The Sun. — London, England, 1854-02-11 00:00:00

or two to offer. The one related to the question of bribery; and he thought he understood the noble lord to say, that if a sitting member was deprived of his seat in conse quence of bribery, by himself or agents, the candi date opposed to him, if he had two-thirds of the votes given for the sitting member, was to have the seat. He doubted whether that could be called an entirely constitutional pro posal, because he considered the fact of a sitting member losing his seat for bribery was no proof whatever of a candi datufas opposed him having the majority of the votes of thetilMors. He feared it would be extremely difficult to say that because A had been unseated for bribery, B therefore had a majority of the votes of the electors. But he thought the greatest difficulty would be found in the clause which attempted to define undue influence." Why, they all knew that a look or a frown was sufficient to inti midate some voters. He contended it was utterly impos sible to define what was called "undue influence," and espe cially by a clause in an act of Parliament. He thought that part of the bills would lead to litigation of a very disagree able character, and not to any very successful result. On the question of undue influence or intimidation, he would refer the house to the opinion of the right hon. ge ntleman the member for Edinburgh (M r . M acau l a y), w h o had la id it down that it wa s i m p oss ibl e t o fi n d any s t a t u t or y reme dy med 7: for that evil, and th a t th e y cou ld on l y h ope t o g et ridof by adopting the ballot. (Cheers.) He would also with confidence refer the noble lord to the opinion on that sub ject of his right hon. colleague in the Cabinet, the member for Southwark (Si r W. M o l eswor th). He w how ever, to find that th e y were this session to have as glad, - an effort made to put down th e offence of bribery. The hon. and learned gentleman the member for Eas t Suffolk, who re presented him (Mr. M. Gib son ) in that house—(a_ laugh )— since he had a resid ence i n th a t county, had given no tice of his intention to bring forward a similar measure ; and, with the great legal knowledge of the hon. and learned member, he (Mr. M. Gibson) had nodbttdanhvehouse woaludt proceed in this ma tt er w ith cons id erable a he had a very s t rong b e lief that the sole remedy for all th e three offences of bribery, treating, and intimidation w as to be found in secret voting. (Hear.) Sir F. KELLY thanked the noble lord for havi ng t a k en up the subject of bribery and corruption. He ass ure d th e noble lord that he would receive every possible assistance from his (Sir F. Kelly's) friends, to carry ou t a measure calculated to put a stop to the evils described by the noble lord. He agreed with him that the system of imposing penalties had failed of its effect. What they ought to do was to facilitate the means by which bribery could be easily detected, and this would deter parties from being guilty of it. He conceived it would be a most unconstitu tional m atter to give to an election committee the power o f sa ying that persons who had only two-thirds of the voters had been duly elected. (Hear, hear.) He heard with great satisfaction the noble lord's statement of his in tention to give to the election committee assessors. It would simplify the proceeding before such committee, and give to their decisions that which did not attach to them —uniformity. (Hear.) Colonel SIBTHORp considered that this movement in reference to bribery was nothing more than an effort to screen the Ministers of the Crown from the consequences of their conduct in reference to Eastern affairs. Bribery —why, the very Treasury stinks of it. (Laughter.) He would tell the Treasury Bench that he had exercised bene volence in the course of the last year, and he would do so again next year, in spite of the Treasury Bench or that house. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) H e re p u di a t e d any thing like undue influence. The right hon. member for Manchester said that the only way to get rid of undue in fluence was the ballot. Oh, the ballot ! why, it was the most contemptible—the most un-English mode of proceed ing that could be adopted. He looked upon the introduc tion of this measure as a sort of political subterfuge on the part of Ministers. (A laugh.) Mr. HUME thought that the house and the country were indebted to any man who proposed measures for putting down bribery at elections, because the value of that house depended on the conviction entertained by the public that it represented the honest sentiments of the community at large. (Hear) Ho believed that the bribery which had recently taken place, and the exposures of that bribery which had been made, convinced many people that the time had come when some remedy for the evil should be de vised. There were two points which had been overlooked by the noble lord—the first was the punishment of agents convicted of bribery, and, secondly, the punishment of those who were proved to have been bribed. Candidates might often shelter themselves under the conduct of their agents, and until the agents were punished by suspension for ever the enormity of bribery would not be corrected. In the case of the bribed, it would be well if a tribunal having summary jurisdiction were appointed, with power to disqualify those proved guilty of bribery for 10 or 12 years. (Hear, hear.) His own opinion was that the only remedy for putting down bribery would be found to be the ballot. The noble lord would decidedly give a crowning triumph to his previous career by introducing the ballot— at least permitting it to be exercised by any constituency, two-thirds of whom should prefer that mode of polling their votes. (Hear, hear.) Mr. PACKE approved of the idea of giving assessors to the Parliamentary committees in future. He wished to call attention to the practice of treating, and to suggest a remedy for that evil. The elections at present occupied two days—the day of nomination, and the day of polling, on which days riot and drunkenness widely prevailed. It would certainly be a great improvement if the public houses in the locality where the election took place were compelled to remain closed on those two days—(laughter) —as by these means much immorality would be effectually prevented. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Mr. H. BERKELEY was glad to see the noble lord pro gressing in the cause of reform, though he should regret at the same time that his pace was so tardy. The noble lord spoke of intimidation by violence ; but did he not know there were such things as intimidation of tenants by land lords, and of tradesmen by customers? The noble lord was evidently on the brink of the ballot. but was afraid to take the final step. Secrecy at the polling-booth was the only protection to the voter ; and the number of election peti tions tried last year demonstrated the necessity for the ballot. No man received money for a vote until after he bad recorded it—the great mass of evidence last year went to prove that. So that, with the protection of the ballot, no man would give moneyeither before or after, inasmuch as he would not know how the vote was recorded. The ballot was, however, a measure of time ; and the day was certain to arrive when the people of this country would stand astonished that such an act of justice should have been so long denied them. (Hear, hear.) Mr. PHINN said that treating should he placed on the same footing as bribery. He thought that good would be done by the withholding the publication of the poll book for some time after the election. The preliminary com mittee would act as an impediment to justice. He asked that the compromising of election petitions should be pre vented, and that a public prosecutor should be appointed. And he also advocated inquiry on the spot, instead of bring ing witnesses to London. Mr. MILES thought that in any measure which the house might adopt, provision should be made to check the scandalous intimidation which, at the last election, had prevailed in Clare and in other parts of Ireland, and which had been a disgrace to that country. He thought the clause proposed by the noble lord would not touch spiri tual intimidation. (Hear, hear.) If they were to have assessors to guide the decisions of the election committees, they should at least be men of such standing as would con vince the country that their decisions were not influenced by party feelings. Mr. RICH would also suggest to the noble lord that the assessors should possess higher legal attainments than bar risters of ten years' standing did, and the number of ten might be reduced to three or four who would form a corps of aid to Parliament on private bills and other matters. Mr. WARNER would regret if the house could not confer a permanent jurisdiction in election matters on some older body than a committee of the house, for be thought everything should give way before the extreme importance of an investigation on the spot. He hoped that if assessors were appointed to advise committees of the house, they would be men of the highest legal standing. He thought, however, that intimidation would never be successfully put down unless there were vote by ballot, and that the publication of the state of the poll in the middle of the day was one great source of bribery. He thought a measure might be introduced by which votes might be taken at the residences of the voters, or they might get a stamped form from the relieving officer, which they might fill up, and send by post as a record of their vote. Mr. R. PFITLLIMORE congratulated the noble lord on having brought forward a bill, with an object which every lover of truth and honour must applaud. He, however, thought there were some points of difficulty in the pro posed measure. He agreed with the hon. member for Bath (Mr. Phinn) that, considering there were members of the house most eminent in the legal profession, they would answer the purpose intended by the noble lord far better than a tribunal of assessors. He thought also the noble lord should introduce into his measure a clause, with the view of calling on every member taking his seat in that house, to declare on his honour that no bribers' had to his knowledge taken place during his election. (H ear. ) Mr BALL said the count r y would never be perfectly satisfied with the integrity of the house until a candid de claration was required from every member, that he had not spent one shilling, directly or indirectly, in bribery or treating. With respect to the suggestion of the hon. member for Bath, he would carry it further. He thought as they bad so many legalgentlemen in the house, it would not be a bad plan to make useof them. They all knew in election petitions how the time of the committee was oc cupied by long speeches, and the large sums that had to be paid in the shape of retainers, fees, refreshers, and such like. Now, he thought if the legal gentlemen in the house were to conduct the cases before the committees, each taking the cases belonging to their own party, the business would be done a great deal better and a great deal cheaper at the same time. (Laughter.) Sir B. HALL tendered his thanks for the bills, but thought Lord J. Russell had been too lenient as regarded agents. Adverting to the country attorneys who mixed themselves up in elections, he suggested a clause, that if they were caught tripping they should b e a t once struck off 44 0 rolls. He was strongly opposed to the assessors being members of that house. