The Sun. — London, England, 1845-05-27 00:00:00

amomealos trusteeship, where th e l ast party on whom the trust devolved bad found the will proved in a wrong j ur i s di ct i on , t h e w h o l e riProceedings became void. N ow thi s state o f t hi ngs , an d ot h er evanees and ineonveniences, would be remedied if the Bill t,fere their Lordships were passed into law. The difficulties ,Present were so great, the inconveniences weresoeverel t y o ti. 't , that parties were obliged to have recourse exclusively w ere ue Court of the Archbishop of Canterbury. But they • not safe even there. The probate under this l /par. iscliction was not void, but voidable; and, until e , `,,was set aside, it was available. - (Ilea!, hea o r o . e ) eery was the difficulty as the law now stood, but it was 1, 1 7 e s-sily removed, and he therefore proposed to do away Ic-`l,' it, Their Lordships would not be surprised that e t l iw oe Y.-aimrnissio ner . had recommended i that they should be o._ away with. With regard to wills, there was no proper "`Ault they should be kept, and still more, there was a e t o "` a r b lty to ascertain what testamentary disposition an indivi- Ith ad left, or who were his personal representatives. As see difficultias were so much felt, it was no matter of wander tiol'at_,the several Committees and Commissioners had rt•com oke.°°e.d the abolition of all there inferior courts. The t ze tnalletion held with respect to the Diocesan courts. In the eboelis.gain in 1 833, the Commissioners had recommended there was not s e s a.s ‘,ent of the Diocesan courts, as ie'""aent business to engage them. In that same year a a7solution f similar kind had passed the ~.i lsr, Rouse °of Pl' t: In I 836 a similar resolution had i iiin g °,_ that House, and 'at again en in 1843 a Bill had been brought La; Rouse of 'Commons for a similar purpose. In Sails lial ' t was proved t h at t h ere had been no suit for three years, port tt Chiche s t er and Norwich there was. at the time th e re- Eli 't'e t 'es made, no business whatever. This matter had beh I.4considered in the report of 1836, and he thought t id h o a n t the th e slatith.odation to establish one genet al Court in London vas Ministration of all effects under testamentary .. V eer ! Rood one. With respect to the . ob . jectres that this ses, ` w ould do away with all local jurisdiction, he must ob- NI e that in one diocese, from Penzance to Exeter, was 120 is es ; arid iu Lincoln, he believed that the distance was not, i lle t , le e ases, much less. He proposed to adopt precisely th e Za,roo plan in proving a will as was now used, only that ittu.".:l simuld be sent to the central Court in London. fesZ t e ,° 1 being liens to the diocesan Court. The only dif lte - " cc ' ne would make was, that the original will should be la h l ) ,_ t l'Y the Registrar of the Court fourteen days, for the 4 7i% of all those who might have a right to inspect it, 444 3 " th at a copy of it should be taken, as was now ta to e r n s , lit'i th en the original should he returned to the exceu o ._ Verit,esPeet to the Prerogative Court of the Archbishop that *4 % . ell the Committees from 1832 to 1836, save of those ?tie Witnesses, were all unanimous in the abolition of tit one " r f ,..t. The whole amounted to this, that there should . be I _ ue tlei.7 . ,urt, and with respect to small property relief might "%rid :'"u. There would then be one central Court in h Pos q t s „, " 1 which from the copies being kept there an ,7ste t;"'tY would be given of investigating the .tes ' la--"ispositions. of property in all future time . . sss_4 l3 a . s the jorisdiction over wills or granting probates, it 11 "sa a ou : all centred in this single court. There were at e s - o alt nical er things which it was improper to confide to en (Te' fra il. „run, as „„, , for instance in the payment of legacies under le kid The a • • particular instances could not he sit sei die „ . , I t it: Cl . e3 in so this ifleapit it he interference of the Court of Chancery, and res pe enue se ft w ehld be better,. therefor t e s , at once to transfer to that court. NVith poo r , e r t to e l iot e . h,_l the ecclesiastical courts to class them with the lessioates. , ri t ':•r•ate s , he proposedmay in appeal to quarter t tith eit it er n. ons ertsis w as fo e r ve t r h y eir recovery. With respect . to D II „ ela to llsw-s Pre Pos e' d to transfer all jurisdiction respecting -r-ce ettn -Gi art of Chancery ; and with respect to all penal (4 the o l es 3 he p r oposed no e et e- hatsy . to transfer them to the civil tribunals intends oof a set 'ltch was an outline of the Bill, and this was ttlitteti, for l i of men against another set of men, but was with • As sail e general benefit, in' which all parties were a t , th e tit Yas 1 812 he found Sir William Scott, together t t-sgteiprtoteilaear,eceurtC4ef Justices and four of the most eminent . in this The same feeling aged . 18 4 ` . in tit w op a i s nio i n t s vie o w f . all the Committees that he was thus en -41 ]tin h ad carrying this Bill through the House ? e a . °44 e, b at ' l 'd brought a Bill to effect these objects into the =Ray i ng t the great difficulties had occurred at that time in ZiY Istili -e n ill into effect. It was said that it would . do • ti Pliil e of titaile /3ishops' .couris, and therefore destroy the dis - th t he t hough t eelee gy. This was unquestionably a difficulty, ,tturthe th tight that it was not for him to meet it. He thought tildiss,ephnenfs_.ought to meet it themselves, and provide for xis out th e lill.3.lneir own clergy.. Year after year passed by 5 et i s th ese ola! hops concurring in the measure intended to a as o -etredu4ceicts.. At length they . concurred, and a measure M i ls!, ta u s , , which, however, did . not thebecom law until report e of the trittestielt ' c o z a t i la ss a i t one fr r o s ro w t a h s e m t a ime , de until the passing *er e sits oleasure to which he alluded, all proceedings Ns. esPeoded, no plan having been in force for the proper nool, he had the . clergy, l i , the early part of the session of t e te, a_ . a serious illness, and when he returned to the _ ',l e„,_",:round that matters were in such a state that any Bill t e es,l i c i ec have brought in would not be carried. He was, there hat ala to see the matter taken up by the present Govern- Zase Ref ejoieed that in 1843 a Bill was brought into the t ;Tl t: _Common,. He would not stop to inquire why t st la eh a let e r 4 assed. Another attempt was made in 1814, , t ztaj oed f th e wi no better fate. In the present year he had QPit it w as not bringing forward this measure, because he t Z e e to leaveae not In his province to interfere, and thought the ces tote it in the hands of the Government, but ai i 'lln y ti Pt bad announced in the other House of Parliament ;L'lat ili _ Id not intend to bring in any Bill for that purpose 11:"1voliticr present session. Finding, then, this to be te case, 11 4 0 ere d that, when he could best effect this object,j he e „, 1t . ,1.0 . s d l l' i Ind had therefore brought the present Bill before VI tat e . Pa• It had been opposed, on the greund that it %Z.lloilbt,ftere with the private interests of certain localities. if all public men trj,' ill tit:l:Po.44in must be expected ; colOrlieist Importance of the measure, bnt a:nd if the Houses kl iv eered e nt had expressed their approval of it, and amend the 14, 4 1 hist em . that i t would go far to th t hit I°4 of ti b e should not . e . xpect e to_ Nat t he p ap I " ee ' th e , at u ic should be prevented . from obtaining a . go d tit '''Usit ; 4 .,5e it did not suit persons in certain localities in :s;4 N t s , 4 '. 1 ,,. 41 ' parl i a men t were to be influenced by such mo tilt4ey -1 ,. 'old ereto discountenance the Bill, it would s tn eh ti t s -41. la e -te ditabl ' e. He had no wish to exclude llem e b o e t r 'hea -°n e lle of Parliament from expressing their s that r otsi ° l'iru e , s ' e 'object • die contrary, he considered t e h o, R A t .° ariZ a fr fss ts'a treated with respect ; but if they were I ' ll isi i l ,,,, t s'iwairt i Pri k vate, and not from public interests, he lou t I t e sure. - til t ighla derogatory to Parliament not to -Otte to'fat - i 'e ra - ,, - „ t rusted that if their Lordships were of to th e o it'ree it th e- '" was a proper one, they would not the °pi:Poliical „th.'r, Sanction ➢without any apprehension as dered, th "l Pr ail th e lPu . 4 Might ' create out of doors. It was therefor at it Was into enalnen t men bY whom it had been "nu: te M e ' lititt their l,nded to do great good, and he trusted, Th e 7°M time °llishiPs would allow the measure to be s t t, oo 14° P of I' ta s "eta one to th e said he was not about to . offer s ifes e - ` t °f th e D je Noble and Learned Lord, but having eriti e 4d, he wat"..e,cle.siastical Commissioners to whom he had Y agr eed It . n i _eure as l a, to make a few observations. .Fle al t` i e ° l isvols e( l t '.' "e Noble Lord, that one of the principal *Ns would b e In the 1 3ill was, how the convenience of . the Nei:: be se e„„Pr"loted by it, and trusted that its machinery WO aot I, 'ustruted, that persons requiring a probate R as e th e f e. put to greater expense or inconvenience than I . v ezo !,, ent ey ett clause of the Bill, which tS‘.li i T s 4 1 ,'ssael'ent from the In one ended by the Ecelesi 2en ro ta t: i "i 'm in thelB42,one recommended of excommunication g t, 11 , 24 . " 4 tti t te eine;:t, t? be - blbed under the Bill. Did Nita 'gullet asst a lay court with a power like this f %Urn w ell as divorce cases were to be referred bet it % s ' karria rit s aat % ' , out l a w Re was of divine origin, .heving reli- NI "eh p ow lon, and was binding by a civil contract,. Vl_ 410 h,.. ere o u .k, I ld fill' . (‘ au , 1101 to be invested in any but a sin tio bite -'IJOAa 4, il llla e N tsbi oh . I thought that the objection, or rather • n , tiod were entertained by the Right Rev. Prelate J'ltl ht . ele w o „, ?II a little c onsideration to be without founda ‘,,,,,eat h e .iu submit it to his n judgment-the best ~,s e , ""t t ittoemitct?ould submit it to-his own mind. If they had li e ,tiii % te e avnit_t_bey would meet with due attention in the l 4,1 1 ttkrhjeet , , 4 7. 7 ',_ he was in office in 1832 he framed a had• was N si i Ns ill 4 I) r• Lush pas divided into six parts, and L°a a....! 1 ?e e a sa e Ington and Sir Herbert Jeon__er Fest, t i md i e thth g 4 , ment caused by the Reform Bill in that iii -1 4 1 1 DessiLi e s done with respect to it. In 1833 it was ta l .tettLe e i, to the measure, and in 1834, "4 - ' 4 44 " which t % s eb ,_ of 84 4 t Z taret to to al "! they were not proceeded with. V, f i %Int is !. objection raised by pow Right Rev. Prelate 1,,,te 6 th ou shin e , invested with the per of excomm e tin Sti?4,ltttoillse oisTilenomemzieNrveas :It i e s r la abl t e ri t h o un d a isch l th e a rg n Dr. t : l N e le d re'a she late Sir W. Scott, nt afterwards y Lord Stowell, Isa l etti o biz h,„rfai!'s ; but then the Right Rev. Prelate N I:, we e get and said lay origin." Excom lieli„ w ee Ret It sounded ver lac e and not very tem -4 O i ' aa t „,,Pe P rs a e ri l Y, 3 ° le its object, g an ' d was like outlawry, \N o "i tli ' o . put in an appearance. The spiritual tw i ts to e .eoti e.celesiastical courts was vested in the Bishop !Is, 44`eitit ed ;',l.e A.rehbishop of Canterbury, the first of f NI hi e 6) aro➢Vicar-General, and the other the Dean oN t ki„ t oim -, ." greater anomaly, or one more offen creli,Wefe Is b e rrine iPle than this, did not exist. It t 'l i Ilea e- ,' so treated - anti ha knew, from a NNy -4 L IBaa -5 , had with ' the two Right Reverend . , ttl, .% ,, n u i d L tnat the were perfectly willing that this dia_Cs ei l s hdi te , "e put an end to, and the power of appointing 'Z e ta 4; sh oela ves s te L d in the ' Crown, ant but they required that Veedieim" take u 0 slfl duty of providing the ti "tN - j i _rts. - ai°lticers an n d it • e ud t es e of the Admiralty and , 'A: th 'li b ! had felt it j to be his duty to state these fore leoithit 1541 , and it only remained for him to hope 'or e eoa tt l of we removed when the Bill wag committed. t o i .al l / 4 1, b INCRILSE • ia e was not only a 'le Ni l , t it a *shine _ / . i . said Tarr i i sai tt l, ttttlii. oi ly wit _ g ot Divine ordinance g , and . so t far there 't t eek ti e,lireee,„," Foncerned, he did not think it advisable N I- `obis cos`e th -.."` Jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts. well. leo‘ tt t t,!a o - t t‘ tt part of the Bill which would abolish local Ns, ,l tied exp ense " e registration of wills, because he thought 40 eila 'lna,, on the poor man while it benefited the Itu_tAteottipld-noetoauld, easily inspect a will in London, but ri el lit, c eomplish this so easily. iii li e , kll eie th e ee Lit-% said there could be no doubt the pre !4% 'el Nth t eel"stical courts was highly objectionable. 