill had been com pletely and effectually accomplished. His Noble and Learned Friend in a Committee of thet House, had stated that the ap pointment of one additional Judge would be sufficient to accom plish the object he had in view, but he must say, that at this moment he could not come to the conclusion to which his Noble and Learned Friend had arrived. He thought it would be pre mature to decide on that point, because they must remember that in the Committee of that House much evidence was given by men of general experience and great knowledge in the pro fession of the law, particularly in the Courts of Equity, to the effect that if a way was opened to new cases, there would be a large accession of business to the Court of Chancery. This to a certain extent had been verified by the event ; he had made inquiry into the number of bills filed in two corresponding periods, and he found that the increase had been in the proportion of 30 per cent., or nearly one-third ; but these cases not being ripe for hearing, they had not the effect of increasing the list of cases to which he had before referred. Independently of these considerations he would state that they could form no adequate idea of the amount of the grievance which suitors laboured under on ac count of the charges. The term fees arising from causes in a single year amounted to upwards of 40,0001. The conse quence, therefore, was not merely to get rid of the arrears, but to get rid of them promptly, in order to relieve the suitors. As far as related to the present question, the main point was as to the appeals ; and it had been said that increasing the number of Judges would have the effect of increasing the appeals. Now what had been the result? Why, at the present moment there were not more than twenty-four appeals, and he was quite satis fied that, when the cases got into the ordinary channels, the num ber of appeals would not exceed fffteen a year.—( Hear.) His Noble Friend had said how unwise it was that the Chancellor should sit in that House, to hear appeals from his own deci sions. He was sure that his Noble Friend had not properly considered the character of that officer, because he thought he could undertake to say that when a case came before their Lordships, either upon appeal or otherwise, the Chancellor would look with more caution to his own decision than any other. He was quite, when his Noble Friend came to reflect on the observations he had used, he would see that there was no foundation for them. He would appeal to his Noble Friend himself, whether there was any truth in the observation. Now, as to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, what were the observations made by his Noble Friend, and what were his arguments? Their Lordships must recollect that that Court was one of the most ancient tribunals of the country, and it had been rendered illustrious by such men as Lord Stowell and Sir Williem Grant ; and yet it was the tribunal that his Noble Friend was anxious to abolish, notwithstanding their Lordships had thought proper to extend the jurisdiction of that tribunal, and establish it on a more solid foundation. That tribunal had jurisdiction new in matters connected with the Ecclesiastical Court, and he thought it must be apparent to all that the present system was far better than the old. Under the old system the appeal from the Ecclesiastical Court was to a Court of Delegates composed of three Judges and three Doctors of Ci ,i 1 Law, and when their opinions were equally I balanced what was the remedy? Why they were obliged to resort to a Commission of Adjuncts. That proceeding was had resort to in a case in which he was engaged, and the result ;here was that the Judges were on the one side and the civilians on the other; in that case a second Commission of Ad juncts was selected, and toe result would have been the same had not one of the civilians given way. Now was it not proper to abolish such a tribunal ? and accosd ingly it was wisely so abolished by his Noble and Learned Friend's Bill, and the jurisdiction given to the Privy Council. t7hen they came to consider that tribunal, it was material to look to its composition. It was admirably adapted for the con sideration of those subjects which came before it. There were questions from all the colonies, embracing almost every variety of European and Eastern law. Where were the Spanish law and the French la.weaccording to the new and old code; Dutch law ; English law (teeth ,law and equity) ; and the Colonial Statutes. In addition to that they had Oriental law—Hindoo and Mohammedan. Subjects connected with those various systems of law continually .came before that tribunal ; and what was the cemposition of that tribunal which was so admi rably adapted for the purposes for which it was established ? In addition to what he had already stated, there were also the Ecclesiastical and Civil law. Well, that tribunal was composed of the Judges of England—the Common-law Judges to decide questions of common law; and the Judges of the Courts of Equity, to decide questions of equity. There were also the Judges of the Ecclesiastical Courts, to decide questions arising out of Ecclesiastical law. In addition to those there were, with respect to the laws of the East, two learned individuals, who filled high judicial situations in the East, and who were to give their advice and assistance upon questions connected with Oriental law. His Noble and Learned Friend said that there was great difficulty in getting that tribunal to assemble. He (the Lord Chancellor) was not aware of such a difficulty existing. It might happen that at times they could not be got to meet upon some particular day and constitute a Court, because individuals who formed that Court were engaged in other occupations; out he (the Lord Chancellor) never knew any serious incon venience to arise from that circumstance. The Judges were summoned according to the questions to be decided. He be lieved that the tribunal had given perfect satisfaction. He had inquired of persons connected with the Colonies on this sub ject, and they not only expressed their entire satisfaction with the management of matters brought under the cognizance of that tribunal, but stated they would regret very much any altera tion in the present system. But his Noble and Learned Friend said that this Court sat only forty or fifty days in the year. They sat long enough to dispose of the business before them, and they must mark that there was no arrear. According to the returns now on the table of the House, it appeared that only eight or nine cases were now standing for hearing; and there never would have been any arrear if it had not been for the circumstance of there being no persons to prosecute in some East Indian causes which came before the Court. That diffi culty was now however removed, and that Court would go on as it was now going on, in a manner perfectly calculated to satisfy the suitors who awaited its decision. When he (the Lord Chancellor) found a system working well, and people perfectly satisfied with it, he was one of those who were very much indisposed for change—he did not wish to change for the sake of change. Some great man connected with the law in the olden time had said, you should never make a change in the law unless it was demonstratively for the better. At the same time he (the Lord Chancellor) was not surprised to find his Noble and Learned Friend bringing the present measure before their Lordships. His Noble and Learned Friend•had led a busy life ; he had now little or nothing to do, and it was natural his active mind should seek something to employ it. It was very much like a scheme formerly submitted to the House by a Noble Friend of his (Lord Lyndhurst's), and which was negatived by a very large majority when it came to be discussed. Having said so much with respect to the Privy Council, he would now turn the attention of their Lordships to the jurisdiction of their Lordships' House. He must say that there never was a moment when it was less necessary to interfere with the jurisdiction of that House. There were Noble and Learned Lords who gave their constant attention to the sub ject. Even vs hen their Lordships sat for public business, the House also sat for the purpose of disposing of causes. The Noble Lord at the end of the bench, formerly Lord Chancellor —his Noble and Learned Friend near him, his immediate pre decessor in office—there was his Noble and Learned Friend who brought forward this measure, the late Lord Chancellor for Ireland—all gave their assistance. He thought nothing could he better than the appellate jurisdiction of that House at a time when the Noble Lord was desirous of producing a change. They had many schemes brought before that House. with re spect to this subject; but he would state to their Lordships that it appeared that nothing could go on better, on the whole, than the present system. He would next allude to the jurisdiction of the Privy Council, which the Noble Lord was desirous to alter. The Noble and Learned Lord said, with :respect to this subject, and he (Lord Lyndhurst) ought to have alluded to it before— that there was extreme difficulty in getting a bar. Now, he had attended there himself while there were questions of great weight, but he never found any deficiency of gentlemen of the , long robe of the very first talent. He bad often heard the Noble and Learned Lord arguing with great force there, and he ( Lord Lyndhurst) believed it was as good a bar, and as regu larly attended, as any other Court of Justice. The Noble Lord said the two appellate tribunals were co-ordinate. A Noatz LOttn—They are for the same questions. The LORD CHANCELLOR—The Noble Lord said they were for the same questions, but they were not co-ordinate, because the jurisdiction of one Court was for a certain part of the country, and the other Court for another part. But he said they were the same questions which came for decision. Now, it was a remarkable fact, that during the two hundred years that the Privy Council had exercised its jurisdiction, in no one instance had there been a decision at variance with that of their Lordships' House. So that practically there had been no inconvenience.