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE expressed his opinion that under no circumstances ought a petition, once presented, to be allowed to be withdrawn, and that the recognisance sys tem ott i t to be amended. He wished the lawyers were ot to the su l e t bie i cei as they bothered the members and mysti fied Sir J. Tito L t o . r ,, .c.e, was also an advocate for introduc ing the prelirni mu7 measure in a much more stringent form. Sir J. WALMSLPY thought the measures were a step in the right direction t l e i , ut he recommended that the punishment of bribing v.raneksushould be made easy and in- expens i ve , through the ;i . ii la o t f the county courts. Mr. NAPIER considered y to the moral education of the people was the effectual w suppress election mal practices, but he admitted trea t thisl;l was likely to do good. He urged that protection• o'lght to be granted against the intimidation practised in Ireland. -anted After some observations by ai r. A Lcoox and Mr. 11. BENT INCK, Mr. H. DRUMMOND said it was tree that the Ati tion against his hon. friend the member for East, Surrey was groundless, but his hon. friend had forgotten to how it came to be abandoned. His hon. friend's s tate porters had got up a counter petition against hi roseu, s a u T t i for the purpose of the other being withdrawn. (A laugh.) He believed the real remedy for the evils of the existing system was the revival of the annual Parliaments—whicli used to be the system until the Whigs came in with their Septennial Act. (Laughter.) Mr. J. O'CONNELL agreed with the right hon. a n d learned member for Dublin University, that it was neces sary to protect Irish voters against intimidation, but it was the intimidation of their landlords. He was persuaded that the only true remedy against corruption and intimi dation was the ballot ; and that all this patchwork legislation, session after session, would prove utterly in effectual. Mr. L. KING doubted the wisdom of requiring deposit of the thousand potmds for which the razognisances were sow required. It might prevent the presentation of peti- tions; for not every one worth a thousand pounds could deposit it any time. Mr. T. KENNEDY said a few words in favour of the ballot. Lord J. RUSSELL said his bill comprised provisions as to petitions and agents. And it was provided that every candidate should have only one authorised agent, and be responsible for no other. (Hear.) Leave was given to bring in the bill. THE LA W OF SETTLEMENT. Mr. BAINES, in rising to move for leave to bring in a bill to amend the laws relating to the settlement, removal, and the chargeability of the poor in England and Wales, said he hoped the house would allow him very respectfully to request their indulgence while he endeavoured to bring before them, with as much simplicity and brevity as pos sible, a subject of great difficulty and perplexity, and cer tainly of great importance. (Hear.) He believed that it was a subject important to all classes—to those engaged in commerce and agriculture, to employers as well as to la bourers, and above all to that class which, in the situation he had the honour to hold, he considered himself the pecu liar advocate in that house—the destitute poor. (Hear.) Within the last ten years a very unusual degree of public attention has been bestowed on that subject, and within that time he might say with truth, that a greater amount of accurate information with respect to it had been obtained than at any former time. (Hear, hear.) In the years 1844, 1845. and 1846, earnest discussions took place in that house, and in the year 1847 a committee was appointed to investigate the whole subject of the law of settlement and removal. That committee con sisted of gentlemen admirably qualified to conduct such inquiries; and, inasmuch as he should have to lay some stress on their recommendations, the house would pardon him if he stated the names. Mr. Charles Buller was the chairman, and the other members were the present First Lord of the Admiralty (Sir James Graham), Sir George Grey, Mr. Henley, Mr. W. Miles, Mr. Bankes, Lord Harry Vane, Mr. Evelyn Denison, Mr. George Poulett Scrope, Mr. C. Villiers, Mr. Aldam, Mr. Bodkin, Mr. Duncombe, Mr. Round, and Mr. Borthwick. They investigated the subject most fully, and they had the advantage of examin ing witnesses from all parts of the country, and particu larly persons who were conversant with the administration of the poor-laws. In the year 1848 Mr. Charles Buller, who in the meantime had become President of the Poor law Board, in order to obtain still further light on this subject, determined to send out into different parts of the country eight gentlemen, all duly qualified to conduct such an inquiry with efficiency, to inquire into the law of settlement and removal in fourteen counties of the country, chiefly agricultural. They did inquire very minutely and elaborately, and reports were presented and laid on the table of the house, and afterwards distributed among the members, full of important evidence as to the working of the law, and peculiarly valuable, as especial pains had been taken to obtain information from those who were practically acquainted with the administration of the existing law. When these reports, parliamentary and official, had been all laid before this house, an opinion was, he thought, very naturally expressed in various quarters, that inasmuch as all the information that could be hoped for was obtained, it became the duty of the Government, difficult and complicated as the subject was, to grapple with it, and do their best to arrive at some improvement of the existing law ' • for all agreed on this, p er h a p s th e only point on which they were agreed, that nothing could be worse or more indefensible than the existing law. (Cheers.) Inquiries were made of the Government from time to time as to their intentions to originate such a mea sure, and last session, it would be remembered, notices of motion were given on both sides of the house—one by the hon. member for Berkshire, and the other by the hon. member for Stafford—of resolutions proposing to affirm this proposition, that the law of settlement and removal ought to be abolished, and the area of chargeability en larged. In the other house of Parliament, Lord Berners actually introduced a bill affirming that principle ; and it was only on a distinct pledge being given by the Govern ment, that they would consider the subject with a view to introducing some measure this session, that the bill was withdrawn. It was in redemption of that pledge that he had now the honour to stand before them to explain as simply and as shortly as he could the bill which the Govern ment thought fit to submit to Parliament. He was quite sure of this, that he had the honour of speaking in the presence of a great number of gentlemen whom it would be perfectly vain in him to endeavour to instruct in any way as to the law of settlement. Very much to the ad vantage of the country they had themselves taken an active part in the administration of that law. But there were other gentlemen who had not perhaps paid the same atten tion to the subject, and there were many out of doors who seemed to him to entertain very erroneous opinions with respect to it. He should, therefore, very shortly, and avoiding everything like tech n i ca lity, s t a t e w h a t h e con ceived to be the substance of the present law of settlement and removal, and the manner in which it operated. It was well known that the area of chargeability under our law for the support of the poor was a parish—not the parish even in the ecclesiastical sense of the term, for under the poor law, "parish" was used to designate every place maintaining poor. There were different divisions, in dif ferent parts of the country, having different names, but he was speaking now of "parish" under the poor law. Of such parishes there were no fewer than 14,614. Those dis tricts varied infinitely in size and population. For in stance, in the county of Durham there was a parish of 53,000 acres, and in the adjoining coun ty o f Northumber land a pa r i s h of five acres. With regard to population, there were many parishes extremely populous, and there were other parishes the populations of which were very small indeed. There were no fewer than 7,000 parishes the population of which were less than 300 each, and very nearly 800 parishes the population of which were less than 50 each. These were facts which were v_ry material with regard to the inquiry into which the house was now enter ing. (Hear, hear.) It was well known that the present law of settlement and removal originated with a statute of the fourteenth year of Charles 11., in 1662, the effect of which, coupled with subsequent acts of Parliament, was this, tnat if a person became destitute in any parish in this country, not that of his legal settlement, upon be coming chargeable he was liable to be removed by warrant of justices —by force, if necessary—to the place of his legal settlement. A settlement, as hon. gentlemen were aware, had been acquired in a variety of ways—by serving an office, by apprenticeship, by hiring for service, by renting a tenement, and otherwise ; and the effect of the law of Charles, coupled with other statutes, was this —that if a person became destitute in any parish but that of his legal settlement, he, on becoming chargeable, was liable to be rem ove d by th e warrant of justices, and by force if necessary, to the parish of his legal settlement. That was the principle of the law. Many people were under a misapprehension upon this subject; they thought settlement conferred a right to relief. That was a ; by the law of England destitution conferred the right to relief. (Hear, hear.) If a person who had no settlement—a foreigner for instance— was destitute in a parish, he must be relieved there. So with regard to a very large class of persons who had no settlement, or whose settlement could not be ascertained, they must be relieved where they became destitute. If a person who had a settlement became destitute in the parish of his settlement, then the removal did not attach as a condition of relief ; but, if he became destitute in any other parish, the relief operated as a penalty upon him, because it necessit a t e d hi s remova l t o th e p l ace of his legal settlement. Such a