The Sun. — London, England, 1854-03-25 00:00:00

SETTLEIIIENT AND REMOVAL BILL. The Settlement and Removal Bill, that is, the bill for re laxing the one and abolishing the other, has received a large addition. By a separate bill, the prohibition of compulsory removal is to be extended to the case of Irish paupers. It will be remembered, that when the provisions of the bill were first announced, the Irish members immediately asked whether their countrymen were to come in for their share of a measure recommended on the general ground of humanity, and on the right of the destitute under the original Poor Law to bo re lieved where they applied for relief. It must have struck most people that not only was it very difficult to defend the exception as a matter of argument, but that its maintenance 'would create a perpetual feud. We are to suppose the case of two destitute families in the same court, iu the same em ployment, and possibly inmates for several years of the same lodging-house. The Welsh or Northamptonshire family is re lieved without removal, and the Irish family is shipped, at an inclement season, to Cork or Belfast, either port possibly still a hundred miles from its home. Such a distinction certainly would be invidious. It admits, indeed, of a defence, and, commercially, of a very fair defence—viz., that the Welsh and Northamp tonshire unions are maintaining London paupers, and Loudon may therefore as well maintain the provincial ones ; or, in other words, if all England agrees to give up compulsory re movals, that is its own concern, and it will find its own ac count in so doing ; whereas Ireland has no English paupers to remove, and would, therefore, gain much and give nothing by being included in the measure. But logic, especially the logic of X. s. d., does not apply to Ireland. She is the poor neighbour to whom we are bound to show hospitality all the more because she cannot return it, or rather because she cannot return it exactly in kind. It is not only inhuman, it is idle to deny that England receives immense benefits from the Irish immigration, and it is but a poor return for them if she flings back on the Irish seaboard every poor creature who asks for relief instead of work. The general question need not be disturbed by the lamentable but only occasional cir cumstance that many destitute persons have been sent here simply to get rid of them, and to be a burden on our rates. That is not an exclusively Irish practice, and, in the present state of the labour market, is not very likely to be resorted to. The present, therefore, is the very time for the assimi lation of the English and Irish laws as to the removal of paupers. That the question is one of very great 'difficulty appears from the diversity of opinion exhibited by the house, without respect of party, and betrayed even by the Government. The bill in its original state has met with a remarkable reception. Those country members who might be supposed to know most about the working of settlements and removals, and the possibility of modifying the one and doing without the other, either speak with diffidence or disagree considerably. Some think that the measure will effect a saving ; others that it will be a boon to the poor Dian, and will complete his eman cipation from a species of servitude ; others that it will lead to great cruelties, and keep the unsettled poor more on the move than ever, inasmuch as the threat of the workhouse will now be everywhere substituted for that of removal. There is room for this variety of opinion, inasmuch as the law can be administered cruelly enough, even after the power of compulsory removal has been taken away. But that power deserves a separate consideration. If the custom of com pulsory removals has led to great cruelty and extrava gance—if it involves the absurdity that in the case of the most enterprising and industrious poor, for such they must be supposed, who leave their parishes in quest of work, the only relief given to distress is transportation to some dis tant and poverty-stricken parish—then we may at once pro ceed to abolish this custom. There will then remain the question, How are we to meet the case of the Irish stranger who asks for relief ? - It appears to be apprehended that every union will haVe a good many strange applicants ; and that in this metropeilis, - 'and other great cities, a majority of those ap plicants will be Irish. What, then, are we to do with them when we are no longer permitted to ship them off to the nearest pert of their own country ? We trust the times aro coming when there will not be many such applicants, and, in any case, some other alternative may be found besides trans portation to Ireland and imprisonment in a workhouse. It is strange indeed if our boasted civilisation and those social institutions of which we are so proud can hit on no kindness to perform to the stranger except banishment or incarcera tion. Freedom is the very genius of our country—free dom to roam over it in quest of employment, and to find it everywhere a home. Yet, when misfortune befalls the Bri tish freeman in his adopted home, wherever that may be, and he is driven to appeal to the humanity of his new neighbours, we are told that there are only two ways of treating him—the two alternatives we give a wild beast—we may either drive him away, or shut him up in a cage. For the honour of our country, we will believe some other course to be possible. It is proposed to deal with the Irish difficulty in a separate bill. There is reason for that. The present measure may well be discussed on its own merits, without the introduction of a new and questionable element; and the Irish bill will probably require provisions that would not apply to the case of English and Scotch paupers. There is always a danger of Irish poor, in the strongest sense of the word, that is the aged, the sick, the maimed, and otherwise incapable of work, being shipped here by wholesale. As long as this is possible, it may be 'necessary to provide against it by some special anti dote ; and, if there should be such an importation as we apprehend, and the antidote be found insufficient, then it will be time to consider how to deal more effectually with Irish applicants. Possibly it may be found necessary to deal with the immigrant at the port where they land, and to send back at once those whose very appearance betrays the specula tion on which they have been sent over. We suggest that, not because we think it at all likely we should ever be driven to such rigorous measures, but to show there is at least one alternative besides the imprisonment or the transportation of the Irish applicant for relief. We are not in the least blink ing the difficulty of counteracting an evil which, as it has hitherto been almost constant, and sometimes aggravated to a frightful extent, may be expected to recur. But if we allow, as we must allow, and even welcome, a regular Irish immigration, then we must also expect those immigrants to be exposed to the usual vicissi tudes of life, and to become applicants for relief. When, in the course of nature and under the dispensations of Provi dence, they are thus thrown on our charity, we - very much doubt whether it would be found possible to keep up a distinction between them and other applicants—whether hu manity itself, not to say common sense, will not refuse to re cognise the distinction. A separate measure is necessary, and it is just possible that the arrangements required may be so complicated and difficult as to prevent that measure from being perfected for a considerable time. There is no reason, therefore, why the introduction of this new feature should affect the discussion of the present bill. We admit that the one bill eventually involves the other, inasmuch as the English applicants for relief being once entitled to it in the place where they apply, the Irish cannot long be excluded from the boon. But they who approve the present bill are bound to support it, even if it takes them ulti mately further than they desire. The President of the Poor /kw Board most emphatically stated on the introduction of his bill that the claim to relief was not in virtue of a settle ment, but of destitution. All who accept that great principle are bound to carry it out, and common feeling, consistency, and the gravest political considerations will compel them to do so. But, meanwhile, on the great principle laid down by Mr. Baines, they are bound to meet the English stranger's application for relief with common hospitality, not with ex pulsion, nor, we will add, with incarceration.—Times. THE EMPEROR NAPOLEON. While we acknowledge with satisfaction the effect pro duced throughout Europe by the publication of the "secret and confidential" correspondence of Russia with this coun try, we are not less confidential by the additional proof it has afforded us of the sincerity of the French alliance. The Emperor of Russia, no doubt, expected when he chal lenged the British Ministers to produce these documents, either that they had been kept secret from the French Cabinet, or that they would in some manner contribute to impair the mutual confidence of the two States. Not only has this malignant anticipation been utterly dis appointed, but, on the contrary, this incident has furnished to both Governments, and to the public in both countries, irrefragable evidence to each of the good faith of their re spective ally; and the case is rendered stronger by the fact that the propositions of Russia were in both instances made separately, and separately rejected. We do not hesitate to declare that the conduct of the Emperor Louis Napoleon in this transaction deservedly raises him to an honourable position in Europe, and gives us reason to hope that all his dealings may be regulated by the same strict observance of good faith. As a representative of mo narchical principles and of those sentiments which ought to be met with upon thrones, it is impossible not to draw a contrast between the honest firmness of a Sovereign who won his crown amid the tumult of a revolution, and the character which the most orthodox Emperor Nicholas has earned for in tegrity, or the King of Prussia for an enlightened con sideration of the public interests. They have contrived to place Louis Napoleon immeasurably above the position in which they stand, for in the dispassionate judgment of Europe the respect he has shown for treaties, and his mode ration in the exercise of his power abroad, have done more to Praise his character and consolidate his power than if he had. imitated the exploits of his uncle, and filled the world with his fame.