—(Hear.) Various ale terations had been from time to time proposed. One was to divide the Lord Chancellor into two, and send one-half of him to the Court of Chancery, and keep the other half on the Woolsack.—( Laughter. ) The project of the late Lord Chancellor of Ireland, if carried, was to put the Lord Chancellor in an easy chair, with two assessors by his side to do the duty. Another was, to take away the appellate jurisdiction of their Lordships' House, and transfer it to the Privy Council ; and now it was proposed by his Noble and Learned Friend to take away the jurisdiction of the Privy Council and transfer it to their Lordships. Such were the various and incongruous plans proposed by ingenious and leaned men when they applied their minds to this complicated subject. The best way to look at the question was, had the present system worked well? He announced that it had worked well—had worked admirably. His Noble and Learned .Friend thought that the intervals between the sittings of that House were too long. Why, the intervals between the sittings of the Law Courts was nearly as long. In the long vacation it was four months and a half, which was nearly as great as the interval between the sittings of Parliament, which was usually more than five months. The Law Courts did not set to hear questions of law more I than seventy days in the year ; and their Lordship's House set more than 100 days.—( Hear.) But his Noble and Learned Friend proosed to alter the constitution of Parliament. He (Lord Cam p bell) proposed to prorogue the House only for a par j titular putpose, or to appoint a Committee. If this plan were ' adopted the appellate jurisdiction would not be considered to be in their Lordships, but in a distinct body sitting within the same wells- The House of Lords had established its judicial autho- THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY MORNING, MARCH 2, i 841.. from a place in Herefordshire, from Shropshire, from Hamilton, from the Cloth-dressers of Leeds, and from two thousand inhabitants of St. George's-in-the-East. Mr. F. FRENCH presented a petition from the Grand Jury of Roscommon (Ireland), praying that in altering the duties on the i m p or t a ti o n of grain, the Go vernment will not remove the present amount of duty levied on oats, which the petitioners represented as most essential to the welfare of large districts in Ireland. rity after A sharp and severe struggle with the other House of Parliament, and he trusted their Lordship, would not now consent to lose that authority, either by delegation or by the contrivances of his Noble and Learned Friend. He (the Lord Chancellor) would not go now into the details of the measures, but he really believed that when his Noble and Learned Friend's Bills came on for consideration, not one of them would be found deserving their Lordships' countenance and support; as he also believed that when considered by the legal profession at large, they would not meet that approbation which his Noble and Learned Friend, by anticipation, seemed to think they would receive. _ Lord COTTEN HAM bad listened with interest to the pro positions of his Noble and Learned Friend, and approved of a great deal of what he said ; no wonder, perhaps, because it was to a a great extent a repetition of theplan he( Lord C.) proposed with such ill success in the House in 18,36. He proposed that there should be a permanent head of the Court of Chancery , but he thought, that so far from being injurious, it was highly beneficial that the separate tribunals of the Judicial Committee ef the Privy Council, and of the House of Lords, should exist ; for he did not see why or how disputes upon the personal and landed interests of an individaal should come before one tribunal. His wish was, that the Lord Chancellor, the head of the House of Lords, should alternately preside at appeals before their Lord ships, and before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. This plan would supersede the necessity of the proposal of a Judicial Session of their Lordships. But, while the recent experiments in the Court ef Chancery were in operation, he opposed the present Bills. Whilst the experiment made by Noble Lords was actually in operation, it appeared to him that it was not wise to enterpose and undo, in the month of Feb ruary, what their Lordships had done in the month of Septem ber. Not. losing sight of the proposition he ( Lord Cotten ham) hadmade in 163'i, he thought it would be still a very great improvement, and that it would secure a permanent interest and advantage to the Court of Chancery, and to the suitor , and to the public. Lord BROUGHAM would take that opportunity to express the opinions he entertained, notwithstanding the very able and important observations made by his Noble and Learned Friends. When there was no arrear, he (Lord Brougham) thought that the Equity Courts would have been sufficient as they were constitu!ed before the recent charges had been made ; but at all events he thought that one additional Judge would have been enough to dispose of the arrear. That arrear had been got rid of ; the Bill having passed in September, and hav ing come into operation in November, only four months had elapsed, and these four months had amply sufficed to get rid of the arrear. When the Bill passed, the arrear consisted of 508 causes, that was in Michaelmas Term ; there were upwards of 200 new causes since then, but these 200 new causes could not be said to be in arrear. Now there were of the entire number 132 causes ready for hearing, and no more ; of these, 32 were set dawn since the month of February—within the last fort night. Those, therefore, were to be taken as new causes ready for hearing. There were 200 causes entered since Michaelmas Term, and now it appeared that the whole arrear was disposed of. He ( Lord Brougham) heartily rejoiced at it, for the sake of the Court of Chancery, and for the sake of the suitors, much more than for any temporary triumph he might have over the learned and experienced practitioners who had been examined before their Lordships' Committee, and from whom it appear ed, that if their Lordships had appointed a dozen Vice-Chan cellors, their Lordships could not do too much for the suitors and the Court of Chancery, and the due despatch of business. When the obstruction ceased, the arrear of the Rolls' Court and the Court of Chancery had been cleared off, the consequence was that there was a very considerable addition to the number of bills filed—the removal of the obstruction made a gush, or a rush as it were, into the Court for a short time, but that in crease of business was not permanent or lasting. After the arrear was disposed of, the business had increased very much, then the usual number of bills were filed, but not more than those filed in a corresponding time in former periods. With respect to the measure before their Lordships, he thought that many of the objections that had been raised to the present system were inherent in an appeal jurisdiction. With respect to the con stitution of the Judicial Committee, he thought his Noble Friend was mistaken with respect to it. It was not correct to say that any one presided in that Court. Properly speaking, the Judges took the causes in rotation. The want of a bar had been objected to by his Ni.ble Friend, but he was afraid that no change in the appellate jurisdiction would affect that.. He greatly doubted that there was enough of business to occupy a distinct court. Looking over several years, the average sit tings of the Privy Council were not more than forty days in the year, and that was certainly sufficient, as there were abso lutely no arrears ; and there were but six appeals set down for hearing, and of these five were from the native Courts of In. dia. The number of days necessary to dispose of the appeals in that House, was not so much as his Noble Friend on the Wool sack had supposed. It was no more than 70 or 80. Now then, to the 40 days occupied by the business of the Privy Council they would give 120 days, which was not enough t.) furnish em ployment for a distinct court, and Judges having nothing else to do. He ( Lord B.) had some slight pretensions to prophetic visions, and he would not predict that his Noble and Learned Friend's Bill, having been adopted by the Legislature, would fail ; but he feared he must predict that, particularly after the observation of his Noble and Learned Friend on the woolsack, he (Lord Brougham) very much apprehended that the measure would never advance to the grace of an experiment. ( Laughter.) Far different from the fate of the Bill of his other Noble and Learned Friend near him, which so far justi. fled the fears he (Lord Brougham) formerly predicted, that though working well in some instances, it really defeated its own objects by excessive success. Upon the whole, before finally making up his mind, he should wish to have an oppor • tunity of examining his Noble and Learned Friend's plan in detail. As at present advised, lie conceived that the evils complained of were not of a practical nature. Some of them, however, were perfectly inseparable from any system. Lord CAMPBELL said he had given public notice of his intention to bring forward this subject, and he had therefore thought it unnecessary, before he stated his plan, to trouble their Lordships by entering into details.