man was, therefore, in a worse position than the destitute foreigner, or a person whose settlement was not known. The latter might be relieved when he became destitute, and as long as he continued so, while a man who h a d a se ttl emen t a t the other extremi ty of the country, if ho received a single farthing, or a single loaf of bread, as relief from the over seer, was liable to be removed by a justice's warrant to his I,gal settlement as the condition of that relief. There was, however, a further consequen ce o f thi s l aw . If th e man who had been removed, in the case he had just put, to the other end of the country, ventured forth again from the parish of his settlement, and came to the place from which he had been removed, and there by any accident—such as the stagnation of trade, became destitute again, he, as the law stood a t thi s moment, was liable to be treated' under the Vagrant Act as a vagrant, and might be sent to gaol and kept to hard labour as an idle and disorderly person. This was , he believ e d, a correc t an d compendious view of the law f settlement as it stood at present. (Hear, hear.) He hail now to call the attention of the house to some of the effects of this state of things. His belief, after looking most carefully and anxiously into the subject, was, that there was no one class of the community which was not prejudiced to a greater or less extent by the existing law. With the permission of the house he would draw their attention to its effect upon that most important relation of all—the relation between the employer and the labourer. By the operation of the present law of settlement, a great many labourers were kept in their own parishes, instead of going to other parishes where they would be able to obtain remunerative work. Cases frequently happened which he would illustrate by a supposition which, he had no doubt, had been exemplified within the knowledge of many hon. gentlemen. A farmer was in want of a labourer; two men presented themselves to him ; one of them was an idle, worthless, slovenly labourer, but a settl.ed inhabitant of the farmer's parish; the other was an industrious, sober, skilful man, a non-settled inhabitantof the parish. Now, what were they to think of a state of the law which actually made the farmer take the worthless labourer and reject the good one? (Hear.) Yet t'iat was the case. The farmer reasoned with himself in this manner :—" This idle, worthless man will do some work, to be sure ; he is settled in my parish ; if he goes into the workh ouse I s h a ll h ave t o ma i n t a i n hi m and his wife and family ; therefore, the best thing I can do will be to give him some kind of job out of the workhouse, and put up with him instead of taking the more skilful man." Now, this system operated, in the first place, to give the farmer an inferior kind of labour. As this was the case in thousands of parishes, what an effect it must have upon the productive agricultural industry of the country ! The system must, also, have a most pernicious effect in the way of example upon the character of the labourer. What could they think of a system of law which taught the idle and unskilful labourer to rely upon the ac cident of being settled in a parish instead of upon his sobriety and skill, and which discouraged these charac teristics in the man who possessed them? When theyremem bered that these cases might be numbered by hundreds and by thousands, he left the house to imagine what the aggre gate effect must be upon the productive industry of the country and the character of the labourers. Under such a system neither capital nor labour in this country could be said to meet with its just return. He had seen peti tions presented to that house from the farming districts, especially since the repeal of the corn laws, complaining of the hardship that, while farmers were exposed to unre stricted competition with respect to the commodity in which they dealt, they should not have the advantage of free trade in labour. He thought their complaint was most reasonable, and that it behoved the Legislature to consider how the griev a n ce m i g ht b e reme di e d. The only commodity the labourer possessed was his labour; and could it be said that he enjoyed free trade when. he could not take that labour to the best market, but was obliged to remain in his own parish ? He (Mr. Baines) was not sure that he had stated the strongest part of the case with regard to the labourer, but what he had stated would be verified' by the observation and expe rience of many honourable gentlemen. (Hear, hear.) The present law, however, operated most injuri ously with regard to the residences of the labourers. He would show the house how the law of settlement gave a direct interest to prevent residences for labourers being erected in parishes where, by the combination of a few landlords, such erection could be prevented. Nearly every ono of the present modes of creating a settlement required a residence of a certain duration in the parish; by pre venting, therefore, the residence of a labourer in a parish, you prevented the chance of his becoming settled there; and covenants were accordingly not unusually inserted in leases that the lessee should not build, or permit to be built, any labourers' cottages on his farm. (Hear.) There was actually a case on the books wherein a farmer had had an action brought against him by the parish for having made new parishioners," that was to say, for having hired two farm servants for a year, and so created two pos sible additional claimants on the rates. (Hear.) There were a great many parishes in the country called close parishes, by which very expressive designation was indi cated parishes, w , who, by combination among them- there was but one landlord, or, THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 11, 1854. selves, could effectually prevent the erection of labourers' cottages in the parish, and where cottages already existed suffered these to fall into decay, so as, afters time, to have no labourers whatever resident in theparish. The result of this was, of course, that the labourers who worked in the parish had to reside elsewhere, an injustice and hardship to which the present law of settlement gave every encour agement. (Hear.) The evidence before the committee of 1847, and before the commission of 1843, showed more cases in which, owing to this policy, labourers had to walk three or four miles to their work in the morning, and three or four miles home from their work in the evening. (Hear.) The house must see at once how severely the farmers' in terest suffered by this state of things in the depreciation of labour. It was occasioned by the extra toil to which the labourer was so needlessly and cruelly exposed. (Hear.) Nor was the additional toil undergone by the labourer the only suffering to which the law of settlement exposed him ; for, compelled to take up his abode in the " open" parishes, he was placed there amid an overcrowded population, and, with his family, exposed to all the manifold evils and wretchedness incident to that condition of over crowding. This part of the subject called for the most se rious consideration of the house. He would not then dwell upon the gross frauds which the system permitted and en couraged; his attention was most especially applied, on the present occasion, to the severe hardships to which the labouring population was so needlessly exposed by the ex isting law. With the permission of the house, he would read a passage on this subject fr om th e re p or t one of the commissioners of 1848, a gentleman now distinguished as one of the most able and intelligent of the metropolitan police magistrates—Mr. A'Beckett :-- " It is, however, as to their command of their places of re sidence, and in the comfort and condition of themselves and their families, that the labouring classes suffer most severely from the operation of the law of settlement and removal of the poor. It is almost impossible to imagine the misery, dirt, degradation, and consequent immorality in which a large por tion of the labouring classes of this country are at the present moment living. If it can be shown, as I believe it can, that much of this moral and physical abasement is caused by the operation of the existing law of settlement and poor removal, the necessity for an immediate alteration of the law will be admitted on all hands. In almost every union where the course of my inquiry has taken me, I have found some one or more densely populated parishes in the neighbourhood of others very thinly inhabited by labourers, and in some in stances having scarcely any cottages at all. In the former the dwellings are for the most part wretched, damp, unwhole some, inconvenient, excessively high-rented, and crowded with inmates to such an extent as to render it impossible that health or comfort could be enjoyed, or the commonest rules of decency observed. It is the general result of my inquiries on this head that the labouring classes are to a great extent demo ralised and deprived of domestic comfort by the inducement offered to owners of property in close parishes to clear their estates of cottage habitations—an inducement for which the present law of settlement and removal of the poor must be held chiefly, if not entirely, responsible. The desire to shift the burden of parochial chargeability prevails almost co-ex tensively with the power, though I have met with some honourable exceptions, and in many cases I have heard the motive openly avowed, and the sanction of the law cited as a justification of conduct involving much unfairness, if not actual dishonesty, towards one's neighbours, and great oppression towards the labouring portion of the community." Another process to which he would solicit the attention of the house was the hardships involved in the removal itself. Let the house consider what that removal was to the un fortunate pauper, transferred—forcibly removed, if neces sary—under a justice's warrant, from, in many cases, one end of the kingdom to the other. He was removed in all probability from a place where he had formed attachments, connexions, and occupation, to a place where he was alto gether unknown—for he might be removed by reason of the birth settlement, 60 or 70 years before, of his father or his grandfather— to a place where he had no chance of the employment to which he had been accustomed all his life, and where, consequently, his own prospect w as p au p er i sm for life, and the communication of the taint of hereditary pauperism to his children. The house, perhaps, was scarcely aware of the extent to which the system of re movals was carried under the present law. According to the latest returns on the subject—those moved for by Cap tain Pelham—it appeared that in 1849 there were no fewer than 13,867 orders of removal issued inEngland and Wales, and,the average number of each family removed under these 13,867 removals not being