4, 41 " 1 ,2 1 1 s a r t the Church had nothing to do with the IL !i t pis t , O ,„ woi.th actions for defamation of character, or '%Ca s Jet ii ! tithes, or with brawling in church ialst *l lO 7. Church had the power of appoint- ISO 1 a,„.` e eat d o lled these cases. But the Noble Earl as t lo . sr e ed wi th 7,ri had alluded to matrimony. Now he '54,741•40,° obit n,'', Noble Earl that marriage was some iitt,4l ti tt Y 44,i' siZI1 contract ; but still that was .rt? reason INN etc .jet• Pates should not be settled in a civil court. t<i t essit y ti, he he had heard urged against the Bill s, eta rt We, ,"'t existed for local courts • but as he did t, lot°llldr"bhible that the functions . wan ecclesiastical .a. It, . 4,,,4"4,,Prtzperly performed, it was, therefore, 1 . 1 '()li b 4 not there should be one great central i,, i ltilt t ll it i?IIANcL t ,v's i :Rre eti e dia no , LOR said he should be . acting h in theoltht fe w sus p l a ne .' ,suPport the second reading, eca h . i ss la ti gnu with one brought forward by t e Rl i Vcr rd; e S -4-44 ; 0; jrcun Lord AI 3 INGER, which did not ll t lII II A LIOr e s il ' "cos read a second time. I ,aw'itti s , o tt lls re e '' d PRINT WORKS BILL. . i , Ay 4 P r i d _ a first time, and ordered to be read a y e t CAU SES e"' il i . te.fas,e L AN CON SOLIDATION (SCOT- Ii/117 : 4 Scot 10 .°) BILL. ' 41 4_ 4 . t-tt eld ti r „ - "allway Clauses Consolidation Bill . No s . -e, and ordered to be committed on "'Ps th en , 1 11 t1113)-- ad Purned till Friday next. % ) , t t../,3 .8 , *----- 1 :1 4 NV 4 k t O P C'o 7 k 1 ,t, ~ tt n ailifilat F O o N or S r . ,,e /I' loe la k y . 26. ) 11 11. 1 111 T.P °°1 ' the Ca • 4 4 % read a t, DEA N ATERWORKS. it ti e i k lits uird ti ttle. I k II w k st,°II°I.IGH RAILWAY DEVIA 'O4 r • p ' also r ead ' I °N mu. c, NI, t/i/bAcoR,„ a third tim e , t4 4itt i t , (lit\rts "ALI. RAILWAY. k Che CouirPresented petitions from landowners a t ' s * t Y• Vof Cornwall against the proposed 'W a ll ' ll A w AT t n 41 t t . r „ RR°, --PORD UNION 01 th:tltTiriio..." Presented apetition from the guardians '` caff eret " , ) pray io _ .- g the klouse to equalise the poor ' flnia sie. 1 BANK OF IRELAND. Sir H. W. BARRON presented a petition from the Rev. Dr. Clay (as se understood) against the National Bank of Ire land Bill RAILWAY BILLS, Mr. STEWART wo RT LEY moved the order of the day for the adjourned debate on Railway Bills. Mr. W. P ATTEN said since - the debate had been ad journed he had considered this subject fully, and ho was 'in doubt as to whether they ought not to adopt the resolution altogether as it now stood. At the same time they ought to look that, in framing these regu lations, they threw no discouragement in the way of rail way companies. The house should recollect that they had in a former session passed certain regulations which at the time were considered as not imposing any restrictions upon railway companies, but were afterwarJs found to prevent many useful schemes from coining before the House. The (louse, he again repeated, should take care that they enacted that which was calculated in the smallest degree to discourage the extension of these projeets, Mr. HAVES said that the commission had proposed that in any railway Bill brought into the House which recited any railway Act already passed, this clause should be in troduced. Therefore they must consider this clause as extending to all railway Bills which had passed since the first railway Bill had been introduced ►nto that Mouse. The lion. Member for the West Riding went as far as that—but the Noble Lord went much further. The Noble Lord further required that every railway Bill reciting any preceding railway Act should be subject to revisiwn and alteration, as regarded the rates of fines. Now if the House intended to revise the rates of charges of all railway com panies, let the House distinctly decide that it intended to revise the rates and charges of all railway companies, after due notice given, and after the parties objecting had had an op portunity of bring heard. It had been said that the charges were high—bat by the returns which had been made it had beets shown that for thirty-eight millions of capital in vested in railways tile average return had not been more than five per cent. Thus it did not appear that such an enormous profit had been made on the capital invested in railways as ought to induce the Ilouse to interfere. It had been said that the charges in foreign railways were leaver. Undoubtedly they were ; but it should be recollected that in foreign railways a portion of the capital had been tar nished by the State, while here the whole had been subscribed by private individuals. And in foreign railways, if there was riot a certain return for the capital invested, taxation was imposed upon the people to secure the required amount. 'I herefore, the resolution in its present state, ought not to be passed, but, at all events, he could not consent to it unless he heard some explanation of the words which provided that if any future Bill should recite a former Act, such Act should be subject to the decision of Parliament. Such a resolution, he repeated, ought not to be passed by the House ; but before the House did pass it, he hoped Government would favour them with their opinion upon the subject, because the resolution in itself affected great masses of property, and was looked to wida great interest by the public. Mr. BARING said the House, by its previous legislation, never intended to sanction the monopolies which were exercised by some of the existing railway companies. If the House re ferred to the reports of former Committees, they would see that, so far from this being the case, a clause was introduced into almost all the Bills to prevent such monopolies but that clause bad since proved to be defective ; but, nevertheless, it was evident every Committee appeared desirous of establishing such a system of competition as would avert the existence of monopoly. He was, therefore, inclined to think the House had already the power to make additions arid alterations in the Acts of companies, who should come to them for extended powers ; but, in his opinion, they had no right to make these alterations until the companies did come to Par liament. He hoped, before the approach of the next sessioa of Parliament, Government would take the whole subject of railway legislation into their serious consideration, and see if something could be done to improve the present system. It was evident such a system could not last ; and ho thought Government could, if they liked, place railway legislation upon a more firm, settled, and satisfactory footing. Sir R. PEEL thought the resolutions contemplated two distinct things. In the first place they contemplated subjecting every railway company, whether new or old, when they ap proached Par.iarrient for new or extended powers, to such restrictions and additional legislation as the House might think desirable. The second resolution sub jected any railway which might hereafter come to Parliament to a resolution affecting the tolls and fares which might be charged on such railway, and he must confess the two resolutions appeared to him to be anything but objectionable. They (the House) had not time then to consider all these ob jections, but they said to the promoters of railway schemes— " We should be prejudicing your interests were we to postpone the passing of your Bill until we had time to give the subject due consideration. We shall consent to paw your Bills generally, without inserting this resolution ; but we shall reserve to ourselves the power of subjecting your tolls to such further control as we may see proper." That was to say, they would not exercise an arbi trary right on the subject of tolls generally, but they should deem it their duty to see that passengers were protected, and, holding these opinions, he should support the motion of the Hon. Member. Mr. PARKER said there was an absolute necessity for the discovering some mode by which the labour of the Committees might be abbreviated, and by which they might be put in a better position than on the mode by which they had been hitherto guided. Hon. Committees might well complain that their labours were somewhat of the greatest, when seventeen or eighteen days were consumed on each line, traffic evidence taking up a five days' consideration, engineering evidence as much more, and clauses, with counsel's speeches en either side, filling up the remainder of the space. He thought that no public duty should be imposed upon the Members of the House sitting on Committees. After a few words from Mr. DARBY, Captain MANGLES said he thought the House ought to well and seriously consider the whole object be fore they legislated upon a subject of such importance. He thought it would be most desirable that her Majesty's Go vernment should take up the subject, and give the whole weight of their inflnence on a question upon which Hon. Mem bers so materially differed. After some observations from Mr. ENTwisLE and Lord EIRINCTON, Mr. STUART WORTLEY said he thought that evary Bill which would be hereafter brought forward ought to be subject to such regulations as Parliament might think fit. Go vernment ought to bring in some comprehensive measure on the subject of railways. Mr. COLLETT wished to know whether it would be a sessional or a standing order? Lord HOWICK thought that it would be better to make it a sessional order, as it would at a future period come under the consideration of the House. Mr. GL ADSTONE said that lie thought it would be im possible not to have some difference, but most of the railways had improved the accommodation of the third-class trains. - . The resolution, as amended, was then agreed to. Sir GEORGE GREY presented a petition against the South-Western Extension Railway Bill, and praying to be heard by counsel. On the motion of Mr. SPOONER, the third reading of the Chester and Holyhead Railway Bill was postponed to Wednesday next. Mr. COLLETT moved, That it be an instruction to the Committee on the Norwich and Brandon Railway Deviation, and Diss and Dereham Branches Bill, that they bear parties on the petition of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of the Borough of King's Lynn, notwithstanding the same was not presented three clear days before the day appointed for the first meeting of the Committee.—Agreed to. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. On the motion that the House at its rising adjourn to Wed nesday next, Mr. COLLETT moved that the House adjourn to Thurs day next. Iler Majesty's Ministers would entertain their friends to-morrow. The Derby day would be the day after, and he saw no reason why Members should not be at liberty to attend i . Captain PECHELL seconded the motion. Sir J. GRAHAM hoped the Hon. Gentleman would not press the motion, it would certainly be a very bad precedent for the House to sanction. Hon. Members were at liberty to attend or not, as they pleased, but to accede to a motion that the House should not sit on a particular day, because there was a race, would be unbecoming the dignity of the House. Mr. COLLETT had no objection to forego the motion, pro vided Hon. Gentlemen on the other side agreed not to make a House on the Derby day. Otherwise he would certainly press the motion to a division. POOR-LAWS. _ . Sir G. GREY wished to ask whether it was the intention of the Right Hon. Baronet opposite to introduce further amend ments into the present Poor-law Act, as, according to the report of the Poor-law Commissioners, which gave full infor mation on the subject, several clauses in it were found to be particularly inoperative. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that he could assure the Right Hon. Gentleman that ho had received the Report of the Poor-law 'Commissioners about a fortnight ago, and quits agreed with him in his earnest desire to amend the law. RAILWAY BUSINESS. Mr. L A BOUCHENE said that the subject to which he wished to call the attention of the House was the present state of the railway business before the House. It was unnecessary for him to go at any length into the state of that business, for it was a matter of notoriety that the amount and the delay of railway business was, without exception, unparalleled in any foreign State. There had been presented to the House during the course of the present session no fewer than 240 railway Bills, 119 of which had received the approbation of the Board. None of these Bills had as yet passed through the House, and it showed what an immense mass of railway legisla tion they had now to struggle with. In the year 1828 and 1831 the House adopted a certain course under circumstances of a far less aggravating description than this. The House resolved to pass resolutions to enable Committees to receive the minutes of evidence taken before former Committees, in order to save the parties concerned a repetition of the expense and trouble which they had already gone through. He would venture to suggest to the Right Hon. Gentleman whether it would net be better to do as was done in 1829. Many Bills in which the parties concerned had expended a great deal of money, would pass through Committees of the House, but at so late a period that it would be utterly impossible for the other House of Par liament to take them into consideration. He would call upon them to consider whether some means should not be devised to facilitate the business, and thereby do benefit both to the public and the parties concerned. It was of the greatest importance to all parties interested that whatever was intended should be announced without delay, that all might know what course they would have to take, and not be left to mere conjecture. — The question which he had to put to the Right Hon. Gentle man was whether he was prepared now to announce to the House any intention her Majesty's Government might have come to in consequence of the state of the railway business of the House ? And if he was not so prepared, whether or not he would he prepared at no distant period? Sir G. CLERK said that the question was of great im portance, an-1 it had not escaped the attention of her Majesty's Government ; but he could not say that it was intended to propose any measure to the House at present. But no inconvenience would be the consequence of delaying any pro position upon the subject for four or five weeks. The two in stances to which the lion. Gentleman had referred, took place under very peculiar circumstances. They were both cases which arose from the sudden dissolution of Parliament—in 1829, by the demise of the Sovereign ; and, in 1831, under circumstances of a peculiar kind. The object of the question was properly understood by her Majesty's Government, and it would be duly attended to, but there was no precedent for the course which was now suggested. Lord J. RUSSELL said the Right Hon. Gentleman was right in saying there was no precedent for the suggestion of his Right Hon. Hon. Friend. But the state of business was also without a precedent.—( Hear, hear.) He hoped that the Right lion. Gentleman would not postpone the announce raent of his intentions for so long a term as six weeks. Supposing the Bills should pass that House, in time to pass the House of Lords, there would be an end to the matter for this session. But if parties saw that by de laying the Bills which they opposed, they could destroy them altogether, or make it necessary to go through all the expense over again next year, they would stop at no expense or shifts to procure the delay.—(Hear., hear.) He agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet that the subject required great attention, but he hoped that its importance would induce the Government to give it that attention without delay. Lord G. SOMERSET explained that the subject to which the Noble Lord referred had been under the consideration of • the Government. THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDA Y _EVENING, MAY 27, 1845. Lord HOWICK remarked, that the promoters of Railway Bills were at a loss to know how they were to get on, as many of them despaired of getting their Bills through both Houses this session. If the Government, as he hoped they would see the propriety of doing so, would give an idea of their intentions respecting those measures, a great benefit would accrue. Defi nite information as to the course Government intended to take respecting Railway Bills that were unable to be carried through both Houses this session, would remove a great deal of difficulty. Sir JOHN WALSH wished to know from the Right Hon. Member for the City of London (Lord J. Russell) in regard to the resolutions he meant to propose, whether it was his in tention to move them altogether or separately? He asked this question, as the resolutions were quite distinct in the princi ples which they set forth. Lord J. RUSSELL said the Hon. Gentleman had better wait till the close of his speech. Captain PECHELL said, that on Friday last he had put a question to the Hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury, respecting the conveyance of the mail to the Scilly Islands, and for copies of the correspondence which had passed between Mr. Augustus Smith and the Post-office authorities. _ Air. CARDWELL answered that the papers were in the hands of the printer. In answer to Mr. MANGLES, Lord JOCELYN replied that all the returns 'applied for were in the hands of the printers. AI R. O'DRISCOLL. Mr. ROSS wished to know whether it was true what had been stated about the conduct of Mr. O'Driicoll, a magistrate, at a recent trial at Skibbereen. It was reported that that gentleman had made use, on the bench, of the following ex pression—" By God, I don't understand these popularity.hunt ing magistrates." If that were true, the matter ought to be inquired into, and taking also his general conduct into con sideration, it would be a question whether he ought to be suf fered to remain any longer on the bench. Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE said he saw an account of what the Hon. Gentleman had alluded to, in the public news papers. lie was not, however, prepared to give any oticial information on the subject, but he would communicate with the Lord Chancellor as to an inquiry into the matter. Lord EBR[NGTON said that Hon. Gentlemen on his side of the House were not inclined to dispute that Mr. O'Driseoll had on a previous occasion been very properly dismissed. The excuse which was then given for his dismissal was, that from the infirmities of his age, and not of his temper, he was inca pable of continuing his duties. He thought that dismissal ought to have taught him a lesson to preserve a better guard over his temper. Dr. BOWRING would wish to know whether the negotia tion that had been going on between the Post-office autho rities of this country and Sweden, that had been for some time discontinued, had been renewed. Mr. CARDWELL said he was not aware that any proposi tion had been made for renewing the correspondence. INSANE CRIMINALS IN SCOTLAND. Mr. ELLICE begged to call the attention of the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department, to the case of a person who had lately been convicted of murder in Scotland. It appeared that the man was found to be insane, and was acquitted of the charge of murder on that account ; but notwithstanding that, the unhappy man had been refused ad mittance into any lunatic asylum, and he was now in a state of raging madness. The Hon. Member then read a letter he had received, stating that the man was in a dying state yet there was no accommodation for him in the prison in which he was confined—namely, that of Cupar, in Fife. Sir J. GRAHAM said he was aware that this was indeed a melancholy case ; but, unfortunately, by the law of Scot land, the man could not be removed from Scotland. By the same law, no public lunatic asylum could be compelled to take him in, and no private one would. The man was at present in prison, where he was to remain during the Queen's pleasure, and could not be removed ; but all proper care should be taken of him, and further than that he (Sir J. Graham) could not interfere. Mr. ELLICE could only state to the House what his in formant bad told to him. He said that there was a ward in the first Penitentiary in which lunatics could be received. Mr. ESCOTT wished to put a question to the Noble Lord (Lord Jocelyn) in relation to a case which involved great in dividual hardship, as well as an important general question. He wished to ask whether any Government return had been received from Bombay, referring to the case of Lieutenant Collins, who had been tried by a court-martial in that Presi dency, and illegally dismissed the service of the East India Company—whether the Court of Directors and the Noble Lord did not think that if this decision were illegal—if it were unjust, full reparation might not be made to the individual who had been so dismissed by this illegal sentence ? Lord JOCELYN said that, by the last dispatches received some weeks since, it was determined on that the case of Lieutenant Collins should be reconsidered. The Government had not since that time received any official information that the subject had been so re-considered, and therefore he was unable to satisfy the Hon. Member on the matter in question. Mr. COLLETT said that, before withdrawing his amend ment, he should wish to be assured that a House would be made on Wednesday.—( Laughter, and " Oh, oh.") If he were not so assured, he should press the House to a division. Strangers were ordered to withdraw, but no division took place, the original motion being carried. Mr. CHAPMAN presented apetition against certain clauses in tho Merchant Seamen's Act. Mr. S. CRAWFORD presented a petition from Liverpool on the subject of Lord John Russell's resolutions. The peti tioners stated that some of the resolutions were objectionable, in asmuch as they had no reference to the extension of the franchise. He begged leave to present a petition, signed by three thousand silk handloom weavers in Middleton and its vicinity, expressing their great distress consequent upon the want of a law to protect their labour; and also a petition from the Pro testant Association of Cork, praying the House to withdraw all support to Maynooth College. A petition was then presented from the Wesleyan Metho dists of the county of York, against the use of spirituous liquors. Mr. MILNER GIBSON presented a petition from the working classes of Manchester, complaining of the want of drainage and sewers, and praying for sanatory regulations. Mr. FERRAND presented several petitions, having refe rence to the resolutions of Lord John Russell ; one from the delegates of artisans in Nottingham, Derby, and Leicester, complaining of the increase of machine power, by which many of them were thrown out of bread ' • also calling the attention of the House to the Fields Garden Bill, and praying for some provision in it which would save them from dying in a union workhouse. Also petitions from the inhabitants of Hartlepool, who complained that they had been deprived of many of their most valuable privileges, amongst others of votes in the election of the Corporation. CONDITION OF THE LABOURING CLASSES. Lord JOHN RUSSELL then rose and said, Sir, I rise to bring forward a motion of which I have given notice, and which embraces a subject of vast extent, and one of the highest importance. I would despair of being able to bring this question on with any effect, were it not that the subject was one which has occupied much of the public attention for some years past ; and, in bringing it forward now, 1 look for the as sistance of this House, in the consideration and elucidation of those facts and opinions which have been already elicited in re ference to it. For my own part, I do not profess to have suffi cient confidence in myself to be able to deal with this subject of such great importance as it deserves ; but I perceive, that in regard to it, the Government are not prepared to come forward with any proposition ; that no other Member of this House has taken it into consideration ; and that various views and opinions have been expressed out of doors in regard to the mea sures that the Legislature should deem it proper to adopt, by which to improve the condition of the labouring classes. Sir, I do consider it a matter of great importance, that this House should have before it not only all the information that could be get in reference to any measure which may be proposed to be adopted for the permanent im provement of the condition of the labouring classes, but also whatever you may be able to learn from the expression of the opinions of persons who have given their attention to the ques tion, and the views which they may have taken of the various plans that may from time to time have been proposed for the approbation of the public, because while, in my view, some of those propositions may have appeared to be sound, others may appear to have been based upon erroneous views of what should be beneficial for the public interest ; and therefore, if not taken up in a determined manner, a measure may be brought before this House that would receive general acqui escence for want o f a better, or it may be that such a measure would be presented, on which a negative could not be given with satisfaction, or an affirmative with safety.