—. ( Hear, hear.) When this subject was deliberately con. sidered, if their Lordships came to the conclusion that that there ought to be in this country, as in other civilised countries where law was a science, only a single tribunal of appeal—if their Lordships should be of opinion (and he was happy his Noble and Learned Friend [Lord Brougham] kept his mind open on the subject ; and he trusted that that Noble Lord would not fulfil the prophecy he had thrown out, of defeat ing the measure now introduced—he who had considered juris prudence in all its bearings)—if they should be of opinion that that anomaly should no longtr exist in this couotry—if in their i decision they should make_ any selection between the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and the House of . Lords, he trusted that the preference would be given to the tribunal that he now addressed.—( Hear. ) He begged to tell their Lordships that it was not new to him to propose measures for the amendment of the law; those measures had now become the law of the land, and be I hoped the time was not far distant when there would be but one j Court of Appeal. The Bills were then laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. , The Duke of BUCCLEUCH laid certain papers on the table j by command of her Majesty. The House then adjourned. HOUSE OF COADIONS, MARCH 1. The SPEAKER took the chair shortly before Four o'clock. STANHOPE AND TYNE RAILWAY. On the motion of Mr. LIDDELL, the Stanhope and Tyne Railroad bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. 'Mr. WILLIAMS presented a petition from Coventry, signed by 7,300 persons, stating that they viewed with feelings of deep indignation, the plan proposed by Sir Robert Peel for the alteration of the Corn-laws, and praying for their total repeal. Mr. ELLIS presented petitions from Bethnal Green, and several other parts of the metropolis, praying for a total repeal of the Corn-laws. Lord DUNCAN presented a petition from the whole sale and retail dealers of Covent-garden, praying that some measure might be adopted for throwing open \Vaterloo and Southwark Bridges. Mr. S. CRAWFORI) presented five petitions from the Ministers and Members of the Remonstrant Congre gation of Ballymoney, in the county of Antrim ; of Holly wood, Dromore, Killinchy, and Newtowkards, in the county of Down. These petitioners, after referring to the practical evils which must necessarily arise from the late decision of the Judges on the subject of marriages by Presbyterian Ministers, pray that your Hon. House will pass a law rendering valid all such marriages which have already taken place in Ireland ; and also a law with reference to future marriages, founded on the basis of religious liberty, affording equal advantages to all sects, and conferring on Ireland an assimilation and equality of privileges in this respect with England and Scotland ; they also pray for a system of regis tration of births, deaths, and marriages. Also ' one petition from the Minister and Congregation of Bamoan, in the county of Antrim, in connexion with the General Assembly, praying that all marriages heretofore celebrated, or winch may be hereafter solemnized by Presbyterian Ministers between a member of their own sect and a member of any other sect, shall be declared valid in law ; and one from the minister and congrega tion of Renvera, county Down, joining in a like prayer, and als6 praying for a system of registration of births, deaths, and marriages. Captain TAYLOR presented a petition from Meath, praying that in any alteration of the Corn-laws a suf ficient protection would be afforded to Ireland. Mr. JOHNSTONE presented a petition from Lanark, against the measure proposed by Sir R. Pea, and pray ing for a total repeal of the Corn laws. The Hon. Member also presented a similar petition from Ayr. PRIVATE BILLS. Mr. STANSFIELD then moved, pursuant to notice, that the Chairman of Committees on opposed Private Bills, should be always chosen from the selected Members ; and also that the chairman of such Cotnmittee should be empowered to order the attendcnce of short-hand writers at the expense of the parties pro moting the Bill, if requested by the majority of such Committee. At the suggestion of Lord J. SOMERSET the Hon. Member'withdrew the latter part of his motion, and the former part was agreed to. An IiON. MEMBER presented a petition from Scot land, praying that a measure for the amendment of the disturbances in the Scotch Church, similar to that brought in by the Duke of Argyll in the House of Lords, may be adopted. Mr. WALLACE presented a petition from Paisley, signed by 3,407 persons, stating that the Government proposition would not relieve their distress, and praying for a more extended alteration of the Corn-laws ; also a petition from the St. George's Emigration Society of the same town, praying that a wise system of emigration may be adopted. Sir C. NAPIER presented a petition from certain naval officers, praying that all masters and mates of merchant ships should be subject to examination before their appointment. Mr. E. TENNENT presented two petitions from the county Pown, on the subject of Presbyterian marriages. CORN-LAWS. Sir A. LEITH HAY presented a petition from Elgin, praying fcr the total and immediate repeal of the Corn laws. Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND presented a petition from the Anti-Corn-law Association of Queenshead, in the West Riding of the county of York, signed by the Chairman. The petitioners stated it as their opinion that it was highly unjust to tax the food of the poorest ,r the benefit of the richest class in the world.—(Hear.) They viewed with indignation the measure of a sliding scale ; and they prayed that the House would not waste its valuable time--(Hear, hear)—by going into the con sideration of any measure short of total repeal.—(Hear.) Mr. VILLIERS presented a large number of petitions against the Government measure relating to the laws on ( orn, and praying for an immediate and total repeal; among them were petitions from a Friendly So ciety in Cheshire, from the inhabitants of Manchester, EXCHEQUER BILL FRAUD. Sir G. CLERK laid on the table of the House papers connected with the fraud in the Exchequer bills. CORN LAWS. Mr. GILL presented two petitions, numerously sign ed, praying that the proposed Ministerial measure with respect to foreign corn be amended before it was passed into a law. _ . --- Sir WM. SOMERVILLE presented a similar petition against the Corn-laws. EGYPT. Dr. BOWRINGgaye notice that he would postpone until this day fortnight, his motion for copies of letters and correspondence which had taken place with the Foreign-Office, on the subject of a claim brought forward by the British Consul at Alexandria, for the right to navigate the internal waters of Egypt under the British - EXCHEQUER BILL FRAUD. Mr. BLEWITT gave notice of his intention to move for a return of the total number of forged Exchequer bills issued, their respective amounts, and a description or statement of the d e f ec t s or i rregu l a riti e s in each of such spurious bills. Sir A. LEITII HAY gave notice that on this day fortnight he should move for copies of any correspon dence from the Home-office since the Ist of July last, relative to the appointment of a minister to the vacant parish of Elgin. THE COMMERCIAL MEASURES OF TIIE GOVERNMENT. Mr. WALLACE said that he wished to put a ques tion to the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government, for which he hoped the Right Hon. Baronet would excuse him. He had been much pressed by his own constituents and other parties to endeavour to elicit from the Right Hon. Baronet, now that the resolution on the subject of Corn-laws had passed through Com mittee, a declaration upon his part as to the pro bable time at which he could bring before the House the proposed commercial measures of the Govern ment. lie was afraid he was pressing upon the Right Honourable Baronet, by putting such a question ; but he trusted he would be eXcused for the course be was taking, as the subject was one of the deepest importance. Sir R. PEEL said that, from the position of the Hon. Gentleman, and from circumstances relating to the county with which he was connected, he need have put forward no claim to indulgence for urging the question. He was afraid, however, that he could say nothing in answer which he had not already stated. It was true that the resolutions relating to the Corn-laws had been passed at a late hour last night, or rather at an early hour this morning ; and he had hoped that these resolutions would be reported to-day. He had fixed the estimates for Friday next; but it appeared from the course of the discussion last night that various motions would be brought on in Committee on the subject of the Corn-laws ; and as there was other motions on the notice paper for to-night, he was afraid that he might be obliged to defer the further consideration of the Corn-laws until another evening. If gentlemen persisted in pressing their motions, he feared that he should not have an opportunity of bring ing up the report before Friday. Dr. BOWRING inquired whether it was the inten tion of the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Ma jesty's Government, that the Corn-laws should take pre cedence of the Exchequer bills? Sir R. PEEL said, he meant steadily to adhere to the course which he has declared his intention to pursue.—(llear,,hear.) He would interpose no public business whatever, except the Act relating to Marriages in Ireland, until the resolutions with respect to the Corn laws had been reported. SYRIA. Sir C. NAPIER was sorry to give the Right lion. Baronet so much trouble ; but he could not refrain from repeating his question to the Right Hon. Baronet, whether it was true that the Emir Bechir had been arrested and sent to Constantinople, and that a Turkish Bashaw had been appointed to assume the Government of Lebanon ? lie thought the people of that country had been very cruelly treated. Sir R. PEEL could assure the Gallant Officer that no apology was necessary _ for asking such a question ; knowing, as they all did, the distinguished part which he had performed in the war with Syria, and the interest which he took in all the affairs of that country. When the Gallant Officer had before asked the question, he had no means of furnishing an answer. Despatches had since arrived, and he could now state what were the facts. It was true that the Emir Bechir had been deposed ; it was true that he had arrived at Constantinople ; and it was also true that an officer, who was formerly in the Austrian service, had been appointed to the government of Lebanon. Sir C. NAPIER said he was extremely sorry to hear it.