less, certainly, than three persons, it followed that no fewer than 40,000 persons were, in this one year, rendered liable to forcible removal from the place in which they had been residing to more or less remote parts of the country. (Hear, hear.) The house could readily picture to itself the aggregate of misery thus inflicted upon the unfortunate labouring class by this very oppressive law. (Hear, hear.) Various provisions had been enacted by the Legislature for the purpose of mitigating that misery ; but the law of settlement had largely ope rated to frustrate them. An act of George 111., in 1795, had, indeed, effected one very beneficial modification of the law of Charles 11. ; for whereas by the latter persons were removable who were likely to become chargeable, the sta tute of George 111. provided that no person should be re moved who had nut actually become chargeable. But here, again, the operation of the law of settlement had frustrated, to a very material extent, the mitigation con templated, for whereas, under the former law, a person would, perhaps, have been removed within 40 days after his coming into a parish, under the later law he was allowed to remain in the parish till he had formed attach. meats, or connexions, or occupation there, and then, all at once, upon the occurrence of some matter, he would be removed under circumstances entailing far greater hard ship than would have been occasioned by removal after the briefer residence. (Hear, hear.) Let him give a still more striking illustration of the harsh working of the pre sent system :—ln 1846 the present First Lord of the Ad miralty, then Home Secretary, carried a measure of most benevolent intention, rendering persons irremovable from a parish in which they had resided for five years. Some benefit had, doubtless, accrued from this act, but it had been largely frustrated by the practical working of the system under consideration, and with what cruel effect he could not better illustrate than by an extract from a letter addressed to him in 1851 by Mr. Doyle, the able Poor Law Inspectorfor the Staffordshire and North Wales district : ‘. But all other injurious effects of the law sink into insig nificance when compared with the sufferings to the poor of which it is the source. In putting upon paper the plain matter-of-fact details of one or two out of many cases that have come under my own observation, I can hardly hope to escape the suspicion of writing under the influence of exaggerated feelings. Last year, for instance, I was instructed by your board to inquire into the circumstances connected with the removal of a man with a family of young children from a union in Lancashire to a union in North Wales. He had been in the receipt of good wages, some 255. a-week, in the parish in which he was on the eve of completing his five years' residence.' From some cause his employment suddenly ceased, and he was compelled to apply for relief. The relief was at once granted, and when accepted an order of removal was taken out. In the meantime the man again got work and was busy at his labour, earning the same wages as before, when he was literally forced away, removed to his parish, a place he did not even know, where he was utterly friendless, and where he had as little chance of finding the peculiar em ployment to which he was accustomed as if he had been cast on a desert island. One of the witnesses, in the course of the inquiry, happened to remark, speaking of this man, He was more like a madman than Anything else, he suddenly b ro k e out, in uncontrollabl e passion, Yes, and lam more' like a madman than anything else; it is en oug h t o d r i ve me mad to be dragged here with my family as I have been.' I turned to the overseer of the removing parish, who was present, and asked, What induced him to remove this mau under such circumstances ?" To prevant him from completing his five years, sir.' It would be easy to multiply cases of this sort, characterised by more or less hardship to the poor, so as to prove that one grievous general effect of the Poor Removal Act is to stimulate officers, guardians, and ratepayers to have recourse to every means in their power to induce those who aro liable to become chargeable to break their residence.' From this district, at least, complaints are constantly made to your board of such proceedings, and, while investigating cases referred to me, I have seen quite enough of the means by which the provisions of the law are evaded to know how hopeless it is to attempt to check the prevailing practice, so long as the inducement to it exists." (Hear.) Another great evil of the existing system was the enormous amount of money annually wasted in the litiga tion arising out of removals, a waste of which the rate payers had most grave cause to complain. (Hear, hear.) The law on this subject was the most complicated, the most obscure, the most unsatisfactory that had ever been de vised ; there were no fewer than 40 statutes on the subject, while, as to the adjudged cases, they were to be counted by thousands, and of such a nature as to make confusion worse confounded. Yet such was the law, and such the decisions which the poor law overseers were to construe and administer, as it were, in dealing with th e un f ortunate paupers. (Hear, hear.) Observe the ordinary course of an order for removal. A man has become chargeable on a parish, say in Middlesex; the overseer finds some reason to suppose that the man's settlement is in a remote country parish, say in Northumberland : he accordingly goes before two magistrates, and obtains an order for the pauper's re moval to his supposed parish in Northumberland, the parish in Northumberland being utterly ignorant, mean while, of the 'whole affair so far ; the order, however, when made, is transmitted to the Northumberland parish, with a notice that the Northumberland parish may, if it thinks fit, appeal within 21 days to the Middlesex Ses sions. The Northumberland parish, perhaps, conceives it more expedient to receive the pauper than to fight so formidable an opposition; if, however, it does ap peal, it comes up to the Middlesex Sessions with its counsel, attorney, and witnesses, and there contends with the Middlesex parish and its counsel, attorney, and witnesses, at an outlay on each side of not less than 501., which the loser has to pay. If the Northum berland parish loses, it has to take the pauper and to pay the 1001. besides ; if the Middlesex parish loses, it has to keep the pauper and to pay the 1001. besides ; or, in other words, a sum is squandered, under this law, upon the lawyers, more than sufficient, perhaps, to maintain the pauper and his family during the whole period of their chargeability. (Hear.) Some five years ago the matter was still worse, for then questions of removal were decided in the courts of law upon the nicest technicalities, utterly irrespective of the merits of the case. A measure, how ever, which he (Xr. Baines) had carried, had swept away these mere technicalities, and had, he believed, done some good so far. (Hear, hear.) Another measure which he had introduced, giving power to the Poor Law Board to arbitrate between parishes, had also, he believed, effected good—(hear)—but, after all, these measures were mere palliatives which had left a vast amount of litigation, wasteful expenditure, and individual misery still unre medied. One most objectionable feature of the present system was that scandal to public justice which exposed the Court of Queen's Bench tri have its time wasted, its dignity compromised, and the rarepayers' money squan dered, by being called upon to decide whether, perhaps, some stable boy had been, 50 years ago, hired by ono hiring or by another. He trusted he had now shown sufficient ground for the changes he desired. (Hear, hear.) He could say most truly that he had made a minute search into the opinions of all those persons who might fairly be considered authorities on questions of this kind, and he could not find, since the passing of the act of Charles 11., any one, whether writer or speaker of reputation, who de fended seriously the principles of our law of settlement and removal. (Hear, hear.) He found, on the other hand, authorities in his favour, whose views were deserving of the gravest attention, and to some of these he would ven ture very shortly to refer. In 1735 a committee of that House was appointed to inquire into this subject, and ho found this expression of their views, reported in the ninth volume of Hansard under that year : " March 27, 1735.—The Commons appointed a committee to consider the laws in being relating to the maintenance and settlement of the poor, and to consider what further provi sion might be necessary for their better relief and employ ment ; and the said committee, having considered and exa mined this affair with great care and attention, came to seve ral resolutions, among which is the following :—That the laws relating to the settlement of the poor, and concerning vag rants, are very difficult to be executed, and chargeable in their execution ; vexatious to the poor, and of little advan tage to the public, and ineffectual to promote the good ends for which they were intended. This resolution was reported , to the house on the 2nd of May, and on the 7th of the same month was agreed to without amendment." Fifty years afterwards Adam Smith delivered an opinion on the subject, which was perfectly familiar to the house, but which could not be too frequently cited, because it was the opinion of a great man, of a great authority on the subject—a man of peculiar sagacity, and having the great advantage in the matter of perfect impartiality— writing, as he did, in Scotland—with relation to the state of our institutions in England : "To remove a man who has committed no misdemeanour from the parish where he chooses to reside is an evident vio lation of natural liberty and justice. There is scarcely a poor man in England of 40 years of age, I will venture to say, who has not in some part of his life felt himself most cruelly op pressed by this ill-contrived law of settlements Let the same natural liberty of exercising what sp:xies of in dustry they please be restored to all his Majesty's subjects— that is, break down the exclusive privileges of corporations, and repeal the statute of apprenticeship, both which are really encroachments upon natural liberty, and add to these repeal of the law of settlements, so that a poor workman, when thrown out of employment either in one trade or in one place, may seek for it in another trade or in another place, without the fear either of a prosecution or of a removal." The house was aware that the wiser legislation of later years had removed two of these impediments to the exer cise of the industry of the labouring man—the exclusive monopoly of corporations and the statute of apprentices. It was for the house now to decide what should become of the third impediment thus denounced. (Hear, hear.) He