—( Hear, hear.) Sir, I must here say a few words more as to the intention of this motion. Had 1 been of opinion that any such measure would be brought forward by her Majesty's Government, I would have taken care not to have done so ; but as things stand at present, when all legislative means of this sort must originate with the Government—when the present Adminis tration has taken from this House to itself all attempts at legis lation, even upon minor importance, and have declared, more over, that whether in office or out, they will be responsible for all measures of legislation which they may pass, affecting the condition of the country. Under these circumstances it would have been idle of me to have taken upon myself to bring before this House any measure of this sort. In my view the reso lutions which I bring forward are closely connected together. I am of opinion that if the Government at the present moment wished to propose a measure useful to the country, and tending to the improvement of the condition of the people, they should consider all the subjects which are mentioned in these reso lutions. An Hon. Baronet addressed to me a question to-night, as if he considered that these resolutions were totally separate and distinct questions. Sir, I think it of importance that the House should have brought before it the whole of this subject, not only that they may consider any one measure in it which improving the may think proper to adept for the purpose of the condition of the labouring classes, but also that we may learn, from the opportunity thus afforded, the opinions of men of experience and weight as to the various plans which have been from time to time proposed for the acceptation of Parlia ment. Whilst, in my opinion, some of those views are per fectly sound, and would tend to improve the condition of the country, there are others which are founded on erroneous principles. Upon mistaken notions of the powers of the Legis lature to promote the happiness of the people, and which, if in dulged in, would lead to consequences entirely different from those anticipated ; my opinion in general is, that you should endeavour to free trade from restrictions—to relieve industry from those trammels which were chiefly placed on it by the Legislature, but that in so doing, owing t o th e l eg i s l a tion of the past, and owing to the present state of the country, it would be necessary to adopt other measures accompanying those measures for the relief of industry. And at the same time, it is my opinion that the great subject of education and instruc tion ought to form a part of the deliberations of Government, and of the measures brought before the House; and if any gen tleman tells me that this subject seems little connected with those that I have mentioned in these resolutions, and that they are separate and distinct, I beg leave to tell him why I differ from him. I think we cannot expect that any measure proposed for the general education of the people would be attended with success unless we improve the physical condition of the people. —( Hear.) hay, Sir, that I do not think that men struggling to obtain the subsistence necessary to support life, are able or willing to make those exertions which would be requisite for giving an education to their children. Therefore, generally speaking. I should say that, along . with the measure for the improvement of education—assuming that to be your object— you should endeavour to improve the physical condition o f th e people. —( Hear, hear.) And, to bring this matter into de tail, I hold in my hand a paper that was signed by Mr. Ash worth in 1840, in which is given a table, showing the earnings and expenditure of four different families, each consisting of a man, his wife, and four children. In the first, the weekly earnings were ss. 6d. ; in the second, 10s. 6d.; in the third, 15s. 6d. ; in the fourth, 265. 6d. In the first case, where the earnings were only lie. 6d., it would be found that the greater part, in fact nearly the whole of that sum, was consumed in providing bread, flour, oatmeal, and potatoes for these six in dividuals—food which was absolutely necessary for their sub sistence. If I look at the second case, where the earnings are 10s. 6d., I find money expended for soap and c an dl es , clothing, and some further expenditure for other matters which afford revenue to the State. If I turn to the third case, where the earnings are 15s. 6d., I find a consumption of tea and coffee, contributions towards a sick society, thereby show ing a certain degree of prudence and forethought. And when I come to the fourth instance, where the earnings are 265. 6d. for six persons, I there find a further sum of 2s. for clothing, 6d. for education, 6d. for a sick society, and ls. 4d. for savings.—( Hear, hear.) These details show, as appears to me, that it is only when the condition of the labouring classes is comfortable, that you can expect prudence, at least, the ability which enables them to follow out the die. tates of prudence, and the means of obtaining education for ' their children.—( Hear, hear.) Therefore, I say at once, that if any person tells me that he thinks the subject of the condition and subsistence of the people unconnected with their education and instruction, my answer is—that so far from their being unconnected, they cannot be separated, and that you cannot take a general and comprehensive view of the situation of the people without taking within that view both means for their physical comfort, lord means for their religious, moral, and literary instruction.— (Cheers. ) In looking at the con dition of the people, I do not wish to go over details which must be familiar to most Members of this House, with respect to the wages on which a great portion of the people of this country subsist. It is well known that, in many counties in England—in many of the agricultural counties—the wages are not more than 7s. or Bs. a week. That has been stated repeatedly, and when I asked gentlemen connected with these counties whether that is so—whether such was the amount cf wages the labourers earned—they answered that undoubtedly such was the fact—such is the condition of the labouring classes in these counties.--( Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, if that be a fact, I need not say what privations it implies— what evil it signifies—and what an insufficient means of pro viding for the comfort of the labourers. Neither need Igo into details, in order to show that the dwellings of the labourers in many of the counties are totally insufficient for their ac commodation—that families are crowded together without any regard to the rules of decency—that many members of a family are obliged to sleep in the same room—and that neither health nor comfort is consulted in the struggle which becomes necessary, in order to retain a room for which they can afford to pay.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") But, Sir, there are general considerations which, it appears to me, we ought to take into account, and which involve a retro spect for a very considerable period of time. lam now, there fore, going to trace the changes which took place in a long course of years ; going back to periods of the last century be fore the French Revolution. At that time we had a debt of about 250,000,0001., and between 14,000,000/. and 15,000,000/. was the sum then necessary for the interest of r t a h t a e t a d m eb o t un a ttng and o t t o he l r 2 e ,s x oo pe , n o s oo es. l., There was then a pay inpoor- rate the allowance to labou rers out oafn altogether unknown to this country. I n t h e course o f th e war thed the poor-rate, o o practicer-rat,e, eras o tbenwhich England carried on in 1793, various changes took place —ehanges, in my opinion, much for the worse, as regards the situation of the people—changes, the effects of which, I think, we are still suffering under, and which have, from time to time, been brought under the notice of this House. In the first place, we have an immense increase of our debt, and a proportionate increase of our taxation. That increase of debt was, in my m i n d, ma de in the most ex travagant manner. Many of th e l oans were contrac t e d i n suc h a manner that more than 6 per rent. was paid for interest, and that not reducible, but remaining to the future. Sums were borrowed in the Three per Cents., as in 1797, when 2001. was given, besides other advantages, to the lender of 100/. So that it appeared, by the table at the end of Mr, M'Culloch's late work on taxation (the last edition), that the sum of 400,000,000/., which we borrowed during the war, entailed upon us the interest of a debt of more than 21,000,0001.—thus obliging us to pay more than 5 per cent. interest. When ' in the beginning of the last century, debts were contracted in times of war, the interest which was necessarily engaged to be paid at the time and subsequently was capable of reduction, so that Sir Robert Walpole (during the long peace, begun in 1713), during his administration, was able to reduce the interest on the debt, by about half the total of the amount which it was at the end of the war. That course has not been possible with any Ministry of this country, considering the mode in which the debt of the last war was contracted. We have, therefore, in considering the taxation, to recollect that the payment of the interest on this debt is guaranteed by public faith, and that it is out of our power to alter it. The whole amount to which we could alter the expenditure consists between the amplest and the most narrow expenditure consist ent with a peace establishment, which is about 3,000,000/. ( Hear.) At the same time. in speaking of the subject of taxa tion, I think I should not omit to state that we have been able from time to time to abolish or diminish taxes which were laid on the necessaries of life ; such as the tax on leather, salt, and candles, which have been entirely done away with. If any one will look at the complaints of the weight of taxation in the last century, they will see that tax (the interest of the debt) pointed out as a tax most injurious to the interests of the country. Still the power which we have in one way or another, whether by direct or indirect taxation, to bear this great amount of interest for the debt was an obligation from which we could not escape, and any one who exa m i nes th e pro p o sal m a d e b y t h e Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government this year for this com mutation of taxation—a relief of taxation by taking it from those things upon which it presses with the greatest severity and imposing it on those things which he and the House con sidered would be less felt—a change by which it was believed taxation would press less heavily on the industry and resources of the country. Another subject upon which great alterations have been made is that of currency. alluding to which the Right Hen. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) last year called it the fatal measure of 1797. The tendency of that measure was greatly to degrade the labouring classes.—(Hear' hear.) I say, the tendency of th a t measure went to di m i n i s h the wages of labour. These wages were neither increased in proportion to the rise which took place, nor to the rise whi c h occurre d i n the value of money. At the same time that depression of the general currency of the country led to effects which such de pression has always produced—that extravagant mode of living —that sudden employment of high profits--that neglect of frugality and vigilance which those engaged in agriculture or in trade practise in ordinary times, and which neglect and exitement produce lasting evils in the country. Ido not see that in this respect we can make any great change in the con dition of the labourer—at loot to his advantage. I believe that the measure proposed by the Right Hon. Gentleman in 1819, and the Bill proposed last year, are founded on sound principles, an d w tothe discussing particular tm what ie iwasn which their necessity they o werer theiradaptation brought forward, I believe it would be the greatest misfor tune if the House would endeavour to depart materially from the principles sanctioned by these measures. At the same time I think we must always remember that these measures in themselves produce their evils—that they have disadvantages accompanying them—that they produced a contracted cur rency which followed the measure of 1819, and at the time created great evils, amongst others injury to the industrious classes which lasted fur a considerable time. But now, Sir, I come to another subject upon which I think Parliament may legislate, and with benefit—to overturn as they have the enormous currency legislation of the war period—l alludef to the policy of restriction and monopoly. If any one speaks of that policy—of the policy of monopoly and restriction, or, as ie is flatteringly termed, " protection to native industry," he speaks of it as of an ancient establishment, as a matter becom_ interwoven with the laws of the country, and therefore ex tremely difficult to touch. But, Sir, let us go a little further, and look at what has been actually the case. We shall find that the chief monopoly or restriction which now exists was intro duced by men who are still living—by persons who are still in Parliament—by those who, although not now in the direction of public affairs, still remain among us, and whose acts we must therefore consider as the acts of our own time. I allude to the system of restriction and monopoly, which was, in the time of Adam Smith, called the mercantile system ; and Adam Smith, in speaking of the restriction introduced by the corn-laws, says he believes that those restrictions in favour of the monopoly of particular trades were introduced by persons who were used to the narrow spirit of corporations—that from cor porations it became common to traders, and was by them adopted in the Legislature of the country—that the country gentlemen, whose nature was, generally speaking, generous, and alien to such partial restriction s were induced to adopt this policy, of little value to them, but supposed to be bene ficial, because it was so considered by the manufacturer and the merchant. Adam Smith might be, and no doubt was, relating what was conformable to the experience of his own time, but the experience of our time has brought us to an entirely dif ferent state.—( Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) We have a vast export of manufactures, amounting, perhaps, to 50,000,0001. ; our manufacturers sell their goods at all the markets of the world ; but they consider monopoly and re striction is of no use to them, and they are willing to admit the imports of every country on the same terms as they desire their own to be received in foreign countries.—( Hear.) They therefore, have adopted generally, with a few exceptions, the theory which Adam Smith and his followers proposed, and which all the political economists adopted—that restriction is mischievous—that it is unwise to favour one class at the ex pense of another, and that such policy is injurious to the labouring classes, above all th e c l asses i n the community. Well, Sir, if such be the case, let us look at the history of some of those restrictions. I will look at one which has relation to timber. ( The Noble Lord then quoted extracts from M'Culloch's Commercial Dictionary, and other books, to show that with a restrictive policy our imports of timber had been greatly diminished, and that trade had been thereby seriously injured, and the sam e argument appli ed e to wool, against restricti ons upon which, tb merchants of London petitioned the Legislature in 1828.) The present Earl Fitawilliam had said such a course . wou e ld sa be total ruin to the manufacturer in the proposed me l o a u s l d Y going back to barbarism. Sir Mathew Ridley as s n a r t e d ,a h acnodm r n. d that _ _ the other House the Duke of Richmond propose 11 n aged in e m o i n t s tee ide s r h ed ou t l h d a b t e th ar s po s i y n s t t ed em to of ionnquiyiriedi.npteorthpe umnadttde_rn.ty cause the entire destruction of the interests alarming. oof ahhigh import the i%fa hn trade. r y Iwnas the chairman, wastho statedCo of was we a b : e re g reat Lord Such was the view that those gentlemen en tertained de ficiency in the import of 'foreign wool which the benefit which import 'duty on foreign wool. From many yrabalrte articles but foreign wool of English manufacture into which nothing the last year the dnty had re sulted foreignt to the owool English shooldhe w wool-grower , -g r admitted,o w er ,foirt therew ash w i g e h r l e y could be introduced. In the course of m t i h t teeree of off, and • the whole duty had been tak en Member for Halifax the result had been a much greater consumption of wool. The woollen manufactures exported during the first eight been increased, but on the motion of his 110 n. Friend the wu!trulY months of this year greatly exceeded the quantity exported for his articles. I mention this as one of many i nstances of the beneficial e ff ects arising from the of ab t ol e ition of high duties last year, and the British wool grower obtained a better price proposition which which that those laws which I am desirous of maintaining, labour would impose on the people operated in restricting of late years, and it is an instance un necessary taxes. I think that impossible to g eneral proposition h prin ciples cannot be disputed. It is what the e"' that a duty caused a higher price on people wanted to buy it necessarily imp os ed nty poorable a d uty A on their labour. If they imposed those duties t he ma n was less to purchase children, an d clothes and food, and to educate his is was most likely to be dissatisfied with his condition. There an opinion a considerable party • this which is still prevalent among to give protectiont country who maintain that it isri ght o certain protect the indus t ry articles, and that it is right t o p d it Is contended that all re- On the other hand, country. should be abolished. I think strictions of a protective nature of these opinions should it necessary that one or the ot h errVansittart in the expression be acted on, or let us imitate ould . given to every branch ofi o his policy that protection sh ould s false and uns oun d. F o r in dustry, or abandon the principle a my own part, I hold it as false and unso und. I s hould be sorry to as it has been proved enter into an argument on the subject, subiect ; and it is, so by the greatest writers on the . moreover, q uestion, Parliament a matter on which, as an abstrac t _ has no not think Parliament should say y ou right to interfere. Ido market, any more than they sho uld must go to the cheapest ought to be i tell you to go to the dearest; but every m a n n a condition to go to that market which he liked best—( Hear, any obstacle to prevent him, let the hear)—and, if there was t was his wish to exchang e his Legislature interfere ; but it market for the advant age labour or his productions in any had the Legislature age of what business to himself and family, not in terfere and say you sha ll . make that exchange —you shall and in a foreign c ountry make that not go to any person dis of th produce of e exchange—you pose you ple your own labour in what wa) which is perfectl y unsoun d in ase ? But thi s is not only an abstract theory , itself, but it is opposed to the c om mon sense of mankind ; and it is a theory on which ma n y mistakes hav e arisen. The a Ministry, in 1842, proposed great alteration on the subject. immediately connected s They were alterations in many a with the produee of the manual labourers of this country. But differentmanner, with then, alterations were made in a to tallyndwith h respect to some of these persons, offended a at th ereg ard tooetx extent There were many persons greatlygreat to which they carried their rneas tire& I, myself, as a Member who were in o f many individu als for the City of London, knew . r trade being reduced. There a frenzy at the prospect of the' were the rope-makers, who said athtte ro Imad e es wou d e upon t he r a w material b . Ther in Russia, if a low duty were p ut who were all were the corkeutters, the boo t and s hoemakers, _ much inflamed at the free-trade plans introduced by the There were Right Honourable Barone t . men who were , _ averaffulg Irons J 55. to 255. per earning a certain amoun t, • woes, and who were therefore in a state of affluence and wealth One of them told me he was skilled as much as any man in the trade, but with all his exertions he was only able to provide him self with meat for dinner during one day in the week. Such was the case of the persons affected by the measure that had been introduced. I will say, that to introduce changes among these men was hardly fair, unless you introduced measures of a corresponding nature among the members of another class, who were represented by Peers of noble descent, covered with honours, having great weight both in and out of Parliament, and who were most powerful to resist the alteration. I have the opinion of Adam Smith as my authority, who stated that he would include one party within the same law of restriction as the other. The Right Hon. Gentleman, the late President of the Board of Trade, has shown the effect of these restrictions, as far as our own manufactures were concerned ; and I will take out of his book some instances, which will show how little alarm was to be experienced, when it was most expected. The article of bonnets produced 13,0001. in 1840, and in 1843 and 1844 this amount was reduced to 12,000/. With respect to cork, a duty of 7s. per pound had been imposed on manu factured corks. The duty was reduced to 10s. per pound on the wood, and to Is. per pound on the manufactured corks. The amount of cork had been augmented, and only 2i per cent., in proportion to the raw ma terial, was introduced in a manufactured state. The Noble Lord instanced a few other articles, which, where the duty was high, bad been diminished in consumption ; and where, on the contrary, the duty was small, a corres ponding increase had taken place. These returns, continued the Noble Lcrd, show how very little reason there was for the manufacturers to be alarmed at the changes which then took place. This showed with respect to all manufactured articles, that we were able to stand in competition with foreign nations, and that nothing was to be dreaded from the skill which foreign manufacturers might exhibit in their fabrication. With respect to foreign manufactures, the duties had been re duced to a gre a t extent . Th e bootmakers and ropemakers were not much considered when it was announced that they would be totally ruined. The right principle remained to be proved. The duties were reduced within that reasonable compass that com petition could enter the field against thorn. I say, then, if this principle is right-if it is right to reduce duties within that compass-let us abandon altogether the principle of the pro tective system, and reduce all duties within that compass. In acting upon this principle with respect to any article of manu facture, if you do not propose to abolish protection with re spect to one article, you will be in a similar position to what you were placed in with regard to the tariff of 1842. If that tariff imposes a duty of 20 per cent. I maintain that it is an extravagant tax. I consider that the principle is altogether false, and we should abandon it as a useless problem of legisla tion. I now come to that great question upon which so much discussion has taken place in the country-I refer to the ques • tion of the corn-laws. As I have adverted on this and other subjects-on the striking changes that had taken place during this session of Parliament-I will advert to what has been the policy of the country with respect to them during the last cen tury. There was, as Adam Smith says, a duty in the last cen tury against the importation of foreign corn ; but, as during the gi eater part of that century this was an exporting country, the people had no great advantage of the lowest price of corn, as the corn sent to foreign parts found the best market ; but towards the latter end of the century, oith the increase of the population, it was found necessary to prohibit that exportation. If they had acted on sounder principles that course would not have been adopted. When we became an importing instead of an exporting country, it was considered necessary that the corn. laws should be revised, and to preserveour interests a reasonable protection should be given to cern. The protection given ex tended to 48s. per quarter, and consisted of a high duty upon all corn under that price. In 1791 another change took place, and Mr. Pitt said, in the course of the debate on the question, that if a protective duty was put on corn up to 50s. per quarter, it would be quite sufficient; but other opinions prevailed at the time, and the protection was carried up to 545. It was over 505., and that was in effect a prohibitory duty. Such a duty as this is quite different from the present system, and let us sae how the change took place. During the time of war and the years of scarcity, corn rose to a very high price, and at the same time the currency becoming depreciated, the City gentle men declared that the 545. was not a sufficient price for corn, and they prevailed on Mr. Pitt, in 1804, to raise the price at which protection should cease. In 1815, when depreciation was carried to its greatest extent, it was proposed that instead of 545., which was the utmost price to which protection was extended, that 80s. should be the price at which protection should commence. I consider that although it might be ne cessary to check for a time the sudden flood of importation, the introduction of that law was as fatal as the measure of 1797. -(Hear.) We have been suffering ever since from the effects of that law. Many years it was considered that this law was not sufficient. The effect of the price of 80s. was net liked, and another alteration of the whole took place, which it was not neceasary to refer to, in 1828, and another scheme of corn legislation was proposed, which had the high authority of Mr. Huskismon. The proposition was, that there should be a high duty imposed when corn was low, but the duty was to be gradually diminished in proportion as the price was increased. I thought it was somewhat desirable on that head. Mr. Canning said, on the introduction of the measure, that at certain times there was a too plentiful supply of corn, and at other times we had been suffering from the want o importation, and he proposed this measure, as it would adapt itself to the price of corn, and