—(A laugh.) LOCAL MAGISTRATES. Mr. YORKE wished to put a question to the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government. It was necessary, in order to make the question intelli gible, that he should first state the circumstances upon which it was founded. About six weeks or two months before the accession of the late Ministry, a representa tion was made to them of the inadequacy of the local magistracy in the city of York,. and, in consequence• of that representation, gentlemen were chosen to replace those Magistrates. Among others, a gentleman named Milnes—a man of irreproachable haracter, and of large independent fortune, was specified in the Commission. In the Commission which was duly sent to York, this gentleman, whose real name was " John Ro bert Milnes," was described only as " John Milnes," He believed the commission had been sent to York, and that the persons appointed were Mr. Hutt, Sir W. Clerk, tnd Mr. Butler, who were all Conservatives. There was also some informality with regard to the appointment of Sir W. Clerk and Mr. Butler, and the question he wished to ask was, why ther e s h ou ld be the same informality in the one case as in the other, and why the one should be decided to be informal, and the other not ? Sir J. GRAHAM said that he heard the circum stance for the first time, and, perhaps, the lion. Gentle• man would wait till to-morrow, and he (Sir J .Graham; would, in the meantime, make inquiries on the subject, INHABITANTS O 1 INDIA. Mr. BAILLIE wished to know whether the House were aware that inhabitants of the East Indies were accustomed to be brought to this country and then left in a state of destitution ; and whether the Board of Control referred the subject to the Indian Government, with a view to their being taken back to their own country. Mr. BINGHAM BARING mado a reply, but with his back to the gallery, and in so low a tone of voice, that we could not catch its purport. CHURCH EXTENSION. that he was about to bring under their notice was one that had excited much attention in consequence of those re- ' ports which had been made during the last five years by ' those individuals who were appointed by the. late Govern ment, under the authority of Parliament, as Inspectors of isons. He wished not to say one word against those Reports ; he thought they were drawn up with an accu racy and an ability which did the greatest credit to those individuals. But th ere was another reason why this sub ject excited so great an interest in the country ; during the last two or three years the House would recollect that some 300 or 400 persons had been confined, in our prisons for what they called political offences. They were a different race of men from those who generally filled our prisons and houses of correction. They were men of more intelligence and great ability ; they had seen, felt,' and witnessed the deplorable scenes which occurred in many of our prisons ; they had called the attention of a great portion of the com munity to what they saw, and they insisted on a strict and rigid investigation into the government of those prisons. He (Mr. buncombe) should be doing the present Legislature great injustice, and former governments great injustice, and to the parties great injustice, if he were not to say that great improve ment had been made in our prison discipline during the last twenty years. When he looked back to those days when such great philanthropists as Mr. Howard exerted themselves ; when he looked back to those days when every sort of disease rei . r,ned in those prisons, and terminated the lives of the inmates in greater numbers than on the scaffold ; and when he looked at the small number of deaths which now occurred, he had a right to think that a great improvement had taken place in the government of prisons. For the Committee for which he was about to ask there were precedents without end. In 1822 a Committee was appointed in con sequence of great complaints of the administration of the , law ; the result of which was, the passing of what was called the Gaol Act, which introduced great improve ments in prison 'discipline. In 1832 the House thought , proper to appoint another Committee to inquire into the state of the prison discipline of that time ; that Commit tee reported that a greater uniformity of discipline should • be carried out in the whole of the prisons of the country Nothing ever was done on that point ; but, in 1835, a Committee was appointed by the House of Lords, and that Committee came to the following resolu tion : " That it is expedient that one uni form system of prison discipline be established in all the gaols and houses of correction in Eng land and Wales, and that it is expedient in order to the carrying out of this, that the plan proposed be sub mitted to the Secretary of State for his approval." The importance of this question arose principally from the great increase of crime which had taken place within the last ten years in this country. Surely her Majesty's Ministers were well aware of the amount of that crime ; but he (Mr. buncombe) did not believe that the House or the public were aware of the extent of that crime ; and therefore he would, with the permission of the House, repeat what the Reports of the Select Committees upon Prisons had stated. By the Report of the Committee in 1832, it appeared that the commitments for the seven years from 1817 to 1824, in one particular pr:son were 56,308, averaging 8,044 per annum. For the seven years suc ceeding 1824, the commitments amounted to 92,848, averaging 13,264 per annum ; and in the seven years ending 1831, the number increased to 121,000, averaging 17,285 per annum. He then referred to the Reports of the Inspectors of Prisons for 1838, 1839, and 1840 ; in 1838 the House should remember that for the seven years previous to 1831, the committals were 121,918 ; in 1838, they were 112,515 ; in 1839, 112,812, being only a difference of 297 between 1838 and 1839 ; in 1840, which was the last Report laid before the House, the number amounted to 129,237, being 16,722, over 1838, and over 1831, 10 years preceding, at the rate of 600 or 700 per cent. per annum ; surely that was an alarming state of crime for the country to be in. It was increasing every day, and it must certainly be worthy of the consideration of Parliament.—(Hear). With that increase of crime of course there was a proportionate increase of expense ; the e xpenses, as appeared by the last return for 1840, were 64,4071. more than for 1838. What was the reason for this vast increase of crime ? It had been attributed to various causes, but he was inclined to attribute it, in the first place, to a general want of education ; in the next place, to the want of employment which produced great poverty and distress, and forced the sufferers into the commission of crime, and in some few instances to the vice and intemperance of the persons themselves who had been committed to prison. The general want of education was proved by the returns made by the Registrars of Births, Marriages, and Deaths.—(Hear.) From those re turns it appeared that 131,000 marriages had been contracted last year, and that of the persons mar ried, 40,500 males, and 58,999 females could not write. It was rather a remarkable fact, that the inhabitants of Lancashire and Wales were the best educated, and that in Devonshire 55 per cent. of the males, and 66 per cent. of the females were unable to sign their names. That want of education was one great cause of the increase in the criminal population was proved from the returns of the commitments. Out of the whole number of persons committed in the year 1840, amounting, as he had be fore stated, to 129,000 persons, 35,552 could neither read nor write, and of the 60,000 persons summarily convicted in the same period, 26,338 could neither read nor write, 13,344 could read only, and 21,0(10 could write but very imperfectly. Many of these persons had been committed under the provisions of the Vagrant Act, and there was one offence for which, in his opinion, if the House did its duty, persons ought never to be committed to' pri son—he alluded to the offence of insubordination in a workhouse, and many persons committed for the offence of insubordination in a workhouse had, when in prison, been treated in a most 'severe, cruel, and brutal manner. (Hear, hear, hear.) The offence itself was a very venial one; anti from the Commissioners' Reports it ap peared that many of the persons committed had been treated with the utmost severity. At Ipswich it appeared that one man, convicted of misconduct in a workhouse, had been shut up in a refractory cell for a fortnight. The Hon. Gentleman next referred to the severity of the treatment of several children in Salford Gaol (as we un derstood) who suffered solitary confinement, and received but the scantiest supply of food. The Magistrate who had committed the parties—he did not know who he was— took care that their friends should not visit these unfortu nate persons; and he should certainly say that the powers given by the Act of Parliament had been violated in these cases. The name of the Magistrate should be given in order that if his con duct could not be justified, he might be held up to merited reprobation. He would next refer to a most interesting retort made by the Chaplain of the Lewes House of Correction. That Gentle man had taken very great pains to ascertain the descent and origin of those