would now quote another authority of importance —one followed with implicit deference by many members of that house, and regarded with respect by all—Mr. Pitt. On the 12th of February, 1796, Mr. Pitt thus expressed him self on this subject : " The laws of settlement prevent the workman from going to that market where he can dispose of his industry to the greatest advantage, and prevent the capitalist from employ ing the person who is qualified to procure him the best re turns for his advances. These laws have at once increased the burdens of the poor, and have drawn from the collective resources of the State to supply wants which their operation has occasioned, and to alleviate a poverty which they tend to perpetuate I conceive that to promote the free circulation of labour, and to remove the obstacles by which industry is prohibited from availing itself of its resources, would go far to remedy the evils and diminish the necessity of applying fog, relief to the poor-rates. In the course of a few years this freedom from the impolitic restraint which these laws impose will in part supply the purposes for which these laws were instituted. The advantages will be widely diffused, the wealth of the nation will be increased, and the poor man rendered not only more comfortable, but more virtuous." The last authority to which he would call the attention 'of the house was that of a resolution agreed to by a commit tee of the house which sat in the year 1847. That committee sat 50 years after Mr. Pitt had used the expressions which he had before quoted, and therefore their experience was of later date. That committee had examined persons best qualified to give all the requisite information, end after the most careful inquiry they had agreed to ;resolution— " That the law o f settlement and removal is generally pro ductive of hardship to the poor, and injurious to the working classes by impeding the free circulation of labour. That it is injurious to the employers of labour, and impedes the im provement of agriculture. That it is injurious to the rate payers, by occasioning expense in litigation and removal of paupers. That the power of removing destitute poor per sons from one parish to another in England and Wales be abolished." Mr. HENLEY.--Was the report of that committee laid on the table of the house ? Mr. BAINES believed not ; but the resolution which he had just read to the house was one which had been agreed to, and her Majesty's Government were of opinion that the resolutions of that committee were perfectly right. They had arrived at that opinion on the grounds which he had already stated to the house and upon some other grounds which he (lid not think it necessary to state. The only real remedy, they thought, for such a state of things as he had described was to take away entirely the power of com pulsory removal, and, by the first clause of the bill which he was asking permission of the house to introduce it was enacted, " That from the passing of this bill it shallnot be lawful to remove by force any poor person, upon the ground of settlement, from any parish in England or Wales." The committee which sat in 1847, having inquired into the question of forcible removal, tut ned their attention to another subject connected with the system, and that sub ject was the area of chargeability. At present the area of chargeability was the area of the parish, and he had already adverted to the great difference of size between various parishes. There was abundant evidence before that com mittee of the evil of close parishes, and the subject to which it became necessary to extend the inquiry was as to whether, if the law allowing forcible removal were abo lished, it would not be also expedient to alter the area of chargeability ; or, if this were not done, whether the poor man would be any better off than before. If any parish had no place in which a poor man could be sheltered, there was as complete an escape from any expense of maintain ing a pauper as under the present law. An evil which would necessarily result from this would be, that poor men would be caged up in buildings such as he had already de scribed, and in which, in a moral point of view, there was as much danger and evil as described by Mr. A'Beckett. To this danger, however, another might be added in regard to the sanitary effects of such a state of things. Places, such as he had described, were the favourite haunts of all pestilential diseases, with cholera itself in the van (Hear, hear.) He would now ask the house to go with him into the consideration of whether, under these cir• cumstances, it might not be desirableto make some al teration in the area of chargeability. He would read to the house the resolutions to which the committee of 1847 had come on that subject. That committee had resolved— " That the narrewnessof the area of chargeability is one great source of the evils above adverted to, as well as of others arising from the interest of landowners and rate payers in preventing the residence within that area of persons likely to become chargeable. That it is therefore desirable to extend the area of rating for the relief of the poor. That unions would form the fittest area for that purpose." He was also of opinion that unions formed the fittest area for levying rates for the relief of the poor, for, although beingthose unions differed in ex t en t , some being larger and some smaller than others, still they were nearly of the same size, and at all events there were no such monstrous dis crepancies in size as existed among the parishes. Ho con sidered that the area of the unions would be more advan tageous than a wider area. It was an area next iu degree to that of parishes, and he was of opinion that it was not desirable to extend the area too much, as it was of the ut most importance that ratepayers should look after every case of distress which came before them. (Hear, hear.) There was another thi ng t o b e cons i dered, and that was, that the unions were districts well known to the law, and in them the ratepayers were represented by the board of guardians who presided over its affairs, and all rates were levied and expended within the same district and under the superintendence of the ratepayers or their representa tives. There would therefore, he believed, be a great ad vantage in saying that chargeability should be attached to the unions. (Hear, hear.) There were, he was well aware, some well-meaning persons out of that house who would go further than he felt inclined to do, and who were in favour of a system of national rating, or even to having recourse to the consolidated fund for the relief of the poor; but he begged to state that he entertained the most insu perable objections to such a proceeding. (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") It was his firm conviction that any such scheme must inevitably lead to fraud and jobbery of the very worst description. (Hear, hear.) Such a scheme would lead to the greatest wastefulness and carelessness. (Hear, hear.) The direct effect of it would be to bring about such a degree of pauperism as no man would ever be able to get rid of. (Hear.) Such a scheme would be totally inconsistent with the present proposal, which recog nised in the fullest possible way the expediency of pre serving the system of local self-government. (Hear.) If such a course were adopted, there would be no local self government at all—honest men would become so careless that they would take no part in the manner in which relief was bestowed, and those who did concern themselves would do so with some sinister object. The sum of money raised for the relief of the distressed ought to be levied and expended in the same area. and expended under the con trol of the contributors or of their representatives. That was the safest and the justest principle for legislation upon this subject. One clause in the bill which he wished to introduce into the house established that unions should be the area of chargeability, instead of the parishes, as had hitherto been the case • and he believed that the imme diate effect of this enactment would be to get rid of close parishes, and that it would be found to act in a satisfac tory manner. Another question which required conside ration was as to the manner in which the contributions were to be raised and the sums to be levied. One plan would be to have some fixed, uniform scale ; but in the course of a few years a parish might alter most materially. There might be a parish, in which a new factory having sprung up, or mineral springs having been discovered, might in a few years have made a great variation in the value of property in the parish ; yet, according to the sup position he had started with, the scale of payment would be invariable. Another circumstance which led him to suppose that it would not be right to take the returns and according to them to establish a .fixed sum, was that to do so would be to give close parishes for the future a benefit on account of the mismanagement of them in times past. It would be, in point of fact, stereotyping injustice for all future times. Another alternative was to aim at gradually introducing a system of equal rating throughout the various districts. He would admit that there would be a hardship in introducing such a principle at once—(hear, hear, from the Opposition bench es )—b u t it was one which be thought it desirable to aim at ultimately. Her Majesty's Govern ment proposed to take 10 years to accomplish that purpose, but that was purely a matter of detail, and it was compe tent to the house to consider and deal with that topic in committee. The proposal appeared to him to be a fair one, and he therefore submitted it to the candid consideration of the house. It was not proposed to make any altera tion in the mode of rating in parishes not included in the unions which were generally of large size and under local acts, and in which the ratepayers entertained a great jealousy of their own system. There was not the slightest intention on the part of the Government to interfere with them ; in short, they would be left precisely as they were at present. He had now stated to the house an outline of the plan which he had thought it fit to introduce to their consideration, and he should regret very much if that plan should be found to infringe upon vested interests. It had been his object to form a plan which would effect the greatest possible amount of good, and which, at the same time, would inflict the least hardship upon any class ; but he would defy any man to stir a step in this matter with out interfering with some interest. (Hear, hear.) The great point in such a case was that the interference should be a maximum in point of 9uality, and at the same time justifiable in point of principle. He would repeat that, to take any course at all, would be to interfere with some existing interest, but ho must add that not to take some course would be