tend to give a stated price, and would consult the interest of all parties concerned. I say that it was a plausible scheme ; and for my own part I supported the Bill ; and altogether my opinion was rather in favour of the fixed price. We have had experience since and I think it has been shown that the system was founded in error, and that it failed in giving a stated price. Even sup posing the general principle is correct, or that there are some particular reasons for imposing duties upon corn, it was very evident that the gradual or sliding scale was not calculated to have the desired effect. It was obvious that the present sys tem, as now carried on in corn, made the entire trade to par take more of the character of a gambling house than the fair dealings of honest merchants, and some had suffered severe losses in their speculations ; and we had experience of this fact within the last few years. According to the returns moved for by the Hon. Member for Bristol (Mr. Miles), it appears that the operation of the law, as altered by the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government, is much the same as the law of 1828. It was shown by those papers that since 1840 as before, the quantity of corn introduced was greatly increased at different times, especially during the three harvest months. In the year 1840 the number of quarters of wheat introduced in the first six months of the year was 876,879 quarters, the quantity during the three harvest months wrs 1,587,000. In 15 , 41, during the first six months, which was a year of scarcity, 2,750,969 quarters ; the three harvest months 2,343,258. In 1842 in the first six months 305,000; in the three harvest months 2,663,160. Thus showing that the tendency of the law was to induce speculators to hold back till they knew the produce of the harvest, in order to derive a benefit from the great rise in price. In the last year the experience of the law was remarkable. In the last year the price of corn was not high, sufficiently high enough to epable persons to introduce it into the country in any large amount at remu nerating prices. In February the price of wheat was 535. 3d. per quarter, and the quantity cleared, 2,725 quarters; in March, 565. 3d., the quantity cleared, 3,472 quarters ; and in July, 545., the quantity cleared, 427,623 quarters. The only system that can benefit the consumer, and lead to a stability in the law, will be such as will range the price from 565. to 64e. and 665, per quarter. That is the only sufficient price to allow for the importation of corn, but less than that will stop and arrest it. I have the evidence of an assistant poor-law commissioner, who, in a report made at the time of the bad harvest, in 1838, declares that the distress then existing was much aggravated by the high price of the corn, and that a lower rate of price, instead of operating in juriously, would have much benefited the employers, in enabling there to improve the wages and living of their labourers, or inducing farmers to employ greater exertions in the cultivation of their lands. This report, in addition to the other evidence I have adduced, goes to prove that the pre sent law is opposed not only to all correct commercial prin ciples, but to the interests of the farmers.-(Cheers.) B u t I will put another question to the House. Does not this evi dence suggest to you that protection is an evil? Does it not lead you to behold in it a check to improvement in agricul ture, and an enemy to both landowners and farmers__ (Cheers.) I may refer to the silk manufacture as an illustra tion of the influence of monopoly. While under the protec tive system during a century and a-half the machinery em ployed was of the most inefficient and imperfect character ; now, under an improved system, it had kept pace in this respect with all the other great branches of manufacturing industry. So is it with respect to the farmer. The amount of protection given him only tended to make him an imperfect, slovenly agriculturist, and the way to make him skilful and successful in his important calling was by the re moval of that restrictive system on which he had hitherto leant for support. I hold in my hand the evidence of a gentleman who made a motion in this House in 1830 respecting the sta tistics of the country. That gentleman was Mr. Davenport, who said that he had taken great pains to improve the land in his possession, and out of a quantity of land that formerly paid 500/. a year, he received 8001., in consequence of these im provements. That gentleman further stated that a great part of England was covered with weeds, and in a state of waste ; that the leases were fenced in with restrietions, and bolts, and bars, so as to interfere with the free energy of the tenants; that the land was generally occupied by tenants without capital ; men careless how they treated the soil, and the landowners were indifferent so long as they got their rents.-(Hear, hear. ) To advance agriculture in the way it ought to be advanced, a union of capital, skill, and labour, is required. Such has been already done in manufactures, and the results were well known to all, so will it be in farming, if the same means are employed. Similar causes will produce similar results. No one can doubt but that if foreign growers were allowed to send their produce into this country, it would infuse a new spirit into our agricultural system. It will sharpen our skill and energy, and enlarge our capabilities.-(Cheers.) The present time is most propitious for a change in the system. The commutation of tithes had lately taken place, and a considerable burden taken from off the landed interest, so that now there was every opportunity under a proper state of the law for the employment of capital and the exercise of skill.- ( Hear, hear.) It was complained that owners and occupiers of land were not satisfied with the present system. But let them abandon protection, and they would find their benefit in the improved markets which would be opened up to them. They would find their advantage of being in a rich country, where commerce and manufactures were flourishing, and where employers being enabled to pay better wages for labour, from the improved facilities given them, would thereby cause a great increase in the consumption of agricultural produce.-( Hear. ) But it was said that if corn were made cheap, wages would be reduced. Taking this fact for granted, supposing wages were reduced to a certain amount, still so long as the real wages were not reduced in relation to the price of produce, an advan tage would be gained by the great impetus that would be given to the employment of labour by the change in the law. But if, on the ether hand, wages were not reduced, a great benefit would at once be given to the artisan in enabling him to com mand an increase of the comforts of life; and in either way the labouring classes would be benefited. The Noble Lord the President of the Board of Trade had said that the introduction of 50,000 head of cattle was a great benefit to the country. If this be so, then I cannot see any distinction between the impor tation of 50,000 head of cattle, and a million quarters of corn. We do not find that when the price of corn is high, wages correspond with it, as many of the operative classes believe. A Mr. Dent, who had written on the subject, amongst much that was. theoretical and speculative, has given a table of wages in relation to the price of corn, from which I shall read a few extracts to the House. The calculations were made from 1792, and grounded upon a similar estimate to that made by Mr. Malthus, of allowing six pecks of wheat for each labourer. In 1795 the wages of a labourer were Bs. 6d. a-week, and the price of bread 82s. 3d. per quarter. In 1801 wages were from Bs. 6d. to 10. 5 .: price of wheat 118 s. 3d. In 1821 wages were 9s. 6 d ., price of wheat 535. 6d., being only 6d. less in wages than the highest average in 1821. In 1834 were 10s., and wheat 465. 2d. In 1840 wages were wages i - .and wheat 665. 4d. ; and in 1841 wages were 10s. This will show that the high price of grain is not accompanied by a corresponding high rate of wages. I will now proceed to show the probable effects of the importation of foreign corn. It is my belief that it will not lead to such an excess, of importation as many think, and that although th e price of corn may not be so high as it has hitherto been, it will lead to a general improvement in the cultivation of the laud, improve the demand for labour, and advance the inte rests of all parties concerned. With regard to what should be adopted instead of the present law, various propositions have been brought forward before the House. In bringing forward m y resoluti ma my object is not so much to propose a remedy as to state the true condition of the country. But if I were called upon to propose one, it would not be that which I proposed in 1840. Yet still it would be a fixed dniy: In 1840 I proposed a fixed duty of Bs. per quarter. That is MO'll than I would now propose. I would prefer at present 45., 55., or 6s. per quarter, as preferable to what I then proposed, and as better, in the present state of affairs, than a total repeal of the whole duty a s some o th er part i es propose d . A not h er pro position is to impose a sliding duty of 10s. or Bs. gradually going down to a shilling. Now in comparing these two pro positions my opinion is decidedly in favour of a fixed duty, because I consider a sliding scale necessarily entails a change in . the amount o f d u ty an d o f pr i ce every year. —( H ear, h ear. ) It I were asked whether I consider it desirable to have any duty on corn at all t should say, as an abstract principle, No; but I know the ii,jury likely to accrue from the sudden with drawal of any long established custom, however pernicious that custom may have been. It may be said, " If you regard it as an evil, why will you not consent to its removal?" But thus it might also be inquir e d res p ec ti ng a man w h o, during a pro tracted life, has been accustomed to stimulating diet ; no phy sician would advise an immediate change of diet, or prescribe the total abstinence from the regimen, however deleterious. It is in this light that I regard the present restrictions Imposed on corn, and yet that there will come a time, as has already arrived for wool, when a total abrogation of duty will be found inevitable and accorded, I for one entertain no doubt; mean while, though I look upon such a course at the present time as premature, and its success equivocal, I think 1 do but consult the best interests of the country in proposing that clause of my resolutions .—" That this House will take the said laws into consideration, with a view to such cautious and deliberate arrangement as may be most beneficial to all classes of her Majesty's subjects." now arrive at the next question which I consider materially affecting the condition of the labouring classes of this country, and, in the words of my motion, I assert " that the freedom of industry would be promoted by a careful revision of the law of vroetual settlement which now prevails in England and Wales " During the war the system whereby the labourer was assisted in his poverty, or remunerated for his work, was most perni cious ; as the war continued the price of corn rose, and the course pursued was to distribute the effects of the high price over the entire family, instead of increasing the wages, and thus more labour was employed than there was demand for. In 1834 that system was altered, and it has been said that the al teration was injurious, but I will avow my opinion, that if that system had been continued, the labourers of England would have been reduced to pauperism, while the forced and com pulsory charity of the poor•rate would have scarcely given them the means of subsistence, instead of as under the present system, charity being given in the whole some shape of wages under the superintendence of employers. I will again allude to an authority from which I have more than once quoted to-night. In a report drawn up by Mr. Tuffnell, respecting the working of the poor-law in Kent, with which he was long officially connected, I find that the amount of wages paid in that neighbourhood, during the two years preceding the establishment of the union there, was 6951., and fur the two years succeeding, 8101. If such has been the wholesome effect of the poor-laws, is it not a false misrepresentation to hold up that law as injurious to the labourer, while in reality nothing could be more beneficial ? ( Hear, hear.) It is now a little more than ten years since that law, as amended, came into operation. The children who were then in a state requiring no immediate employ ment have now grown up—they seek for labour, but unfor tunately that artificial state of labour which characterised our industrial population a few years ago, still indicts its disas trious consequences en our agriculture, our manufactures, and our commerce. You have matte alterations, but it is not suffi cient to have altered your poor-laws, it is not sufficient that you now standby the principles of that law; temporary and alleviating measures must be sought, must be adopted, to meet the exigen cies of superabundant labour.—( Hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, the Secretary of State for the Home De partment, has undertaken to introduce a measure, admitting the proposition that it was a hardship that a man could not transfer his labour to a locality where demand was greater ; but, while assenting to this, he does not agree or propose that five years' industrious employment should give a settlement ; yet what can be more rational, more equitable, more just ? ( Hear, hear.) And what is the working, or the effect of the working of the present law of settlement ? A young man mar ries from the agricultural districts, he settles as an artizan at some manufacturing town, gives the district the benefit of his skill, but after ten or twelve years of thriving industry, by some sudden panic in trade, he is deprived of work—he seeks the means of temporary subsistence from the Union, but is told, " You must go back to the town whence you originally migrated, and seek that relief we cannot afford you here." That such a system is fraught with evils no one can surely doubt. Colonel WOOD.—Hear, hear. Lord JOHN RUSSELL—The Hon. Member for Brecon cheers that expression. He proposes that one year's residence should give a settlement ; I, however, do not think that a less period than five years would be advisable to establish as a rule. With regard to lesser periods of two or one years, if a relief for temporary distress were required, it might be beneficially accorded for a few months, even should net the applicant be of long residence in the town, because a great hardship is fre quently entailed on a poor man engaged as an artisan, suddenly and but temporarily distressed, being sent back to his former place of residence, where, losing all employment or prospect of employment, he becomes a pauper, and eventually losing all moral elevation of character, ceases for ever to be, what under due care he might still have remained—a good and useful member of society.—( Hear, hear.) I now pass to the next branch of my series of resolutions—" That a systematic plan of colonisation would partly relieve those districts of the country where the deficiency of employment has been most injurious to the labourers in husbandry." In adverting to this question, difficult and delicate as I admit it to be, I have made my allusion cautiously, because I conceive that a system of emigration too extensive, or compulsory, would not only be unadvisable, but dangerous. Nevertheless I consider that a voluntary system, carried out with caution and benevo lence, may , be made beneficial to the country and the emi grants. I have been told by Mr. Hedges, who for many years represented the county of Kent in this House, that the effect in his parish, of voluntary emigration, has been produc tive of the greatest advantage to the district, and by intelli gence he has received from the colonies, of happiness to the parties who embraced it. The price for labour in Canada was 2s. 6d. a day, and in West Canada Sc. and upwards. When men can thus go to a country whose inhabitants speak the same language, and are characterised by the same habits, the emigration is positively advantageous to them. But great care is required in the safe working of this system ; for you must not send out as emigrants men who are unable to bear extreme labour, and the privations to which they are too often subject ; nor must your system be that of indiscriminate assimilation between parties hitherto unknown. They should go out, not only ac quainted, but connected with each other. In the army and navy you give those officers who choose to accept the offer Your Crown lands en certain favourable terms. Let your emi grants proceed out under those as a head, and by that arrange ment, and in such a transaction all parties wi:l be the gainers. They will accept your home manufactures, and send you their produce in return.—( Hear, hem ) The next question to whick I shall advert is, the important one of education. I will net now enter at length into a subject connected with such vast interests, and which demands such anxious and protracted consideration. That a great advance has been made in the education of the people during these last few years no one can entertain a doubt. Previous to that it was considered that education was general and useful, but an inquiry into its naturc proved it nominal, and not the moral, religious instruction which would tend to elevate the character and improve the social condition of the people. I find in a late report of the British and Foreign School Society, in reference to the gaol returns, that in some counties one. third of the population was unable to read • in Devon, out of 61 only four could either read or write, in Denbighshire one-half, and in other counties the population was even less. Now, Sir, these are statements made in regard to counties in Eng land, but it may be said that although these prisoners are un able to read, yet religious' instruction has been given to them. It may be said that they have received such oral communica tions from clergymen in the gaols, and other ministers of the Gospel, from friends, and from neighbours, that they cannot be said to be in a state of ignorance ; and, I must confess, that I can understand those, among whom reading and writing may not be prevalent, yet who, if such pains were taken to teach them religious and moral truths, might, in point of learning, be said to be a far from uninstructed people. What, I may ask the House, was the case in Sussex, some short time ago? I find, in the same return 1 have already quoted, that out of 171 persons, 141 did not know the Saviour's name • 24 knew his name, but no more ; and only 6 out of the wh o le number had received any instruction. Some indeed of them had been, by their own acknowledgment, at places of worship, but when they attended all was darkness and confusion to their minds. Now, Sir, I do say that when you take measures to promote the well-being of the people—when you take measures to re move any restrictions which may press upon the introduction of articles necessary for food--I say that as Christians,:and as le gislators, you should not shut your eyes to this gross state of ignorance. Do not forget that while, in this month of May, there are excellent and pious men meeting day after day, to consider what sums they shall distribute in China, in the South Sea Islands, and in Africa, for the promotion of the Christian faith—do not, I repeat, forget that in the county of Sussex, and in every other county in England, a wretched number of persons, who have felt the lash of the criminal law, are existing in total ignorance of every duty ' which Christians ought to perform. Sir, I cannot entertain a doubt that the House will wish to pass measures to amend this evil ; I cannot entertain a doubt that the present Govern ment would like to see measures passed, with the view of cor recting this alarming evil. True, we are here met by the ob jection, that such measures may jar with certain sectarian jealousies, and interfere with religion, and that you cannot consistently, and in disregard of the religious liberties and rights of conscience, pass any general scheme of education.—(Hear.) But this you can do— you can make a grant to those who apply for it for that pur pose, and thus you can promote and assist to educate the peo ple. One plan is to give pupillary teachers to schools through out the country ; another is to endow teachers, and so to en courage small seminaries. And here I must call the attention of the House to what is the present situation of schoolmasters. On those men depend much—the important religious education and secular knowledge of the people of this country, and yet there are few of these men who remain satisfied with their sta tion—few are anxious to return to the situation of teachers. What is the fact? No man would remain a schoolmaster for a longer period than ten years. I have understood that that is the case with regard to the National Schools. I have frequently asked the Secretary of the British and Foreign School Society with regard to it, and he says " We have many clever young men educated in a school in the Borough-road, they go from us and take charge of schools, but people finding that they are worthy of confidence they are tempted away to other more profitable pursuits and lucrative situations and leave to inferior masters charge of their schools." This is a misfortune. They are in consequence of their abilities employed by merchants and manufacturers in si tuations of importance. But not surely more important than those of instructing the children who are to form the men of the country.—( Hear, hear.) It must have struck the observation of every one, that it is the school master who really forms the school, for though one may teach by rote certain words, or certain parts of the Bible or the Church Catechism, he cannot communicate one idea, still less one principle in accordance with the doctrines of the Bible. I am sure, Sir, that all Hon. Members who hear me are as anxious as I am, to second any means for improving the edu cation of the people ; and it cannot be done if we vainly try to impose compulsory regulations, ur seek to drive the child to certain schools, let them be established ones or otherwise. Such a mode of education is impracticable, but you can assist the schools founded by Protestants or Dissenters, and by this mode you get rid of the objection I have referred to. Now, with regard to the national schools, it has been stated by the irwe C o ut o ol n d sm ebxe i p t t e e rne e r o i f lr3eo Education ne a t at h ido a do t i at il i o f pntuh:epyo implyingswe s e et they o ya g w i o v u e ld a 11 require total expenditure of 400,000,. I still think that the grant you propose for educational purposes should be increased. I think that it should not be less than 150,0001. per annum for the people of England and Wales, and I think that the greater part of that sum should go to the national school ; some part of it might be combined as an assistance to the endowed schools, and the rest might be expended on the other schools th roug h out the country. And this might very well be paid under the supervision of the Committee of Edu cation oft he Privy Council, and I am of opinion that in that way a large amount of good might be done to the cause of edu cation. This, then, Sir, is the resolution to which I beg the attention, and if I may, the approbation of the House—" that the improvements made of late years in the education of the people as well as its more general diffusion have been seen with satisfaction by this House." I mean not by these words that the people should be instructed in the way proposed by Go- 11•••...m.in5.., .r. vernment—not on the principle of exclusive scula, trt to the p s i ;blished Church, but on a principle of . separate eduntioll for di9r all the denominations into wh tch th e inhabitants ed. I have given a vs ry perfect outline of this measure, which think ought to Le introduced for the purposes of educatioa. I have , in un.. dcrtaking to introduce this measure before the House at this s l s time, taken into consideration the improvement which has this period been effected in our trade—the general and pt 1.1 - the tranquillity and obedience to the law which of affir ming empire—a tranquillity which obviates the poss ibility fug any it was brought forward to put down clamour or to fui .y d u political end or party object. You ought also to take vantage of such a period, and to propose such measures as Y____ o prevails °v. may think beneficial to the great mass of the people. Ib. 7 given you my views of what is the course of policy %chic! would adopt ; and whether you think free trade, or the prl cip!e of protection should maintain the ascendancy. should not, at least, wait till a time of disturbance or calm - nit t ~ b r should arrive, before you do something for education... If i " so—and I pretend not to know what meesures may strife _n time—it will not be so beneficial as at this time. And let ale say one word to those who support the agricultural ioteri,nts this House—namely, tkat the settlement of this question wil l be most favourable to them. Adopt my resolutic 'll add to it any further resolution that you may think 1..% 1, - according to yo ur own p r i nc ipl e , and as your ow - views may dispose you ; but my opinion is, tha your laws cannot stand as they now are. The condition of the people requir es alteration—not for the purpose of providing directly for their well being, but for the purpose of giving, as far as in you lies, freedom trom those restraints on food and education which your own legislation has imposesh The resolution having bees put. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD rose. an d sa id that the amendment of which h e h a d g i ven not i ce, 011 the first recolution of the Noble Lo r d th e M em b er f or L ondon, h a d referent.' to a period long b e f ore t hi s t i me. I n the year 1842 a pet i t i on h a d beenlaid before the H ouse , s i gned b y 3,324,000 o f t h e wor klOg classes of the country, praying the House to sake into it, eesmi-- deratton the propriety of extending to them some measure of political right, by an extension of the suffrage A motion nu conformity with the prayer of the petition was brought before' the House by the Hon. Member for Finsbury and by himself, but that motion did not meet with the opinions of the liouse i and had, in consequence, been thrown out. The Noble Lord had advocated the principle of the new poor law, but he. de nied that many of the propositions that had been put forwiaNt on that subject had met with the assent of the late Government. It was his (Mr. Sharman Crawford's) belief that the object of the New Poor-law was totally to deny to die poor man the right of relief. He believed that the operation of the poor-law was to diminish wages, because the poor man was willing to take any wages rather than submit to the means of subsistence that the law held out to him.—( Hear, hear..) 114 his opinion the Poor-law Commissioners ought to be compelled by public opinion to relax the restrictions that were placed gym the poor.—( Hear, hear.) As to the law of settlement, Ire would not now enter into that question, as he should have an-A other opportunity of doing so, when he hoped to be enabled to. persuade the House not to adopt the proposition of the Right Hon. Baronet on that subject. With respect to emigration he was anxious that means should he taken to keep all the abfe bodied labourers in this country, and he was sure, if the means of the country were properly carried out, thas,`, could be easily done.—( Hear. ) He thought that 44 millions of acres of arable land would be quite sufficient for that pttr pose and for the comfort and existence of the whole population. The great evil of the country was that the poor were driven off the land, and that there was no mode by which the agri cultural labourer could elevate himself from his condition.— ( Hear, hear ) The manufacturing districts were overwhelmed with labourers from the agricultural districts, and that had arisen from the causes he had pointed out. He believed' there was no mode by which the House could make itself snore popular with the working classes than by respectfully consi dering their petitions which expressed a desis e to be properly represented in that House, and to participate in making the laws which were to govern them. The Hon. Member then concluded by moving the following amendment to the Noble Lord the Member for London's resolution : That the present state of political tranquillity, and the recent revival of trade, afford to this House a favourable opportunity to giviim mediate attention to the claims so repeatedly urged in the ptli tions of the people, for an extension of the Parliamentary saf- , (rage, as well as to consider of such measures as may tend.. permanently to improve the condition of the labouring classes." Sir J. GRAHAM then rose—With the permission of ank House he should have wished to have addressed it immediately after the Noble Lord the Member for the City rif London had sat down, but as on the first resolution it was his intention to move the previous question, and as the effect of that motion would have been to have prevented the Hon. Member for Rochdale from moving his amendment, he felt it but right and , courteous on his part to give him an opportunity of doing so._, After reading the resolutions of the Noble Lord, he confessed that he had come down to the House with great doubt and per plexity as to the course he should pursue, because he felt assured that it would be no slight task to follow him through the different positions he bad laid down ; and if anything were wanting to increase the difficulty, it was the statements of the Honourable Member for Rochdale. Having made these preliminary observations om the difficulty of following the Noble Lord, he felt bound in. justice to him to say that any thing more comprehensive, or more worthy of the subject, than the speech of the Noble Lord, he had never heard in that House.—( Hear.) It was totally , devoid of any party feeling or any acrimonious assertions. He believed that no subject was more difficult to start with than that which related to the improving the condition of the labour ing classes. Their labour was their only property; and no subject, therefore, could be more important than their welfare. He trusted that the House would believe him when he said that he intended to meet the Noble Lord in a spirit totally devoid of party, and a desire, if possible, to benefit the working classes. The Noble Lord had asserted that the present Government had been unmindful of the in terests of the working classes, and that the Members on that. side of the House generally were careless about them. In order to deny that he thought he need only refer to what had been done by the Noble Lord the Member for Dorsetshire— ( Hear, hear)—and what had been the course pursued by the' Government with respect to the measures of the Noble Lord. It was true that some modifications had been made in them,. but their general principles had been approved of by the Go vernment, and no doubt they would ultimately be carried into effect. The Noble Lord had said that the wages of the agricultural labourers of England did not exceed Bs. a week. Now, his information on the subject differed from that of the Noble Lord. He believed that the average was 10s., and that it was somewhat higher than it was a few years ago. In Norfolk, Suffolk, and Lincolnshire, he was certain the average was above 10s. He would now follow the Noble Lord through all his resolutions. In the first place, he would address himself to the protecting duties. The first resolution could not be looked upon in any other light than complimentary to the present Government. The second resolution, which was with respect to the protecting duties, he would now proceed to. The great policy of Mr. Huskisson was not the abolition of protection, but a substitution of the protecting duties for the prohibitory system. Mr. Huskisson was a strenuous advocate of the corn-laws of 1815, and was the principal author of the corn-law of 1828. He admitted that whilst Mr. Huskisson was the advocate of a protective duty, he was also the author of a gradual de crease of the duty, in proportion to the increase of the population. He asserted that such had been the pc hey of the present Government.—( Hear, hear.) He cm not wish to weary the House with unnecessary details. But as the Noble Lord had gone so far into them, he must follow for some way. In the first place he must call the attention of the House to how much had been done in the last three years in relieving the productive classes from indirect taxatiou bearing upon their enjoyments. In 1843 and 1844 no less than 6,300,000/. of indirect taxation had been repealed.—(Hear, hear.) At the same time, by means of direct taxation, the deficiency had been removed, the income was raised above the expenditure, and the naval force of the country bad been en larged to the amount of 1,000,000/, per annum.—( Hear, hear.) When the present Government came into office, they found 1,152 articles, of almost the first necessity to the working classes, subject to duty. They reduced that number more than one-half. —(Hear, hear.) The N o bl e L or d re f erre d t o th e ante sedent history of the National Debt, and had stated truly, that reductions of the interest had at times served to relieve industry in a considerable degree. But the present Government hat not lost sight of that question. On the contrary they had last year been able to effect an operation of great mag nitude, by'which a a saving of more than a million was obtainesf... The Noble Lord would excuse him for saying that he was rather amused by the dexterity with which the Noble Lord evaded the responsibility of his own restrictions. He thought s t u h l a u t t i w u h u e n a s a t m h e e m N b u e h r l e o f L u t h rd a sHousefourth, t h,i brought tw as fo t r h w e ard du t s y u . c o h a r e f that hat Member to move for a Committee of the House to go into the consideration of the question, whether or not the hear.) of the a people should be a matter of protection. — ( Hear, wo re n s i ol d u b t e io t n h . e_ri ( g c ht he c e o r u s r . s ) e, Hinsettehaudugofhtbrthinagtintghefocur wua7red taken so vague a as it went to the question directly.---(Cheers.) But it was quite clear that the Noble Lord himself bad not made u p his mind his own question. Then he said that the time regulation. e eongruta introduced,ll na dit a duty of 4s. or 1. was go ne by for a s duty of Bhse. sufficient. —(Hear, H on ear ce , r h a ear , an ) d that oe Noble Lord now repudiated the idea of taxing food for the purpose of raising a revenue, and was willing to admit of a protection. But, in fact, as a matter d of uty would be a delusion. Four er five. shillingprotection,s, for t w he h p n eurl ir es i de ces `were low, would be no :proeee-t tion at all, and when they were high, no Govern ment would be strong enough to preserve the peace of the country with such a restriction upon the. importation of food. He was satisfied that all the speculation which the Noble Lord attributed to the sliding-scale would be' as nothing compared to what a fixed duty of ss. would give rise to. The Noble Lord said that the sliding-scale caused fluctua tions of price. He (Sir James Graham) denied that. He thought that absolute fixedness of price could not be attained with the variability of our seasons. But he would say that no law could produce less variability than the present law. It was very true that a larger amount of foreign corn was brought e i c n r u t l h at e iu u quarter.. th r e e H T m e h e a a n r t t : h however, o u e a w n r t e e . e r d, He) en was t to thought theth t he result e e i u t h a r v est , tvoe ti t anve r y na turale r v ery' natural the holders of corn should keep it back, until they saw what the state of the harvest would be in respect to quan tity and quality.—( Hear, hear.) He did not wish to overlay this part of the question, but he would absolutely deny that the present law produced uncertainty. In the last twelve months, the fuctuations in price had been—considering the nature of the seasons—very small. Since the Ist of January t n oionAn. nrthodueop ogwdphnauirrttetittheyemetd:wr,ihelehlasihild: h a gle r b,to coteeni neverhee last, to the present time, 57,000 quarters of fo dadutyqat anu b lua e , tdfr e ht ei n ne:ps introduc edstrh.heaasuedt present quarter.bbeen a re t ig th n e h en ig r h n est h barley, he was able to show that nothing could be more equal hundred o t d r u advantageous tyand thousand uutnotwithstanding th th s t l h s e . 6 e d ff . ec p t er b q e ua if rte t r h . ere O h f fallen much below 325. , and bad not varied more than Is. or had been th g e ua u rt n e i r f s or i m m were entered for consumption. Now he would ask what wen d Noble Lord recommended in force, with such harvests as we had had the last two years ?—(Hear.) The Noble Lord said that no impulse had been given to agriculture by protec tion. But the Noble Lord should admit that since the termination of the French war, there had been a great improvement in agriculture, so much so as nearly to keep pace with the wantsof a population which had doubled in the mean time.— (Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had stated that the increase of the population was nearly miraenlous= that it amounted to 250,000 a year. The Noble Lord under. stated the fact, for in the last year the increase had heed 370,000. In the last four years no less than 1,500,000 had been added to the population of these narrow islands, whilst the whole amount of the population of Canada was little above 1,000.000. The population of Holland was but 2,800,000, and that of Switzerland not quite 2,100,000. Bat this country, with the conduct of which he (Sir J. Graham) and his colleagues had bees charged for the last four years— (Cheers and great laughter)—the population had increased by a number equal to more than two-thirds that of Holland or Switzerland, and beyond that of Canada.--(des of " Hear, hear.") But at the same time necessaries _ of wages had risen, and the prices of all the that o f life had diminished.—(Cheers.) But t ection to the agri they were to do away suddenly with orthe)had exist e protect culturist, which— (whethereilgrffict a great injury upon .fife of a century, theywould Noble Lord had said, that measuWis whole community. The s hould be adopt ed to improve the condition o f all classes of t he conunanity. But he would ask,was it not the fact, that all er e Of ris e thi e so' the t di. ho i dare - • e rls : sber v...• OA ii° 4