persons who inhabited the gaol in question. He said that the result of his in vestigations convinced him that those parties were objects rather of compassion than subjects for judicial regulations. He found that out of 949 felons and vagrants, 57 were children of paupers ; 28 were illegitimate ; 232 were or phans under nine years • of age ; 133 were or phans between nine and sixteen years old ; and 27 had been deserted both by father and mother. Those children should not be made inmates of gaols, where they were exposed to constant contamination. If they took Capt. Wi:liains' report, they would not be surprised at the great extent to which crime prevailed in Manchester. He stated that in walking through Manchester, he found the public-houses open at a quarter past one in the morning, and they were only closed on the appearance of the police. They were crowded with men and women ; many of the latter had infants in, their arms. On descending into a cellar he was struck by what appeared to him the unusual sight of the room being papered, but on holding a lantern to the wall he discovered that it was covered with an innumerable quantity of bugs, which presented the appear ance of paper. Such was the state of the manufacturing districts ; the case • was equally bad in the rural districts. Let them look to Cambridge, the seat of all that was orthodox and of all that was learned. It was a disgrace to the country that there should be a gaol in that town in the condition in which it was described by the in ' spectors. He knew that there was a Chancery suit pending, but though that might be a good reason for closing the doors, it was no excuse for the state in which the prison was actually found. The Uni versity made no provision for the religious instruc tion of the inmates. A clergyman of King's Col lege had formerly attended, but had discontinued for private reasons, since which no religious service had been performed. There was no efficient discipline observed, The prisoners passed much of their time over the fire, engaged in obscene talk. One striking fact was, that ac coring to the return for 1834, there were three commit ments for each individual. The only provision which this University had made consisted of religious tracts. These statements were contained in the inspectors' reports. He thought that, if true, they proved the necessity which there was for inquiry. They proved that there was no unifcrm system in the discipline and management of the prisons, and that the recommendations of the House of Commons, in 1835, had been in no respect attended to. It was impossible that ' there should be uniformity under the present system. Under that system the Visiting Magistrates had the power of drawing up certain rules ; those rules were submitted to the Secretary ' of State for his approbation, and different sets of rules were approved for different parts of the country. He did not blame either the Secretary of State or the Magistrates, but he blamed the Legislature, who allowed such a system to be pursued. He blamed that House, who did not grapple with the difficulty, and lay down one general rule to be observed throughout all the prisons in the country. He believed that such a rule would be of great advantage both to the ends of justice and to the prisoners themselves. It was totally impossible, at present, that any Judge, in passing a sentence upon a prisoner, could know precisely what amount of punishment that prisoner would undergo. There was, in fact, a total want of uniformity, both with regard to labour and diet. When an individual was put to the treadmill, the amount of labour which he performed must depend upon the number of hours, the height of the step, and the rapidity of the rotation of the wheel. But if one in dividual was sentenced to six months' imprisonment with hard labour in Devonshire, and another received a similar sentence in Northumberland, here would be a great inequality in the punishment inflicted by the two sentences.--( Hear, hear.) In Exeter a prisoner was kept at the wheel for eight hours and a half; the height of the step was eight inches, the number of steps taken in a minute was twenty-four, making altogether an ascent of 3,120 feet by that individual. In Newcastle-upon- Tyne the number of hours was six, the height of the step was ten inches, the number of the steps in the minute fifty-two, and the prisoner performed altogether an ascent of 13,666 feet. In Worcester, instead of being six hours atthe wheel, the priso ner was kept there ten hours and a quarter, the step was seven and three-quarter inches, the number of steps per minute forty-eight, and the ascent was 12,000 feet. It was quite clear, then, that though the sentences were the same, the punishment of one would often treble the amount of punishment of another; this ought to be investigated. Then, how did they stand with regard to diet? In some places, where the labour was the hardest, the diet was the smallest and the lowest. In the Bedford House of Correction, the Aylesbury, and the Spring-field, the diet was very low, they s had neither meat nor potatoes. In the Bedford House of Cor- Mr. BANES wished to know if it was the intention of the Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir R. Inglis) to bring forward his Bill for Church Extension before Easter. Sir R. INGLIS said it was his intention to bring the subject before Parliament during the present session, but it was not his intention to bring the subject forward before Easter, and he would give timely notice when he would brini h r it forward. IMPORTATION OF FLOUR FROM AMERICA. Sir R. PEEL said that with regard to the question put by the Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Thornely) last night, and which he was not then able to answer, he had now to state that he held in his hand a paper which stated that a cargo of corn was shipped from New York on the 3cl of August, and arrived at Liverpool on the 13th of September. Mr. THORNELY said that he also held in his hand a letter from an individual, who stated that he left New York via Halifax with a cargo, on the 4th of August, and did not arrive in Liverpool till late in the following month. He had been fifty-one days on the voyage, and he missed the I Is. duty by being one day too late. FRENCH POSSESSIONS IN AFRICA. Mr. SHIEL begged to ask the Right Hon. Gentle man, Sir Robert Peel, if he could inform the House whether the account given by M. Guizot in the French Chambers of Deputies of a conversation alleged to have been held by him with the Earl of Aberdeen, in reference to the possessions of the French in Africa, were correct or not. Sir ROBERT PEEL thought that. the Right Hon. Gentleman ought to have known that questions should not be put on subjects of so much importance without previous notice.—(Hear, hear, from the Ministerial Benches.) However, as he happened to be prepared to give an answer in the present case, it was not of so much inconvenience as it might be on other occasions of similar importance.—(Hear, hear.) His Noble Friend the Earl of Aberdeen, did not admit the accuracy of M. Guizot's account of the conversation alluded to—(Hear, hear) —in reference to the occu pation ha no observat to make upon that subject then of part of Africa by th e French. What the Earl of Aberdeen said was, tha t he d ; Hear, hear. and not that he i o n hd no objection :o that occupation."— () COLONIAL PASSENGERS' BILL. Mr. GLAI)STONE moved the postponement of the Colonial Passengers' Bill ; and in answer to Mr. La bouchere, stated that the Bill was postponed, not for the purpose of any material alteration, but to consult the personal convenience of members. After a few words from L ord JOHN RussELL, the Bill was postponed. PRISON DISCIPLINE. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE ros e to bring forward his mo tion for an inquiry into the ru les, re g ulations, and dis cipline of the several prisons and houses of correction in England and Wales. He said he regretted that he did not feel justified in deferring his motion, as it would not only save the time of the House, but spare him the pain of relating, and the House the pain of hearing those statements of sorrow and distress which he should have to make, and which could be but too well verified. • • H e could not entertain a doubt but the House would accede to the motion. Looking at the vast importance of the subject, and the questions it involved, he thought he had a right to call on the House to agree to his motion. But in calling on the House to agree to it, he hoped, at all events, that whatever might be their difference on other matters, as he had brought f orw ard the question with no hostile feelings to f e eling would enter into th e dis cussion, called th e a tt ent i on o f single vote in its consideration. H c u e s s w i oans, wellor influence ho any sti o i n it e y , , s t o ha h t e n tru o p st a e r d ty that it would be received without the House to the prison discipline of the country, whe raecethaat ther he censured the present system as too severe, or said that in some points it was not severe enough, he must be exposed to the reproach of having too great a sym pathy with vice, or on the other hand that he was not susceptible enough to human sufferin g , and did not make allowances enough for humaa frailty. The question •' rection the allowance was only 224 ounce s o f b rea d an d e i g ht system, wou ld i n stitute an inquiry into its ... Meets' , ounces of cheese, and three pints of gruel per week. In some end demerits. He had trespassed on the -- attenti ori' S o ! other prisons the diet was much better. Take Worcester for the House longer than perhaps he ought,. but bea example, where, though the labour was hard, the diet was had such a body of evidence, and so many - c omplaints on Of very good—there the allowance was , 172 ounces of bread, 24 subject, that he did not know where to begin or where to en-et ounces of meat, 2lbs. of potatoes, four pints of soup, 14 pints of and he feared he had not said enough to induce the Eloastet gruel, and Ilb. of suet-pudding per man per week. If the agree to his motion. —(llear. ) He trusted he might sac- e. diet at Bedford were right the diet at Worcester iLust be ceed in inducing the House to grant him a Committee of _r_ wrong.