—Times. SACRED HARMONIC SOCIETY. Her Majesty the Queen, with Prince Albert, the Princess Alice, and suite, was present at the performance last night. The programme comprised Mendelssohn's Lobgesang (.. Hymn of Praise"), and Mozart's Requiem. The illus trious party arrived just before the beginning of the Re quiem, and were welcomed by a l o y a l an d h ear ty demon stration ; after which the " National Anthem" was sung, - with impressive effect, by the vast body of c h orus an d in strumentalists composing the orchestra of the Sacred Har monic Society. Miss Birch gave the solo s . Th e h a ll was crammed to suffocation. Tne utmost order, however, pre vailed, and the performance was listened to with strict at tention from first to last. The Lobgesang and the iyqt.ient together constitute an almost exceptional entertainment. The interest excited by a comparison of two works of such opposite styles and periods is of itself enough to repay the attentive hearer. Mozart was born in 1756, and died in 1791; Mendelssohn was born in 1809 (18 years after the death of Mozart), and died in 1847. But genius belongs to no age, and though in the Requiem and the Lobgesang—which were written - with the lapse of half a century between them—music seems to speak in different languages, it addresses itself to the heart in both. The Lobgesang has been mush better performed than last night in every respect but one. The tenor music was sung by Mr. Sims Reeves as it has possibly sung before ; and the thrillin g recitative, " never been We called through the darkness, Watchman, will the night soon pass?"' which leads to the magnificent chorus, "The night is departing," was given by that gentleman with a depth sa meaning and a dramatic effect which could hardly be surpassed. The choruses, on the whole, were tamely and coarsely sung ; and the first of the three instrumental movements was by no means well executed. But the Queen came to hear the Requiem, and it is only just to the members of the Sacred Harmonic Society to say that on no other occasion, and in no other place, have we listened to so admirable a performance of that sublime work. The choruses were superb—remarkable alike for vigour, precision, delicacy, and point. The solo singers were Misses Birch and Dolby, Mr. Sims Reeves, and Herr Formes, who were all so good that it would be in v idi ous to single out any of them for special praise. It was the first appearance this season of Herr Formes, whose fine bass voice sounded as deep and mellow as the pedal pip es of an organ in the solemn phrase at the beginning o f "Tuba mirum," which he declaimed with appropriate in emphasis and dignity. On appearingthe orch es t ra, previous to the commencement of the Req uiem, H err Formes was honoured by the audience with a round of applause. Mr. Costa is entitled to unqualified praise for the pains he must have taken in rehearsing the Requiem. Had the Lobgesang of Mendelssohn been as lucky, the performance of last night would have been one to remember. Both works are to be repeated shortly. On retiring from the hall her Majesty was again enthu siastically cheered. gen ; on . the Bri- • to await y of tho e of our tter fact to hear Charles. Lt•straj e Belts. le. The, )ably be ch there y strong 3sia, but of metal_ bring to ors, once Lily com- g note of .00ps are from St. loing his movinees )eir.g the 1 trades may sue )rovineeffs 11 places• ly to get. st of the Won the Dry sum -1 is mo to start. 'ed. An . . by au is answer arrived. ay abide refuse to sr at St. ame will. that the time as I further ) evil day [an Prin be so in- Ring till will be 7, after ae unne- are coin- England. kjecture ; ;ty obvi- Lll if seri re would. ) occupa , 'equire a iment on that the st, to be by the conl ' ,11 " y lows St count 11 ralleo s effoi is years to of Fi tape tat ' 0 . 5 it ri gb .ts. ues all to int of ugh .it is 10( 1,000 5 RI Inish .chle fa the Gov rrn rhere the sing, , are print i pal , ulat it] 'iat art th cir wing of ight - for torth of How to by i 1- 1 . e liu a 1 art 3 t 1301 11 " ions pties prol 'ably be en so i 11.11 11- r former cede it is t ag ►last ►pitsiJ t of subs j ent As the abite .nts coati non rliam en ) seat of D aDOP 001 ►ulati Ong =nit: y to ie ad mai id, a,*. fter y. Let e:112 tai n, uro :ne y and of 'Com el there 6 ) rather I o I' the di rt riots ov ;ions LI I ports cten ing and s. Tne tins 4vian ant 1 the I le hero per. ance ,neec ring and the )1d (all per oz. Indard. Spanish 75. 6d. r , and SHARE MARKETS. (THIS DAY.) BRITISH RAILWAYS. RAILWAYS. Closing Prices yesterday. Aberdeen. 19i -- 201 4# -- 4# Ambg. Nottng. Bost, and Eastn. Junct.. Belfast & BallymFna. _ . Birming. Wolverh & Stour Valley • Birkenhd. Lancsh & Cheshire Junct _. . 8 - 9 12 —lO disj DO. Clicsh. & Birk., £5O and 225 Cons. Do., £20..... Blyth & Tyne original £25 (issd. at £45) Bristol and Exeter Caledonian Chester & Holyhead. Cork and Bandon Cork, Black, & Pass. Cornwall 14i 18 7 —• 6 d 89 - 91 51i - 524 13 - 14 9 • 11 Crieff Junction Dublin&BelfastJunc. Dundee Perth&Aber deen Junction Do. New 39 - 41 7i - 8 igi ------ i..i East Ang1ian......... Do., (XlB E & H).... Eastern Counties..... Eastern Union, A Stock Do., B. Stock = iii Do., Now A East Lauca,shire 58 - 60 55 - 57 Edinburg!: & Glasgow Edinb. and Peebles Edin. Prth. & Dundee Forth & Clyde June. pla,sg ow & S. Western Great Northern Stk. Do., A. Stock Do., B. Stock Gt. Sth . &West.(lre.) Great Western Irish South-Eastern Lancaster & Carlisle Do Thirds ii = 23 85i 86 72 74 Ll 7 - 119 86 - 99 74 - 74 88 91 11 12 L., 11 —l2 p 60i 61 7 -- 7fid Do. New Thirds Laneash.andYorksh. Do., Fifths D a., Wst. Riding Un, Leeds Northern di '7_ i*i Liv.Crsby.&gouthpt London & Blackwal] Loud. Tilb. & Sthend. Loud. Bright & S. Cst. Lond. and N. Westn. Do. Fifths 73 7i par—gyp 954 964 954 - 96 lid 1 d par r - 1 d 75 76 12 11 21 10 •9.d Do.lo/.5h.,M&8...0 Do. Eighths London and S. Westn. Do., £5O Do., £4o' •Lndudrry& Coleraine Lndncln7. & Ennisk. Manch.Shef.& Linde Do., Man. & Lin. Un Midland 16i - 56 - 57 29 - 30 I Do. Birmng. & Derby Nlidld. G. West. (Ira.) Do. Half Shares Newcastle & Carlisle Newmarket Do., Bury Extension. Nwpt.Aberg. & firfd Newry & Enniskillen Newry Warrenpointl and Rostrevor Norfolk .... gd— id 51— 4id 6 - 8 43 - 46 3# 29 ... 30 8 10 Northn.Counties Un, North British North Devon, No. 1. Do., No. Do., A A Deferred Do., B Guaranteed 'North London 11 - - li 6 i 7i 50 - 54 i -ip bo. New £lO N. &S. Wstrn , Hamp stead, and City Jn North Staffordshire North Western N. & S. Westrn, June Nuneaton, Hinckley, and Leicester Oxford, Worcester, & Wolverhampton Portsmouth Scottish Central Scottish Midland Shrewsbury &Bi mg Do. L. & N. Western Guaranteed St ask._ Shrewsby. & Herefd. Shrewsby. & Chester (N. W. Min ; Do. Halves,l Do. Oswestry Shropshire Union Do. A, B, C,& D,fully paid up at per cent South Devon South Eastern South Wales S. Yrksh. & Riv. Dun Do 6i 61d1 7 74 ... -. . 27 - 29 84 86 52 - 54 57 - 59 55 - 60 3 - 2(I 15 -- 16 7i -- 8 11 -- 12 3i -- 3id 13 15 58i —59 i 32 33 3 ld 4 5 Staines, Wnlc. olz Stockton & Darling. Stockton & Hartlepl. Taft" Vale ... Do. £lO shares. 27 - 30 IDo. Prof., No. 1. Thames Haven Dock and Railway Vale of Neath 2 - 2 141 154 44 - 5 24 - 26 5 - 6 Waterfd. & Kilkenny Waterford&Limerick West Cornwall West End of London and Crystal Palace West London all 51s, 100 20 ••• - ... 6 - 7 Wimbledn & Croydon York Newctl.&Berw. Do. Extensions Do. G.N.E. Purchase York & N. Midland._ coi 64 10 9 5 4d 43 -- 44 61 601 1 1 10/1 PREFERENCE SHARES. St. 100 Aberdeen . ... St. 100 Do. No. 2, p. c. 25 30 Blyth and Tyne 10 per c. pref. (issd. at 500 ... - ... St. 100 Bris. & Ex. 4p. c. St. ... ... 20 5 Do. 4p. c. Shares St. 100 Caledonian £lO 95 98 96 15 all Chester & Holyhead Guar. 53 per cent ... ... 64 64 Cork &Bandons4p.c ... ... 64 all 'DundeePerth &Aber deen Junction 33 all EastAngliam (£3los) 6 per cent 3ll 3 .. 5 all Do. (£5) 7 per cent 4 4 74 2 Do. (£7 17s) 7p. c. 4 i p 6t all Eastern Counties Ex tension, sp. c. No. 1 $ i p P nx 63 all Do. No. 2 10 all Do. New 6p.c. St l2 13xd 20 all Eastern Union, Scrip Guar. 6 per cent 5 all Do. 51., 10 per cent ... 10 all Do. 101. Debentr.Sh- ..„ . . St. 100 East Laneash.6 p. cts. ... xd 5 all East and West York shire Juno. Pref ... ... 5 all EdinbPrth.&Dundee - ' - 53 per cent. St. 100 Glasgow & S.Western Guar. 5 per cent xd • tha St. 100 Great Northn. sp. C. -. 1 d St. 100 Do. sp. c. Redeem., —ll2 at 10 p. c. prem... 100 105 10 10 Do. 43 p. c. Scrip 10 6 Gt.N. of Scot. Ist Pre ... ... 64 all Gt, Southn. &Westm. (Ireland) Eighths) 7 8 20 4 Do. 4 per c. Pref. Sh ... xd 50 6 at. Westn. (Berks & Hants Ex. sp. e) 64 7 St. 100 Do, coy. red. 43 p.c 95 97 St. 100 Do. con. red. 4p. c 9O 95 St. 100 Do. irred. 4p. c 9l 93 16 6 Lan. &York. F. £2l id par St. 100 Do. 6p. c. Stock 20 13 Leeds N. 6p. c. No.l ... .. 12i 9 Do. Quarters, 1848 .. ... St. 100 London and Brighton Guaranteed sp.c . . ... ... St. 100 Do. Pref., sp. c. St. ... ... 50 all Do. Convertible, sp. c., 1852 — ••• St. 100 Do. New Guar.6 p. c ... ~. St. 100 Lon. &N. W., Coy. & Nuneaton 50 5 London &S. Western Con. Thirds 24 2i p 7 123 all Londonderry& Coler 3 Shares 123 all Londy. &Ennis.4Sh lli —12 i 25 all Ylan., Shef., & Lin., 4 Shares, No. 1. 