prejudicial to all the interests of the country. He had referred to two or three topics which were really only matters of detail, and nothing would give him greater pleasure than to put himself in communication with any gentleman who might be willing to offer any suggestion on the subject. He should be happy onto receive isvuebjaeonyt.sng(Hgeosatrionh,earei.t)herninw"or his s t wi of sh th t a o t a h o o fos : rn s hk e ee. „ plish the object he had in view as efficiently as possible, and he should be delighted if he could introduce a measure which would conciliate most support, and which would least interfere with vested interests. (Hear.) He would o o f ni t y he re o pe om at in h e i r s oo ea a r n n d es m t a relu ac est tu t r h e a s t o t f h t e h h i o s u o s o e nn , fo tr i . y t , h o e employment r,wonld g o i f ve la th bo e ur m a ea n s d ur c e ap h i e had tal,an t d h? of ho t n h o e n d r e o s f ti p tu ro t e Poor, . s p i o dti s e i r n a g o. to n them a calm, candid, and dispassionate con- Mr. WALPOLE asked if the measure would extend to the removal of the Irish poor? Mr. BAINES was obliged to his right honourable friend for the question. The bill related to the removal of per sons on the ground of settlement, and it was limited to England SO Wales. It did not therefore affect the re. moval of the Irish poor, because they were removed not on on the ground of settlement, but on different grounds alto gether, and when the question came to be dealt with, the case of the Irish and the Scotch poor would have to be considered together. He concluded by moving—" That leave be given to abolish in England and Wales the com pulsory removal of the poor on the ground of settlement, and to make provision for the more equitable distribution of the charge of relief in unions." (Loud cheers.) Sir G. GRE ir said he had listened with satisfaction to the clear and able statement of Mr. Baines, and that he gave his cordial support to the principle of the bill. Mr. W. MILES wished that a more extended view of the law had been taken, and that we were not to attack the poor-law piecemeal. The bill only went to the question of settlement, but the bill would not be allowed to pass with out a full inquiry into the system. He wished for the pro duction of certain returns as indispensable to a proper con sideration of the measure. Mr. PACK, thanked the right hon. gentleman for his clear and lucid statement, and concurred in a great deal of what the right hon. gentleman said as to the hardship to the poor man of the present law of removal. He con sidered that the change in the area of rating from parishes to unions would be productive of the grossest injustice. Another point most material in his mind, was the altera tion of the area of rating; and he felt confident that in many parts of the country that alteration of the area of rating from parishes to unions would be productive of the grossest injustice. (Hear.) Land had been purchased, and was being purchased comparatively free from rates on one side of a hedge, while on the other the :and was burdened with poor, and there was consequently a considerable difference in the mchase money. Therefore it would be a gross robbery upon those persons who had been purchasing property on the understanding. that it was free from burdens, if the right hon. gentle man's bill were to saddle them with very serious. charges. Under these circumstances, he thought, if the area of rating were increased, the area of rateable property should also be increased. It was not fair that landed property , should be exclusively called on to contribute to the suste nance of the poor. All property in the country without exception should share in the expense of the maintenance of the poor. (Hear, hear.) Lord LGVAINE inquired whether the Gilbert unions and the parishes under local acts were to be exempted from the operation of the proposed bill ? He thought that if there were any part of the country where the administra tion of poor relief required amendment it was in the me tropolis, where some parishes were entirely inhabited by the rich, and others almost wholly filled with poor ; and in the latter the rate was, of course, exceedingly heavy. Mr. BAINES observed, that the Gilbert unions were not comprised within the bill. The abolition of the poor's removal would extend to all unions in England and Wales formed under the Poor Law Amendment Bill. Mr.HILDYARD said, the present was a subject of great importance, and required serious consideration. Without disrespect to the great talent and industry displayed by the right hon. gentleman, he must say that he could not altogether concur in the general favour with which the right hon. gentleman's observations appeared to have been received. He thought the right hon. gentleman had to a certain extent exaggerated the evils of the present Poor Law, and had rather described the state of things existing 20 years ago. (Hear.) The state of the country was now different from its condition at the period when the report which had been read to the house was made. That was a period of very great distress, and therefore any defects in herent in the Poor Laws exhibited themselves with great intensity. Within the last two or three years enor mous emigration and other circumstances had, happily, mitigated the evils of a surplus population. He called the right hon. gentleman's attention to a serious defect in his scheme. He understood that as soon as the present bill passed the poor would become chargeable on the spot where they resided ; and the consequences of such an enactment would be, that if a poor man died, leaving a widow and a burdensome family, immediate means would be had re course to in order to get the latter out of one union into another. This mode of dealing with the poor, namely, driving them from ono parish to another, had actually led to the law of settlement ; and he was apprehensive that the right hon. gentleman had not been able to grapple with this difficulty. He contended that gross injustice would be done to well-regulated parishes by this proposed law. Mr. KNIGHT contended that to increase the rate in a parish was in effect to reduce the value of the property, and that the measure would prove one of confiscation. From statistical data he deduced results which went to show that much error and mystification prevailed respect ing the operation of the law of settlement in close and open parishes. If the principle of equalisation was adopted, it would be impossible, he said, to stop short of a national rate. He argued that taking away the Settlement Act (which was the real Poor Law) would be a hardship to the poor. Mr. V. SMITH insisted that the law of settlement was a curse to the poor man, and as great an evil to the em ployer as to the employed, and that, although this mea sure might be injurious to some property, it would remedy a greater injustice. Sir J. TROLLOPE thought it was a defect in the mea sure that it exempted parishes under local acts and Gilbert unions. He was convinced that the house would consider the bill, not as a party measure, but as one for the benefit of the country Mr. HENLEY characterised the measure as a confis cation of a large portion of the property of the coun try, and complained of a union rating, as in some cases, where the union district was large, weakening the control of the ratepayers. As it affected the poor, if a large pecu niary burden was cast upon particular parishes, they would endeavour to recoup themselves by pulling down dwellings. Before this question was settled it ought to be known what was to be done with Ireland. He hoped that ample infor mation would be laid befcre the house in order to enable them to come to a dispassionate judgment. Sir J. SHELLEY had no good argument in favour of union rating. Lord C. MAMILTON complained of the hardship that would be inflicted upon Irish paupers in England. Sir J. PAKINGTON could not refrain from expressing his satisfaction that a subject of so much importance as that which they were engaged in discussing had been at length fairly brought under the consideration of the house. He was one of those persons who had for some years been of opinion that the law of removal had inflicted great hardships and great sufferings upon the working classes of this oonntry. He had also long been of opinion that if the present law had been abolished, the retention of the existing system of parochial rating would be attended with very considerable difficulties. A feeling of alarm had, however, sprung up in this country—a feeling which had rapidly increased within the last two years, lest any changes which might be made in the law of removal while they had the effect of doing away with some hardships, would lead to the infliction upon the labouring classes of others of a character no less severe. That alarm had been founded upon the efforts which had been made in numerous parishes of the kingdom to defeat the opera tion of the Five Years Act, by forcing parties to change their residence after a certain p er i o d, an d th us t o d prive them of the advantages which that act had been framed to confer. He understood his right hon. friend opposite to say, that although he intended to abolish the law of removal, he did not intend to touch upon the right of settlement. He (Sir J. Pakington) was of opinion that that was a most important feature in the measure, and contributed to relieve it from the grave objections to which it might otherwise have been liable. His right hon. friend also proposed to establish a union instead of a parochial rating. Now, that t was rvuadegndtsl mhehduot o ateee p alatdrhi e ihl nkon n loegftstnrh t ri e. o uobawgdwty t hejuhetnimheeharttieolr propertyispeo b i wmo j hnr rewaeaocglitnefaltnhrigaotpfutntsoooiryhuhro wouldsietono f sti bndoe t v imiecm e odo n aouro d n t. ffnei friend n uEti materially r g y. htoe propositionaffectar.)He thee ttd n ahhe i reeHr o r n ogteuwhr r oh a en: t oica i putnaneedgs and die apprehensions Op po sit(gear,e would avail himself of the information thus produced, and tat w t ih h l es i Aa a s t o t hil wthhe i eh f ar respect sheot th e wouldnah, efieotnrii upon which those apprehensions were based. of Ireland, and that he would not shrink from the difficul- Kingdom, he undoubtedly would have to encounter. Sir G. Tyler, Mr. 13 - AIES said he was gratified at the manner in which the question had been discussed. In reply to the request for ample time to consider the bill, ho should, without such an appeal, have given ample time for consi deration. On the 10th of March the subject would be again brought forward, and before that he expected a valuable report would be in the hands of members, which would throw much light on the subject. Leave was then given to bring in the bill. IMPROVEMENT OF TOWNS IN IRELAND. Lave was given to Sir J. YOUNG to bring in a bill for the improvement of towns in Ireland, and to Mr. Ross MooRE to introduce a bill on the same subject. Mr. I. BUTT moved " That the general committee of elections do appoint the select committee agreed to, to inquire into the allegations of the petition of John Patrick Somers ; and that such select committee consist of five mem bers."