—( Hear, hear.) The diet at Aylesbury was very low, spiry, but whether he succeeded or no in impressing on, .n,.1 and a complaint had been made relative to the tteatmedt of House the necessity of inquiry into the present system , 11 : 13 ,,u e females with children at the b r e as t. The inspector stated showing that the cruelty with which it was attended ofigh : l 4 that when a woman went in with a child at the breast she had be redressed, he was at least satisfied that they would no mote than the ordinary allowance, out of which she had to ample consolation -in having engaged to take into 'the' . cL support herself and i n f an t. Th e f ema l es i n th ese prisons were sideration a subject of such importance and such hntelftniten i subject to the most severe privations; and the quantity of diet (Cheers.) The Han. Gentleman concluded by moving ~ , .4 was extremely small. The Hon. Gentleman then referred to Select Committee to inquire into the ru l e s, o r f egu co la rr t e i7ts; l - 1 : 00 a statement of the quantity and nature of diet given to female ' discipline of tier seraeral Gaols and Houses prisoners in the Coldbath-fields prison. But it might be said England and Waieee - to report what alterations appear tr . , that the surgeon had a power to increase the quantity of food. necessary in die laws now in ' force for the gO n s'e f r d ii i nl e A i r y ; Why the surgeon had always that power—but why was not a Prisons, in enter en insure a more uniform system regular rule adopted for individuals in such circumstances. In throughout the witc/.13; and further, to report neon th e -. e :l 1 ; the inspector's report it was stated that though a small quan- eieney of abolishing the infliction of corporal punishment, P' tity of food might not be immediately injurious, yet it would i criminal offenders. operate slowly, and come against the individual at some remote I On the motion being put, period of time. He would now call the attention of the , Sir J. GRAHAM said he gave the Hon. Gentlen ann li b e t o ; House to the prison discipline of the United States, and there ' had just sat down, every credit for the humane motive'," an d they would find a much better system in operation. In the induced him to make the present - motion, and for the calln;st Eastern. Peniten'iary the prisoner had a pint of coffee and temperate manner in which he brought it forward. n e ._ a d, three-quarters of a pound of brea I for breakfast, for dinner , cordially agreed ix the sentiment with which he opened bil:atm o he had meat and soup, and for supper he had Indian corn and dress, that this was not a party question, nor one wh ich n? , it molasses. The same, or as good a system prevailed ;be considered in such light.--( Hear.) And looking that he in the other prisons of the Union.—( Hear, hear.) If the I without any such feelings, he must declare to the Hou se ` f i s d House were to introduce the American system, he hoped was opposed to the appointment of a Committee. He Fe e race, that a better dietary than the present should be also intro- to see the Noble Lord, the Member for London, in his P , hid dared. There was likewise not only a want of uniformity in because he had devoted grest attention to the subject, snetten• labour and diet, but there was also a great want of uniformity rendered considerable service to the Government by the 0 , with regard to the religio is instruction which should be tion he devoted to it. By the Act of 1835 inspectors Wer; u t - a l afforded to the inmates of prisons in this country, and he pointed, and he (Sir James Graham) having stn `' e e r ge thought also that the power which the gaolers possessed, and intercourse with the persons appointed to dieel!thst the manner in which they used it, was most objectionable. He the important duties of that office; could state ode had got statements here in the House from individuals who had it was impossible for a more judicious selection to be , tle suffered greatly in consequence of the arbitrary and cruel con- than the gentlemen who were appointed.—e Hear, hear.) A c t duct of gaolers. In one instance, with the particulars of which would now point out the course of proceeding under t o w o of he (Mr. Duncombe) had been furnished, a boy was put into a of 1835. Four times in every year every gaol and I° l , refractory cell in the depth of winter for quarelling with an- correction was visited by responsible officers of Goverr se eres other boy—he was kept there for three days without fire, and tnd reports of a confidential nature were made to the .• v •te • with nothing on him but a rug—at the end of that time he tary of State. Every year, moreover, a full report ir a 'i;e of had actually lost two of his tees from the excessive cold he had pared by each inspector, in reference to each gaol and lt:its suffered, and he ultimately became a cripple for life.—( Hear, correction, giving details of everything discovered cotrlte'itee hear.) All that punishment was inflicted for a very trifling the Act of Parliament, and these reports were laid t rj esce offence indeed. . table of both Houses of Parliament. What was the coneor S ow . An Hoes. Memeee. on the Ministerial benches—What is the of s uch a practice? It was that the utmost publicitY of name ? given to everything connected with the gaols and bel l e, Mr. DUNCOMI3E said the name was William Griffith; the c orrection; and light was not only thrown upon their wet, boy had haltered so much that he was not able to be tried but the greatest publicity was given, and discussion, if not when the Court. sat, and the result was that he was kept in sary, ensued,—(Hear, hear.) The House should ree° to prison for three months longer than he should have been kept, that, in consequence of that publicity, a check existed upon Ib' in order that he might be sufficiently recovered to be taken proceedings that might arise within the prison no from the cell to the place of trial. There were several other The consequence of the absence of direct enactment wive be instances of equal hardship in other prisons—there was the ease want of uniformity in the proceedings of these gaols. .ee of John Riley, who was confined in the Wakefield House of Noble Lord opposite, when he was Secretary of State , ' w',l Correction. The fact .had already been represented to Lord infinite care, assiduity, and labour, framed one general nind e y Normanby. It appeared that when the prisoners were in the regulation, which, after consulting the prison inspectet ee l'ea yards at work, they were not allowed to turn their heads to the thought on the whole would be most conducive to the " e Beet right or to the left—much less to speak. However, to that he gulation of the gaols throughout the kingdom ; and rhe es' (Mr. Duncombe) did not object, as the silent system was ap- say he thought the course adopted by the Noble Lord in tic s proved of. This man Riley was affected with asthma. He formity with the decision of the Legislature, was that e t,o was told when in the yard that he was not to move or turn his was most expedient and practicable. The Noble L ...,, head, nor yet to expectorate. Now, as Riley was affected with Secretary of state, recommended the adoption of certai n 7 0 0 asthma, it was necessary for him to expectorate. He was not lations, though he had no power to enforce them; and a bet allowed to expectorate for twelve weeks ; and the consequence where those regulations had not been entirely adopted :of was that his throat and chest swelled in such a manner that his had been adopted to a great extent. A most salutarYt to life was despaired of.—(Hear, hear. ) When the case was first had been given to the Secretary of State with refe reo7 o . related to him (Mr. T. Duncombe), he almost felt inclined to prison regulations ; for though he had not the power: ol , r doubt whether it could be true. He laid the case before the forcing regulations, but could only recommend them fof trio Marquis of Normanby. The Home-office instituted an inquiry, tion, the power of recommending had been combined WiT e eet and Lord Nermanby directed, if the allegatioes should turn exercise of a veto in cases where the recommendation ,w7 e s t se out to be correct, that the prisoner should be imme- adopted, and this double power had had the effect of prOn:teee diately released. He (Mr. T. Duncombe) at the same much greater uniformity than exeisted under the old 'Si' . • time, wrote to a gentleman, living in the neighbourhood of He would state to the House, the counties in which the, ei Wakefield, to inquire if this could possibly be true. The next lations which had been recommended were adopted • ee r r post brought the man's release. What had been stated in rela- were adopted in Bedford, Cornwall, Carnarvon, Ca r '. ,ere tion to this poor man was but too true. The gentleman to Chester, Gloucester, Hants, Hereford, Lancaster, Letelet whom he (Mr. T. Duncombe) had written, replied that the Lincoln, Nottingham, Kent, Middlesex, Norfolk, Oeeet statement was true, that the man had b een prevented from ex- Somerset, Pembroke, Salop, Surrey, Suffolk, Wins', b e e pectorating for twelve weeks—that since his release, as he was Yorkshire. In all these countries the code te e t e enabled to expectorate, his health had been better, but that men d e d by the Secretary of State had been ad, Os the swelling in the throat still continued, and that it would be w ith o ut var i a ti on . Now, that was a great approxit -ea a long time before he recovered from th e e ff ec t s o f the toreite to uniformity.—(Hear, hear.) ' The Honourable Gentglei he had undergone in the Wakefield House o f C orrec ti o n.