10 all Do. Now, £lO 9 9A 6 .4 Do. 4-'6 id ipm 43 12 all dlarypt .Sz Carl. 4 p. c ... 1 ... 12, all Do. 43 per cent 12 103 Do • • ..• ••••• St. 100 Mid. Consol.6 p.e.St. ... . St. 100 Do. Consol. Bristol & T.lirm. 6 per cent 132 134 163 5 Do. Pref. , q per con,: 1 § id 10 6 Norfolk Debenture St. 100 Do. Pref. 4p. c. Stock ... xd St. 100 Do. 5 p.c. E ... at — xd St. 100 Do. 54 per et . pref.._ ~. xd St. 100 Do. Way. Val. sp. C. ... x d St. 100 North British ... ... 20 all North Staffordsaire ... ... St. 100 Oxford, Worcester, & Wolyerh.£ls, 6 p.c. 95 100 15 15 Do •• 8i all Scot. Cent., New Prof . .. P 8 all Shrews. &Birm.N.G. 4 —lO Pm 10 all Shrewsby. & Chester (Nor.W.Min), 8 p.c. 163 17 10 10 Do. 5 per cent lO 103 25 all D So s u . t fi h x D ed ey ,4 o i n per cont. 4 1 d 1 _... 13 i p 10 1 1.0.6 all S. Eastern (Reading Ann.) of £1 Os. 6d. 223 233 St. 100 Do. 4?sper cent _ 20 all S.Yorksh.4p.e.Guar. 17 —l9 25 all Stockton and Dar lington, 4 per cent. ~. ... 25 5 Do. do. do, ... ... 121} all Stockton and Hartle pool, guar. 5 p. c. till Ist July, 1856 ... . 5 3 Waterfd.gr,Kilk.6p.c. 2 1 d St. 100 York, Newcastle,and Berwiek,4 p.c. Pref. 85 90 17 5 Do 34 34 25 10 York&N.Midiandli. and 8. Purch li ... id Busini sis done this day. 100 8 100 54 100 - 1 1100 1 16$ 1611 St. 50 20 11A 10 1.00 174 114 all all all 1.00 42i 34 all 8/ 2s St. LOO" 476 17 a 1 LOO 5i 17A 71 all 100 3 1.00 Li ] 20 20 10 10 2/ 2s 100 100 100 100 50 20 20 20 21 2sl 20 20 50 20 90 51 2 lii i 85 6 7323 2i 1194 83 9 734 Se PP 6° i t PP 911 PP 95/ 6 5i 95 i f 11 •; +, • 56 1 i 32 6k 7 per cent. THE SM:N, LONDON, SATURDAY _EtVENING, MARCH 25, 1854. all all all all all I:LS all 15 A A 1 10 1 1 all all 15 10i all Agua Fria Anglo Austrin. Gold Anglo Californian Australasian Australian Australian Cordillera: Australian Freehok Ave Maria Baden (Gd. Duchy of:. Blaenarvon Ir. & Coa' British Austrin. Gold British Iron Brazilianlmp.(issued at £5 pin Do. Cocaes & Cuiada Do. St. John Del Rey Carson's Creek Clarendon Con. Min Co. of Jamaica Cobre Copper Colonial Gold Copiapo Copper Min. of Eng Do. Pref. 74 p. cent, English and Austrin, Copper Smeltg. Co General Great Nugget Vein Do. Registered Great Polgooth Liberty Linares Loud. &Californ. Gold Quartz Crush. Co. Mariquita Aexican&S.Amerien. New Graiada New Linares Mining and Smelting Co Noureau Monde Pontgibaud Silver Lead Min. dt Smelt Port Philip Quartz Rock Rhymney Iron 'Do. New Santiago do Cuba ?4uth Australian fin Croft United Mexican Waller West Granada West Mariposa .Vorthing Mining of Australia Yuba la —la pl 1 2 - a A 9i d 7 9 3A 4A li 21 31 33 A id 39 - 41 - 1A 10 - 12 50 - 60 2 - 4p li - 24 1 1 2 A d i 11. 12 g - 4 5 - 6 - i 1 15 17 d 1 lip 29 31 8 10 4 - 3 d 4i 2t 34 d i id + FOREI 10 5 20 20 9 3 8 2g. Antwerp&Rotterdam Belgian Eastu. June Beziers to Graissessae Bombay, Baroda, and Central India, &rip Central of Italy Charleroi & Erquelin Demerara 20i 100 20 15: all all Dijon and Besancon Dutch Rhenish East Indian Do. Extension dt. Indian Peninsula Gd. Juliet. of France Grd. Trunk of Canada Do. Debentures Do. do Central of France Western of Canada Shares Do. Bonds (Ist is.)'s7 dandlton & Toronto Do. 6 per cent. _ Lake Coust. & ilasle iaucea & - 2istoj r. 5 p. c pre: Luxembourg Do. (Railway) Do. Pref Do. (Canal) I Do. 6 p. et. pref Lyons and Geneva , Lyons & Mediterran. Madras Maria Antonia Do. do. New . Melbourne Dk. & Ry Namur & Liege (wit" interest) Do. (ex interest) Norther n of France Do. 20/. 3 p. c Bds (fmy. B. & Ams. Shs. ; I NorwegianTrunkPref Paris and Lyons Ditto Bonds ~'aris and Orleans iaris and Rouen Paris and Strasbourg ParisCaen & Cherbrg Quebec & Richmond Rouen and Llavre Royal Danish Royal Swec..isu li Sambre and Meuse... Do. 5i p. cent. Pref. Southern of France.. St. Andrew's and Quebec (A) West Flanders 11 Do 5A per c. Pref 0 Western of France 7 West. of Switzerland 2 Wiesbaden .5 Zealand 4 —34 d i 14 44 3jd id il3 2 -24 p 1 -- - . - 41 3id 21i —22 i 7 9 p 1 lip 107 109 dis Ci 3 4 1 1 lr 1f d 3 2 d 1 id 6 - 71 284 -28 i - 84 11a nip 424 - 434 32 - 34 274 -27 i - • pm ld par . . d 7 . :* 8 ▪ - • ... ▪ -pm 3i - 1 2i -34 p 5 4.dl ii 4 : , 6 51 2a IMPERIAL PARLIA MENT. HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTE, RDAY.) HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair at 4 o'clock. PRIVATE BILLS. The following private bills were read a third time and passed:—Hatfield Chase Warping and Improvement,King ston upon Hull Docks, Nottingham Waterworks, and Rossendale Waterworks Bill. The Hull Cemetery Bill was considered and agreed to. The Kilkenny and Great Southern and Western Railway Bill was read a second time and ordered to be committed. PETITIONS. A large number of petitions were presented, praying that all public-houses may be cleared on Sundays. Mr. MAGAN presented two petitions from Drogheda against Ministers' Money. Mr. F. SCOTT presented petitions from various places in Scotland, against the Scottish Education Bill. Sir J. TROLLOPE presented petitions from Unions in Lincolnshire, against the Poor Removal Bill. Captain VERNON presented a similar petition, end praying the poor may be relieved by a national rate. Also a petition from certain electors of Chatham in favour of the Bribery Bill. Sir H. HALFORD presented a petition from a Union in Leicestershire in favour of the Poor Removal Bill. Sir J. DUKE presented a petition from a city parish against the bill. Mr. F. DUNDAS presented a petition from the Orkneys against the endowment of Roman Catholic clergymen in prisons. Mr. 0. RIO A.RDO presented a petition from Worcester in favour of the Poor Removal Bill. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Islington against the bill. Mr. MUNTZ presented a petition from Birmingham generally approving of the New Reform Bill, but against the minority clause. Mr. PETO presented a petition from Norwich in favour of the establishment of reformatory schools. Mr. BROWN presented a similar petition from a place in Lancashire. Sir J. V. SHELLEY presented a petition from St. Martin-in-the-Fields, Westminster, against the Poor Removal Bill. Mr. MAGUIRE presented two petitions from places in Ireland praying for the discharge of the order for a select committee to enquire into conventual institutions. Mr. SPOONER presented a petition from a place in Warwickshire against the endowment of Maynooth. Mr. COBBETT presented a petition from the Oldham guardians against the Poor Removal Bill. Mr. HADFIELD presented a petition from bankers, merchants, and other inhabitants of Leeds, Wakefield, Bradford, Sheffield, and York, complaining of the consti tution of the recent commission for inquiry into the regis tration of titles, and alleging the importance of legislating only on evidence before a committee of the house. METROPOLITAN SEWERS. Sir B. HALL said all the unpaid commissioners of the metropolitan sewers had resigned, but before their resig nation they ordered all the draining works, amounting to 3,000,0001. sterling, to be continued. Now, he wished to know if these works had received the sanction of the Secretary of State. Mr. FITZROY replied that such sanction was not ne cessary; but the continuance of all the works had not been ordered. The only order made was that the works already commenced should be continued until the new commis sion was appointed. CHILDREN OF SOLDIERS. Mr. OLIVEIRA asked the Secretary-at-War, consider. ing the objects for which the Royal Military Asylum at Chelsea was established, as set forth in the several royal warrants bearing dates respectively the 26th day of April, 1805, the 4th day of February, 1809, and the 10th day of October, 1811, by which the whole number of children of non-commissioned officers and soldiers mostly employed on foreign service was 1,200, and that at the present time there are only 350, whether it would not be desirable to fill the number up to 1,200, giving the preference to the children of non-commissioned officers and soldiers now or or about to leave on foreign service, instead of permitting them to have recourse to parochial relief. Mr. S. HERBERT said the statement of the hon. gen tleman was quite true, but part of the establishment had been abolished, and such a change had taken place in the asylum that it would be impossible to comply with the request made by the hon. gentleman. SCOTCH FISHERIES. Mr. F. DUNDAS asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what measures will be taken by the Government for the protection of the fisheries ou the north-coast of Orkney and Shetland, in the event of war being declared. Sir J. GRAHAM stated generally that every measures fi w s ou e l rie db s. e taken for the protection of these and all other h The LORD CHANCELLOR took his fat on the woolsack at five o'clock. would, he submitted, be prematnre to announce any proceeding of this sort, until the emergency to which it was to be directed arose. (Hear.) Their lordships then adjourned at seven o'clock. PROCEEDINGS IN CiIANCEZY. Lord ST. LEONARDS moved for retunar ; of all the cases before the Court of Chaucer• and the :Masters in Chancery. His chief object was t) ascertain the actual state of all matters which had beer before t &al court for some time, and to vindicate it from the r ittacks which had been made upon it with respect to delay. If it should appear that suits were now pending which ought to be wound up, he should feel it proper to move that their lordships should investigate into the present state of the proceedings in the court, with the view of re medying evils, if any should exist. Lord BROUGHAM expressed his satisfi motion at the motion of the noble and learned lord. B:e was confi dent that the 'returns would shovv that ',here was no ground whatever for the complaints of del; Ly which had recently been made. Lord CAMPBELL trusted the returr is would be agreed to, for he was sure that there was no grievance connected with the Court of Chancery. Although no human