—Agi eed to. The house ;adjourned at twenty minutes to one o'clock, until Monday next. SPORTING NOTES. THE PROGRESS OF SPECULATION. The movements in the Turf Market during the week have been somewhat important and although at present it is difficult to determine their origin satisfactorily, yet their tendency is perceptible and significant. Those relative to the Star of Surrey and the Chester Cup are perhaps the most interesting. This horse steadily advances in popularity and his pretensions to support are daily vaunted with growing confidence. The " stable," too, in which he has been recently lo cated, and the party into whose possession he has been transferred have a powerful prestige, and this circum stance has undoubtedly produced a telling effect on the public, and will account for the increased eagerness which has within the last day or two been evinced to " get on" him at advantageous terms. At any rate, the knowledge that he is now the property of Mr. Howard, and that he is trained by " Honest John," is sufficient to render backers confident and layers wary. Still the Star of Surrey encounters violent opposition in certain well-informed quarters where the belief widely obtains that he is a confirmed " wind-sucker." Although there may be some foundation for this report, yet I am in clined to believe that the person who recently purchased him, is too good a judge, and too well-advised, to buy a horse of that description. That the Star of Surrey possesses a favourable chance of carrying of the Great Cestrian prize, I will not attempt to deny; but it is scarcely more formidable than that of many other ani mals that are as leniently handicapped, and have, per haps truer titles to support. Among the animals of his own age the undermentioned are weighted lighter : The Duchess of Loi raine colt, Bridesmaid, and Miss Sellon ; and among those "in" with him on unquestion ably good terms are Torn Sandhurst, Aldford, Black Doctor, Llanforda, Joe Miller, Cobnut, Muscovite, and Ne wminster. For the last mentioned I still retain my old fancy, a fancy that is increased by his return to his former position in the betting. Muscovite must be marked "dangerous." He is doing strong steady work for either the Chester Cup or Metropolitan Stakes, and he will prove a most formidable antagonist for whichever event he is in tended. The most important incident connected with specu lation on the Derby is the strong and steady support which Autocrat still receives. Last Thursday he was backed for little less than a thousand pounds. A heavy commission is, I understand, in the market to lay against him when his price is shortened to 3 to 1. Even this prospect, however, does not discourage his backers. A FRESH MAN. Feb. 11. LIVERPOOL SPRING MEETING, 1854. Weights for the LIVERPOOL SPRING CUP of 100 sovs. in specie, by subscription of 10 sovs. each, h ft, with 60 added ; one mile and three-quarters. 24 subs. Age st lb Colsterdale 6 8 7 Cariboo Lancashire Lass 4 8 2 Ulster 4 7 10 Dove Kilquade Missive Cleveland Cabin Boy 4 7 6 Angelo The Event 5 7 2 Light of the Harem 4 7 2 Escape Weights for the AINTREE Pi Age st lb' Eulogist 4 8 7 Lancashire Lass 4 8 2 Sir Robert a 7 12 A xwell Warwick Worcester The Tempest 5 7 6 Songster 5 7 6 Escape Age st lb Charity Helena (h b) Lurley The Speaker, by Gabbier St Clair Roebuck 3 5 8 The Medal, by Pantaloon Mrs. Humby 3 5 7 Antonia 3 5 6 The Cripple ndromache 3 5 0 ,ATE of 70 sovs. One mile. Age st lb Voucher 4 7 4 Game Tommy The Buck Lord Lieutenant 4 7 0 Rachet6e 5 6 10 The Speaker Antonia 3 5 8 Andromache 8 5 2 Daphne DONCASTER SPRING ACCEPTANCES FOR THE Age st lb Hungerford King of Trumps 5 8 1 Eulogist 4 7 13 Daniel O'Rourke 5 7 12 Ethelbert Feversham 4 7 4 The Little Fawn 6 7 2 Lerrywheut St. Michael 5 7 2 Mr. Sykes 4 7 0 Jack Leeming Dove Windsucker Alonzo Colsterdale Lord Faueonberg 4 6 12 Catherine Parr Radcliffe Hero 4 6 10 Jan ey 4 6 9 Jack the Giant Killer Needwood a 6 8 Candlewick Marchioness St. Andrew 4 6 4 MEETING.—MARCH 7. DONCASTER HANDICAP. Age st lb England's Glory 5 6 2 Helena .(h b) Vixen Light of the Ha- rem 4 5 12 Pearl Criterion Village Lass Middlesborough 3 5 7 King Alfred Caliph Baal bec Midsummer Ptolemy 3 5 5 Lady Napier 3 5 2 Blakeley Toggery Streatlam Fairy 3 5 0 Julius Agricola 3 5 0 St. Clare 3 5 0 Pauline Sister to Aphro- dite 3 4 9 Antonio 3 4 6 G.—APRIL 27 and 28. E MALTON HANDICAP. MALTON MEETII ACCEPTANCES FOR TEI Age st lb' Daniel O'Rourke Songstress 5 8 3 I _ Vindex 4 7 12 I Brat,. Lough Bawn 6 7 81 The Even, St. Michael 5 7 7 Birdtrap Win dsucker 5 7 6 T. 4 - 1 -1 Catherine Parr 4 7 4 Colsterdale 6 7 4 Tonic 6 7 3 Dove 4 7 2 Janey 4 7 0 Captain Cornish 4 6 10 Provost Marshal 4 6 9 Miss Agnes 4 6 9 St. Andrew 4 6 7. ACCEPTANCES FOR THE CONVIVIAL HANDICAP. Age st lb Age st lb Daniel O'Rourke 5 8 5 The Tempest 5 6 9 Songstress 5 8 3 The Collier 5 6 7 Vindel Catherine Parr ... 4 7 8 Patience Brocket 4 7 8 Wings of a Dove 4 6 2 Tonic 6 7 7 Light of the Harem 4 6 2 The Puritan The General Ann Eliza 4 7 0 Jetty Treffz Braxev Captain Cornish... 4 6 12 Penitent 3 4 10 Miss Agnes NOTTINGHAM SPRI ACCEPTANCES FOE THE No Age st lb Windsucker Alonzo Jack Leeming Cariboo Tickton Surveyor Tomboy a 6 10 Landscape 4 6 7 Florist Age st lb Cabin Boy 4 6 5 The Collier 5 6 4 Bracken 3 6 2 The Event 5 6 2 Bird trap 4 6 2 Twinkle 3 5 12 Queen's Own 3 5 10 King Alfred 3 5 9 The Jewess 3 5 7 Diligent Phoenix 3 5 3 Bright Phcebus 3 5 2 Jetty Treffz 3 5 0 IVlonimia 3 4 10 Penitent 3 4 7 ACCEPTANCES FOR THE Age st lb Alp a 10 7 Tomboy a 10 4 Victress a 10 0 Star of England a 10 0 Nonsuch Songster Miss West (h b) a 9 8 May-day Squire of Malton a 9 7 Beresford Fazely iG MEETING—FEB. 21. TINGHAIII SPRING HANDICAP. Age st lb Wellsbourne (h b) 5 6 7 Vixen 3 6 4 The Event 5 6 0 Old Castoff 5 6 0 Miss Goldschmidt 5 6 0 Criterion Annabel 3 5 2 Roebuck ...... lIRDLE-RACE HANDICAP. Age st lb Torn Gurney 6 9 4 Teddesley Gerald 5 9 4 President Luck's-all ..... Friendless Boy a 9 0 Blue Bonnet Bravo 6 9 0 Galileo 6 8 12 Salopian 5 8 10 Beech-nut TOWER -HILL.—It is in contemplation to form a car. riage roadway for waggons, &c., to pass over Tower hill, instead of, as at present, having to take a circuitous route. INDIA AND CHINA MAIL.—The telegraphic accounts MARSEILLES.—Advices from Marseilles mention a received yesterday from India, represent trade to have considerable decline in the price of wheat at that port, improved at Calcutta, but ne mention is made as to the and add that 50 or 60 shiploads were about to be sent state of the markets at Bombay. From Madras the to England. ST. PETE URGL—The l e tt ers f rom S t. Petersbur pureports are p ecu li ar ly d is t ress i ng. In consequence of reach to the 2d of Feb ruary . Th e fact of several ESBghr- the continued want of r a i n , there had been a f a il ure of chases of tallow having t a k en p l ace i ndicated that there the crops, and a famine thre a t ene d th e Presidency. The markets would, however, soon b e supp li e d from other are some operators w h o s till d ou b t the probability of a pl aces , b ut i n th e mean ti me several riots have taken blockade. The rate of exc h ange continued with a de- clining tendency, an d wa s l ast quoted 381 d. pl ace . Th e revenue o f th e l ocal Government would ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS.—The following mem- principal sources from whence the Treasury is supplied. bers of the college, having undergone the necessary exa- From China the advices represent little alteration to minations, were admitted licentiates in midwifery of the have taken place in the state of general affairs ; neither college at the meeting of the board of examiners on the the Imperialists nor the insurgents appear to have made Bth inst. !—Messrs. Joseph Walter Raleigh Amesbury, much progress lately. The mails byway of Marseilles will Hon. East India Company's service, Bengal, diploma of not arrive in London till Monday next. The present membership dated May 24, 1850; William Gabb Jen- o pportunity will bring much later news from the Australian kins, Aberystwith, April 15, 1852 ; James Ekin, Lon- colonies, the dates being—Sydney, Nov. 26 ; Mel don, November 5, 1852 ; John Buck Stedman, Union- bourne, Nov. 29 ; and Adelaide, Dec. 3, by way of street, Borough, March 5, 1841 ; Henry Cornelius Singapore. Thomas, Glocester-street, Pimlico, May 9, 1851 •; Tho- [ADVERTISEMENT.]—Fifty thousand Cures have been mas Dandy, Rufford, Lancashire, April 1, 1853 ; Henry effected by Du Barry's delicious Revalenta Arabica Food, Pratt, Montreal, June 24, 1853 ; John Ignatius Purcell without medicine, inconvenience, or expense (as it saves Williams, Denbigh, November 4, 1853 ; George Stop - fifty times its cost in other remedies).—"Twenty-five years ford Taylor, Sheffield, February 3, 1854. nervousness, constipation indigestion, and debility, from THE FIRES IN SOHO.—Yesterday Mr. Bedford, coroner which I had sufferedgreat misery and which no med, i for We s t m i ns t er, h eld an inquest at the Vestry-hall, St. ci gne could re move or relieve, havebeen effectually cured Anne's Chur c h, respect i ng t h e d eaths o f t h e e i g h t per- by Du Ba rr y' s F ood in a very short time. W. R. Sons who we re kill e d by the fire which took place on Reeves, Pool A n th ony, Tiverton. " " Eight years ' dys the calamit ous occurrence h ave a l rea d y appeare d , and Tuesday la s t i n Prince's-street, Soho. The particulars of pepsia, n ervousness, debility, with cramps, spasms, and nausea, for whi c h my servant h a d consulted the a d v i ce The verdict the evid ence did not jur elicitwas a that any further H. Adams, CH er facts of interest. o imany, have b een e ff ectua ll y removed b y D u B arr y's of the y , W. . . delicious food in a very short time. I shall be happy Adams, Sarah Mullins, and the other five persons died to answer any inquiries. Rev. John W. Flavel, Rid - from burning in the house 19, Prince's-street, but that there was no evidence to show how the fire originated,arm, lington Rectory, Norfolk." "Three years' excessiveand nervousness, with pains in my neck and left The jury added their opinion that better means should be adopted to secure the efficient use of the parish has been radically removed by Du Barry's . excellent ,, general debility, which rendered my life very miserable, engine. Two OF orrn CUSTOUERS.—The revenue tables for Fif ty years, indescribable agony from dyspepsia, food. Alexs. Stuart, Archdeacon of Ross, Skibbereen. 1851 show the declared value of our exports to Russia in that year to have been 1,289,704/. To Wallachia spasms, sickness at the stomach, and vom m it a t r u i l a gs,a nervousi - ies; asthma, cough, constipation, flatulency, of Jolly,testi and Moldavia, 284,348/. ; Syria and Palestine, Egypt (Mediterranean ports), 968,729/. ; the rest of 1 Wortham Ling, near Diss, Norfolk." of " l.7o s rd Stua ' r " Turkey, 1,987,011/.