— h a d d we lt upon the state of crime for the last ten years. t e h bil. ( Hear, hear.) Now, with regard to the s pi r it ua l i ns t ruc ti o n of b e f ore hi m , as the result of a regulation made by . the MIO the prisoners. He would relate to the House what was the Lord opposite at the Home-office,. a valuable register eles practice in the prison at Salford; and his Hon. Friend the Mem- number of persons committed for trial. He would state Ittje ber for Salford was ready to corroborate his statement. It ap- House the number of committals for trial before 183.5, , 1 ; • 01 peered that there were 131 Roman Catholics among the pri- the improved discipline commenced under the Act to Wh' el e soner3 in that prison. The Visiting Magistrates had made re- had already referred, and which had been followed up by o l io gulations which at first sight appeared well calculated to secure quent enactments introduced by the Noble Lord opposite• o s to the Roman Catholic prisoners the right of seeing their priests, number of persons committed for trial in the year 183 0 tor and receiving spiritual consolation from them, but these regula- 18,657, or one in every 744 of the population. The in B ot l ' tions vs ere rendered of no effect by the conduct of the officers of committed for trial in 1840 was 27, 18 7, or one in every b. go the prison. It was with great regret that he (Mr. T. D.) the population, showing an increase of 45 per cent. Ass said anything that could be considered as casting any reflec- Honourable Gentleman, in order to make out his stat e !N" lion on the chaplain of that prison ; but it seemed that that that crime in the course of the last ten years had increaCd o o, Rev. Gentlemen was actuated by hostile feelings to the Ro- per cent. had included summary convictions in his calcuneeso man Catholics—in fact, his feelings almost amounted to per-, but he (Sir J. Graham) had purposely omitted them,h7 t ei' sooal antipathy to persons of that religion. It seemed that the commitments for trial included all crimes of any t il es isir the Rev. tientiernan was in the habit of preaching contro- rude, and afforded a much more certain base on which te e 6 000 versial sermons in the chapel of the prison—sermons in- late the comparative increase or diminution of crime, awe, eel tended, not only to show the superiority of the Protes that it appeared that the increase within the last ten yearle. tent over the Roman Catholic faith, but h o lding out indi- been 45 per cent., and nut 600 per cent., as had been rv iTtbe viduals professing tl.e Roman Catholic religion as persons sented by the Hon. Gentleman. He now wished to dire c eet ed_ to be avoided ; and th re was one instance of a prisoner, a attention of the House to what had been the practical t i ; di' Protestant, saying to the turnkey, at the conclusion of one of the recent improvements in prison discipline. In 1 6 1 . 70 I , these controversial discourses, oDo ask the chaplain to number of commitments for trial amounted to -27,731, el i ' es esti preach that sermon over again, for it makes our Roman Ca- 1840 they amounted to 37, 18 7; so that , although the:elsor tholic fellow-prisoners as mad as blazes."—( Hear, hear, and been an increase of 45 per cent. upon the period of te ,t 0 1 a laugh.) Now he (Mr. Duncombe) would ask if that were yet during the last five years there had been a reductle",•se/ the way to administer spiritual instruction ? And was it pos. 45 per cent. to 30 per cent. He regretted as much ,n ee f r Bible to anticipate any reformation from such bigotry and in- man could the increase of crime ; he admitted it, - net a l' iti e tolerance? The Reverend Mr. M'Carthy, who made those gre tted it, but at the same time he thought it was more etatements, added that no Roman Catholic priests were ad- reut than real. He attributed'this increase to several ca milted to see the prisoners in the prison in question. They had first, to the increase of population, our population having' de_ repeatedly made a request to that effect oftheeiovernor to the gaol, the last ten years increased 14 per cent ; in the next P. t` to the turnkey and to the chaplain, but in only two cases had to the increased efficiency of our policees tablisholeber they succeeded ; and they were then told that they should not was beyond a doubt that there were a large . cite have had access to the prisoners, were it not that they had said of crimes which formerly were committed with g u r;it,sf: that they wanted to consult their clergyman as to their de- in consequence of the difficulty of detection, the P,lf ee e ' s fence. In his opinion no governor or chaplain should be en- of which were now frequently discovered and ern . k o s , trusted with the power whi c h h a d b ee n th us abused. There punishment, in consequence of the increased efficierskelio,e, was another subject, and it was one of a most painful nature, to police force. Those persons were now frequent l y „ eee e doe' which he wished to call the attention o f th e H oes ee_h e meant commitment followed detection, and conviction ft"', hie ',lis,' the infliction of corporal punishment upon criminal offenders. mitment, much more frequently than formerly. !,":660 °' He thought that if he could succeed in obtaining a Committee tributed to the salutary effect produced by the Inttig - sfe etii: that would be a proper subject for its inquiry. He did riot our criminal code, in consequence of which these,6 t ask the House to express an opinion as to the expediency of longer that unwillingsyss, on the pert of parties ioreietee! abolishing corporal punishment altogether; he only asked them prosecute, nor on the part of Juries to convict, for 01 0 1110, Ito institute an inquiry into the subject. He believed that felt assured that the prisoner would receive a proper l i sst most persons admitted that that was a description of pu- ment, and no more than a proper one ; and he rejotee74ler s nishment which ought never be inflicted upon adults ; salutary effect thus produced by the mitigation of o ur . S)ll 3 ° while all practical men of the highest authority were in favour code. Another alteration, which had been introdneno: of its complete abolition. Perhaps the House was not aware of years since, by his Right Hon. Friend the • Member 4 7 e A, es" the number of eases in which corporal punishment had been worth, by which one half of the expense of the eriogicul s Wel y inflicted of late years. In the year 1838 there had been 939 in all cases, defrayed out of the public purse, bad NWT_ el of these cases; in the year 1839 there had been 1,026 cases ; ded materially to increase the number of preseentiettfe_e i es 0 , and in the yea • 1640—the last year for which there had been were the reasons why there had been an 'apparent ine e t :gifer, any returns—the number of cases amounted to 1,207. It crime within the last ten years. The HMI: ' 6 74str appeared, however, that in the year 1828 there were but 222 i'had referred to the want of education -as one , I toc e , j cases of corporal punishraeat ; in 1829 there had been 336 , causes of increase of crime. No man deplored theriMon ' caves; and in 1830 there had been 3e4 cases, making for those of the great mass of the population more than he (S i t tee three years only 942 cases, which was less than the number in Graham) did. With reference to the public morals, Ti e Si , l the single year 1840. It appeared from the report of Inspector ference to the public safety, no man could be more i ttit . , Williams, that in some prisons a scourge was used similar to convinced than lie. was of the absolute necessity for o : ie e r that used in the army ; in others it was a scourge similar to sion of education among all classes of the community i . 0 41 that used in the navy ; in others, it was a simple rod ; but he any measure which it might be his duty to bring fer s ! r e tine' t had in some prisons found scourges of a very improper descripe reference to the condition of the pauper population, h „ o rte, tion. In Swaffham, where the handle of the scourge consider it his duty not to lose sight of that very 3114.00° consi , ted of whalebone , the keeper himself inflicted the subject. It would be impossible for him to follow themeetti punishment. fhe number of lashes was n o t spec i fied , bu t Hon. Gentleman into all the cases to which he hedr7„-111., the sentence was, that the person "should be whipped until H e th oug ht, t h ere f o r e , t h at i t wou ld b e mos t desiraPi tte it o his back was blooded." No medical man was in attendance. he should, with the permission of the House , point l's,eo Now with regard to that case at Salford, where an individual general course, both of the Legislature and the Execnt' sof et l be had been taker , out of his bed and lashed. On June 2 d , he was vernment, upon that important subject. He wodideeeetr taken out of his d and his sentence carried into effect, pre- tempt t o sa y th a t some abu s es had not taken place, as , I t T e etsii vious to his discharge the next morning. Could is. be right to out by the Honourable Gentleman ; bat he was quite. 