institutions were perfect, he belies red that very little remained to be done in the shape of improvement in the Equity Courts., The LORD CHANCELLOR had no doubt the re turns would remove some misapprehensio.2s respecting proceedings in these courts, but they would also show that some cases had been hanging over fo r some time. They, however, were rather administrators of the effects of deceased persons than suits, and before tfiey could be brought to a termination they often requir ed communi cation with persons in all parts of the woi Id. If there were case of delay, the blame rested with, the parties, and not with the court, which endeavoured to push suits forward, The returns were then agreed to. SECOND COMMON LAW PROCEDURE, 1854, BILL. The LORD CHANCELLOR, in moving the second reading of this bill, said he would not again enter into its details, but would merely make one or two observa tions upon some objections which had been. urged to the measure. One of the provisions of the bill was that it enabled parties to have their causes tried either by juries or by the judge alone ; and it had been said. that he had done wrong in making it optional with the judge. It would be extremely embarrassing to a judge to have to try certain cases—for instance, a case of trim. con., and award the amount of damages. After a trial was over, the jury sunk again into society, and nobody could point out a man and say, " that is the person who taxed me to such an amount," but this parties would be enabled to do with reference to a judge. _Again, it was said that in pauper actions a, defendant should be at liberty to pay a sum of money into con t, and if the plaintiff went on and did not recover a greater amount, he should be called on to pay the additional costs. Now, he thought that must be qualified. Suppose the character of a person had been 'attacked, and he' brought his action to vindicate it, should a party be at liberty to say, "Here is 50/., go on with your action if you dare ?" and if the jury found that , the plaintiff was entitled to no more, he was to be called on to pay all the costs. Surely that would be scandalous. Such a law could not be permitted. There was another point to which he wished to allude—..the commis sioners recommended that the common law courts should be empowered to make an order for ' specific per formance. Now, this was not possible wi t.b. reference to all kinds of contracts—for instance, to plat an extreme ' case, where a person make a contract to marry ; he thought, however, that the bill provided for every such case where it would be at all useful. provided for delivering up chattels, and where a party lad agreed to do certain work its performance might be ordered by the court. It could not, however, be madle to apply to the sale of estates, where a question of title was con cerned, because there was no machinery, as in the equity courts, for inquiring into questions of tittle. He in tended to propose that the bill be referred to a select committee. Lord CAMPBELL said a school had sprung up out of doors which treated with contempt everything esta blished. He was of opinion that, where there was con flicting evidence, a trial by jury, with the assistance of a judge, was the fairest and best kind of trial. With re gard to the question of specific performance, he thought there should be one court which should deal with that matter, he did not care whether it was a court of law or equity, but whichever it was the parties should have the option of suing for damages or enforcing the contract. He rather preferred the power being given to a court of law. Lord ST. LEONARDS, with reference to the dis cussion between the noble lord the Chief Justice and his noble friend on the woolsack, entirely agreted with the view of the latter on the subject of specific performance. Lord BROUGHAM agreed with his noble friend the Chief Justice so far as that there should only one court to deal with the question of specific performance, and he did not see why a judge of a court of equity could not as sess damages without the assistance of a jury. He thought there should be an option allowed to parties to sue for damages for breach of contract, or to enforce it by means of specific performance. The Earl of WICKLOW drew attention to a new prin ciple which had been introduced into the law of the land by this bill—he alluded to the clause which empowered a judge to dispense with an oath in the case of persons con scientiously objecting to take such an oath. The house ought to have been informed of the provision in the bill, whereas he was the only person who had brought it be fore them. THIS DAY.) The Duke of ARGYLL said he was one of those who were present when his noble and learned friend explained the bill, and he drew especial attention to the clause in question. There was nothing more anomalous than the law as it stood in regard to voters. Where conscientious objections existed they ought to be respected. In fact, that was already the principle of the law, Quakers, Sepa ratists, and Moravians, were now allowed to dispense with the taking of oaths, and was it to be said that others who conscientiously objected to take an oath were not entitled to the same amout of relief? He concurred with what had fallen from his noble friend as to the ex tension of this clause to Scotland, but he felt convinced when once its principle was established in England, it would not be long before it was extended to Scotland. Lord BROUGHAM, as showing the importance of extending the operation of the clause to Scotland, mentioned a case where a man had been imprisoned thirty days because he refused on conscientious scruples to take an oath. After a few words from the LORD CHANCELLOR, who combatted an opinion expressed by the Eall of Wicklow that the clause in question ought not to have formed part of the present bill ; the object of the clause was to deal with those cases where to insist upon evi dence being given upon oath was to shut out evidence altogether, The bill was read a second time, and referred to a select committee. The Highways (South Wales) Bill was read a third time and passed. The Registration of Bills of Sale Bill was read a third time and passed. _ _ VALUATION (IRELAND) ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. The report of the amendments to this bill was brought up and agreed to. ____ PRAYERS FOR THE SUCCESS OF OUR ARMS IN THE EAST. The Earl of CLANCARTY wished, before their lord ships separated, to put a question to the noble earl opposite (Aberdeen) upon a subject which he considered of great importance, and which he believed was re garded as of great importance by a large proportion of our population. Their lordships and the other house of Parliament had been for some time engaged in discussions in reference to the position in which the country was placed by the course of events in the east of Europe, and the war in which it ap peared we were about to be engaged in consequence. They had had produced before theta the diplomatic cor respondence which had taken Place between our own Government and that of Russia, including the secret despatches, and it was most gratifying to him, as he was sure it must be to their lordships generally, to find that those despatches not only reflected no dishonour upon, but the highest credit upon every one wh o h a d b een en gaged on the part of this country in the correspondence. The discussions which had occurred showed that the preparations made by the Government to meet the emergency were most complete in their character, and that the utmost care had been taken to ensure the efficiency of both the naval and military force about to be employed. Public opinion seemed to be wholly in approval of the policy of the Government, and the en thusiasm of the country in favour of the war was equalled —if not exceeded—by the soldiers and sailors who were about to be personally engaged in it. There appeared to be every element. Notwithstanding all these favourable prospects, there was one circumstance which he, in com mon with a large class of the people of this country, looked upon with disappointment and regret—that was the omission, on the part of the Government, to take any step for publicly invoking the Divine blessing upon the ex pedition. He was no advocate for superstitious observ ances, but it was not to be forgotten that the battle was not always with the strong, and when they saw that even the Emperor of Russia had thought it necessary to re cognise the interference of Divine Providence, so far as to invoke publicly at a grand military display a blessing upon his banners, surely we, who had the right on our side, and who were standing forward to protect the weak against the strong, ought not to neglect so import ant a duty as before entering upon the war to pray for the aid of the Almighty Disposer of events in the ap proaching conflict, lest, in the end, we might have as little cause for congratulation as had the Spanish king who sent what he believed to be the invincible armada to attack this country. - The question he wished to put was whether the noble earl had any intention to propose such a proceeding as he had referred to, and if so when he would be prepared to indicate when they might ex pect such intention would be carried into effect ? The Earl of ABERDEEN considered the noble earl's appeal somewhat premature, /for war not having yet been declared, the time had not arrived when such a step as that to which the noble earl referred could pro perly be taken, even if it should be thought proper to take it at all. He would remind the noble earl, too, that there was in our liturgy a prayer to be publicly used in time of war, and which for the same reason—that war did not exist-'was not read in our churches ; and it them, nor had its features been described to them by the noble lord, further than that it would alter the arrangements proposed by the