—making a total of 3,549,959/. 359 ' 8711 .; en removed by Du Barry's excellent food. c . menials of 50,000 cures (including those Kin Drs. Ure, Russia took of us cotton manufactures of the value of ;d e Decies, Major Genera} Thomas g 48,846/. ; cotton twist and yarn, 176,271/. ; hardwares (gratis). In canisters,6g.. King, with . full Shorland, and Harvey 5b , 11 and cutlery, 86,044/. ; lead and shot, 5 2,640/. ; iron and instructions, llb., 2s. 9d. ; 21b., 4s. , 9 lolb , 335.. The ; steel, 70,214/. ; machinery and mill work, 216,0521. ; 121 b 9 2 • super-refined, 51b., 22 . ; . ~ .. s. , ' free. Barry Du Barry and Co., silk manufactures, 7,422/. ; tin unvrrc ught, 14,1301. .; 101 b. and 121 b. carriage tin wares, 8,1671. ; woollen and worsted yarn, 217,5121.; 77, Regent-street, London ; also,. Fortnum, Magma, and woollen manufactures and hosiery, 34,9101, , dill 0 ber Majesty, Flocs y. 1 , C o ., purreyorS 1. .---_-.-.. 4 SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE.- CUSTOM HOUSE, FEB. 10. ENTERED INWARDS.—The Maria, from Seville ; queta, Denia; Jonge Renjee, Worcum ; David, Callao ; Caroline, do. ; Hoffning, Antwerp ; Elizabeth and Sara Gothenburgh ; Zante Packet Packet, Ancona ; Demerara Trinidad ; Mermaid, Messina ; John and Thomas, Leg • horn ; Eagleswing, Denia and Calpo; Jenne Albert, Bar deaux ; Wave, Medemblik. ENTERED OUTWARDS FOR LOADING.—The Yldefoniss for Bilboa ; Lord Wm. Bentinck, Valparaiso ; Gwain Maid, Corfu and Patras; Argentina, St. Thomas; Era,. Porto Rico ; Rosalie, Syra and Smyrna ; Penguin, St. Thomas ; Tulloch Castle, Port Philip ; Tiber, Melbourne. CLEARED OUTWARDS WITH CARGO.— The Jane, for Corfu, Zante, and Patras ; Jan de Witt, Payie. LIVERPOOL, FEB. 10. The Lusitania (s s), from Monte Video, off Pwllhei, put in for fuel. The Lusitania left Admiral Corry's squadron at Lisbon, Feb. 4. A vessel, bottom up, not coppered, was passed Feb. 1, by the Lnsitania. The Great Britain (s s), was to sail from Sydney, Nov. 19) and from Melbourne, De•c. 30, for Liverpool, via Cape Horn and the Falkland Islands. The E. Z , for New York, put into Belfast Lough yes• terday, with loss of sails, and making a little water. The E. Z. sailed from Liverpool Jan. 18, after putting back. The Argentina, tender to tho Liverpool and Brazil steamer, struck on a sunken reef, Jan. 21, when leaving Monte Video for 'Buenos Ayres, and is reported to have been abandoned and sold. HOLYHEAD, Feb 9.—Yesterday it blew a fresh gale from the N.W., which continued to-day. Two steam tugs hare arrived in the new harbour, ready, when the gale subsides, to render assistance to the Bona Ventura, from Savannah, on shore at Rhosnigyr ; the spars, sails, &c., cast on shore, are being saved. The Eliza, of Waterford, from Cardiff to Liverpool, with foretopmast carried away, and sails blown to pieces, is at anchor close to the rooks near Aber fraw, near Caernarvon Bay, a steam tug will go to her as. sistance as soon as the weather moderates. GLASGOW, Feb. 9. The Agnes, of Dundee, bound to Australia, with a g enera l cargo, was wrecked' on Seals kerry, one of the Orkney Isles, during a gale on the 29th January —crew saved ; portions of the wreck have come ashore. GOTHENBURG, Feb. I.—The Mary is reported to have been totally lost near Lysekill. Jan. 29 —crew saved. The Charles Jones, of Liverpool, from Leith to Valpa raiso, was totally lost, with all hands, on the 31st of January, during a hurricane from north-north-west to north-west; no trace of cargo has been observed, but portions of the hull, such as decks, lopsides, spars, &c., and a cask of wine have been found, but as no floors or timbers have been seen, it is supposed that that the wreck has not yet broken up. Some pieces of the ship's papers have been picked up, which identified the vessel. The Crescent, of Swansea, from Limerick to Glasgow , in working up from Cliff Sound to Sc a ll oway, on t h e 2d, of February, struck the ground on a bar, but was got off the same day, and is now at Scalloway, discharging cargo in a damaged state. The Dispatch (schooner), of Belfast, coal laden, got ashore on the north-east end of Lady Isle, on the night of the 3d of February. The crew were taken off by a tug from Troon, and it is feared the vessel has gone to pieces. A dismasted ship abandoned was fallen in with on the 24th January, during a heavy N.W. gale, in lat. 43 N., long. 47, by the Commonwealth, arrived in the Downs, which vessel lost during her passage, two top sails, water casks, and had bulwarks stove. The Steven Lurmann, from the Texel to Liverpool, got in contact with the Eliza Morrison, from Callao to London, and lost both anchors and chains, and is in Dover-roads, being supplied ; the latter received considerable damage. VESSELS SPOKEN WITH. The Lord Dalhousie, for Calcutta, Nov. 9, lat. 14 S, long. 87 E. The Prompt, Grangemouth to Melbourne, Jan. 3, lat. 1 N, long. 21 W. The Typhoon, from London to Bombay, Jan. 4, lat. 2 N, long. 23 W.; Hyderabad, from London to Adelaide, S.A., same day. The Ann Miln, from Leith to Port Philip, January 6, lat. 2 N., long. 22 W. The Antoinette Maria, from London to Port Philip. The America, from Cardiff, Jan. 10, lat. 7 N. long, 25 W. The Ocean Eagle, bound South, lat. 11 N., long. 29 W. The Ada, for Port Philip, Dec. 7, lat. 10 8. long. 28 W. North Star (s.), for Melbourne, same day. The Northern Light, 2 dis. pendant, (No. 9,163), steer. ing west. lat. 20 N., long. 31 W. The Flora Hastings (barque), steering to the south-west, westward of Scilly. COUNTRY MARKETS. LIVERPOOL—FEB. 10. The market this morning was thinly attended by buyers. A moderate business transpired in wheat and flour at quite as good rates as on Tuesday ; but if hollers had yielded a little in price, there were buyers of both articles. Indian corn heavy, and 6d to Is per qr. lower. Oats id to ld per bushel, and oatmeal 6d to is per load, reduction. Beans Is per qr. lower. WAKEFIELD-FEB. 10. - - --- --- The arrivals of grain reported this week are moderate. The wheat trade continues very inactive, and prices must be noted 2s per qr. lower than last week, without leading to much business. Barley is per qr. lower. Old beans in limits i demand, and new, being generally out of condi tion, are very difficult to quit, and is to 2s per qr. cheaper. Oats and shelling have respectively declined id per stone and is per load. EXETER—FEB. 10. CATTLE.—Prime beef, 10s 6d per score ; cows and calves, 9/. to 11/. ; butchers' calves, 6d to Od per lb., rearing calves 00s to 00s eac h. Sh eep, 6 d to 7d. Lamb s, Od to Od per lb. Stor e h ogs , l arge s i ze, 40s to 508 each dips, 20s to 26s ; small, 16s to 18s. Rough fat, 5d per lb. Pork carcases from 9s 6d to lOs 3d per score. CORN.—In our market wheat may be quoted from 9s Od to lOs Jd. Malting barley, 4s 9d to 5s Od ; grinding do., 42 03 to 4s 9d. Oats, 25s Od to 28s Od. Beans, 56s Od to 58s Od. Peas, 00s Od to 00s Od. FLOUR. —Fine, 60s Od to 62s Od; seconds, 58s Od to 59. Od per sack. INVERNESS.-FHB. 7. - - - - MEAL.—Oatmeal, per imp. boll 22s Od to 23s 04 ; ditto second, 00s 04 to Os Od; barleymeal, 15s Od to Os Od ; peasemeal, 15s 04 to Os 04; bran, per stone, Os 7d to Os Od ; Ist flour, per 2801 b, Ms Od to 56s 04 ; 24 ditto, 47s Od to 4Y3 04; oatmeal, best, per st. of 141 b imperial 2s 20 to 2.3 4d ; ditto second, Os Od to Os 00 ; barleymeal is 4d to is 64 ; peasemeal, is 64 to Os 04 ; Ist flour, 2s 9d cash, 3s Od credit ; 2d ditto, 2s 3d cash, 2s 7d credit. BRISTOL SUGAR--FEB, 10. The market has been rather quit this week, and but little business transacted since our s ] ast either in British plantation or foreign. Prices, however, are firmly sup ported, importers showing no disposition to relax in their pretensions. The refined market is dull, with a tendency to lower prices. COAL MARL Prices of Coal per ton at t CET.—no. 10. he close of the market : s. d. Bata's West Hartley 22 6 Huddle W. Hartley 22 6 Cragwood's Hartley 2l 0 Davison's West Hartley 22 t' Dean's Primrose 2l (. Hasting's Hartley 22 6 Elolywell ........... .....• 26 0 Howard's West Hartley Netherton 21 6 Longridge's Wst Hartley 22 6 Old Adairs 2l 0 Raveusworth Hartley 22 61 Redheugh Main 20 0 Tanfield Moor 2l 3 Tanfiehl Moor Butes 21 :II West llartley 23 0 Walker Primrose 2l 0 Ships at market... 587 s. d. West Pelew 21 6 Wylam 24 6 Wallsend, lie. Gosforth 28 0 Bell . 29 0 Belmont 28 0 Hetton 3O 0 Haswell 30 0 South Durham ~ 21 6 leambton 29 6 Plummer 29 0 IRussell's Hetton 29 6 Hunwick 2l 0 Kelloe 3O 0 lAdelaide Tees 29 6 Hetton Tees 23 0 Elgin 2l 9 I Sold 124. RAILWAY SIIARE MARKETS. LIVERPOOL, FEB. 10. STOOK EXCHANGE. —The following were the sales in the morning :—Birkenhead, Lancashire, and Cheshire (Chester and Birkenhead), 174 ; Caledonian, 261 ; East Lancashire, ; Lancashire and Yorkshire, 651 ; Midland, 634 ; Norfolk, iq ; South-Eastern and Dover, 18 19-16. The afternoon's sales were :—Caledonian, 261 # ; East Lancashire, 16# ; Lancashire and Yorkshire, 614 ; London and North-Western, 103 ; M anc h es t er, Sheffield, and Lin. colnshire, 22i ; Midland, 634 2 ; North Britisl4.B 5.16; South-Eastern and Dover, 18 7-16. MANCITTISTER, FEB. 10. STOCK EXCHANGE.--We have had a de c li n i ng market, and but a limited amount of business. it was remarkably quiet, BIRMINGHAM, FEB. 10. STOCK EXCHANGE.—There was no mat er i a l a l teration in the railwashare to-d and prices about the market same as yester day BRISTOL, FEB. 10. .—The market remains in the same ina B n T i O m c a K t eEsxtactElANGß state. R/RTZS. OF A 80N. On the 10th inst., at 24, O xford-square, Hyde-park, the wife of T. W. L. Mackean, EN. On the 10th inst., at Gaston.house, the wife of Justinian PellY. Esq. _- OP A DAIJOHTEE. On the Bth inst., at Ludford, near Ludlow, the wif e o f Lieut.-Colonel Inig o J ones. On the B. Holland 9th inst., at Widmer, the wife of th e R ev . W . . MARRIED. On the 10th inst., at Paris, Henry Baring, Esq., M.P., to Mademoiselle Marie de Martinoff. On the 10th inst.. at St. Mary's, Islington, James, only Holborn surviving s on o f Mr. Richard Sanderson, of 4, Thornhill crescent, Barnsbury-pa r k, I s li ng t on, and 9, Brooke-street, , to Harriet Tyrol', youngest daughter of Mr. Richard Green, Framlingham, Suffolk. DIED. On the 10th inst., Catherine, the wife of Mr. J. Brady, of Canonb ury - square, Islington, and Staple-inn, in the 61st year of her age. On the 10th inst., at the residence of his father, Thomas aged 39. LONDON: Printed and Published by KURD° YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at 27ze Sun Office, N 0.112. Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county' , ot Middlesex, Saturday, ]February 11, 1. _~ beir 378 3bi . ,;:. fir:. :. ~.f ~.(~~'~_ T a • la I, TEA and ' APPI. 10, A and buts such deny nude one , by tl T 1 end one and mut sent .fro 'on I a pe oP ar all Cd a i D sr