11t' f keep a prisoner thus in suspense ? Instead of going to bed re- that those abuses were in course of gradual diminut ion i f sl l° ? joicing in the expectation of being released on the following effective c hecks were now applied to them ; and d o ' morning, he thinks only of the punishment he is to undergo L e gi s l a t u r e would but steadily adhere to the coUrSO i pie I previous to quitting his place of confinement. Could he leave withi n the last six or seven years of progressive legitoil the prison with any other feeling but revenge ? If h e (M r . coup l e d w i t h t h e constan t c h ec k o f the executive rintnitifsj Duncombe ) w ere In take the opinions of those who were deeply they would arrive at the most desirable result; a n u and well acquainted with th ese ma tt ers , he s h ou ld take the opi- uniformity of system, and a really effective and well e, nion of the Chaplain of the Devizes House of Correction, as de- discipline. He should observe that the curet to • _.,,0r livered in his report to - the Chairman of the Quarter Sessions. Hon. Gentleman had referred, had taken place two Yr'4,lol In that report he commenced by saying that hot trusted he should and were cases referred to in the fourth Report of 11 not be considered out of order, or as going beyond his duty, inspectors. But abuses had since been of mach less 1); when he stated his belief that the punishment awarded to pri-• occurrence, in consequence of the superintendence_ et_, soners previous to their discharge from confinement wee prison inspectors, and the constant vigilance of the Se eg li most essentially bad ; during the prisoner's confine- of State for the Home Department. He did not lit "WO, ment, he might perhaps have been made aware of that statement, mean to take any credit to himself ii iiet the sin and folly of his former course, and his heart been but a short time in office, and he .5 11 _, 1 , 14 5 0 fr0 might have been softened; but previous to his leaving the that the inquiry he had made into the matter only tau F" t prison, h•s flesh must he torn and lacerated by the lash. The that upon the present subject he had nothing to do but L ifer report went onto state that the writer had many times noticed to adhere to the line taken by his predecessors.-" ( etto°, the countenances of the people to be cast down and dejected hear.) In September last, immediately after he lor„,e,',', for some days previous to their dismissal, and all his efforts to into office, the sixth annual Report of the Prisons' bl' t r e ,sfi e r , o recal them to a conviction of their duties had been ineffectual, had been published. The Hon. Gentleman oppe" 'e =ve • and the man leaves the prison is degraded and a hardened sin- Member for Lambeth, who had taken much interest e ,A nor. The report concluded by expressing the greatest horror subject, had called upon him on that occasion, and poin;is ot , at all corporal punishmenti. There was only more instance some improvements in the manner of dealing with be fi a r w ith which he should trouble the House on this part ports of the inspectors; and upon the suggestions o f t r? of his address. It took place in the gaol of Lan. Gentleman he ( Sir J. Graham) had acted . The 0 caster, for insubordination, and breach of prison discipline. were very voluminous; and he had called upon the in•ieete..o The case was as follows :—The prisoner objected to his hod, to subdivide their report into three parts ; first , theYe Jere and called on the gaoler to send for one of the Visiting Magis- point out any matters to which the Secretary of Stet we re v e trates. This the gaoler did not do, and paid no attention to devote his particular attention ; next, they 0 1 9 his complaint; the prisoner said he would not be locked up indicate any . matters within his control, upon,o o , 4 t unless his food was improved, or a Visiting Magistrate was sent in their opinion, he ought to remonstrate r", fv,: e t for; great confusion took place in the prison, in consequence with the Magistrates; and thirdly , they were rieof of which the Visiting Magistrate arrived the next day ; the out any matters which, in their opinion requiro.sfee gaoler reported the case of the prisoner, and he was sentenced legislative interference. They had at once, with gte e lt.A t ie to receive twelve dozen lashes on his bare back. Then came and promptitude, acted upon these suggestions. He,esseed that account of the punishment. He was punished in the in- wards written to the Magistrates, anti p ointed out to u r el ief et snecting-room, in the presence of all the prisoners of the ward. statements of the Inspectors ; the Magistrates tun" eie t 0 0 ' Previous to the day fixed for the punishment the chaplain had large and free admission of several irregularitiei, 4 r et i e been conversing with the, prisoners, requesting them to case was there a refusal, on their part, to adopt t'' s aint act with propriety during the ceremony of which they mendation suggested to them. They stated, hoe m oo s were about to be the painful spectators. When the they were unable to carry out at once ail that was ti ,pf i o r culprit was brought forth, and the prisoners ranged them upon the subject of prison discipline. A very ! die t, round the room, the most perfect order and tran. portion of the improvement in discipline rested upon hes si i t quillity prevailed, every eye was intently fixed upon the tion of the separate system of confinement. Now, ye Ili f e ' s ti unfortunate culprit, and tears were observed to course down Gentleman opposite appeared, in a good deal of 'wit ttir e st the cheeks of many of the beholders. It was said that such said, to have confounded the separate system with tiL e ol f' - / punishment was inflicted for the benefit of the Crown pri- system. The solitary system was no doubt open Le 7 0 ,eied soners, but he would ask whether such scenes were to be per.. abuses, and required the utmost discretion in its s oli lo t 0 milted, or whether they were likely to be causes of reforma- (Hear, hear.) He agreed with the Hon. Gentlennictl i oi Lion?--( Hear, hear. ) He had a return from Warwickshire of solitary system, if pushed to excess, coupling le* eie‘te persons confined in the Houses of Correction there, from the close confinement, might operate most prejudicial i.' 00 01; 0 1 age of twenty years and upwards, and from the Ist of Fe- dangerously. upon many temperaments ; and he 1 /1,1,00 1 ,1,e bruary, 1840, to the Ist of February, 1842. By that retu rn pared to vindicate its adoption by a square rule, r , t o he found seven persons were flogged in Warwick Ca s tl e , fi ve re f erenc e t o particular subjects ; and he was sure tir t df in Warwick gaol, of whom four bad been sentenced by a Re- gislature had not considered the matter in su_e'la 10 0 ,, d e verend Gentleman. He would ask if it were right that a The Legislature had decided that in no case shu, n „ f asnot single Magistrate, and he a minister of the Gospel, should have confinement be inflicted fur more than one triont7;tete the power to order such punishment ? If a Committee were and that the same person should not be subjecte u v i eg: e it appointed he would like that that gentleman should be exa- more than three months in the space of a year. „ o at h , mined as to the motives that induced him to award such punish- Gentleman had stated that at Ipswieh the surgeon 00 ; . "vd! ment.—( Hear, hear.) No doubt he had reasons, and he might visited parties undergoing the punishment in tines ; . , !i idfV convince him (Mr. D.) of the utility of corporal punish- that was clearly a violation of the law at which he l v ijda O. ment ; but until he heard such reasons he would consider Graham) could not but feel surprised. The law Pr ot iii e s , that so brutalising a system should be abolished.—( Hear.) where solitary confinement was inflicted, the g0ve;04,!,,,a He now begged to refer to, the principle of solitary confine- chaplain should visit the prisoner once a day . 00 d , ''',, separate epo-fy ment, and he found that system recommended by two of the about to point nut the difference between Inspectors, and condemned by the third. It was recommended and the solitary system. He held in his hand all A t iew tret' ee t, by Inspectors Crawford and Russell, and condemned by Mr. circular letter, written by . the Noble Lord, the 0 0, Williams, and he ( Mr. Duncombe ) thought that, however London, in which the distinction between the two p ~,, 0 13 letter be , se e' , well it might look, the system of solitary confinement was one was plainly and clearly pointed out ;of that t ca re feli, ' that wouldnot be acceptable to the people of this country.— read one or two sentences. It stated that " great et Irttedil, (Hear, hear.) There was a model prison in the Milbank Pe- ,be taken when the system was put into operatL n eat , gen it:, netentiary for the purpose of carrying out the principle of soli- I found separate with solitary imprisonment. It d!, tary confinement, but the result was, that they were obliged to I understood that solitary imprisonment implieden _ an Is tr , relax the regulations, in consequence of eight persons being , gloomy and narrow cell, without any oecupa "' l e ci ment: ° !, ell attacked with insanity. That model was erected upon the 'of bread and water only. ' Separate impriso loge , 1 ,.,, principle of that which existed in Philadelphia, in the United other hand, implied confinement in a _ ;th onot s esti; States ; but the Report of the Commission instituted by the lighted, well warmed, and well ventilated cell, 7'_ n athe ~gi, Legislature of Lower Canada in 1836, to investiate the diffe- religious instruction, and regular employmen t 's! er eet;ier, rent systems in operation there, decided against the system visits of the chaplain." Now, it was necessary "' elic it el i tA pursued in Philadelphia. The Hon. Gentleman then quoted rate cells in the different prisons, in order to carry ` e f o ra t ios: the opinion of Dr. Parsons, who stated that, though in many into operation ; and the Magistrates wished h t estee V; of the cases the prisoners might be predisposed to insanity, yet had incurred such an expense they should have s. l ' A.O IA the cases were too numerous to justify him in saying that all experience of the operation of these systems. L e e n'es who were attacked had been predisposed to it. The Hon. had been appointed by the Noble Lord. oa _, eo: 00 1 Gentleman then referred to the testimony of Captain Hall for London to superintend the erection 1 " the ite' against the system of solitary confinement. He trusted that any kind in the different gaols lit of his ore her Majesty's Government, before they decided on such a He gave them a plan gratuitously , the r ein •