bill now before them, and that it would not put the Irish paupers on precisely the same footing as the English poor. That was quite evident; because, if it did, it would only h ave b een necessar y to leave out the words "England and Wales," and not to introduce a new bill. Brit whatever the changes the noble lord had announced might be, the public consideration of this bill, as well as the petitions both against it and in its favour, had all pro ceeded on the supposition that the status of the Irish poor was to remain as it was before the measure had been pro posed ; and if at the very moment of the second reading such entirely new provisions were to be suddenly intro duced, he must say that a kind of deception had been practiced upon the public. (Cheers.) There had nut been a single witness examined before the committee of 1847 who had not been asked how he proposed to deal with the Irish poor, and they had all given answers which showed that the matter had not escaped their attention, and that they attached the greatest importance to the subject. And, indeed, the returns which had been moved for fully justified their view of the case. It appeared from one of these returns that the number of orders of removal in Eng land had been—from parishes 498, and from unions 3,742; making in all 4,204 ; the number of persons affected by them being 10,032. The Irish orders during the same time had been—from parishes 383, from unions 4,832 ; making together 5,215. Now, taking the average of per sons included in each order at so low as G, that would give b nearly 10,500 ; and addinr, one-tenth for the parishes not rerorted, that would crivell,4l2 Irish p aupers who had come under the present b laws of settlement and removal. Nor had they been sent from one or two places in England or from the western coast only ; for he found there had been as many as twenty towns in England and Wales in which these orders had been acted upon. (Hear, hear.) Thus they had a system of operation with reference to the Irish poor, which was confessed on all hands to be of the greatest importance ; and yet when the house were asked to read a bill on the subject for the second time they were told that there was a part of the measure, and that a most important part, not yet before them. (Cheers.) In moving the amendment, of which he had given notice, he (Mr. Stafford) could assure the house that he brought it forward from no belief that the question was unimportant or that it was one that could possibly be of a party cha racter. As a member of an Irish Board of Guardians and as the president of an English board he had seen enough to prevent him from wishing at all to dogmatise, and to con vince him that this must always be more or less a mat ter of compromise. (Hoar, hear.) A great deal had been said of late about extending the area of taxation, but the present bill appeared to have no such object, and it cer tainly possessed no machinery for such a purpose, It pro fessed simply to redistribute the burden amon g st the same parties as now bore it. They were told that the present law of settlement interfered with the freedom of labour, and that it tended to disunite the interest of capital, but he thought that no foreigner could land on our shores, and see the numerous works in progiess around him, could wit ness the vast masses of men collected together, quietly, re tiring as soon as the work on which they were engaged was completed, and assembling again as if by magic in ano ther part of the kingdom to carry on similar operations— no foreigners, ho said, could have witnessed such things and have possibly conic to the conclusion that labour was not free in England. (Cheers.) As to disuniting the in terests of labour and capital, there was certainly a melan choly spectacle of that disunion existing at the present time. But he would put it to any hon. member whether that strife between labour and capital had the least what ever to do with the law of settlement ? (Cheers.) On the other hand, the agricultural poor, upon whom this bill would have the most stringent operation, had endured a period of high prices without the slightest attempt at com bination or riot whatever. (Hear.) He did not deny that some of the details of the present law of settlement might be faulty, and might require reform, but he felt con vinced that the abolition of that law would be unwel come to the labouring poor. (Cheers.) They had lately seen the public sympathy excited on behalf of the wives of the soldiers who were going abroad ; but what steps had the War-office taken with respect to these poor women ? Had they made them chargeable to the port of embarka tion, or to the town in which the barracks were situated ? Certainly not. They had made a wiser and more humane arrangement. They had said that, if these poor women had been deprived of their husbands, they should not be also deprived of their friends, but they should be conveyed, at the public expense, to their respective homes. (Hear, hear.) Ho hoped the bill would be withdrawn, in consi deration of the evils which would flow from it. The evils it proposed to remedy might be more efficiently dealt with by other means. He opposed the bill from no party feel ing, but in the belief that it would allow the tide of pau perism to overflow the whole country—that it would tend to destroy the present arrangement of property, while it impaired the birthright of the poor. (Hear, hear.) He moved that the bill should be read a second time that day six months. Lord D. STUART, in seconding the amendment, depre cated the matter being treated as a party question ; and said that the difference between his political views and those of the mover of the amendment proved that they were not actuated by party views. The bill had two distinct objects, the abolition of removals and the altera tion of the area of rating. It was in fact two bills ; and to give full effect to its provisions a third bill ought to have been added, making it applicable to Ireland. He under stood this would have to be done to enable ministers to carry the bill ; if so, ho hoped it would not be carried. If he were an Irishman he would never support a bill which made a distinction between England and Ireland. But he objected to this bill as regarded both countries. He did not wish to see the power of removal taken away, either as between parishes in this country, or as from this country to Ireland. He believed that it would be inju rious both to ratepayers and the poor. He saw in it a tendency to bear hardly upon the poor man. The rate payers in large towns would find their burdens unjustly increased ; for if paupers once knew that they could come and throw themselves on the metropoiis without being re moved, there would be an immense influx of that class. The only means which the ratepayers would have of de fending themselves would be by a harsher treatment of paupers, thus endeavouring to keep them away. This would make the condition of the latter class worse than ever. Instead of schools and other institutions being established for them, every endeavour would be made to keep down the rates. It was of course a hardship on the poor not to bo able to go where they liked ; but it could never be contended that they should go and claim relief wherever they chose. Giving the right hon. gentleman credit for ability and the most praiseworthy intentions in dealing with the poor laws, ho could not but think that he had drawn an exaggerated picture of the effects of the pre sent law of removal. It was not the usual practice, at least not in Marylebone, to remove a pauper the moment he became chargeable to the extent of a single loaf of bread; this was only done where paupers were likely to become permanently chargeable. The right honourable gentleman had not even stated the law correctly ; for a man could not be removed who was chargeable through sickness or accident, unless it were certified to the magi strate that the sickness or accident was likely to render him permanently chargeable. It was said that, in some cases, removals cost 1001., but lie knew that in the metropolitan parishes the average cost was from 51. to 71. A man who returned after removal was cer tainly liable to imprisonment ; but this was under the Vagrant Act ; and though it might be a good reason for altering the provisions of that act, it was none at all for abolishing the law of settlement. If the bill passed they would have hundreds of thousands of Irish poor coming to this country, and there they would remain. A return of the mumber of Irish poor relieved in this country in 1847 would show the frightful consequences which might ensue from abolishing the right of removal. There were 7,864 Irish poor relieved in 1847 in the parish of Marylebone ; in the parish of St. Pancras, 7,660 • in the small parish of St. Martin-in-the-field, 11,587. fri Liverpool there were relieved in that year no less than 47,194 Irish poor, and in two parishes of Glasgow 30,000. The expense in the case of Liverpool was 20,0001., and in the latter 29,0001. (Hear, hear.) It was true that a famine prevailed at that time in Ireland ; but they were legislating fur bad times as well as good, and such consequences as those ho alluded to should be guarded against. He thought the house ought to have the whole measure before it in order that they might be able to come to a right determination on the en tire question. With regard to the substitution of a union for a parochial rating, he believed that that proposition would lead to a confiscation of property in many parishes. He looked upon this measure as the first step towards a national rating. (Hear, hear.) Nothing in his opinion was more precious than the right of self-government. It was to the habit of attending to their local affairs that they were indebted for all their greatness, and they should be cautious ere they struck a blow at that system. (Hear, hear.) He therefore begged to second the motion of the hon. gentleman. Mr. K. SEYMER said it was somewhat new to see a member for a metropolitan borough seconding the motion of a county representative. It was evident from this that the question would not be discussed on party grounds, but he thought the fact might suggest some misgivings on the part of those county members who were going to oppose the bill. (Hear, hear.) He thought some little breathing time should be allowed them before they were called on to consider the application of the principle of the bill to their Irish fellow subjects. When that part of the ques tion was brought forward, he trusted it would be of such a nature that he could give it his support. But in the meantime he would not refuse to vote for the second read ing of a measure which he believed to be advantageous to Englishmen. (Hear, hear.) Mr. H. DRUMMOND said that this bill would sever the last link between the parson and the poor, the com mon-law rights of the latter having been previously frit tered away. He drew a hideous picture of the dirt and immorality of the Scotch system, and asked whether this was what it was wanted to introduce under the pretence of freeing the labourer. He approved of a free communi cation between Irish and English labour. The poor laws were the Magna Charta of the poor, and were their only idea of the constitution. If, on consideration, he found this bill, and others which must follow, for the benefit of the poor, lie would support them ; but if they were only , intended to cause a saving to ratepayers, he should op pose them. Mr. RICE supported the bill on the very ground taken by Mr. Stafford at the end of his speech—namely, the at tachment of the poor to their home. It was to t heir home and not to the place of their birth that they were at tached, and the bill was intended to prevent their removal therefrom. He believed, also, that it would conduce to the moral and social improvement of the poor, and so to the advantage of the owners and ratepayers, and that it would also tend to give more employment to the labourer. Mr. CHRISTOPHER opposed the bill, believing that it would injure the poor, and that it was calculated not for the benefit of the industrious, but for that of those who had no fixed residence, and who could wander about at will, bringing their labour into competition with that of the industrious. Ho argued at some length against the proposed rating system, but his great objection was, that the spreading the rating over districts would induce the forcing of able-bodied men into the workhouse instead of giving them employment, which the present system induced. The measure would do away with the wholesome interest which the richer took in the poorer classes. He also con sidered the bill as a removal of the ancient landmarks of the constitution. _ _ _ Mr. P. URQUHART supported the bill. Mr. BUCK supported the amendment, considering that the bill would be a boon to vagrancy. Sir G. PECHELL expressed a decided opinion a ga i ns t the measure, which he thought would be very unpopul ar throughout the country as soon as it was understood, and he did not believe that the poor man would be bettered by it. Mr. KENDALL said that the bill would increase the burden on the ratepayers. As soon as it passed, we should have thousands of men who would do no work whatever. But such misery and perjury were cau se d b y the existing law of removal that he must approve of the part of the bill 1 which abolished this, while opposing the proposed union rating system. Mr. VERNON SMITH suggested that those who were agreed as to the desirability of getting rid of the existing law of removal should support the second reading, as the rating portion of the bill could be altered in committee. Wile bill would, aruona other Advautpigew, get rid of the MINES. MARKET NEW COVENT GARDEN. The supplies of both fruit and vegetables here to-day were good. On the whole an extensive business was transacted, as follows : FRUIT.—:-Pine apples, English, 6s Od. to 10s Od each ; ditto colonial, is Od to is 3d each ; hot-house grapes, 15s to 30s; foreign ditto, is 6d to 3s Od per lb; apples, 6s to 8s per bush ; pears, 3s Oct to 6s per dozen ; lemons, 9d to is 6d ; oranges. 3s Od to lOs per 100 ; almonds, 2s to 3s per lb.; Barcelona nuts, 24s per bush.; cob-nuts, 100 s to 110 s per 1001bs ; chesnuts, 2s to 4s per peck ; filberts, 85s to 100 s per 100 lbs ; walnuts, 8d to Is 6d per 100 ; strawberries, 2s per doz. VEGETABLES.—Cabbages, 9d to is 6d ; Brussels sprouts, 2s Od to 2s 6d per half sieve ; brocoli, 9d to is 6d per bund.; greens, 4s Od to 6s Od per doz. bunches ; French beans, 3s to 4s Od per 100 ; potatoes, 140 s to 180 s per ton ; new ditto, 6d to 8d per lb. ; asparagus, 4s to 8s per 100 ; sea-kail, is to 2s per punnet ; garlic, 8d to is per lb. ; turnips, 2d to 4d per bunch ; carrots, 4d to 8d per bunch ; cucumbers, is Od to 3s Od each ; celery, 6d to is 6d per bundle; spinach, 5s Od to 6s Od per sieve; onions, 2s 6d to 3s 6d per bushel ; Spanish ditto, is to 3s per doz. ; leeks, lid to 2d per bunch ; shallots, 8d to 10d. ; horse-raddish, 2s Od to 4s Od per bundle ; parsley, is 6d to 3s Od per dozen bunches ; rhubarb, Os 4d to is Od per bundle ; endive, 2s to 4s Od per score ; beet, is to 2s 6d per dozen bunches ; parsnips, 9d to is 2d per dozen ; small salad, 2d to 3d per punnet ; mushrooms, is to is 3d per pottle. NEWGATE AND LEADENHALL. Turkeys, 480 d. to 8s Od; Geese, 5s Od to 6s each ; Ducks, 2s Od to 38; tame Rabbits, is to 18 9d; wild ditto, 8d to is 2d ; Pigeons, 8d to is each; roasting Pigs, 48 63 to 7s each; Surrey Fowls, 6s Od to 9s Od ; ditto Chickens, 5s Od to Gs 6d; barn-door Fowls, 4s Od to 7s Od per couple; Capons, 3s to 4s Oct ; Chickens, is 6d to 2s Od per couple ; hares, 2s 0(1 to 3s 6d each. English Eggs, 7s 6d to 8s 04; French ditto, 6s 6d to 7s Od per 120 ; fresh butter, 18 1d to 1s 4d per lb. BILLING SGATE. Turbots, 2s Od to 10s ; Brills, is to 3s Gd each; Salmon is 3d to is 9d per 113; Cod F;41.1, 2s to 6s Od each ; Soles, 6d to is 3d per pair ; Eels, 8d t o is per lb ; Lobsters, 6d to 3e Od ; Crabs, 6d to 2s 6d ; Whitings, 2s Od to 10s per doz.; Doreys, 2s to 7s ; Mullets, Gd to 2s 6d each ; Common Oysters, 108 Od to 16s Od; Natives, 40s Oct to 50s Od per bsh; Mackerel, 25s to 35s per 100; Smelts, is Oct to 5s prdoz.; Skate, (id. to Oct per lb; Shrimps, is 6d to 2s 6d per gallon; Bloaters, ls 6d to 2s Od per doz. ; Fresh Herrings, 8s Od to Os Od per 100 ; Haddocks, 4s to 12s per doz. ; Plaice, 4d to is Od each ; Carp, 2s Od per brace ; Tench, 2s Od to Os Od per brace ; Gurnets, 4d to is Oct each ; Halibut, 6d per lb. • Salt Fish, 2d to 5d per lb. ; Prawns, 2s Od to 4s Oct per lb. ; Flounders, is to 1.86 d per dozen ; Sturgeon, 6d per lb.; Pike 6d per lb. ; sprats, 3s Od per bushel. BREAD. The prices of wheaten bread in the metropolis are from 10d to 11d; of household ditto, 841 to 94d per 41b loaf. NEWPORT. _ _ _ Beef from 3s 2d to 4s 4d;:antton, 38 6d to 4s 6d ; veal, 4s Od to 5s 2d ; pork, 3s 6d to 5s Od per Blbs. WHITECHAPEL. _ _ Beef, from 3s Od to 4s 2d ; Mutton, 38 4d to 4s 4d ; Veal, 3s 8d to 5s 2d ; Pork, 3s 4d to 4s 8d per 81bs. by the carcase. HIDES AND SKINS. Market hides, 561 b to 641 b, 2d to Od; 641 b to 721 b, 2d to 3d; 721 b to 801 b, 3d to 31d ; 801 b to 881 b, 3d to 30 ; 881 b to 961 b, 3d to 3d ; 961 b to 1041 b, 3d to 4d ; 1041 b to 1121 b Od to Od. Horse hides, 6s 6d to Os Od; calf skins, light, 2s Od to 3s Od; ditto, full, 5s Gd to Os Od; polled sheep, 7s 6d to 9s Od; Kents, 7s Od to 8a Od; Half-breds, 6s 6d to 7s 6d ; Downs, 5s Od to 6s 3d ; shearlings, is 6d to is 7d. HAY MARKETS. SMITHFIELD.—Meadow hay, 3/ Os to 5/ Os ; clover ditto, 3/ 15s to 6l Os ; and straw, 1/ 17s to 2/ 5s per load. Supply moderately good, and trade rather dull. UIIMBERLAND.—Meadow hay, 2/ 18s to 51 5s ; clover ditto, 3/ 15s to 6/ Os; and stravr, 1/ 188 to 2/ 6s per load. A fair average supply, and a sluggish demand. WHITEOHAPEL.—Meadow hay, 31 Os to 5/ Os; clover ditto, 3/ 15s to 61 6s ; and straw, 1/ 16s to 2/ 4s per load. Trade steady, at late rates. LLOYD'S SHIPPING.-(THIS DAY.) LONDON, March 25.—Wind this day at Noon, W.S.W. ; strong breeze, and cloudy weather. STEADIERS (TRANSPORTS) TO THE EAST.—The Governor of Gibraltar requests that masters of steamers, when they arrive near to the Rock, to be distinguishable from the Upper Signal Station, they will hoist their numbers ac cording to Maryatt's Code. FALMOUTH, March 24.—Wind, N., fresh breeze, with fog. Sailed—Lucy, for Trinidad ; Anna Magdalena ) , Santa Cruz. RAMSGATE, March 24.—The Ceres, of Wisbeach, Hartle pool to Abbeville, was totally lost this morning during thick weather, supposed on the Kentish Knock ; crew saved. PLYMOUTH, March 24.—The Bonetta (barque), Pernam buco to Hamburgh, sunk to-day off the Start, after being in contact with the Anne Kimral, London to Cadiz ; ten men and the master's wife lost ' • the latter vessel has arrived here, w ith b ows s t ove, and 5 feet of water in hold. LIMERICK, March 22.—Wind. N. Sailed—St. George, for Barbadoes. LISBON, March 18.—The Soberana, Pernambuco to Fal mouth, arrived here on the 14th inst. leaky, and has partly discharged. ST. - CBE'S, March 17.—The Cheviot, of Milford, run on the rocks, and was wrecked ; crew and part of cargo saved. FISHGUARD• March 23.—The Thomas, from Liverpool, which was beached here on the 20th, has been surveyed, and will discharge. (BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH) LIVERPOOL, Saturday, 10.45 a.m. Wind, W. ; ;rash booze, and fine Sailed—Cambria (s), with troops, for Malta, via Kings town; Mount Washington, Africa; Chilena, Valparaiso. Off Port—No*4n ?incl. A oquipa (barques). MILITIA. Mr. M. MILNES asked the Secretary-at-War whether, in the new arrangements respecting militia officers, it was intended to give colonels' pay to lieutenant-colonels com manding, while on duty, and while incurring the same ex penses as full colonels ? Mr. S. HERBERT replied in the negative. POOR REMOVAL. Mr. HENLEY asked Lord J. Russell, or the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether the Govern ment proposed to extend the provisions of the Settlement and Removal Bill, so as to affect and abolish the power of removal of Scotch and Irish paupers from England, and of Irish and English paupers from Scotland ? ;Lord J. RUSSELL said the Government intended to in troduce a distinct measure on this subject for Ireland, with the view of abolishing the Poor Removal. Mr. DISRAELI asked if the noble lord had any objec tion to postpone the second reading of the Poor Removal Bill until the Irish bill was before the house. Lord J. RUSSELL could not consent to such a delay. NEUTRALS Sir F. KELLY asked Lord John Russell, or any other member of the Government, whether it is the in tention of her Majesty's Government, in the event of a declaration of war against Russia, to adopt any mea sures having reference to private property on board neutral vessels, or to the searching of neutral vessels, or to the fitting out of privateers ; and, if so, whether by order in council, or by instructions to the commanders of British ships, or how otherwise ; and whether such mea sures will be submitted to Parliament before they are de termined on or adopted ; whether her Majesty's Ministers intend to lay before this house the convention and agree ment which has been entered into between this and the French Governments, declaring the objects to be attained by the war which they they have undertaken conjointly, and the means by which they intend to effect the same. Lord J. RUSSELL said this question had already been discussed ; and what he then said he had now to repeat, namely, that the Government required some time to con sider the matter before they could come to any decision upon it. Sir F. KELLY reminded the noble lord that he had not answered the second question. Lord J. RUSSELL said it was probable that the deci sion of the Government would be embodied in an Order of Council, but it was probable the opinion of the house would have to be taken upon it. THE WAR. Mr. DRUMMOND asked if the noble lord had any ob jection to produce the treaty which had been signed be tween England and France relative to the objects of the impending war? Lord J. RUSSELL said no treaty had been signed— only notes had passed between the two Governments on the subject, and it would not be proper to produce these. _ . OATHS BILL. Sir F. THESIGER asked the noble lord if he intended to proceed with the Oaths Bill this day week ? Lord J. RUSSELL said he did, unless some urgent business should prevent his doing so. Sir F. THESIGER hoped the noble lord would give a more definite answer than that. Lord J. RUSSELL said he would on Monday. MILITARY UNIFORM. Mr. EWART called attention to a statement made in the public papers, that " the officers of all grades in the Russian army are now (with a slight distinction) clothed exactly like the men ;" and to inquire of her Majesty's Go vernment whether, on grounds of general expediency, as well as in justice to British officers, the propriety of adopt ing a similar system in the British army and navy will be considered. Mr. S. HERBERT said such a change would involve great expense, but he hoped shortly some arrangement would be come to by which it could be accomplished with advantage to all parties. METROPOLITAN GRAVEYARDS. In reply to Lord D. STUART, Mr. FITZROY stated that a most elaborate return con nected with the metropolitan graveyards would shortly be forthcoming. . • Lord D. STUART would communicate with the hon. gentleman before accepting this latter return in lieu of those for which he had asked. SETTLEMENT AND REMOVAL BILL. Mr. BAINES having moved the second reading of this bill, Mr. H. T. LIDDELL presented a petition from Liver pool against the measure. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE wished to put a question to the Speaker with regard to this bill. After the statement made by the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) that it was his intention to introduce clauses to prevent the removal of Irish paupers in the different unions of this country, he wished to ask whether it would be competent for the noble lord to introduce those clauses into a bill, the title of which specified only England and Wales without an in struction to the committee ? He asked this question, because he thought it might be well for the house to know what the bill was that they had before them. (Hear.) The SPEAKER replied that if the noble lord wished to introduce these clauses it would be necessary before going into committee to move an instruction to the committee to alter the title. Lord J. RUSSELL thought his hon. friend must have misapprehended his reply. What he did say was, that he had proposed to introduce the clauses, but that he found the construction of the bill would make it difficult to place them in it, and he had therefore undertaken to introduce a new bill. (Hear, hear.) Mr. STAFFORD complained that the house really did not know what the bill under discussion was ; and he thought that the conduct of the Government with reference to it was as unusual as it was blameworthy. On the 10th of February the bill was brought forward, and its first clause, as well as its title (to which the hon. member for Finsbury had called attention), distinctly limited it to England and Wales. The bill had been commented upon, and petitioned for or against throughout the whole coun try. In the meantime, however, rumours had got into cir culation to the effect, that the Irish members had sent a paper to a gentleman high in the Cabinet, stating that un less the irremovability of the Irish poor was admitted they should feel it their duty to oppose the bill. (Cries of " No, no," from the Irish members.) Well he (Mr. Staf ford) had not seen the paper, and could not pretend to state what it contained ; but of one thing he was sure, those rumours had become so current that yesterday his right hon. friend the member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley) had put the question to the President of the Poor-law Board, whether the Government were or were not prepared to ex tend the provisions of the bill to the Irish poor ? The right hon. gentleman stated in answer that he did not know. Mr. BAINES observed that what he had really stated was, that the question of Mr. Henley referred to Ireland I and Scotland, and that, as the Poor-law Board had nothing to do with those portions of the kingdom, he had better put his question either to his noble friend the Home Secre tary or to the noble lord the leader of the house. (Hear.) Mr. STAFFORD said that, at all events, it had been publicly announced by the Irish members in the lobby that the Government had acceded to the request contained in the paper to which he bad alluded. (Hear.) Now, how ever, the noble lord told them that the Government had neither refused it nor acceded to it • but that there was to be another bill, of the provisions of? which the house were necessarily ignorant, seeing that they neither had it before ---- it enormous expense of disputed removals; arki though would not, of course, compel landl or d s to build cottages for labourers, it would relieve th em f rom t h e reason which prevented them from buildin g . H e strong:ly advocated the measure. Colonel DUNNE complained that Lord John Russell had not kept faith wlth the Irish members, a rho had ob Wiled from Lord Palmersto n a recogn iti on o f th e claims . of Ireland on the subject. It was never k nown what the Cabinet would do on any question, and one member of it contradicted another. But if Ireland were to be included in this bill, by instruction of the committee or otherwise, it would be considered in the way becoming independent members—but if not, it would be opposed. Mr. AGLIONBY thought the question as to the intro duction of Ireland ought to be at once settled, and that the vote of every English as well as Irish member depended on it. In reply to Mr. Stafford's remark, he said that there was nothing in this bill to prevent the poor from returning to their native place; the only object was, to prevent their forcible removal. He objected to the second clause, not as tending to a national rate, but because it tended to perpetuate the present system. The subject would never be settled until fairly grappled with, and levy made on property wherever it was found, and of whatever it consisted. The present system was unconstitutional, and opposed to the very act of Elizabeth which enacted that the poor should be supported out of the wealth of the country. Mr. KNIGHT vindicatad the working of the old system, and expressed a hope that the bill wou ld not pass. He was convinced that it was not for the good of the poor, and that the right of settlement was the title deed of the poor to relief. lie did not regard th is bill as Mr. B a ines's, but as Mr. Chadwick, s. and as the produce of an old aggressive board, and of the starving party, who, S WO years ago, taught that all charity was wrong, and that ha rs h nes s and severity—the characteristics of this bill —were the proper treatment for the labouring classes. He cited e v id ence i n su pport of this character of the parties he I referred t o an d p roce eded at very great length to eulogize the r esu lt s ' of the law of settlement, which had made our labourers the best clothed and best fed population in Europe. In assailing the bill, he pointed out among its dangers that the promoters of a strike, like that of Preston, might, under the new measure, first flood all the work houses in England with their surplus population, and, this being placed at free quarters, the fight might begin. The law of settl emen t had defended the labourer against the proprietor, and clearances had taken place in Scotland and in Ireland for th e want of suc h a l a w, an d G o d forbid the proprietor should regain the tremendous power he possessed and abused b e f ore th e law existed. He next assailed district chargeability, which, he contended, experiments had already proved was a failure. After about an hour and a half of the hon. gentleman's arguments, the inattention of the house became impatience, and he ended shortly after a warningthe to h ouse not to imitate the bureaucracy of revolutionary France. Sir G. GREY gave his i cordial ass en t t o the second read ing of the bill, believing t to be framed on a right princi ple, and supported by accumulated evidence, while Mr. Knight's speech had shown that it was no h asty production. The opinion of the labouring class was known to be in fa vour of the abolition of compilsory removal, and the bill was eminently calculated to promote the interests of the poor. As regarded the rating portion, it was certain that, at present, rating fell very unjustly, and the proposed al teration did not tend towards a national rate, or to unfair local self-government. He regretted to have to allude to the other question which had been raised, but must say that if Colonel Dunne had accurately described the engagements into which the Government w as said to have entered, he must reluctantly with. hold his support from the bill; having seen too much of the evils from floods of Scotch and Irish pauperism to assent to the alleged proposition. Nor ought distinct matters to be mixed together. The engrafting the pro posed addition on the bill would raise =opposition through. out the country. Mr. PACKE moved the adjournment of the debate, on the ground that the house had not sufficient information as to the bill. He dwelt upon the injustice of the course that had been taken, which he described as unfair and un principled. Mr. MOORE thought that the intention of the Govern. ment ought, after the speeches Which had just been made, to be distinctly stated. Mr. MANGLES moved the adjournment of the debate, and the question was put. Mr. WALPOLE called upon her Majesty's Ministers to explain how this most important subject was to be treated. He hail intended to support the second reading, until he found what course was proposed to be adopted. Sir J. GRAHAM had been prevented by Lord Palmer ston's illness from seeing his lordship, but was of opinion that the debate should be adjourned and placed first on the orders for Monday, when he hoped that his noble col league would be able to explain what hail taken place. As far as he understood the principle of the bill, it was to substitute destitution for settlement as a right to relief ; and it was certain that if that change were adopted, a re consideration of the cases of Scotland and Ireland must come. But if the concession were made in those cases, it, must be accompanied by detailed regulations requiring ma tured consideration. These were not yet prepared. Mr. DISRAELI said that the bill had been introduced on the 10th of February, and the interval had been intended for the country to consider the measure. Much conside ration had been given to the subject, but now all the data were changed, and he suggested a later adjournment than was proposed. Lord C. HAMILTON entered at some length into a de- tail of what had passed with Lord Palmerston, denying that any sort of compact had been entered into, and ex plaining that all that had been done was to bring before Government the claims of Ireland to justice. Ho read a paper, in which the views of the Irish members had been embodied. Sir J. PAKINGTON complained of the course taken by the Government as most unfair towards all parties. He had come down intending to support the whole bill, believing that the whole plan was before the house. Fur ther proceedings ought to be adjourned until the inten tions of Government were known. Mr. S. WORTLEY thought that the debate should be adjourned to the earliest possible period, because it was of the highest importance to know as soon as possible what were the intentions of the government. At the same time ho thought it would be most convenient to have all the measures of the Government before the house at the same time. (Hear, hear.) Sir G. GREY thought that the proposition to adjourn until Monday was only fair, when it was expected that the noble lord at the head of the Home Department would be in his place. The SPEAKER then put the question that the debate ba adjourned until Monday next. Mr. PACKE said that he would move an amendment that the debate should be adjourned until the 24th of April. Colonel DUNNE gave notice that if the bill should_ go into committee, he would move an instruction to the corn mittee to insert the words " Ireland and Scotland" in the bill. Sir J. GRAHAM said that the house would not be in a worse position respecting Irish and Scotch paupers by reading the bill a second time. (Cries of " No, no.") .Elon. members could have the fullest opportunity of moving any amendments they pleased in committee. The noble lord the member for Loudon had come down to the house that evening at considerable inconvenience, and from indisposi tion was obliged to leave early. He, however, believed that the noble lord would be in his place on Monday even ing ; and he also hoped that the noble viscount the Secre tary for the Home Department would be also present on Monday, when he would, no doubt, be prepared to make a statement in reference to the measure before the house. It would be impossible for the Government to frame a mea sure until they knew the pleasure of the house with respect to the removal of Irish and Scotch paupers. Mr. PACKE—WiII the right hon. baronet undertake to I say that no debate will take place on Monday on the bill Sir J. GRAHAM—Oh, no ! After a few words from Lord H. VANE, The house divided, when the numbers were -121 For the amendment Against it The announcement was received with loud cheering. INCOME TAX. The house thou went into committee on the income tax, Mr. BOUVERIE in the chair. The several clauses were agreed to, and the house re sumed. On the motion for the second reading of the Bribery, &c., Bill, Colonel SIBTHORP felt it his duty to move the adjourn ment of the house, if the bill was persevered with. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said if there was any objection to proceed with it, he would postpone it till Monday. The second reading was accordingly postponed till Mon day. On the motion of Mr. GRENFELL for the adjourned debate on the Military Knights of Windsor, . 4 Mr. R. PHILLIMORE said he understood the Govern ment intended to accede to the motion, but he felt it necessary to state, after an examination of all the docu ments, he was satisfied that the Dean and Chapter of Windsor had discharged their duty in the most upright mauner. The address was then agreed to, and the house ad journed at a quarter to one o'clock. TAILORS' AGENCY LITERARY INSTITUTE, NEWING TON CAUSEWAY.—The Rev. W. Cadman, rector of St. George's, Southwark, delivered a very able and appropri a t e lecture to the members of this institution on Thursday evening, on the Responsibilities of .Werkin Men the Right Hon. the Earl of Shaftesbgry presiding: - he popu larity of the noble lord, from.tie enlighten° iefforti he addressed. has made to ameliorate the uen4ition of th e - h um b ler classes, drew together a numeroumaidience ; and the lec ture, which was an eminently practiculone ' was well fitt e d to instruct and benefit those to whom it we , a Lord to ok occasionShaftesbury, to notice, in acknowledging g a a the v objoteets of this of c thank, promising and interesting institution, where the workmen of one establishment are united. together promote intellectual am, education of their children, and. their own intellectual the im provement. The lectures, library, reading-room, baths were earnestly commended urged upon the members by sobriety,• lordship, and bY his who faithful attention to the comfort f •'to s o their households show how much they valued those provetueut which had been go opportunities of ini diligence, a brought within their reach. The noble addressa was warmly applauded, and the whole lord's proceedings were calm . lated to excite the liveliest interestsl diccously nd wisely desire the FATAL AFFRAY. in all w ho advancement of the labouring catastrophe occurred afternoon Portion of the community." — SHIELDS - , MARCH •- 23 A serious market-place. A n this can:Lao, in South Shields named Chr. _ . unfortunate s Dixon, having shipped for 61., Londo n vo y a g e, was in terrogated by a union man , a nd abused fo r not adherin g to the uni on ru l es, which require 61. 10s. An alterca tion to o k termed) was st ruc k on th e back of the ne ck b y th e union place. Di x on (the black le g , as he was man, and th e poor f e ll ow f e ll, and died in a few minutes. A feeli ng The crowd (rave indications of t akin g summary vengeance 01 horror has been excited here by the deed. on the unionist, who fled into a neighbouring public house, until lie was taken in charge by the police. The deceased was comparatively an old man to his assailant. The deceased is reported to belong to North Shields. Large meetings of seamen c ontinue to be held here on the subject of their disputes about wages.-- , ltzpping Gazette. RELEASE OF MR. BELL, THE ENGLISH ENGINEER. —A letter from Brody of the 14th inst. informs us that Mr. 8011, who was taken prisoner by the Russians in the Black Sea while serving in an Egyptian steamer, had arrived in that town, accompanied by a Russian officer. Although it is long since the Czar professed to give Mr. Bell his freedom he has only just been re leased, and his friends have hitherto remained uncertain even as to the fact of his existence. Offers were made to Bell, while a prisoner, to enter the Russian service, i but he refused them. He is now on his way to Trieste, via Vienna. _ 'Paid. - ....., . '~